skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Different strokes for different folks, certainly.

Lifting for me is almost a sort of meditation. I don't listen to music and I'm extremely conscience of my breathing. This probably sounds silly, but in the thick of it it's almost like I'm having a conversation with my body. I'm exerting so much force the only thing my brain can think is "am I activating the right muscles? can I safely do another rep?" There's something magical about the last rep slow grind, it's like a drug. The gym is the best part of my day hands down. There's something to be said about a consistent progression path as well.

Running is alright too. It's not anywhere near as fun as lifting for me, and the first 5 minutes is annoying, but once I'm in the zone I enjoy it. I only log 3 or 4 3.5 mile sessions a week though. FWIW it took me a long time to be in decent enough shape to enjoy running.
Yeah but if they wish to use a note taking system for code they should be using emacs, it's not only the one with most features by far but also the one with the biggest range of customizations, hell you can write your own parser on top of it. If you are going to introduce another program anyway to do the note taking the choice should be a no-brainer.
"Conservatism and masculinity are deeply intertwined"

Why do you say conservatism is intertwined with masculinity but not femininity? Does one make sense without the other?
And then you realize you need to port the same app from Windows to Mac, Linux, Android and iOS. Good luck.
There are a number of dedicated HN readers. I assume they mean one of those.
Love: That any terminal anywhere that speaks VT100 --
including real DEC hardware from the 70s and 80s, "communications programs" for DOS or Windows, and modern ssh clients -- can interact with a program that also speaks VT100, and that program thereby can produce a clean, usable, if not elaborate UI on 8-bit hardware with KiB of RAM through to 64-bit hardware with GiB of RAM and beyond.

Hate: Mainly kids who've never seen or interacted with a dialup or other serial connection, let alone a real hardware terminal, who think that "the terminal" is some software construct which can (and therefore should) be thrown out and replaced with something based on the ergonomics of a 2017 Macintosh.
One thing I would point out here is that things marked [dupe] are listed in the "deleted" list. These are probably not deleted to remove discussion, but... because they're duplicates. If someone is looking at this list they might believe certain submissions are being deleted to censor them, rather than them just being oversubmitted topics/articles.
Robert FitzRoy, who founded the warning service in 1861, was captain of the Beagle on which Charles Darwin sailed in the 1830s.
- Purism petitioned Intel to open source it, or make it optional, and sell machines with it as disabled as possible

- Dell sell machines with it disabled

- System76 sell machine with it disbaled

- Google have been working to try and neuter it
There are several virtual machines capable of running various versions of CP/M and a couple emulators of CP/M itself. (For example, https://github.com/jhallen/cpm )
Risk also isn't the same thing as uncertainty. Also, markets can have a short attention span.
Honestly i find the screenshot shortcut way worse. I would happily take control center screenshots only(like recording a video screenshot) to turn this godawful shortcut off.
> Fighting imposter products may have extremely valuable applications for blockchain, for example knock-off Gucci bags

This example always gets brought up but Gucci bags already come with serial numbers and receipts that you can use for lookups and registration with Gucci. Presumably Gucci is using a database to store this information. What benefit would consumers realize if Gucci changed out their database for one that was immutable? Is there really any significant number of Gucci consumers who don’t trust the company to maintain the integrity of the product database they currently use? The interests of the company and their customers seem pretty aligned. Perhaps there would be some benefit to having the full sales database easily and instantly accessible by anyone in the world? But absent any demand from consumers for them to go farther than they already have that would seem to be outweighed by Gucci’s desire to not reveal all of their sales data to competitors (or GDPR-busting private information for that matter).

If they did want to give up such detailed information then why not just provide weekly sql dumps on the web and avoid the consultant fees and expense of maintaining a more inefficient database? Perhaps they could also make customers sign a contract that prevents hem from engageing in private sales without registering the sale with GucciCentral. The fact they have never taken a simple steps like these to dispell any trust issues between them and their customers tells me that there may not be many that their current systems don’t already address adequately.

