skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Sometimes whatever `window` and `button` actually are have references to each other (ex: parent/children relationships) so it's possible -- in fact it's surprisingly common that -- there is no correct order.

You need total knowledge of what can throw exceptions, and while the same is true for status codes, the raison d'etre for exceptions is shrinking the amount of error handling in your code. If you're checking for exceptions at the same rate you'd be checking for status codes, exceptions are pointless.

But generally, your suggestion to change the architecture points to what the problem with these "ergonomic" changes engender. You more or less never have to rearchitect or refactor things when using status codes, and rearchitecting and refactoring are error prone and generally hugely fraught. The cognitive load of things like exceptions leads to lower productivity or lower quality, because you only have so many brain cycles and something has to give.

I think ergonomic changes are helpful to get more dynamic programmers into stricter languages like Rust. But I think we should keep in mind that typing and boilerplate are really never our problems and prioritize accordingly.
I think there is not much difference. I used that approach myself once when writing a simple parser in python. I think it lacks some elegance, but it may be better than out-arguments (pointer argument to return value). On the other hand, the two-variables handling has the disadvantage that the "real" return variable is always (over)written, also in case of error.

I think there is one underused error handling mechanism: "asynchronous error handling" where you have to to ask for errors explicitly. Like in the OpenGL API, for example. It might be the best choice where there is a lot of communication between largely isolates states.

So that could be one answer: If possible design the API in such a way that functions that can have expected errors [1] do not return values that only make sense if there was no error. Because this means that control flow gets very irregular on the calling side. Such a design could be hard to do though, I don't know.

The other answer could be: Don't have errors that you don't know how to handle. Unless you write very low-level code, like a library (which means you probably want to delegate the handling), just die on errors that you don't know how to handle. Make the die() call a best-effort cleanup routine if possible, and keep the important to-be-cleaned up state as global as possible (NOT on the call stack), to support such a cleanup routine.

[1] I hate the vagueness of that term, but take it to mean "no statically obvious wrong usage by the caller", like passing in made-up or corrupted values
Well, the Barbary pirates and War of 1812 pretty much ended that way of thinking for the United States.
> is that both the left and the right mostly agree that we shouldn't be dropping bombs on people.

You mean in terms of voters, right? Because in terms of politicians, there seem to be an awful lot of hawks on both sides.
> Why would a civilization even be terrestrial, wouldn't an ocean living civilization be even more likely?

There's a book about this, can't remember the name right now. Basically it looks at very ancient maps of the Antartica that have details that we only figured out in the 20th century with equipement allowing us to see through the ice layers.

The book posits that there was a rather advanced civilization living before the last glaciation.

It also posits that all the massive flooding mythology found in most human religions is actually stories transmitted by survivors of the previous era.
Yes, but the web browser is ubiquitous so it's naturally going to sponge up defaults.

If someone's mad that people don't auto-assume they design robot neural interfaces when they call their self a front-end designer, then they're just fighting their own ego.
If you write it, I'll buy it.
The Sound of Pixels
I don't think it's for that kind of situation. It's probably more for, like, a weird construction setup where the car needs to be told when it's okay to cross over the normal lines painted on the ground, or a parking garage where the car has to be told where it's okay to park (e.g. different sections may have different rules).
"Ski boots are the worst. Solid plastic. They'll be around till the sun goes supernova."

- Douglas Coupland, Generation X
From the article:

> Pincoin was particularly unique in that it offered bonuses for bringing other people into the program, a tactic that might sound familiar. The scammers paid out in cash until January when they began sending iFan tokens. Then, last month, the team vacated their fancy offices leaving only an oddly well-made – if incomplete – website in its wake.
How Russia’s AI Assistant Compares to Siri and Alexa
Don't all airlines already sell standby tickets? I'm guessing the demand on the average flight isn't enough to cover the chance someone won't show.
Maybe it was a illegal civilization and the plate tectonics swallowed the evidence?
I wouldn't call that ambiguity. While several shorthand notations use =, it is always clear from the context which one and only one is referring to (and if there are multiple that all of them agree).

