skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
As someone who's been using Vim for years, I'm not sure if as a newcomer I'd be intrigued or scared off by that intro video.
C++ in the right hand is very succinct and expressive for solving algorithm problems. If someone claim c++ expertise but switch to their secondary language for some questions I'd think twice about hiring them.
The point of having the monopoly is be able to strictly enforce restrictions on things like marketing through an organization that is judged by compliance rather than by selling as much as possible.

> Well, if you nationalize heroin retail, then you will need to have a heroin shop in every hamlet, town, and neighbourhood. It hardly seems practical. You'll just end up with a somewhat smaller black market, instead of eliminating it.

Yet somehow places like Norway, with a population density nearly identical to Ontario manages to keep the black market for wine and spirits quite small, despite very high taxes on them compared to e.g. neighboring Denmark.

Which means there already is a suitable retail network. Or you can license pharmacies.

And the big difference is that people would be assured of getting clean, uncut, predictable doses. The cost of heroin is also so high and unstable that while there is reason to be concerned about making it too cheap, a large portion of the harm from heroin today is the high cost. The daily consumption of heroin for a typical user in clean, medical grade heroin costs less than $20 (we know, because it is produced for medical use, and prescribed e.g. in UK hospitals).
On one hand I agree, but on the other many people do not believe "slavery" exists anymore. It would be a hard sell to get everyone onboard to support this cause with that rhetoric.

I've run into this when I've discussed sex slavery with people. The word slavery visibly doesn't sit well with some as a description for what's happening.

In the end, what matters is that support is brought against trafficking and slavery.
I think you are making evolution sound less scientific than it is.

One thing that is a certifiable fact is that species are not fixed. As shown by the fossil record, new species can show up and old species go extinct. And in a smaller time scale, the artificial selection that happens with domesticated plants and animals shows that there can be significant changes in species.

Once we realize that some sort of evolution must be happening the question becomes to explain what mechanism is behind it. One of the initial hypothesis was the Lamarckian theory that animals can pass on to their offspring traits that they acquired via their lifestyle. This was eventually proven false when we found no evidence that this is not how genetics actually works. Darwin's theory of natural selection is still with us because it withstood the test of time, not because it is unfalsifiable.

This is very clear if you read Darwin's books. He was aware that there are many
things that would contradict his theory if they were true and he spends lots of chapters refuting them.

A more modern source I like to point to is Talkorigin's list of 29 evidences for macroevolution. It covers many of the things known to Darwin and more recent developments such as genetics, molecular biology and new fossil finds. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
> Fundamentally correct? Evolution is neither demonstrable nor falsifiable, so it's not scientific.

Being 'scientific' is not required for an idea to be correct (nor does it imply the idea is correct).

Though frankly, when they said "fundamentally correct" they meant "doesn't have any significant conflicts with our current knowledge of the subject".
The argument for micro/macro evolution is weak (what, exactly, is the line between micro and macro? why would one be different from the other? if a car can drive 10 miles and 100 miles, do you need a completely new theory to test if it can drive 1,000 miles?) and the distinction between laboratory observations and historical observations (fruit flies or bacteria in a lab versus fossil records) is not one that distinguishes science from not science, otherwise astronomy wouldn't be a science either, since you can't exactly put a star in a lab.
>His company was, as we all know, a dorm-room lark, a thing he ginned up in a Red Bull–induced fit of sleeplessness.

False. He stole the business from the Winklevoss twins.
Except they didn't ask the students what they thought "makes economics important". Since the intended audience is undergraduate economics students, they probably don't need or want to be patronised with an explanation of why a professor thinks they should study the subject they've already chosen to study. That would be silly.

What they did ask is, "what is the most pressing problem that economists should address?" If the intention, as stated, is to write a textbook that helps reduce the gap between economics as a theoretical discipline and economics as experienced in the real-world, then it absolutely makes sense to begin with what students consider to be the most pressing real-world economic issue, and use that as a springboard to explore the rest of the discipline.

In fact, starting with real world examples and applications, and gradually building towards fundamental, mathematical theories and models is the right way to teach any scientific subject. It mirrors the actual development of science, where fundamental theories are derived based on observation of the real world, and can be later disproved by new evidence. Introducing abstract and theoretical models too early not only risks confusing students, but it risks creating a situation where the models are considered intrinsically "real", and contradictory evidence is ignored. This issue has plagued economics, have taken abstract and simplified theories about markets and human behaviour and made them ideological dogma. The theories end up becoming lenses through which all evidence about the world is viewed, rather than imperfect attempts to explain the evidence.
Magnitude 7.1 earthquake hit Mexico City
IMHO the main problem with mutable global state is - you don't know what caused it to have the value it has.

