skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
they use canonical SMILES. Problem: there's more than one way to make canonical SMILES :(
I don't think 2.6 kernel reasons are relevant anymore, in fact they apply to ram compression techniques better, than to old raw swap on disk.
Pretty much all smart sysadmins want swap.

The kernel expects it, and performance is almost always worse without it.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15952447
haha. I know. I am just telling you to look beyond the words.
The reason those articles are suggesting swap is due to the settings I linked above that most people are missing. The kernel is not evacuating cache early enough and it gets wedged. Kernel devs even argue among themselves about this. A properly engineered system would never need swap, that much is for certain.

And if you must use it, then at least know when you need to encrypt your swap. If you have customer data in memory that is encrypted at rest, then you must encrypt your swap.

Some people use crypttab for this, but I think that is a mistake. Rather, people should have a swap volume or partition that on each system boot, you use cryptsetup with a long randomly generated password and mkswap -f, then swapon each time.

Most companies have policies about encrypting customer data. If you have swap, it plays into that policy.
You should check his comment history, its worth reading.
It's probably 17 hexadecimal zeros.
>We have far more problems with too many .Includes causing terribly performing queries with bad JOINs than lazy loading problems. Granted this code base is in a bit of a state and we have a complex order structure that can go like 10 layers deep, and ideally we're looking to go even deeper with complex pricing. You do an include with all of that and you're going to get a terrible query.

Wait - are you "Include"ing things you don't need? If not...assuming a sane query plan, shouldn't the single query (e.g. "Include" version) outperform the deconstructed series-of-queries that brings back the same data?

E.g., Included:

context.Orders.Where(x=>x.OrderId = 5).Include(x=>x.OrderItems)

which translates roughly to

select * from Orders o join OrderItems i on o.OrderId = i.OrderId
where o.OrderId = 5

vs.

var order = context.Orders.Where(x=>x.OrderId = 5);
var items = order.OrderItems;

which translates roughly to

select * from Orders o where o.OrderId = 5;
select * from OrderItems where OrderId = 5;

As far as I understand the former will outperform the latter, even if you don't take into account the additional connection overhead. If the second version was faster...wouldn't SQL just compile down to a series-of-queries automatically?
The Private depends on the Public - https://georgelakoff.com/2017/11/26/protect-internet-freedom...
Ok, for two+ person household it's $14k, but then it's double income.

And the premiums are not horrible either. It took me two minutes to find a bronze level plan for $398.56 ($4782 per year). It's not much at all. It's cheaper than paying much higher taxes in most of the EU.
Some systems have it activated by default, on ubuntu it was a matter of installing a package zram-config with default configuration.
I use sourcetree and it's pretty great, especially the aforementioned block-level staging.
>> People with their crazy rice strategies.

You're making assumptions that your definition of "perfect" is the same as everyone else's. There are cultural differences with respect to the preference of the actual texture and stickiness of the rice.

For example, my Chinese parents basically don't like the stickiness or texture of rice made by any other culture. It might be close minded, but it does illustrate that different cultures have different standards for what makes rice "perfect".
Bitcoin's purpose isn't for investing. People might choose to invest and speculate on the future value of Bitcoin but, among other things, Bitcoin's purpose is a currency that is decoupled from a central government.
Ah, except that capital equipment in your business you pay 2% interest to finance? The manufacturer sold it at a cost + profit margin that included the 2% fee they're paying on their equipment, payroll bridge loans, etc. So did their suppliers, which factors into the costs paid further upstream and passed on down. There could be many, many layers from resource extraction (mining) to consumer goods, making a multiplying effect. And what is GDP? The aggregation of all these transactions.

So even if the bank only captured 2% from you, in aggregate the banking system sucks double-digit percentage of word GDP into their coffers for something that history has shown they don't actually do a good job of providing, in the absence of bail-outs.

