skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
As someone working in one of "America's best hospitals" I can confirm that those consumer reports are a complete joke.
I've completed many of the videos within the Ultimate Angular course series. The content is excellent and the delivery is on point. I am excited to dive into the NGRX Store and Effects Course.
I find it extremely funny that I'm defending Microsoft's spam, especially considering their history, but I think at this point that Microsoft is just fighting fire with fire.

I get at least 1 weekly notification to use Chrome. Either directly on google.com or on translate.google.com or several of their other properties. Despite me clicking "No" on the damned thing across as many devices as I can remember since Chrome appeared back in 2008.

I highly doubt that the Google Skynet isn't able to identify that's it's me across all these devices, considering my usage patterns. Or even better! Considering that I'm actually logged in to the Google Account permanently via Gmail...
Announcing Ant Design 3.0
SEC Emergency Action Halts PlexCoin ICO
From what I understand of Minsky's work, that isn't worst-case, it's the work required. You need to examine every possible state to get an answer.

> even if such a machine were to operate at the frequencies of cosmic rays, the aeons of galactic evolution would be as nothing compared to the time of a journey through such a cycle ...the magnitudes involved should lead one to suspect that theorems and arguments based chiefly on the mere finiteness the state diagram may not carry a great deal of significance. [Minsky, 1967]

Minsky's impression seems to be that this is the bare minimum amount of work required to solve the halting problem for a specific case.
would this be prior art?

https://techcrunch.com/2015/09/10/whats-better-incentivized-...

or this:

https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/228577/the-da...
I have seen parts of this in other training (six sigma, tqm, etc). But there is something very important in dedicating the time to think outside the most obvious immediate problem, which we often need to be reminded of by process.This was the link I found, but honestly the images in the Google search were better.

http://begrip.be/kepner-tregoe-analysis/
I find most devs won't buy a tool like Reshaper, so if the company won't pay for it, they will never use it.

I love resharper personally and have my own licence.

I mean, I've seen WPF apps where everything was in app.xaml.cs because it was just easier. Need a function, stick it in App.xaml.cs. Need a class, stick it in app.xaml.cs. At this point I think APp.xaml.cs in one our solutions is around 130k LOC because one of the devs thought just having a whole bunch of global functions was easier than worrying about nonsense like classes, ecapsulation, testability etc. You can do this when their is no code reviews. (Who has time to do code reviews, that's going to slow everyone down!)

I've seen console apps written that were all in Main because the attitude was start writing it, debug as you go, almost like writing C# interactively, moving the debug breakpoint up as you make mistakes nad want to rerun stuff. When you can get to the end without it blowing up. You're done. Deploy it.

Or web projects where they say we want you to gather data from some DB, display it in a nice way. It's just a PoC, so knock it up in half a day. It actually though ends up pretty complicated but you get it done in a day or so. But still, the code is a mess but it's PoC. But then the client likes it so this mess gets deployed. Then they want a feature added, but you don't have time to rewrite it so you just have to hack around the initial mess to get it working. Then more features and more features until you have an unmanagable mess that you hope you never have to touch again.

When you're working to half a day / a day for what's a non-trivial project sometimes even naming variables takes a back seat. So you end up with stuff like `var varvar` or `string s1`, `string s2`, `string s3` ending up in your source code.

It's not great, although sometimes it makes me laugh, it mostly makes we think why do I bother though, but that's the reality for some places.
You want the "trusting trust" keyword.
Refactoring nested conditionals in Elixir
i386 in this context refers to 32bit intel x86 cpu architecture in general and generic pc compatibles specifically. OpenBSD currently runs on 486s and better:

> All CPUs compatible with the Intel 80486 or better,[0]

[0]https://www.openbsd.org/i386.html
I am not sure I understand what you are showing here? I looks like a normal link to a Amazon wish list to me.
> refer to agile as mini-waterfall

This articulates something that's been banging around in my head for a few years now. Agile always boils down to a series of waterfalls crashing down on each other, driven by a pool of tickets with no real consideration that some tasks can't be broken down or take more than 2 weeks to complete.

"I'd like to attempt to modernize of a codebase built up over 6+ years, so we can take advantage of technology which didn't exist then." "Yeah, can you break that down for me into tasks that can be done in a single sprint, preferably in parallel?" "Sure, give me a few months." "Yeah, can you break that into 2 week sprints too?"

Even if given the time to create those tasks, they would be put in the backlog behind a pile of feature requests that nobody actually needs. They would then be culled as "Won't Do", since the backlog has gotten too big.

</rant>
They only have live sessions there, I was thinking more in terms of traditional asynchronous code reviews, e.g. via Github comments.
Yeah, if it's qualified with graphical design, then will fit under UI (usually). But the argument goes that a product is "designed" (i.e. a plan of how it works, looks, and interacts with other systems), and thus has a "design", encapsulating everything from purpose through to visual look and feel.
Linux and BSD ran for a long time on 32bit systems. 4GB of memory is an ocean in my mind. Those systems should be able to compile their own programs and tools.