The solution is traditionally access restriction (OO) or immutability (FP), but it can also be - strict no aliasing rule.

Imagine if there were only 2 kinds of functions: pure functions (that can accept parameters have local cariables, and return values, but cannot change nor reference global state), and impure procedures (that cannot accept parameters and doesn't return anything, but can reference and modify global state, always starting from root object and going through all nested objects).

Then if you want to know ALL plaes which could have influenced or depended on the value root.objects.player.x - you simply search for that exact string.

You can start with all code using global state directly, and slowly move parts into pure functions. It can even be automated.
Fortunately this ridiculous Discovery Magazine article also links to the published paper, which is is not paywalled.

http://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/SuKqGmXPA8zJdrkjkSRE/full
Cultivating this attitude in future leaders does in fact seem to help them gain power. I think it ties in with the need for A) impeccable credentials and B) the ability to cavalierly invite the CEO, world leader, whomever, to play golf.

In some people we call it charisma, in others we call it entitlement. I'm starting to wonder if it's not only the person we describe, but also our own position and personal knowledge of them that influence the decision on which one to call it.
> If you type a variable name that doesn't exist [in vim]

Start typing a work and press C-x C-[nolk]

* n for a word in open buffers

* o for "omnicomplete" which is quite similar to "intellisense"

* l for the entire line in open buffers

* k for the word from a dictionary

There are several others, but those are the main ones. As soon as you start a completion, you can use C-p and C-n to go up and down the list respectively.

> Vim doesn't provide much help when you mess up

Vim is designed for editing text. I don't know if a better editor (yet) suited to editing, rather than writing.

> Vim doesn't tell you that you accidentally called "reduc" instead of "reduce"?

It can, so long as you have it set up to. Vim even has a spell checker.
And that's how I think it makes sense to treat narcotics too.
New Udacity Course – Intro to Self Driving Cars
Not mention allowing non-Xcode apps (e.g. Flash + JavaScript) in the app store. This reversal happened even after Jobs' open letter "Thoughts on Flash" [0]. IMO, it's their biggest reversal in the iPhone era [1].

[0] https://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/ (April 2010)

[1] https://www.wired.com/2010/09/apple-lifts-app-store-flash-ba... (September 2010)
The thing is, in JavaScript, unless you are extremely rigid about how you program, it is very easy to cause bugs.

It is basically a language which trains you to try to err on the side of caution.

It's often preferable to be religious when you can be, as even if you do there will still be plenty of bugbears left to watch out for.
A local firewall probably wouldn't have helped here -- the DNS lookups would be performed by mDNSResponder, not by iTerm itself.
Well, what do we expect? We've got a giant human-making machine called the government. If you remove all the fluff and noble-intentions around it, it's core effect is the creation of more people at the expense of the top-producers that are already-existing. Net result being what we see happening to our planet. And the answer is apparently, as usual, is to have "more government". Not more government to reduce population or to make us more efficient in usage, but to punish the heavy-users and heavy-producers.

It's all fine and dandy to help people, and to move the destitute and suffering out of poverty and struggle, but we've gone way beyond that. I'd argue that we've gone way too-far and we're now actively breeding more people than we should-be. Eventually, it'll get to a point where we either destroy the environment permanently and X% of the world dies off as a result, we discover some sort of tech-utopian-advancements that negate all the bad effects and we live happily ever after, or we start saying no to more humans and go forward as a society in a sustainable way where tech and conservation technology follows-pace with our population growth.

Uncomfortable questions await us in the future.
I have one. You get like 6mo free if you sign up with a Prime account and only $4/mo after that. I read more than a handful of great articles from them each month and that price seems fair.
Jagmeet Singh Says He Supports the Decriminalization of All Drugs
Clocks for Software Engineers
No subscription is needed to read the article. (However, the link is broken and leads to a page with no actual article; several people have commented with corrected URLs.)
> Who gets to decide what groups deserve that label? Donald Trump?

Twitter, on Twitter's platform. And yes, people are perfectly free to disagree with Twitter's characterisation of particular groups and comments.

I'm afraid we're going to have to agree to disagree on the notion that platforms which distribute more criticisms of US policy to more people on a daily basis than most revolutionary subversive movements manage in their entire history are going out of their way to be helpful to the US propaganda narrative, or indeed the implicit argument that promotion of ISIS can be judged to be a threat to humanity only in terms of US propaganda narratives.
(disclosure: I worked at FB for 3 years)

I don't agree that it's "super toxic." Any company that gets this big and is also a utility will get its fair share of complaints, and this fair share will seem huge because the base is huge. Think about Comcast, for example. For the most part, people will still use it b/c it's embedded in so many parts of our lives. It has a monopoly on the social graph. Heck, growth has been exceedingly strong even though its been around for over a decade.

