skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What's the big need for an AOT native EXE for you? You just don't want to copy a directory tree instead of a single file?
Deepest hand dug well in the world (2006)
Right, he isn't really talking about changing the way we assign version numbers to software projects.

Rather he's talking (in a rather confusing way) about changing the way we convert names-and-version-numbers into identifiers used in package management systems.

The convention he suggests is basically what Debian has always done for C libraries (putting the soname in the package name), so it's certainly a plausible way to manage things.
Yes. t-SNE is probably the only algorithm that might produce "sensible" 2D mappings.

BTW, matplotlib has a nicer facility than add_subplot() for making grid plots:

fig, axes = plot.subplots(nrows=figdims, ncols=figdims)
for dim, ax1 in zip(range(2, MAX_DIM), axes.flatten()[:(MAXDIM-2)]):
.
.
.
https://gitlab.com/nowayout/prochunter/issues/1#note_4689476...
> Fundamentally its about a lack of qualified professionals that are willing to think through their application in detail.

There’s also a distinct lack of companies willing to pay the premium for quality software and in the corners companies that don’t need to have anything more than some throwaway solution.
Agreed, plus version pinning isn't mutually exclusive to running latest, head, or whatever you call now. You can still resolve now to some version. For example, Debian stable resolves to version 9. Stable points to the dependency tree called version 9, but you can also just reference it directly if you want. You can go back in time and reference dependency tree 8 if 9 was a doozy. It's foolish to think every version is going to better than the previous, in my experience. Sometimes you have to make the present the past until the future gets its act together.
> This blog seems to confuse people being dumb or in the process of learning with bad architectural choices.

This blog describes a number of the infrastructure teams at companies I've worked for in the past decade. These teams have Lead Engineers and Architects with lots of education and experience. They aren't dumb. They just also aren't really engineers. It's not their fault, really; it's the practice of the industry in general.
You can state that a neural network is a hypothesis set, but is it useful when you've got a hypothesis that is 100's of values each with billions of possible values? I mean why talk about that in terms of a set?
So what you're saying is that 'Windows 9' as a viable name was, in a sense, taken?
BBC carried an article today on the very topic of handwriting (Do we need to teach children joined-up handwriting?) http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41927258
After a few tries, I understood how to unpaint some parts and make them white again. It's not intuitive at all. Just add a white color button.

I still think the selection is also not intuitive, but I didn't play too much with your project. Perhaps your selection method is better. Follow your instinct but try it with a few more users. (As an alternative, show the expanded selection automatically when the user moves the mouse, but change the corner only when the user clicks.)
Some are engineers. But when you don't flit like a magpie to the new shiny you become a codger or geezer. Managers can't tell the difference, gotta just buzzword pad your resume to get a job.
Also a whole load of numpties in higher management who dont see the value of proper architecture and how it will prevent bad things happening in the future. Because the architecture is invisible to them, they fail to see value.
Does anyone have any data on how much on average the CPU is taxed from the mining?

From Kiro: However, if you give them an incentive to run the miner for longer durations (like giving them in-app rewards) it may be good.

I have such an incentive, that may keep tabs open all day. But if its 100% and degrades performance so much that will discourage users from doing it. I doubt it will work.
On that point my teeth were grinding because it assumes an identity covariance matrix. Ie the bubble needn't even be spherical.

The second is that the squared norm has a chisq distribution. There's no point simulating it. You can just plot the pdf, and have all kinds of facts about its mean, var, entropy etc. Also, iirc Shannon had something to say about this.

However, I do think these facts are worth a reminder.
You don't normally use Maven to compile every change when doing Java projects. Your IDE will incrementally compile what's needed based on importing the Maven config. You use Maven for tasks like packaging, linting, building JavaDocs etc.
This is how Wade was originally going to be implemented. I actually had a local version of it using an inverted index and a deterministic acyclic finite state automaton [1]. It was using TF-IDF as well for the rankings.

I began to experiment with a couple of my own ideas and used a trie rather than a DAFSA because it could be stored and loaded rather than generated at runtime. I also created and used the various linear methods described in the post to rank the documents.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deterministic_acyclic_finite_s...
It's the same mentality behind cargo cults. A is successful, A does X, therefore doing X will lead to success. It's what humans do when they don't really understand why A is successful.
> I actually preferred the documents were all generated, either by software, or at least using markup like HTML or LaTeX, that are diff'able. But I know this is impossible to impose on the layman.

I agree with that. Regarding MS Office compatibility however, you don't need to stick with Libre/OpenOffice. There is also SoftMaker Office.

http://www.softmaker.com/en/softmaker-office
The rise and fall of Limux (my perspective)
It is. Seems like the first few pages are tailored to sales over anything else.
I don't see how you can justify the claim that a scrollable map with hotel locations and prices isn't "presented to actually help visitors".

