skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
No, they don't have the same features. That's why he described WeChat as a platform rather than a messaging client- the extent to which it dominates online life in China has no analogue in the US.
It was the Tsar who took control of the Russian farm yields in order to supply the WW1 army, with strong encouragement of the British/Entente.
WeChat is crazy big in China, to the point where you use it to pay for almost anything. It has allowed even the extremely rural to digitise their payments - every stall has a QR code that you can scan and transfer money to. The payment feature scales up very quickly, allowing you to do everything from book cabs through the app through to splitting restaurant bills with other people.

It's more than just a messaging app - it's more like a mash-up of WhatsApp, PayPal, Twitter and Facebook.

Things that WeChat had before WhatsApp were things like "Moments" which WhatsApp adopted quite recently (and in a more simpler way) as "Status"[0] and they also had very strong business integration which WhatsApp only recently began to flirt with through WhatsApp for Business[1].

[0] https://faq.whatsapp.com/en/android/26000031/

[1] https://blog.whatsapp.com/10000637/Introducing-the-WhatsApp-...
They don't need to have any control of patents to do this, though, they can simply operate through FUD alone. Even though it's illegal, US IP law is very weak against such fraudulent behaviour and the slap on the wrist they _might_ get if they're caught will be outweighed by the profit they make from those who fall for their racket.
At least I am not lying... ;)
so, uh, I have similar issues, and you know what works for me?

Going into a physical office with a professional middle manager.

I mean, assuming I find a place where I'm a good fit (meaning, my technical abilities make it worth the time of the middle manager to manage me) it works really well, because the job of the middle manager is, essentially, to make people like me work; Because I honestly want to be useful, I think that often said middle managers feel good about the whole thing, too, because I really do get more done under their guidance. They feel useful, I feel useful, etc...

The other thing is that I go through periods of strong productivity and of very weak productivity. This is... acceptable in industry. Ok, so you have some unemployed time, but that's okay because when you are really productive, the remuneration is pretty great.

Also, on the ADHD side? for me? this is after getting the medication. It helps... a lot. but I still benefit more from having a middle manager than most people do, I think.

Append: more on medicalizing your shit:

We live in an age where we spend a huge amount of our GDP on medical care. We have amazing solutions for a lot of problems. Take advantage of this, because when medical science has a good solution, it's often super easy and effective.

Sleep apnea, for instance, is easy to test for and easy to treat, and if it goes untreated? Really fucks up your attention span (and your cardiovascular system) It's one of those things where modern medical science has a quick, cheap and easy mechanical fix.

There's a bunch of other crap like that, too. I personally would go for the sleep apnea test before I messed around too much with medications; not that medications are bad, but if you have it, treating sleep apnea is an unalloyed good, (well, getting mask fit setup is... difficult, but that's mostly a matter of buying the masks and trying them; a small matter of money on a software dev salary) while most medications have pluses and minuses that need to be carefully weighed, even once you've found the one that is best for you.
This isn’t even good whataboutism, it’s downright lazy. Apple is a giant corporation that avoids taxes, not a citizen with few or no choices. This is a business maximizing profit, by choice, in another market.
No question, both the commercial potential of CRISPR and the humanitarian potential will be served by keeping MPEG LA on the outside. So far that appears to be the case, their dream of acting as the centralized CRISPR patent authority hasn't gotten traction.
There are plenty of Americans who don't have access to a "family doctor". Not everyone can afford or bothers to get an annual checkup.

Same reason grocery stores often have a "check your blood pressure" kiosk, or offer flu shots. It's quick, it's convenient, and you reach people who would otherwise miss out. Sure, a doctor or nurse can check your BP or give you the vaccine, but there's a significant benefit to expanded access.
I remember reading a similar anecdote in the book Turing's Cathedral, where it suggested that von Neumann had a particular preference for loud marches. It also makes me think about what Stanislaw Ulam wrote of von Neumann[1]:

"If one has to divide mathematicians, as Poincaré proposed, into two types—those with visual and those with auditory intuition—Johnny perhaps belonged to the latter."

[1] http://www.ams.org/journals/bull/1958-64-03/S0002-9904-1958-...
The double standard is what they publicly state they believe in. You're talking about whether they have to comply or not with a US-based hypothetical. But they clearly published on their website what they believed in with regards to the US requests. Can you link the same for the Chinese policy?

> I'm happy that Apple will at least transparently defend user rights to the greatest of their ability in China

Why do you believe it is transparent? Can you link to something showing they "transparently defend user rights to the greatest of their ability in China"? Otherwise in the absence of being able to provide this transparent proof, will you admit it is not transparent?
WhatsApp didnt have the features WeChat did.

