skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I actually didn't move a single goal post. I never stated that I believe that the USPS is "losing money" in the strictest sense on each of the transactions. You're projecting Trumps tweets onto me personally.

I don't care if Trump famously doesnt pay his bills because that has nothing to do with how I view Amazon. If you ask me directly I'd say it's tasteless how Trump treats his contractors and fucks them around when he can definitely afford to pay them.

And maybe he is lying about the ends he's after, that's the risk with allying with people who do have different motivations than you. However that's a risk you have to take in a society that's trying to organize many different people with many different opinions. It's almost like we need to debate and come as close to a solution as possible that meets each person's expectations/motivations without crossing the lines in the sand we each draw for acceptable behavior.

So let's discuss all the issues so you can maybe have a real discussion with me and not just argue with me because you think I'm some Trump shill.

Trump
1.) He treats women like garbage
2.) He plays games with subcontractors and employees to fuck them out of as much money as possible or not pay them at all.
3.) He plays all the tax loopholes to pay the minimum possible tax that he can.
etc etc.

Amazon
1.) Utilizes the USPS's precarious financial situation and their massive buying power to get lower rates that screw over the USPS in the long term.
2.) They don't care about the fact that when they have drones doing deliveries and drop USPS that all of the USPS workers who need their pensions paid will be SOL.

Free Press
1.) I don't think that the press is too free when it's basically all sock puppeting for rich people whether that be Fox News or Washington Post. At the same time I would definitely oppose any kind of legislation that curtails the ability of the free press to be.. free. I don't have to support gutting the Washington Post to talk about putting some regulations on Amazon.
This (video) is another instance where the lanes split apart but the part in the middle has absolutely no markings to indicate that you shouldn't drive there.

This (photograph) is what it should look like: http://s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/02/24/67/2246762_3a6ea81...

Is this (bad line painting) common in the US?

Edit: on a second viewing, I think it actually does have some chevrons, but they're very faint.
> Tesla's PR department is obviously full of shit.

Elon Musk; Is full of shit.

Little by little more and more people ll come to understand that.
Fun fact - given the current implementation of Autopilot, it is insane to expect an autonomous vehicle. There should be some kind of common sense/intelligence test for would-be users of Autopilot. So far, every incident involving Autopilot that I have heard about or looked at can be summarised with "Driver was being a dumbass"
This is similar to the question "When did you stop beating your wife?"

You baselessly claim the action is true, and frame the question as if any answer must first acknowledge your baseless claim as true.

I see this as more of a contextual rebuttal to Tesla's ubiquitous PR campaigns that follow every prominent accident. Tesla loves to trot out all of the reasons we should blame the driver in nearly every case. That isn't problematic in isolation. But the fact that it is interspersed with a marketing pitch taints it as an infomercial. Right after we learn that the driver wasn't paying attention, and that all of the warning systems were ignored, we're reminded that Teslas are safer in the aggregate, and that N Teslas have driven this stretch of road M times, without any other accidents.

There is also zero accountability for these PR statements. There are no methodologies explained to any degree that can be verified by an outside party. The data is private.

The IIHS has given their data, the source of that data, and the methodology that was applied.

What was it that you expected from the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety?
It does matter when the article title claims that it's a reproduction of the accident. If it's not the same location, it's not really a reproduction, even if the cause/effect is the same.
Also changing the postal rate is the issue. Let me see if I can dig up some articles for you that detail why that process is difficult.
3 x 365 = 1095 extra miles a year. A typical person drives 10,000-15,000 miles per year (USA).
My opinion is that the most valid separation of concerns in MVC puts the application state in the model -- it's the thing that is valid or not valid.

I get that there are places where you need more specific validation and that can easily go in the controller.

What I can't imagine, and maybe you can help with this, is when you'd need to reuse validation across controllers that doesn't make sense the model?

