skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You're quite right that freedom of speech and expression is a core American value.

Another core American value is independence of thought and action. We are a nation of grown-ass men and women who do not require a company, a government, or any other arbitrary authority to sign off on the exercise of those rights and liberties which are our common birthright.

So if Facebook chooses not to permit its users to say controversial things, the American response is not to go crying to Daddy to make that mean old mister Zuckerberg be nice, but instead to say: "Well, then, you do just as you please - and be damned to you, because I will go and do as I please." And then, suiting action to word, to set up one's own website, where one may speak as one likes without fear of being suppressed by the ukaze of some billionaire overlord. We do, after all, still have an open Internet. I think it would behoove us to use it.

To that last point, let me reiterate that I have no love for Facebook, and would prefer that such a behemoth, opaque monstrosity - with such an astonishing degree of power to mediate the social interactions of more than a quarter of our entire species - not only did not, but could not, exist. That is far too much power to inhere in any single organization.

Where we differ, I think, is in our evaluation of the most useful method of taking that power away from the organization which holds it now. You seem inclined to prefer that government should do so - an obvious answer, to be sure, but in my view fatally flawed insomuch as that, in taking that power away from Facebook, this government would necessarily gather that same power to itself. (Who else, after all, would you have tell Facebook what to do?)

I would rather see that power, not still further agglomerated into a different monolithic bloc of same, but rather atomized. It seems to me much more in accord with American values that this mass power be broken down and distributed among many individuals, such that each may exercise her rights with the maximum liberty to do so, and none may forbid another from doing likewise.

There are some really exciting projects underway right now to build a framework in which this can happen - indeed, a framework in which nothing else can happen, wherein the construction of a Facebook in anything like its present leviathan form is impossible because it has no apparent benefit to offer. This is a very long-term goal, I freely concede! I may not live to see it bear fruit, if indeed it ever succeeds in so doing. But nothing else of which I'm aware offers a better prospect of upholding those American values which my fellows and I hold so dear.
The graph at the start of the article is terrifying: it basically says that since 1973, on average, there was no correlation between your productivity and your earnings. None. Work hard? No difference. Work longer? No difference. Work smarter? No difference. Firm introduces new working practices? No difference.

The people who started work in 1973 are now retiring. This means that this disconnect is not only true of everyone currently working, it's always been true for pretty much everyone they know or report to.

We've normalized a situation in which employees have no skin whatsoever in their company being a success. And then we wonder why the productivity figures are lackluster. Given that graph, I think it's amazing they're as good as they are.
#Cisco #iOS Software is affected by #RCE flaws
notice that you had to repeat function signature on line 14

print("hello", func(msg string) { ... })

when signature is much larger it becomes very annoying. something like

print("hello", Printer(msg) { ... })

would be perfect, but something something golang generics something?
You Won’t Believe the Simple Error Responsible for VC’s Sexism Crisis
Greg Young also uses that word :)
E*Trade, in Bid to Survive, Returns to Its Roots
Because they're your listings — not your service. If someone saw McMansion Hell they may be inspired to find shitty listings of their own on Zillow, and maybe they just happen to create an account and consider using it to find non-shitty listings when they're ready to buy a house.
> "On HN, the community decides what is acceptable having seen the comment."

Not really, that's just a common fallacy perpetuated from the ones that see their political views represented by the heavy handed moderation around HN, or the ones that actually don't pay attention to what is going on in HN.

Moderators in HN heavily editorialize the Front Page by removing the flags from some posts and flagging other highly voted ones by the community.

They do the same to comments that don't follow their personal views even when those comments don't break any of the guidelines but happen to be against the moderators political views.

Bottom line: You might be deceived by the appearances here, or you might be actually enjoying so see anyone that disagrees with you being shut up in HN, but factually, it's not the "community" of HN that is deciding what is acceptable, it's largely the moderators of HN.
The answer is one of the top comments:

> Yellow. Looks like a squiggle of yellow oil paint squeezing out of a short, fat tube.
We've all been trolled by a toy artist...
It seems to me that there are great benefits to be had if you can keep the transactional integrity of direct connections to a relational database like PostgreSQL. The performance and scalability is often better than people expect because the data stays closer to CPUs and it avoids moving too much across multiple nodes on the relatively slow and unreliable network.

In a lot of cases, there are natural separation lines such as between groups of customers you can use to shard and scale things up. Unless you are building something like a social network where everything is connected to everything, you don't need a database that runs over a large cluster or clustered queues in between components. These are often just more moving parts that can break.
But the code containing the bug is already there. The idea of TDD is that you write tests verifying behavior before there is any code.
It is not Debian's fault that Google prioritizes ad ridden mailing list mirror links over the neat & clean bugs.debian.org pages.
Apple bank? ...and it begins.
> This assumes that if you can create a TXT record for a.com that you must also have access to the ability to create other records for a.com.

