skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The source is elegant, but the programs are even more amazing, in my humble opinion.

Makes me curious about the 'runtime' which makes their impressive execution possible—granting that the analogy has definite limitations and could be misleading. The aspect of a 'runtime' which I see carrying over is that once the 'source' is 'compiled' into proteins, something makes the interesting behavior of those proteins what it is. I think where the analogy could be misleading is that the architecture of programming language runtimes tends to be a single coherent system with definite separation from programs executing within; whereas in the case of proteins, a large part of what provides for their biologically interesting behavior is just their general chemical properties (which are sort of contained within the 'programs' themselves, rather than in a separate external system). But there are probably aspects of the environment into which the proteins are released that systematically influence their behavior in a way that could be abstracted and studied (at which point it might have some loose resemblance in role to language runtimes). Maybe?
>Wouldn't it be better if we adopt the position that unbreakable crypto is a basic human right?

Is the right to have the ability to pay to have anyone in the world you don't like murdered, without it getting back to you, a basic human right?

If so and people start getting murdered for hire, and law enforcement has no way to stop it, would you be okay with opening in certain cases a previously undisclosed back door, for example as part of tracing payments in the dark net?

What if normally cryptography were secure and uses of the backdoor only happened like this:

>The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Would you be okay with the back door existing if it were used under such a court-ordered scenario? Why did I just quote this text, in your opinion? Why does this text not end with a period after the word violated? Then it would read:

>The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.

Don't you agree that as a "basic human right" this version appears much stronger than the first version I quoted?

So, would you prefer if the second, abbreviated version replaced the first version?
The author is talking about code used in a unit testing library that he is developing. As long as you don't release your test code as part of your software package, I don't see why some smart shortcuts that can help with the programming experience can not be used.
Not saying it's bad, I just wanted to note that the VCs don't need to subsidize your trades on Robinhood.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_saving_time#/media/Fi...

In areas that are arguably Europe, it looks like Iceland, Kaliningrad Oblast, and Belarus are the places that stick out.

I'm in California; most of Arizona is permanently in daylight savings, and we work with a lot of developers in China and India, which don't observe it. It certainly complicates things, sometimes.

I've done work on my product's logging subsystem before, and especially bugs with recorded times. Dealing with different DST rules is a mess.
Yeah it's never going to work if the approach is "trust us" or any kind of "limited use" that requires restraint from the humans supposedly being limited.

We need strong technical limitations, on par with the strength of the crypto we use today.
Injured motorcyclist accuses robot-driven vehicle of 'negligent driving'
It's a dumb quote. People who don't have something mentally or physically to work on till they die loose their minds and bodies in a slow painful process. You can have all the money in the world, but if you have nothing to work on when you wake up in the morning, you might as well be a potted plant.
My First Data Science Article Accepted to KDNuggets
So is Gold!
Don't use it if you don't want to. But literally millions of American citizens are getting into crypto right now (looking at Coinbase's numbers). And if this is an emerging area, I don't see any problems with them coming in.

I feel most negative comments on this thread are from folks who missed the crypto train last year and are just bitter and trash any new development in this area.
The second sentence in the article:

> I wanted to see how close I could come to making a DSL (domain specific language) with its own syntax and features, using only the C preprocessor and more obscure C features and GNU extensions.
I've been using Stash to invest in some EFTs. I've only put in $50 to date and will put in more since the market is doing well but I did it more as a learning experience.

What would be the best way to learn, for someone looking to invest $500+, who's never done much investing before?

Outside of ~10 shares of Starbucks stock given to me when I worked there in 2001, this has been my only experience.

P.S. Those Starbucks shared have been long-lost - somehow they moved them from Schwab to another company and no one told me where/how). I forgot about them until today.

EDIT: Looking at my docs, I bought 7 shares at $18.275 in April 2001. The stock price is $60.55 today. I need to figure out who holds these and see what I can do to reclaim them.

EDIT2: I found them. I found where the original account was, called them and got the details. Sadly, the account was marked as dormant and I learned about "Escheatment". The stocks were cashed and the amount is now held by my state and I have go through several hoops to reclaim.
It should be easy to audit and enforce. Just have to scare people a bit into respecting the system.
Cultural momentum (as an "is" not a "should").
I know you want this to be true given your stated disatisfication with the current state of attention deficit medication, and I know that arguing about statistics seems pointless, but this is n=40 (21 test 19 control). No matter how good your p-values are or how many different tests you run, there's just nothing to take away from this right now.

That is not to say its worthless. If there are a number of repeated similar trials by different researchers and this study is combined with those in a larger meta-study that continue to show significant results, then it could end up being a very important study to look back on.

