skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Here's a novel thought: maybe we're following Google and Apple's design frameworks because those frameworks provide the best ease of use, consistency, predictability, and usability to designers, which is the point of good UX? People who don't appreciate these things don't understand user experience applies to the process of design too?

I get that there's a point to individualism, being trendy, hip, new and having a brand. But to be brutally honest, brands these days are created through spoken narratives with their actions, their storytelling, and their advertising. I think most skilled designers learned that long ago - it's much more efficient to speak through the traditional mediums of color, graphics, stories, and text. You have to do a ton of work to create your own look and feel framework (most of it involving robust layouting, consistency, and thinking through a ton of edge cases - read the material docs from cover to cover to get a sense of how much decision making it is). While doing this, you have to balance both branding AND UX decisions(!). Sticking to using graphics, color, and text separates a lot of the branding vs UX concerns, and is much simpler to reason.

Unless you're a rock band or a creative agency, creating a novel new page styling is simply an inefficient use of time and money.
>I'm seeing a permanent back arrow overlapping the video itself. Don't cover up the screen.

Removed that. Originally I wanted it to make it easy to go search more, but meh, people can use the back button. :)

>At the end of the video, it still shows recommendations. Do you have any control over that? Can you set it to not show recommendations?

Not as far as I know. And from what I've read from YouTube's ToS, it wouldn't be ok with them. (Can't disable functionality)

>It is missing comments. I can see why you would choose that, but I'd rather have comments (something I also miss when I watch YouTube on a Roku) and still not have recommendations because they lead to watching too many videos.

I'll consider adding them on dropdown. :)
There's overlap. The herd instinct reduces risk.
There are Software Engineers but just because you are a Computer Programmer does not mean you are an Engineer. Engineers are defined as "individuals who uses scientific knowledge to solve practical problems." Most so-called engineers are software programmers.

But Language is fluid and changes with time, so at this time "Software Engineer" is the term so it's no good fighting it.
Probably through some combination of:

1. Publish higher-quality content on the verified channel, and lower-quality closely related content on unverified channels. Suggestions on the unverified channels are more likely to include content from the verified channels than content from elsewhere, as that content is more closely related.

2. Get multiple channels verified! If it can be done once, it can be done multiple times.
The why is for concealment. If you discover a power drain you might scan for wifi. But you'd be less likely to look for a signal over power lines.
Text Embedding Models Contain Bias. Here's Why That Matters.
Monopolies I Have Known
Education is not about just reading, but regardless - you know what's better for reading than an iPad? A paper book. And if your concern is weight, you know what combines the best qualities of a paper book and a tablet? An e-book reader with e-Ink display.

(This is sad, really. As I understand, e-Ink tech is patented to death, so there's little progress there.)

Still, I'm not saying iPads are useless in general. The topic is relative merit of iPad vs. other possibilities, in education. My claims are as follows:

- iPad is a bad idea in education, partly because of the low capabilities of the device, and partly because not much apps that would would make full use of the capabilities of the device in order to encourage learning (this is kind of similar to "edutainment" or "educational games" for PC - utter crap that only fools parents)

- given that, iPad looses to plethora of other tools available for teachers, most of which are low-tech

- neither of the two points above will prevent iPad from succeeding on this market, as the hype is strong enough to overcome rational obstacles

--

Incidentally, I feel like back in 2015. I thought iPads already succeeded in getting sold to schools en masse, and it already turned out to be a colossal waste of money. I'm pretty sure we already had those discussions on HN.
The shift to from native to web apps has been a disaster in a number of different fronts.

1) Performance. A Visual Basic 6 app on a 500 MHz system with 256 MB of ram was much more smooth, with less lag and instantaneous response than a modern web app on a 4 core 3 GHz machine with 16GB of RAM.

2) Cost. In the past, once you had purchased the binary it would continue to work basically forever as Microsoft did a great job with keeping Windows backwards compatible. Now, software has become a service that you have to pay for every month. If you don't pay, you can't log in to the web app. In addition, if the web app made changes you didn't like, too bad. If the web app is discontinued, too bad. Also, if you think that the cost is better because you are using "free" web apps, you are paying with your privacy.

3) Lock-in. With native applications your data was on your machine. Even it it was a proprietary format, if you tried hard enough, you could defacto reverse engineer the format since you had access to both the file itself and the machine code. Now, your data is not stored on your machine and the web app controls access to your data.

4) Privacy. With a native app, you could do all your computation and data manipulation on your machine, even disconnecting it completely from the network to make sure your sensitive information did not go where you did not want it. With a web app, you are of necessity sending your data to someone else to process, and you have only their word that they won't do anything bad with it.