I absolutely could not understand why Laravel divides things the way it does and I just did not like it. Request classes are a concept that don't even need to exist, and don't, in other frameworks.
Interesting that they're announcing 1.1.1.1 in Australia, while their CDN traffic still goes via Hong Kong
Spring is a very powerful but complex framework. It's very easy to get started (Spring Boot). I especially love JPA as I just need the persistence to be getting done. The architecture is clean and standardized.

However, you have to be prepared for a serious learning curve when needing customizing (e.g. attribute based authorization with Spring Security and AOP). It's a jump in the cold water after the pain- and effortless start using Spring Boot.

I haven't mastered Spring yet (in depth understanding of DI, AOP and the configuration), but I feel that when mastered, Spring is the ultimate framework to build concise and clean applications.
No. I completly agree with, it's far easier than debugging what configuration has been applied due to specfic annotations used.
Learning a new interface isn't especially novel for consumers, most of the interfaces you take for granted were adopted in the last 30-40 years. The necessary tipping point is that the reward for the effort of learning a new interface must, in the preference interests of the consumer, exceed the cost of the learning effort. If it does not then you should revert to the principle of least surprise.
There is a solid white line. It's forbidden to cross a solid while line on the freeway.

What does a solid white line mean to you (in your country)?

The linked video is a different story, but the image you linked makes it quite clear not to drive there.
This is wrong in every possible way. There isn't enough mass of hot material in any plausible fusion reactor to even breach the vacuum chamber.

Or for better context: research facilities today regularly lose plasma containment. It's why we don't have practical fusion reactors, but they're already at the plasma densities we would run at (which is an order of magnitude or so better then the Sun achieves).
Added a FAQ section: https://github.com/slmgc/Nothing#faq
The complexity of modern sites is insane. It's also insane to relay on other peoples services ('cloud' and 'server-less') for simple websites, like publishing articles or blog-posts. Those services could be gone tomorrow!

A lot of users may also chose to disable JavaScript in the future, as more and more malicious actors use JavaScript to exploit people (the latest trend is to hack sites and js- libraries to make other people mine crypto-currency).

I believe the answer to many of todays challenges is to move on to static sites, and to make most sites work without JavaScript. You only need JavaScript if you make a site that is basically an application. A blog or a newspaper is not an application.

For a blogger, another feature with static sites is that they don't require a specific back-end (like wordpres or drupal). As a static site, their thoughts and ideas can live on for millenniums, long after the last wordpress or drupal instances has shut down.

Disclosure: I'm not un-biased here. I'm actually so biased that I wrote my own static site generator last year to make it simple to publish blogs that works great on both mobile devices and PC's.
Right. Aviation and the NTSB understand each other. Commercial aviation accidents seldom have a single cause, because decades of hard work have eliminated all the single causes of failure. It usually takes a whole chain of failures to bring down an airliner, and it takes long, complicated investigations to figure out exactly what happened.

Crash investigations tend to have conclusions like "A happened, and that would have been survivable except that B also happened, and the pilots were distracted dealing with A while B was the more serious problem." There's a whole field of "cockpit resource management" which deals with such issues.

The NTSB's job is not to assign blame. It's to understand exactly what happened and figure out how to keep it from happening again.

This crash is somewhat similar to the four other Tesla crashes where a stationary obstacle was partially obstructing the left edge of a lane. We know that Teslas will plow into such obstructions. Here's the area of 101 leading up to the crash.[1] Note the width of the space between the lines marking the gore area, the pointy section as the exit lane tapers off. It becomes a full lane wide, and widens very slowly. It's possible that the lane following system locked into the gore area as a lane, and followed it right into the barrier.

CALTRANS standards call for a sign in the gore area.[2] But drivers keep hitting them. Replacing them is dangerous work, because there's live traffic and not enough room for a block vehicle. Especially here, because this is a left exit designed for high speed. So one of the options is to put the sign overhead, well ahead of the split. That's what CALTRANS did here. Tesla's system, of course, does not understand such a sign.

