skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The Tartars are over the hills. Democracy is in decline. Authoritarianism is on the mega-rise. The state of democracy is bad and looking worse, and if the Brexit/Trump trend of destroying the EU and breaking up the Atlantic Alliance bear just a bit more fruit, you may find that these "Tartars" are a lot closer to you than you once believed.

You call me blind to the future by looking at the past, but quite frankly, you appear to be repeating the mistakes of the past by not learning from them.

Democracy was not "won". Liberty for all does not exist.

These are fights that every generation must wage.

Or we will (and are currently) losing.
What if I am an Austrian citizen and resident traveling to the SF Bay Area? Does it still apply? (Not clear on how jurisdiction works in these sorts of cases)
Semiconductor Device Fundamentals by Robert F. Pierret was my go-to for undergraduate text. The diagrams speak a thousand words and Pierret is a funny dude. Builds everything up from basic quantum.

Don't mistake it with his graduate text, Advanced Semiconductor Fundamentals, though. That's also a great text, but very short and focuses almost exclusively on the quantum aspect without getting too much into the higher level meat of putting it together to form devices.

For a comprehensive guide, though, Physics of Semiconductor Devices by Simon M. Sze was my reference bible. It's big and bulky, very heavy on the first principles math and physics, and has everything from quantum to devices and variants on devices.
Cool. Now explain how online transactions will work in your cash-only society.
Hard work of the parents doesn't really factor into it. It's the social standing of the parents. A single mom who works 2 jobs works harder than most of us on this board. Yet, our kids are going to have it much, much, much easier than hers would.

"Why is it not acceptable for someone that had better parents to do better?"

If your whole schtick is about "meritocracy", then having people start out better by default defeats that entire thing.
Brain-stimulation trials get personal to lift depression
Indeed, they know few to none of these petitioners will quit. 3,000 petition signatures will do nothing. 3,000 resignations would, but Googlers aren't going to pass up on the high paychecks, three five-star meals a day, and massages in the office based on moral grounds.

(In the same vein, Google's NetPAC has been quietly donating the max to Republicans like Paul Ryan and Steve Scalise, while most of their engineers openly oppose them.)
Without corporate personhood, how do I sue a company for a harm it did to me? I can't prove the CEO, the human being who does administrative jobs, did the harm, and I certainly can't prove any other employee did, either, so who do I sue? Do I try to sue everyone from the board on down to the janitor? That kinda screws the janitor, to be named in a suit for something the low-level employees had no control over.

So how does it work?
I completely disagree. YouTube is a victim too. Using an incident like this to criticize a policy you don’t like is completely beyond the pale. The fact that they apparently drove a crazy person to attempted homicide has no bearing whatsoever on whether those policies are good or bad.
Clumsy phrasing on my part. I meant that collectively, the participants in this thread are irreconcilably opposed. You and I seem to be roughly aligned.

I'm horrified by jakeogh and the unfettering of corporate monsters to gobble up little people; I expect he would be similarly horrified by me for contemplating having the state rein them in.

I'd like to think there's a middle ground where we all deplore and distrust the concentration of power in either public OR private hands, but past experience in debates like this leads me to believe that's unlikely.
I will add that I watched Lemonis' spin-off show "The Partner" and it was hot-garbage. One of the worst reality shows I've ever watched in terms of structure and concept.
Handle Ajax Requests in ASP.NET Core Razor Pages
I would. It would make for excellent interview fodder.
Steve Blank talks a lot about this history of Silicon Valley and how most of the original technology scene was started by DoD projects.

https://steveblank.com/secret-history/
SPARKZumo: Ada and SPARK on Any Platform (Part 2)
Not everyone who needs to store a password is in a position to judge if cache timing attacks will never be in their threat model. Sane recommendations for people who would like to just not mess up their password database matter.