Of course there's some synergy between helping visitors and profit to Google, that's how business models work. And if you think that following the links to hotels.com and tripadvisor.com will get you more altruistic and unbiased information than the Google links then I'd like to sell you this fine bridge with air conditioning, great views and swimming facilities, which 93% of visitors rated as 4 stars or higher.
If you have to write that kind of code for work you're probably out of luck, but if you're comfortable with FP and have some control over your stack I'd suggest the typelevel stack. I didn't know what the magnet pattern was until you just said so, and it seems like an awful idea relying on implicit abuse on the level of the cake pattern - something which has been discouraged for the last 4 years now.

Implicits are great, and allow you to do some really amazing things, but you have to be careful not to abuse them or risk making your code take forever to compile and be impossible to debug.
I'd say transformations are more important than rotations, as in a 3D world we'll almost never see an object from a perpendicular view point, but most of the time we'll see objects that are the right way up.
>It's unclear to me if this is due to a failure of communication on the part of the original authors of Go, or if there's a deeper justification for go dep that I'm missing. If you know, set me straight in the comments below.

Sounds like an extremely trivial thing to solve technically.

Make all name-X belong to the same account -- that is, treat "name" as the unique identifier that binds a package name to an account.

So nobody but those that have registered name-1, name-2 etc can register name-66.

That's like 2 lines of code.
This may be a very naïve question, but how far are we from toolkit that takes a dataset and a scoring function or goal and figures out which is the best technique, and optimizes it too? Sure, it's probably really resource intensive, but can it be done? Maybe with some kind of genetic algorithm selecting techniques and parameters?

Soneone must be working on this.
And I thought I was the only only to go "wtf" when I first read about the magnet pattern. They claimed it to be "elegant", but it really is only "clever" in the worst possible way and makes it hard to reason about the code.

I've got a theory that the type of people doing overly complex Java enterprise (see EJB 2.1) 15 years ago haven't vanished, they're just doing Scala now.
The article makes good points, but they feel impractical and/or risky to follow.

> At this point you could even get rid of the version altogether and just use the commit hash

Right. Until someone brazenly force pushes to a repository, and makes it hell for your package manager. You would now have to manually hunt your dependency's repository for the closest commit hash to the one that was removed. :|

> Package managers should provide no options for version pinning. A package manager that followed such a proposal would foster an eco-system with greater care for introducing incompatibility.

We all want to live in this ideal world. But this requires developers to trust the authors of upstream dependencies. Sometimes this is hard to do, especially for critical projects. I just want my shit to continue working, and not be subject to the whims or genuine human errors of upstream authors.
11% of the world plays Basketball. http://www.espn.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/19814/is-basketb...

In saying the most popular sport in the world I am talking about what people participate in the sport. There have been a strong argument that while Football/Soccer is the most watched sport in areas where it is played the vast majority o players are under 14 and due to economical factors the adult populations do not have time for leisure.

Also people don't understand how global basketball has become the last 20 years (I really think it is tanks to the Dream Team of 1992). Right now in the U.K. for under 25 year olds Basketball has replaced football as the most played sport there. Also for places with bad weather it is easy to play basketball inside.
Also:

I think many more product types could target smaller niches through some auto-scaling like service. For example, let's talk about food. it's possible to imagine Amazon starting a cloud for manufacturing food, where you send the recipes of what food to make, and you get a batch of it made(maybe not so large), and this gets distributed/sold via Amazon's grocery section.

Same for restaurants, you upload you recipe, and some chain restaurant makes your food and give you royalties.

And of course it could happen to clothes(already with printed t-shirts), electronics, shoes, etc. Maybe even houses, if housing gets done at a factory, modular fashion, using a set of standard blocks and software verification.

And there are all kinds of new technologies, like hyperloop, bio manufacturing, etc - that would require building a lot of infrastructure. and the fastest the rate of change goes up, maybe infrastructure we'll get refreshed faster.

And clearly we could use more teachers.

Or people at command centers for self-driving cars.
I am not sure I understand your argument. How is Trump not an anomaly? How many other politicians out there are like Trump? Voting for Trump does not make you like Trump.

I am well aware of people who approve of him, I also wasn't surprised when he won I expected it exactly because I don't live in a bubble.

