skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
And the insidious part of this is that MoviePass doesn't have to fail. If they achieve sufficient market dominance they can ruin any theater that refuses to play ball by removing their ticket "subsidies".

"Heads I win, tails you lose."
My household has an electric car in a conventional car. Your opinion is a fantasy. If there was no public charging infrastructure we would have been stranded many times.

Owning an electric car oftentimes means rather extensive coordination with my wife on the one day a year where both of us need to travel a long trip. That's the one day a year that we absolutely have to have charging infrastructure.

On extremely cold days in the winter my wife occasionally had to stop at a Chili's to top up on her way home. Without public charging she would have been stranded.

Don't even get me started about the time that we had to move and live in a vacation rental for a week. The grounds in the outdoor outlets were faulty. Electric vehicle Chargers verify the presence of a working ground, so I had to hunt through the rental property to find the best outlet and use a long extension cord.

So if you think electric vehicles will work without public charging infrastructure, you're delusional.
Phoenix Framework: Introduction to Ecto and Models
Ah! That was confusing.
> Defensive programming is erroring out and refusing to do anything from that point forward (think of it like an uncaught exception with less information)

I’m not sure where you got that impression, but it’s not the generally accepted definition.

Defensive programming does not imply crash/abort/exit, it just simply implies a style of programming where you don’t trust “things will always be ok”. That could involve checking every input for correctness, checking every function output, handling all exceptions, etc. Yes, a defensive method could throw an exception on invalid input, but if the entire program is written defensively, then it should be handled and potentially continued.
TL;DR—Don't get too excited, Safari is still the new IE.
What you can do from the start that will help you down the line is to use a common RPC framework/library across the board, especially if it supports failure injection. It's a shame when you can't easily do chaos testing on a system because it chose to use a different RPC system.
I am not sure if you have ever been on the other side of this, but having people constantly assume you are a man because you know how to program and you're on the internet gets very old, very quickly. You can either accept being constantly referred to as a guy, which becomes flat-out alienating, or you can speak up for yourself, in which case you get responses like the one you just wrote.

I get that the gender of the author doesn't matter to you, and it may not even matter to the author of the article, but it does matter to a lot of people. No one is suggesting mistakes are a grave sin—even if her blog does say "Julia Evans" in giant letters right at the top. If someone makes one though, the correct response to people pointing it out is to accept the correction and keep it in mind for next time, not to accuse them of spam.
We need to have a look at Strava data from LV to Area 51
It's both a product of crypto-hype and one of several futures of art collecting.
The U.S. Government Once Nuked a Bunch of File Cabinets
eh maybe send a newsletter to everyone registered to the service announcing it, then if people have complaints like "Hey I totally forgot I should have not done this..." / valid reason they can email and you can take their device id out of the megadump?
In this context, "chaos" means roughly "injecting failures/latency"
Automated tracking from road cameras is everywhere on literally all major roads in western and central EU (not sure about eastern EU).
I would think that if elephants are smart enough to learn that recorded buzzing is not a threat then they will also learn that the fake hives don't pose a threat.
Yeah, everyone is the new IE.
> I've learned that there's even nothing wrong with almost totally ignoring errors.

I sincerely feel bad for developers who work with people who have attitudes like the above. Detecting production issues is miserable with code like that, let alone debugging them.
Show HN: Minibase – init and early userspace for Linux
This is a great way to make a lot of money but doesn't provide a lot of value. In fact, it destroys one of the most important parts about digital media: that it can be instantly copied exactly. We need to continue teaching people that it's perfectly acceptable to make exact duplicates of something, not head in the opposite direction.
A related Ask HN (from 2016) that I submitted: [Ask HN: Who uses Chaos Monkey in production?](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12749597). A couple of interesting responses there.
Sorry, but Ubuntu and Gnome NetworkManager issues do not equate to issues with Linux. They are very distro and window manager specific.
I wonder if the raw data can show any paths/areas missing from openstreetmap - would be interesting to align the datasets
It says something about the engineering maturity of the industry that destructive testing in production environments is among the more sophisticated practices.
Strava has an Apple Watch app (source: I use it regularly).
I'm not sure what is this supposed to mean. Yeah the US are huge and sparsely populated. The EU has almost 200 million bigger population.
Do you work for a salary? If you do, the shareholders (or private owners) of the company you work for earn a passive income off of you.

The point of the passive income idea is that you can earn marginally more by increasing your salary, or you can package your efforts in a product and earn exponentially more by scaling the sale of that product.
I don't quite follow the angle of promoting smaller studios' movies. If I am such a studio, and pay moviepass $100k to push a movie, and then that results in $1M tickets sold thru MoviePass, and I get $500k (or whatever), didn't MoviePass just lose $900k? MoviePass is both the marketing channel AND consumer. The studio has to make a profit and that has to come from somewhere - MoviePass' profit.
The difference is you pay a huge premium for Apple products, Linux distros are generally free (unless you want enterprise-style support).