But right now its just 40 people eating refined turmeric and taking memory tests...
And with software - where you don't want to break what isn't broken - the car you build out of a skateboard frequently has weird shortcomings due to its origins.
I think you're missing the point of the article. The author isn't limited to standard C, and neither is anyone with a unix and GCC.

Are you just nitpicking the author's description of extensions as "C?"
You should vote with your feet and not go to events with a phone policy you disagree with.
So are Berkshire Hathaway shares not investments, because you need to sell them to end up with money? What about a savings account with compound interest, or an ETF with automatic dividend reinvestment - do they not count as investments either, because you have to do something with them to get money out?

Don't forget that investing in the stock market is still something of a gamble, because the return for everyone is not guaranteed to be greater than zero - a company can go bust leaving the shareholders with nothing.
By this measure, U.S. stock-market returns aren’t as big as they look
you can analyse the hell of the stock and still be wrong. Markets can stay irrational much longer than you think!
You keep using that word "column store" but I don't think you know what it means.

Since when did it imply all the limitations you are saying?
"""Fujita and his team had carted away all his belongings, ripped off the wallpaper, checked under flooring, and scrubbed and disinfected the apartment from top to bottom. They left a deodorizing machine to run inside the apartment for a few days."""

Anybody have any idea what sort of device this `deodorizing machine` would be? I'm very curious what sort of technology could pull off such a feat.
The Killers embraced it as well.
Having a phone with you is a sign of personal weakness.
It’s not just to protect the investor, but also to protect those selling the investment. Generally these are non SEC regulated securities, so the disclosure and registration rules largely don’t apply. Investors are expected to do their own due dilligence. It provides a degree of protection to the vendor from accusations of miss-selling, or missleading or not fully informing the investor of risks.

SEC regulations are there to protect investors. If the rules for trading my nn regulated securities were dropped, then there would be much less reason for securities to go through the registration process, undermine my the whole regulatory system, but ncreasing risk for everyone including the country. After all these rules came out of the aftermath of the Great Depression.

Think of it on the same way as retail goods quality control standards. If you buy goods in a store they must comply with strict safety and quality controls, but if you’re a business or dealer those rules don’t apply, for extample if you’re buying the goods to scrap them, or bring them up to standard and then sell on. Different rules apply to retail purchasers and trade purchasers.
> What do you do when you pay with 20$ for something, but get change for 10$? Why are "argue with them", "accept the loss and move on", "karate chop" and infinite other things not among the options?

Well, some of them are illegal for the aggrieved party to employ, and in any case not providing better options than that list, for a party facilitating and profiting from the transaction, who is thus not an uninvolved third party, will greatly increase the risk of legal liability and PR damage.
We Can’t Do That in One Sprint
Yondr is a system which locks your phone in a pouch which you put in your pocket. It is not taken away from you.
I agree. A lot of young people have not seen anything except the economic expansion we have experienced for the past 8 years.
I now wonder if there are any surveys of first mover advantage in pyramid schemes, ponzi schemes, bubbles.

SOME ONE made one a fortune during the tulip mania. Right?
We've got a minority working in the US and a majority across the Pacific. It adds friction, but you work it out. Even in the local office, a couple of the devs tend to have personal matters in the morning, but work late into the night. Again, you work it out, and it's not a big deal.
great response
A hub for all the innovations of tech industry in China
REpsych: Psychological Warfare in Reverse Engineering
It's often to remember the other point of view when you see huge performance differences.

> A bug in Go <1.9 was causing a 30x slowdown in our Gitaly service.
This reads like "we are not going public anytime soon"...
I would go back in a heartbeat.
I've seen tons of people kicked out of venues. Most of the time the ushers are good enough to not disturb the event further when they do it.
Probably either an ozone generator or something that sucks air through a carbon filter.
Well, back in the old days if we wanted to complain we'd write it down on a piece of paper, wrap that piece of paper inside another piece of paper, and then put that in an unlocked box out in our yard.

That's similarly how we'd order products, out of magazines. Only in that case on the paper we'd include things like our bank account information that we'd put in the unlocked box in our yard.

I'm not suggesting that things can't or shouldn't be better. I think it's just important to have a realistic perspective on where we are in this continuum of service vs privacy.
It is database per device and table per sensor, not just one table. With SQL you can do joins, aggregations, etc. If you just want to log it, sure use a log file. As soon as you want to use the data somehow, you need SQL or your own log file parsing and query code. Personally, I rather just use SQL.
I might not have expressed myself clearly enough. It's not risky, it's not a feature I don't understand how it works, and I'm using it exactly as it's described in GNU's documentation on labels as values and computed gotos: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Labels-as-Values.html

The "I don't know how that works, but the important part is that it does." sentence was meant to highlight the apparent absurdity of dereferencing a void*, not to say that I don't understand exactly how to use the feature.
Asking the venue usually works. IME a quick tweet on the day will get the stage times.
What's the need for anything? Your argument seems to be predicated on a very specific definition of what need is which is somewhat at odds with most of the rest of the world.
I used to be enamored with what I could do with the preprocessor back in the 80's. I've since reverted all of that (in C code I still use) back to mundane uses of the preprocessor.