Please tell me if I’m missing something. This one has puzzled me for years.
> if you're arguing against that, then you're part of the problem

That's in incredibly dangerous and irresponsible thing to write. We need to entertain all arguments, not enshrine some things in untouchable dogma. Calling people personally awful for stating an argument --- instead of addressing the argument --- is the reason that today's public discourse is bonkers.

The line I quoted above turns disagreement into a witch hunt.
Ack, forgot to add the link- [1] was meant to link to https://srconstantin.wordpress.com/2017/04/09/sepsis-cure-ne... .

I couldn’t find a comprehensive treatment of the broader issue on a quick check- I suspect that the nature of an issue revolving around “what we know vs what we formally know” resists discussion in places like scientific journals. But there’s some overlap with more well-known issues, such as antibiotic development- even though new antibiotics can be patented, the return isn’t enough to stimulate nearly sufficient development (e.g. https://www.pharmaceutical-journal.com/news-and-analysis/fea... .)
While I agree with you, you should note that even approximation within any degree of error is NP-complete for a large class of NP-complete problems (e.g. TSP, and the problem MAX-EkSAT used in the paper).

That is, a polynomial algorithm for the approximate problem would be just as significant as one for the exact version.
I really don't see the problem with either of those. I spend 8+ hours a day in VSCode and it works flawlessly.

I just spent more than three hours with a friend on Discord playing The Division and it was smooth as it can be.

It's kind of become the norm to hate on Electron apps, but to be fair, I don't see the point.
They can tell you something is different, or out of the normal range, they don't give you the real cause of the problem though. This is left to the doctor who will take into account age, gender, medical history, as well as the fuzzy description of the problem from the patient. Then they'll give you some medication and hope that it heals in a few days, if not, then re-assess and do more trial and error diagnostics and medications (which can go on for months, even years).

If we had technology that could monitor internal changes on a real time basis though, then the face of medicine would change forever.
mosh[1] provides the buffering you're looking for and some other useful features, at the cost of extra complexity that could lead to other issues (e.g. no scrollback unless you use tmux as well).

[1] https://mosh.org/
You have this wrong. If you have 51% of the mining power, you do indeed have a negligible chance of winning seven consecutive blocks in a row if you mine the normal way. But, if you just mine seven sequential blocks without publishing the first six until you've mined all seven, you have a rather good chance of getting all seven blocks before the rest of the network mines seven blocks.

The idea that it would cost billions of dollars worth of ASICs to get this chance relies on the fact that Bitcoin is in an absurd boom right now, such that only new ASICs are competitive and there isn't a pile of old used ASICs available. If Bitcoin ever stagnates, this will rapidly stop being true.

You're also assuming that the ability to rewrite an hour of Bitcoin history isn't worth a couple billion dollars to anyone. That's an interesting assumption. (If I were, say, Israel, one of my enemies started using Bitcoin to buy weapons, and I thought that the ability to rewrite Bitcoin history an hour at a time could bankrupt them, I would be thrilled at the opportunity to spend a billion dollars to do so.)

I'm frankly rather surprised that Bitcoin, and proof-of-work blockchains in general, are considered secure enough for serious high-value work.
A doctor accusing other professions of being arrogant? That's rich.
I think the point of machine learning is that such detailed models do not need to be explicitly modeled, but as some implicit layers to learn.
How can you see who is rate limited from the provided resource?

Edit: Looks like we have overloaded it right now. Maybe it showed that info when the whole application was working.
It could be your mindset. When I worked in drug development (wet chemistry and lots of animal studies) the regulation, while everpresent, just didn’t seem like any kind of burden when compared to everything else we had to deal with.
Moneyspire 2018 18 for Mac Crack and Full Version
Totally agree. Real men aren't cowardly shepherded into accepting bizarre associations between manliness and disregarding the environment.
Cloudreach is an amazing place to work for!

