skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Such bias is probably relevant for articles estimating current military strength, or evaluating national strategy, and so on; topics where you need judgment to make sense of ambiguous data.

But I don't see why you would think this article should be distrusted. It just describes a historical event, which was widely covered by newspapers at the time.
Show HN: A simple Time Series exporter for Prometheus 2.0
Whoops, I forgot, I could write at 3. My aunt loves to tell the story of how she got me to finally talk by making me ask for a Coke, after discovering I could read and write.
But there you usually have a "flat torus" which cannot exist in euclidean space. I.e. the distances between points in a PacMan style world are such that the loops around the world are always the same size. That's not the case for a toroidal planet as in this article: the inner equator is much smaller than the outer one. Moreover, the flat torus has zero curvature and no surface (of finite extent) that lies inside our space can have zero curvature everywhere. The argument for that is remarkably elegant: suppose you have a surface in space. Pick any point as an "origin". Then since our surface is assumed to be finitely large, there must be a point on it furthest from the origin. But then the surface at this point is tangent to a sphere centered at the origin and in fact must lie entirely on the inside of the sphere. But then it curves at least as much as the sphere and hence has positive curvature at that point.

So you'll never stumble across a PacMan world in all your travels across all the galaxies. (Interestingly, PacMan's world can be embedded into a hypersphere sitting in 4-dimensional space.)
>stupidity (dont know what they want so they get best)

How is that stupid? It's not like a brain surgeon who just gets what's the best out there (or considered top) is in any way stupid because they're not a tech-geek to care to do a full "market review" on their own...
Yea I was just about to mention that as well. I never liked touchwiz but I just got the s8 and it's a nice phone. Maybe I just don't like the default icons and design? I'm not sure, but I customized it to look more like regular Android.
> Idris can often infer entire functions from their types if the domain is amenable to accurate type-based specification.

This is a great example of what I'm talking about. The kind of functions Idris can generate is that of functions that you could manually write with only marginally more effort -- if that -- than the effort required to write the precise type. I don't think those functions ever form a significant portion of a significant program, if at all (those functions must be so generic, or else there would be a search problem that Idris can't solve, that they would already likely be in the standard libraries). When Idris is able to generate an efficient sorting function given some constraints, then I'd be impressed.

> can be automatically generated via the interactive "proof search" mechanism

If you've spent a significant amount of time with such proof assistants, you'd see that the proof search is rather pitiful.
I wonder why evolutionary algorithms never managed to be that successful.
For whatever reason I was under the impression that those phones were larger than they are. Thanks for pointing those out to me!

I'm still probably going to switch to Apple because I've been working towards being more privacy conscious in the last several months and Apple's stance on privacy and encryption is appealing.
PyDev of the Week: Matthew Makai
They have a theory. They make a experiment to prove the theory. The experiment disprove the theory. They conclude that since the first theory is false, the second theory must be true.

This is bad science. A disproved theory only prove that the theory is false, not that some other theory is right.

> Bias, as we define it, occurs when two groups of people act identically but are treated differently.

If I walk into the hospital, I act identical to any other patient. The mechanical actions I do do not reflect how I get treated, and the reason is very basic. Context matter. Intentions matters. Motivations and incentives matter. A lot of the speculations could be investigated further to find evidence for this, but the research in this article has not done that. They had a theory, they tested it, got negative results. A poor scientist turns the data around to fit their narrative, making the experiment itself irrelevant to their conclusion. A good scientist either refines the theory or moves on, making new experiments to prove or disprove them.
Q is exactly that for K. Almost everyone switched from Q to K sooner or later, because once you grok the ideas, the verbosity gets in the way of both reading and writing.

There's also kerf, which is verbose; AFAIK it was not met was the same success that APL, J or K have -- though likely for unrelated reasons.
Being Turing complete doesn't mean you cannot prove anything without solving the halting problem. Programs have many potentially undecidable properties, and halting is only one of them. It's also one of the strongest.

It doesn't matter which property you are looking at. If it's undecideable, you can sidestep the issue by forbidding programs for which the checker is not sure.

That doesn't mean you have to lose Turing Completeness. You just have to chose properties that don't imply that the program halts. Static typing for instance doesn't mean the language isn't Turing Complete. Simply typed lambda calculus is the exception here.
> the body of the article is truthful to the title

With all due respect, I don't see how the article backs up this utterly exaggerated claim.

Unless, of course, you're using the word "dying" in the sense that everybody and everything will die at some time. But I don't think this is meant here, as that wouldn't be "shocking" at all.
It seems like it's like Tor, except instead of just paying my ISP, I also now get to pay more money to use this new POC protocol with a subset of Tor's features. Am I missing something?
I've seen a bunch of sites do that, and honestly I appreciate that as an end user because I want to get to the actual site, but at that point, AMP's story that it makes the web faster is actively untrue: you have to wait for the AMP page to load, scroll, and then load the normal page.
>Of course YouTube or another video heavy site like FB is going to dominate when only size is considered.

