skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's a very different explanation than the one I was responding to, in which men are having less sex because they'd rather just watch porn.
Sometimes it is just a self fulfilling prophecy. If everyone feels we are in a bubble, a non trivial selloff can cause panic and lead to a cascade of more selloffs.
> appeal to authority. Would I really read this if it was written by a 20 year old without a track record?

First, that's not what appeal to authority means. It doesn't mean, "Don't be interested in what Einstein thought," for example.

Second, ironically, the big problem in our industry is that no one ever listens to those who have gone before. It's Alan Kay, not Alan Key.

We reinvent technology, package it with a new logo, give it a new name, and run into the same problems as before, until someone comes up with a new technology to replace it, which is the same technology again, ad infinitum.

You really need to listen to authority, because, frankly your software sucks. How do I know? Because all software sucks. Alan Kay, not Key, is one of the few people who understand that and understand what kind of creativity might lead us out of this mess. We should all be interested in what he's saying.
Actually that's the property of xor, not randomness. Data xor uniform distribution -> results in uniform distribution. It doesn't have to be random.
I'd rather people not reward tax dodging, and enforce people paying their fair share.

Combating extremism and taxes shouldn't be combined like this, It's morally repugnant.
I'm personally betting against serverless computing in the enterprise, except for very specific uses.

In general, serverless computing tasks cost 100-1000× more per cpu cycle than a counterpart running on a cloud server.

That means that for tasks that are running regularly, they are a huge loser.

They have unpredictable latency, you lose control of things like logging to disk (you get locked in to cloudwatch or whatever, yet more money and tooling required)

The notion of scale seems promising at first, but I would be very skeptical before I accepted the claim that someone can scale lambda volume from 10 to 10 thousand executions per minute without setting off alarms, dropping traffic, and probably having an engineer at AWS Lamba get paged.

So what are lambdas good for? I'd argue that they make good glue for deployments or batch processes that happen infrequently, don't require predictable performance, and for which having a dedicated server is a little wasteful. I'm skeptical even of those. Remember, a micro server is free tier.

I have had success building prototypes with AWS Lambda, so there's that aspect too.

I'd be interested to hear a counterpoint from someone who uses serverless compute in a large enterprise setting in place of a traditional server stack.
Stop spreading false information. Segwit is implemented, it’s working. 90% of the miners are working on the Bitcoin chain which has Segwit. One large miner did not support it because the Segwit change also removed a bug in Bitcoin that enabled them to “cheat” with the mining using something they patented called ASICBOOST. They could use it but nobody else could. So they had a perverse incentive to block and delay Segwit and Now to promote BCH.
18 dead in attack on Afghan funeral: officials
How about this: https://read.acloud.guru/serverless-superheroes-eric-hammond...

From the article:

> The most surprising thing I learned from building TimerCheck.io was: If designed well, it is possible for some products built with services like AWS Lambda, API Gateway, and DynamoDB (often categorized as “serverless”) to require zero technical maintenance! The public, free TimerCheck.io microservice API was released in July 2015 and I have never had to do anything to keep it working or to scale it, with one notable and unexpected exception.

> The only time I had to do work on TimerCheck.io was when Amazon declared that AWS Lambda support for Node 0.10 was being phased out. If my code base had been larger, it probably would have been easier to simply upgrade to Node 6.10, but I decided instead to rewrite the function in Python 3.6. It has continued operating smoothly since.

> As part of the rewrite, I also took advantage of one of several good AWS Lambda deployment tools that have arisen to fill what was an important gap when Lambda was launched. I chose Amazon’s open source chalice tool for this project, and was thrilled with how it eliminated all the work of setting up an API Gateway, a formerly daunting task.

> The TimerCheck.io service has had a few short outages over the years, but they were always due to region-wide problems that AWS experienced, and AWS resolved the issue without me having to lift a finger. Even with a lot of work and expense, I could not reproduce that uptime. Letting Amazon operate my service infrastructure more reliably is well worth the cheaper price.