This touches on another point that one sees much of in mathematics lectures but little in math lectures.
Mathematical notation needs to be unambiguous but also facilitate communication and hence tends to be very terse. Thus when discussing addition on a finite field F_5, one usually starts defining equivalence classes [j] and an addition operator "+" and then says that [3]"+"[3]=[3+3]=[5+1]=[1]
followed by a disclaimer like:

"We hence see that this notion is compatible with the previously defined one when identifying ... . Hence, if there is no possible confusion, we will simply write ..."

See also Tao's comments on rigor in mathematics:
https://terrytao.wordpress.com/career-advice/theres-more-to-...

All notation can be made rigorous, if one wants to, but discussion is more concise if we let everybody do that by themselves.
They cremated their dead for fear their decaying bodies would corrupt the Earth (or their karma or their gods or whatever). And voila, they're gone.
Everyone knows that govt. forcing decency down corporate throats leaves everyone unhappy, it is a compromise after all... Though techies seem to forget the same logic applies to them as well, especially when they push boundary after boundary.
Y'all did see the winking smiley emoticon, eh?

(I really was just trying to fill in the blanks for anyone who hadn't encountered "sauce" as internet slang for "source" aka "provenance" yet. Given the responses though it feels like I accidentally trolled. Please excuse me. ;-)
the value of Uber is convenience.

flailing your arms on a street corner hoping that some vacant taxi will notice you is both silly and inefficient. at any one time there are tons of people needing taxis and tons of empty taxis burning fuel unable to find fares. if there was an app that allowed you to tap a button and have taxi arrive to pick you up, it's likely Uber would not be where it is today.
> in this otherwise dismal time

While I understand this sentiment I've come to the conclusion that it's wrong and maybe even dangerous. Ultimately it got us Trump. I think this perspective on our current time is mainly cause by how the need cycle works. Someone on the a16z podcast claimed that shorter new cycles lead to more negative reporting. He suggested the thought experiment of a need paper only published every 100 year. It would contain awful stuff like WWI & II, but lots of positive we never think about like the number of diseases that have been eradicated. We have fewer military conflicts, unbelievably better build mortality, fewer famines, more individual freedom. It's not all great but it's so much better than we tell ourselves. According to Russ Roberts a study found that even economists who are pessimistic about our current situation will answer that they'd want to be alive right now when they are asked at what time in history they'd want to live.
While I find myself more upset with the current state of things than ever before I must agree.

Edit: formatting
No one deserves to be bombed. Some people should be stopped, by any effective means, but that's an entirely different calculus. If you had those people in prison, they would not deserve their prison being bombed.
We already have a system in place at our house where you earn 30 minute slips (for electronic time) so it wasn’t so much a choice between what to do. When he did read he was just choosing really easy, below grade level stuff and wanting to read them over and over again.

This was more about getting through something that took longer than 30 minutes to read. I knew he’d love it, he just wouldn’t see it through.

Removing electronics til it was done just made it a non-optional task.
It's only worse because the oppressive state exists there and not here. You think the highest bidder would hesitate to sell it on to an oppressive state?
Yes, I mean the people. The center doesn't want war right now either, despite the best efforts of the media to whip up a war frenzy.

Our foreign policy is directed by people who do not care what the american people think.
If you work with mySQL, follow Percona's blog. It's full of awesome stuff.
The Best Open Source (and Free) Crypto Trading Bots
“I want to be my own boss.” “I love risk.” “I want flexible work hours.” “I want to work on tough problems that matter.” “I have a vision and want to see it through.” “I saw a better opportunity and grabbed it. …”

I've started several companies, and the reason was the same each time, I believed there was a market for an idea from which I could make money. Those other reasons never came into play. I suppose that starting a bussiness has different reasons for people who are already unhappy with their lives, but starting a business really shouldn't be undertaken to minimize stress and the number of working hours.
Are external GPUs for Macs viable in macOS 10.13.4? We tested to find out
"Not only will America go to your country and kill all your people, but what's worse I think, is that they'll come back 20 years later and make a movie about how killing your people made their soldiers feel sad.

