skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'd blame it on taste variability. I'm a fan, and some of the criticism I read in the thread surprised me very much as well. Between general taste and the standards set by other stuff one reads, there's plenty of variability.

RE hardness, I'd say it's 90% hard by volume. The protomolecule is a core plot point, but its magical properties aren't big part of the story, by volume (with possible exception of Cibola Burn). Beyond that, the only "out there" elements are the absurd fuel efficiency of the Epstein drive, and the plausability-stretching stealth tech. But it may be that my threshold for hardness is lower than yours. I wonder what other things you would classify as not being properly hard?
Brian Goetz said:

> We are "reclaiming" the syntactic real estate of "_" from the space of identifiers for use in future language features. However, because there are existing programs that might use it, it is a warning for identifiers that occur in existing syntactic positions for 8, and an error for lambda formals (since there is no existing code with lambdas.)
My car (a Honda) won't lock with the button on the door handle if the key fob is inside, so I don't forget it.
If you have dual stack, any A record will get used some of the time. It's part of Happy Eyeballs.

I suppose that you could add a long artificial delay to the IPv4 service.
I don’t eat meat at all, so this would be an option for people who are ethically against meat but might feel they “need it” for health.
Something a lot of HNers seem to forget is that people used to build websites just for kicks. You like DragonballZ? You make a DragonballZ page on Geocities just for the hell of it. No adsense, no Google Analytics, no search-engine optimization or newsletter or investor pitch... that part of the early web seems to really have faded, and it's a pity.
While this syntax looks decent to me, I'm curious why they didn't go with a heredoc approach, e.g.:

String s = <<<TEXT
<html>
<body>
contents
</body>
</html>
TEXT
It won't do much. It'll definitely get rid of some low-value companies but that's about it.

People think that adtech has some incredible insights but 99% of data is terrible. If you check your profile at any major site, you'll quickly find that you're probably in several conflicting segments that have nothing to do with you. Context is still king for any marketer who knows what they're doing, but unfortunately the industry is overwhelmed with subpar talent and politics through layers of agencies that buy buzzwords like "AI" and "data". Barely any adtech companies have a direct link to a person, and any links that did exist are even harder now with adblocking, 3rd party cookie deletion, ephemeral mobile device ids, IP renewals, and other noisy and loose signals.

Interestingly, big companies like Facebook and Google that have user logins and 1st party data connections will actually benefit from the higher industry regulation and are not going to lose any of the data that users willingly give to them. ISPs are another major source of data, along with credit agencies and banks, and now giant ecommerce companies like Walmart and Amazon, all of which have very accurate and exhaustive histories and will see little change from GDPR. Overall it's well-intentioned, and good progress, but what it will do is vastly overstated.
I had very similar experience with Facebook when tried to check my profile.
Out of 20 interests only 4 were correct

I think it is an intentional stretching the interests way to far to look better for advertisers.

In more details:
https://levashov.biz/can-trust-facebook-audience-interests/
>"Is it me or are we asking too much of our relationships?"

I understood the thrust of the article to be "the quality of human interactions" with our friends(its even in the title.) How can that be asking too much? Is it even possible to launch an actual friendship without meaningful interactions?
Type systems are leaky abstractions. [...] I think it is a good idea design wise to account for that possibility, and give people the ability to completely bin the type system when they need to.

Agreed on both counts, if we're talking about having escape hatches like `unsafePerformIO`. Maybe even `undefined`.

But I grimace a little whenever I see someone criticising the prevalence of runtime problems like, say, null pointer exceptions in Java, and then in practically their next breath advocating a functional programming language with a better type system like Haskell... and giving a neat example that will quite happily compile and then crash at runtime when given an empty list as input because it used a partial function like `head` without checking. This sort of gaping hole in the protection of the type system is less welcome.

Could you elaborate [on 27 different ways to handle errors]?

I think gizmo686 did a nice job of covering this in another reply to your comment, and I added some further thoughts of my own in a reply there.

In our current context, I note in passing that the issue of throwing from pure code when catching needs IO is another somewhat counter-intuitive result that we might instinctively expect the type system to protect against.

Compared to which language [can Haskell not handle basic record types very elegantly]?

Perhaps C, C++, C#, Java, and friends as a starting point? At least the names of members of structs/classes there are used in context and don't clash with the same name used in a different context.

