skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Your list is heavily loaded with free products that are good enough.

The lesson is that if a commercial product wants to be widely adopted it needs to be significantly better than the similar free products to compensate for the hassles and headaches of buying software (and the god damn support contracts). Simply being free is a major advantage right off the bat.
Have you considered that charity and donation campaigns are perhaps more necessary in the US due to lack of social safety nets and governmental disaster relief?
True --but "Chinatown" is mostly has greater Hong Kong ancestry and most of the Japanese WWII effort happened in northern China and Manchuria whereas the statue is a memorial to the struggle of Korean women. So it's there more to be provocative and political. Not that Japan isn't being too prickly on the subject, but also SF does not have a large Korean community like LA or NYC/Queens.
I'm guessing he's referring to Oracle as the competitor.
Right now its at 47,008 signed

LOL, somebody actually down voted stating that 47,008 have signed so far?
"I am absolutely going to be loyal to Corpco and its best interests. If I am so much as arrested for my work, regardless of how the trial goes, I can't work for Corpco. If I do something that causes an investigation into Corpco, I will be hurting the company. I left Donoevil because I saw that if I stayed, it would be bad for the company, and I didn't want to be part of that - I wouldn't be showing the loyalty I promised the company. I'm proud of my decision and I wish all the best success to Donoevil."
>So no alien with technology to build something like that would want to ride at a "bicycle" speed.

I agree with this conclusion and I think it is of natural origin but that conclusion does rest on several assumptions.

1. That its current speed is the speed it was traveling at in the interstellar medium.

2. That some technological civilization would be unwilling to wait 50,000 years.

3. That it is working as intended, it may have been designed to go faster but something went wrong. Perhaps it was never intended to cross interstellar distances at all.
Why would incremental development be unsuitable for refactoring, specifically? It is pretty much universally accepted that incremental methods are the best way to tackle software development in general.

If 'refactoring' did only refer to simple, mechanical changes like renaming, I could see it, but you have just argued against that interpretation.
My local library sponsors something similar.
I've noticed (aircraft) pilots are the same --- or at least the few I've met. Very very serious at work, but the exact opposite outside.
I would love to discover new skate spots in my city. The list of activities seems pretty short...
Simple, backend-free, full-text, faceted search engine in JavaScript using VueJS
San Francisco angers Osaka by designating ‘comfort women’ memorial city property
Are you saying that once the configuration is fonr there is not a QA environment?
I think he meant it. His English is very fluent throughout the article.
I use memory palaces for a lot of different tasks. I'm certainly not great at it, but you can train this skill to be quite quick. It's great for learning names, vocab words, remembering to do lists, among other things.

The couple key strategies for a memory palace are:

1. Ensure your palace is as real as possible. Spend some time mentally mapping out every detail of your palace in your mind so that you don't have to later.

2. The more animated or "human" the better. Our minds are better at remembering faces.

3. The dirtier the better. Our brains are also way better at remembering sexual imagery.

I got about 13 words on this test using this technique poorly and it only took a couple seconds (and I didn't memorize the second half of the list).
Building an RC Plane from a Wall Heater
FRP is like excel or well constructed makefiles in that the runtime understands the data flow. Then on updates to any data, you walk through the dataflow graph, running pure functions to update each node.
You legislate it. Figure out how much the earthquakes are costing and tax drillers.
Native English speaker here. For me the weirdness of the English used is entirely dependent on context.

For technical writing (scientific papers, technical blog posts, documentation) what matters is the clarity of the ideas and the science/design behind them. My brain is aware that I'm not reading literature. As long as the English is competent enough, I will readily forgive any weirdness. I will judge you more on your actual API or your actual science than your English unless I truly cannot understand what you've written, which is rare.

If you are writing a novel or doing standup comedy[1] or some other form in which the presentation is important, the weirdness of ESL English will be more apparent. My own status as a monolingual, in my mind, still leaves me little room to judge other's language skills, but I will notice more.