(And, fwiw, I don't know where you're getting 2% interest. Any real industrial financing would be much higher, with larger compounding effects.)
--force-with-lease is usually the better option; it makes sure nobody pushed anything since the last time you fetched from the remote.

If they have, you can fetch, see if you still want to overwrite that branch, and if so run it again.
Yes, that's why this news about no-limit poker is interesting.
Some sorts of fraud are legal if that's what you mean.

Usually, when committed by the government.

Examples:

- Underfunded pension funds,

- bank bailouts with taxpayer money,

- wars with made-up reasons,

The cost of each should be in the trillions but it's not fraud. By the same reasoning, previously one could expect to get a positive real interest rate (= nominal interest rate - inflation), yet that's not the case. Legally fraud? No. Challenging the economics of the last few milleniums? Yes.
> It's cheaper than paying much higher taxes in most of the EU.

This is demonstrably false. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_hea...
has he successfully converted his bitcoin into "fiat" currency? or does the college accept and denominate tuition in BTC?
It's virtually indestructible. But global prohibition would limit its utility and likely cascade to diminished investment in mining.

But it will likely never go away until/unless you could find an unfixable flaw. For example, a flaw in the hashing algorithm that permits you to double-spend. Unfortunately there's effectively an enormous bounty on that particular defect that no one has yet claimed. If someone did, another coin with another hashing algorithm would take bitcoin's place.

More importantly -- what is your motivation? Let's please enumerate the evils going on in the world and rank bitcoin appropriately. It's not worth your time.

If you are really in a huff over the energy consumption I think your consternation is poorly focused. Again, let's rank our concerns here. In any case, the best way to "destroy" proof-of-work coins is to invest and promote coins that are similarly effective without proof-of-work. e.g. proof-of-stake coins like Raiblocks.
Wants important is the blockchain technology. As Bitcoin continues to grow it further legitimizes the strength of the blockchain technology which can be applied to many other areas in tech. Bitcoin itself is useless, essentially sending "thin air" back and forth as someone else put it.
I am unable to focus because of it. It's making me sick now.
At one time I lived in an apartment building just outside of Seattle that had public retail space in the lobby. To allow residents and their visitors in after hours, a fancy touch screen was installed where you could enter an apartment number and it would phone the apartment where someone could then punch a number and unlock the door. Standard stuff.

Except that the touch screen could be activated by rain. In Seattle.

There was a small cowl over the apparatus to keep regular rain off, but if there was any wind at all, it was very easy for drops to be blown onto the screen and it would start phoning apartments in the middle of the night.

Amazingly, this was among the building's least troublesome faults.
The reasons behind the Starbucks BBC iPlayer warning
Mark Hamill strikes back at Cruz: Thanks for 'smarm-spaining' net neutrality
No.

There is no worry putting swap on SSD.

Given the choice, you should prefer swap on SSD (since it's so much faster than spinny disks).

If swap on SSD was a bad idea, do you honestly think every laptop, desktop, and server manufacturer that uses exclusively SSD would still enable swap?

Every mainstream OS wants/needs swap - it helps all of them
I can't think of any startup that has become a billion dollar company by copying the business model of an existing billion dollar company.

Targeting the markets and customers of existing billion dollar companies is often a good idea, but you need to have something new to succeed.
> But the damn migration issue is a real kick in the teeth: changing the model is no big deal in the application, but a real pain in the database. After all, databases are persistent whereas application data is not. ORMs simply get in the way here because they don't help manage data migration at all.

If you ORM doesn't help you manage data migration, get a better one. Any ORM worth its salt should let you generate migrations; at least Django and Hibernate (+ Liquibase) can. I find the key to making everything work nicely is to let the definition in the application/ORM be the source of truth for what the DDL looks like. If you want a particular SQL table layout, figure out how to tell the ORM to generate it. If you try to retrofit an ORM onto an existing table schema (which it seems is this author's preferred approach), you're in for a world of pain.