That would be flawed if individual sites couldn't also host videos -- or if we didn't care whether they do.
You don't have to do that thinking if you use a library which implements one for you, which is one reason why we made libraries so easy to use.
How do evolutionary hyper-parameter optimizations compare to Bayesian ones? My impression always was that Bayesian optimization is more targeted, and therefore more efficient and ultimately finds optimal parameters faster. However, evolutionary algorithms are easier to parallelize, so maybe EAs indeed have a place in a non-research-oriented, applied DL setting?
How to Build a Company Where the Best Ideas Win
> They do due to the AMP carousel at the top, but that’s it. AMP pages don’t receive bonus points in the search ranking for being AMP

Nobody ever gave a shit whether they were the top search result. They care about being at the top of the page and getting more clicks. The usage of the term "search ranking" presumes that the top search result is at the top of the page.

> They are, but they’re also hosted on Google AMP Cache.

When I go to one of these pages, my URL says "Google.com" is the domain I'm at.

Just to check: how long have you worked at Google?
These two twenty-somethings convinced HSBC to work with their startup
Were you at PyCon UK this weekend? Cause you just repeated our pitch, just about word for word :)

I started out on QBASIC and Visual Basic, back in the day, and as far as I'm concerned it's practically dereliction of duty that there wasn't something similar available for the web. Eventually, we got fed up enough to go and build it ourselves.
They have a GUI designer for Swing.

https://www.jetbrains.com/help/idea/components-of-the-gui-de...

And integrate with Scene Builder for JavaFX.

JavaBeans are the Java version of VCL components.

Qt doesn't have a component eco-system like Java or even .NET enjoy.

The company behind Qt is still trying to sell QML to C++ developers, looking from the set of talks at Qt World Summit.
Danish sub owner Peter Madsen admits to dismembering body of Swedish journalist
If it’s done right then I would expect Face ID to be as fast, fewer false positives, fewer fails. I don’t know if Apple has accomplished these goals but if they did then I'd consider their implementation innovative and would not assume it was done due merely to an inability to integrate Touch ID into the display.
Actually, it's trivial to prove advertisers will ignore it: If the API actually became popular, ad blocker plugins would override it to always return the low battery status. Ad networks would respond to that by ignoring it. And now it's a zombie API.

The moral of the story is that Web API development is now driven at least partially by "How will advertisers abuse this new API?", and probably will be moreso over time, and that has, ahhh, interesting interactions with the forces pushing the browser into being the universal VM platform.
Yes: https://www.lesserwrong.com/feed.xml. Firefox auto-detected it.
and still can't make an IDE that doesn't crash..
Hi, fable-elmish author here. Elm is great if you don't care about investing into two ecosystems or don't have a backend, or don't have a Native client in addition to Web, or don't care about what JS ecosystem has to offer.

Fable lets one use F# for both frontend and backend, and being able to share the code (models in particular, but really anything) while maintaining clear separation of tiers reduces your code base and dramatically improves quality w/o the need for elaborate tests.

Fable-elmish lets one use the same frontend code and architecture to write Native and Web apps. Again, YMMV, but at our company being able to transition an entire team between completely different types of projects avoids expertise silos and makes truly cross-functional teams possible.

We have OSSed a lot of our backend tech that helps building event-driven system in F# as well, in case anyone's interested: https://prolucid.github.io.

As Tomas said, just like Lisp in Paul Graham's "Beating the Averages" has been his secret weapon, F# is ours.
Javascript """engineer"""
Strictly speaking, that compilation happens in JS, not necessarily client-side ;)

(Right now, it does run in the browser, but we'll be moving it to the back-end soon to improve performance. For now it's good enough.)
It's especially interesting when you consider that Google has now, for the first time, a fully globe-spanning own network that can interface with any ISP directly, without relying on any intermediate ISP.

Google now has at least one product in the entire stack of the internet.

You can use a Google Pixel, and Google Chromebook, using Android and Chrome OS, browsing with Chrome, while using Google Fi and Google Fiber, connected directly to Google's backbone, visiting Google's Search, Maps, etc or other sites hosted on Google's cloud, using Google's DNS server.

At this point you can use most of the functionality of the internet without ever leaving the Google ecosystem.

And this is just going to be expanded.
You would have to compare the GDP to some measure that better maps to real world value. And the choice of measure to use would be controversial. HDI? GNH? HPI? GNW?

