skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I use my Instant Pot several times a week. I do not cook vegetables in it, with the exception of artichokes (18-20 mins for that is a game changer).

Use it for meats, chili, rice, steel cut oats, soups, beans. Give it a try for one of those.
> Also who names emojis

Developers of screen readers, for one.

If you're on a Mac, use VoiceOver or the "say" command-line tool on an emoji.
I once tried to pressure cook a large pot of habanero peppers (to make hot sauce).

(While doing this I was drinking with friends... bad idea)

I wanted to open the pot and so put it in the sink and ran a little cold water on it until I could just get it open. The resulting steam hit me in the face and hands. My face turned all red and hands swelled up and I could barely see. No real damage but it was very intense pain for a few hours and completely sucked. It also made me not like spicy food for about a year thereafter (fortunately that went away).

Off topic but just a word of warning about pressure cookers and hot peppers.
TUBERCULOSIS AND INTRAVENOUS USE OF FORBIDDEN DRUGS
Something from a few months back that's a bit closer to Bitcoin's actual implementation but at a similar level of readability: https://github.com/jamesob/tinychain
Thanks. My quip was just that objects (as in object-oriented-programming) aren't the right abstraction. Having some kind of mapper in your language between the database and the entities your program is dealing with is useful, and you showed that functional programming is a more friendly host than oop.

(Logic programming might also be workable?)
> My guess is that automated driving systems will have to err on the side of caution and that this will result in seemingly (to the passenger) unnecessary slow-downs.

How are you expecting to be able to regulate implementation specific details like this across the industry? How would you enforce entirely requirements like this? If it's left to invisible hand of the market I would assume that the demand would be higher for cars with more aggressive driving styles, that will get you from A to B faster.
The most cringeworthy thing I heard about ORM's actually happened two weeks ago when I explained our use of a query builder rather than an ORM. The new senior developer was talking about speed (??? uhm… k...) and the benefit of being able to switch between PostgreSQL and... MongoDB. I just cringed up, didn't know what to say. Using the same domain model in an RDMBS as a Document Store? I really didn't know how to respond to that.

On the other side you have juniors, just starting development and working with an ORM/ODM the first time. It's not uncommon for them to spend years in development while learning very little SQL at all, hardly understanding the database (apart from what they learn in school). I don't blame them. I hardly know TCP/IP at all and still I write technology for it everyday. But ORMs are a more leaky abstraction; a lot of complexity is made easier by just switching to SQL.

More principal points:

- Why do we want to abstract away further from the most important part of the business: data. Data usually outlives the applications built on top of it.

- Best practice is to keep backend API's stateless and requests short-lived. ORM's promote the use of state. In client-side applications state is a much more interesting long-lived thing, but a backend API these days? It has actually become a lot simpler there since I've started doing development; few modern backend servers render views these days.

I understand why the author (re-)embraced stored procedures but I never will. Blame the overzealous PL/SQL Oracle seniors I've met, god forbid any human bestows such complexity on it's fellow colleagues. It's also hard to automate tests for them and promote it through DTAP alongside an application, hence I keep putting all logic in the application.

I can imagine if the language and ecosystem are very strongly geared towards ORM you shouldn't try to do anything else. That's just painful. But in most languages other than Java and C# I'd make a good consideration if you really need/want an ORM (coming from Java, I never took non ORM design seriously there, but perhaps I shouldn't have).

Not sure where I'll stand in a few years time on this… but for now just happy with plain old SQL and query builders.
> ORMs are bad, because objects aren't particularly useful to deal with most data.

Objects are containers of data; that's a crazy statement to make. The relational structure maps pretty cleanly to objects, properties, and collections.

However, objects are not good for reporting. And the author mentioned doing 14 joins and hundreds of columns - that smells like a reporting query.
I didn't downvote you, but something about systematic on-time performance metrics might have been more helpful than your personal dissatisfaction with delays?