> These two things don't really get along because you can really only use database identifiers in the database (the ultimate destination of the data you're working with).

> What this results in is having to manipulate the ORM to get a database identifier by manually flushing the cache or doing a partial commit to get the actual database identifier.

Use UUIDs. Generate them in the application, but use them directly as identifiers (pkeys) in the database.

> Something that Neward alludes to is the need for developers to handle transactions. Transactions are dynamically scoped, which is a powerful but mostly neglected concept in programming languages due to the confusion they cause if overused. This leads to a lot of boilerplate code with exception handlers and a careful consideration of where transaction boundaries should occur. It also makes you pass session objects around to any function/method that might have to communicate with the database.

> The concept of a transaction translates poorly to applications due to their reliance on context based on time. As mentioned, dynamic scoping is one way to use this in a program, but it is at odds with lexical scoping, the dominant paradigm. Thus, you must take great care to know about the "when" of a transaction when writing code that works with databases and can make modularity tricky ("Here's a useful function that will only work in certain contexts").

Use a monad to represent "this function has to happen in a transaction", then all those problems go away.
The New Fear of Sex Traffickers Echoes a Medieval Fear of Child Murderers
I am all for municapal internet in the US, but really it is a bandaid. The fundamental problem is how competition is regulated in the US. Most European countries I know of did not achieve high speed internet by making it municpal. Rather we did it by forcing competition. Cell phone and broadband infrastructure owners in Europe typicall have to let competition offer services on their hardware. Same with power. Here in Norway companies owning the power cables going into my house are not allowed to exclude competitors from using their lines to send power to me.

You, need struct regulation of natural monpolies and that is what the US lacks. That is why Americans ironically end up with government solutions.

See the same with so many things. Government mandated minimum eages because unions are so weak. In Nordic countries, Germany etc there has never been a need for go ernment to provide this as unions have solved the problem with exploitative wages.

Ironically by fighting government regulation you just end up with more government.
There's a fair bit to unpack there.

It used to be that savings & loan type banking couldn't mix it up with serious financial engineering. Then the rules governing these things were broken down, and retail banks started taking on more and more fancy (and risky) investments. That's the kind of stuff that eventually led to the bailouts.

But I don't think it can be stressed enough that "getting too wild" meant getting involved in a lot of capital markets that were traditionally firewalled off from savings & loan banking.

Holding up what happened to the banks during the financial crisis as an argument for savings & loan banking being riskier than investing in the open market is a lot like telling people that, if they don't like the heat in the frying pan, they'd be a lot better off in the fire.

(edit: totally mistyped in that last paragraph)
Shortly after a big upgrade to the application I worked on, we started to get bug reports on our forum about a pretty ugly bug where a modal window would get “stuck” after clicking OK. The window would no longer respond to users but the application would act as if it were still up, and the only way out was to kill the process and lose all the unsaved work.

Understandably, the complaints got louder and angrier as no one on our engineering or prerelease teams were able to reproduce it, but easily half the bug reports were all about this issue and identical. After 2 weeks of trying every configuration of video card, OS, and any other alchemical recipe we could think of, my partner on the test team stumbled upon the license crack online while searching for anyone else having this problem but not having reported it to us directly.

As a brief respite from this ongoing madness, he decided to install the crack on a clean machine and aee how it worked so we could report it. Lo and behold, the problem reproduced on the first try. This whole time, indignant, angry users who were actively threatening our team and vowing to never use another product from our company had been bested by a poorly written crack.

Before exposing the secret, I asked dozens of the most vocal and vicious reporters to please email me a particular log file, and give me contact information where we might get in touch with them as we were close to cracking the case. (Pun intended, and this was before we had very clear rules around personally identifiable information, but even with the policy at the time, these weren’t our customers so I felt less anguish about it.). I received all of it and more, invited them to share their experiences on the forum threads, and then tactfully but clearly explained exactly why they’d seen this problem. I offered to work one on one with anyone who felt my accusation was in error, but not one single affected user replied or followed up after that message.
Then we get one company deciding which features should and should not be available to a web page.
Here here.
GloFo is owned by a middle eastern oil fund btw.
https://www.reddit.com/r/BitcoinMarkets is slightly less terrible, but doesn't go in much on technical details
You can just recreate a CS degree and build yourself a foundation from which you can build anything.