Just building another company and saying "we're not FB" is not enough. For most people, FB is good enough, just like a utility. It will be exceedingly difficult for a company to just come in this one angle and win. In order to win, they need to play to a strength that isn't dependent on the existing social graph, because you are not going to win taking FB head on. It has to be guerilla warfare.
Washington Post all the way. I still read it, but NYT often disappoints me when I already know something about the subject. New Yorker is good, but not science sections. The NYT Cassini coverage was good.

edit: I mistakenly put Wash Times. Yehowa.
Nice. But launching a new service in 2017 without forced HTTPS or even HTTPS support is a no go. Please set this up. Letsencrypt does not cost a dollar.
Did you read your own source?

> Currently, there is no non-circumstantial evidence that these differences in test scores have a genetic component,

---

> Soon, other studies appeared, contesting these conclusions and arguing instead that the Army tests had not adequately controlled for the environmental factors such as socio-economic and educational inequality between African-Americans and Whites.

----

> The majority of anthropologists today consider race to be a sociopolitical phenomenon rather than a biological one,[34] a view supported by considerable genetics research.
Net neutrality is about the ISPs. That's how it's defined (semantics!) and that's what I think it should be.

If you want to discuss the ramifications of browser features for the net, by all means do so, but don't try to paint my approval of both net neutrality and this Apple feature as somehow being inconsistent or indicating that I don't understand what's going on.
I agree that going to the extreme of 100% eliminating global mutable state is going to fail for practical purposes, but we don't need to go that far to benefit.

I think of the code that I wrote when I first started programming. Nearly every variable was global, because I simply couldn't be bothered to think about where it could be accessed from. But nowadays I can't remember the last time that I used a global variable, and I'm no worse off for it. For beginners it's a tempting tool to turn to, and we need to continue teaching aversion to it. Like `goto`, we can both consider it harmful and also happily allow its use when well-considered.

(Historical fact: very ancient versions of Rust didn't have global state at all, as Graydon was hoping to find a way to avoid ever needing to use it; eventually he was persuaded otherwise. Though global mutable state in Rust still requires the `unsafe` keyword to access due to the risk of concurrent access, so it's rare to see it in the wild (and quite obvious when it is).)
I believe that is general true with all black markets. Legislating morality doesn't make the activity stop it pushes it underground where criminals can capitalize on the black market. Same with weed.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant but sunlight doesn't go underground.

If the market is above ground it might actually make stopping those violating the law easier. Never mind also, in this case, improving health by mandating things like screenings and protection.
> If by "dereguation" you mean creating government agencies like Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae

I don't.
Looking at the CloudWatch console, I see I can also add AutoScaling and EC2 actions that are triggered by an alarm. That still leaves open other risks like a bandwidth bill for S3 hosted content.
Visa's product is called Account Updater[1] and MasterCard's is Billing Updater[2]. It allows previously approved billers to get updated card information when a card is replaced due to expiration, loss, fraud, upgrade, etc.

[1] https://usa.visa.com/dam/VCOM/download/merchants/visa-accoun...

[2] https://www.mastercard.com/us/wce/PDF/Billing%20Updater%20Br...
The Little ASP.NET Core Book
Quoting someone else:

> Jagmeet Singh is the first major politician to bring this issue to the forefront and it happened completely by chance through a single off-hand question.
The fact that there logically exists a list of game entities, and that all threads are required to have a consistent view of these entities at any point in time and are allowed to mutate them, is a global mutable state.

So for games - like for most non-trivial applications - some global mutable state is unavoidable. The task IMHO is not to eliminate it but to reduce it or at least restrict its "degree of globality". For example - even when you can't avoid global mutable state shared by threads within one client process, probably you can reduce the global mutable state shared by different client machines in a multiplayer match.
The Right Way to Manage Secrets
Not easily, and absolutely not with Apple's approval.
One of the most confusing things I find with web development (which I'm mostly new to, coming from a backend background) is that everyone seems entirely happy with JS (or more accurately the DOM?) and CSS being giant mutable state buckets.

I've worked in mostly backend software for a decade, and web dev is easily the hardest thing I've ever had to work on.

CSS especially is a nightmare. It's near impossible in complex projects to work out if your change is going to change other things adversely. Not only do you have to know all usages of the CSS class (for example), but if it's a scoped class (.foo .bar) you have to know all instances in which is it scoped in this exact way. Because it's visual you're basically testing with your eyes, there is no "refactor to green" possible.

In Javascript it seems normal to (at least in angular) push to global scope, and so it can be really unclear where values come from, or how they get set.