I'm assuming you're familiar with the Argon2 RFC sections on Argon2id? I think it goes into quite a bit of detail between the two.
Do Google employees actually believe this?
They didn't step up to Stalin and Mao. Hitler was because of alliance with Britain and the Japanese attack, not because of how awful the Nazis regime was. The US for the most part didn't want to get dragged back into another European conflict. Hitler was bad, yes. But what happened in Germany was rooted in the outcome of WW1, which was rooted in all the alliances and what not proceeding it, which was rooting in yet prior conflicts. A lot of which had to do with the colonial powers fighting over how to divide up the world, or because of religious differences.

A pacifist might say Hitler, Stalin and Mao are just symptoms of the deeper problem, which is the willingness of human beings to engage in violent conflicts just because somebody tells them to.
I worry that culture doesnt help at the top of leadership.

Once you get to the top of an organization, only a few people need to listen to you. As long as you keep their paychecks and power, they will listen to you.

Dictators dont care if war is unpopular as long as its beneficial.

I think nukes may be obsolete because war is no longer beneficial, but leadership of a company may be 100% set on finding AI by any means necessary.
Phased arrays of antennas can compute the incoming direction of a signal entirely through signal processing and do not require a motorized platform.
Military funding is used as a slight of hand. The legislature scares the public, the public hands over money, and then the military is used to invest the money in long term goals to build a future technological society that the private sector is wholly unwilling to do because of short term profit focus.

This also has the benefit of getting war averse liberals to say nice things about the large standing army and bloody foreign interventions of the US empire, most of which have failed to produce anything other than blowback and civil war across the globe.

https://archive.org/details/NoamChomsky-ScienceMilitaryFundi...
A large fraction of the world's best engineers don't want to be associated with military projects. So companies have a choice to hire them and not do military projects, or not hire them and do them.

When I was running a robot company, I made the decision to not do military projects (mostly for personal reasons) and it helped me hire some great people that I couldn't have otherwise.
April 4, 2018 – Seriously, Science?: Seriously, Science?
Social networking software is not in any way equivalent to medicine so thank you for making this false equivalence because it proves the point that these regulations are ridiculous.

If you don't want facebook to track you don't make an account on their website and don't click any of the stupid buttons on their website.
No, this is a common misconception. Google still has "Don't be evil", but Alphabet also now has "Do the right thing". Both are hilarious in the context of what Google actually does.
You should understand that building basically anything will further the goal of some military over another.

Technology is neutral - who it's used by and how is not.

I don't care what you build, if it has the goal of improving a workflow or automating a process then it will de-facto support one organization over another.
FWIW, I checked Twitter (hashtags #YouTubeShooter) this morning, and it was ugly, but I only saw one tweet that made inferences to Islam. Most of the right wing comments were to the effect of "Gun laws didn't stop this" or pointing out that her beliefs (veganism, animal rights) are traditionally associated with left wing beliefs. The left wing comments were to the effect of "NRA is a terrorist organization" and "ban AR15s" and general wishes of harm on 2A supporters.

I took special note of this because there is this meme of conservatives applying the "terrorist" label on the basis of race or ethnicity, and this meme has scarcely matched my experiences.

EDIT: Some people are downvoting, presumably because they think I'm making a political statement. I'm not; just sharing my data points.
I played http://lensmoor.org/ a lot in high school because a friend did and because the filters didn't catch it. It was a fun time.

I made it to level 30 of 99 (well, 198, as you could "remort" and start over as a more advanced species. I loved it, but had an epiphany that I would either have to accept that I'd never be a top-tier character, or I'd have to significantly increase my investment in the game, which I wasn't willing to do.

But I loved the immersion and creativity that came with the game, and the roleplaying was a blast.
I have refused to work for defense companies, I try to encourage my friends and sibling to avoid these companies.

Boy they pay great though...
But we allow people of colour to dine. As long as they keep to themselves in the separate room and pay a big premium.
It's like a nuclear race, you are funding it not because you want to nuke someone but because you don't want to be nuked.