> Speaking of expenses, I’ve been pleasantly surprised by the cost-effectiveness of the AWS services used by TimerCheck.io. I wrote an article that broke down the operating charges for December, 2016 which came out to $11 for 2.1 million API hits. I just checked, and in August 2017 it had grown to 4.8 million API hits for about $20 (“blended price” makes it difficult to calculate exactly).
It's good and affordable until 2020 which is when the current (second) iteration is projected to go bankrupt. We shall see what happens after that.

https://house.ettoday.net/news/803652?t=%E4%BA%8C%E4%BB%A3%E...

I did enjoy getting an x-ray (ankle injury) + evaluation + a week of painkillers for $27 USD without insurance, though. I can only imagine what it would have cost in the US.
https://blog.cr.yp.to/20140205-entropy.html
>How Serverless Computing Will Change the World in 2018

You shouldn’t have expected much in the first place.
Training Officers to Shoot First, and He Will Answer Questions Later
> My experience with formal proofs is it imposes a high cost.

What is that experience within the last 5 years. Does it include Idris, Agda, and Coq?

> I don't think that there are people in this thread who believe that you can impose formal proofs on a system without incurring a significant cognitive overhead

The idea is that by asking humans to make small proofs, the remainder of the majority of additional cognitive overhead can be assumed by the machine.

This conversation has a curious pre-assumption that this cognitive load is "new". In fact, it's not. It's an alternative approach to working with the complexity already apparent in our domain.

> You still aren't getting it. The module was built upon faulty presumptions. Peter Norvig himself said that no language, no matter how type strict, would have enforced this convention.

Why is Peter's comment relevant here?

> I'm sorry, but writing user stories on the back of a napkin (yes, that's BDD too) isn't a similar technique to formal proofs in any way, shape or form.

It is if you care about the results. A lot of modern BDD process has humans as verifiers. And no one's saying that has to go away. But we might need it LESS for certain parts of the system.

Certainly in my user-facing fintech applications I have wished for tools that could do this. Sadly a lot of my work in that field predates the usability of a lot of these tools.

> I absolutely do, that's why I use the right tool for the job.

And the right tool for the job is evidently not a computer?

What I think you're missing is that these formal proof systems come with an implicit power: the ability to extend the a more generic type system at build time to reason about your domain.

This application is as radical in nature as it is classical. Everyone in every domain has suggested for half a century that we work to bring our code closer to our domain and further from the minutiae of machine implementation. Modern systems seek to do this by creating stable abstractions to build upon.

This takes 2 shapes: trained by data (classifiers, regressions, and statistical methods) or refined by logic (proofs, dependent types, type inference and verification). The line between these types is somewhat transient, and over time it's almost certain it will blur. Already we see F# using "Type Providers" that let you use samples derived directly from an API (or specs, or both). These can be obtained as part of the build process, and then the program can be checked against the spec.

There is only one real downside to this approach: it makes development require even more computational power. But given that we're solving a much harder problem than the users of our software, the asymmetry seems reasonable.

I think you and I agree in the general strokes but you don't like the word "proof", if I'm being honest. I don't know why that word bothers you so much. Did you watch the video? Have you tried Agda, Coq and Idris?
Not really, calling women females is a strong signal that a the speaker sees them as part of their outgroup. And because it's not openly stigmatized yet people will say it casually -- you couldn't ask for a better bright line that says "don't date me".
The article seem to suggest that "white males dominating positions of power" and "males committing sex crimes and getting away with it" are the same issue.

Both of these things are problems. The former because it suggests that equal opportunity is a myth, and the latter because criminals are getting away with sexual harassment/assault and even rape. But I don't think they're the same issue.

In my opinion, if we solved the equal opportunity problem, we'd still have to face these three problems:

1. Sexual harassment and assault are considered acceptable behavior by many males.

2. Rich people face a different justice system than poor people.

3. Women face skepticism, hostility, and sometimes reprisals when they come forward with allegations of sexual harassment/assault or rape.