I agree that GNP is a terrible measure of real world value (a lot of things increase GNP that decrease human well-being on a global or long-term scale). But if you want to falsify it, you need some other measure. Is the other measure falsifiable?
Suicide molecules kill any cancer cell
This does not accord with my reading of history. GAs (heavily crossover-based evolution) were failing pretty hard at optimization until the early '90s, when they adopted some good ideas (real coding, better mutation operators) from the (largely mutation-oriented) ES community. If you look at the most effective single-objective evolutionary algorithms today, they're mostly descendents of ES, like DE and CMAES. Honorable mention to the micro-GA as a descendent of the GA lineage, but its effectiveness is largely driven by discontinuous mutation events. The Goldberg-style GA is woefully out of date and not particularly useful.
Reading the docs, it says the Forms run on the client, so most rendering should run too. Client-side rendering - while it has its disadvantages - shouldn't be worse for the CPU time than server-side, though. What's your concern?
> That’s Google Search, not AMP.

That's AMP. AMP prefetches content from AMP sites which must be hosted on google.com.

The AMP team, when asked about hosting AMP content outside google.com, mention they can't prefetch from other domains with current tech as a blocker for this.
Mobile App UX Design Principles: 15 Rules for Creating Apps That Stick
Then closely followed by the spreadsheet.
An essay about how the web is dying that leads with a click-bait title? Is this satire?
And yet, reading the title I was waiting for the "reason number 7 gonna blow your mind !"

And I hope it won't stop others who are allergic to clickbait titles to read your article, because it is very well documented and very insightful.

I am, too, afraid of the end of net neutrality and the future you describe is really scary.
What's the right way then? When I worked at a media conglomerate, AMP was the only thing that reigned in and enraged the biz-dev and ad-ops departments. I'm still proud that my AMP launch partner pages are out there and serving up content really fast. I hate that it took this to provide that experience, but I prefer it to the FB and AAPL walled garden syndication approach for business and tech reasons.
I would guess that in a company like Facebook, 99.5% of the code they wrote is not Haskell. If they have, say, 200MLOC of code written (just a number), this would be 1MLOC...
Dilbert Creator Scott Adams Launches ICO
I do miss when there was more web on the Web. I've been wondering if the problem is that I don't search as much as I used to, or if there just isn't as many fun sites to visit these days. There actually used to be hangouts on the web outside of chat and social media, like bizarre, bangedup, or the old 4chan. It used to be a blast just to read through 4chanarchive, to see how many times Pawn Stars got called during the last BattleToads thread. I used to see anons in front of the Scientology building in Cincy on a regular basis. I think that's why I enjoyed HWNDU so much.
> You can say that Google traps publishers, but not that AMP is not the open web. Google AMP Cache is a website on the (open) web.

This doesn't make any sense. Why would a google trap be "the open web"? Google & Google Cache & Google Search isn't open web. It is deductive that google doesn't show you the best resources available on the web but the ones that are of their interest.
End of smashed smartphones as scientists invent super-flexy touchscreen
the legacy fighters are pretty old airframes and I think even the new blocks are going to be outclassed in any seriously contested airspace. the real comparison should not be between the f35 and f16.

it should be between the f35 and a different program which isn't a gross hodgepodge of the demands of everyone and their mom. concurrency, one size fits-all-fighter...madness.
Random freezes, phone calls not having sound, and for me as a podcast/audiobook listener that side is awful, widget not working, having to restart the app or the whole phone, bluetooht connectivity being very unreliable. Usability gone much worse regarding audio.

In situations where with ios9 I could rely that I put my headphone on and push the button on the headphones the correct thing would start playing immediately this got worse with ios10, things started to not work always and with ios11 it's so bad that I can't bring myself to spend money on a new ios device. When my 6s dies I hope there will be something other then the duopoly available.
The types line is what some people do with Haskell, Idris. I do personally favor writing the large-scale types beforehand, because that gives the compiler a chance of saying "look, you program is wrong", what is way more useful than "hey, your program has this type". Besides, abstract-type driven programming is an incredibly good methodology where it's applicable.

On code understanding, what makes it better than the programmer inserting the debug statements themselves? It saves some misunderstanding from the computer's part.

On refactoring, some IDEs do that. I'm on the fence about its usefulness.
Regarding the effect systems slide. One of my favourite features of the Nim programming language is its effect system,[1] it tracks IO effects, but more importantly it also tracks the exceptions that are raised by each procedure. This allows for a very nice implementation of checked exceptions and docs which contain the possible raised exceptions of each procedure.

1 - https://nim-lang.org/docs/manual.html#effect-system
In a sense yes, although I suggest that a "business process" is too broad and difficult an abstraction. Better for most [1] systems in industry and commerce to elicit and model sequences of recorded events [2] involving interactions with things, people and places in different contexts, with support for constraints [3].

Modeling the above in a business sense, with support in existing paradigms and languages is already a solved problem, just a little known one.

---

[1] The other type of system in industry and commerce being the continuous system that isn't based on recorded events, but instead on logging errors and abnormal circumstances, e.g. an elevator control system or an automated warehouse delivery system, or the engine monitoring software in your car.