Federal standards recommend striping in the gore area.[3] But CALTRANS does not usually do that. Probably because standard truck-mounted lane striping sprayers can't do it without shutting down the freeway.

I look forward to seeing NTSB's take on all this.

[1] https://www.google.com/maps/@37.4107387,-122.0752862,3a,75y,...
[2] http://www.dot.ca.gov/trafficops/tcd/exit-gore.html
[3] http://www.fdot.gov/roadway/ds/06/idx/17345.pdf
Data is the New Love (2017)
You are not clearly communicating what you mean in your original post. Do you think the TC's are robbing? The GC's? I am not sure anyone is talking about resettling Varosha, so I don't really understand your point. In any case, the is no _money_ to resettle Varosha should the Cypriots every get it back.
What you're describing is Level 4: full self driving in limited conditions.
The Waymo fleet is a great example of that.
A way to sell in an imperfect market is with branding. You, as the seller (or manufacturer), won't risk your hard earned reputation by selling a couple of lemons. Something like in the kitchen appliances market. You can't try a dishwasher nor a washing machine at the shop, but you know that you cannot go wrong with Bosch (no affiliation, I'm just satisfied with them).

The interesting part in my opinion is that in the mattress market this branding system seems not to work.
> There are employees there who probably buy the idea that it's motivated by speed, but the project wasn't created primarily for speed, just like Chrome wasn't primarily motivated by the need to make a better browser

You have evidence of these two claims or you're speculating?
That kind of lane marking (or lack thereof) seems very unsafe. I realize that often this is due to construction / etc but the immediately-to-the-left lane's marker was Very Clear, and didn't have a visible split in it. I had to watch it a second time to make sure that I didn't miss the indications that the lane was splitting away (other than the highway signs). This kind of thing (lack of clear markings) can be really dangerous when driving at night in the raid (road is more reflective than normal), or in an unfamiliar area.

The autopilot could be better, but the road engineers should have made sure the lines were painted correctly.
If by "unusable" you mean that they actually work, and do not actively try to kill you, then yes, that's what they have.

Tesla's system is exactly the same thing, except that it is marketed as some fancy "autopilot" with "self-driving hardware" or whatever BS Musk is pushing to fanboys blinded by the whole "look, ma, no emissions" thing.

But of course Tesla can't call it that, and not something fancy like "autopilot" because otherwise what could they market? A glorified golf cart (granted, a pretty fast golf cart) that combines a luxury car price with a Yugo quality? That's not a winning combo.
The China Hustle
We used spring boot heavily at my last job. It was very fast to stand up services and it led us to move away from a massive monolithic weblogic stack.. changes were pushed out so much faster...
someone who deletes their tweets every 14 days also uses a blocklist, figures.
On April Fools’ Day, Elon Musk Tweets Tesla Is Bankrupt
Is it because the article/headline are bad or because you don't like the idea?
But if you look at the history of the term, the Lisp or APL families of languages have just as much of a right to claim "functional programming" as their own as the ML family. I say this as someone who really likes OCaml and has never gotten along very well with Lisp.

Also I don't see how Go can be considered actively "anti-FP" when it supports passing closures as arguments, which many, many languages do not. I don't understand why (some) FP and Go partisans feel such a need to see one another as enemies.
HackerRank is hiring a leader to build a system for creating CS challenges
Our mission at HackerRank is to match every developer to the right job, with the underlying driver being skill vs resumes. We are doing millions of developer assessments every quarter with customers across different industries from internet, banking, retail, automobile, etc. using us for their entire technical recruiting process. What this means is, we are building an interesting data asset on the DNA for a {job role, company} and the DNA for a developer that helps us recommend the right jobs. We are consistently evolving every year to make the matching algorithm better.

One of the important parts of the matching algorithm is designing the right CS challenge that is both high quality & relevant to the job role that's being assessed. The CS challenges (referred as content going forward) is a core part of HackerRank. It helps us assess skills of a developer in different areas. We are looking to hire a leader who will manage & lead all content engineering efforts on HackerRank. What does this include?

