skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not really addressing the heart of your question but WaPo is owned by Bezos and his holding company not Amazon. So they would not really have a great reason to siphon off Amazon's revenue stream.
Rust isn't inherently thread-safe; not like in the way Java is thread-safe because of how the JVM's memory model is defined.

Rust makes it really difficult to share mutable data. But once you do that, such as by smuggling a pointer _through_ an unsafe block, all bets are off, even for code outside an unsafe block.

Also, as with Java there will always be bugs in the compiler and runtime. Rust programs were susceptible to StackClash just as much as C applications.

No matter what language you use, if you minimize shared mutable data you'll minimize thread-safety issues.
1) WaPo is not owned by Amazon.

2) That would create a clear conflict of interest. This post is an example of what can happen when you have only one source of funding which you may need to criticize.
I'd advise against doing that. Perhaps use it for yourself but don't bring the client into it.
I think this is a bit of a just-so story. Rebuttals:

* There are top-tier progressive think-tanks that write favorably about single-payer; EPI is an example.

* Single-payer is ideologically anathema to conservatives and libertarians, so a majority of think tanks are going to be constitutionally incapable of proposing plans.

* For the past 8 years or so, progressives have been working to support the health care victory they already achieved in the ACA, which has been under continuous assault since the GOP regained control of the legislature. It would be weird to see them endorsing a new health care system (and, in the process, conceding defeat on the ACA).
Confounding factor: Carbohydrate intake is associated with poverty (because they are generally cheaper).

If anyone has access to the full paper, does it account for this?
This is it. So many people appear unable to understand criticism at a structural level. As long as every individual or corporation is acting as you'd expect them to act given the conditions they're in, we're supposed to throw up our hands.

But of course we don't have to do that. We can note the various reasons things work this way — growing monopoly power, tax laws governing nonprofits, lobbying regulations — and figure out how to change them.
Except for the definition of "evil" is pretty grey. If Google believes that their worldview is the "good", then people who challenge that viewpoint are necessarily harming the good and therefore shutting them down would not be evil at all.
Apple to FCC: Protect net neutrality and don’t allow online fast lanes
Facebook to open source LogDevice
The people with real power in America, connected insiders, the also uber rich, and their media mouth pieces are turning on Google.

This is a call to arms by an elite to elites. Not a call for a fairer market.

Google has gotten away with treating users like products since forever. That won't change since that's how all tech and media companies thrive.

That Google is manipulating the elite behind closed doors is the problem being highlighted. Nothing substantial about how it abuses the public for its own gain.

Note too how this is being posted in Jeff Bezos's paper. This could have been a press release or some industry post, blog, but it's getting prestigious lift.

Right after the "free speech" situation at Google.

Little to NO sustained outrage over their role in the employee recruiting ban with Apple and others, depressing wages for the tech industry.

But it sure feels like today Google alone is being targeted with a wave of negative media coverage.

Note Amazon just rode into our backyards with its barely vetted purchase of Whole Foods.

EDIT big media piles on: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/08/google-is-losing...
Deepsearch is a privacy enhanced search engine from Tsignal
Then the smaller firms could be acquired. As it is, because of the slowing new-company generation, large firms have been getting fewer and fewer options. Small firms can take risks to create new products and processes which can then be acquired and taken up and expanded by large companies. Generally its much more difficult for a large company to do that creation part in-house. So insufficient small firms end up affecting the large-firm capability in the end.
One of the perks of university is there's hopefully a little more distance between admin and fund raising and research, plus tenure, diverse funding, etc. to counteract exactly this scenario.
Not to sound glib but that's nothing new and everyone in the research world knows that. The only new thing here is that it's a public story involving Google.
If you're on Linux, a tiling window manager solves most of these issues with a single monitor.

>On a single monitor, this means endless clicking, scrolling back and forth on the page you are trying to debug, next think you know, your fingers and wrists are sore and you haven't gotten too far in your work and your coworkers tell you that you have RSI.

Trust me, neck problems due to constantly looking at 2 monitors is as bad.
They are small businesses, promoted by hourly workers. What does that have to do with VCs?
Here's a video of the Game of Life on a Penrose Tiling:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DFi4FgzEeQ
It's hardly the fault of the language if people are lying in their method signatures. I'm not aware of a mainstream PL with a type system that is powerful enough to avoid something like that.
"Working for" implies paid employment. He never worked for Google. The think tank is supposed to be independent from its donors. If, in practice, it's not as independent as it's supposed to be, all the more reason to admire him for following the spirit of what the organization was supposed to do. In no way was he legally or morally beholden to Google, despite the fact that it was ultimately revealed that they were in a position to get him fired. If I hold a gun to your head, you don't owe me anything--though you might still do what I say.
Isn't that what at-will employment is? From my last employer's handbook:

Employment at the Company is at will. The policy of at-will employment means that employment with the Company, is voluntarily entered into, and you are free to resign at will at any time, with or without notice or cause.