The same criticism applies to Windows - give it away for free and I might care less about crashes and the huge slide in quality over the last ~5 years.
Ironically, we're not supposed to assume gender based on someone's name either.
I hate to think how many talented designers and engineers are building systems to convince their marks to spend more money than they intended to spend. Or maybe can afford.
You guys should check out https://reddit.com/r/babyelephantgifs for a daily dose of adorable pachyderms!
It actually doesn't destroy that - it assumes that quality will never change and adds a new asset type to digital files. You end up with both collectible/signed/authentic versions and the infinitely replicable copies. It allows artists to implement scarcity without implementing DRM.
PWAs on iOS mean a huge shift in strategy for startups.

In many cases(including mine) it now makes more sense to go PWA first instead of native.
How do you resolve this without coercion or theft? The only real regulation that I can think of that has reduced fairness and efficiency in startup investing (in favor of protecting the public) has been the accredation requirement, but that is relaxing and probably (for better or worse) going away.

Any other mechanisms to increase risk taking by investors that they are currently unwilling to take today (which basically is what you are looking for) either seem to need to shift the risk elsewhere (ie, onto taxpayers, which is basically a proxy for forced risk taking) or through other regulations, backed by force.

Do you have any reason to think the reason commercial loans don't work for startups has to do with anything other than the obvious: there is insufficient ability for startups to pay interest on the loan, and/or the default risk is too high? If you honestly think there is a market inefficiency here due to cultural bias or structural mispricing on the part of banks, then that sounds like an opportunity.
The performer's share - 40%. Songwriter's share - 7%.
They don't, but I'm confused how that matters.

Say you're in a "secure" place, where I'm not allowed to do stuff. You probably have keyboard/mouse connected via USB, right?

I can easily unplug them and insert my own, if you don't glue them in place. I did that in a number of internet cafes in the past.
At least in my case, by continuing to charge me monthly even after I canceled the service. Their customer service is non-existent, so I had to file a dispute with my credit card company to make it stop.
Would be good to read what steps Strava uses to anonymize this data prior or shortly following upload.

I'm also hoping they put some logic to prevent a single device trace from showing up on the heatmap regardless of frequency, and that 2 devices would need to converge within a radius for there to be a trace, but that might be wishful thinking.
Let's consider sales first, then streaming.

For sales, royalties make sense for songs if we believe that more valuable songs (as measured by how the public values them) should earn their creators more than less valuable songs earn their creators. That's because it is almost impossible to tell ahead of time which songs are more valuable and which are less valuable. You can only tell that based on what songs the public actually buys. Furthermore, this changes over time...a song can start off not valuable, and then years or even decades later become very popular.

What you really want for setting a fair price to the creator is the integral of value to the public over the copyright lifetime of the song. Royalties are a way to approximate that integral.

How about streaming? Similar argument to that for sales, just using play rate to approximate current value to the public instead of sales. This is arguably a better approximation.

For programmers, most of us get paid a decent wage up front to write programs as employees. The employer has estimated how valuable having the programs are to them, and made an offer based on that, and we accepted. We don't ask for a royalty instead, because we would rather have a big check upfront instead of tiny checks dribbling in over the life of the program (which would not be the long copyright life, but rather how long the employer uses it).

For programmers who are selling their programs to the public instead of writing them as employees for a specific employer, their cut of the sale is effectively a royalty.

Finally, what about per-execution royalties for programmers? There are a few differences between programs and songs that make it generally less sensible.

First, number of executions is not as good an approximation to value as it is with songs. That's because programs are utilitarian, whereas songs are art. We run programs to accomplish tasks, and the value of the program to us depends greatly on the value of the particular task we are accomplishing with that run.

Second, most programs aren't streamed for each execution. You can't get execution information back to the programmer unless such tracking is specifically built in. It's very hard to do that in a way that is not visible, and potentially disruptive and intrusive, to the user. If you are in a competitive market, that can put you at a disadvantage compared to competing programmers who are not doing per-execution tracking.

Third, program value is not as uncertain as song value. Programs are tools, obtained to accomplish specific tasks. Users often have a good idea of how valuable accomplishing those tasks are, and how much the program will aid that, so can often can figure out up front what the lifetime value of the program is to them. Programmers who know their market can also figure out the value to their customers of the program. Unlike with songs, this means that we can set a fair to both parties up front fixed price for a program. We don't have to resort to a drawn out approximation like they have to do with songs.
> Okay, but how about other JavaScript engines?