So the incentive here is to continue to make it viable in order to have an argument against someone trying to blackmail you because you are so locked-in into their ecosystem.

On the other side, the more viable you make it, the better future you are building, as you then have access to a platform where you can actually control from end to end, and so implement whatever your future requirements require you to.

They are not in a hurry to change the status quo, they are playing it for the long term.
Why Google Design Sprint may not suit your needs
There was the "I don't like Mondays" shooter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland_Elementary_School_sh...
It's the only sane thing to do.

A write(2) to STDERR_FILENO for verbosity/debugging is fine, but mostly you don't want to do this because it will interleave with any non-line-buffered stdio writes to it... An _exit(2) is also OK if you really want to do that, but generally you want to do some cleanup, so might as well do the self-pipe thing every time.

The only tricky thing is when you use SA_SIGINFO and you want to pass the siginfo_t data to the event loop. You can write(2) that to the self-pipe, but you have to be careful of the possibility that it will fill up. You can always create a new pipe(2), write(2) the siginfo_t to it, close(2) the write end, and send the read side fd via a socketpair(2) that the event loop listens to.
I don't agree that corporations are people. If you believe that a corporation is a person, then I see your argument, despite not agreeing with it.
Two lifetimes ago, I was running a game dev company [0]. As part of that, I did some research about client-side prediction for twitch games. Ended up not making such a game, but I wrote a few articles with the results of my research [1]. Over time, and to my surprise, they became one of the three often cited articles about the topic, the other two being the Valve wiki and Gaffer on Games.

One lifetime ago, I was working at Google Zürich. I was at my fourth year there and I was not really looking for a new opportunity. But a recruiter from Improbable [2] found me thanks to these articles, because client-side prediction knowledge is very relevant to a company making a massively multiplayer, massive-scale simulation platform. He somehow convinced me to leave the comfort of Google Zürich for the crazy adventure of Improbable in London, at a time that we were ~30 people, had no investors, and no product, only some really cool tech.

I made the jump and never looked back. And my bet has paid off [3] immensely [4] :) All thanks to these four blog posts.

[0] http://www.mysterystudio.com

[1] http://www.gabrielgambetta.com/client-server-game-architectu...

[2] https://improbable.io

[3] https://www.uktech.news/need-to-know-2/everything-you-need-t...

[4] https://www.mcvuk.com/business/netease-signs-partnership-wit...
This is first time I'm hearing it but NDP seems really cool. I like the idea of augmenting the memory and peripheral devices with intelligence.
A good push on Wayland will cull the herd of WM/DE's quite a bit. At least, it will funnel them into a small set of common toolkits for building DE's.
You should never be using `.constructor` anyway because it isn't reliable because a very common pattern replaces the `.prototype` with a new object who's `.constructor` is `Object`

var Foo = function () {};
Foo.prototype = {
bar() { return 'bar'; }
};
var f = new Foo();
f.constructor === Object;

When you use `class` you are still messing with `.prototype`. The danger is that programmers new to JS don't understand that they are and don't understand why that matters.

Calling `super` is very anti-pattern in JS. Unlike classic OOP, parents are not static. Lots of very common things can rip that rug out from under you by modifying the parent in many different ways (createProperty, Symbols, proxies/reflection, etc).

Static methods do indeed exist without classes.

class Foo {
static bar() { return 'bar'; }
}

//is identical to

function Foo() {}
Foo.bar = function() { return 'bar'; }

If you use `Object.create()` and ES6 object literal syntax you don't have to type `function` either. You get the added bonus of being easily able to wrap it in a normal function that avoids constructor weirdness

var someProto = {
bar() { return 'bar'; }
}
var myInst = Object.create(someProto);
I think we would be fine with a smaller military. Nobody is talking about completely stopping military expenditures. The question is whether it really needs to be as big as it is right now.
Doesn't by the same logic working on them, and thus implicitly supporting the political or societal status quo, make you an activist as well?
It's not, but the software and hardware stack means a single human in a bedroom can create this instead of a small room of illustrators and keyframe artists in America and a large room of inbetweeners in Korea.