Been voted amongst the greatest places to work a number of times, and it's for good reason... the projects are challenging, the perks are amazing, the people are wonderful, company is growing very fast and they live up to its core values:

* Be easy to work with
* Promote personal growth
* Be one step ahead
* Respect the individual and individuality

Feel free to find me, I'd be happy to help out.
The Sound of a Targeted Attack
10 minutes a day, an hour every other week for retro, a half hour every other week for showing the work to the stakeholders and whatever time it takes for the team to understand and clarify the work? (Grooming)

I mean, I don't love SCRUM, but I don't understand everyone talking about how much overhead it is.

That said, learning the process can take time - early grooming sessions can be terrible. However, on an experienced (in SCRUM) team in a functional organization, it doesn't take much time at all.
What’s almost worse is that if you want to say start an apple orchard, good luck trying to figure out what the applicable rules and regulations even are!
"Scrum master", "daily scrum standup", and "product owner" aren't programmer phrasings, those are mangement phrasings in the field of software.

There's plenty of other actual programmer phrases you could have put here, but it's somewhat telling to me that your sentence of programmer phrases actually has more management phrases.
We've implemented git-flow at work. Do you use git-flow with GitHub pull requests? I've found I'm more so using git-flow for just creating the feature/hotfix branches and then doing my merges inside of the pull request UI. It seems to be working ok for what we need but I wonder if I'm shorting myself on the workflow opposed to merging using the git-flow command line tool.
Often there is legacy code around which forces the decision, at least partially.
Do I have to register for the SAT solver?

Their web page says: "We are currently in Alpha Test. Users can submit problems via our SaaS portal in Conjunctive Normal Form (CNF), which ultimately represents the normal form of Boolean propositions for the problem’s variables and constraints"

I have no problem providing real, hard SAT instances in CNF. It should be really easy to verify whether they have something good, unless they have a size restriction.
Preface: I'm a 2.25MW bitcoin miner myself (see https://toom.im).

This author is getting the causation backwards:

> Is there a correlation between power consumption and the cost of bitcoin.

Yes, of course there is a correlation, but he's getting the causation entirely backwards.

The profitability of mining is directly proportional to the price of bitcoin, because you're paid with 12.5 Bitcoins per block. But your costs are fixed in USD -- you pay for electricity costs, per kilowatt. Therefore as the Bitcoin price goes up, it's profitable to run that many more miners, to produce that many more hashes, until you fill up the profit with electricity costs again.

So the price of Bitcoin determines the hashrate, not the other way around, like he's presuming here:

> If this correlation is strong enough, it means the Bitcoin will always be bounded by the cost and availability of electricity.

This guy also assumes that miners are paying the average electricy price in the US and China. Miners pay nothing like that. California electricity rates are around 15¢/kW. Central Washington is 2-4¢. That's 6-7x cheaper. The same is true for China.
Cyberattacks Against Intelligent  Transportation Systems [pdf]
Free Google play codes – how to get free Google play – Google play free |
I don't see how you can reach this conclusion. At the very least, it goes against conventional wisdom. And, of course, it depends on where you sit. With my home airport as SFO, I can be happy about the diversity of point-to-point options I have, but you might argue I'm just flying from one hub to another.

If it's true that there are more "hubs", that means that there are also more point-to-point flights for more people. And conversely, the more point-to-point flights there are, the more you could argue some of those points are hubs.

Ultimately the issue comes down to how airlines see themselves and market their routes. Low-cost carriers like Southwest are invested in point-to-point, but in the international market, nationality regulations mean that flights are necessarily hub-and-spoke, at least in small countries. If I take a nonstop Icelandair flight from the US to Iceland, is that a point-to-point route? Or would you argue it's hub-and-spoke because Icelandair uses KEF as their hub?
You don't need to communicate your programs to anyone or anything for them to exist. If I write a program on a piece of paper, and don't give this piece of paper to anyone else, a program still exists. (I might have to transcribe it into a computer if I don't want to run it manually myself, though.)
Those sound like good first steps, but everyone needs a way to disable it (using any operating system, including Linux).
Warning: opinions

We tried git flow for awhile, but it didn't really meet our needs, so we got rid of it. Plus the whole thing feels a bit yak shavey to me.