SpiderMonkey uses NaN-boxing, so pointers to objects will sometimes take up less space than in V8. As for hidden classes, I'm not sure about how shapes (SpiderMonkey's term for hidden classes) interact with constructors.

> And shouldn't stuff like this be in the specs, so that the language becomes more consistent and predictable?

That would stifle compiler innovation. Not even the "low-level", "predictable" C and C++ mandate particular implementations, beyond specifying the bare minimum necessary to ensure pointer arithmetic works portably.
Incorrect, as far as streaming royalties go. Performers get 5-6x what songwriters are paid.
Creating Gifs Automatically with Mask R-CNN
What kinds of jobs do those people hold?
This made me chuckle. I had the pan of the condo in mind whilst reading it too.
Reducing "Other TSDBs" to log-structured-merge trees is misleading. Any large-scale TSDB has something sophisticated underneath and LSM is often just one tiny part of that. I would argue (as most do) that any TSDB "simply used an LSM" it would be doomed at any scale over time.
Lots of people believe chrome is new IE
This is basically the concept of Dark UI Patterns. Great video on some examples here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KVyFio8gw4

I find the Ryan Air example particularly interesting.
I once was talking to a firefighter who was saying that these days house/apartment fires burn hotter and much more rapidly. Why? Because of cheap furniture (materials and construction). He didn’t have kind things to say about IKEA.
This Horror Movie Is Based on a True Story. Sort Of
I think even "simple" generators are harder than they look. Plus, those 'bell and whistle' features quickly end up becoming critical once you scale up from a few pages.

Also yea, don't really want to do CSS and web design just to put a bit of content online. Hence why these things exist.
I've been using this technique for several years now, making sure that my honey-pot addresses are widely available. Any email that matches a whitelist gets through immediately. Anything that matches my blacklist goes straight to spam.

Everything else is put through a comparison filter that looks to see if it's similar to something that's been blacklisted. If so, to goes in the spam folder.

If something is then still unclassified it goes through a Bayesian filter trained on the explicitly black/white messages, and prioritised accordingly. Anything that's closer to black than white gets delayed a day or two, anything that's nearly white goes in my inbox.

Works a treat, and in my experience, even with only a comparatively small amount of email, it beats the gmail filters, because it's trained on my data.
JavaScript is successful for several reasons:

* It compiles on the fly (and extremely quickly at that)

* It runs almost everywhere and JavaScript interpreters (plural) are on almost every modern computer

* It is multi-paradigm. This means the language can be structured in a OOP way somewhat like a Java program, or (thank god) you can avoid all of that nonsense.

* The language is extremely forgiving, which makes it extremely sloppy but very cozy for amateur programmers

* The most important part (and least understood) is that it features concepts that make programming fun: functions as first-class citizens and native lexical scope (without some conventional bullshit like a lambda expression)
Standards-Based, Open-Source Middleware for Predictive Analytics Applications
I took this article as iOS app dev paranoia.
Hey I always asked myself if this is art. In a research project I made animations from simulations, the idea was to explore the limits of communication in open science via social media. The effect was in the order of 10^7 views/year. I always believed that there is an art side here, especially from looking at the original simulations, which were heavily compressed in order to fit in a goldfish attention span. Would love to see them running on big walls or living inside cheap flat screens.

After the social media meltdown I lost interest into sharing more. Here [0] is a page with direct links to the animation postings, for the rest anybody interested can find more from this hint.

[0] http://chorasimilarity.github.io/chemlambda-gui/dynamic/rawu...
It's a limitation in the car. When you have an AC based charger, the conversion and step up to battery voltage happens inside the car itself.

This process generates waste heat, which must be vented. At level 1, (wall outlet,) and level 2, (oven outlet,) it's not a big deal. When rapid charging, the heat dissipation is huge.

The AC to DC converters that can handle rapid charging are physically huge and There's no practical way to put that inside the car itself.

I suggest learning the basics about how charging a battery works. You need to apply a DC voltage directly to the battery. Electric vehicle batteries are in the hundreds of volts.

What these systems do is the car and the charger communicate, and the car ends up telling the external charger how to charge its battery. That's why there's a lot of competition among standards.
You didn’t see anything from ikea because the ikea stuff got bought as soon as they put it on the floor.
I want to know, what's the fidelity on these recordings?