Yup! And LE is totally fine with this! Have you read the ACME DNS verification spec?
Ubuntu Desktop Weekly Update: June 30, 2017
Ah the faulty algorithm.
too bad about the RE on the REOI. But TDD really failed because it didn't identify SLG parameters. I don't know if I'd call it a failure though, SLG parameters are usually hard to know before the start of a project and, even, throughout.
I don't follow your reasoning. Please explain how either WWI, WWII or the cold war were caused by limitations on free speech in Europe (which in this context largely means western Europe).
Two cases:

1) MBR "style" partitioning:

in first sector of the disk there are at most 4 addresses pointing to the partitions on the disk (which may consist of primary partitions and as such volumes, or one of them may point to an extended partition that has a chain of EMBR's pointing to logical voluems inside it)
It is trivial nowadays, using freely available software, to search the disk for the volumes and rebuild the partition tabel in the MBR.

2) GPT disk:

The first sector is only a "protective MBR" where in the partition table there is only one entry spanning from sector 2 up to the end of the disk (this can of course be rebuilt in no time).
The issue is that the GPT partition table (i.e. addresses of the volumes) is in the following sectors (and the overwriting of 24 or 9 sectors will destroy the data for good, as normally only two sectors are used) and due to the peculiariries of the way these GPT entries are stored it is slightly more difficult to rebuild the data (though the actual volumes on disk can anyway be found and retrieved/imaged).

But - IMHO more or less the only good thing about GPT - the MBR and all GPT tables are automatically backed up to the end of the disk, so there is usually no need to rebuild anything, it is just a matter to properly restore the entries from the backup.
Recording User's Session
Let’s change how we elect the House of Representatives
Possible, but there's ample evidence around the Yxa (Swedish name for axe) theory. Even use in a similar context: https://i.stack.imgur.com/LNTu2.jpg https://i.stack.imgur.com/xzaQ9.jpg And it matches the "U" for "U-Boat", which apparently would be more common in Swedish (Ubåt) to refer to a submarine. It does require you believe whoever made the ball mixed Swedish and English, which seems possible given that it is a Chinese knockoff of a Hedstrom product.
OP said Finland and USA.

Also, as far as Socialist countries go, there are plenty that come short when it comes to business (Italy, Spain, Greece,etc...)
for those who object to the compromise, how much should mcmansion-hell and the EFF have been willing to spend to fight? It would be many thousands of $$$
...and some thoughts on the matter by another lab member:
https://labsblog.f-secure.com/2017/06/30/what-good-is-a-not-...
Gnuplot needs to die. It is not GNU. It is not libre open source.
Text (aka strings) exists in virtually all software projects

For me, distinguishing between text as something that is intended to be read by humans and strings as serial sequences of characters that may or may not be human readable but will be processed by one or more computing automata is useful. For example in C, the string "Hello World" is terminated by a null character. The null character is not part of the text the string encodes.

Or to put it another way, I find that treating strings as text as two different layers of abstraction clarifies my intent. Code that manipulates text is built on code that manipulates strings and in between there's parsing that has to occur.
That seems like a very limited view: a lot of that “unimportant stuff “ has been massive improvements in safety, durability, fuel economy and emissions, ride quality and comfort, etc.

The other thing to remember is that you're comparing technologies at different parts of their life-cycle: automotive technology matured half a century earlier so it's unsurprising that there's less room for dramatic change, just as the computing market has had periodic plateaus where the annual changes were far less significant to users – how many normal people even know what CPU/GPU they're using?

(and, of course, for awhile they've been moving together as we're seeing manufacturers shipping cars which have things like the ability to stop when a kid jumps in front of the vehicle. That's not just a car thing or just a computer thing but it'll save tens of thousands of lives, which seems a lot more significant than most of what's in an app store)
How would OpenNIC help?
I hope this gets some traction here. This is an apolitical piece, potentially applicable to democratic governance worldwide.
How to MAKE AN APP LIKE TRELLO: CASE STUDY BY QAREA’S EXPERT WEB DEVELOPERS
That's what I came to guess too.
One thing I'd add is that the potential for new technology to better identify risks also is the potential to nullify the need for insurance. It is fundamentally the uncertainty over which house will burn down that leads to the need for insurance; if anyone had a 100% accurate model, the folks who were definitely not going to have their house burn down would not need insurance.
The Plot to Disrupt the NCAA with a Pay-For-Play HBCU Basketball League
This Is the Closest Thing We Have to a Master Equation of the Universe
Thanks, Fenlon J sets out the specious reasoning inadvertently in his analogy quoted in para 30:

>". . . a non-party corporation that warehouses and ships goods for a defendant manufacturing company might be ordered on an interim injunction to freeze the defendants’ goods and refrain from shipping them."