Before anything else, check out Coursera's Learning How to Learn course.

You can jump right into CS50 which will provide you with a very strong foundation.

If you wished to continue developing your C skills from CS50, you could work your way through K&R, Hanson's C Interfaces and Implementations (in conjunction or following working through material on algorithms and data structures), and learn lower level details by working your way through Bryant and O'Halloron's Computer Systems: A Programmer's Perspective.

You can learn proofs from Hammack's Book of Proof, freely available online. From there, you can learn algorithms and data structures from Stanford and/or Princeton's courses on Coursera.

The above would be the equivalent of a strong CS minor.

From there, you could dive into pretty much anything. The recommendations from https://teachyourselfcs.com/ are spot on. Between Coursera, edx, Stanford's Lagunita, and Udacity, you can learn pretty much everything. Be sure to check out Udacity's courses on debugging and testing, as well as anything Peter Norvig teaches. Lagunita will be helpful for CS theory, Computer Networking, Compilers, Databases, and Data Mining.

If you were to complete all of the courses I explicitly mentioned, you would have the equivalent of a CS major as long as you study discrete math (Rosen and Epps are the standard texts) and Operating Systems, too.
Some predispositions are plastic and can be altered over time by behavior, though it is a complicated business. New preferences, new problem-solving techniques, new mental hygiene habits, these can all effect real change at what many people would call the “personality” level.
Ya I realize this now. I usually keep backups. I don't know why I haven't been on this project. I'm using git properly now with proper backups for the project. Though everything's still on the local machine, it's better than the setup I had. I chose to take it as a warning to sort that shit out.
You admit you're not a Bitcoin expert but claim it's a pyramid scheme? Do you even know what a pyramid scheme is? I'm by no means a crypto fanatic, but you really have no idea what you're talking about...
Go ahead and say "speculate on", and throw away your scare quotes.
I haven't used induction, but it could be a game changer if and when it ever comes to the mass market.
There's a lot of white on this map: [World Population Density](http://www.luminocity3d.org/WorldPopDen/) — the hard part is gonna be getting data between Europe and New Zealand without Big Wire.

I love how Staltz's solution to this goes hand-in-hand with re-personalising our interactions. In short:

1. The Next Billion haven't yet become used to the idea that useful tech services must be global, and provided for you by a single corporation.

2. They want to communicate with other people they know, physically nearby-ish.

3. Sneakernet is never slower than talking in person.

4. Isolated mesh networks and comms with days of latency are viable for these new net users.

5. Get enough people using a mesh and the networks will start to connect.

6. Where the internet is already pervasive, privacy and autonomy advocates are resisting corporate control, and choosing decentralised alternatives.

7. For now, we can exploit the existing internet to handle long-distance.

8. But eventually, enough people will have the bottom-up mindset, and the weak links in the mesh will become worrying.

9. So a solution will emerge to fill in the gaps in the mesh, using ships / beacons / balloons / satellites / modulated whalesong.
As someone who has made an EMR and has used OpenEMR there are a few reasons why there hasn't been a fully implemented open source solution in this space.

1.) Hospitals are fairly risk averse organizations. Instead of spending resources on building out a technical team and building their own solutions they usually will outsource tech to a third party (EPIC, GE, Cerner, etc). A CTO of a hospital is usually just a checkbook personified and buying IBM never got anyone fired.

2.) An EMR is not a trivial software application. A good one has an extremely large feature set with multiple specialized applications depending on the type of physician who is using it.