For example, Apple's iMessage and Facebook's Messenger development over the past few years has basically been to become increasingly like WeChat. Whether it's stickers or payments or animations, etc.
Most commercial panels are Crystalline Si (marked as blue).

The great promise is currently the perovskites (red-yellow), which could be far cheaper to manufacture (room temperature, soluble, common elements). However, current variants are not stable and degrade quickly over a few months.
I've only experienced that during a movie in, say, the midnight premiere of a popular sequel where people are really giddy. But I've experienced that everywhere including Paris and Prague.

I guess that's what you're referring to because it's hard to call applause during credits "inappropriate." Thought that's something I only experienced out of the States.

It's just fun. We're social animals. Nice to just go along with it instead of being judgmental.
Or maybe the audience enjoyed the movie?
I like to draw a distinction between abstraction and automation as architecture ideas.

Abstract stuff is "just" more abstract and adds a new concept on top of the old. Abstraction makes the coder feel all grown up and maintain the daydream: "once it's done building the features will be so much easier."

Automation is the part where we say, "this is repetitive and hard to keep track of - so make the computer do it." Automation creates leverage. And sometimes you need a truly novel abstraction to automate successfully, but in most instances you only need the same old 70's era programming constructs wired up a bit differently. Which does lead to dropping one abstraction in favor of another, as you allude to.

Even if you get into, "well we need to Optimize it, we can't just do the simple and straightforward thing" you can start automating the trivial, repetitive optimizations and get into the business of generating code. And that can be abstract, but it doesn't have to be - you don't have to incorporate a whole suite of compiler checks or a runtime model, the "compiler" can be a FSM that emits source code - but it'll be automated, and you can add the interface and checks to it that are most relevant to the problem, and make the output look human-readable to some degree.

Edit: another benefit of this approach is that your initial coding environment truly is "implementation detail" since it's the starting point and you just add the leverage you need from that point rather than feeling obligated to use the officially branded abstractions.
Great tool! Definitely easier to use and find than whatever tool Facebook created. Thanks!
MPEG-LA has also been getting into the human genome project-write initiative.

Source: I'm on the intellectual propety working group. The only other active member is MPEG-LA. Send help immediately.
The 1921-1922 famine most heavily affected the Volga basin and the Ural region. Western Siberia and Ukraine were hit to a lesser extent.

Among the regions that were not affected were Arkhangelsk and the Far East - i.e. the regions where American forces had invaded/intervened.
I think it's also a risk tolerance thing.

To analogize, if you are a general carpenter, you can always find work, but it will be at a lower rate. However, it will be varied.

If you are a fine cabinet carpenter, your work will likely be more focused, possibly more repetitive, more lucrative, and harder to find (you'll have to seek out the folks who need really really nice cabinets).
Here's an example of what a soccer game would look like if commented the usual way:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vJn5XxWg9U
I appreciate your point, but just think of the social changes that came about from birth control and the ability to control when you start a family. This breakthrough might not fix everything but it would be a boon for sexual freedom.
* Climate change isn’t a liberal fact vs some conservative alternate truth; climate change is a scientific fact.

* Evolution isn’t an atheist fact vs some religious alternate truth; evolution is a scientific fact.

* Personality differences (note: not to be confused with IQ or proficiency!) between male and female isn’t a conservative fact vs some liberal alternate; it’s a scientific fact.

Damore suggested we use these well established cross cultural personality differences to inspire positive improvements to the workplace that will allow women and men alike to more naturally be attracted to this line of work, and to thrive in it!

But because the scientifically uncontrovertial truths he quoted to formulate his argument are not currently considered “politically correct”, he was basically “crucified” and made an example of.

Scientific consensus is not conservative or liberal, religious or atheist, etc. Scientific consensus is the best unbiased reflection of reality we have.

Of course, any use of the words “fact” or “truth” must be qualified with the appropriate level of uncertainty — not even the best scientific establishments can reach fully 100% confidence — but may established scientific “facts” are called such because our uncertainty levels of them can become so incredibly low. The law of gravity, the claim that the world is not flat, and many others are clear examples of this.

We MUST stop politicizing the notion of “fact”, unless you really want to enter a post-truth world where unjustified opinions and feelings hold equal truth to scientific facts established with literal mountains of evidence and broad consensus.

If observing scientific fact creates a “hostile workplace” and is a fireable offense, then we have truly entered an Orwellian age of Wrongthink and Thoughtcrime, where we must all constantly police our own thoughts and utterance so as not to contradict the ideology of The Party.