If neural network voice generation tech gets democratised in the next few years too then you could even be pushing out video content too as an entirely different personality than your actual self.
You’ve never had a conversation with a poor person, have you?
So Java, which was supposed to be "write once, run anywhere", didn't meet that goal enough, so Docker wraps it in something that "actually for real" is supposed to be "write once, run anywhere", but even then doesn't quite meet that goal?
This if kinda of funny, because I was the used to be the jerk full-stack developer. My reasons where the following:

1. Job was to easy for me.

2. The non technical people where not very bright. (seriously they where just winging it.)

3. I didn't care.

4. Wasn't challenged.

5. Non technical people treated me as a code monkey, when I first got there.

6. I had the power. Even if the fired me, it would take them weeks to get back up and running.

7. As of right now, Developers have the power.

Oddly, enough I am not a jerk, but I didn't like being taken advantage of in this particular situation.
Ask HN: Thoughts on Cryptocurrency Indices?
Cryptocurrency indices typically take the top 20-30 cryptocurrencies by market cap and apply one of these 3 different methods.

1. Weighted proportionally by market capitalization
2. Weighted proportionally by market capitalization but capped at a certain %
3. Weighted by square root of market capitalization

Proportionally weighting makes the index vulnerable to a s single large constituent.

Capped and other weighting methodologies theoretically should diversify risk and reduce volatility. But if there is strong positive covariance between coins, then volatility is not necessarily being reduced in the index as a whole.

What do you guys think? I gave it my best shot and blogged about it here:

https://medium.com/hodlblog/hodlbot-cryptocurrency-investing-on-autopilot-dce2e4c9a7f7
sorry for being ranty on HN, I'm abusing my anonymity to vent.

please support a bootstrap method. I can't use any project in a programming languages that require downloading a specific binary to use in certain setups.

It's not a hyperbole to bash rust, we're crazy people who make sure our projects can be bootstrapped like so. I was very interested in mrustc. but it's going to die very quickly when every version bump is an extra rust (it took me 9 hours to build rust at some point).

Having to give up projects because they threaten to use rust is painful. It's a good language and someone went out of their way to fix the bootstrap problem. please give him a hand.
Why would a website flow through a user's clipboard?
We should probably link to the main paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41522-018-0050-9
What is Stream Processing?
It's not. Well, as long as the GDPR applies. So, if we assume there are a 5 billion profiles on fb (2 billion actual users, and everyone else that use the Web at least occasionally - I'm not sure if 5 billion total is a bit high) - compliance with GDPR would render some 100s million high value profiles illegal. Applying the GDPR to the remaining profiles would require an entirely new business model for Facebook.
No. It's right here: https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct.html

Common misconception, and pointless to even bring it up. Because while "Don't be evil" is in their code of conduct, they regularly do evil.
cMUD was the successor to zMUD.
Power is more complex than the direct application of violence. Corporate relationships with governments can induce them, and often have induced, violent reactions against people harming a company's interests.
I think if you count the JVM languages as one (Scala, Java, Kotlin, Groovy) it is the largest even for startups. (This article deals with a property of the JVM not really Java the language.)
> The streaming giant have some highly-anticipated new releases coming out in April, including Jaws, Knocked Up and The Blues Brothers .

I guess 40-year-old movies are considered "new releases"
Today's match Barcelona VS Rome 04/04/2018 directly from here
So many requirements for digital cash

- You want control to fight fraud/bad actors

- You don't want to much control for a single party (incl gov)

- It should work without necessary global communications (e.g. post disaster; global consensus like Bitcoin won't help there)

- Users want privacy

- Usual stuff like no double spending

- Transparency would be nice to verify correctness and no abuse by your bank

- Easy to use

We'll have a hard time finding a replacement satisfying them all. I wonder what we'll be willing to give up.
This isn't logic, i literally quoted the dictionary at them :)

(though i admit different dictionaries seem to have fairly different definitions here)
Why do they need to be “people” to be a victim?