FWIW, English is absurdly complex and I cannot imagine the difficulty of learning it as a second language. For example, I just learned about adjective ordering[2] recently. It's true that, as the example says, I need "three good reasons" rather than "good three reasons," but I knew that purely through intuition rather than being taught. That kind of fine tuning must be maddening to master as non-native speaker, and I have nothing but admiration for those who even come close.

[1] https://www.thisamericanlife.org/blog/2016/09/french-vs-amer...

[2] http://www.gingersoftware.com/content/grammar-rules/adjectiv...
Will the Hyper-V features need to be installed or will it be installed automatically?

I'm just curious because sometimes it messes with your video card driver.
If you are a political cheerleader for the DNC or the GOP you are lighting the fires.

Money overcomes political ideals or the interest of those with less money.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1...

"Report by researchers from Princeton and Northwestern universities suggests that US political system serves special interest organisations, instead of voters "
(OP here.) Fair enough—thanks for the thoughtful clarification.

By the way, I'm a big fan of your "Math ∩ Programming" articles. People who found my blog interesting will certainly think the same of yours: https://jeremykun.com/
https://material.io/icons/ is great, all open source and you can edit their vectors to make your own variations

https://thenounproject.com/ is also awesome, a lot of variety

https://www.flaticon.com/ is great for colorful things
I agree with this. The model would be the US Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund. The idea is all drillers pay an excise tax into a fund, and this fund acts as insurance for anyone who can show damages by an earthquake in a drilling area.
>>Or, just imagine microsoft won and you substitute windows for linux in this thought exercise. Wouldn’t that be a problem for innovation?

There is no "winner" as far as I can tell in the grand scheme of things. We're talking about a set niche of computing. Win10 is still superior for a lot of GPU-clustering specific work; HBM2 memops via Vega architecture comes to mind as the Linux compute drivers are simply inadequate and the Windows tooling is significantly better.
Some states do practice pure democracy, like California. We have citizen initiated constitutional amendments, recall power, legislation and even citizen redistricting.
IEEE and ACM are the professional organizations for software engineering. They even jointly published a code of ethics for software engineering: https://www.computer.org/web/education/code-of-ethics.
Smaller changes tend to be safer and should break less. The less you change at one time, the better and less bugs which are easier to spot and fix.

But if safety does not matter, or its pure crap anyway. Then refactor away.

Proper review of core components that are used and proven is hard already, refactoring such components - don't do it if avoidable - there must be a very good reason. And convenience ain't one - you'll probably get some duplication of code and double maintainance during the transition period.

Making small PR is just a way to be safe and smart, one branch with individual gradual commits that could be used separately is also a way (if they could be reviewed separatley).
Text Advertising - See The Twilio® Advantage - twilio.com‎
Adgo.twilio.com/Text/Advertising‎
Designed for Developers, Simple Pay as You Go Pricing—Talk to a Specialist Now!
Get A Free API Key · Automatic Volume Discount · Global Infrastructure · Talk To An Expert Today
Types: Call Tracking, Lead Alerts, Text Message Marketing, Phone Number Lookup

MessagingProducts & PricingShort Codes for SMS & MMSSMS PricingContact Twilio
A "winner" is all but guaranteed when it comes to slicing the smallest performance gains in any field. And this is a niche field of performance; as I said in another comment, Win10 is still superior to Linux in other compute-bound systems (HBM2 is incapable of being exploited to its fullest potential outside of Win10 due to AMD's poor compute/blockchain drivers for Linux, for example - if you need blazing fast memops for the price, nothing beats Vega architecture right now).
Today the two major cryptocurrencies are bitcoin and ethereum. The two major cryptocurrencies two weeks ago were bitcoin and bitcoin cash. Three years ago they were bitcoin and ripple. Four years ago [1] the two major cryptocurrencies where bitcoin and litecoin. The next two major cryptocurrencies were peercoin and namecoin (they are 50-75% down over the last 4 years). Will bitcoin remain on top forever? Maybe. But it doesn’t have the properties that give some intrinsic value to gold. It’s not just the network effect. You cannot replicate gold, but you can create new cryptocurrencies (how many hundreds do exist already?) which are just as good as bitcoin or better. Why does the network effect matter anyway if it’s not used for transactions?

