skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ah, Dylan was a ton of fun.

First, some personal background: When I was an intern at Harlequin, I was one of the first users of Harlequin Dylan. Later, when CMU stopped work on Gwydion Dylan, I helped start an open source project to maintain it. And when Harlequin wanted to start open sourcing their Dylan (which later became https://opendylan.org/ ), I met with them to help hammer out licensing details. Harlequin released a lot of cool code.

What was cool about Dylan? Well, it was a basically a relative of Common Lisp, but with an infix syntax, but it had been simplified to improve code performance. It was a more ambitious language than Java, with full closures, basic macros, and generic functions. Dylan had static typing if you wanted it, or you could leave code untyped. (Unfortunately, collection and function types were fairly weak due to the lack of standardized generic types.)

In the end, Apple's abandonment of Dylan and the rise of Java united to make Dylan irrelevant. But it was a fun language, and I had a lot of fun hacking in it. I think that the closest popular language at the moment, design-wise, is probably Julia.

I still remember one 20-hour day that where a friend and I set up tower computers in a cozy basement room at Dartmouth, and I eventually convinced the Gwydian FFI tool to parse 10,000 lines of Linux headers.
Incorrect. Bitcoin isn't "backed by electricity". You can't turn Bitcoin back into energy. The energy is used to secure a distributed ledger to prevent double spend attacks on ongoing transactions, in a really inefficient way, but don't call it "backing".

PoS will succeed. It already has, we've set all the pieces. The thing is, you don't want to live in a world where Bitcoin and PoW dominate our financial transactions. That world is not livable.

Bitcoin transactions are secured by spent electricity. PoS transactions are secured by cryptographic signature schemes and reputation of operational security. It's how the world already functions, just more replicated.
But the GDPR doesn't come into effect until May next year.
No. There are sustainable alternatives to PoW. See Tendermint and the Cosmos Network, for example.
Lightning network allows trustless instant and low fee payments.
It is at the embrional stage yet, and the whole structure has yet to be defined, but the point to point protocol for trustless off-chain instant transactions is ready.
Trump pardoned someone who bragged about his self-described "concentration camps" and policing practices targeting people of Latin American descent, then bragged about how he wasn't going to listen to judges who told him to stop doing it. (Among literally hundreds of other instances of corruption, cover-ups, civil rights violations, and humanitarian abuses.)

I don't know how much more explicit you expect his support of white supremacists to be. (Honestly, I doubt you're engaging genuinely at all.)
Has anyone tried this service? I haven't had much luck setting this up... and I'm fairly certain I have the DNS setup accordingly.
Oh, that makes sense. I didn't think of that interpretation.
> Transaction number is not correlated with mining energy expenditure.

You're only kind of right. The mining algorithm cares not one bit about number of transactions, so higher tx volume has no direct effect on the mining energy expenditure. But it does have a second order effect.

More transactions usually entails higher fees (as people compete for block space to put their transactions in). More fees means higher mining rewards, means higher incentive to mine, means more mining activity, and, therefore, higher energy expenditure.
No, you are incorrect. The important aspect of proof of work is that it is very expensive to create an alternate history (maybe one where you didn't send $15,000,000 to the exchange, for example). If you are doing useful work, someone can pay for it, and you can use that payment to make an alternate history for free, defeating the security assumption of blockchains.

Blockchains only work by probably wasting in order to build a history. If you aren't wasting, then it wasn't expensive to build the history (it was subsidised), and it wouldn't be expensive to build a different history (that one could also be subsidized)
No, a transaction here is referring to a transaction. The block reward on Bitcoin is already 12.5BTC is 12.5 × $4000+. That incentives the expenditure of significantly more energy than $20 worth.
Reddit, Twitter, and Facebook are way ahead of the weather channel, local news and the NWS.

We're tracking tornados around our neighborhood in real time by the pictures people are posting and their reports. Also some meteorologists are doing really technical explainers via periscope. You won't see any of this on TV.

TV is to busy covering tornado damage that happened this morning and stretching it into all day coverage. I'm tempted to call them worse than useless, negligent.

When they catch up (hours later) they'll pull video from Facebook or Twitter and mash it up with the same kind of "man on the street" coverage they've been doing for 40 years.