5) Software Freedom. Web Apps basically did an end around on the GPL and LGPL. With native apps, if they used GPL or LGPL libraries they would have to inform you and you either had the whole source code (GPL) or the option of modifying the library and using it with the application (LGPL). With web apps, they don't even have to tell you if the backend is using GPL software and you have absolutely no way of inspecting or modifying that GPL software that you would have had with a native app.
Because most devices are quad-core. After a certain point context-switches create a diminishing return.
Hi dang. I unreservedly apologize. Can you please tell me which rule I broke. Maybe it was interpreted as being sarcasm but I meant it in ernest, but I accept brining it to your attention your have been a better course of action.
A great book for this is Thinking in Systems by Donella Meadows. She has many illustrative examples that really help get the points across. Coming from an electrical engineering background, I found her discussion around the interactions between positive and negative loops to be very interesting.

https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Systems-Donella-H-Meadows/dp...
You mean racial mixing should be chosen by cultural preferences/technology/wealth, which what's always been happening, rather than scientific reasons aimed at improving anything? I can't see how arbitrary human culture is any better than more purposeful breeding. Culture selects for racial purity in some cases, and for mixing in others, but it often depends on political history - Koreans don't want to mix with Japanese because politics, not because they're too far away from each other. Is politics really a better decider than science?

Use race for eugenics though is a very coarse metric and I wouldn't advocate for it unless we somehow lacked any better measures. I think a better program would measure performance in whatever criteria people think are desirable and go for those regardless of race. It might turn out that the tallest people are black, and you end up with a lot of black genes if you like tallness. So it might look racist, and it might shrink the populations of some races relative to others. But again, that's what already happens through arbitrary reasons anyway. We're already breeding more blacks and less whites simply because blacks are generally poorer than whites and poor people tend to have more children. I don't see how you can be happy with that (selecting for poverty!) but not with people putting the quality of their children ahead of their own personal desire to spread their genes.
It is enforced no matter where in the world you are, as long as your site is accessible to EU citizens. And you will be surprised by how much jurisdiction European courts can have. A monetary judgement can be collected from any American company via UFMJRA, for example (http://www.uniformlaws.org/ActSummary.aspx?title=Foreign%20M...).
In your own words, would you kindly elaborate on the difference between engineering and technology?
De la scriere la alfabet – scurt istoric
What you have is clearly a management problem - you are the problem.
You can also go to prison for insider trading. Is this also too onerous for you?

What reason is there for leaking information about the company you are currently working for?
Same boat. I'm still close friends with, and have mad respect for the folks who stuck with proper engineering when I realized that sort of work doesn't really align with the way I naturally think.

They've demonstrated years of diligence in earning that steel ring.
I don't know. Those all seem like valid complaints to me. The os is separate from the applications and everything he listed has its own industry.

Microsoft was reamed over installing IE as the default browser on their OS, so how is not letting you change safari as the default on iOS any different?
This has been done in the past, and publishers always cave after seeing a massive drop in traffic. This new law makes it so that they can't allow Google to use their snippets for free even if they wanted to.
How about comparing to the best library? A few alternatives are mentioned in this discussion.
Limited financial means is the key here. A decent smartphone costs as much as a lower-end computer; for kids, there's a good chance it was either-or proposition in terms of which device they get to own (instead of sharing with family).

Reminds me of a friend who, few years ago, was a teenager of limited financial means. He earned his first real $50 through a phone. His laptop broke, and he didn't have anyone to borrow one from in time, so he ssh'd into a remote machine from his phone and did the work (some data wrangling task) this way. Where there's a will, there's a way.

But still, that in no way suggests phones are good at text editing or productive work. They're capable enough, if you have lots of will and no other option.
HP is jumping into the pot business
there are better devices for reading. Objectively.
> But Language is fluid and changes with time, so at this time "Software Engineer" is the term so it's no good fighting it.

But language being fluid, fighting it seems perfectly reasonable.
Is it enough to know that things are "Sold by and shipped from Amazon" or whatever the phrase is, rather than "Sold by XYZ TRADING INDUSTRIES LTD"? Or does the quality issue find its way into official Amazon distribution?
I've written this a dozen times, but 'software engineer' has pretty much never been a sub-category of engineer. It's a title internal to the software industry, and need not have any relation to Engineering beyond a metaphor. I genuinely don't understand why people find the distiction between a title and a kind of engineer such a problem. Why doesn't 'software architect' get the same criticism for not being an architect? If you're at work, everyone knows what 'software engineer' means. If you're at an engineering convention, don't call yourself an engineer unless you have the credentials.