I have plenty of good friends who voted Trump and Hillary and I understand why people would vote for either of them. I also understand why Trump still have a relatively large approval rating and disregarding his absurd and clumsy style I am not as negative towards his presidency.
https://blog.golang.org/survey2016-results

Note that generics is the highest requested change.
Cool stuff! Apparently Nolan's "Dunkirk" used a similar technique involving miniatures. Literally green plastic toy soldiers on the beach to recreate large assembled forces. No doubt, with enough texture and natural light this can look more cinematic than graphics ;)
Interesting links. That paper indicates that it's primary benefit is with rotations rather than translations. Regular CNNs are perfectly capable of dealing with translations.
I was recently reading the section on importance sampling in David MacKay's "Information Theory, Learning, and Inference Algorithms". Page 373-376 in the linked pdf (http://www.inference.org.uk/itprnn/book.pdf)

He shows that importance sampling will likely fail in high dimensions precisely because samples from a high dimensional Gaussian can be very different than those from a uniform distribution on the unit sphere.

Consider the ratio between a sample at the same point from a 1000D Gaussian and a 1000D uniform distribution over a sphere. If you sample enough times, then the median ratio and the largest ratio will be different by a factor of 10^19. Basically, most samples from the Gaussian will be fairly similar to the uniform. A few will be wildly different.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding both the post and MacKay's book. I'd be happy to be corrected.
How often do people look behind their desks at the usb cables plugged into their systems. Many do not.
This is exactly what I find unconvincing.

If it creates a filter bubble how can it then increase tribalism and polarization?
Do we need to teach children joined-up handwriting?
Names for libraries serve a dual purpose: they must be resolvable by computers (i.e. package managers, linkers, etc) but also meaningful to humans -- the programmers who supply the name as user input in the first place. Version numbers allow one to trace the provenance of later artifacts back to earlier ones somewhat linearly, instead of having to hunt for comparable artifacts unconnected by graph edges.

If libraries upon major version changes were renamed instead, the programmer would have to maintain a mental mapping between the predecessor library and the successor, and all code and configuration references to the other artifact would have to be updated 'by hand', without assistance to be gained from the package manager.

Including multiple versions of a library in your project is unsupported in many environments, so if the library author ever envisions a situation where the two 'versions' will be used concurrently, renaming makes sense. In the Java ecosystem, this approach was used for Apache Commons Lang, Apache HTTP Client, and Jackson.

Semantic versioning has good intentions, but adherence and accuracy of the signalling is variable. Absent external enforcement, that's just the way it is -- it's a self-asserted string that no one bothers to validate and everyone hopes they can rely on. If package repositories were more than just storage, perhaps this would be a different story.

It's strange to extoll the virtues of Go's dependency management, because by convention it binds the artifact identity to a resolvable external URL without any indirection. Meatspace maintenance changes like changing the hosting location of the artifact will cause Go to treat it as a different package, and inability to directly communicate externally will also break your build. Every other packaging solution has independently come to the conclusion that abstracting away artifact identity from artifact location is a good thing, but to each their own.
I like html but a lighter format along the lines of TeX or something s-expression/indentation based would have been nicer
Throughput improvement is nice but not game-changing. What I would be more interested in here is a comparison of the longest latency. One problem my former employer had in a large Cassandra deployment was GC pause times causing latency spikes exceeding SLAs for a critical service. They did eventually tune the cluster to avoid these issues but to be honest it kind of shook my faith in any JVM-based database (maybe unfairly).
Judging by the screenshots, the author uses Silence SMS app and you should too
OP brought up Rails, NPM, and Go but not Rust.

The Rust ecosystem might be a demonstration of the inverse problem. Pinning versions is trivial in Rust because its default. You will never be pushed over a major version boundary without intentionally doing it (and "always get the latest" is just the "" version).

The problem then becomes that crates never reach 1.0. Flask is probably the oldest piece of software I use that similarly never reached 1.0 - albeit its been pretty close ever since the project was reorganized last year - but the entire Rust ecosystem is buried in Flasks. Software that is 99% of the way to what the creator wants 1.0 to be, but the last 1% is something nobody wants to do. When you are 99% of the way there, the software works in 99% of use cases, and that last 1% is... the last 1% anyone wanted to do. Which means they didn't want to do it.

Probably the most blatant example of this in Rust is regex, which is blessed crate that is still only at 0.2, among many others (just from my hobby Rocket project are base64, chrono (and time), cookie, dotenv, envy, error-chain, lazy_static, num-traits, rand, redis, and uuid all still in version 0.x. That being said, the impl period going on right now and this entire year of direction from the core team was explicit in bringing as much of these fundamentals to 1.0, so we will see how successful the effort is.

Probably the greatest problem with semantic versioning in that* context becomes feature creep. It is scary to go to 1.0 - you feel free in 0.x land where you can make major breaking changes in a .x release whereas you need to increment that scary major version number to do it later on. And besides the fear there is a lot of logistical headache properly maintaining semantically versioned software - you should expect if you never release a 2.0 to have someone trying to contribute 1.x bugfixes down the road, with the need to release 1.x.y bugfixes for all time. Because 2.0 is, like the article says, a new library - its a different API, you changed the meaning. So you are now maintaining two libraries.