Blaming transit workers for system performance is also pretty controversial; most would probably attribute that to incompetent management or stingy taxpayers?
>>Masked comic book vigilantes aren't ever going to be a reality on the mean non-virtual streets of cities

Unbelievably, this is actually the case in Seattle.
I don’t think the DoD getting to unilaterally decide what devices can be sold in the US is a good precedent at all. I expect devices with troublesome features like support for end-to-end encryption would be the first to go, and insecure devices would probably stay as long as the vulnerabilities were known to them.
No, BBR does deliver significant performance improvements in high packet loss links. It is designed as a general purpose algorithm (not just for high bandwidth links) - they are using it on the YouTube (and other) content servers as well as between their datacenters. I believe trying to optimise delivery of content to high loss, high latency mobile users was one of the use cases they designed for.

See slide 33 here for a comparison to CUBIC under packet loss - https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/98/slides/slides-98-iccrg-a...
From the link:

> a 2015 proposal from Samsung has outlined a 4600-satellite constellation orbiting at 1,400 kilometers (900 mi) that could provide a zettabyte per month capacity worldwide, an equivalent of 200 gigabytes per month for 5 billion users of internet data
How China got a U.S. senator to do its political bidding
Oh, the implementation was fairly straight-forward. I think just sorted arrays are something.

It wasn't about speed of execution, but expressiveness when coding. Later on they even added proper type system support.

Common operations were things like map/project, extend, filter, join, collect-by-key / expand, etc.

Just as Codd pointed out in his original papers, relations allow you to not have to make a choice about a hierarchy for your data.

Using key-value store like a hash-table in your program, or the much vaunted has-a relationship between objects would force you to make these choices. Thus making interacting with the data awkward for all but one access pattern.

Relations work best when your program is written in a style that deals largely in immutable data. (What we call 'purely functional', but people in dysfunctional languages have also picked up on the advantages recently.)
Huh. ToledoTel is the telco it its service area. It isn't competing with the local telco. I don't think this is an example of municipal networking.
Because self-driving on a highway is a solved problem. It's the edge cases that are hard.
cause I think its relevant -- note he's the creator of SQLAlchemy.
I might be way off-base here but I think he means tech being the core of a startup. An example might be one of the big unicorn idea - ride sharing. Here, implementation and people which matter. Differentiating based on tech is moot.
I mean, the CIA director ordered all the documents destroyed. Clearly any effort to uncover it is going to be speculative.

Who else is making FOIA requests, interviewing people, and systematically collecting evidence? [0] Nobody.

[0] https://webbrain.com/brainpage/brain/6FBA86B0-0C57-9FCA-5CF9...
What advantage does that give over a more traditional toll road approach? I.e. Raise money, built road, charge toll.
This process to build such a highway in california is beyond even the considerable means of Elon Musk - just the land acquisition and environmental review costs are staggering.
Perhaps I should have said "analogous to" and not "the same thing as". I'm not trying to put forth an opinion here, just trying to point out that ToledoTel is the phone company in its service area.
You can however gdax limits you to 10k/day of withdrawls from the exchange (be it usd or btc). And gdax has a 3-6 day wire transfer delay.

You end up making more by simply hodling
The difficulty in an ISP is going to be about initial funding and being sued by regional monopolies. An ISP, specifically one that does not require additional hardware/software to organize and power tiered net neutrality violations logic, has orders of magnitudes less moving parts and disruptive needs for real estate/infrastructure. Maintainence labor could be simplified by training existing city electrical teams to work on both wire sets. We're talking about something with a lot less toes to step on. The failure scenarios for an ISP are so miniscule they make public transportation look like Chernobyl. Does a public ISP need to be ran better than those other things? There's just so much less to mess up and the consequences are just so much smaller and less permanent. Even if the mayor explicitly sells you out to the NSA or acquires someone's browsing history abusively or somehow the internet is out for a day, that's pretty much nothing compared to lead water, out of service rail line, environmental disaster, etc..
ORMs:

- Are maintainable by a team. "Oh, because that seemed faster at the time."

- Are unit tested: eventually we end up creating at least structs or objects anyway, and then that needs to be the same everywhere, and then the abstraction is wrong because "everything should just be functional like SQL" until we need to decide what you called "the_initializer2".

