skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Seemed fine until the end, where metaphors have been mistaken for new words. Example: "dumpster fire."

> Webster's continues its descent into stupidity.

I feel as if it a move to stay relevant. Who is actually buying dictionaries? When was the last time you saw a commercial or ad for a dictionary? When these additions we're announced I saw it on multiple news feeds with mostly comments like yours. I heard about it on talk radio on my drive to work. I also had coworkers talking about it. To me this is nothing more than advertising and an attempt to gain some sort of engagement to stay relevant.
I wouldn't use that as an example, the wording of the 21st amendment is "The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed," not "the manufactuer, sale, and transportation of intoxicating liquors should not be prohibited."

It's my opinion that if there was a new amendment that would be in direct conflict with the other amendments without expressly repealing them the conflicting amendment it would be a constitutional crisis and it would cause political instability.

It would be, at the very least, go to the Supreme Court.
You can self learn math to a certain point but eventually you will reach a subject where its introductory text requires a context not written plainly. This is easily observable in research. Researchers do not write papers with the goal that everyone understand their work but rather that those in their field understand so the work can be verified. You are then stuck either having to derive the mathematical principles you need or you will have to ask others for help.
Because the Linux Kernel community doesn't do enforcement like that not because they don't have enough guns, but because they believe it to be harmful to the overall ecosystem. If you plan to slowly herd them to where you want them, a bounty hunter taking loud potshots scaring everyone doesn't help.

The theory is that a violating Linux-based device where you can try to get the manufacturer to fix this in the future is better than a device with a closed system and no chance of getting it opened because the manufacturer was scared of legal consequences of using Linux.
a "radiator" is a heat exchanger and "radiator" is the industry standard term. these semantics are required for effective communication about technical topics.
The naked and the read – Inside the library of Norman Mailer
I think the actual number I saw was either thousands or tens of thousands, at which point you start having to worry about the fire code.
Amazon removes reviewer emails from profiles
Isn't it the case that with this sort of system that if you increase your skills, your company is more profitable and therefore you all get paid more? (Which is a common system in capitalist America - the exact same job with the exact same skills at different companies pays differently based on the company's ability to pay, and year-end bonuses are often linked to the company's profits that year. And employees who get stock grants or options are effectively compensated based on the performance of the company, incentivizing them to cause the company to succeed.)

That's very different from a system where the government sets pay scales for the entire country, and an individual's efforts cannot make a meaningful change in their own earnings. In the system described in the article, it can.
Not necessarily. For example: I need a chase scene in my story here.

If you're telling a modern story, your first inclination is either a car chase or a foot chase. You certainly CAN just spice these up (put them in a surprising location being the easiest) but there is value in trying to find a different way (chase on Segways, or maybe on animals stolen from the zoo, etc).
When I say "fast and powerful", I mean what I've built which can use Dragon as a backend, not Dragon itself. Their user-facing command system is very limited (single trigger phrase, bad support for passing arguments to commands, must pause after talking). I have continuous recursive command recognition (you can say hundreds of commands in a minute, my record for perfect accuracy is ~280) and a command system that is leagues beyond Dragon's (and it's free on top of Dragon).

I plan to build/support professional workflows like CAD. I'd love to hear about your needs. I strongly believe eye + voice can greatly surpass keyboard/mouse in many environments.
It would definitely be an improvement. It also makes gerrymandering super hard. It's just a huge change that could happen at any time and completely throw off the government.
Markets reward what you can take.

Sometimes you have to give first.

But only sometimes.
...as I indeed mentioned.

But we've got to remember that attitudes to security and understanding of subtleties around crypto code were very different a decade ago, the output from automated checking tools was trusted significantly more, and we're talking about OpenSSL, a project whose source is generally acknowledged to be full of Weird And Inadvisable Shit anyway. The example you're leaning on was basically a perfect storm that resulted in the worst possible scenario.

On the other hand, package maintainers fix security issues on versions of packages the developers have stopped caring about every day of the week, and of course these never hit the headlines.

And of course I'd never suggest that any package maintainer could ever know better than you. Though unfortunately such superior and unilateral attitudes are one of the things that maintainers are needed to protect against.
Because it's an idiom that has come mean something figuratively, not literally? Like "hot garbage". Plenty of info about the meaning of "dumpster fire" online.
I've curated a list of resources for those procrastinating and reading too much
I'm not 100% sure, but looking at the documentation, you can manually use/tweak the three.js objects underneath A-Frame. [1]

They seem to discourage it though, or, it seems like they'd rather you use the markup implementation.

[1] https://aframe.io/docs/0.8.0/introduction/javascript-events-...
Either they don't check it out, or for once shit is real and unlike a hollywood movie, it's actually top secret.