America making a movie about what Vietnam did to their soldiers is like a serial killer telling you what stopping suddenly for hitchhikers did to his clutch."

- Frankie Boyle

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZwuTI-V8SI
As the article points out, an ancient industrial civilization would need to mine resources. I think it is fair to say that they would mine a lot of gold and silver for use in electronics. If such a civilization existed then one would think that most of the earth's natural veins of gold and silver would have been mined making large easy to find naturally occurring veins rare. It seems though that our civilization has found plenty of easy to find large scale veins of gold and silver.

Does that not make it unlikely that any ancient industrial civilization lasting centuries could have existed before us? Or over tens of millions of years would more naturally occurring easy to find veins of gold and silver rise to the surface of the Earth's crust?
I'm with you, what do you call someone who can build and ship the back and front end of a working application, if not a full stack developer?

Because its pretty obvious a bunch of these people exist,
What about pre-emptive defensive? Defense from uncertainty? Defense from economic hardship?

(Whoa! I really just meant to raise the questions, especially in the case of justification for recent US military conflicts. I'm not advocating for anything!)
>Please don't masquerade mythologocal saints/yogis as scientists.

What is a scientist?

Does Newton qualify as one in your worldview? He spent about half his life on alchemy.

Will any of our scientists qualify as scientists after a thousand more years of science?
> By contrast, ~30% of
> American billionaires
> are dropouts.

How is it a contrast when more than ~50% of Chinese billionaires are dropouts? [1]

Added to that, of the 78 self-made women billionaires, 49 of them are from China. [2]

1. http://en.yibada.com/articles/195121/20170220/new-hurun-list...

2. http://www.scmp.com/business/china-business/article/2117158/...
This is not video game style remote driving. The car is always in control, and its primitive object avoidance routines won't let it crash into a barrier. This is presumably to allow humans to help make higher-level decisions. For example, maybe the car asks something like "this road is blocked. I could cross the double yellow line to get around, or I could reverse and go a different way. Both of these options are suboptimal, can you help me choose?"

The most extreme type of assistance could maybe be a human drawing or modifying the vehicle's planned path (if you watch any of the Waymo example videos, you'll see the immediate path that the vehicle is planning to take). But even in this scenario, the car is still responsible for navigating that path and avoiding any obstacles.
I'm not sure I get the distinction. As for curl, it doesn't follow any standard which seems worse, but does at least helpfully demonstrate that the RFCs cannot be implemented by major clients.
It used to mean "define" in ancient times.
It is a bit disingenuous to neglect to mention that a5'd lower bay payload is half the size of a f9 payload.
In your example of solving x^3+4x=0 you write

..x=0 is consistent..

You don't see the problem with this? Saying x=0 and that x is an element base ring means that x is the element 0. You can't later in your problem write "...x=2i..." if you are going to persist in your view that x is an element of the base ring. What you have shown is that the variety of the ideal generated by x^3+4x is the same as the variety of the ideal generated by x, x-2i, x+2i if we are talking about C as the base ring. If the base ring is Q then a different thing is shown.

You can't logically say, in a consistent manner, that x is in R and x^3+4x = 0 and that x is 3 different values. An element of a ring is not three different elements. An element of a ring is itself. If you want to vary the object x then you need to enlarge your ring to an algebraic structure that admits x so that it behaves the way you wish to view it. Your view of what is really happening when solving an equation is not rigorously sound. The proper way to view this is in the context of algebraic geometry.
Barjavel - La Nuit des Temps ?
At question is whether the benefits of static typing outweigh their costs. From my experience (purely anecdotal) static typing provides a false sense of security that encourages bad practices, thus turning the benefits of types into costs themselves.
They will not stop producing them until they are sure they can pull of BFR. The CTO has already said that Falcon 9 will be available as long as people ask for them.