- Can make it very easy to create maintainable test fixtures which raise exceptions when the schema has changed but the test data hasn't.

- Prevent SQL injection errors by consistently parametrizing queries and appropriately quoting for the target SQL dialect. (One of the Top 25 most frequent vulnerabilities). This is especially important because most apps GRANT both UPDATE and DELETE; if not CREATE TABLE and DROP TABLE to the sole app account.

- Make it much easier to port to a new database; or run tests with SQLite. With raw SQL, you need the table schema in your head and either comprehensive test coverage or to review every single query (and the whole function preceding db.execute(str, *params))

- May be the performance bottleneck for certain queries; which you can identify with code profiling and selectively rewrite by hand if adding an index and hinting a join or lazifying a relation aren't feasible with the non-SQLAlchemy ORM that you must use.

- Should provide a way to generate the query at dev or compile-time.

- Should make it easy to DESCRIBE the query plans that code profiling indicates are worth hand-optimizing (learning SQL is sometimes not the same as learning how a particular database plans a query over tables without indexes)

- Make managing db migrations pretty easy.

- SQLAlchemy really is great. SQLAlchemy has eager loading to solve the N+1 query problem. Django is often more than adequate; and has had prefetch_related() to solve the N+1 query problem since 1.4. Both have an easy way to execute raw queries (that all need to be reviewed for migrations). Both are much better at paging without allocating a ton of RAM for objects and object attributes that are irrelevant now.

- Make denormalizing things from a transactional database with referential integrity into JSON really easy; which webapps and APIs very often need to do.

Is there a good JS ORM? Maybe in TypeScript?
I suggest you look at Irvin's brain [0], which contains a lot of the connections. Red items are confirmed, documented CIA, yellow is "highly likely but not 100% confirmed".

[0] https://webbrain.com/brainpage/brain/6FBA86B0-0C57-9FCA-5CF9...
> Differentiating based on tech is moot.

There were many ridesharing startups before Uber, but the reason why Uber became the market leader is that they were one of the first to leverage the iPhone.
Wikipedia says SQLAlchemy was created by somebody named Michael Bayer : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQLAlchemy

EDIT: Sorry, my mistake. The partent is talking about the parent comment, not the FTA
>Unethical human experimentation was pioneered by the US.

Have to guess the Aztecs and many other civilizations before that had it figured out before us.
Is this meant to be scary though? From my perspective, it's obvious that bitcoin markets aren't as developed as traditional stock / forex markets... but it literally got added to CBOE one week ago. It seems there's nothing categorically preventing it from developing in time. So while this is interesting it doesn't seem particularly important right now.
That's because if a pressure cooker explodes in America (or more generally, the West) and kills someone it's a national news item: http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/health-problems/mum-...

You haven't heard about Indians killed by pressure cookers because it simply doesn't make the news.
Sarah Palin Oldest Son Arrested on Domestic Violence Charges
This is a great comment. You did miss one requirement to fall into federal jurisdiction:
C. The firearm or ammunition was transported across a state line at any
Not to challenge your argument itself, and I know you’re not the author who commented above, but I really dislike this kind of “argument-swapping.” I see it a lot, for a lot of issues, but especially for issues that are complex and not deeply understood by most people, like Bitcoin, corporate finance, etc.

It starts with an easily-digestible and shareable argument, like “Bitcoin prices and market cap are a lie.” Then someone points out that, yes, perhaps many people misunderstand basic concepts in finance like spread and market cap, but that applies to any asset or currency or security.

Then someone else joins in with a completely unrelated argument, like “yeah, but Bitcoins don’t actually do or represent anything, whereas stocks do.” Even assuming this is a valid argument, it doesn’t change the invalidity of the first argument. But I fear that all too often people see the entire exchange as if it’s a sequence of related claims, and thus feel inclined to believe and share the initial talking point as if it was somehow corroborated by the later unrelated argument.
A median-income household owning a median-priced house and making the standard 15% 401k contribution will clear "millionaire" by retirement age, easily.
(Mike Bayer is zzzeek: http://techspot.zzzeek.org/)
We've used a Japanese multi cooker for years. Tiger brand. Does rice, steaming, slow cooked stews and soups, even cakes and yoghurt. I'm very surprised at everyone talking as though the Instant Pot invented it.
Why not say Hello?