For that matter, how many secrets both military and political weren't exposed untill way after it happened. Check back in several decades
My friend and I converted an old organ pedal board to digital using some magnets, reed switches, and an arduino. Mounting the reed switches on foam board was a fast easy hack. It did require a real organ seat though because of the length of the pedals.
A new approach to fusion energy starts today
Perhaps if it’s released before another key is pressed, the mode stays changed. If another key is pressed first, it changes back on release.
In some Hunter gatherer societies, leaders weren't people who wanted that job,but people who were selected by the community to do it.
Yup, if you know the beginning and the end, theoretically there are only so many ways to get there. The trick is picking the most interesting route that also creates the emotional journey you want the audience to go through.
I would have appreciated this article more if author were to add more photos of the well-functioning small town it has today .
It seems to me that the author is missing the core problem here. The problem isn't trying to improve oneself, but tying your self-worth to the success (or failure) of these improvement efforts, or hoping for magic habits like IF or polyphasic sleeping or a specific schedule to fix your life.

I don't stress about not achieving personal goals immediately, as long as I'm making progress, or at least learning. My diet, for example, is pretty much a model of what many people would ideally like to eat. I didn't do this by going cold turkey, but rather by a decade of trying without judging myself for each failure.

By contrast, I've failed pretty hard at trying to wake up earlier over the last decade: instead of forcing myself to do so, I've made sure that my time commitments allow for it. It turns out this was a pretty great way to handle it, as I just found out I've had a sleep disorder for pretty much my entire life. Now that I've addressed it, waking up earlier has become a lot more feasible. If I had pushed myself and judged myself for failing the way the author does, I feel like I would've failed at both those endeavors.
I think that'll depend on the materials. Maybe money is harder to fuse than Hydrogen.
The second quote is specifically distinguishing them :) it says that Continuous Delivery enables Continuous Deployment, while making it clear that they don't necessarily apply to the same cases.

As for the third quote, notice it says production-like, not production itself. The idea is that you test in an environment that is as close to production as possible. Nobody will die if you deploy a bad build to a real pacemaker - as long as it's not inside an actual person :)
I find worker-owned businesses very interesting. Obviously getting paid the same regardless of role may be an obstacle to attracting highly skilled people, but if salaries are competitive and established in function of role and experience, in a transparent way, that could be great.
If I had to guess at their reasoning, it's because these phrases are greater than the sum of their parts. Dark chocolate isn't just literally dark in appearance, it has a higher percentage of pure cocoa. A dumpster fire isn't literally just a dumpster on fire, it's a situation that's FUBAR.

So having definitions for these phrases has additional utility for readers in a way that having definitions for "red firetruck" or "trashcan fire" does not. Consider that many users of English dictionaries aren't entirely fluent in English, and might be coming from a language where these metaphors are different or non-existent. For instance, the German word for dark chocolate (because German has compound nouns where other languages have phrases) does not call it dark, it calls it bitter.
> skills and professionalism can be valued by the free market by people competing for them; why, despite pure populism for the lowest common denominator, someone wants to return to something like this, is completely beyond me.

The real determination of where the money goes is by the owners of the business. If one looks over the Forbes 400 richest list, we can see the heirs who drain off so much profit each year from the labor of those who work - the Kochs, the Waltons, the Johnson family. The Rockefellers fell off the list in the past few years, $2 billion is the individual cutoff and I suppose Forbes doesn't know of any individual in the family worth more that that. But I can assure you if they and their three siblings are worth 1.5 billion each, and their first cousins are all worth 1.5 billion each, they are not out there breaking the bricks.

It's amusing to hear about meritocracy and the rat race for education, skills etc. when these heirs are the people controlling the economy, and causing so many economic and other problems due to its increasing lopsidedness towards them. What are their skills and professionalism that are valued? The money they suck off from those who work is the truest lowest common denominator, rule by parasites. At least Lenin, Stalin and Molotov rose due to their merits, not their birthrights. Russia went from being a country pushed around by the Japanese, with an GDP equivalent to 1917 Brazil, to a superpower sending satellites, men into space, probes to the Moon (the first country to do so). It also had little crime and little poverty.

I am supposed to get into a tizzy about someone with less skills getting the same pay as me, when the money is being sent off to the heirs who do no work? I certainly would prefer that the people actually doing the work alongside me get the money.
As far as Sovereign Citizen conspiracy theories go, this is one of the more sensible ones that actually bears a resemblance to actual law rather than assigning talismanic significance to CAPITAL LETTERS or gold fringes on flags.
There is an excellent book called 'Maverick' about a Brazilian manufacturing company that, while not owned by the workers, gets much closer than almost any other business. I highly recommend that all founders read it

https://www.amazon.com/Maverick-Success-Behind-Unusual-Workp...
> Isn't it the case that with this sort of system that if you increase your skills, your company is more profitable and therefore you all get paid more?