Do they think we don't know how out of date and ridiculous they look? It's surreal.
You are terrible at explaining things and are correcting someone who actually explained it much better than you, even if he is technically incorrect. Your jargon laden overly verbose response is wildly out of place in correcting a simple layman level description of something. It's not appropriate to respond to a simple metaphor by slinging general relativity equations, you've probably instantly turned off anyone reading this from your position and at the end of the day you aren't really saying anything different, you're just trying to sound smart. If you are saying something differently, you've utterly failed to communicate it in any reasonable way.
IMO, the best functional programming resource out there is this free online course by Prof. Dan Grossman at UW: https://www.coursera.org/learn/programming-languages

He focuses on teaching the syntax, semantics, and idiom of Standard ML, a classic functional programming language that's closely related to OCaml, Haskell, and others. He has a gift for explaining simply and clearly and keeps his lecture videos short (~10min) which helps to absorb their info. Check it out: https://www.coursera.org/learn/programming-languages
“It’s not a bug, it’s a feature” – The problem with SemVer
I'm only referring to my own experience.
I could have sworn there was still sizeable Bitcoin mining done near the cheap hydros such as in Washington State(around 3c/kWh).

Sure China and Ukraine is cheaper but not that much.
Amazing how one gets downvoted for stating simple, trivially verifiable facts.

https://i.imgur.com/VYqvYHAr.png

http://www.americaneclipse2017.org/maps/the-sky-during-total...

http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/observing-news...
The thing I find most frustrating about semantic version is that even under the strictest adoption it overly legitimizes breaking changes across major versions.

I see far too much refactoring of JS library APIs that is essentially aesthetic across major versions - D3 and Angular spring immediately to mind (I understand the scalability justification for Angular; I just don't really believe it).

To me, having an elegant API is not the highest concern because what I'm interested in is building products, and from that point of view stability is much more important. I do not appreciate a committee of J Random JavaScript Developers randomly dumping extra work into my product backlog because they didn't like the cut of an API's jib, especially when these people have gone absolutely out of their way to drive adoption in the first place.

To give a counter-example: .NET code I wrote in the mid-noughties whilst working at Red Gate still runs today, substantially unmodified. Some of that stuff is 11 or 12 years old. SQL Dependency Tracker is the most obvious example, because the product hasn't changed much since 2006, except for additions to support new object types in new versions of SQL Server. The fact that new .NET versions haven't broken the product has obviously made it much easier to support through the years.
I have a pet theory (hypothesis?) that infant amnesia is due to acquisition of language. When you gain language and start thinking in it, you lose the ability to meaningfully access memories made beforehand.
You can buy a phone like that, they are usually advertised for rural use

edit: or you can make one http://zerophone.org/ which also has plans to crowdfund some pre-built phones
http://www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/electric-vehicles/ev-em...
Strange that always jm is involved and not flagged, isn't it?
"But the Arpaio case is different: The sheriff was convicted of violating constitutional rights, in defiance of a court order involving racial profiling."
> As for Kotlin, it remains to be seen how much uptake it will actually take.

Kotlin is a language made by JetBrains which happens to be the creator of the official Android IDE. So yes the push will be strong from both Google and JetBrains. Java was a bit more modern than Objective-C but if I see what our junior Android dev has to type and type and type and type in Java to do the same as I do in Swift....kids get bored quick you know...

> Despite all attempts from Apple to push Swift, many keep on using Objective-C.

I don't encounter many during my job as an iOS developer. I encounter people maintaining an existing Objective-C codebase that isn't worth switching and adding 10MB of application weight for Swift.

I guess for all green fields projects 80% is Swift. There's just no reason to use Objective-C anymore since Swift 3 so the only people that choose it are:

a) People interfacing with C / C++ a lot
b) People creating a framework that needs to play nice with both
c) People stuck in old ways
I would go with:

- "Focusing on what is best for the community"

- "Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting" (yes you said not to but it does apply)
*at least an equal amount of energy is needed to reverse it
> The number of transactions is entirely unrelated to the number of people mining

I also commented elsewhere to this effect, but this is not quite true: number of transactions correlates very strongly with higher transaction fees, which further incentivises mining activity. Higher transaction volumes also usually come hand in hand with higher prices, which is another incentive for mining activity. Just because there is no direct effect (which you're absolutely right — the mining algorithm cares not one bit about the transaction volume) doesn't mean there aren't second order effects at play.
The first piece is merely a defamation project and contains a lot of false information. You forced me to publish a statement (and release the emails we exchanged) on that here:

https://digiconomist.net/re-serious-faults-in-beci

The second piece contains a lot of cherry picking that I asked about in these emails as well, but never got a response to (instead my emails were quote mined to support those false statements).

Nothing else to say to you. Everybody else is welcome to ask questions and discuss as usual.
> First off, everyone would agree that humans, apes, dogs, squirrels, spiders - all "think" in essentially different ways.

I wouldn't, and a lot of the other comments on this story imply that they wouldn't, either. As an example, when I think, it's not usually in the form of words until I try to map my thoughts and feelings into a more concrete form. I'm particularly conscious of this because I frequently wrack my mind looking for the word that closest matches the thought that I'm trying to convey. The thought itself starts in a wordless form.