Yeah, why not, those arrogant pricks.

If I was a member of an advanced civilization, I'd definitely want to hang out with weird bags of water, who's only claim to fame is designing, constructing, and testing, ways to destroy most life on the planet.

Yeah, great times, for them, I'm sure.
Math behind rotation in MS Paint (2011)
The problem with ORMs is that they're an attempt to hack relational models into languages that lack them. The thing nobody has ever done is add relations as first class citizens to a language. Instead we have only maps, arrays, and lists in our languages and we have to shoehorn richer data into that.

That's why hierarchical document databases have had a resurgence. At least they match the data model if the language.
Trouble is nobody's yet figured out how to build a completely decentralized internet that is anywhere near as good as the regular internet.

Mostly because wireless technologies still don't scale that far, which means wires in the ground, which means gatekeepers on the other end.
why add the overhead of a VM?
Yes, SQLAlchemy uses tons of magic.

But my very point was not to make it traverse object graphs at all. You can write nice SQL using it, with selects, joins, functions, etc. All these parts, SQL clauses, are composable, so you can factor out common parts.

Yes, I'm fine working with lists of tuples, not "model objects". Object graphs don't map all to well to the RDBMS model all too well. It's best done on case-by-case basis, if you care about performance at all.
zzzeek - can I take this chance to praise your work on SqlAlchemy. People say there's not enough thanks given to open source developers... here's thanks to you. It's the work of a craftsman.
Having PK relations defined was usually sufficient for me. I like SQLAlchemy for its straightforward mapping of SQL.

I don't usually work on the "model" level, though; I work on "table" level.
For C# and LINQ in Excel there is my ESharper add-in https://vlasovstudio.com/esharper/
I use a Cuisinart pressure cooker like a chain smoker. I cook a vegetable stew that lasts 4 or 5 meals, then cook my next vegetable stew for the next 4 or 5 meals, and so on.

No recipes. Basically what's fresh and in season from the farmers market with legumes (lentils, beans, peas, et), nutritional yeast, herbs or flavoring (usually ginger or jalepenos) and water. Then salt to taste, topped with nuts, and crispy vegetables like onion or pepper.

Actually, here's a video of it -- http://joshuaspodek.com/20-minute-vegetable-stew. It's 20 minutes and not that exciting, but it shows how to make a delicious stew from entirely fresh ingredients with zero planning.

I make bread starting with wheat berries in it (grinding them into flour in the blender first). Also fruit stews that are incredible desserts.

Total life changer. Restaurants are disappointing in comparison and I live in Manhattan. It paid for itself in the first use.
Back off, Man.

These are Experts here.

Show some respect.
Yeah they're the same person. His HN profile has a link to his blog.
Yeah, I would be concerned about 'wash trading' too. And the Crypto trading space seems like the Wild West in int 1880s in how some crypto trading sites and exchanges are screening for this kind of illegal activities while others aren't.

> PSA: The Bitfinex trade engine ALLOWS for WASH TRADING

> The trade engine on Bitfinex will allow you to buy and sell to your own orders, the procedures to do it are as follows (which will likely be ‘fixed’, or partially fixed after this post…)

Source: Wash Trading Bitcoin: How Bitfinex benefits from fraudulent trading => https://medium.com/@bitfinexed/wash-trading-bitcoin-how-bitf...
Your observation of the unhappy timing is probably related to the temperature. Cold batteries have lower voltage across their terminals, triggering the chirp.

(You can troll people into thinking you have magical powers, rub the batteries of a just-failing calculator/scale/wristwatch in your hands and you'll get another ten minutes of use out of them)
I've noticed that when Trump detaches a thing from government control (Paris agreement, net neutrality), the populace and media go full on chicken little sky is falling.