Content strategy: This involves building the overall strategy of what types of CS challenges should be built? taxonomy, type of challenges, the timeline to ship & owning the entire process end-to-end. Some of the strategies might change due to external market demands.

Building a system of crowdsourced generation of challenges: Moving from the Encarta model (generating a small number of challenges from a small set of experts) to Wikipedia model (generating a large number of challenges from the 3m+ developer community). Building this will come with its own challenges of ensuring we can retain quality and the right incentives at scale. This would involve building the right framework to manage the hundreds/thousands of challenge contributors and also managing a small team of curators

*Quality control: There’s a difference between Quora answers vs Y! answers. Ensuring we have the right quality framework (for e.g. grammatically correct, crisp problem statements, relevant to the job role, code stubs present to make it easy for developers to get started, etc.) and continuously improving for all challenges is important. HackerRank challenges should be synonymous with HQ CS challenges.

We are looking for a leader who's passionate about solving the problem of matching developers to the right job and has a developer mindset ready to build this.

While we would want this person to be ideally in Palo Alto or Bangalore, for the right person, a remote position is OK too. This is a hybrid EM/PM role. If you're interested, please send a note to me on your skills & how you would help us build this system: vivek@
4 (Four) Ways to Reduce Stress in Business
No, they are not OLED, just LCD and LED.

Specific models I don't know by heart.
Interfaces are not necessarily supposed to make things easier, they're supposed to allow the user to achieve things that they otherwise could not do (there is no easing of "can't do it") or that they otherwise had to exert decidedly more effort in attaining results than the effort of learning the interface (there is an easing, but it's tied to the cost of change/learning). If you can't meet the bar of those criteria you should always revert to the principle of least surprise.
Just to expand a little on the "you can take any loop and transform it into a tail recursion" (because I think it's cool), here's an example:

Python iterative solution

1. def fib(n):
2. i, curr, next = 0, 0, 1
3. while i < n:
4. i += 1
5. curr, next = next, curr + next
6. return curr

Python tail-recursive solution*

1. def fib(n):
2. def fib_tail(i, curr, next): #1
3. if i >= n: #2
4. return curr #3
5. return fib_tail(i+1, next, curr+next) #4
6. return fib_tail(0, 0, 1)

Some explanation of the 1-1 conversion process:

#1. We need a helper function, `fib_tail` to keep track of the variables we update in the while loop. (lines 4-5 in iterative)

#2-3. Return `curr` when the opposite of the while condition is met. (lines 3,6 in iterative)

#4. Recursively call `fib_tail`, using same update logic as while loop body when passing arguments. (line 5 in iterative)

#5. Call helper function with initial values for the additional variables (line 1 in iterative)

* We're going to pretend that Python supports tail recursion. It doesn't, but I figure more people are familiar with python; think of it more as pseudocode for instruction. You could easily implement the above in something like Scheme
Website Chatbots: The New Alternative to Facebook Messenger Bots
Fuck their paying customers
It isn't.

Quoted from the C++ standard: "the asm declaration is conditionally-supported; its meaning is implementation-defined". ISO C does not differ much in conformance (the asm keyword is common extension listed in annex J). There exists implementation without inline assembly support, e.g. MSVC x64. There are alternative keywords used in practice (e.g. `__asm` or `__asm__ __volatile__`). Actually the contents are not supposed to be assembly language in all cases when it is supported, as I know there exists implementation with JavaScript as the "assembly" (Cheerp). Even the implementation supports "genuine" assembly, it varies in syntax, e.g. for x86, Intel (MSVC), AT&T (Clang), or both (GCC) ?

So no, you can't expect it too much, if you have to.
What's the right way to set this up for cellular traffic on iOS? (The instructions are for wi-fi only)

Is there anything better than https://www.dnsoverride.com/ (found via google)?
One thing I always wonder about is the Tesla HUD -- my gut feeling is that if instead of rendering three generic lanes, it tried to render the lanes/obstacles it saw, the driver might be more attentive while in Autopilot mode.