I do wish people would talk about 2 more. All in all, I think it's extremely good thing for our society that women are coming forward and males who have committed sex crimes are paying for it. I just wish they were being prosecuted and not "forced to step down."
This article comes across as extremely creepy and catfishing people on social networks for ‘research’ is not okay.
As Cell Service Expands, National Parks Become Digital Battlegrounds
I'm a netbsd developer and run netbsd. I think most active netbsd developers do.

a lot of former netbsd developers are still hanging around and contributing to pkgsrc while using it on OS X or linux, I don't think that's a thing to be ashamed of.
No, but saying that making white people "uncomfortable" is okay _is_ fighting racism with racism, and should not be tolerated.
Why an Upstate Prisoner with a History of Escape Foiled His Latest
My figures are based on square kilometres. A square mile is quite different.

Edit: bonus round! I got Manhattan right but did the reverse error for SF (quoting km^2 for miles^2).
I would agree, but I make liberal use of the free limits so I can't complain much. I don't really want to spend too much money running Spamnesty.
> what lies have been told to which people

In practice, this is not a problem. People who lie very much, in my experience, have a couple of strong narratives they build their lies on. Because they follow some vague set of rules (which is easier to remember, especially if you use them repeatedly), it's possible for them to re-invent the same lie for the same situation, every time. On top of that, they are prepared to cover any minor differences that can occur one way or another - mostly by diverting the attention of others to something else. As long as they stay consistent with their lies and manage to stay within the bounds of what others consider plausible, it's very hard to recognize their lies. It's even harder, in practice, because what we consider probable is greatly affected by the flow of conversation and what's happening around it, so with a proper preparation, it's possible to sell almost any bullshit to almost anyone.

Well, that's the deep end of conmen and people who use lies - one way or another - for work. However, many people are able to lie easily and they are almost never challenged, at least if they don't exaggerate too much. Our brains are great at filling the holes in the narratives, which has both a good side - art - and dark side - lies.
busy streets webcams?
As far as I can tell, it's a bit like the 20% Google time. Except for instead of it being one day a week, it's 25 people in a building for 5 years.

The people being given money for AI are expected to work on AI, not on whatever they think is cool.
I worked on my first side project, XBRLStudio [1]. It's a Windows desktop application that allows users to organize and view XBRL quarterly and annual financial filings.

I'm traveling today, but would love to hear any feedback on the project.

[1] https://XBRLStudio.com
And most tellingly the innovations at Bell Labs didn't just arise in computing--the transistor, the solar cell, information theory, statistical process control, the laser, the cell phone, and the discovery of cosmic background radiation are some examples. What Alan Kay is talking about is literally a cornucopia. Long term scientific research directed by scientists works.
I think that you can opt for image previews if you create an account. It’s in the options (maybe). The feature is there, I just don’t remember where.
I've always thought of the limit on executions on aws for lambda as a way to not shoot you in the foot. The limits are pretty high, and asking them for a raise in limits isn't a problem.
I'd prefer to ask for a higher limit than to see one month a bill with 1000$ because I accidentally made a lambda call itself in a loop infinitely.
Our house came with a ridiculous reverse osmosis filter on the kitchen sink, and the included TDS meter showed < 5 ppm. It seemed great at first, but we grew concerned about the potential for mineral deficit for our kids, so I disconnected it. But, we could find no definitive source of info on this topic.

It's hard to take the water fanatics seriously: the manual talks about how the filter "reprograms" the water so that "the water is imprinted with the far-infrared frequencies." And: "the water molecules are shaken by the special field in a way that, for a short time, the clusters and the hydrogen bridges are broken up", and "the water is carried forward in an s-pattern movement, identical to that of water in nature".

Then again, I'm the guy who disconnected it out of possibly baseless fear of demineralization, so I'm not in a position to throw stones.
Didn't DJB somewhere describe a PRNG model in which this is not true and you shouldn't let an adversary give you PRNG seeds?