I can force my thoughts into an "audible" internal monologue, and I do when I'm reading, writing, or conversing, but it's a relatively forced way of thinking for me.
Personally, I have not read Feser. I would recommend PMS Hacker's book "Human Nature: A Categorical Framework", which, from reading Fraser's blog posts, I see moves along similar lines. The philosophy of mind is a topic I'm quite interested in, so I think I can respond to some of your questions.

> humans are different because we are capable of abstract reasoning and logic whereas animals are not. Do you suppose animals really are not capable of these two mental faculties?

We need to ask, in what sense and depth are animals able to express that form of reasoning and logic? Humans do so at unique levels through language. There is a layer of reasoning and following logic that can be expressed by being shown by doing, like preparing, but there is another, higher form, that can be expressed by being said through language, like planning. The former is continually in the present. It does involve a kind of thinking and a kind of intelligence. But unlike the latter form, which expresses an understanding, and therefore the ability to express in language, the past and future tenses, there is no expression of why it is being done. That expressing of why, that kind of expression of reasoning, animals lack and humans are capable of through language.

Language is not just some thing we slap over thought. It is an ability that, through its use, expresses the concepts and limits of our thoughts. It is the animate expression of our thinking, that is the collection of our rational and cogitative faculties that define us as persons rather than animals.

It's not so much that animals lack reasoning or logic (that is the view of a crude Behaviorism), it is that humans are capable of the same and far more unique expressions of reasoning and logic than animals, so much so that humans are unique from animals as a result.
I think ReSharper already warns about a lot of those so if you've followed up on those warnings already you're in a good shape to switch to compiler errors. I don't think it'll take a long time to fix all new warnings even on larger projects. But the gains are huge.
No. The effect of the waves is so small that it required a gargantuan project to detect the strongest events. The LIGO detector is possibly the most sensitive instrument of any kind humans have made.
You can't just scale the number of transactions in a block forever and still have a stable currency. If you have only a few miners working on massive blocks, then they confer very little confidence onto the transactions in the blocks. More transactions, more mining. The whole point of the system is to verify transactions and it stops working if it doesn't do that.
Good list for starters, but obviously the reset question has nuances (not opening that can of worms).

One thing that bit me when I was a complete n00b: assigning registers from within more than a single always block. On my simulator (at the time) it worked perfectly but the synthesis tool silently ignored one of the blocks.

EDA tools suck. There I said it. Coming from a software it's truly shocking how poor error/warnings are handled. My "favorite" part is that you cannot enforce a "0 warnings" discipline as the libraries and examples from the vendors provoke thousands warnings and the only workaround is to filter the individual instances of the messages.
> I always like to remind people that Bitcoin miners consume about the same amount of energy as Christmas decorative lights in the US. Kinda puts things in perspective...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
I thought the underlying issue was people dying from exposure to pollution? Or is that not something that you're concerned about?
Web app or Mobile app? (for new companies)
When launching a new company is it best to launch with a web app first, and then develop a mobile app after, or is the reverse better? Why?
No, usually investment provides money for people that want to build something with it, and you get it (and a small profit, for the risk) back afterwards.

In this case, though, no one but you has a benefit.
Not knocking on your effort here, but you think that it would have taken more effort to submit a PR to Vue than building an entirely new open source framework from scratch over the course of several years?

If so, there is something very wrong with the state of open source development.
Given today's technology and sufficient time, you could devise an AI that could watch dance videos, "understand" dance, and create its own Silver Lady.
A lot of research was done by heavyweights for PoS in 2012 and 2013. The consensus was that it was a fruitless pursuit and that PoS could not match PoW in terms of security and decentralization.

Several papers have been written about it.

https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf
^W and other keys are now working after the latest ChromeOS update, so maybe it was just an older version. The rest of the issues remain.
Unfair to compare to PHP and Ruby who blossomed because of the web.

Go and Rust are recent and massively backed.

I did a Pharo MOOC last year, ST is far from dead, it's "streets ahead" in many department its not even funny.
Some NICs actually ban domain squatting, and that’s a good solutiion, IMO.

If you actually need the domain, good, you can get it. If you only want to buy it to sell it later again, your problem.
I can also put that cash in a sufficiently opaque and uninteresting-looking envelope, put it in the mail, and the Post Office will take over. There is time and energy cost incurred, but it is a cost already being paid. Mostly by advertising, right now, since an assortment of lawmakers have decided in their infinite wisdom that it's not something our tax dollars should be supporting any more.
> Plenty of people do dispute historical oppression. Plenty of people deny outright that it was oppression at all. They think it was better back then. And they are not outliers.

I would be surprised of slavery deniers or any comparable entity comprised more than a tenth of a percent of the U.S. population, but I'm happy to be disproven.

> But if you're claiming that historical oppression totally ended at some point, what date do you believe that was?