[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/reuvencohen/2013/11/27/the-top-...
>The Whole Product concept was popularized by Geoffrey Moore in Crossing the Chasm

I see the value in Geoffrey Moore's framework. There are similar analysis frameworks. One is MCDA (multi-criteria decision framework)[1] and another is SWOT Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats[2]. There must be a dozen others.

But I would still generalize them down to "multiple dimensions" because one can use it for non-commercial products sold for free such as comparing GCC vs Clang/LLVM -- or -- compare non-specific products such as "categories of products". An example of comparing multi-dimensions of categories such as "live theater" vs "movies".

Without GM's book and his framework, if we see someone say that "GCC is superior to Clang because it targets more cpus than Clang and the resultant binaries of LAME MP3 and FFMpeg compiled by GCC have better performance", it means the commenter is leaving out other dimensions to support his conclusion of GCC superiority. By omitting the missing dimensions, the observation that Clang/LLVM is winning over GCC in the "marketplace of ideas" seems totally illogical. But once one adds in additional dimensions such as Clang not forcing a GNU license and/or Clang exposing the AST parse tree, its adoption makes more sense.

Same for categories like "theater vs movies". When movies first came out, some experts believed that films would be a fad because "audiences want to see _real_ actors in person and not some _artificial_ projection on a screen". The experts were only focused on one dimension: the appeal of the audience being in the same physical space as the actors. They ignored all the other positive dimensions that films allow such as closeups on actors faces. (E.g. a live stage play's script can't rely on very subtle facial responses such as an eyebrow raise or a tiny smirk of the lips because anybody beyond the 3rd row won't even see it. Stage dialogue with whispers can't be real whispers, they have to very loud and very fake stage whispers. Films also allow alternating time and location cutting for storytelling. But live Broadway theater is also still around -- because it has quality dimensions some people prefer.)

A lot of arguments on the forums about X being superior to Y are really people favoring different dimensions and then talking past each other. Since people can't agree on all the dimensions/criteria to consider and how to weigh them, the debates remain unresolved.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple-criteria_decision_ana...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWOT_analysis
Fascinating. I am not super familiar with the verification of consensus systems like this one, but have done some work testing resilience and consistency guarantees of distributed data stores. Would something like Jepsen [1] be useful here? Could it be adapted to verify contracts like those of BTC with similar modifications to adapting it to verify, say, a new distributed database?

[1] https://github.com/jepsen-io/jepsen
John Oliver[0] might have had something to do with that.

[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92vuuZt7wak
I don't know, it goes both ways. I don't tell my manager what I really think and i've seen them be shocked by sudden exits from employees (leaving them in big trouble).
> To take us back to where we started, we are talking about language design, and while many languages can imitate the style of others, they are optimized for certain pragmatic and aesthetic concerns. That is my whole point.

If that were your whole point we could have avoided this thread. No one disputes that.

In fact your point seems to be that Java/imperative languages are better than Haskell/functional languages, for a reason that you have tried to elaborate and that I have failed to understand.
Money isn't infinite, fiat currency is a token of future tax raising power.