The policy also means that the Company may terminate your employment at will at any time, with or without notice or cause.

This right to terminate employment with or without notice or cause also applies, of course, to decisions regarding other terms of employment, including but not limited to demotion, promotion, transfer, compensation, benefits, duties, and location of work. No representative of the Company, other than one of the Principals, has the authority to enter into any agreement for employment for a specified duration or to make any agreement contrary to foregoing. Any such agreement must be by individual agreement, in writing and signed by you and one of the Principals. Accordingly, neither this manual nor any policy contained in this manual is intended to imply continued employment or otherwise limit in any way the policy of at-will employment. Nor does this manual, in describing Company policies or procedures, commit the Company, to follow any particular procedure in the course of imposing discipline, changing the terms or conditions of employment, or terminating
Well, Netflix was too big to care until they told people and the public lashed out at them. Their private face is still the too big to care, because they aren't willing to go to the Hearing. Every other Corp obviously feels the same at the top.
Wake up every morning,
Give thanks,
Practice Gratitude to my Wonderful Teachers by practicing sitting meditation.

Catch your luminous mind early in the day and sit in the in-dwelling Nature of Expansiveness and Clarity. Mind has a natural state beyond the vicissitudes and temporariness of all manifestation. Resting in this natural state is the key instruction.

A single drop of water every day can bore a hole through a stone. But splash a bucket of water on a boulder all at once and there's no progress. Steadiness and Regularity in commitment to "polishing" of mind state, clarity, joy, altruistic and beneficent intent and attitude, all lead to serendipitous unfolding.

I'd say find a nice list of skillful mental qualities to cultivate and work on one each day in a rotation. Training diligently in the Four Limitless Abodes or Four Divine Modes of Being (Brahma-Viharas) is my heart's advice to you.
Football can also be played with flags or where players are not tackled by saying the play is over when momentum is stopped. Countless intramural and pickup games are played like this every day. And you still have an offensive line in setup, depending on the number of players.
In addition to what was said already I have recently began to wonder whether "attractiveness" is as clear-cut as what one might initially assume.

For example on two different occasions when I was hanging with two different friends of mine we looked at Tinder profiles of women on my phone and both of them had almost the exact same reaction when I started swiping; "wow, you and me have really different taste in women!"

In both cases I was swiping on the women that I found to look the most attractive. Previously I might have thought that everyone would agree that these women were attractive.
Some syntactic sugar can help with this a bit; here's the same code rewritten using the pipe operator in Elixir:

def make_tiramisu(eggs, sugar1, wine, cheese, cream, fingers, espresso, sugar2, cocoa)
beat(eggs)
|> beat(sugar1, wine)
|> whisk
|> beat(beat(cheese))
|> fold(whip(cream))
|> assemble(
soak2seconds(fingers, disolve(sugar2, espresso)))
|> sift(cocoa)
end

It reads a lot closer to the recipe, though the nested multiple operations are still a bit hard to read. Separating them into their own named functions would probably be better.
> The hyperspec has a definition of what is a variable

The hyperspec's definition only applies to the hyperspec, not the paper. On the hyperspec's definition, an array cell is not a variable, but it seems very unlikely that this is what the author of the paper intended. It's much more likely that what the author intended by "variable" the CLHS calls a "place". (But this is exactly the problem: we don't know what the author of the paper intended because he didn't say. We have to guess.)

> vars take on values only of the specified typespec

Right, but the spec doesn't actually say what happens when this constraint is violated.
Exactly. Almost any error can be a type error with a sufficiently expressive type system, because a type system is just a way to mechanically prove things about your code. A more expressive type system lets you prove more useful things.

Of course, you can easily do things in a dynamic language that are observably correct, but which are very difficult to prove correct without advanced logic (i.e., an expressive type system). And more advanced type systems typically lose some nice ergonomic properties of simpler type systems, such as clear error messages, type inference, principal types, or decidability. So I can definitely see how someone moving for example from Java to Python would find the latter very liberating at first.

On the other hand, you can argue that people shouldn’t be writing code that’s so difficult to prove things about in the first place. :)

To my mind, the benefit of static types is that they allow proving properties of your code, but the cost is that they may force you to do so; the benefit of dynamic types is that they don’t force you, but the cost is that they don’t allow it.

On balance I think static types are therefore preferable, because you can always fall back to dynamic types (strings/hashes/variants/sums) in a static language, but you can’t “fall forward” to static types in a dynamic language.
Exactly. Huge corporations would LOVE to push their health insurance costs to the taxpayers.
Apple Balks at Higher Web-Access Fees After $1B Video Bet
Even George Costanza knows it's okay to eat garbage if it's on top.~

People in general are way too picky about what they shove down their gullets. It's just chemicals, and the chemicals in formula are close enough to natural milk that it won't kill fragile human babies. Likewise, the chemicals in Soylent are close enough to food that you can quaff it in lieu of eating.

