skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
From the technical paper:

Checked C adds new types to C:
• ptr<T>, the checked pointer to singleton type,
• array_ptr<T>, the checked pointer to array type,
• T checked[N], the checked array type,

Many people have been down that road. GCC had "fat pointers" for subscript checking years ago.[1] That never caught on. Walter Bright had a proposal.[2] I had a proposal. Microsoft had "Managed C++". It's technically possible, but retrofitting old code rarely happens.

[1] http://williambader.com/bounds/example.html
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8509155
While I think it’s important to disagree with news that might be less than factual and better yet - think with a skeptical mindset, I think it’s rather anti-intellectual to blanket misleading or factually lacking news as ‘fake news’.
It's not very surprising for me, because C is a simpler language and it's easy to paint yourself into a corner with C++.

The critical question is: what does the error rate look like for code of similar complexity? It's very possible that C programmers will try to keep things simple, because the language doesn't support them and they have to be extra careful. The flip-side is that they probably can't develop projects as complex as C++ would enable them to.
> Sorry Because of its privacy settings, this video cannot be played here.

Seeing the same here, there doesn't seem to be any links to direct the user straight to the Vimeo page.. I'm trying to access from Australia btw
2018 G20 Buenos Aires Summit, Focus on Money Laundering
C and C++ have big communities and they're also not primarily targeted at weekend projects.
Or even just build a transmitter.
What's special about that? I can't see anything unexpected. Do I miss something here? I don't know (any) assembler well.
Try it on something that isn't a trivially sized repository. E.g. on linux.git it takes 4-5 seconds on a warm cache on SSD to show anything, whereas "git log" is instantaneous. This is because to show the graph it needs to search forward through the history before knowing how to paint it.

Then when it does show something it's pretty useless on complex histories, e.g. on linux.git a few dozen pages down into the output we're at 140 characters on graph lines before we even get to showing the commit id and climbing. Scroll down a bit more and all you're going to see is jumbled graph line output as the commit info is entirely pushed off-screen.
Granted it was a while ago and things may have changed, trying to do a simple typo correction lead to what I described. I really don't have time to dig through their documentation just to do something as minor as fixing spelling. It was obvious the editor took offense to it. So thats that from me, sorry for helping I guess.

Also run into problems where pages on companies are wrong and edits are prevented even though the information is outright inaccurate. Apparently having the info on the company website isn't cite-able? Seems stupid to me.
Good times. I was once known as the guy who owns the AmigaDOS manual - the Amiga books were so expensive that we had a group of guys where each of us bought one book and we made photocopies.

All the cool stuff was of course in HRM and RKM so having the original DOS manual was kinda like ending up with the short end of the stick. :)
So it always updates the HEAD pointer, except when it doesn't, and you give it the name of an existing branch that represents the commit to change your working tree into, except when you specify -bf to use the HEAD commit, and except when you specify -b and a branch name that doesn't exist. You can also specify start_point to use instead of HEAD.

So, the checked out commit is the second ref specified, or HEAD, unless the flags are such that you can only specify one ref.

Git checkout also "merges" uncommitted changes with your new HEAD, which you didn't mention and makes me wonder why the command isn't called "git merge".
Yes -- and that has turned out to be a bad design decision. It's somewhat convenient to use methods like strcat() to build up strings, but it also leads to very insecure code.

I think the inclusion of strdup() shows that it was a mistake to make C strings completely allocator-agnostic.
Yeah, most projects don't consist of a single function locking and unlocking a mutex. :) Try doing the same in five 200 LOC functions with multiple returns when three different threads are sharing the data, for 10 years, with a yearly personnel turnover of 20%.
Macbook Pro 2015 maxed out running Sierra - no issues other than I'd like a larger SSD. I probably won't buy another until there is a significant speed upgrade or something fails.

All things considered, I might wind up taking this laptop to my grave.
Clang offers a memory sanitizer that does a lot of extra checking. People don't ship their software with the sanitizer activated because the performance hit is nontrivial.
Personally, having an RX only SDR is sufficient, there is so much interesting stuff to listen too.
It seems even @potus has a probability of .929 of being a bot. Is this fake news?
You can have a static buffer:

static char buf[128];

and use strcpy() at any point to copy into it, so I don't think statically allocated strings must be literals.
Can you share the paper on the new method?
Yes. Changed now from https://sixcolors.com/link/2018/03/apple-watch-adoption-numb....
I don't see any reference to any network infrastructure failures. Maybe they mean 'China's internet was flooded with reactions'?
Taipei is using a blockchain alternative to transform into a smart city
Is it?

To start, it isn't really a C-like language, is it? It looks more like Pascal (or Modula), which is a different offshoot from ALGOL than C is.

Wikipedia tells me that Ada-0 was based on LIS from the mid-1970s, so a couple of years before the K&R C book came out.