On a related note, we will eventually be running development tools on microcontrollers. Not that little 16bit parts will run the tools, but that 16bit parts are going away. In price sensitive areas this will not happen, but for things with a larger budget why not run the tools right on the target? If your controller is an RPi why not use it for development?
A talk by Ken Thompson, "trusting trust".
I've had interviews with most companies you mention. Getting in touch with a recruiter and passing the phone screenings hasn't really been a problem.

Maybe I'm not smart enough, but on-site rounds are a different story. I've practiced CTCI and solved my fair share of questions on Leetcode. Yet I find pretty hard to get back into it on a short notice. It's not a one-time investment. I assume I'm not the only one since

- The on-site to offer conversion ratio is typically between 6:1 and 8:1 at such companies.

- Most people do better with practice. It implies that a standardized process is biased towards people who have the opportunity and time to interview a lot for fun. (Some companies let teams do their own hiring though, where this is less of an issue).

Not everyone lives in the valley or in a place with a high concentration of tech companies. At least the Microsoft-era questions such as "how much would you charge to clean all the windows in Seattle" were more equally silly and unfair to everyone, including outsiders.
Why is Redox not viable competition?
OpenBSD supports a wide variety of hardware platforms, including machines with Alpha, PA-RISC, and SPARC64 processors. On each of them, the base system is able to compile itself.

If rustc cannot even build itself on i386, what kind of support can we expect for other platforms with an even smaller user base?

On a project such as OpenBSD they cannot suddenly drop platforms and only support amd64 as portability is one of their main "selling" points. Furthermore, that would also mean to lose the developers that are interested in these alternative platforms and probably chose OpenBSD because of the platform support. Furthermore, such developers are usually not only contributing to platform-specific parts, but also to system utilities and ports.

For the full list of platforms, see https://www.openbsd.org/plat.html
> Imagine your DMV visits applied to life-and-death situations.

I don't have a lot of trouble at the DMV; maybe we could use an example where I've consistently had terrible experiences, like UPS?
>>> It often is a task of it's own. It's not always "low-level work", sometimes it's directly replacing key components in a huge chain of events that all need to be modified to accept your refactor. It really depends on the codebase, features you're developing, nature of the business engagement and so on. There is also risk in a refactor, especially if it's heavy in business logic.

And that's why refactoring has a terrible reputation and developers can't be trusted. Now you're talking about replacing key components and altering the business logic under the pretext of refactoring.

This should NOT be called refactoring, this should be called replacing key components and revisiting the business logic.

Of course, management doesn't want that to be done without justification.
If you want to effect change, do some work, don't write emails.
Couldn't tell from the screenshots, does this allow login/submission/commenting/my threads/etc?
Going to play devil's advocate and ask, did you really expect a tech company to encourage children to avoid all of their products and go play outside like they did 30 years ago when these companies never even existed? Of course they want children and people of all ages on their services. It's in their best interest to get the majority of folks using their platform.

I seriously have no idea why this is so hard to understand.
Where's the attack there? It's a statement of fact.
Learn React Fundamentals and Advanced Patterns
There is a `file upload error` when submitting an application on this page https://unify.id/iOS-application.html.
That's a really good reason to write business logic in a way that doesn't have those dependencies hard wired in. I often end up in those sorts of nightmares in codebases that use the active record pattern (hiding database access everywhere), hooks, critical logic in the HTTP layer, and so on.
The seed planted in youth need not yield fruit. At maturity, it will provide a lifetime of advertising revenue.
Sure thing. Good references on this data are very, very easy to come by. If you want to dispute the hispanic numbers, based on the facts, the burden is on you to prove the prevailing authority numbers are wrong.

"Since 1960, the nation’s Latino population has increased nearly ninefold, from 6.3 million" (the US population was 180 million in 1960, that's 3.5%)

"The foreign-born Latino population has increased to nearly 20 times its size over the past half century, from less than 1 million in 1960 to 19.4 million in 2015"

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2017/09/18/facts-on-u-s-latinos/

Here's information showing the US was only about 4% hispanic in 1965 (11% black, 84% white).

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/09/28/modern-immigration-wav...

All the reference points line up to my information being approximately correct. For example, there were 2.1 million Mexican immigrants in the US as recently as 1980. By 2006, that was 11.5 million.