(I don't have any problem with what CloudFlare is doing.)

Edit: While I was writing this comment, drewbug linked to the exact DJB post I was thinking of. Thanks!
Definitely not. I was chewed out on two separate occasions in my Econ undergrad for using "men" and "females".
>> If you increase the supply of fast food you increase competition which lowers prices

That presupposes that restaurateur was making fat profits. If he isn't, then increasing supply in the absence of higher demand will only result in the restaurant going out of business. But increasing demand will grow the economy even when the restaurateur is making thin profits.
Remote Access your home network using smart-phone and 5€ Linux H/W
I finished Data Commander (MVP) - http://conceptoriented.com - A web-app for column-oriented data transformations.

After getting some feedback I decided to position this technology differently. Instead of exposing the functionality via web app, I started implementing a Java library http://github.com/asavinov/bistro - an alternative to map-reduce. In 2018 I am going to develop a server for IoT and stream analytics - an alternative to kafka stream analytics based on Bistro.
OkCupid, Match.com, Chemistry.com, PlentyOfFish, and Tinder are all owned by the same company. They like to hide that fact and pretend they're all separate entities to end users, but it's true. Some of them were once separate, then purchased later, but Tinder was part of them from the very beginning. So they're not really "losing" users, just shuffling them around from site to site.

http://iac.com/brand/match-group

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Match_Group
1. on-device speech recognition and command clasifier. V. Proprietary.

2. antigen target filtering system for a boolean logic platform for using CAR-T with AML.

3. Database and retrieval system for a series of experiments in gerbil and chinchilla cochlea to study wave propagation along the organ of corti.

4. a unity-based traveller RPG character management suite.

5. A system to measure whisker deflection in rats as a proxy for studying Bell's palsy

6. a variety of small silly projects for personal use.
Ah, I got it wrong. Mixed miles and square kilometres.
I already answered at your question. There's no difference between qwerty and keybee for your specific argument. Also the other user answered to you.
My team (~20 people within a Fortune 50) could be considered a success story.

We use Lambda for ETL type work, Healthchecks, Web Scraping, and infrastructure automation.

> Serverless makes it harder to test locally, harder to move between hosts

Most of our code is written in Java. We have a main method, which calls a static method. The only difference between running locally and running in Lambda is that the Lambda calls the static method while we call the Main method locally.

This also pretty much eliminates lock-in since all of the code behind the static method could without much trouble be moved behind an API endpoint running in a more traditional environment.

> The only ones that should be considering serverless are companies that need to scale up and down operations at a moment's notice. That is if you're huge or doing a lot of short-burt big data processing. Otherwise, it's all koolaid.

Respectfully disagree, as first hand experience has taught me otherwise.

Just like any tool, Lambda is extremely effective when used for the things it excels at.
I am not sure what point you are trying to make, but what you quoted wasn't my answer in its entirety. The parent made the assertion that we are asking police officers to be super human and I was disagreeing with that and the rest of the answer goes on to explain why.
Why on Earth should people of conscience not be concerned with a self-perpetuating inheritance of power? That seems to be exactly what affirmative action programs are designed to counter-balance, so not understanding your criticism of them here.
Keynesianism a feedback control loop. Neoliberalism is an open loop. Do you save money for a rainy day or do you spend it like a drunken sailor?
Israel kills far more Palestinians than Palestinians kill Israelis.
As almost average looking guy living in Baltimore I found Match.com to be the best dating app and worth the money. I at least had one date a month with average looking women. POF was 2nd while Eharmony was the worst.

Though in 2010 to about 2014 Christian Mingle was the best as there weren't many guys on it and I dated a dozen average to attractive looking women in a few months. Not many use it like before as they didnt jump to mobile quick enough.
In my experience, serverless, at least in aws, is primarily useful as automated glue connecting various aws services together.

I think as a platform to build your core application on, it creates a lot of vendor lock in for very little benefit that couldn’t be achieved using a container scheduler like kubernetes.
Conveniently ignoring the fact that many people who could do those jobs don't have many other options.
That's amazing..!!!
For sure. In another office they use a geiger counter (a much more standard way to get randomness, and probably easier to setup).

