skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> My goal would have been to have one generic type that can store the cell types text and number which I can store in an array.

FWIW generics wouldn't help you with that, "sum types" would. A sum type is a souped-up enum which can store associated data alongside the "enum tag", so you can have e.g.

enum Foo {
Bar(String),
Baz(u8, u32),
Qux,
}

and at runtime you ask which "value" is in your enum:

match foo {
Bar(s) => // got a Bar with as string inside
Baz(n, _) => // got a Baz, took the first number
Qux => // Got a Qux, it stores no data
}

(and in most languages the compiler will yell at you if you forget one of the variants).

So for your use case you'd have e.g.

enum Value {
Boolean(bool),
Integer(u32),
String(String),
// etc…
}

> I played around with interface and reflect.TypeOf but lost too much performance compared to just storing everything in a string.

Maybe try a struct with an explicit tag rather than reflection? e.g.

type ValueType int
const (
TYPE1 ValueType = iota
TYPE2
TYPE3
// … one for each concrete type you want to wrap

)
struct Value {
type ValueType
value interface {}
}

and then you can

switch value.type {
case TYPE1:
value.value.(Type1)
case TYPE2:
value.value.(Type2)
// etc...

I'd expect reflect.TypeOf to be very expensive, this is a check + a cast.
> regulatory solution that makes the free market work

The amount of cognitive dissonance in the comments here is astounding.
The Power of Pettiness
Yes, I see this value. But again, that's something that could rather easily exist as an open-source, self-hosted tool, and I kind of wonder why the middleman hasn't been optimized away.

We're in a world where people would rather self-host github to save a few bucks...this is an easier problem.
Is there a qualitative difference? I was under the impression that neuro networks worked by converging to a solution BY randomly stumbling into it? Is my rudimentary understanding off this off?
>This is not a narrative, this is the technical facts. You're pushing a narrative.

Then you immediately launch into narrative, one that avoids detailing how Jihan doesn't control the hashrate. Individual buyers and operators of Bitmain's mining hardware do. You are attributing things in plainly incorrect ways.

>Bitcoin mining has never been as centralized as it is right now with one man controlling over %70 of the hash rate via multiple pools.

Nothing about the owners or the choices they can make with their hashrate. All some narrative about "evil Jihan."
> Space probes may be cheap but they are slooooowwww

If we spent as much on a space probe (or probes) as on a manned mission, I imagine there would be enough weight capacity to make the unmanned rover (or rovers) faster, if that was considered worthwhile.

Also consider that the total distance traveled by a unmanned rover over the course of the mission already exceeds that of manned missions. Wikipedia links to a nice chart from NASA [1].

Distance traveled and speed to travel that distance isn't necessarily connected to the value of a rover.

As to "all that new technology [we gain from manned exploration] would probably make it easier to later send rovers all over the solar system", frankly, we could just develop the new tech for unmanned exploration directly. Manned missions primarily serve as PR, except when we actually need careful manipulation, like repairing the Hubble, something that has almost continuously been pushed off to the point where it likely makes sense just to replace it.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Roving_Vehicle#/media/Fi...
Right. The solution is for them to immediately say: We need 3 people to take this offer of $800 in US cash (not vouchers), or 3 people will be selected randomly.

I guarantee there will be enough takers. The issue is, even though the cost of overbooking is already factored into the cost of the flight, the airline is still trying to eek out extra dollars by offering less than the cost (vouchers, starting with lowball offers, etc).
yeah, I don't fully understand this. I've had the least problems with GOPATH than I have with any other language. You literally set GOPATH=${HOME} and it just works.
omg That is an awesome idea. I feel like it would be really fun to write and super entertaining to shout at a robot DM when things go pear-shaped.
It is new to C#, which is slowly catching up to Scala and F# in that regards. Mads Torgesen is good friends with Martin Odersky, in fact, when I first met Mads back in 2006 or so, they were talking about adding pattern matching to C#. C# is a much more conservative language, and it makes sense it would take a while to add.

There are good reasons to use C#, so when it gets a new feature that other languages have had for years, well, it is newsworthy.

Now when will javascript get pattern matching?
PHP has had a dedicated password hashing function since version 5.5: it's password_hash().

But at least, if you want to roll your own password hashing, do it right: use hmac, salting, stretching and a decent hash function - or use bcrypt/scrypt and save yourself a few headaches.
Disclaimer: I mean this with love

This post really frustrates me, because the lengthy discussion about identifying problems and implementing solutions is pure BS. Go read the years worth of tickets asking for monotonic time, and see how notable names in the core team responded. Pick any particular issue people commonly have with golang, and you'll likely find a ticket with the same pattern: overt dismissal, with a heavy moralizing tone that you should feel bad for even asking about the issue. It's infuriating that the same people making those comments are now taking credit for the solution, when they had to be dragged into even admitting the issue was legitimate.
> Not to sound like an anti-intellectual, but could it be a misnomer to assume that innovation comes from academia.