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/mexican-immigrants-u...
Having statistical skills is helpful, but statistics only gives part of the picture. Patients often have bad outcomes despite providers adhering to the best current standard of care. And that doesn't just fall out of the noise because there are persistent differences in the patient populations between providers. We have no reliable way to identify and quantify all of those confounding factors. The data and the clinical research simply doesn't exist yet.
There's a very large set of problems that would become solvable if digital identity could be done. Sadly, as of yet there's no solution in sight that doesn't require a third party.
Honestly, the only way I can think of would be for the system to be rebuilt from the ground up with more objective, reliable, verifiable data (and data capturing mechanisms).

Accumulation of power inevitably leads to abuses of said power, at least in my experience.
wouldn't it be better to incentivize to Saas customers to watch tutorials, since the more they know how to use the product the more liky they are to continue using it?
The performance of the compiled code is great, and the performance of the compiler is something they have identified as a major issue to fix, and are working to solve it.
I think you are referring to “Reflections on Trusting Trust” by Ken Thompson.

https://www.ece.cmu.edu/~ganger/712.fall02/papers/p761-thomp...
At this point i386 is legacy for most of the world. OpenBSD is an ultra-conservative, orthodox project, therefore they will probably support i386 for years into the future - I mean, they supported VAX until 2016.

That is a choice they are entitled to make, the trade-off being it would appear to make most modern technologies a poor fit for adoption in OpenBSD - that's the price they have to pay. It is a problem of their own making.
OpenWrt in a WiFi card reader
There is a possible defense: https://www.dwheeler.com/trusting-trust/
You're looking for "Reflections on Trusting Trust" by Ken Thompson, one of the original co-authors of Unix:

https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=358210
i also saw the same eurobsdcon youtube video.
i agree it is somewhat hard to imagine replacing long-time unix tools with newer versions that only differ in being implemented in a new language. making sure nothing breaks takes so much time, with not enough reward.

but writing new tools in safer languages makes more sense to me.

yes, you would need the toolchain in base. not easy, but should be possible. i only know go. perhaps it's still too much of a moving target for openbsd.

you could write programs in new safe language and put them in openbsd ports. problem is that it then isn't a "part of openbsd". do openbsd developers really want to write their next daemon in c? for how long will they stick to c?
Those systems also had a very different dynamic because of the limits on non-textual communication. If you had a camera and if you had a decent connect you might be able to upload your crappy 640x480 picture to someone in 2 minutes or so, otherwise you were limited to emoticons.
Well I applied for a job at both Netflix & Twitch and never heard back from them. I think if I had Google/Apple/Facebook/Amazon on my CV I might have gotten more recognition. Just my personal opinion, I could be wrong.

Funny thing is, I have been called by Google, Amazon and FB recruiters in London couple of times. But I never went for onsite interview. I figured they can't really match contractor pay and they only outsource "shitty" jobs to London (I told recruiters my contractor rate and asked them if they can match/beat it and answer was no).
I currently have around 3k unread emails in the gmail box. Granted, most of them are highly unnecessary or don't need a reply. It doesn't bother me one bit. If I need to find a particular message, I'll search for it. If something is important and I missed it, I'll either get an auto-sent reminder or someone will reach out again or in another way.

I am not a slave to my email, just like I don't feel the need to pick up my phone every time it rings. Have I missed some time sensitive information? Occasionally. Has it blown my life up and caused a world of hurt? Not once.
Obviously a language needs to be capable of expressing laziness (which requires closures and some mutability), but it being the default is the issue in Haskell, since basically everything returns a closure computing the value rather than the value itself, which is really weird and unexpected, and causes unintuitive (at best) memory usage.

As for implicit parallelization with no annotations at all, the main Haskell implementations don't seem to do it, so I guess it just doesn't work (the reasons probably being that there are penalties due to caches being CPU local and the cost of synchronizing threads that make automatic micro-parallelization much worse that explicit coarse-grained parallelization, unless the micro-parallelization is done in hardware by the CPU out-of-order logic).

And obviously a type system with controlled mutability like Rust's allows to express explicit parallelization just fine (in fact, writing a safe explicitly parallelized web browser in Servo was one of the main goals of it).

> What you really want is a static checker that only prevents shared, simultaneous mutability but admits everything else. The Rust borrow checker is an important step in that direction but it's not it.

Is there any example of a static checker that allows more expressive programs than Rust's while preserving the same guarantees? (and without requiring extra annotations like programmer-supplied proofs or using best-effort automatic theorem proving). Is that even possible?
Same reason why not having net neutrality is a problem. Eventually health care gets terrible for the people who aren't paying, or are paying less, and you've institutionalized a two or more tier public service based on wealth.

What if somebody could pay extra to have the best firemen, or the best police?