The main practical concern was that we need to make long-lived releases of our components that we would need to support in the long term. Git flow (and, at the time, its opinionated tooling) just assumes you have the one master branch for making releases. We needed to maintain a few at a time. There have been some accommodations in tooling for this since then [1] so maybe it wouldn't be a problem any more.

From the yak shave perspective, I guess I was just unable to find much of value in this process over a much more ad-hoc approach where people work in branches, rebase from time to time, and then put in for a merge with their team when they're done. All of this to-ing and froing with the develop branch, feature branches, bug branches etc, leads to much more typing and work to do simple things, but doesn't really add a lot of value to the repo in terms of stability or readability or anything else, as far as I can tell.

In my view, git flow abstracts away git even more, and conceals the actual mechanics of branches, commits, and merges, doesn't add much value to the repo, and potentially does harm by detouring devs away from really learning the tools they actually need to understand to do work in industry at large.

Maybe this is something that makes sense at a larger scale? Not sure.

[1] https://github.com/petervanderdoes/gitflow-avh#creating-feat...
When "the problem" is over-valuing hard skills, and under-valuing soft skills, which is TFA's thesis (and mine, for purposes of this discussion), then it's rather less a "witch hunt" — which is speciously hyperbolic language in the first place, and the use of which, I submit, is far more contributory to the state of "discourse", such as it is.

I also, you'd do well to note, never called anyone "personally awful" (more specious hyperbole, hmm?). I said, paraphrased, that certain behaviors and positions are contributory to ("part of") "the problem", which we've already established is pretty narrowly defined.
Yeah, I was really surprised the long-press-left-edge wasn’t a gesture that made it to the X, among other things.
> Mr. Ten Eyck says the requirement was “ridiculous” in practice — the equivalent of finding an earring in the orchard — so Indian Farms came up with an alternative to scouring the orchard every morning. “We have trained the guys only to grab the rails of the ladder,” he said.

My interpretation is getting to the same result more efficiently, not selectively applying based on that quote.
I don't want "big tech" anywhere near my doctor's office or anything else having to do with my health.
It's unfortunate that people think "tech" is what health care needs, when in reality society would benefit tremendously if something as simple as a 5-10 day water fast became mainstream [again], as it used to be, before modern medicine took over.
Your example reminds me of this video [1] that (humorously) goes over a similar mismatch problem.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
> The point system is there to give an idea of how much you can cram before the deadline and negotiate with the client about what to axe from the release

Well, it's more than that though - otherwise you'd just assign each developer 80 "points" worth of work for each two-week sprint.

> If nothing is going to be cut from the requirement docs, all the castle about poibts priority and speed just falls down (or you have a ridicolously lax deadline, of the likes I’ve never seen in practice)

Adding stories to an iteration in progress is also (I'm pretty certain) explicitly discouraged.

If your manager is doing that, you've already kinda lost the Agile battle.

I think that's sorta what people mean when they say people are doing Agile wrong - they do these things that are explicitly discouraged.

Whether there's any way to reconcile that, I can't say.
Tegal's great. Seatbeltnoff to Brandenburg gate in 30 minutes. Taxi to plane in under 5.

Manchester t3 isn't too bad - I've left a taxi with 15 minutes before take off on a couple of occasions with no problems.
maybe you want to time a rebuild, maybe somehow something outside of tup's knowledge changed, maybe you want to tar the directory w/o build artifacts, maybe you simply need to quickly free up some hd space, &c &c
But that's being NP-Complete, and so can be converted into exact solutions for other NP-Complete problems. Otherwise, by definition, it's not NP-Complete.