The solution to the rich hording everything is taxation and redistribution.
We do similar for flood insurance. These quakes are not the devastating kind. They range in the <M4 scale, so it'll be mostly toppled chimneys and adornments, perhaps some brick walls might collapse. The damages are typically in the "minor", possibly escalating to "moderate" but not "major", so there would not be armies of lawyers trawling for claimants. But this is still a nuisance which needs to be addressed for property and infrastructure owners as well as an incentive for the industry to find better solutions to disposing drilling water byproducts.
Just remember, the people watching Netflix are the ones consuming the bandwidth. I agree, though, the watchers of Netflix should pay a tax so the rest of us don't get our network congested to the point our torrents are slowing down. :)
Seven plus or minus two refers to working memory. When you encounter say a navigation menu with 10+ unstructured items, it becomes impossible to consider all the options at once.
Movie N-back Play N-back with your movies [YouTube]
There is a very simple test: fast.com. I tried fast.com over sshuttle and OpenVPN and OpenVPN was faster while sshuttle kind of collapsed.
By working with them on a number of non-trivial problems over the course of some time, usually measurable in weeks or months at least.
I believe protection against abuse of top-down policy is what the 2nd amendment is for, no need to pollute the globally-efficient distribution of goods and services with redundant efforts.

If you would describe most of the populace as imperfectly rational (I would, and I acknowledge my own contribution to that) then it seems irrational to support policy that depends on a perfectly rational populace; like a policy that depends on a nationwide constant temperature of 72 degrees.
It obviously depends on who you ask, this is an incredibly politicized issue, but core developers would argue blocksize is not bike shedding, but rather an important defense against centralization and censorship. I think the stat I heard is that at 1mb, and with some interesting distribution topology, the current speed of block propagation across the majority of the network is 250ms. So, this is obviously where things get tricky, one person’s bike shedding is another’s critical requirement.
It's true that in most cases if one thing beats another, you can find some dimension on which the winner was superior. But it isn't necessarily true in all cases. If it is the case that sometimes things win only due to entrenchment or random network effects, then there may be some cases where the winner is strictly worse than the loser, though these cases will be rare. If you found one, though, it would be the strongest possible evidence that sometimes markets/evolution/whatever don't pick the best thing. The OP is asking for those examples.
name one country which was annexed by USA in last decade
Sure, but we have (ideally/optimistically) a representative democracy, and not a direct government-by-the-people. That means that we nominate people we trust, and surrender some of our direct decision-making and opinion-influence authority to them when we vote for them. There are slightly more direct ballot measures and such at more local/municipal/state levels, but even those often take the form of "statement of purpose/priority"-type resolutions that the public expresses support for, and their elected representatives translate them into policy, or delegate that translation, et cetera.
Yeah, real world network paths, especially inter-data-center ones, generally do operate at exactly zero packet loss. Until they don't, alas.
No do not confuse land prices with rents. Rents are set by wages. Land prices are set by loose credit.
And this...

"To give you an idea of what an actual proof looks like in Coq, below is a proof of one of the easier lemmas above. The proof is virtually impossible to read without stepping through it interactively, so don’t worry if it doesn’t make any sense to you here."

is why Coq is not one of my favorite tools.

A proof consists of two things: the "proof state"---a statement of what you know at a given point--and a sequence of "proof operations"---the manipaulations that move from one proof state to the next.

Most mathematical proofs you have ever seen have been presented as a list of proof states, with the operations either explained in comments or taken to be obvious.

Coq (and most other similar systems) present the proof as a sequence of proof operations, with the state invisible unless you're going through it in a Coq IDE.

On one hand, that's the same thing as a program: a Coq proof is a program for creating the proof. Unfortunately, on the other, I've never been able to read Coq proofs the way I can read programs. Probably a lack of experience, I guess.

On the other hand, Coq is a damn fun computer game.
All Day Inspiration- Learn Something New Every Day
Trailforks seems to be working in that direction.
The folks at Heroku have the 12 Factor App https://12factor.net
Please use a more informative title and name the hobby. The current title "My unusual hobby" is click bait.
Ah looks like the lobbyists came to share some downvotes for information they didn’t like (or maybe a normal user from oil country?)

I can’t imagine why someone would downvote factual information that adds to the discussion. The downvote option wasn’t added so people could hide comments they disagree with. I’ve personally met dozens of people who’ve signed NDAs with natural gas companies but live in denial if you insist.
Ask HN: Do we need another blogging platform?
So, I have got this idea and wanted to get an opinion regarding what others might have to say.