He wasn’t even quoting scientific fact for hostile purposes; it appears entirely benevolently motivated, out of a desire to create an engineering culture more compatible with feminine personalities (which even many males have, as he points out!)

But because it touched a topic of political sensitivity and quotes a scientific fact that was “politically incorrect”, the truth of his argument, and even the well intentions of it, were made irrelevant. He was crucified, to make an example to all of what truths must never be spoken.

And this is why we can’t have nice things. Now we can’t even speak about making the workplace more suitable to women, because to discuss that would imply that there’s a difference in personality between women and men — and such a thing now can get you fired.
Kindles don't have that restriction, and they're by far the biggest ebook reader family on the market. Yeah, they only support MOBI, but that's just a simple file format conversion that Calibre (FOSS, available on all major platforms) can easily handle.
Whatever metric they choose is almost certainly much more likely to be gamed by powerful people. One doesn't need to look much further than PropOrNot, or the Google changes to address supposed fake news, or the immediate reactions to the Russia indictment, to know that any drive to "eliminate fake news" will immediately be turned against independent media and causes like BLM, opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline, any political figure not popular with Beltway types (like Sanders or Stein), etc.

I do enjoy being told what I actually want, though, so keep using that not-at-all-patronizing rhetorical maneuver.
Wait, so somebody actively tried to kill the scourge of communism in it womb, and you say it like it's a bad thing?!

Maybe that civil war should've been bloodier, if only the other side could have won... it would have spared the rest of the world at least (hint: Eastern Europe) from the hideous ideology and politics that spread from Rusia and infested them and dragged them down for decades after decades.
Hadley Wickham (R & beautiful API's for data stuff) once replied to my comment about buying a dead tree copy of his book and recommended the HTML version.
I think working remotely has it's pluses and minuses. I'm a few years in and have only had one in-office programming contract.

The positive is that I am entirely focused on GSD. I'm not sure about everywhere, but the place I was in-house at was fairly sparse and focused as well. I dread the thought of ever working at a place with pool tables or other distractions.

Working remotely puts a lot of trust in my work. They trust that I'm doing what I say I'm doing when I track hours. I've never had an issue disputing hours, so that's not a negative.

Working remotely pegs you as one of the smart ones. Apparently I earned the right to work remotely? I don't know, it's just work to me, but I also do a lot of short-term contracts, so the image is probably different.

This leads to the big downside. Out of sight, out of mind, out of personally caring. This somewhat goes both ways, but it's difficult to make text friends. Humans are simply wired for face-to-face, and I don't think Skype really replaces that.

This causes some problems with impedance. If I ask a question, I would need an answer right away because that's likely a blocking issue. If everyone else is on lunch, in a meeting, and so on, it leaves me hanging.

A positive is seeing a whole lot of codebases. It really helps you understand where you and everyone else is in the pecking order. It also brings up a lot of issues surrounding the meaning of good -vs- bad code, experts programmers, and so on. Exposure has shown me that these concepts are murky at best.

A negative is that some companies try to pay lower, selling remote work as a benefit. It isn't. I often have to split my day and work odd hours to keep myself on the same page as everyone else, nullifying whatever inconvenience I gain from not going to and from a local company.

But, really, it all comes down the company that you are working with. It is obvious when they haven't worked with outside developers, so I think it's a lot more about the company than the actual ability to work remotely.

Remote work is just work, and I don't think that, outside of direct human interaction and speed of communication, there is a significant difference between in-house and remote. Either way, code is written and shipped.
China can only “win” if English usage gets better there. Because to win means to get Europe e.g. to see them as example. But we understand too little of Chinese in general, the culture and the language. We do however almost all get taught murican, I mean English at high school (have to note that few year after my high school time, you can now study Chinese and do some exams on it)
Well, "good embedded programmers" are a subset of "good programmers" so yes. The point I'm making is that as embedded programmers get more experienced, we are able to do more with less. And so the hallmark of a good embedded programmer is not only writing less code that is more efficient than sub-good embedded programmers, but then doing so without sacrificing any of the code clarity and maintainability and secure patterns that all good programmers strive for regardless of what kind of programmer they are. It's the same concept the article talks about, just flipped on its head because of the environment.