3.) There are compliance and regulatory hurdles which scare away a lot of people from working in the field.

4.) The players in the field have no incentive to open source their work since they make all of their money on enterprise sales contracts.
I was exaggerating slightly. I was mainly trying to make the point that pills for pennies comes with other consequences. There are indeed better ways to do it but those have ripple effects that people ignore. If you change the rules, the companies will adjust and our access and jobs will change too. You can't just say I want all the good things of today and none of the bad and lower costs.
Probably because it’s none of our business? Literally and figuratively.
Yeah, Intel's design rules are infamously draconian.
>> I've never been to a Chinese home that didn't have a rice cooker (huge selection bias in there but still).

That's a pretty fair statement. I'm of a Chinese background, and the only people I know who don't have rice cookers are people who don't cook rice often enough to merit one.

Also, I don't think I know any Chinese people who even bother cooking it the traditional way in a pot. My parents taught me how to do it when I was 10, but the only time I would ever do it that way these days is if I want the burnt crust at the bottom of the pot (sooo good when eaten with soup).
I use the git CLI. I do it for one reason. I know exactly what i'm doing on it. I have nothing to prove to anyone, I'm not trying to impress anyone with my "hacker" skillz.

When I've tried GUI's, I'm not 100% sure what's going on under the covers. Sometimes they try to obfuscate things. While I'm probably not the worlds most advanced user, I know enough to know what I want to do, and how to do it. The CLI let's me do it. The GUI get's in my way.
> no Git command called ... "revert"

Maybe not in the way Source Tree uses it, but there certainly is[1]! I've had to use it a few times.

> git-revert - Revert some existing commits

[1] https://git-scm.com/docs/git-revert
And if bitcoin crashes and people who took out mortgages to buy it end up on the street it could take the reputation of blockchain down with it...
Αυτά τα Χριστούγεννα μην ξεχνάτε το SEO της επιχείρησης σας -
i'm guessing their marketing people used their own static website service to host the site, which is rate-limited by default... and they probably forgot to disable the limit for it.

would not surprise me the least from the last 12 month of service i've got from them.

everything they offer is at best usable, slightly lacking would be the honest opinion though.

i.e.

1. 25GB Cloud Storage. can only be accessed from the browser.

2. Mail sorting rules can only be applied when the mail first comes onto the server, applying them to emails already received is impossible.

3. Marking mails read on their own (not a third party!) app keeps them unread on the web interface. The Web app is not a native application. I'm still amazed how the managed that.
The Instant Pot models are on sale regularly. I paid $90 Canadian for mine.
Worth noting that if you like the idea of indexing your mail, there's also Notmuch. It's a dedicated email search and indexing tool and is very nice when paired with something like OfflineIMAP to sync messages.

https://notmuchmail.org
Show HN: Stampd.io now supports Bitcoin Cash
SourceTree by Atlassian ... free.
I'd hesitate to call Magit a git GUI though.

If we take Ranger for example, who calls itself the "CLI file manager", then Magit is rather a "git CLI".
Prior to the current bubble, the value of bitcoin was largely based on it's use cases for selling illicit goods over the internet, collecting money for ransom ware, evading currency controls and taxes, and general money laundering.

An investment in bitcoin was a bet that it would continue to be used for criminal activity.

The current bubble is based on exactly what you say, though. Price manipulation by a few shady, unregulated exchanges leading to insane price increases, followed by a speculative mania.
You're comparing git to vim in terms of ease of use...
We could say that many had an educated guess that Bitcoin would be the way of the future. It's initial promise was brilliant, however at the time of writing it seems to have lost much of its use (e.g. cheap micro-transactions between peers), due to technical and economic issues (limited transaction rates, insane volatility). It's not clear whether any of these will change, so I wonder what people are investing in? I believe what the parent poster was referring to is that much of the investment seems to be purely driven by speculation on the value, rather than its promise as a platform.
It was designed by José Valim, a Rails core team member.