The Ada '83 Rationale, at https://web.archive.org/web/19970407040255/http://sw-eng.fal... , mostly compares Ada to Pascal equivalents, though many other languages are mentioned.

The bibliography lists those languages: https://web.archive.org/web/19970407041806/http://sw-eng.fal... . You'll note that C is not present in the list.

The Ada 95 Rationale does reference C and C++ ("Ada 95 incorporates the benefits of Object Oriented languages without incurring the pervasive overheads of languages such as SmallTalk or the insecurity brought by the weak C foundation in the case of C++" - http://www.adahome.com/LRM/95/Rationale/rat95html/rat95-p1-2... ) but as you can see, it also refers to Smalltalk. The references include Modula (though not Modula-2) and Wirth's paper on "Type Extensions".

It comes across like they drew much more from languages other than C and C++, and were in the niche of "high performance, real time, and very important software", but from a different path than C/C++.
Refining oil also requires substantial amounts of power. From what I’ve read the power to refine a litre of gasoline e.g. requires as much power as an electric car would need to go the distance 1 litre of gasoline gives you.
http://archive.is/MtjAr
I haven't seen an off-the-shelf x86 machine that actually requires binary-only drivers for essential functionality in a very long time. Sure, there is lots of specialized hardware that no one wrote an open source driver for but you don't buy those from Dell or HP.

Most x86 boxen tend to run tons of proprietary firmware but at least that isn't pinning me down on ancient hacked-up kernel trees.
Having lived for a while in Chile (where according to the article financial literacy is below average), my experience very much agrees with this. I noticed many people struggling with basic arithmetic resulting in me having to check the change at small shops since it would often be wrong. It also leads to people making crazy decisions with respect to choosing to buy in cash or on credit (in quota). I'm not talking about household appliances that people need, but I've seen things like a person buying a 50$ blanket in 12 installments over a year. Many people would just fill up they're salary with monthly credit payments.

I've heard some people say this shouldn't be an issue with most supermarket labels including the "price per unit weight/volume". I agree this should be an obligation by law, but I feel like many people are unaware of these labels. I know it sounds crazy to a tech crowd but I'm sure many people don't compare the weight/volume with the price but instead go for the cheaper product price.
> EULA's are of questionable utility not because they are legally invalid

Most EULA's are invalid in Germany (and possibly in other parts of the EU) as you need to accept them before buying, which usually isn't the case, and they count as AGB (more or less Terms of Service) which are heavily regulated in what is allowed to appear in them (including no surprising clauses).
Even if it's relatively easy to not get caught, you can't be sure exactly how easy it is, and the downside is catastrophic. So no, I don't think every entity in your thought experiment would be committing fraud. Only ones that knew for sure exactly how easy it is and that they would not get caught for sure. And those ones, by definition, would never be caught so the public would never know ...
No it wouldn’t as refining oil is extremely energy intensive.
Reading text, scrolling by using the down-arrow on the Amiga in 1988, was smoother than than the Windows 10 laptop I'm using to view this page, here in 2018.

I can't imagine what personal computing would be like in 2018 if the Amiga system had gained market dominance.
The point is that C could be made much safer to use with a few "simple" (at least seemingly) tweaks. C has great tooling support on all platforms, including embedded, so it would be a compelling advancement if the language standard were to include such a thing. The important thing would be to coerce such a string type to character arrays so it remains compatible with all libraries without casting.
”to "pull down" the main display and see the OS GUI behind it“

I haven’t ever used an Amiga, but thought its “main display” was its GUI, or that its GUI at least was on par with the command prompt. Am I wrong, or am I reading too much in this statement?
> "Is there any proof that actual people use and value Google and Amazon assistant more than Siri?"

This is a common confusion among iPhone users. I suspect the reason is that if all you're used to is Siri (and it's myriad disappointments), it's hard to conceive of the the quantum leaps that is Google Assistant in product polish and usefulness.

First and foremost is the near flawless voice recognition. I, with my India accent even, can just say things to my Android device (and now, my new google home) it just ... gets it. It's spooky.

Then, after it recognizes the question/request correctly, it is very likely to take the correct action with a high enough probability that it's now almost a surprise to hear "Sorry I don't now how to do that yet" when it does happen.

Outside of the active queries, there are things it does automatically that are at the level of what a particularly attentive human assistant might do for you.

It'll check your calendar and remind you that you should start driving for your 4pm appointment because the traffic is unusually heavy on 101 today.

Or that your flight tomorrow morning has been cancelled. It knows about your flight because of the confirmation email in your gmail account.

Remember, you have to take no action for this sort of reminders. Just have to opt in when assistant is setting itself up on your new phone.