This title sometimes accompanies pretension toward traditional engineering, which is fine as far as it goes - usually not very far. I realize that there are some efforts in some jurisdictions to get something like engineering credentials for programmers. Ok, maybe that's not misguided, but I've yet to be convinced. It depends on how you conceptualize software. I don't think of it like engineering, I think of it like math. But more than that, I think of it as computer programming! If you think of it like engineering, I don't have a huge argument with that, but I have a hard time seeing is as more than an ill-fitting metaphor. I think that is one step better than the manufacturing metaphor.
So what? We'll all just have to install a newer version of one of the many existing browser extensions that saves all our email.
It has been, it's called Microsoft Surface. It's sized for creating things and is running on the OS made for productive work. But it's expensive and made by a company that's not very much liked by people.
No, everyone is accused of copying Apple, and Apple gets a pass when they come out with something that other companies already did. But the least similarity to anything Apple does is often labeled a copy, sometimes even requiring time-travel as the supposed copy was released first.

Take for example the idea that other companies copied Apple's thin bezels. The predecessors for that were the Sharp Aquous, Xiaomi Mix, Samsung Galaxy S8, and Essential Phone. Samsung even had "True Tone" long before Apple started marketing it, but were accused of copying it.

I favor Kirby Ferguson's take on this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wq5D43qAsVg), and we are better served by companies taking designs from others and improving on them, and open publishing and sharing, and the incessant cry of "Redmond Start Your Copiers" is really wearing thin.
Systems Thinking has been a huge buzzword in the Coursera course catalog in recent years (that's where I first heard the term called out as a special thing outside of just "how we learn science"): https://www.google.com/search?q=coursera+systems+thinking gets many hits.
Those three traits are exactly what I use for college recruiting. I guess some people look at great developers on an absolute scale but I consider it on a relative scale within the role under consideration. I consider those three traits make a junior candidate great. Actually those same traits are important for all roles. It is just that for junior roles I don't expect much beyond that.
Copywriter willing to help for free
If you don't trust the dragonfly team to not produce collisions, you probably shouldn't use the software anyway.
Your cannabis oil cartridge is getting low. Please replace it to continue using this vaporizer.
Most people seem to have missed the reported fact that a security researcher now working as an executive at Grayshift was previously an employee at Apple. The exploit being used in the GrayKey device may have been exported directly from within Apple's walls. Perhaps this man was involved enough with iOS security that he a) built in a backdoor; or b) discovered a vulnerability, and instead of disclosing it, left Apple to profit off the exploit; or c) gained enough knowledge of the systems to be able to reverse engineer an exploit from scratch, after leaving Apple.

The fact that the company producing the GreyKey has an executive who is a security researcher and used to work for Apple is such an obvious, damning piece of evidence. I don't understand why this connection hasn't been more widely reported and investigated.
Hmm, someone claims that she invented Malthusianism. She must have a time travel system....

"Limits to Growth―the first book to show the consequences of unchecked growth on a finite planet"
They are supported. Similar to how they're supported on other architectures, by having a runtime with a scheduler.
I’m not sure which is worse: “engineer”, or “architect”.
What are good resources to help start thinking in systems when designing software?
"thread" here refers to logical thread. A single logical thread can be used to run any number of goroutines, just one at a time.
That's one of the ideas that Zuckerberg put forward during his testimony to Congress. In his view, AI will solve the problems. Nope, that not going to happen. If it's impossible for people to figure out how to best present news. AI won't be able to do it. If he truly believes it then he has a dangerous blind spot that means the problems will never be controlled if he continues to be CEO.

My suspicion is that he's protecting future profits by hoping automation will fix all the problem.

Either way, a company run by Zuckerberg means that the problems won't be fixed.

It's time to regulate Facebook's businesses.
It's true that software engineering doesn't require licenses like other engineers, and is not regulated unlike other engineering professions.

But after that the article goes off the rails trying to draw a distinction. Programming above a certain level is engineering, just like being a mechanic above a certain level is engineering.

Unregulated, unlicensed software engineering has also produced stupendous advances in programming in the last few decades, not remotely matched by advances in other heavily regulated and licensed professions.
This is completely backwards to me. Instead of changing the name because it doesn't provide enough civic value, how about provide more civic value? Software is increasingly part of our infrastructure. The Internet is becoming utility.

There are engineering companies of all sorts that are only trying to make a (zillion) bucks and not interested in "an explicit responsibility to public safety and reliability". This isn't unique to software.
Who cares, what matters is which pays better :-)
Currently an undergrad at CU. Had never heard of this before. Interesting article.
Pusaudžu velosipēdi – VELO OUTLETS
It’s interesting you call it hearsay, because this would neatly fit into some of the exceptions to the rules AGAINST hearsay:

Records of a Regularly Conducted Activity. A record of an act, event, condition, opinion, or diagnosis if:

(A) the record was made at or near the time by — or from information transmitted by — someone with knowledge;

(B) the record was kept in the course of a regularly conducted activity of a business, organization, occupation, or calling, whether or not for profit;

(C) making the record was a regular practice of that activity;

(D) all these conditions are shown by the testimony of the custodian or another qualified witness, or by a certification that complies with Rule 902(11) or (12) or with a statute permitting certification; and

(E) the opponent does not show that the source of information or the method or circumstances of preparation indicate a lack of trustworthiness.
I feel like empiricists routinely and easily perform the partially opinionated act of operationalization, and what's being critiqued here is the <lack> of opinion in operationalization, except for the mocking of scientific appearance. Likewise, many discussions on consciousness are worthy of critique for lacking operationalization.