Haskell also has the same challenge as any functional language when it comes to constructing new values from existing ones where there is deep nesting. As you say, lenses can help there, but bring some additional complexity of their own.

Compared to what? Would you consider Haskell better for type safety than say Java/C#?

Yes, certainly. I'd much rather write software that involves complicated logic and needs high reliability or longevity in a language like Haskell than a language like Java, other things being equal.

I'm just wary of putting Haskell up on too high a pedestal, partly to avoid setting expectations too high for those not familiar with it yet, and partly because I think a lot of mainstream languages could benefit from relatively simple improvements in their type systems without necessarily encouraging the "using types for non-trivial things requires five PhDs" stereotype.

I assume you meant the features you noted above as missing (easy record types, coherent error handling, lack of partial functions) in Haskell but widely available in other languages -- could you note which ones you had in mind?

Yes, for example the struct/class member naming mentioned above. Almost every statically typed language I have ever used does records better than Haskell, because Haskell doesn't really support record types at all, it just has a bit of syntactic sugar that creates the illusion of that support if you don't look too closely. (This assumes the basic language without the various relatively recent GHC extensions/proposals, of course.)
A game accepting the token would be able to get an instant potential audience of people who had built up a lot of value in it already
>anyone who's working with containers hits problems from reusing the same subnets sooner or later

Docker doesn't support IPv6, I think.
> Strassen's algorithm is asymptotically the fastest known algorithm for dense matrix multiplication

Coppersmith–Winograd approaches take the crown for asymptotic scaling in matrix-matrix multiplication [1].

It kind of blows my mind that a tight bound on the complexity of matrix-matrix multiplication still isn't known!

Edit: Some quick googling shows that François Le Gall took the crown in 2014.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_complexity_of_ma...
Your article was the content of the link I originally submitted.

Mods: Can you update thread to point to the above link? Bloomberg bamboozled my post.
Courtesy of FreeBSD’s SIGIFO
https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=siginfo&sektion=3&...
No, it's not. Robinhood hides non-Plaid linking options behind a "don't see your bank?" button at the very bottom of a long list of banks that few people are even aware is an option. The point is that even smart people on here seem to have no clue that Robinhood is collecting this information when they link a bank account through Plaid because the permissions you grant are that opaque.
The Decline of Working Hours per Year After the Industrial Revolution
This is the life-long volunteer work of Al Kossow, who is now Software Curator at the Computer History Museum. http://www.computerhistory.org/softwarehistory/team/Al,Kosso... Also a 'thank you!' to the various mirrors that help share their bandwidth. Yes, a truly incredible and inspirational contribution to all geeks interested in preserving those bits! Al does this because he thinks it's important. True Hacker Spirit !
XML is OK, but it's not exactly human-readable, nor does it play well with version control tools. You can actually edit OpenSCAD and Markdown files and be reasonably productive.
Almost everyone in my life knows to turn the lights off when they leave the room too. It was also drilled into us as kids to not waste energy. I've drilled it into my SO. It's really not that difficult of a habit, switches are by the door.

Can't control roomies but that's about it.
Why should I have to comb through my imagination looking for a problem that fits this solution? No other technology community has to use so much exposition to convince others why their technology is useful.
CDN networks are well equipped for this because of their large geographical footprint. If they can terminate "bad" requests closer to their origin then they don't add up nearly as badly for the application server.
MNPG Satellite Console
> Event sourcing and CQRS as a whole leads to horrific complexity quickly, especially if you violate certain constraints.

This has been my lived experience with it, as well. I find that, in retrospect, the complexity was really not worth it.

And now, with regulation like GDPR, how do you handle things like the right to be forgotten in an (and especially if it's a legacy app) ES/CQRS architecture? What I've personally discovered as the approach we implemented at work is horrifically complex, to borrow your words.
Nice!

I regret to report though, but something is broken - nothing above the SUPERHOT videos section is clickable :(.
Time and fees from exchanges. Some routes work out OK, some not so great. Often the problem is liquidity in local markets. Even for small amounts. What look like arbitrage opportunities are really information about money movement inefficiencies.
I used it playfully/jokingly, but perhaps in poor taste given the article's content
Yeah, has anyone seen the recent dramatic acceleration in GPU/TPU/etc computation? [1][2] Cost per flop has significantly decreased.