The only problem is determining which chemicals are actually important, which is somewhat difficult, because yadda yadda yadda unethical human experimentation....

But that wire-mom vs. cloth-mom monkey experiment should also suggest that there's more to breastfeeding than just nutrition.
Heck of a lot of Dog wagging here over whether or not Google could legally apply the pressure they did.

The answer is yes, they could. Great.

The issue isn't whether or not they could. It's whether or not they should be in a position to do so - is the concentration of power required to apply such pressure healthy for society as a whole?

It is worth noting that at the time of me making this comment, this is not a single point arguing directly that such concentration is healthy or beneficial.
I'm always bothered by un-edited podcasts. It isn't hard. I have a tiny little podcast with few listeners and still edit them all. For an hour long podcast I can easily cut out 5 minutes worth of pauses, "ummm"s, "you know"s, talking over each other and mis-talking. Makes the podcast sound so much smoother.

Probably takes me somewhere between 2-3 hours to edit a 1 hour podcast. Yes, that is a lot, but if 100 people listen to it and it saves then 5 minutes then that is well worth it. As an added plus, you and your guests sound a lot smarter.
Incorrect. He was not a Google employee. Google was a patron of the nonprofit think-tank, NA, and he worked for NA. The patron didn't like what think-tank was saying and used leverage to corrupt think-tank because it's leader lacked integrity and moral courage. NA's leadership could've chosen to say "FU and here's your money back" to Google, but they didn't. NA sided with Google, but he still isn't, and never was, a Google employee. It's fucked up and every NA patron should pull their funding if they had any integrity.
Nah, you're over thinking it. Heavy hits are perfectly legal and (for the most part) the refs aren't making mistakes or ignoring illegal behavior. Enforcers just discourage the opposing team from making those legal hits.
It's like some Jewish organization funding Nazis and then being surprised (and angried!) that [Nazis] bit the hand that fed them. It's somewhat incomprehensible.

Perhaps people assume that Google funded this org because of the ideas it spread, and not for some profit motive, or for some outcome. So now it seems it was never about the ideas. I mean, the left is for anti-monopoly laws, therefore that something like this might happen should have been pretty clear.

So it's either stupidity on part of Google, or perhaps they fund such organizations in order to have control over them. (invisible hand of self-censorship, because money)
I think the Bench logo is confusing. I've never heard of the company before, but the logo looks like it might read "Bench Pi". It's the pi symbol in a shield (although it's so small it's very hard to tell at first glance), so... I'd guess the company has something to do with setting math-based benchmarks as some sort of metric-as-a-service?

[looks at about page]

Okay, no, it's nothing like that at all. The logo gave me the wrong first impression of the company.
I'm surprised by the complaints about Postmates in this thread. I use it 1-2 times/week for various pickup tasks (food, items from walgreens, items from safeway), and I'm always pleased with the service / speed.
It depends what you mean by "our" understanding. If the "our" refers to us paranoid computer professionals, then I completely agree with your characterization. If the "our" refers to society at large, then I do think there was a sea change with Snowden.

Furthermore, there is a distinction between understanding how vulnerable everything is, and believing that the modus operandi of government institutions is actually that of an attacker (and furthermore, the societal effects when that belief becomes widespread. But I digress).

The only point I was picking on is your characterization of Wikileaks's approach to audience-impedance-mismatch as "contempt". Contempt of the lagging-understanders isn't outright wrong - I can try it on myself, but dwelling on having contempt for say everyone using gmail wouldn't be healthy or productive. But it's certainly not charitable to ascribe to others, which is why I said it comes down to pure political disagreement.
I would argue that the NCAA stands in the way of a true professional minor system similar to Baseball.

NFL doesn't prevent the minors from existing, NCAA does.
The New CEO of Uber Sits on the Board of The New York Times Company
Barry Lynn (and the organization) was doing the work he was hired to do.
What happened to the exhaustive list of unnamed Github contributors? I thought that was a really powerful marketing method: dear unnamed Github user x1230134384, your contribution has been acknowledged! Feedback without requiring identification, it's kindof very cool in a project like this.
Eh, not really, it's just going to require an exponential increase in computing power. They already have the platform, in theory it would just be about scaling.

That said, it's kind of a huge scaling problem. If it really is a matter of throwing more hardware on it, and they currently use, say, 100 servers, they're going to need 429496729600 servers to get the same times they are getting now.
That's the first time I've ever seen someone else mention "Synergy"

I used it back in college When I had a spare laptop I wanted to use as a second display. It seemed like it was doing really hacky things behind the scenes but was probably the easiest instance of "Software Remote KVM" I've ever seen.
The correct response would be "Go ahead, kill me now, motherfucker." ;)
It's an incredible website! But it still does not work completely "right." For example, the back and forth buttons don't navigate to the correct scroll locations.

