skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A few years back I wrote something similar for ClojureScript:
https://github.com/binaryage/cljs-zones

The drawback was the need to manually wrap all participating async functions into a special macro (zones/bound-fn). With async_hooks this could be automated I believe.
This sort of teenage gatekeeping is why nobody will take your advice seriously.
This is a problem in PHP, which has both primitives (including copy-on-write arrays) and Java-style objects, but it also has literal pass-by-reference referencing (you can write a swap function). The misuse of “pass-by-reference” here creates confusion.
"A Zone is an execution context that persists across async tasks. You can think of it as thread-local storage for JavaScript VMs."

In case anyone else was wondering.
>The only thing you can do with a Java pointer "value" is to tacitly dereference it.

No, that's not true at all. Crucially, you can assign a new value, and that is where the distinction you're calling pedantic makes all the difference.

When assigning to a function parameter, am I assigning to the variable passed as an argument or am I assigning to a copy of that variable?

It's hard to overstate the importance of that question, and that's why these two concepts have long established names: call-by-reference and call-by value.
I'm not sure what is obvious. The government pays rent on something it didn't build. Cargo is vital to so many sectors of the economy, and passenger trains are not.
> It’s the same thing every software dev encounters

No, it really isn't. "Upstream first" development such as Red Hat does is fundamentally different than developing in private, even if that includes throwing the occasional scrap back over the fence.

If you think this exchange has been unpleasant, consider that casually dismissing others' experience rarely leads to any other outcome. Did you do your part to make it pleasant for anyone else?
Mostly Google. I am yet to find a search engine that gives better results for technical queries. Google just works.
Americans Want to Regulate Facebook and Twitter; Not Apple, Microsoft or Amazon [pdf]
As a cyclist, I have to ask: do you have a source for that claim?
Care to propose a rephrasing that's more clear? If the average person can't understand the meaning of that sentence, the only real solution is to improve K-12 English teaching.

> and wasn't clear to virtually anyone who agreed to it

Virtually everyone who agreed to it never bothered to even try to read the policy in the first place. So, really, what difference does that make?

Again, the fundamental point is that chasing ToS clarity/readability/length is a losing battle. The majority of consumers don't care enough to read, no matter how simple you make things. Improving this metric won't make a difference. This issue is a red herring. Focus efforts elsewhere: consumer education and consumer rights.
> language choice (among various more-or-less suitable options) has a negligible -- if any -- effect on a business's bottom line.

That's just, like, your opinion, man.

(By which I mean: I disagree, and we both know there's no clear evidence one way or another)

> To increase the appeal of a language, the best things you can do is create great tooling, lots of useful libraries, and a friendly community.

I do what I can, but a bad language can do those just as easily as a good language - tooling and libraries are much more a function of big-corp backing than they are of good language design. It's remarkable how much Scala has managed to achieve in those areas without having a big name behind it, but there's no competing with the amount of programmer-hours the likes of e.g. Google can pour in. The only way Scala can hope to win is on actual language design merit (and maybe winning popularity on that is impossible, but given how well Scala has managed to do so far, I remain hopeful).

> In addition, an argument for "my language is better than X" can usually be easily countered with an argument for the opposite, creating a net result that doesn't help your goals. Debates are sometimes interesting and informative, but they're not effective marketing.

A genuinely better language should have at least a slightly better chance of winning a debate over which language is better. If we don't believe that then we have no hope of ever learning truths, and may as well pick languages to use at random (or I guess go with whatever Google picked).
Thank you so much for mentioning random-forest supervised learning, I did some duckduckgo'ing and came across this [1] and am excited to try it out.

[1] https://labs.genetics.ucla.edu/horvath/RFclustering/RFcluste...
definitely:
https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.02727

I work kind of adjacent to two of the supervisors on this project at NIST, and the workflow for these types of projects usually goes:

(1) build predictive model of chemical composition -> superconductivity from past experiments or databases of simulations
(2) Build and program automated sample prep (this is actually the hardest part, not the machine learning)
(3) Build and program automated structural characterization and superconductivity measurement

The difficulty is finding a system whose design space can be explored with and measured with automated tools, otherwise the machine learning isn't used effectively. As others have noted the models are decades old in some cases, what's driving this is researchers who know how to automate traditional mat sci workflows and know enough about machine learning to pick the automated runs optimally
Google because it works. I don't remember last time I had to visit the second page to find something. Also it's fast, and obviously well integrated to Google Chrome.
Say hypothetically if a got my Drupal site for cheap and now I'm hacked. I pay someone another $100 to install the patch and get rid of the malware, I still come out ahead.