There is also one final fear with the way Rust setup its crates ecosystem - if you are bold and break things but don't end up delaying 1.0 for way too long, you might end up incrementing the major version a bit. And there is a cultural and subconscious aversion to anything on crates.io you see at version 3.0 or heavens forbid 4.0 or more. That software is unreliable, the developer is changing it all the time!. But then you go and use a 0.15 crate that is having the same problem anyway, just without saying "this probably does its job" like a 1.0 can.

In the end, versioning truly is almost meaningless, even in an enforced semantic versioning system the intent breaks down and meaning is lost just because different people release software differently. But that is a real deep almost - because its still more information than not having it, and in Rust right now at least it gives more helpful information than not. I'd call it a success at that point - way more than say Linux, where the major version is incremented whenever Linus wants to run a Google+ poll...
The Future of Tab Mix Plus
There is a Chinese translation for this article http://www.infoq.com/cn/news/2017/11/Software-architecture-d...
A lot of quality software is "not required" because it's sold with steaks, strippers, kickbacks and conservatism (the "nobody ever got fired for choosing IBM" effect), not because the end users don't care about quality.
Yes! I feel that way too. So far I've found Breaker has the best guest search. Definitely lots to work on in the podcast space :)
Because there's been zero consistency to the verification process, for years?
You can check the BIOS to see if there is an option to disable it.
Hmmm. I didn't actually do the numbers. Let's see...

A randomly-googled 2MW diesel generator consumes 50 gallons/hour at quarter load and 160 gallons/hour at full load [1]. So let's say it's 100 gallons/hour to run a 2 MW generator at full load instead of quarter load. The OVH incident report [OP] says that their data center has two cables in each carrying 10 MVA (mega-volts-amperes, ~ watts), giving us 20 MW as roughly the maximum power consumption of the data center. Divide, multiply, it'd cost 1000 gallons/hour to run at full load, orrrr $3000/hour at the current price of diesel [2].

Yeah, that's pretty cheap, okay. You might run these generators for a few hundred hours over the lifetime of the installation and they probably cost millions of dollars, so you're not going to spend more on fuel than you'd spend having to replace the generator early. Why don't they have a dummy load for that scenario?

[1] http://www.dieselserviceandsupply.com/Diesel_Fuel_Consumptio...
[2] https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/gasdiesel/

edit: Now that I look at the math I did I realize that I didn't need to look at OVH in particular at all, just compare the cost of fuel to the purchase price of one of the diesel generators I was looking at. >_< Meh, math still works, I'll leave it.
Here we are now, in a line with BSS and Usenix users.
The actual diesel engines and generators are simple metal. Not the switching circuits. If the electric controllers can't handle the load/switching speed/whatever, no clever software and/or reliability in the actual generators will help.
> “How are you planning to handle GDPR requirements and removal of data?” – turns out the answer is often “Er – we haven’t thought about that.” Cue a sad face when I tell them that if they don’t modify their immutable log they’re automatically out of compliance.

Can't you remove data by iterating through the log in a separate process, and remove data as you go? It will be slower, for sure, but is speed a requirement when removing data?
Roger that. Thanks!
Will check it out!
Using most content blockers with default settings will block all Facebook tracking you'll encounter without visiting the site itself.

In contrast, opting out of Google is a largely unviable feat for most.
It's misleading because nobody is buying water or electricity or paying rent on Alibaba today for 11.11.

Comparing apples to apples would mean comparing the amount spent online in the U.S. with a single company. Even comparing apples to pears would mean comparing all online sales in the U.S. to Alibaba 11.11 sales.

Comparing all "consumer spending" in the U.S. with Alibaba 11.11 sales is, well, it's misleading.
> buys your car for much less than it's worth

Which is clear, if they buy it from you, then sell it to a dealer who then sells it to the next owner. These are two intermediate steps where someone needs to make their cut.

You as the seller would get the most if you sold directly to the next owner, but that is much more hassle for yourself. You have to make appointments with people who want to see the car, test drive it, ask a lot of questions, and then try to bargain for a low-low price.

If you sell to one of their sites, you get less money but it's a very simple and quick transaction.
I think Snap is an interesting company. I'm very curious to see where it'll be in 3-5 years.

I wonder if kids not yet on Snap (because they're too young), will go directly to Instagram for its stories feature in addition to pictures, etc., or if it'll still acquire those future social media users. I think it's unlikely to grab many new adult users who are only now getting into social media.

If I were the head of Snap, I'd scrap the spectacles operation and spend time thinking about, and experimenting with, the future of media and social media.

Perhaps there's an iPhone-like opportunity.

I also think it needs to make its product way faster and more intuitive to use.