1. The interface changes, and changing things are more interesting to look at.

2. Seeing something like two lanes when you're on a five-lane high way should make a driver do a double-take and perhaps pay more attention or disengage autopilot.

3. Ditto for obstacles.
A few years ago I made a Python script that does the same thing, minus the reverse mode of converting the assignments back into JSON: https://github.com/xenomachina/jsflat

I've found flattening JSON in this way not only useful for line based tools like grep, but also for understanding unfamiliar JSON. Sometimes it's nice to be able to see the whole path down to the value you're looking at.
I really dislike the marketing around "autopilot." The common defense of Tesla's autopilot is that there are disclaimers, and the driver should always be at 100% attention.

Well, look at this, copied from Tesla's website:

> Full Self-Driving Hardware on All Cars

> All Tesla vehicles produced in our factory, including Model 3, have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver. [1]

An average person is going to read this and think, "This care drives itself, and it's safer than me!" The rest of the page describes space-age features like switching lanes to get to an exit faster and self parking:

> All you will need to do is get in and tell your car where to go ... Your Tesla will figure out the optimal route, navigate urban streets (even without lane markings), manage complex intersections with traffic lights, stop signs and roundabouts, and handle densely packed freeways with cars moving at high speed ... and park itself.

They're selling a car that full on drives itself. This is not being sold as adaptive cruise control.

FWIW, they included a weasel phrase by saying "hardware" is there, as opposed to software, but come on! An average person is not going to understand that distinction. I think they need to dramatically scale back the hype around this feature until it actually delivers what it promises.

Edit: I'm also confused by why they need to hype up autopilot so much. They are already selling more cars than they can make, and a sexy electric car appeals to lots of people. I think it would be enough to stick with that.

[1] https://www.tesla.com/autopilot
I read it in the same sense as reproduce a bug.
Hangzhou:

$ ping 1.1.1.1
PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1): 56 data bytes
Request timeout for icmp_seq 0
Request timeout for icmp_seq 1
Request timeout for icmp_seq 2
Request timeout for icmp_seq 3
Request timeout for icmp_seq 4
Request timeout for icmp_seq 5
Request timeout for icmp_seq 6
Request timeout for icmp_seq 7
Request timeout for icmp_seq 8
Request timeout for icmp_seq 9
Request timeout for icmp_seq 10

$ ping 1.0.0.1
PING 1.0.0.1 (1.0.0.1): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=50 time=167.359 ms
64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=50 time=165.791 ms
64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=50 time=165.846 ms
64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=50 time=166.755 ms
64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=50 time=166.694 ms
64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=50 time=166.088 ms
64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=50 time=166.460 ms
64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=50 time=166.668 ms
64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=50 time=166.753 ms
64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=50 time=165.670 ms
64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=50 time=166.816 ms

Seem not China friendly :-(
and this sounds awesome, I'll definitely test Gron. I love jq, but oh boy how complex it is. I find its syntax getting very confusing very quickly as soons as you try to be a little fancy.
Wow, I had to watch the road a second time to see markings of the split. In the beginning of the movie, I was expecting that there would be two lanes on the left and two lanes on the right.
Yes they are very faint.

I think in rainy conditions humans might also be fooled by it.
I don't think the word reproduction is always used as strictly as your definition. In computer software/hardware the word is used even if the geographical location and hardware is different. I don't see using it to reproduce car issues would be any different.
AI Generated Web Dev Questions
It looks like an overfitting stick-to-left-lane problem.
When most of your users have a problem it’s not PEBKAC, it’s bad UX.

Just because a door says push, doesn’t mean it looks pushable. If it doesn’t look pushable, users will pull.

If all the PR and the CEO keep saying “autopilot”, users will use it as auto pilot. If it isn’t autopilot, it should have a different name.