Your reward is not commensurate with the opportunity cost of improving your output. It gets worse with larger companies.
Installing WordPress on Ubuntu with Nginx and MariaDB , PHP7.1
I had a long reply, but now deleting it all except this bit, which goes back to the theme of the actual article :

If there’s ever been one thread on Hacker News where a user could reasonably claim to doubt another’s memory of an event that possibly didn’t occur : this is that thread.
That's empirically not the case--lots of boring procedural stuff in the Constitution was repealed by amendments without having to specifically use the word "repeal" in the amendment itself, e.g. the election of Senators, when Congressional and Presidential terms begin and end, the succession procedure for the Vice President to assume the Presidency, and so forth.
Equal payment is definitely not the norm for co-ops worldwide. Workers realize they should be paid for their contribution. For example at Mondragón, a network of cooperatives in Spain which employs 75,000 people, workers established a scheme that distributes profits in line with contributions. The difference between this co-op and other businesses is that workers decided to collectively absorb the impact of the Recession, taking a 5% pay cut and shifting jobs between co-ops as needed such that zero workers were fired despite an economic downturn.

What you will see is that, for example, instead of top managers of a co-op making hundreds or thousands more than the median employee as in a public corporation, they make a more sensible amount which still attracts and sustains the best talent in the enterprise.
You don’t have to be irrationally exuberant to succeed in the market, even if it’s irrationally exuberant. Is every single company on earth leaping and dancing to the latest fad of the minute in order to succeed? Is the secret of Warren Buffets’s success piling in on on all the latest trends? No, yet somehow our economy seems to bubble along ok. So I categorically reject the idea that this is the only way success is gauged, that’s self evidently not true.

Secondly, if the market is wrong and you dance to that tune, eventually when reality catches up the market will realise it’s mistake. Trust me, the market can sell out of your company faster than you can pivot your entire business model.

But sure, it is possible to make money following trends. But it’s not the only way. It’s not an immutable law of capitalism, and there’s plenty of money to be made providing actual, sustainable value.
How Lying to My Students Helps Them Find Their Voice and Pursue Truth
With delete seems exotic, doesn’t it get confusing?

I use caps-lock for escape. It’s really nice but whenever I use a coworkers computer I find myself suddenly writing with caps-lock on even though I’m the only vi-user at the office.
Culture - it helps if you have good self-awareness. Understand how you like to work and what kind of people you like to hang out with and work backwards from there. Translate this into what kind of culture you're looking for. Use this to build a framework to filter firms.

When trying to assess a firm's culture, try to meet as many potential colleagues as you can. Ask them what it is like to work there. Speak to people who use to work there.

No one likes to speak badly of a firm.... they will speak to you in semi encoded toned down messages. Take what they say then times it by 2x-10x and that's what the firm is like.

Good luck :)
Treat every line of code you write as both a feature and a liability, then add on a much, much higher cost to test/verify than cost to build. Like say you need the feedback of 5 very busy people to get buy in for features and say you also need to have 3 of those very busy people verify the output. Now add in a third-party you need to pay to do security testing. So for any new feature you add, you’re directly adding risk and increasing the cost of formal verification.

With these constraints, even if you want to do CD, your CD will end up looking exactly like a waterfall development model. It makes no financial sense otherwise.

I work on predictive systems at a hospital, and this ends up being the case for almost every deployment. The costs of making a change and verifying it or adding features is so damn high that you need to think in 3-6 month deployment cycles about everything.
> it's not Twitter

And that's the problem with this comparison. SMS are not used like tweets, they're used like IM messages. So 250 SMS per day should be compared to e.g. 250 Telegram messages per day, not to 250 tweets per day.
Anecdotally, the best developers seem to always be pushing small changes, or always have a few commits in the daily cut. Interpreting this is a bit of a chicken and egg problem - is throughput higher because the changes are smaller, or does high implementation volume just imply more changes? Or maybe it's just a free form of advertisement: "I always see that X is pushing, so they must be good"

This is a really interesting question.

I agree that better developers have a natural inclination to break down large changes into small, self-supporting chunks.

But I do worry that this approach can be doomed to stick at a local maximum.
Yea, i wondered the same thing. I like the idea of a worker owned Co-op in general, but it's subject to them actually being functional. I don't see how that could be the case with industries with large productivity/talent gaps, like software. Most of the co-ops I've come into contact with are smallish restaurants or grocery stores, which makes sense: most tasks can be handled by anyone and those that aren't can be judged a lot more effectively.
Does anyone know what kinda of watch he's wearing in that picture?
The spider on the dollar bill gives me legal advice in my dreams, and it says I don’t have to pay taxes. Plus, it says the best way to deal with cops is to scream, “false arrest” at the top of my lungs.