By that point where they can no longer produce F9 they plan to have a fleet of Falcon 9 on the books that could continue for quite a while.
Where as both Steve Jobs and Alan Kay believed in the Dynabook, I find it interesting how starkly different their views are on the stylus. One of the first things Alan Kay had after seeing the iPad was try using a stylus [0], where as Steve Jobs was heavily anti the stylus [0]. So I can imagine a fairly interesting back and forth over the topic. But Alan has only ever mentioned the following two sentences:

> And he says, “Well, people lose their pens.”

> And I said, “Well, have a place to put it.”

[0]: https://www.fastcompany.com/40435064/what-alan-kay-thinks-ab...

[1]: https://www.engadget.com/2010/04/08/jobs-if-you-see-a-stylus...
Enjoy your promotion in China.
If you need beta testers for the program, let me know. I've completed several MOOCs and a Udacity nanodegree, so I have experience on starting and getting throught online course work
In what physical context do we multiply signals together instead of adding them?
Well technically, they were paying her the big pay package to turn around the company, anyone could have burnt yahoo to the ground. Law of entropy.
With a tax rate like that, you pretty much can't have much income inequality.

As we all know today from history, there was lifestyle inequality in the cases where there was supposedly income equality.
DragonFly web documentation is wiki-based and tends to not always be up-to-date (contrary to man pages).

All recent Intel GPUs are supported, including Kabylake and Coffeelake.
Take Buddha for example...

An early example of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish?
> or anything written before 1950
This makes me wonder if this problem might at least partially be caused by American society valuing practical application and usefulness for bringing money home much higher than education as a value in itself. Short term as long term thinking probably also plays a role. What would someone read that was written before 1950 that is directly applicable and help getting a well paying job?
won't get fooled again :)
They were against standing armies, but then they changed their mind when the capitol was burned down.
Evidence of a deep state?
These Medical Delivery Drones Could Soon Be Supplying U.S. Hospitals
For those interested in the subject, Roberto Saviano's Gomorrah is a fascinating non-fiction account about the lesser-known but incredibly powerful Naples mafia, the Camorra. Among other industries, it has inserted itself at the center of the luxury fashion industry, with a fascinating hold on the same factories that produce attire and accessories for the red carpet.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/jan/12/crime.mafia

> The Neapolitan Camorra, or "the System" as it is known by those on its inside, is a vast, pullulating world of gangs. They form, split, descend into vicious feuds, and re-emerge in new alliances only to be annihilated in some new internecine war. Whereas a Sicilian capo can confidently expect to see his grandchildren set out on their criminal careers, a senior camorrista is lucky if he reaches 40... Following a series of highly credible death threats, since autumn 2006 Saviano has been given an armed escort at public expense.

https://www.esquire.com/style/news/a50424/italy-mafia-counte...

> Quoting Italian journalist Roberto Saviano from his 2006 book Gomorrah: Italy's Other Mafia, the article points out that: The workforce in clan operations is highly skilled, with decades of experience under Italy's and Europe's most important designers. The same hands that once worked under the table for the big labels now work for the clans…Which means that the clothes made by the clans aren't typical counterfeit goods…but rather a sort of true fake. All that's missing is the final step: the brand name, the official authorization from the motherhouse.

> Basically how it works in Italy is that multiple factories would bid on a job to produce clothes or accessories for a fashion brand. The brand would then supply fabrics and designs to each of the factories, and whichever one supplied the garments fastest and with the highest quality would be paid. Those factories that didn't win the bid would then re-brand the clothes and sell them through the Camorra's retail network. It's part of the reason why today, nearly 10 percent of all fashion related-products sold in Europe are counterfeit.