We will always question whether the operationalization is a good proxy, but there's a difference when firms lack even the opinion to do so.
Ah, the old banana myth. How the EU forced banana producers to only produce or sell bananas with the right curvature.

Only... that‘s not true. The EU defined quality classes for all kinds of products. And in the case of bananas these included curvature.

Producers could still sell whatever curved bananas they liked. At whatever price they liked. They just couldn‘t claim it conformed to this specific quality class.

Because free trade includes regulations like that. Traders want to establish a baseline what‘s acceptable to most of them and not specify every product detail in every shipment.
As for changes in time, the term "engineer" used to mean the guy who drove the locomotive - and that guy didn't design the locomotive.
> Nothing important. Just more drug busts.

People dying because of drug overdoses seems like a pretty big deal to me, but then again (thank God) I've never had a family member or close friend succumb to a drug addiction.
>... we’re all seeing is that a lot of work that has been done to enable international cooperation ... pulled apart. We’re seeing the progress we thought had been made in this country in race relations being reversed. We’re seeing the partial breakup ... of a united Europe...

> One of the problems when you bring technology into a new area is that it forces you to oversimplify.

It is fortunate that we have thinkers such as this to simplify the world for us.

Should we pine for the united Europe of Rome? Of the Reich?

Was it evil to tear down those cooperative societies?
In theory (if someone does the non-trivial work), probably.
Thanks for the thoughtful comment and reference.

The 'in context' was not so much about multicollinearity but about shared and unique variance.
Yes. I build apps/website for a living so here is my thought:
PWA is still very early and buggy as hell. I try to ship PWA version of my website and it did not work well under many circumstances

I also build a React-native app. Although the experience is absolute amazing, it is a little bit laggy compare to other native app (and beautiful animation is a pain)

So yes, for now we still need native apps
>The second sentence I quoted is not true.

I assume you are refering to the sentence:

> If we wanted to consider x+3 a polynomial, we would be asking for the t value such that (x+3)[t] = (-1)[t]

Bearing in mind that the example I have in mind is the equation "x+3=-1" with the solution of "2", in what sense in the above sentence not true?

>When presented with the equation x+3=-1 x+3 is a polynomial. -1 is a polynomial.

Fair enough. In that case, I assume you would consider the equation "x+3=-1" to be false, as it is clear that (3,1,0,0,...) != (-1,0,0,...). Unless of course you are asking, as I had suggested, that you are looking for the particular element at which polynomial evalutation yields an equal result on both sides. If this is the case then, as far as I can tell, you are introducing the machinery of formal polynomials for the sole purposes of overloading the "=" symbol in a confusing way.

>I gather you do not think x^2 - x + 1 = 0 is a polynomial equation.

Define "polynomial equation" If you are asking if I would consider that an equation taking place in R[x], then (absent some other context) the answer is no. Even with other context I would say that "x^2 - x + 1 = 0" is false as a polynomial equation. You might be able to get me to call equations done in the quotient ring R[x]/<x^2-x+1> polynomial equations, in which case "x^2 - x + 1 = 0" would be both a polynomial equation and true at the same time.

If you are asking if I would call "x^2 - x + 1 = 0" in an informal setting, then the answer is yes. However, I do not see how this is relevant, as the whole point of this comment chain was the formal notion of polynomials.

>x^3+4x a polynomial?

Informally, yes. Formally, it depends on context. However, absent some context, I would not consider "x^3 +4x" to be a formal polynomial.

>Is there any other reasonable interpretation using accepted mathematical conventions?

Yes, x^3 +4x is the member of the base ring corresponding to "(x * x * x) + (4 * x)", where x is some other member of the ring.

>Perhaps you don’t think 2/(x+3) is a member of R(x). What is it a member of then?

I am glad you asked. I believe my above answer regarding x^3+4x still applies. However, let me ask you: Is x^3+4x a member of R(x)?

>What is it a member of then?

Again, depending on context. Without context, I would consider 2/(x+3) to be a member of R.
Minor typo on pdfcircus.com

—wihtout uploading to a server
Is there any good app or strategy for the user to invert colors for reading at night that leaves images unaffected?

Right now, I use "inverse colors" on my Android tablet to lessen impact on sleep, and that's an improvement, but images get inverted also.