This actually illustrates his points. Which is this: the browser(s) ALREADY implement all of those features. It already knows forward and backward and new tabs and link and etc. etc. etc. SPA's completely ignore these and must re-implement everything. This means:
* choppy differences between different SPA
* when new browsers come out with new navigation features, guess what, you have to reimplement them!
* Extra javascript code
* Extra bug opportunities
* What if a user keeps your page open so long that you change JSON? I have seen my wife keep a tab opened for weeks....

I guess this is just my DRY training kicks into overdrive, but reimplementation of well-tested, well-proven patterns really doesn't smell right. Which was his point.
"Retired" as in burned up over the Pacific.
Okay, reality check time. Houston is the ninth busiest port in the US [0], it's the epicenter of the biggest petroleum refining region in the US [1], it has a huge banking and white-collar infrastructure, it contains a bunch of world-class universities [2], and has the largest medical center in the world [3].

None of this was true for Galveston in 1900 except the bit about being a port. Houston has taken a big hit, but it's not leaving the global stage.

[0] http://www.nglog.com/about-us/the_usas_busiest_ports

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_refining_in_the_Unit...

[2] https://www.visithoustontexas.com/about-houston/colleges-and...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Medical_Center
Businesses large and small can make business decisions. But only especially large businesses can go around making "offers you can't refuse" to every think tank in order to get what they want.
This is the article in a nutshell. Google funds anti-monopoly think tank. Anti monopoly think tank writer praises the EU for fining Google for being anti competitive, Schmidt gets guy fired by threatening to withdraw funding. I know that's just his side of the story, but it doesn't look great for the think tank or the Google.

If you didn't know it already, think tanks are a euphemism for propaganda machine.

Shortly after my group published a statement praising the European Union for fining Google for violating antitrust standards in June of this year, I was contacted by Anne-Marie Slaughter, the president of New America, who said that Eric Schmidt, Google’s parent company’s executive chairman, was furious about the statement. Schmidt, she said, was threatening to pull his name and substantial funding from New America in retaliation.
Europe has no standard size rink. Finnish league is different from the Swedish league etc.
There's a huge range of possibilities between "I don't trust anyone and use only a CPU I made by hand and software I wrote bit by bit" and "I execute everything blindly that shadyapp.com sends me daily".

Debian for example has people review everything that goes into the package repositories, has policies about what types of things are allowed, and the history of packages on the repository can be inspected. An app developer couldn't selectively deliver a malicious key-leaking version of an application to an individual user running Debian with the application installed from Debian's repository.
> some states have at-will employment

All states except Montana at 0.32% of the population.
99.68% of the population of the US are in at-will employment states. Most everyone is under at-will.

The negative consequence is that if you cannot have a meaningful income to survive while exercising your rights, do you have a right to begin with?
The calculator link you gave is doing exactly the same thing, smallest percentage is 1%. It doesn't make sense.
Postmates is a disaster of immature management. I worked in engineering for a while. I spent many Fridays at Hotel Utah Saloon listening to Bastian try to argue his points like "Women couldn't possibly write code as well as men." I also watched the company transition from a point where Bastian and Sean would get into open fights in the middle of the office. Bastian would tell everyone they were fired. Eventually the company got bigger, they moved into a new office and Sean reasoned to keep Bastian away from the company. Bastian's hot head and immoral demeanor makes Travis Kalanik look like a good person. The only way to get ahead at Postmates is to be part of the "f-ck buddy" group in the office. Go out drinking with Sean and you will get a raise and a promotion. They brought on new managers and new middle-tier but as all of us saw, it was more of the same like minded childish ways that ran wild.
This looks similar to Humio
yes, CS is misnamed.
Arithmetic – 6 to 60 in binary, is it possible?
This...doesn't quite compute to me. Professional football was born out of amateur athletic clubs and college clubs. The lack of a development league for the NFL is lamentable for a few reasons, but I don't think it's insidious that people play for free then get the attention of the NFL, if only because most people play football because they enjoy the sport.

If HS and CFB didn't exist, there would be no NFL, because it would mean that everyone stopped caring about football.

(Disclosure: I live near Pittsburgh; even though I never played, the sport runs deep in the roots of the area!)
Maybe, but they LOVE the huge competitive advantage it gives them over smaller and more nimble firms nipping at their market share, because it's very onerous for small businesses to competitively offer health benefits.
Only 2.5 percent of Journalists solicit end-to-end encrypted communication
root_axis' reply is what I was calling bad faith:

"Castigating someone else's opinions as the destruction of open discussion is the height of irony."

This is putting words into kobeya's comment, which was about discourse, not discussion.