The book itself is a shocking read - highly recommended.
They are expanding physically (good sign) and also funding some neat OSS projects & keeping the ME in check.
Yup, my undergrad journalism profs would be moritified. In my defense, it was early and I was still working on my first coffee.
I'd say there are a couple of things that apply:

* `?` can propagate values/short circuit control flow, but it also contains a hidden type conversion. The target needs to be a known type for it to compile.

* A proposed `catch` construct will include implicit type conversion for its result value.

Some things that came up in the past but met resistance:

* Removing project structure from in-code to being defined by the filesystem.

* Hiding `Result` types in signatures with special syntax.

* Dropping immutable by default, though this was pre-1.0.

Also, `Rc` and `Arc` are good examples for this. They do seem trivial, but having them auto-clone would mean:

* Every newcomer who writes `fn foo(val: Arc<Bar>) {}` instead of `fn foo(val: &Arc<Bar>) {}` or `fn foo(val: &Bar) {}` will get an implicit atomic increment/decrement at every function call.

* It also makes it a lot harder to reason about code if you want to use a clone-on-mutation-unless-not-shared strategy.
What is the difference between operating a car remotely and "giving it feedback"?
What if for 8 hours a day your job was to avoid crashes in remote vehicles... every 6 seconds your monitor changes feed to a near accident and you have to react, your decision saves the vehicle and passengers or there is a crash.. next.. next..
> ...and some "scientists" still think hunter-gatherers built it with stone chisels.

Well yes, that's how actual scientists work: on evidence. Until there's evidence to the contrary, the most likely hypothesis is that the structures were built with the tools and labor that we think humans possessed at the time.

I didn't find anything in your links that mentioned the myth of Atlantis.
This assumes that
1. Assad is a rational actor
2. Assad has absolutely control over the military
SSL Adoption Continues to Rise
> Typically we write that the solution is "x = –2"

That is not overloading "=" at all. It is overloading the word "solution".

What your teacher probably told you is:

"x+3=1 is equivalent to x=-2 by .... Hence, the solution of x+3=1 is the same the solution of x=-2 (which is -2 in both cases). Since the solution of x=-2 is so obvious, we also say the solution is x=-2 to mean that it is the same solution as of the equation x=-2."

Same difference as in "Q:Would you like a large coffee or a small coffee? A: Large "
The correct answers should only be either phrase "A large coffee" or "a small coffee", but the answer was an adjective.
Can we keep the Reddit jingoism to Reddit? This site is intended to be a welcome reprieve from the vacuous discussions elsewhere.
That's a reason to bomb the boomers, not a backwards country half way around the world.
Tickets should also be liberated from being person-bound. If I have to cancel a NL-CHN trip a week in advance, I lose most (if not all) of the money spent on it, and any recoups are in the form of vouchers. And the airline still resells the seat! However, if I could just sell the ticket on the secondary market, I’d recoup most of my costs.
Pre-emptive Defence is a euphemism for offence and is an illegal act of war.
Sure. I'll have to dig up the literature but I'd be happy to do so. Can you be more specific ?

If you are interested in investigating, It'd be illuminating to contrast the belief systems in Vedas and Puranas. (Rigveda and Puranas to be more specific. ) If my memory serves right, Narayana(Vishnu) was a minor diety in Rigveda whose only claim to fame was carrying Indra on his back to circumnavigate the universe 108 times. He gradually started gaining more prominence as time passed, as a benevolent and sophisticated alternative to replace the more belligerent/primitive Indra. By mid 15th century(I could be wrong), this process was complete, with Vishnu taking over Indra completely, as established in that Govardhanagiri tale where Indra was utterly humiliated by Krishna.

Coming to the claims on Buddhism, once again, examining the Rigvedic and post Rigvedic belief systems can help you hypothesize how things unravelled. (Replacement of Horse with Cow as the sacred animal, renouncement of non vegetarianism, incorporation of Tantric belief systems etc ) Destruction of Buddhist monasteries and massacring the monks is quite well documented too. Read about Pushyamitra Sunga for example.

Edit: Typos