Then as the dust settles, people start having conversations like this one. Private and corporate entities, wealthy individuals, organizations, step up and attempt to fill the gap.

So. Isn't that the whole point? That society as a whole is better suited to solve these problems than the largest centralized node on the network?

Edit: K I'll just absorb downvotes for having an opinion which doesn't actively oppose trump in one particular case.
When you do something with the pot in a way it wasn't meant to be used, I guess all bets are off.
I'd be interested in knowing who was really providing the layer-2 connectivity. In most places your options are the local telco and the local cable company. What were the other options here?

It is possible in some places to get IP transit from someone other than the telco or cable company but almost always that is happening using the layer-2 infrastructure from the telco. I've never heard of that happening via cable but I suppose it is possible.

I've been out of this for a while, but in Connecticut it used to be possible to lease layer-2 connectivity from the telco and then provide the IP services on top of that. This was done via DSL to the end-user with the layer-2 traffic aggregated and backhauled via ATM virtual circuits to the ISPs router in some data center. It was still difficult to compete with the local telco -- who also was selling IP transit of course via the same methodology. Mainly the problem was the economies of scale. The pricing favored high-volume which is hard for a small company competing against the market visibility of the local telco.
LINQ itself doesn't have anything directly to do with SQL. It's a mechanism for composing expression trees that are compiled into your application. At runtime a LINQ query provider can walk the expression tree and translate it into a query for the underlying data store. It's a very very powerful concept, but IME it doesn't get used all that much for things other than SQL because writing a query provider is a lot of work.

Anyway, the typical C# ORM is Entity Framework, which includes the LINQ-to-Entities query provider.
I think they will never implement it. If all the shit and stuff you've already watched was filtered out and every movie was only listed ones you'd likely see a fairly empty page.
I understand the benefits from instant web chat, but I think it's not too difficult to access the signal protocol through Whatsapp or Signal's desktop app.
Great Work!
> Also who names emojis, are they author named‽

Actually, the Unicode Consortium names (when you hover over the emoji)
http://www.unicode.org/emoji/charts/emoji-versions.html#v9.0...
This article is total trash. Liquidity is always a factor in any asset that you buy or sell, whether its a stock, a bond, a work of fine art, or a bitcoin. All prices are fictional until you execute a contract and receive payment for a sale.
Thus the Boring Company was born.
ORMs of various stripes were in common use well before 2004 so 1 & 2 don’t sound terribly persuasive. 3 is definitely an evergreen selling point - you might change to a different RDBMS vendor (back when there was such a thing), etc.
You can cash out Bitcoin and the price is actually very accurate. The money I see in my bank account is real I can assure you of that. Also I know friends that cash out six figures at a time and the price they get is within less than 1% difference to the last sell price.

The number is accurate enough for most orders under $10,000,000. Has this person actually traded Bitcoin?

You might not be able to sell a large order to the cent, but with Bitcoin you are certainly able to cash out within less than 1% of the listed price. I move orders around a lot and I see real money, so I know it's not fictional. In addition I frequently use an exchange with about 100 times less volume than the USA exchanges.

Also shares have a spread too.

The Bitcoin order book is not razor thin, unless you are trying to sell $10,000,000 in one go. Then you just need to spread out the sell over about 5 hours.

Also the issue with arbitrage isn't the Bitcoin side of the transactions, it's often the USD or AUD side.

But arbitrage does work and the price is much closer worldwide than it used to be.

These little islands that the author talks about range from $1,000,000 24 hour volume for the smallest exchanges to $200,000,000 24 hour volume for a mid - high size exchange.

TL:DR I can assure you the price is real, cashing out is easy and viable. If you want to cash in $10 million just expect your limit order to execute gradually over about 5 hours.
The New Span Type – Stephen Toub
I've used http://bookshelfjs.org/ but I'd stay away from it, only felt cumbersome. No productivity gain.

It's built on top a query builder Knex (http://knexjs.org/) which is decent.