The use of “misnomer” in that sentence is, itself, misnomer. What you describe is, perhaps, a mistake, but not in naming.
I think you mean to use a total transaction number for bitcoin, rather than a per-second number, to compare to Visa.

If we use the 7 TPS number that people seem to be using (even though the real number I think is slightly lower), then we end up with 220,752,000 transactions in a year; three orders of magnitude less than Visa.
I think the implied point is that somehow telecom business or software design wizards are meddling with what the user sees in digital catalogues, in contrast to the Dewey Decimal, LoC, or other supposedly more neutral topical classification.

It's still a tossed-off claim, and I wouldn't even agree anyway under the best good-faith understanding of what he's trying to say.
Does that mean it now throws an error if you use the common punt like `foo, _ := …` and never check `_`?
What's that on his face?
Also note, some of the tooltips appear as "undefined" and there's no way to advance the cursor past a horizontal rule at the end of the document.
I agree that there are safe (or safer) ways to do things in PHP, but in business settings, it's often hard to enforce such things. "Discipline" is very hard to maintain consistently across people with different backgrounds.

I've actually gone as far as rejecting commits that failed the linter and style checker, but that only works for code bases I have control over. It doesn't apply to the libs.

I now prefer languages where the entire ecosystem is passing strict compilation requirements.
My complaint is that the airlines are too quick to bump people involuntarily and too quick to complain about overbooking. The "problem of oversold flights" (as the article puts it) is trivially solved without involuntary bumping. They just don't want to.

This article paints involuntary bumping as some terrible thing the airlines are saddled with, and this new approach offers a way to finally get past it. Which just isn't the case at all.
It depends ... the treatment may be wanted, but unless it has a much higher cure rate than the current regimen, no insurer will offer it, and no single payer system will either.

In the UK we have NICE (National Institute for Clinical Excellence) who make the decision over what drugs can be used on the NHS (and most private insurers use the same gradings), if it doesn't offer a clear benefit over the existing treatment in both effectiveness and then cost it won't be approved.
Extensions (with permission to a domain) can inject elements and javascript into webpages, and javascript running in a page can use the DOM APIs (the same APIs that a webpage's own code uses) to see what's on the page, including form content.

Chrome extension sandboxing is mostly about controlling what webpages an extension can manipulate, not so much about how it can manipulate it. It's not obvious that there is a better sandboxing solution for the general case. (There are possibilities for specific uses though: Safari has APIs for extensions to use set up regexes to block images/ads without needing permission to run arbitrary code on sites.)
Unfortunately without the protections that most show business workers enjoy.
While "fuck generics" might be a low-resolution characterization, it's not entirely inaccurate, and the efforts of Taylor (and perhaps others) notwithstanding, as long as anyone is writing things like "I don't have in my mind a clear picture of the detailed, concrete problems that Go users need generics to solve," there's reason to believe it's apt enough.

As other respondents to the GP comment show, it's not at all hard to come up with that ostensibly elusive picture if you're attending to it. So I suppose the obvious takeaway is that they're still not really attending to it. Which is fine, Go clearly has its niche and its fans, and people who don't want a pretty good Blub have other options.
There are many comments griping about generics. There are many comments griping about the Go team daring to even ask what problems the lack of generics cause.

But take a look at this article about the design goals of Go: https://talks.golang.org/2012/splash.article Look especially at section 4, "Pain Points". That is what Go is trying to solve. So what the Go team is asking for, I suspect, is concrete ways that the lack of generics hinders Go from solving those problems.

You say those aren't your problems? That's fine. You're free to use Go for your problems, but you aren't their target audience. Feel free to use another language that is more to your liking.

Note well: I'm not on the Go team, and I don't speak for them. This is my impression of what's going on - that there's a disconnect in what they're asking for and what the comments here are supplying.

(And by the way, for those here who say - or imply - that the Go team is ignorant of other languages and techniques, note in section 7 the casual way they say "oh, yeah, this technique has been used since the 1970s, Modula 2 and Ada used it, so don't think we're so brilliant to have come up with this one". These people know their stuff, they know their history, they know more languages than you think they do. They probably know more languages than you do - even pjmlp. Stop assuming they're ignorant of how generics are done in other languages. Seriously. Just stop it.)
Not in a literal sense of the word, perhaps. But in practice, "idiomatic C++" is taken to mean STL- and Boost-like.
While the trope of mixing animals with human forms to create demonic images goes back as long as we have had civilization (notable examples from Greeks, Egyptians, and Mesopotamia) - it was Leonardo Da Vinci's notes from "Study of a Dragon" from 1513 that crystalized an important component of the concept:

If you wish to make your imaginary animal seem natural…take
for the head that of a mastiff or a hound, the eyes of a
cat, the ears of a porcupine, the nose of a greyhound, the
brow of a lion, the temples of an old cock, and the neck of
a turtle

Which is to say - if you want to make something terrifying to humans you take known (fearsome) elements and mix them into a previously unknown combination. One strikes that balance of known and unknown.