Animals can hear way more frequencies than us, in one direction or another - typically the high registers. The recording may sound totally different.
Assuming perfect systems that never fail seems more immature, no?
Given the visibility of HN threads I expect this data to get scrubbed post-haste - so download it / archive it ASAP
I think what Le Guin is expressing tacitly that most of us adopt meaning into our lives. We fall in love. We get religion, we have kids, we are dedicated to our vocations, etc. Creative people create meaning for their lives. This is hard work requiring extreme skepticism and bravery (which ultimately can be very lonely): each idea must pass a battery of psychic litmus tests to be considered valid. It's exhausting. But this sort of way of life is the ultimately most fulfilling, I think. Most purposeful. Note: I don't really do this my own life, I feel like I have too many adopted meanings in my life that crowd out this process and lack the fundamental courage to really do this.
The only thing that isn’t the new IE is IE.
Ask HN: Is it important your partner/spouse be interested in your tech career?
I've been working in the tech startup scene for the past few years and have come to love the work and the community. I'm actively engaged at work and enjoy working on side projects and doing reading/research with my free time. It's come to be a hobby for me and the lines between work and play are becoming less easy to distinguish. I'm not troubled by this, but it has affected some of my personal relationships - some for the better, some for the worse. Most notably, for the worse with my significant other who is not at all interested in the tech scene.

I'm curious about how common this is in the HN community and how others may be coping with this situation. On the one hand, it would be nice to be able to have at least casual conversations about what I'm working on, why I find it interesting, why it might matter to someone not directly involved with the technology, etc. On the other, I can see the merit in completely disengaging from the tech mindset and engaging on a completely different level while at home with family.
“Pump-and-Dump” schemes in Telegram groups drive penny crypto coin prices up
David Chalmers has spent the better part of his career trying to arrive at a consensus definition of consciousness. [1] It's not exactly fair to fault the author of this article for failing to do so. Chalmer's interview with Sam Harris gives a pretty good overview of the difficulties that arise when we specifically try to define and explain consciousness in anything beyond the most general terms. [2]

[1] https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=o8AfF3MAAAAJ

[2] https://samharris.org/podcasts/the-light-of-the-mind/
He wrote his own tools in Python to achieve this (repo: https://github.com/3b1b/manim).

FAQ: http://www.3blue1brown.com/about/
Honest questions:

Who are the “any satellite photo providers”?

How many are there?

How do I find them?
The Awl was a treasure. RIP.

https://www.theawl.com/2018/01/awl-ends/
Go to any computer store and look at keyboards.
Friedrich Hayek – The Denationalization of Money (1976) [pdf]
i think you are indeed correct on stating that.. the chaos monkey, cool naming :)
OS/2 was another common one, at least up until the current decade. Not sure there are many of those left at this point.
You're perfectly allowed to use "they" since you weren't sure.

It's not nice to assume "he" to always be the default - that is what was being corrected. One did not have to know that "she" was correct, but it was easy to find out that "he" was probably wrong. Let's keep discussion on topic, rather than venturing into talking about what you're "allowed" to do.
This comment made me laugh. There's a bunch of charitable explanations as to why it was written, most notably "honest mistake".

But there's also very uncharitable explanations! For instance, I'm sure I'm not the only one who's noticed that hard technical IT blogs written by women are disproportionally often written by women who were born men (disproportionally wrt the general population of transgender women). Just like the one starting this thread might have assumed that "it's deep tech, so it must be a guy", I can imagine that stevenh assumed that "it's deep tech, so she must be trans". This is beautifully similar to the sentiment of his comment in general, to not under any circumstance let anyone get away with getting gender stuff wrong.

So it looks like even the people who have a strong opinion about being hard on each other about gender stuff, can do it wrong. Maybe the lesson is that we should be slightly less hard on each other about it?

I propose we politely point out mistakes and assume the best intentions (even though of course sometimes that assumption will be wrong).
PWA = Progressive Web Apps for anyone else confused.
Have you played Overwatch?

Overwatch is ONLY cosmetics in lootboxes, has high drop-rate in normal play. They give them out like candy. They literally gave you more at Christmas.

It's rubbish suggesting you have to grind, you earn lootboxes for virtually EVERYTHING because you are constantly earning XP for playing almost every game, QP or ranked or arcade.

There's a reasonable in-game currency, no external trading, and is frankly an example of loot boxes done right.

Your attitude is "I'd rather defraud the devs, even though the game I have is the opposite of Pay-to-Win."

I don't get it.
Reading just who says what in the article explains:

"the “panpsychist” view is increasingly being taken seriously by credible philosophers"

"...says Philip Goff, a philosophy professor at Central European University in Budapest, Hungary."

"David Chalmers, a philosophy of mind professor"

"writes Hedda Hassel Mørch, a philosophy researcher"

"Goff" "Goff" "Goff"

"Chalmers quotes his colleague, the philosopher John Perry."

BTW:

"Goff believes quantum entanglement [...] suggests the universe functions as a fundamental whole rather than a collection of discrete parts."

Pure bunkum. Quantum entanglement is very limited phenomenon (in the sense of contribution to the rest of physical phenomena), here it's used only because it sounds "sciency" not because it's relevant.