WalterBright has posed a real problem here, but I honestly think that the solution is just that patients pick their doctors, and if they can't get the doctor they want, they can get on a waiting list for that doctor while seeing another. Additionally, that waiting list would not involve any administrator latitude or patronage, just list seniority.
Let's Science the Sh*t Out Of Toilet Paper Reviews !
Of course. But the whole point is that we shouldn't treat a teachers' union as an authority on whether it does (or can) exist. And no, it's by no means an established fact that it can't.
Amazon Aurora Auto-Scaling Serverless Database Service
A bash script (CLI) for displaying crypto currencies market data in a terminal
Provenance is the history/story of a piece, and it's a big value multiplier in the Art and Antiques world.
My sense is that Apple is in less of a position to use child data for exploitative purposes, because their aim is to sell hardware. It bestows the sense that Apple isn’t trying to exploit children for data, at least beyond selling them more hardware. In facebook’s case, selling the data is their entire business model, and that should make us nervous.
> He has a point though…

Does he? He "stat[es as] fact" that

> There has been no attempt to move the smallest parts of the ecosystem, to provide replacements for base POSIX utilities.

which as xwvvvvwx notes is categorically wrong, then points out that rustc can't compile itself on i386, which is relevant… how?
CBOE Will Start Bitcoin Futures Trading on December 10
It isn't necessary to be the best. What is needed is that patient outcomes get better. Those who are at the wrong end of the curve need to acknowledge that they need to do better and those in charge of the system need to assist them to improve.

Making payment conditional on results is not likely to have the desired effect, especially if the decision to pay or not is not made by the person actually affected. If anything it will simply drive medics away from difficult areas of expertise.

Take the above with the usual scepticism, I'm a software developer after all, not a medic. But it seems to me that you always need to have carrots as well as sticks, or perhaps just carrots.
I got a letter addressed from House of Commons when I was moaning about snoopers charter or it's ilk a few years back. I was on holiday and it was waiting for my return.

Generic Response. I binned it and decided never to waste my time again.
Hedge Funds Prepare to Trade Against Bitcoin
Not sure what the "it" is in your first sentence, but allow me to address the rest of your points. "First compilation ... will be very slow": the go compiler is in fact quite fast, orders of magnitude faster than C++ or rust compilers. The fact that there's a noticeable pause when you want to compile thousands of files does not mean that its slow. "There won't be a second compilation": not for each top level tool, but there certainly could be shared packages that don't need to be recompiled. "Go compiler is fast when you add the `-i` flag", ok, do that then. "Now, github goes down, your build is broken": you only need to depend on external github references if you want always to build against the latest version of your referenced code. I can't imagine anyone interested in stability wants this. There are lots of options for vendoring your dependencies in tree.
Watching my children I would argue its a desperate attempt to get children under the age of 16 using Facebook as they just don't.

Both children attend a Music group which has used a facebook
group for years. The older children (17-18) all have active facebook profiles - the younger children don't they use Instagram and Snapchat...
Some of these seem a little far fetched, but many could be real. I don't think we'll be having "A hot breakfast tailored to your specific nutritional needs (based on chemical analysis from your trips to the “smart toilet”)" anytime soon.

Light field displays are going to be so cool!
I imagine the time aspect is especially important in some areas. For example patient impressions of orthopedic surgery is guaranteed to be terrible in the short term, but it's the long term outcome--eg mobility--that might really matter, after everything heals and recovers.
Coming from a mid-size consulting background, all I can say is that agile is absolutely essential, but it's also absolutely worthless if expectations aren't aligned at the start of a project.

Think back to the project management triangle that was probably drawn up in the 1960s. Between scope, time and quality, you can only constrain 2 out of 3. Waterfall constrains scope and time at the expense of quality. Agile constrains quality and time and leaves scope flexible. That is an incredibly tough pill for most businesses to swallow, but it's absolutely in their own best interests. Agile manifesto lauds "working code" and if you build debt, you're probably not producing working code. Quality-first requires flexible scope. If business accepts flexible scope, then agile is miraculous.

These processes are not for developers, they're for business. To give them visibility and skin in the game.
If I say "You have a big nose, it makes you ugly" as the first line in my email, it may well be a "statement of fact" and yet still be a personal attack. Your implication that a statement of fact cannot be a personal attack is untrue.

Whether the OP has or has not written Posix utilities in rust is of no relevance to the actual argument whatsoever, it is just a way to have a dig at the OP.
Niantic doesn't seem to have a problem with this.
ELI5: I dont understand how this can't all be avoided by the watch makers associating each watch with an official serial number and having an official website that you go to check your serial against.
> When it’s time to leave, an on-demand transport system has three cars waiting for you, your spouse and your kids

This sounds incredibly wasteful. I doubt car sharing (self driving Uber) will be workable if the fleet has to be sized to 2-3X number of households.

Instead, wouldn't it be more reasonable to assume a mix of real public transportation and increased amount of telecommuting?
Refactoring may change how business logic works internally without changing anything in input/output or features. If you need to change how key components are implemented, without changing what they do, then you are refactoring them. Changes may be big internally, but it is still called refactoring if features don't change.