Truly terrifying things that may exist in the universe at large may not come across as terrifying to us given that we have had no exposure day to day (GRB's, anti-matter, etc).

One of my favorite (possibly apocryphal) anecdotes about this failing is when the Egyptian dynasty under the reign of Thutmose I expanded into Phoenicia (modern day Israel/Syria) they tried bringing their religion with them. During the Middle Kingdom the god of Chaos (and evil) Set was depicted by a Hippo. The Phoenicians were unfamiliar with the animal and in turn had a hard time taking the religion seriously. The religion was not adopted widely outside the Nile valley.

Anyways, here's a fun tool that let's you mix and match various animals to create your own terryfing beast: http://www.universalleonardo.org/playActivity.php?id=525
forgot to switch to his sockpuppet account
Just because there is one attack-vector available against your privacy doesn't mean that you should just widely open other attack-vectors.
You're just going to throw that out there with no explanation? Waterloo had a very strong reputation prior to NAFTA. In the 1990s, prior to the tech boom, it was far less common for co-op students to do work terms in the US, but the school was still just as highly regarded as it is now for CS/engineering/math grads.
Please tell me which US airline other than Southwest gives a full refund (even if it's in the form of airline credit) on a no-frills basic economy ticket to a passenger without special status after 24 hrs of booking the ticket.

The last I checked most of them charge change fee to the tune of 150-200 dollars. Moreover, if you get it in the form of airline credits it's further restricted in the sense that the credit is available only to the person under whose name the ticket was booked. So if I book tickets for my daughter and pay for them and have to cancel them, I can't use that money other than to buy a ticket for my daughter on the same airline in the next 12 months.
Well, there's Backblaze B2, it would only cost $0.10 per download: https://www.backblaze.com/b2/cloud-storage.html

Alternatively, there's bittorrent, which was pretty much designed for this.

But considered you can find decently priced dedicated servers with unmetered gigabit ports, seems like installing Linux + nginx and enabling automatic security updates might still be the best option.
At some point you need to accept that a government does represent the people.

Not everyone and not all the time but over a sufficiently large time frame it does.

This doesn't mean that Chinese are inherently oppressive it just means that the current cultural construct does heavily lean that way.

There is a reason why you cannot transform a dictatorship into a democracy overnight without heavy and and continous influence.
A democracy lives not because of a piece of paper but because the cultural construct of the people supports it.
And while it is a chicken and the egg problem at some point that argument becomes irrelevant.

For China to change it will have to change its cultural constructs that allow it to sustain itself as it does today.
Shouldn't we be researching ways to terraform Mars from afar rather than ship a couple humans to go live in the middle of red rocks for a few decades and then die?
SourceLair – Terminal Upgrade
http://urbanedge.blogs.rice.edu/2015/09/08/forget-what-youve...
DraftKings and FanDuel will no longer merge
> That's not exactly surprising, the C# community has been doing that since the beginning of the language, anything not in the language is pointless academic wankery, and as soon as Microsoft announces it it's the best innovation in computing history since Microsoft was created.

That isn't true inside Microsoft. Many of the people who work on C# are the same academic wanks that work on Scala or F#. C# has a different user base from those languages though, so they still have to be careful what they add to the language, and many language features are planned 3 or 4 versions in advance.
That will be a valid rebuttal when ten million shitty shared hosts are no longer on 5.x - and probably an out of date 5.x at that.
Meter! That's what I forgot!
One person's "leadership" article is another person's "entrepreneurship" article is a third person's "management" article and a fourth person's "SAAS" article. For example, currently https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14763111 is the top story on the front page. There are perhaps several dozen tags that might point to the bit or piece that one or another individual might find most interesting and each of them is going to be misleading or disappointing for another...think about the potential unfulfilled expectations that a simple |Go| might create.

For me, the only site that really has useful tags is StackOverflow and the price of those useful tags is massive moderation and (to a first approximation) no socializing or chatting or arguing or cathartic expressions of opinion. And complaints about the price of a useful tag system applied to fairly objective topics.
Wow, I just visited their website and it's awful. I saw a total of 4 or 5 different popup widgets[1]. What a nightmare.

[1]: https://i.imgur.com/EMdObEd.jpg
I'm well aware of that. The original comment suggested that password hashing is bad, I was trying to identify what the poster thought should be used instead.
You didn't notice the sarcasm?
That's going to happen before go 2. Go 1.9 / 1.10 time frame.
Most of these comments seem to read more into the guy's article than there is. Nowhere did he advocate throwing away digital searches and returning to card catalogues. You can be nostalgic for something old-- especially just the aesthetic, which is mostly the case here-- without demanding it be brought back.
A pretty basic example, but one which illustrates your earlier point pretty well.