Also incidentally, in my experience, good embedded programmers are less prone to "get lazy" on devices with sprawling amounts of resources than less experienced embedded programmers. Hungry dogs run faster, yes, but for example just because we've been given a generous 32KB of program space doesn't mean we're going to use it all up in a fit of laziness or start cramming in the features.
You're right, it didn't start with the Civil War. I just thought that slavery was a nice simple example of the legitimate use of force by the government that was decried as abridging the liberties of the Confederates. I get that you don't think 'the right to own other people' is, like, a real right like 'the right to kill animals however I want' and all the other ones you object to the government regulating away, but that's your personal and very subjective line and not some foundational precept.
You might also be at risk for blindness! Please, please, please go see an eye Dr! It's isn't just about how clear your vision is. These are your eyes.
> cool optimizations ... but ... fickle ... internals ...

Yes. I wrote about this in some detail 2 years ago, Jitterdämmerung:

http://blog.metaobject.com/2015/10/jitterdammerung.html
> If you have any thought or insight on how to get over that...

It depends with which concepts someone is already familiar. To me the only really new concept was the lifetime and ownership one, all others have just a different syntax plus here and there some extra goodies. As example, when I saw the match keyword I thought "cool, Rust has a keyword for guards".

I learned Rust shortly after 1.0 was released. The real obstacle for me to overcome was to build a mental concept of what Rust is. Something that wasn't really communicated while reading the first pre-release Rust book.

You have to read a lot to get an idea of Rust, it should be the other way around – a common mistake done by almost everyone teaching something. Ideally the first chapter would be a buzzword free, Rust code free chapter about how Rust works superficially and why there is a need for yet another computer language. It should describe what kind of tools and concepts in Rust exist and which problems they solve. This is better than introducing somewhat complicated concepts/tools and trying to explain how they fit into the big picture at the same time.

Ideally there would be an introduction like this:

A program needs a structure, variables, control flow, tools... blablabla... this leads to some common problems [some easy examples] and [this] are some concepts Rust invented/uses to solve them.

In later chapters the abstract ideas would be "converted into Rust". Also don't go too much into detail. I don't think for example that a representation of the memory layout of a vector helps much. At first I just need to know there is a thing where I can put objects of the same type into, how it is implemented is not that important for a beginner. It's better IMHO to know how to do something right, than why something is right. This reduces the mental burden in the beginning of the learning phase. The why is something that you learn over time – or maybe you are not that interested and skip it forever, also a valid thing to do.

Overall the Rust community does a stellar job providing so much help in so many different ways – /r/rust on Reddit is really awesome – thanks for the book and your open mind to ask for feedback.
That's where #6 comes in:

>Use Vuong's test to check alternatives, and be prepared for disappointment. Even if you've estimated the parameters of your parameters properly, and the fit is decent, you're not done yet. You also need to see whether other, non-power-law distributions could have produced the data. This is a model selection problem, with the complication that possibly neither the power law nor the alternative you're looking at is exactly right; in that case you'd at least like to know which one is closer to the truth.
Yes. It's normal. It's why people have to pay you to work. Unless you are a slavish minded individual, why else would you be motivated to work? You are trading your valuable time for something you don't want to do for money.
> thinks like namespaces and organization and modularization not only aren't emphasized, but seem like unimportant distractions from the core task of programming

There's an analogy I've heard, and I can't remember where. It might be a Feynman quote I'm recalling...

It'd be crazy to start design work on an airplane, if you're hungry and want to go to the corner store a block away for chips. It'd also be crazy to try to walk to China, since it's a long way, and also you might drown. The approach you take to solving the problem of getting from here to there depends completely on where here and there are, and what else you want to carry with you.

I don't use namespaces and build modules for an Arduino project, or a simple command line tool. But for large projects, I literally can't live without namespacing and modularization.

The core task of programming constitutes very different activities at different scales, as different as comparing walking to building jet engines.
Show HN: Algosaur – cloud scripts for automation
Hello HackerNews! I would like to show you a concept project I've been working on for some time: https://algosaur.com

The initial idea was to create a platform capable of hosting small scripts which I constantly make for work and grating everyone access to them, without the need for downloading anything from github or console knowledge requirements. For ease of users' understanding I had to rename "scripts" to "bots" though.

If you are a developer you can hook your service to the platform and make it available to the public. If you know Ruby, you can plug your script directly (you'll have to contact me for this option though). Python can also be available in a matter of a week or two, if anyone ever shows interest.

Thanks for your time and looking forward to your feedback.
Will this mean the canonical links will start to disappear from pages? I doubt amazon, for one, will want to lose their tracking markers from pressing share.
For anyone interested in cross platform development, check out Haxe and its testing process. Writing a target that passes those tests is like finishing Dark Souls. The level of effort here is about on par with finishing the character selection screen.
So you know that experienced Scala devs won't like your offers, but you aren't interested in the less experienced devs who apply.

What are you looking for, exactly? As an "inexperienced" Scala dev, I'm genuinely interested.