So it's not clear what they're actually doing, but if they can solve NPC problems they would say that. So I expect that they are getting approximate solutions that are not then NPC.
We’re not going to Venus anytime soon
No. (Well, in the short term as miners leave, the block time increases, which increases the block pressure and increases fees, but the block time re-normalizes itself regularly as the mining difficulty adjusts.)

The only thing that the number of people mining directly affects is the cost for an attacker to perform a 51% attack on the network.
Forget relaxing! We can have some fun with this; The Young Punx:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cb9jQN5hdLY

"Perhaps violence later"
As for the bags at least, that's absolutely not what that article says.

In fact, that article doesn't take into account the littering of plastic bags. But sure, I'll grant that if you're the type to reuse bags, you probably aren't the type to litter the plastic ones in the first place.
What an ironic comment - I tell a software developer that medical science isn't as easy as measuring weight changes, supporting the point that doctors need to do a lot more than that to come to a diagnosis, and then a doctor (I assume) tells me to STFU because.. oh, of what I originally said in the first place. What was your point here? I hope you don't make these kind of mistakes with actual patients.
Thanks. And now it's even worse; the phrase they were going for (and Google didn't pick up) must have been something like "godless savages". Just lovely.
You mean where I said

> I didn't spill any data (that I know of)

> doctors also don't even know how to frame their problems,

> most of them punch out of math as fast as possible.
There is also set of markets that are just always going to use it.

I live in Australia, so when I go to Europe, it is always via at least one hub airport. Often Dubai. Same story if I go to the east coast US.

Even if this model is becoming less important, airlines like Emirates and SIA will be in a good position to dominate what is left of it.
It's way cheaper than on Bitcoin because there's no PoW. Each participant would pay to run their own servers that connect to it.
I've not used Git Flow, but at my current workplace, we use the following workflow:

- Master, main, and feature branches.

- Main is the trunk

- Work is done on feature branches that correspond to an issue

- Work is merged, once complete, from a feature branch back to main

- Main is about to use a CI/CD system to automate the testing and merging of feature branches and deploying them to a staging env. This is currently manually done.

- Releases are done by periodically merging main into master + squashing all the commits being merged into 1 commit. The result is that every commit on the master branch is a new version/release, which we tag appropriately.

The master branch is protected and only the project lead has the ability to override the protections and push to master. All work is normally merged following a pull request on github. It works very well for us. "Rebase early and often" is our mantra and conflicts are infrequent. I'm very happy with it so far.
This is pretty much how bash completion works...
"Somewhat telling"

I see what you did there, nice ad hominem. But don't worry, proper Computer Engineer here, with a capital E.

But the example holds, despite your ad hominem.
The source code of a few versions of CP/M was released a couple of years ago:

http://www.computerhistory.org/atchm/early-digital-research-...

The accompanying article does a good job of putting CP/M in its historical context describing what it actually was. But other than nostalgia (and those who have sacrificed their eternal souls to WordStar), there isn't much of a reason to actually run CP/M itself. There's not a lot to see there - if you've ever used the MS Windows shell, imagine its Paleolithic ancestor.
To me this looks very similar to running a source based distro (Gentoo,Exherbo,...) with lots of packages using git as a fetch method (Gentoo uses the -9999 version suffix, Exherbo calls them scm packages).

Can anybody tell me when I should use gittup instead? Is it just a matter of size? Is rebuilding significantly faster with gittup due to the automatic rebuilding?

I mean to me it looks that gittup has some serious limitations in its current state (e.g. no 'make') while the others are full blown linux systems.
Well yes, the cited Mark Duggan example is pretty damning, but there's Olivia Solon'a recent White Helmet article (which simply presents other secondary sources as if it was primary evidence) and the bizarre 'no such thing as false rape allegations' editorial, which as we've seen is false twice in merely the last two weeks.
What do you mean? How does that help you to decide if a paper is worth reading or not?
> Could it be that Mr Buffett just doesn't get it?

People said the same thing in 1999 when he famously refused to invest in tech stocks and then you kno0w what happened.