Eventually one tires of no support in the symbolic debugger, program analysis tools, compiler error messages that are based on the post-expansion code, nobody else understands the code, hygiene problems, etc.
How many actual $$$ millionaires are there really? With old currencies in old-fashioned off-shore bank-accounts? After all, it's still the govt controlled currencies that buy you houses, supercars and tropical islands. /s
It is a much more horrible process.

Well exactly, which is why it's really valuable for founders in that position to lean on - much more applicable to the bulk of founders.
Nah, they won't be able to wonder anything anymore. The spaces where human personality might develop will all be filled and sealed shut.
It’s Time to Call Out the #BadApple
That's fine it is your choice not to attend no-phone shows.
I think it would be better if you gave drivers/customers complete control over everything.

Let drivers choose their pick up area (like a circle on a map), drop off area, price, pickup time (15-minute window), whitelist/blacklist customers, etc.

Then riders can see what drivers are offering and decide if it's worth it. Riders could also post requests that drivers could bid for.

See here for an example of what I mean:
https://github.com/kaseyb002/EgglerPool
Failed acquisition: dog bites man story. Strange though that the acquired company principal is roaming around bad mouthing the acquirer rather than "focusing on strategic projects" or gardening.
There are a couple of cool apps on phones called "Telephone" and "Messages" and you can call or text people in an emergency situation.

I'm pretty sure those are the apps one would use during a terrorist attack. But I've never been involved in one, so I could be wrong.
Should That Be a Microservice? Keep These Six Factors in Mind
Splitting up the companies, perhaps on product boundaries (say, for example, breaking out Google Maps in to a separate company, etc), could certainly help by reducing the concentration of power.

However, many of the most objectionable challenges posed by these companies -- challenges such as tracking, lack of privacy, putting people in to filter bubbles and otherwise manipulating what they see or how they see it -- are not really addressed merely by splitting them up.

Laws and regulatory structures have to go further to limit and channel their behavior.
> I hadn't thought of that aspect, but that presents an interesting problem. As more things get centralized on phones, this will become less & less feasible.

You don't need to have your phone out. Apple Pay works on the watch.
> Futures contract is bought or sold to hedge against risks for the underlying asset. Ex: Buying corn futures to hedge against corn price fluctuations. In case of bitcoin though, there is no underlying asset, right?

The underlying asset is 1 or 5 bitcoins, depending on the exchange where the future is traded. (CBOE and CME, respectively.)

A traditional futures contract obligates the parties to carry out the exchange/transfer at the agreed upon price - this is distinct from an option, which gives one party the right to transact at a given price, and the counterparty the obligation to transact at that price, if the first party elects to exercise their option.

There's a lot of detail on the CBOE BTC futures available at http://cfe.cboe.com/cfe-products/xbt-cboe-bitcoin-futures/co...

Since the CBOE BTC futures are apparently settled in cash, that means that holders of the futures won't get an actual BTC, they'll get USD equivalent to the settlement price. So someone who paid $17,000 for a BTC future whose value on the settlement date was $11,000 would receive a deposit of $11,000 USD. And if someone paid $11,000 for a BTC future contract, and BTC was worth $17,000 when the settlement amount was determined, that person would get a deposit in the amount of $17,000.

I don't know how CBOE is handling this internally - but it's possible (likely?) that the people who are actually selling the futures (e.g., agreeing to deliver a USD amount equivalent to the value of 1 BTC on a date in the future) are purchasing BTC on the open market at the time the future is sold; and they're selling the BTC on the open market on the settlement date (perhaps a little before or after) so they will have the cash to meet their obligation to deliver USD equivalent to the settlement price.

So my hunch is that it means that there's a little extra selling happening on settlement days - but it looks like the volume of contracts (1,907 on January 9, per the article) is small enough that it shouldn't be moving the market a lot. That's roughly 21 million USD compared to a daily average trade volume of about 9 billion USD.
Heh, were you around for the Secret days? So much "news" came from that app.
> The vast majority of people who have been involved are way ahead.