Even if you want to insist that YouTube can not possibly be a victim, it’s still horrible to jump on a multiple attempted homicide to criticize policies about videos posted on a web site.
I am OK with weapons development. What I don't like is that these weapons get turned into big business selling them to unstable regions and in the case of the NSA the technology gets used against its own citizens.
That's the thing, though: the vast majority of Bay Area programmers aren't writing code to serve people--they're writing code to make money. Serving people is sometimes a side goal, but for most it will always be a side goal and money will always come first.

There's a running narrative in a lot of Bay Area startups that they're saving the world, but over the years I've become increasingly cynical that saving the world and making money are compatible goals. Every startup I've seen start with noble intentions has compromised their values to make money. Sometimes it's just to stay afloat, and I don't begrudge them that. But even while I don't begrudge people making money just to get by, I can't support the narrative that this somehow is making the world a better place. The ways people become rich involve increasing income inequality, centralizing power, collecting and selling people's privacy, stealing people's attention, lying and manipulation (most marketing), inserting yourself as the middle man in transactions. Some products do provide real benefits, to be sure, but I can't help but think that if it weren't for the desire to get rich, we could get those same benefits without the problems I've listed. And notably, there are very few cases where I believe the tradeoff is a good one--more often the downsides outweigh the upsides.

And to be clear: I don't think there's usually any malicious intent here. When people start off, they really do intend to save the world. But you make compromise after compromise because you "have to" make money, and eventually you're not serving users any more. It can happen to anyone.
How about game balancing?

That's what I did in a game company, I for example plotted (time or matches) vs. experience + # of people who made it that far for all players and identified a choke point where a large part of players had a long interval with a little progress (and so they dropped off).

Designers need help, some of them are fluent with (big) data but most aren't - and you can be their partner :).
Fwiw, it used to be called the far more accurate Department of War.
I'm not arguing that at all - precisely the opposite, in fact. I'm saying that so long as we put privacy in the hands of end users and don't hold service providers responsible (the point I was replying to), we more-or-less cripple our ability to utilize the internet that exists today.
Capital interests wont go away quietly, but I hope you're right.
Netflix FlameScope
Can you clarify your second line, "Once you get to the top of an organization, only a few people need to listen to you. As long as you keep their paychecks and power, they will listen to you." Are you saying that everyone has to do what you say because you pay them? If so, I don't think that point applies to this situation - we're talking Google engineers, they shouldn't be hard pressed to pick up their things and find a job elsewhere that aligns better with their values.
https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-tim...

> But those who quote Holmes might want to actually read the case where the phrase originated before using it as their main defense. If they did, they'd realize it was never binding law, and the underlying case, U.S. v. Schenck, is not only one of the most odious free speech decisions in the Court's history, but was overturned over 40 years ago.

> First, it's important to note U.S. v. Schenck had nothing to do with fires or theaters or false statements. Instead, the Court was deciding whether Charles Schenck, the Secretary of the Socialist Party of America, could be convicted under the Espionage Act for writing and distributing a pamphlet that expressed his opposition to the draft during World War I. As the ACLU's Gabe Rottman explains, "It did not call for violence. It did not even call for civil disobedience."

> The crowded theater remark that everyone remembers was an analogy Holmes made before issuing the court's holding. He was explaining that the First Amendment is not absolute. It is what lawyers call dictum, a justice's ancillary opinion that doesn't directly involve the facts of the case and has no binding authority. The actual ruling, that the pamphlet posed a "clear and present danger" to a nation at war, landed Schenk in prison and continued to haunt the court for years to come.
I'm not a business person but Nathan For You, while being funny and enjoyable, really tought me some ways to think outside the box about marketing. His ghost realtor gimmick is still being used afaik.