What's my incentive to do things differently?
Pretty sure BYD beats Tesla in EV numbers. I'm already seeing EV fleet taxis in Asian cities.

https://www.google.com.sg/amp/s/insideevs.com/byd-1-world-pl...
At what level are they starting this kind of test? I assume this is very expensive so it's probably not at the lower level.
I hope the investors have read this.
The idea is to offset a bias against hiring them. But ideally in these situations taxes would fill the gap, justified as having the disabled in the workforce keeps them off welfare programs
It's not that other auto-makers were sleeping all this time. They build new factories every now and then and increase automation where appropriate.

"ultra-high resolution" doesn't mean much if you can't see the problem.

"advanced machine learning" sounds dangerous once the machine damaged itself or killed a bunch of people trying to figure out things.
Moreover, even if they achieve 6k/week, it'd take about 83 weeks to go through the 500k+ model 3 reservations.
This is true. But a key point: Tesla doesn't actually have to beat state of the art in automation to be profitable. Their cars are already great, electric cars are simpler, they've streamlined the sales process in a way that already gives them at least 10% greater cost advantage if everything else is equivalent (while also eliminating a major pain point for consumers).

But it goes beyond just the fact that technology has advanced: Tesla is willing to pursue alternative approaches where others have long stopped (and this is a point the author of this article makes later on). The fact that Tesla doesn't have the conservative culture of other car makers means that they'll make mistakes like this, but also that they'll find new solutions (or recognize existing solutions in similar fields that haven't become industry standard) whereas others would not.

You cannot automate EXISTING car designs much. And Model 3 does make improvements, but in many ways is built similar. It's like trying to automate soldering components by hand. Automation of electronics required a change in the fundamental way electronics were built. Through-hole is hard to automate but relatively easy to build by hand. Surface mount is simple to automate and ultimately better in several ways, but is super annoying to build by hand. Tesla needs to find the surface mount of car manufacturing. And I think they're trying.

Something particularly hard to automate for automobiles is the wire harness. There are many degrees of freedom; it's kind of like tying your shoe: easy for humans, hard for machines. The Model 3 uses less wire than the Model S/X, but only by a factor of 2 or so. Model Y, on the other hand, is supposed to use like an order of magnitude less. This is like optimizing a circuit board for automation by only using a few through-hole components, relying mostly on surface mount.

So Tesla is going to have to continually redesign their vehicles to be more and more amenable to automation. They can't do this as a step function, and Musk has realized that now. (This is another good point the author makes.)
I also deleted my account several years ago, and I've since made the conscious decision to let relationships fade if the only thing that would keep them alive were passive 'keeping up' via Facebook. But that suits my needs - I'm really not interested in what hundreds of people I've met are doing on vacation or thinking about politics or eating over the holidays.

My wife, on the other hand, lives for this stuff. She is much, much closer emotionally to people she went through earlier stages of life with and she routinely moans and shrieks about the things I mentioned above. And this suits here needs, because she cares about that sort of information.

That said, even if we grant Facebook a monopoly on 'keeping up with old friends', every other 'social vertical' that currently relies upon Facebook for connection, networking, and event planning represents a startup opportunity with massive market potential. Big one: mommy groups.
I can use a normal skateboard, but there’s no easy way to brake other than use your legs or “eat shit”. Not great for your knees.

Electric skateboards (one I have) has regenerative braking and it’s amazing.

Being able to control your speed is a pretty big feature.
Brill and Crovitz Announce Launch of NewsGuard to Fight Fake News
Here is another video about Michael Forzano from SUNY Binghamton, where he attended to study computer science:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWF8SDFju4M
I think it comes from a basic lack of respect or understanding of the actual skill requires to work an assembly line properly. Highly educated creative class are trained their whole life to look down with disgust on the people who do repetitive labor. The name shows it.. They call it unskilled. And yet how many of them could do it?

It takes an enormous amount of focus and concentration, the ability to learn complex routines quickly, to create efficiencies without breaking rythyms or rules. All while being payed less and treated like a second class employee.

Why is toyota different? Because they dont think like this. Line workers are thought of highly. Their ideas are integrated into the system. Most of all they are not disposable cogs
The fact that we get so much traffic and contributors to our community from HN means that for every 1 person like you who is so disgruntled and disturbed by other hackers talking about their Open Source projects, that there is a good 70 to 80 who appreciate it, get value from it, discover a new cool tool, and wind up building projects and helping out.

Can you see, at all, from the other perspective? Maybe I annoy the living daylights out of you, but can you also see how you come off as one of those cliche "hater HN commentors"?

If you had 3 worlds to choose from, one where people openly talk about their work which they give away for free to others, or a world where everybody tries to censor, silence, and hate on others for being passionate about their Open Source projects, or a world where, because everybody is so spiteful and nobody is supportive, that everybody is forced to make their software proprietary and charge for it. Which world would you want to be in?