There are myriad other such examples. It has saved my bacon numerous times. We're truly living in the future.
Introducing Supernova Studio
I recently watched a talk from 34c3 (chaos computer club conference) which were held at the end of last year about Twitter bots, their existence and their detection.
The speaker couldn't find a lot of bots that were cited in studies and that their methodology were somewhat arbitrary.

Definitely worth a watch:
https://media.ccc.de/v/34c3-9268-social_bots_fake_news_und_f...
(The video is German but there should be a translated version of it on the site)
Which makes me wonder "Why?" Beth is not exactly mod unfriendly as they pretty much need them to make their games playable.
I'm saying that Wikipedia has a much more nuanced discussion of its reliability (including drawbacks of the studies involved) than the summary in your comment.
Not by counting pennies. Estimate, get a rough order of magnitude - things you can actually keep in your head and get an intuition for instead of math to maybe forget in a checkbook somewhere if you record the calculation at all. Check your balances. Savings going up is good, savings going down is bad.

If you need to get detailed, or your estimates don't line up with what your savings account is actually doing, you can also harness the power of online banking records do half the work for you. I semi-recently went over three quarters worth of transactions and aggregated them by category: "Food", "Home Expenses", "Car Expenses", "Food", "Health", "Shopping", "Subscriptions", "Charity", "Unknown". (Not well covered by this exercise alone but easy enough to add to account: taxes.)

This already was overkill for me. I did nothing but fact check my gut (which was wrong on some details but right on all the macro points that actually mattered - rent, living expenses, and entertainment - exactly as you'd expect with estimates.) Monitoring total spending already tells me I'm where I need to be - with a good rainy day fund, a good savings fund growing at a good rate.

Chicken? Don't know don't care. Food totaled bellow my estimates, which were already low enough I didn't feel them worth the opportunity cost of trying to optimize. That time would be better spent learning how to better negotiate raises and hiring, or learning new career skills. Unknown? Ditto. I happened to subdivide "Food" a little when initially categorizing out of ease and curiosity into "Groceries", "Caffeine", and "Eating Out". Could've saved $633.45 between 1/1/2017 and 8/16/2017 by not buying caffeine, didn't use a lick of manual arithmetic to figure that out. Computers did it for me, and it probably wasn't worth the electrons to even do that.
"If advertising is dead why are companies still shelling out millions"

Think of it like a sponge, the water the sponge soaked up is money. Those companies are trying to wring out the last drops of water. Some people think the water will go on forever but those people are short-sighted and often greedy, at least in my limited experience.

I've been saying advertising is dead for a couple years now, and my prediction is usually met with hostility. My observation is based on the business trends of newspapers. What used to be a solid marketplace is now one of the most difficult to survive in, because the only model that really works is subscription and nobody wants to subscribe when the news can be found for free elsewhere.

The last year or two showed us desparation tactics like using Javascript tricks to yell at consumers for having ad-blockers installed. Business psychology experts have confirmed this is a terribly stupid approach to customer service, and I think it's safe to say if those site operators were not desparate for revenue they never would have gone that route.

We can also conclude that Ad blockers aren't going away. They're getting smarter and more commonplace. The ability to filter out the data we receive from outside sources is one of the most powerful things that technology allows us. People hate ads. I forget who said that, but they pointed to the success of technologies like Tivo, and I would also say look at how pirated television is very popular, one common trait about pirated TV is the ads are removed.

The conclusion is obvious, if you're paying attention. Advertising is dead. That is not to say you can't make a few bucks from it still, but it's an advance warning to start thinking about other revenue models. Businesses will always need to advertise, but The New Market Order will see free advertising opportunities replacing paid advertising. Why should a business owner waste money on ads that nobody will see and thanks to ad-hostile plugins like Ad Nauseum, analytics can't accurately report results for, when they can get better results from social media engagement which costs nothing?

I apologize for not citing my sources but I don't have the time to spend looking up things I've read for the past several years.
My first full time job was at a store that sold Amiga's (and PC's). We had a very large range of software - including every game, constantly getting new stock. Once we convinced the boss to purchase a shrink-wrap machine to keep everything looking neat, we started taking games home, copying them, and sharing them with the local community. The next morning, we'd shrink-wrap the games back to their original state, and put them back on the shelf for sale.
> Corporations are not people - they can be bound by laws but not arbitrary social conventions.

Corporations are bound by social conventions for the same reason natural persons are: if they sufficiently violate them, people impose consequences on the corporation by actively avoiding interactions beneficial to the corporation.
The case for apps to decentralize: 5 reasons  the long tail needs crypto
How the new Game of Life knightship was found
Black-Grey Silicon Watch Bands 22mm
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16574316
> would be astounding if all the trillions of cells in your body underwent the same genetic mutations.

spoiler: they won't all undergo the same epigenetic changes either.
Nice to see that instead of a free license they've opted for a bullshit made-up one where they want you to cite their papers.
Oh fsck didn't see the answer 7 days ago hopefully you see my reply.