How about a blogging platform that forces the writers to write articles/tutorials/blog-posts in bullets, aiming to summarise their thoughts in to-the-point bullets?

The reason why I wanted to make is, most of the times I see people using _thousands_ of words to say something that could be said in _a hundred_. And the platform will force you to produce to-the-point content.

Business model: Everything that medium has to offer will be for free with custom domains, email based subscriptions, analytics, SSL support in the paid tier.

What do you guys think?
the rich are not in cash, they are in assets. Workers lose out under inflation (and I mean real inflation not some bullshit figure the state concocts).
I recently upgraded to a Lenovo Thinkpad p51s with a 1TB SSD and 32GB ram. It is basically a t570 with a better graphics stack. Runs Linux beautifully.
> It's more than the population of some countries and 20 US states.

That last part (the margin of victory was tiny relative to some state populations) provides valuable insight into how broken the Electoral College is as a selection system.

(I don't mean that small-in-population states are solely responsible for electoral skew, but they're a good example of the problem.)
> appeal to free markets

This isn't about markets (free or regulated). The entire point[1] of an ISP is to (for a fee) carriage IP packets. Just like UPS/FedEx (for a fee) carriage you physical packages. I'm appealing to the simple idea that both of those businesses have an obligation to fulfill the service the customer paid for.

If ISPs costs are too high, they should e.g. raise their {monthy flat rate,per-bit bandwidth fee} or any claim that they provide access to the internet as an internet service provider is fraud.

> ISP was indeed, to some degree, a shared commons.

The internet is a shared commons. The actual carriage of packets from your house to the internet is usually some kind of leased flat rate or pay-per-use service. You are not sharing your ADSL line or contractually guaranteed portion of your local cable line's bandwidth.

[1] obviously they also handle associated technical minutia like assigning IP addresses
I'll prefix by saying this is my best understanding and that I'm not an expert by any means. Hopefully someone can correct me if I make any mistakes

My understanding is that a "cash settled" Bitcoin future essentially conducts an exchange from USD to Bitcoin with the exchange on the Seller's end, and then from Bitcoin to USD on the Buyer's end.

So, imagine a normal future's market where the Seller and the Buyer both want fiat, and are willing to do their conversion from Bitcoin to fiat with the same exchange that conducts the transaction. So, when it's time to settle the futures contract we see the following transactions:

Seller Buys a Bitcoin

---------------------

Seller -> Exchange: $10,000

Exchange -> Seller: 1 Bitcoin

------------------------------

Seller settles Future contract

------------------------------

Seller -> Exchange: 1 Bitcoin

------------------------------------------

Buyer receives delivery of Future contract

------------------------------------------

Exchange -> Buyer: 1 Bitcoin

---------------------------------

Buyer exchanges bitcoin to fiat

---------------------------------

Buyer -> Exchange: 1 Bitcoin

Exchange -> Buyer: $10,000

The Exchange, however, doesn't want to be in the game of holding bitcoin or exchanging bitcoins. So they modify their contract to say that the Seller will pay them in USD (whatever the conversion rate of Bitcoin to USD is), and the buyer will receive USD (again, with the same conversion rate). Then we condense those transactions above:

Seller settles Future contract

------------------------------

Seller -> Exchange: $10,000

------------------------------------------

Buyer receives delivery of Future contract

------------------------------------------

Exchange -> Buyer: $10,000

Now the Seller, Buyer, and Exchange are only dealing with a fiat currency that they're familiar with. However, through the "Bitcoin Reference Rate", or the computed conversion rate, the Buyer and Seller are being exposed to the Bitcoin market.

So, you're right that what's really being traded are USD pegged to the "Bitcoin Reference Rate". However, since the Bitcoin Reference Rate should be a fairly transparent conversion into Bitcoin market conversion rates, it should exactly track if a Buyer and Seller traded Bitcoins and then immediately convert them to fiat dollars.