VC funding is another indication/signal of the value I have created. And no, they don't want me to do some stupid "open core" crippleware (like some of my competitors do) or even convert the open source code from MIT/similar to a terrible AGPL/similar license. They want me to create such a core component of infrastructure that we become the defacto standard, like MySQL, Redhat, and others have become.

So no. You have no basis to hate what we are doing, except for your own frustration probably at hate others have given you. Don't pass that along, you are better than that.
what seems to be lacking from these discussions is the notino that forethought and consideration can win the day.

if there is some brain fart, and its tracked down and fixed, the value of encoding that in a unit to be run until heat death. as you say, exactly zero.

but if there is a problem area that keeps throwing bugs like a metastatic tumor - say race conditions or memory footprint, or unicode handling. in that case the return on writing tests to try to shake out those areas is pretty high.

I think the real failure here is to try to substitute informed judgement calls and meaningful discussion with simple checklists of dos and donts.
Tell HN: Use WaveNet to remaster songs
I recently acquired a pair of bass-heavy headphones with haptic-feedback (Nuraphones, amazing sound can't recommend them enough), and figured out many of the old hip hop tracks I listen to sound horrible while remastered rock anthems sound perfect. Since many of the tracks I listen to only gather a few thousands views on youtube I have few hope to hear them with proper remastering applied to them.

I have not yet heard of any real product that uses machine-learning algorithms adapted to sound processing such as WaveNet and I am posting this in the hope someone with the right skills and resources could implement this.
Unless I'm misunderstanding you, what you're asking is only possible in a function signature if the compiler inlines it.

However, outside of function signatures, if you write:

int a = 2;
int &aref = a;
int b = aref;

I'd assume that the compiler is smart enough to optimize away &aref.
Intel is giving up on its smart glasses
> I only did basic Java in university so I might be remembering incorrectly, but aren't variables storing non-primitive values called "References"?

Technically yes, but since the language doesn't let you talk about references directly, the concept rarely comes up. Like, in theory you could say "a is a reference that refers to a value of type Foo", but people don't actually say that; they just say "a is of type Foo".

> Seems weird to me to say that Java "passes by value" when all objects being passed are actually references to objects.

Indeed, completely agreed.
Same arguments skiers made about snowboarders when they came out.

It’s just a different thing, get over it!
> Facebook has quietly altered its terms of service, making stricter Irish data protection laws no longer binding on the vast majority of its users

Was this made more feasible by the recent international corporate tax changes in the United States?
The process used by the car industry is state of the art and highly competitive. But the product itself has areas that have seen very little innovation for decades - just incremental optimization.

Tesla started with a clean slate, of course they will repeat some mistakes but they have the prospect of building a revolutionary product. In a way, a bit of chaos comes with the territory.
Google is doing the entire stack so kind of hard for Nvidia to have a competitive product to the TPUs.

But also Google is already doing the 2nd generation of the TPUs and would expect a third.

The data of chips coming from 3rd parties are probably numbered.

The dynamics of the industry changed where now the companies that are buying the chips have skin in the game with the cost of running the chips. Versus the old days Intel sold a chip to Dell who then sold it to someone else.

It just makes sense for Google to do their own silicon at this point as saves them a ton of money.

But also Google has the data to improve the chip that Nvidia just does not have.
It's a peak rate, not a sustained rate. I think their peak rate has been about 2500-3000/week over a day (so about 350-425/day), so 6000 peak rate isn't totally out of the question. It wasn't long ago that they were only doing 1000 per week for the Model 3, so why (fundamentally) couldn't they increase it to near 6000 in a few months, too?

Remember this is also an internal target from an internal email, not supposed to be a public statement. You don't reach your high external goals by setting the bar low for internal goals.
That’s assuming they are going to plateau at 6k/week, which is certainly not their plan.
I'm not really that surprised myself.

It's becoming increasingly more okay to just bleed resources and pay your technical debt off or lower your development costs by requiring users to have stronger machines. It's like implicit crow funding but in a very stupid way. Steve Jobs said it best in [0].

I recognized the author instantly (I know him because of his Pepper & Carrot comic which he notably does in an all FOSS set up and puts under CC-BY-4.0) and if he says the laptop looks nice, is quiet and works well for his typing and art then it should be a glowing endorsement but people are inventing flaws, pointing out the GPU is a weak integrated one, that the CPU is dual core and too weak for compiling lots of C++, that 16 GB of RAM is too little (I happen to have 32 GB but 16 GB is not little at all) and also totally ignoring that this is clearly a slick small ultra book (with an ultra lower power CPU [1]) and meant to run all FOSS with no fuss (feel free to steal that catchphrase), meaning no Windows, no AAA games, etc.