That said, this doubles as a public art installation in their lobby - something many companies spend thousands (or millions!) of dollars on. So it's not just PR, it's actually surprisingly practical.
I don't understand how you can make that assertion. The effects of inflation are compounding and disproportionately bad for the poor. Have you ever been poor? The price of everyday goods was definitely a cause of worry for me on a daily basis. And you shouldn't take anything from "seroius economists" on the issue, most of them are from the 1% and totally clueless.
Oh in a different field don't forget 3M.
Not Facebook. Whatsapp.
Charity stream (Jan 4-7): Mega Man, Music and the world record for most wizards
The TL;DR:
We are putting on a 72 hour Mega Man themed live stream for Child’s Play. There’ll be musical guests, prizes, and a bunch of Mega Man games to beat. Oh, and this year we are trying to break a world record for the most people dressed like wizards in a single room.
January 4-7th, 2018 on https://megamanathon.com/, or live at MAGfest.

The Basics:
What is the Mega Man-athon?
An annual, 72 hour non-stop gauntlet of Mega Man, Mega Man-inspired games and music to raise money for Child’s Play. It is hosted by MAGFest and presented by Half Empty E-Tank.

What was that about the world record for wizards?
According to the Guinness Book of World Records, the largest gathering of wizards is 252 wizards. We think that’s an absurdly low number, so we are going to try and beat it. We will have official, unbiased observers and a bunch of wizards during our music block on January 5th.

Who is Playing?
We’ll be playing the classics but also some weird stuff like “Street Fighter X Mega Man”, “Mega Man Xtreme”, “Mega Man 8-Bit Deathmatch” (a Doom mod), and even the Mega Man Board game.

Notable (we think) players:
Epic James of Epic Game Music
Matt Papa of Inti Creates
BlueMetal
Tterraj42 of TeamBN
The 8-Bit Duke

Musicians:
Thursday night we will be joined by the NPC Collective (Nerdy People of Color Collective), we will have performances by: Sammus, Shubzilla with Bill Beats, Amanda Lepre, Eye Q, D&D Sluggers, Kadesh Flow, Ohm-I, and Ducky Dynamo.

Friday night we are going to break the world record for the largest gathering of wizards. Performances by: Super Soul Brothers, The X-Hunters, Flabbercasters, Crunk Witch, and 2 Mello.

Saturday night, DJ Cutman and the GameChops crew will be be tickling the ear drums of all present with their nerdy EDM with sets by Dj Cutman, Grimecraft, Ben Briggs, James Landino, Jadeabella, Wishlyst, Ralfington, VGR (Video Game Remixes), and Flexstyle.
> Here's my hypothesis: The problem with these static verifiers is that they are applied at the wrong stage.

They can be applied at lots of stages. Why not apply them to all of them?

> Either your program (or code unit) is sucessfully verified or it isn't.

This is demonstrably false. It can help you write better, safer code incrementally. Every approach that is discussed here has a "refinement" plan.

> Imagine instead writing code that is made "safe" using run-time asserts everywhere.

I can imagine this, it's the C/C++ style of code circa 2010. It's awful for users. But it's not what we're discussing here.

> If the static verification community is imploring the development community to, with some effort, change its practices to improve code safety, would that community be willing to, with some effort, move the application of their verification logic to the optimization stage where it would be more practical for a wider range of applications?

Yes. You're already seeing two major examples of this: Type Providers and derivations of dependent types fall into one camp, dependent type implementations (of which the most prominent is Idris) fall into the other. All of them offer the ability to extend the type system and make proofs useful to developers even as they also help make code total and enforcible.

I think it's further along than you seem to suggest. Can I suggest you grab a copy of Atom, Atom-Idris, and go through some Idris tutorials? You can also try F# and use Json samples pulled from an API to generate types that inform your tooling and improve code quality.