Jeph started without a story and mediocre drawing style but loveable interesting characters.
We got our weird relationships of our nerdy main character with many interesting side characters. Over time his artstyle got better and we got to know the main characters with their backstories, quirks and robot sidekicks.

What went wrong (imo) is that jeph wanted to experiment. We now got inconsistent personalities and people acting out of character. There are many people we got to know who now only get occasional cameos, but every week a new sode char (at least it feels like it).
In this process marty dates a trans person and had sex with her, faye fell in love with a robot and everything "controversial" what you can think of was tried leaving established characters behind and just showing me an empty shell of a webcomic I once really liked.

There are no indy music references, much less robotic weirdness and every small robot seems to get a humanoid chassis. The comic lost the edge it oncehad tryimg to be edgy.

At least that's what I think and I'm still sad that I'm alienated from the comic.
Human beings have a tendency to overestimate our innate ethical abilities. The Milgram[1] and Stanford Prison[2] experiments are usual examples of how quickly and easily humans devolve into despicable behavior. We really only need a small nudge and most of us end up capable of being Holocaust interment camp guards. Recognizing your own enormous ability for evil is important or else you might easily end up acting on it.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment
Something like memory pools or manual memory management. Yes the memory pool will come from the heap or stack but the heap/stack allocator will have no idea what is going on in there.
Propane is popular because it's convenient, but it's hardly "the 'American' BBQ experience", King of the Hill aside.

For the troops in Norway, my guess is that NATO is trying to make sure that Russia has to watch it's entire western border, and the hope is that this will help spread their resources too thin to do anything like they've been doing in eastern Ukraine. But Erna doesn't seem to be interested in explaining why she invited them in.
> Can you convince me of why I should trust Youtube's owners to police what I can see and hear, rather than rely on my own whims and judgements?

Asking this question is precisely the systemic risk to Youtube. If there's thought policing going on; there will be a host of players with "the best of intentions" who want in on it. From Animal Control to the Pentagon; every branch of .gov will want a piece of that pie as will most of the quasi-governmental and non-governmental stakeholders.

If only truth is allowed; whose truth?

If fiction is marked as such; who decides what is not fantasy?

If some powerful faction makes money from people believing that chemtrails are government mind-control drugs being spewed into the air to make us all more compliant and effeminate; should they be allowed to spread that belief at will? What happens if the profitable meme is that a certain ethnic group is diluting the purity of a majority ethnic groups heritage and should therefore be exterminated? Do we allow that?

What are the limits of acceptable folly?
I'll admit that this theory is pretty out there, and I'm not going to continue to expound about it here. I'll also admit that I can easily get pretty worked up, and veer into the partisan, hair on fire rhetoric that is the very subject of my ire. I pledge to do better, and read your article.

I developed the roots of this idea over December '16, after several conversations with one of my life long friends I hadn't seen since a few months before the election. He's an attorney, and someone I know to be extremely bright. He voted Trump. The level of spite and shadenfreude in all of his arguments, and him repeating the phrase "I've never been so sure of anything in my life", in regards to his confidence in Trump to fulfill his campaign promises, was very jarring. All of these traits were completely foreign to my friend before Summer '16. He hadn't gotten less intelligent in any other avenue of his life.

I only came to this theory through the realization that susceptibility to public relations tactics, weaponized persuasion, whatever you want to call it, is not a matter of intelligence at all.
Had a git tepo that I messed up pretty bad while in college, went to the professor to ask him to delete the repo so that I could start over. He told me to fix it as he wouldn’t delete it, best advice I’ve gotten as it truly was a learning experience.
In this context "main display" means "whatever display is in the foreground" as you could have, say, a Deluxe Paint screen. It'd take up, literally the whole screen, and you could drag it down by the top bar and see the OS desktop screen behind it, possibly in a different resolution and number of colors.
You are right that this could explain the velocity at a particular radius, but it's the radial velocity profile as you go out that hints at dark matter. The velocity as a function of radius is strange.
This doesn't seem specifically a linear vs distributed VCS thing, as much as it is a unique property of git. I previously used Mercurial, and at no point did I feel I had to understand how the VCS stores its commit graph in order to know what running some set of commands will do.

git is unique in its apparent assumption that it's nothing more than a series of convenience scripts that let you work on the raw filesysten representation a bit more easily. In a way it's more a filesystem-level representation of a DAG with some sugar on top, than it is a DVCS.
Yes, but unless you expose at the language level an interface for all types of allocators and enforce it then a whole lot of allocation techniques like memory pools couldn't be used with strcpy or would have to use char* type of strings again.

The point is not that allocators don't know how much memory has been allocated, but that C has no idea about the underlying allocator, so it cannot ask it about the length of the string as it was proposed.