The Canadian courts wouldn't make an order to a Lithuanian warehouse to hold goods being sold by a company in Moldova who happened to have the same name as a company previously the subject of a lawsuit in Canada, would they?! As part of an interlocutory injunction the stated aim of which is to close down that foreign business (it's said [albeit potentially erroneously] that without a Google listing the foreign seller won't be able to continue business) prior to a court judgement on the full facts of the case?

It's good to see that 2 of the judges agreed this was beyond the pale.

At para 53 Abella drops this clanger:

>"It does, however, make Google the determinative player in allowing the harm to occur."

The original harm was twofold. Reselling re-badged products and an allegation of reverse engineering, the selling of the new product "unfairly" leeching from Equustek's sales.

The first part is dealt with by the litigant not selling the product to Datalink to resell. The second part is accomplished by Datalink (incorporated in Canada) no longer existing.

>"Equustek’s claims were supported by a good prima facie case, but it was not established that Datalink designed and sold counterfeit versions of its product, or that this resulted in trademark infringement and unlawful appropriation of trade secrets."

Equustek could proceed and have Datalink closed down by the courts; but apparently haven't bothered to do this for 5 years.

It strikes me the media companies have jumped on this in order to get a judgement allowing them to get interlocutory injunctions (with permanent effects) that force Google to, in effect, close down businesses/websites (by de-indexing) rather than having to get an actual court judgement on the full facts of a case. [See para 66] Datalink have yet to be shown to be guilty, the intended receiver of the Google Order is to shut then down completely - that seems like a loss for the rule of law.
From where I'm sitting, your reply looks a lot like an insult. I hope I'm just reading it badly, but as is, I don't think we're going to have a productive discussion.
But I was under the impression that the point of message brokering is that it doesn't have to be service A that puts it there; only that some service puts the message there.

I feel like the article is attacking message brokering by discussing the disadvantages of bad use cases for them. A good use case for message brokers is when work needs to be done on an item, but not immediately.

My company uses them in a way I believe is quite effective. We pull in data from an external source, and send the ID of the item to about five different queues to do different tasks. Each time one of the queues finishes the work, it send a message to a validator that checks to see if all the work is done. If it isn't, it waits to get that message again from another worker. If it is, it marks that item as ready for the end user.

These are the kinds of use cases I think message brokers should be used for. Not to send a message and wait to get an answer back. Why not just use an HTTP request for that?
It's a scam because they purport to be affiliated with the company everywhere except the disclaimer at the bottom.
I don't believe so. The abstract of the paper indicates that they separated the groups into those who ate 15/20/65% protein ratio through the day, and those who did 33/33/33%.

In my experience, "timing your protein intake" refers to the timing of protein intake relative to exercise, about which I do not have any sense of measurable validity.
Organoids Proposed to Screen Patients for High-Priced Drugs
Microsoft did not live up to expectations... and that for more than 20 years and counting...
The constraints are important. They're what let you code safely, and also give the compiler the ability to optimize better.
Kubernetes 1.7 is released
> If I recall correctly, the Swastika is banned in Germany, [...] Context matters, you know.

Exactly, and that's the reason why you can use the Swastika as much as you want in Germany when the context makes clear that you're not using it for political purposes. These silly strawmen arguments do not help the discussion.
Watch a Supercomputer's Fever Dream of the Chelyabinsk Asteroid Flameout
Microsoft did not live up to expectations. For 20 years and counting now...
How ringless spam voicemails became a partisan issue
Microsoft Office 2017 Product Key and Crack Free Full Version Download
You were right!
Minuscule Measurements Over 12 Years Confirm Existence of Orbiting Black Holes
Morgan StanleyVoice: The Path Ahead After U.S. Leaves Paris Agreement
I currently work at Nokia/Alcatel-Lucent/Bell Labs/foo and there's a lot of restructuring going on. Lots of layoffs and org changes which is making everyone's head spin and adding a lot of uncertainty into the workplace.

A big part of the Alcatel acquisition was acquiring their customers - in a recent All Hands meeting, Nokia stated they were planning to move away from "nuts and bolts engineering". In America at least.
Driverless Cars UK: All the Self-Driving Car Tests in the UK UK
These LED eyelashes are future fashion – The Verge
Pretty sure we had stuff like that in 1997!
The whole point of arbitrary TLDs was to enforce self-segregation for some industries (porn above all), so I expect systems dedicated to web-filtering have adopted or will eventually adopt some policy on the subject. I guess .feedback should be considered "fraud, scam".
This is what ancient, 3km long ice cores tell us about climate change
Apple Celebrates America's National Parks This July with Donations and Apple Wat
I assume you didn't watch the video and therefore didn't understand the point.
If the issue is that the traffic costs money, grandfathering old images doesn't solve the root problem.
Thanks for this answer!
Nanjing Rd has two completely different sections - Nanjing Rd East, which is a boring low-end touristy place, and Nanjing Rd West which attracts upper middle class locals. You can probably argue that lots of stuff there are overpriced, I'd happily agree with you on that, but Nanjing Rd west is definitely not for tourists.