[2] Recorded for business or legal reasons.

[3] It's those constraints that prevent an elevator from moving with its doors open, or billing for that product not shipped, or allowing someone to vote twice.
I wasn't there :)

I learned to program with Turbo Pascal and then moved to Delphi. While watching your introduction demo my thoughts were "this is like Delphi for the web". I've also missed something like this for a long time.

I'm definitely going to try your product!
huh? He's describing a future where the web no longer exists. Only Google, facebook and amazon's network exists. This seems pretty representative of the term dying.
Watch it turn into a Docker rival soon enough...
Yes, you're right. Thanks for the correction!
I love this idea. It reminds me a lot of old school .NET worked within Visual Studio, or the Delphi editor for Windows application forms.

.NET has evolved into a totally different beast so I don't use it any more. This framework brings back the simplicity that I feel has been lost from drag and drop tools.

Drag and drop tools exist for the web, but there's nothing that introduces and organises the use of simple programming languages within the mix - at least that I know of - so this is definitely going into my list of cool tools.
> When your constraints mean that only the right thing can be done, you can make the thing implicit.

Except that sometimes, when you think about the practical issue long and hard enough, you can find that some constraints need not be stated at all, and can be completely factored out of the language, at least in most cases. For example, GC removes resource management out of the equation (it's not always the right solution, but it is the right one in a large enough portion of software). Or, while FP people pore over effect systems and how to constrain effect, languages like Eve that adopt synchronous programming (which is based on ideas from temporal logic), get a mathematical framework in which effects and computation are one and the same, and effects don't pose a challenge to begin with.

> I actually think that gradient ascent from Java will happen, and will move the industry forward

Perhaps, but I doubt it's in the direction pointed to by Idris. We have much better ideas around. The author of the slides mentioned only the segment of PL research that he find appealing. Other segments may have some more promising ideas.

> I think we can go at least one or two substantial steps better than Idris: I want Noether's levels of stratification (beyond just total/not-provably-total), and I want Rust-style linearity, not as a specialised capability but as something integrated into the regular type system. But even if Idris is the limit, it's still a big step ahead of Java, and it's going to take the industry a while to make that step.

I think you have fallen in love with a specific formalism (I've fallen in love with others) and can only see progress within it. If you take a step back, ignore formalism altogether and ask yourself -- or better yet, conduct research -- on what are the actual problems in programming, you may find solutions in completely different directions.

> it's still a big step ahead of Java

I don't think so, and I don't know why you'd think that. I'm not even sure that Java isn't the limit (modulo small improvements). Of course, when I say something is a big step ahead I don't mean that I enjoy it more or that it can pull some more technical tricks, but rather that it reduces development costs by 30%. If Idris is a big step ahead of Java, by how much do you think costs at, say, Google or Amazon or Citibank would drop if they decided they would all switch to Idris tomorrow? I'm fairly certain that it wouldn't be anywhere near 30%, and I'm not even sure costs wouldn't actually rise.

> it feels like most of the industry is only just adopting the things that OCaml offered, and not yet familiar enough with them to appreciate what Haskell offers above that.

I see it not as progress but as change in fashion. Tastes change, and so people adopt some ideas. Have productivity levels risen in the past three decades? Significantly less so than even Brooks's prediction, which was considered overly pessimistic.
that it barely bothers to carry any antisurface capability at all

What about the 20 P-700 Granit (with optional nuclear warheads)?
> why not buy a a $800 phone (Android or iOS) with every new release?

I think this is a terrible mindset, personally. There is so much waste, these are perfectly good phones but everyone is convinced to do a 2 year contract lifecycle.
Did you mean Microsoft Silverlight?
For applications that are not memory bound, the 1080ti is better. Also, if we are talking about deep learning, inference can be handled with lower precision. The p100 does not have int8 support and hardware, but the 1080ti does. So presumably for the same memory bandwidth you get twice as much data.
> Bandwidth is expensive

This is easily solved by switching to peer to peer protocols, which would work like a charm if our providers did the sensible thing and gave us a symmetric bandwidth to begin with.
> What's the reason for keeping your address a secret?

I, and the people I love, have public political opinions on the internet, and SWATting is a thing.

I can either keep my address a secret (and I do; I use my PO Box whenever possible), or I can decline to participate in public civic discourse and encourage the people I love to do the same.
I believe my case was pretty clearly articulated as are some of the other comments on a thumbnail sketch of the tradeoff comparison we have and continue to do. I'm sorry you believe the worst in this community.
Hmm, we must share the same demographic because I just commented a reply almost identical to yours.

Happy Pythoning :)
It seems docker is being "abused" as a way to build one-off playrooms for spare time tinkering.

And frankly i can't help wonder if this is because more and more languages is sprouting their own package managers, while at the same time developers are getting ever more lax about dependencies hygiene.