Strong disagree :(

Cryptocurrency investment is speculation in a zero-sum game. Every dollar someone pulls out of the system in profit required someone else to put a dollar in. All those people who sold bitcoin at $19k could do so because there were buyers. Every single one of those buyers lost.

Cryptocurrencies are not shares in a corporation or bonds or any sort of interest or dividend producing financial instrument. Even the ICOs that claim to be so only work when new money is coming in. To get a (real) dollar out of the system, someone else has to put a dollar in. To get more money out of the system than you put in, someone else has to pay. For that person to get more money out, more people have to come in after them and pay. The top of the pyramid gets paid, the bottom is left holding the bag.

The only growth in market cap is new money flowing into the system. Once enough decides to flow out, the gig is up and the whole thing tanks.
> This seems to go against centuries of crusade and genocide, but we can always try our best :)

I'm German. I seriously hope for this world that no one will ever again dare to repeat the atrocities that my ancestors have committed. But then, I am afraid, the Holocaust and the two World Wars have drifted so far out of living history that some may at least be tempted to try the latter one again.
Berkshire Hathaway is something of an exception as the vast majority of successful company's pay dividends. Clearly, buying a single stock is risky. But if you buy a basket of stocks and those stocks pay dividends then the only way to lose money is for the socks to be worth significantly less money when you sell them thus making it a positive sum game.

PS: Berkshire Hathaway still returns money to shareholders via stock buybacks. Which preform similar functions the difference is simply related to taxes. They can and are likely to at some point issue dividends.
Ah, good to know! Thanks. Yet another cool little feature from Mozilla.
Safari now supports Service Workers: What this means
Dutch intelligence agency spied on Russian hacking group
All those rule books, but it takes just one butt scratch on the way back from the interplanetary probe toilett to unfold this scenario. Poor europe.

Honestly, after seeing those anti-corruption rule books - and on the same homepages where they are displayed, the markers in countrys where you cant to buisness without - sort a contamination scenario in itself, i doubt that anything can prevent this once the dice with the one killing side gets re rolled often enough.

So my money would be on less philosophers employed, more disease-control specialists, which would quickly introduce counter agents that could be consumed by the local flora/fauna.
>"The "bottoms up" approach you mention seems like it could be really powerful and definitely complementary to whats being done now. I have however seen a lot of approaches "sort of" like that not work that well."

Such as? I mean that is just the (correct) discrete version of Armitage-Doll, their continuous approximation only works for very low mutation rates and/or short time frames. What did you see that didn't work?
Yes, the Bolt is good and the Model 3 is ideal.

And good to hear that the 2019 Leaf will (according to leaked info) have an option for 200+mi range and 100kW fast charging. Now, if only they get access to the Supercharger network, this will be a very interesting vehicle as it'll be the first one truly competitive with the Model 3 (the 50kW of the Bolt isn't fast enough, and it uses a different charging standard which is not at all compatible with the extensive Supercharger network).

...but I'm worried that the base 2019 Leaf still has a sub-200 mile battery and only 50kW charging. That makes it a pain to do long-distance travel. (Still fantastic for a second car, though, as is the older Leaf.)
Congrats to NZ and Rocket Lab for joining the elite club of orbit-capable rocketeers. It's a huge achievement.

Surprised there's so much complaining about a test payload. Everyone's a critic, so I'll be one too:

"FAQ: How long will it remain in orbit? The Humanity Star will orbit the Earth for approximately nine months before its orbit starts to decay and it is pulled back into the Earth’s gravity."

s/gravity/atmosphere
> if my driver just drops me off at a different place than where I asked...

"Hey, this isn't the right place. Take me where you said you would please."

> ...or doesn't pick me up.

"Hey gran, I'm going to be late for lunch, the darn taxi driver hasn't turned up. I'm calling another firm - guess I'll see you when I get there."

> otherwise how can they charge me if I ruin their car

They will prevent you from departing, and demand cash. If you refuse, they'll either call in law enforcement, or in some places, call in several of their colleagues. In either case, they get their money one way or another.

Look, I'm deliberately being a little flippant here, but none of the problems you outline are in any way unsolved. I'm struggling to think of any situation where any of this data needs to be recorded, never mind viewed later.

Human interaction has dealt with all these obstacles for millennia, and new ways of mediating it don't turn them into new obstacles.
My take: rethink the problem and the solution. While there are perfect applications of the preprocessor (such as pasting or stringifying tokens) - yes at some point (rather sooner than later) it gets unmaintainable. But I don't share the sentiment that C wasn't powerful. It has everything one needs (and, due to memory control and cpp, arguably more than most languages).

These days I mostly use C, and occasionally resort to python as an accompanying scripting language to generate data definitions (either in plain text formats or as C structures).