It depends on how you precisely define "historical oppression". The most common definition I'm aware of refers to slavery, Jim Crowe laws, lynchings, etc. Those things largely ended in the 70s in most places in the U.S., but I'll go so far as to say the 90s.

> They do take issues with a lot of the behaviors of a group that has benefited from and sustains oppression. But I object to that too.

This is sort of my point. I have no idea what you possibly mean by "oppression" or "benefited from" or "sustains". Team "identity" has watered the term down such that I have no idea if you're talking about real oppression (probably not, since that would be newsworthy) or merely women having different career priorities than men. I'm inclined to think if you were talking about meaningful oppression, you could call it by name and wouldn't need to rely on the shock value of the word 'oppression' to advance your position.

If you want to (for example) make things better for inner city black communities, come grab a shovel. But no one is oppressing these communities nor do they have an incentive to do so--poor communities are expensive. If poverty were an easy problem, it would be solved. People who talk about "oppression" and "structural racism" seem to think that wealth is the default state of man, and that poverty can only be explained by oppression.
You're right. Sorry. After re-reading the article I see the entirety of my comment is wrong.
There is also the fear of "nerdy" (or just insecure) men of coming across as creepy, or inappropriate, or harassing. As a result, they are not assertive enough. It's more than just fear of being rejected.

I don't think this has an exact equivalent for women - while women can also be afraid of coming on too strong, I think the fear behind it is different.

(Also, many confident men seem to be entirely devoid of this kind of fear, and as a result unfortunately really act creepily or become "pick-up-artists"... but that is a different topic.)
I'd love to, but as someone who has spent a lot of time looking recently, it's certainly not easy to find anything suitable here in the UK. You can get dumbphones, but getting a good dumbphone, with reliable reception and decent battery life, is a different question altogether.

If you want anything at all beyond basic features, like say a dual SIM option for use when travelling, you're straight into high-end smartphone territory, even if you actually have no interest in the so-called smart parts of the device.
Even algorithms are impressed with Alonso's performance.

Alonso's balls 1 - Honda algorithms 0
The waste mismanagement is not unique to nuclear. Check out this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_Canal#Love_Canal_disaster

Out of all wastes to be mismanaged, higher radiation would probably be the easiest to detect - simple detectors are widely available commercially.

Yes, we need ways to store, or recycle - there are ways to do that too - nuclear waste, but that doesn't seem to be an intractable problem, and I don't think this is the main hindrance to the wider spread of the nuclear energetic. Irrational fears of "radiation" and political issues seem to be more prominent there.
Interesting idea indeed, you could even have the price go up exponentially based on how many domains are already registered to a single entity/address/etc.

First domain? 1 a year. Second? 10. Third? 100. Fourth? 1000.

No one squats domains after that.
That energy is not just confirming the transactions in the existing block, it is protecting all transactions in the blockchain history, adding security to each of them. That represents a history of more than $70 billion in value. Suddenly it doesn't seem so expensive anymore.
I could put you in my will and leave my Nokia to you, I'm fairly sure it will still work by that time :)
I'm just trying to not be absolutest by stating it can't work. I'm in the camp that believes it's just obfuscated PoW.
I don't. It's a guess. But I do think our ability to explain things comes not just from our genes but from our culture, and culture is something animals haven't yet developed.
Well, yeah. This is the company that lobbied hard to restrict release of public research (ie NOAA mapping data). Of course they are scum.
Making Your Own Custom USB Cables
In a pinch, a piece of CAT5 will do.
Basically the animal analog of the turing test?
Furthermore, the "documentation" on this makes it seem ridiculously simplistic in terms of its functionality.

Non authenticated pages are cached regardless of status? Http 500's are cached without an option not to?

The requirement to set a "shard" http header seems to indicate that the http Host header is not used to identify a unique URL?
I'm still curious as to how is this profitable to whoever created it. There is a shit ton of code in this project - this same amount of code written for an employer or commercial project would net the author quite a bit of money - so what's the benefit creating this abomination (that doesn't even work) versus just working on something actually useful?
Would love a source for the "vast majority" part. I doubt hardly any of the apps I use on a regular basis do this, assuming I even give them those permissions.
Maybe We All Need a Little Less Balance
Serious question... Is there any data on usage of tracking for paid vs free apps?

There are plenty of cookie onboarding vendors who will pay a monthly recurring CPM rate for mobile logins that they can match against and they do not require you to show ads.

So if the majority of users are not privacy aware and would just accept whatever permissions are requested, what is the disincentive for a paid app to include these trackers and add a recurring revenue stream?
Second that. I had the same hike in income by calling myself a consultant. Funny thing is that my current contract has run for longer than some perm positions I've had in the past and for all intents and purposes I function like a regular perm employee. Except for the salary.
Check jaekwon's comment above.