I once tried to work out why a fancy ajaxed select box (rendered in JS / CSS, naturally) was firing its onblur event at the wrong time. There were at least three JS event handlers (from memory, jquery, angular and native) that could possibly have events against it. Everything is smushed together, and because it's about losing or gaining focus the observer effect comes into play, and… it's a nightmare. From memory I just gave up, and I presume that particular bug still exists today.

Testing any of this stuff is also pretty nightmarish. Knowing the web I'm almost certainly behind the curve and there is new hotness out to solve this, but I've never much luck with automated browser testing. Things like Protractor tests are incredibly onerous to write, and inevitably end up as flakey slow messes that fail builds due to flake more often than they find issues.

I imagine there are lots of ways to solve these sorts of things, but all I've read feel like variants and retellings of "do it right", which isn't really that helpful, because a) what is right?, and b) it's easy to slowly slip away from "right" without noticing.
Hm...

I guess there's no particular reason a species has to optimize its fitness beyond a certain level. It just needs to find a niche and occupy it.

At that point, the mechanisms, cycles, and patterns of life for the species continue, but no longer need to select for improved fitness. So I guess it makes some sense that selection would then go down an arbitrary path, of a complexity commensurate with the life form.

Let's say humans (or our ancestors) achieved our base level of fitness (a stable and thriving species with a well-established niche) as social, tool-using primates. Our achievements of language, abstract thinking, civilization, culture, art, complex tools, religion, science, etc. might be the result of pursuing that arbitrary, aesthetic path. The species would have done just fine without any of that, but we did it all anyway.

Interesting. I don't know how much I buy it, but it is an interesting direction I haven't thought about before.
Very nice. Two features I would like are tabs next to the "Today" tab that say "Yesterday" or maybe "48 Hours" and another that says "This week" or "Last week."

I often miss the news for a day (too busy) or a week (traveling/camping) and then want to catch up. Also sometimes I avoid the news for a day because I'm avoiding a sporting event spoiler. Most websites/newspapers are geared toward today and don't let you easily see what they looked like yesterday or a week ago. Even better would be allowing a time range and being able to see the top news during that time period.

Some basic filtering would be nice too. For example, I might want to see a politics-free feed, but right now that would require looking at three different categories. It would be nice if each category had a checkbox next to it, and clicking on the label selected the category and clicking on the checkbox deactivated it when no category is selected. Also it would be nice to be able to add search strings that would remove items, so I could add "Trump" to a list and not see any articles with that in the headline (or maybe in the summary). As it is now under Business I'd still get a lot of Trump-related news.

Also curious why you chose to have some feeds off by default.
And if you do -- say you forgot to kill some mega-cluster you were experimenting with and it ran for a few days before you terminated it -- they'll usually just drop the charge.
The essence of neutrality concerns is the absence of control. Apple gives the user control over this, and many other aspects of the browsing experience. So... what's the problem here?
> I'm still a little unclear on RISC-V's goals

Maybe a bit cynic, but given their churn in the lower level specifications (supervisor mode and up) my guess is:

Main goal: write lots of theses and papers and obtain degrees.

Secondary goal: have an unencumbered ISA to help with the main goal.

Everything else depends on those who adopt the ISA. If some org is willing to spend the multi-million $$$ necessary to design a high-performance desktop class CPU (and more to make it a reality), it will happen.

Those low-end chips are easier to do, and an easier market to serve: The ISA's license fees are a bigger chunk of the chip's price, so RISC-V dropping that to 0 helps more. You also don't need to build a high-end chip that blasts everything else out of the water before your newcomer is even considered, since in the microcontroller market there are several pockets of "good enough".

If that works out, there might be attempts to scale up later (when they have experience and financial resources to work with).
Interesting, thanks for the example. It doesn't fully seem to be consistent with my experience (I feel the US allows much more freedom than many civil law countries, which seems unintuitive give this line of reasoning) but you're probably right, I'll have to read more about this haha. Thanks!
Not to mention the Internet. There will always be some external mutable state. At best you can view other nodes in a computer network as actor objects.
1 millisecond of buffering is geat on a high speed core link. But if you apply that to a 5 megabit connection you've basically decided you'll only buffer one packet. A slow-speed bottleneck link needs to have more capacity. The charts in http://www.nctatechnicalpapers.com/Paper/2011/2011-right-siz... suggest that 64KB is often a good buffer size for end links, and that can absorb 10 packets fine.
Not fruit flies, but in Cetacea at least?[0]

[0]http://www.cell.com/trends/ecology-evolution/abstract/S0169-...
As the joke goes
Programmer : chooses her variables always different, with a name as explicit as possible
Mathematician : chooses her variables from a handful of greek letters