All praise the great money spider.
The classic book ‘Peopleware: Productive Projects and Teams’ covers office layout from productivity perspective:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0321934113/ref=dp_ob_neva_mob...
Don’t get too hung up on the Trump part, it’s not the important part.

The important argument is that our incredible success in extending human age over the last century is not due to individual lifestyle changes, but societal changes.

If we want to live longer, we need to stop poisoning our environment.
Creative careers elude people of color
Sure, if you consider staring down at your phone in public a social activity.
Picat is a pragmatic mix of several programming paradigms, and it supports both directional and non-directional computing.

Pattern-matching is directional. Consider the following predicate definitions:

p([a,b|_]) => true.

q([X,X]) => true.

A call p(L) succeeds only when L has at least two elements and the first two elements are a and b, respectively. A call q(L) succeeds only when L has exactly two identical elements.

Functions are directional. In Prolog, the length(L,N) predicate can be used to compute the length of L and can also be used to create a list of a given length N. In Picat, you need to use function new_list(N) to create a list, and use function len(L) to compute the length of L.

Loops are directional. Unlike in ECLiPSe-CLP where it is possible to iterate over a list that is to be created, in Picat the collection of every iterator must be fixed.

Unification is non-directional. A call X = Y is like an equality constraint over terms. Built-ins predicates, such as member(X,L) and append(L1,L2,L3), are defined by using unification, and can be used in the same way as in Prolog.

Constraints are non-directional. While a unification X = Y has a unique solution when it succeeds, a system of constraints may have multiple solutions. Picat provides a built-in, called solve, that calls the imported solver to search for a satisfactory or an optimal solution.
GPUs are at least an order of magnitude faster at training neural nets than CPUs. This is why companies like Google very large amounts of multi-thousand dollar GPUs like the Tesla V100. If cpu WASM is ever faster than WebGL, it's just that the webGL implementation is suboptimal (or that WebGL has too much overhead for real GPU compute)
This part about sleeping sounds a lot like me. What was the issue, if I may ask?
IMO you need to be careful about going too far the other way though - if you start going with the non-conventional choice too often, or where there isn't justification for doing so, it can start to feel forced/different just for the sake of being different.
Very interesting.

The first successful non-hierarchial company that comes to my mind is Valve.

I recall reading that Valve has a higher revenue per employee than any company in the world...

Edit: profit, not revenue
Once you mastered the Kinesis Advantage you don't want to go back. Your hands move way less on the Kinesis than on a normal keyboard. Maybe this is also the reason why I always found the use of ESC in vim an odd choice, i.e. you have to move your hand to reach the ESC key. Moreover, the Kinesis has the arrow keys below the "c" "v" "m" "," keys so you can navigate without moving your hands, this is similar to vim but without the annoying mode switches.
History of HTTPS Usage
In a world where that was the expectation for everyone, sure. Professional jobs are a hell of a lot more interesting/rewarding than being a cashier. I don’t think you’d have programmers quitting to do service work if they weren’t making more money.
Typically buildings with escalators will also have elevators too though, explicitly to allow for people who won't/can't use the escalator.
You can't go so over the top that it doesn't fit your story. Like a space shuttle chase scene in a low key romance is not going to play unless you've done a LOT of work to pay it off. Everything needs internal consistency, but you still need to add layers to keep it from being dull. So long as the core trope is there (chase scene with the reversals etc) your audience will be able to follow what is going on and be in for the ride. The hard part is not being stupid about it.
It's probably easier to raise capital an owner run business -- think of it like a crowdfunding.
> we can see the heirs who drain off so much profit each year from the labor of those who work

If successful people couldn’t pass ownership onto their heirs, the value of ownership itself would drop dramatically. If Bud and Sam Walton knew they couldn’t pass on their business to their kids, they would either have never done it in the first place or they would structure the business to close out well before they died. Neither of these is good.

Most complaints about rational capital allocation, including this one, are based on a failure to generalize or punch through enough layers of indirection.
EOS might be of interest or lisk.
A Dramatic Non-Reading of William McGonagall’s Bad Poetry
Is Your Cocktail Making You Sick?
"UFOs" are most certainly experimental US craft and airframes, and the UFO myth is fueled by Air Force psychological warfare, disinformation, and the public's vulnerability to it.

A good read is Mark Pilkington's Mirage Men, there's also a documentary to accompany the book[1][2].

As far as this article, however, it seems to be advertising for Tom Delonge's "To The Stars" media company[3].

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Mirage-Men-Adventure-Espionage-Psycho...

[2] https://www.amazon.com/Mirage-Men-Robert-J-Durant/dp/B00IXPQ...

[3] http://newsbreaks.infotoday.com/NewsBreaks/Crowdfunding-New-...
Interesting that Thom is supposed to be quite embarrassed by Fitter Happier these days and reportedly it's one of the only statements he wishes he could take back.