I do personally use a more noisy, bulky and powerful laptop with even more than those "just 16 GB" of RAM[2] but I'd not call Librem13 weak, especially if it fits the owner's desired usage and does it in a slim and convenient for his travel patterns size.

I do wonder if my perspective comes from the fact I try to use stuff the best and fullest I can. E.g. for 5 years (2011/2012 - mid 2016) I ran a bulky business-y hands me down HP laptop bought in like mid 2010 (IIRC) with a dual core Intel CPU, 2 GB of RAM, integrated weak GPU with support for only OpenGL 2.1, 500 GB HDD. It came with SLED preinstalled and the only Fedora spin it could run well was Xfce and before Fedora when I ran Windows 7 on it I had to disable Window transparency and all the Aero baubles. I abandoned it only after the keyboard broke and by that point the battery was no longer holding charge too so I decided it's not worth it to sink cost into fixing and upgrading it to fit the times (battery, SSD, new keyboard, more RAM, etc.) and moved to a brand new laptop and Windows 10. It wasn't a money issue (or I'd go with keeping that husk of HP alive) but more of a personality issue, I didn't do anything power hungry regularly so that laptop was very fine for my web browsing, learning PHP, C, C++ and Lua, doing university work, writing LaTeX, etc. and I knew I'd move back to Windows from Fedora which would be an effort in itself too.

[0] - https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Saving_Lives.txt

[1] - https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/processor...

[2] - http://www.x-kom.pl/p/293547-notebook-laptop-156-msi-pe60-6q...
The pen versus the hand. What you do manually isn't expanded on paper, procedures and books. Yet it does require finesse, patience, precision, attention.
Only if you (strangely) assume they won't keep ramping up.
Armstrong was the chief enforcer of the omerta. He is personally responsible for preventing others from speaking out about doping. He ended the careers of two riders and successfully sued a British newspaper for libel. He dominated the most prestigious event in cycling through the most sophisticated doping operation in the history of the sport. Armstrong (and the flood of sponsorship money he brought with him) fundamentally changed the culture of professional cycling for the worse.

Armstrong wasn't alone in doping, but he thoroughly deserved to be made an example of. He posed an existential threat to the sport of cycling and the mistakes that allowed his reign must never be repeated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filippo_Simeoni#Feud_with_Lanc...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christophe_Bassons#1999_Tour

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2013/08/27/lance-arm...
Pedantic arguments like this can be a good source of fun as long as everyone approaches it in a lighthearted way and acknowledges that it's pedantic. I could certainly see a conversation around pass-by-value/reference happening in my office, but if it got to the point of people getting angry at each other, that would be a sign that something is very wrong.

When actually communicating with people for the purpose of conveying ideas (not just for fun), it's best to avoid terminology where not everyone has the same understanding of the definition. Open discussions about terminology are also a good way to identify these types of ambiguous terms and possibly come up with technical terms that everyone agrees on.
Hey Tesla, how hard can it be to actually make a car?
Though that charger is not fully standards-compliant, it is one of the more compatible chargers out there because it's popular. So if the laptop doesn't work with it, it probably doesn't work with the others, either. That's unfortunate. Thanks for the info.
As a researcher in this field I'll just add that in many cases, automating the mat sci workflows (the sample prep and the characterization) is a massive leap in and of itself, even without adding machine learning. The benefit of machine learning in many of these projects is to pick the automated runs optimally (choose he right neighborhood of composition space), which probably adds a 10-100x speedup on top of the already 100-1000x speedup gained from just not making and characterizing samples manually. It's truly a synergistic combination of advancements in both fields and has great potential for accelerated discovery. /shill
If you are doing an L7 http health check, then you should be able to validate a specific URI's expected successful/healty response.
There are a variety of mechanical systems used to combat this problem, not just thick grease.

Limited Slip differentials can be employed to ensure that one wheel can only slip so far before the differential locks and then both wheels are forced to rotate together. LSDs can be employed in 3 positions front, rear, and center. The front and rear will lock left and right wheels together, the center one will lock the rotation speed of the front and back axles.

You can also add manually selectable locking differentials in any of those positions instead. Frequently, you see LSDs in front and back and manual lockers in the center.

In off road applications it is more common to see manually selectable lockers in every position. Because of the lack of differentials, though, manual lockers put a lot of load on the drivetrain if the surface isn’t slippery.

The alternative, traction control can use variable differentials to send different power amounts to different wheels, typically by employing the brakes on the slipping wheel to force power to distribute evenly.

Obviously, there is a lot to this, but highlights some of the options.
Why not include a small script that backs up their playlist before upgrading, whatever the workaround? Pretend it's one of those Apollo 13 duct tape situations, I'm sure some solution would come up! I don't use Amazon fire but love VLC.