MBP is probably the worst example you can possibly think of - I can order on jd.com and get it delivered in a few days for roughly 105% ($13,888 HKD vs 12,799RMB) of apple.com/hk's listed price. I save a trip to HK and a few hundred $ wasted on flight tickets/hotel stay.

https://item.jd.hk/1989565050.html
iOS requires a touch on the screen to start playing a sound source.
Why not hate both?
bcal v1.6 – Byte CALculator for storage conversions and calculations
Election Fraud Commission Asked for Sensitive Voter Info via Insecure Email
## What's in?

- Evaluate storage arithmetic expressions involving +, -, *, / (thanks @SampuZ)

- A minimal mode (option `-m`) to show result in bytes

- Assume byte if unit is omitted for a conversion

- A Python3 test framework with multiple test cases

- Several fixes and additional sanity checks on input

Homepage: https://github.com/jarun/bcal

Features: https://github.com/jarun/bcal#features
really dumb idea but..

What if the insurer and healthcare provider were one and the same?

Wouldn't that remove the fraud 'game' , increase transparency, and lower premiums?

or will it actually make it 2x worse for the patient?
> Gone are the times of leaky abstraction of the digest loop

But now you have zone and it's leaky. See this stackoverflow question for example: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/43097291/firebase-datasn...

Edit: wrong link
It's really important in TDD to know that your test fails when the code you write for that feature it is missing. If it doesn't fail, that's a false positive. The prescribed pattern is, you write your test (it should be red), you write your code (it should turn green), you commit, push to CI, look at the rest of the tests, make sure none of them turned red... take another look at the code, refactor, commit, push to CI, look at tests again, and then start over on the next feature.

(Edit: OK so reordering the commit is not actually the most important part, it's checking out that commit you reordered: with the code for the test, without the matching code for the implementation; and running the test to make sure that it fails until the feature is implemented.)

I don't really care if you think it's cheating to reorder the commits, if it gets the job done faster / better in some way. I'm not writing code for a grade, I'm writing an application that I'll need to maintain later. If that feature breaks and that test doesn't turn red, it's been a complete waste of time writing it (and actually has provided negative value, because I will now be less inclined to test that behavior manually, knowing that there is a test and it passes.)

That's a false positive that you can easily guard against by reordering the commits before squashing/merging everything back and confirming you see some red where it's expected. (You don't need to reorder if you did actually write the test before writing the code for the feature, but forcing people to do this seems to be the most common cause for complaint about working in TDD. If your developers quit their jobs, then TDD has provided negative value too.)

Meanwhile if you have tools for analyzing code coverage, you can make a rule that code coverage must remain above X% to merge work back to master, or that merges must never decrease the percentage of code covered by tests. You don't have to use these rules, but if you're having trouble getting your team members to test their commits, it's not always a bad idea. It has nothing to do with proving things to managers. Code that isn't covered by tests is code that can break silently without anybody noticing. Code that is covered by bad tests is no better than code that is not covered by any test. It can break without anybody noticing. You need to know that your tests work; if you write the code before the test it's just so easy to accidentally write a test that passes anyway, even if the feature was never implemented.

Also, because you can. Forget TDD completely, if you don't know how to use rebase and cherry-pick, you need to learn to use them so you can reorder your commits.

It makes your history cleaner. Nobody cares what commit you were looking at when you started making your change, that's not useful information. Would you rather have a history that looks like this[left] or this[right]?

http://www.bitsnbites.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/1-nonlin...

You may not care now, but I'll bet you care again if you're stuck doing the conflict resolution when it's time to merge!
You look at the axe and wonder: "why?" :)
I'm thrilled that you created an account to post specifically this comment. It is, indeed, a yule answer.
> Two way data-binding was a feature in 2013 and Facebook said it was a bug. It turns out they were right. Ember, Angular, Vue, and others would later adopt the one-way model.

No, they weren't. It's just a different way to manage state. And VueJS employs two-way binding so I'm not sure what was the intent here.

> Redux brought predictable, functional, maintainable state management to JavaScript.

Stopped reading here. Too sensationalist.
Toyota Completes First In-Home Human Support Robot Trial in North America
I do not see any references to Thought Leader[1].

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZBKX-6Gz6A