Even if we assume that it were a perfect piece of software 10 years ago, craigslist, at some point within the past few years, updated its CSS to include @media rules to display properly on mobile browsers. This update needed to be made in order to support an entire class of devices that didn't exist 10 years ago.
I feel there should be an agent with a fiduciary duty to my best interest.
I am right up your alley as a customer. Here's where you lost me.

1. Coverage. Where are you located and what's your service area. (I did see it at the bottom in a small font, it's not enough)
2. Price and general conditions. Should be the front of your service. Just like the uhaul trucks. IMHO.
3. More pictures of the car/cars. Could it fit my family? Could it fit more equipment than what you initially put in it?

There's just not enough details on the landing page to get me interested enough to even drop an email.
I think blockchains are more practical for a few traders who meet around a Buttonwood Tree (permissioned) than they are for the public.

The reason we got so far before blockchains were invented was that you've never get a paper in a CS conference if you built a distributed system that did not increase it's ability to handle more workload AT ALL when you add more nodes.

If 5 parties that don't trust each other 100% share a blockchain they get a lot of benefit from that. Upping that 5 to 500 or 5000 does not increase the value proportionately. That is, blockchains don't scale.
If anyone is interested in learning more about Liu's "controversial arguments", I encourage you to read Charter 08, the document for which he was imprisoned and brutalized:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_08

Original Chinese: http://www.2008xianzhang.info/chinese.htm

English Translation: http://www.hrichina.org/en/content/238
It's actually "raízes cúbicas", "raiz" is female.
I'm impressed to see "multiplicação" correctly written in an English language page, usually everyone ignores tildes and ç, but they are important.
Yeah, there were certainly ground-rules established ahead of time, and we wouldn't have even considered it if we didn't have a pretty excellent relationship.

It's been ~18 months so far and things are still going great. I really don't know what we would have done without the extra help just a phone call away...
the use of the monotonic click example is also interesting because of the similar tone of responses to that issue. I think it's just the rsc way.

basically it goes like:
> If google isn't screaming about it, it's not important.
> If google has a workaround, then it's fixed.
"Notwithstanding the above, you grant us a non-exclusive, royalty-free, transferable, sub-licensable, worldwide license to use, store, display, reproduce, re-post, modify, create derivative works, perform, and distribute User Content on the Site or Application or other third party websites or application..."

Well... no
Any chance you want to try PVS-Studio on QEMU? It's about one million lines of code, do not huge but definitely nontrivial. We use static analysis and have reached almost zero defects.

You can contact me at pbonzini@redhat.com if you are interested.
(Chinese citizen here)

I do know a decent number of top Chinese VCs looking into investments in Silicon Valley. Those funds are typically started by Chinese entrepreneurs who made a fortune in things like the internet wave or real estates.

There do exist branches of Chinese government, or nation-owned organization making investments in US. But they are not the top VCs, and I haven't seen any of them taking a stake in a top US AI startup.

There are a couple of reasons why Chinese money is flooding into silicon valley. First, there is too much cash in the domestic market and not enough good tech investments to make. Second, there is a fear that Chinese economy might crash someday so having oversea investment diversifies the risk.
> For some reason the unmanned missions are managed much better.

I think it's largely because they don't have so much safety-related red tape. Loosing a robot is not nearly as big of a deal as loosing a human.
The inverse of course is to remember that new technology is hot, cutting edge, and cool... thus good! Old technology is just tech that has managed to solve problems for years, survived many users, grown through numerous changes in application and expectation, and has an established base of understanding and knowledge both within its very implementation as well as those who work with and on it. I look backward on the 40+ years of predictions to the ends of paper, internal combustion, hydrocarbon fuels, and general ignorance since I've been reading and chuckle remembering the hubris of those who were certain the hot new thing would clearly displace older technology simply because something was new.
Again, you are getting offended. Not once did I suggest editor implementors are clueless. They're likely some of the best and sharpest developers out there. Please, as I mentioned earlier, take this project with a grain of salt.

By "fallen behind" I meant still making the assumption that many users are still using outdated browsers. This is not the case anymore, especially in the last year. And because of this fact, many WYSIWYG editors might be implementing a lot of cross-platform bloat that just isn't necessary any more. Rather than raging, perhaps browse through the ProseMirror source and see what you can remove as "obsolete" code.
Regular airlines offering ultra-low fare deals (such as those offered by Spirit Airlines) is a new trend.

Not being able to cancel / refund your ticket is NOT a new trend.

Other than Southwest most airlines would not let you change your tickets without paying a fee, and this has been the case since quite a few years.