The reality is that moores law has petered out, but we have algorithms now (deep learning) which are optimized for parallel execution.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLOPS
[2] https://aiimpacts.org/current-flops-prices/
* Your job is to put money in companies with low valuations, that you will eventually be able to exit at a high valuation.

It's all rainbows and unicorns, until someone hands you cash and you manage to exit your private, illiquid investment.
It could be just the demo. I've never experienced sluggishness of even older hardware with the actual app
> Then what are they using instead? Whatever it is, how does it provide the basic functions? Does it call into native NT API directly?

They use a PAL, each platform has it's own PAL and the Windows Kernel as two (WinRT and Win32).

https://www.zdnet.com/article/how-microsoft-is-taking-on-the...

> What? Win32 is not part of the kernel, it's a layer on top of the native NT API (or VMM32, if you remember Win9x...)

It wasn't. When WinNT hit the scene in the 90s there was definitely a distinction between Userland and Kernel space but by XP there was so much encroachment. MinWin was the creation of horizontal layers of separation.

https://betanews.com/2009/12/02/mark-russinovich-on-minwin-t...
I've been holding off adding a bank account till I open a new one specifically for robinhood
I use remote black hole routine announcements to the upstream ISPs to filter source or destination addresses from traversing the congested link.
I've never tried to serve HTTPS locally without a proxy (ngrok etc.) or behind a load balancer, because I always end up serving the app with one or the other. And now there's Let's Encrypt. Why would you ever develop with HTTPS locally?
One of the biggest reasons is that the US essentially subsidizes drugs for many other countries, such as Canada, that impose price controls, and threaten to allow other manufacturers to provide the drugs in their countries if the companies don't accept the imposed price. This enables these countries to get access to new medicine without paying the cost of developing the new medicine. Its time to end the trade war on medicines.
These are just syntactic sugar, not going to change much to the way Java programs are coded. I found these changes rather tame compared to historical ones. Java 8 (lambdas), Java 5 (generics, annotations) and Java 1.1 (inner/anonymous classes, reflection) were far more disruptive.
I've had Spectrum for the last 4 years. I know they've been slowly rolling it out to their entire network start last year. My connection currently is ipv6 enabled. I might be they are reconfiguring your area to their own ipv4 and ipv6 standards.
Hey, speak for yourself pal. Some of us have been making shitty websites all along.
He's talking about the positions, not the people in them.
The point is to compare RH with other brokerages. Right? If everyone is using Plaid, then you are still better off not paying 4.95. Or, are you claiming nobody else is doing it but them ?
They are probably referring to this: https://www.martinfowler.com/bliki/CQRS.html
>"The scrubbing centers buy or build mitigation boxes that take large volumes of traffic in and then do heuristic checks (liveness of sender, protocol anomalies, special queueing) before passing it to the target. There's some in-line layer 7 filtering happening, and there's continuous source'

Where these heuristics done in hardware then? ASICs FPGAs? Could you elaborate what the "liveness of sender" and "special queueing" heuristics are?
Has anyone compared the rates of carbon monoxide poisoning with and without keyless ignition? I could actually see an argument for keyless being safer: if people can leave a car and completely forget to turn it off, they can certainly do that and forget to take the keys with them. At least with the keyless ignition you have the _possibility_ of being alerted to your mistake (my Toyota beeps so loud that it would be pretty much impossible to ignore).
I was hoping to see some well-cited figures and facts supporting the author's viewpoint, but instead was greeted by a cacophony of hyperbolic, smugly-worded, opinionated ranting of an ad hominem nature. Not sure why people on Hacker News would buy this noise. I can understand that there are arguments against the Singularity, but this ain't it.
I mean random chance means some of his predictions came true, some of them insightful, but a lot of the stuff on this list [0] is wayyy off the mark. "Average life expectancy is over 100 :P

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictions_made_by_Ray_Kurzwe...
Great job on SUPERHOT! All the smashed monitors are worth it ;)
For what it's worth, the easiest way to demonstrate a round earth is to Skype/Facetime/$equivalent someone in a different timezone. The more dramatically different the better. Get them to let you see where the sun is in the sky. On a flat earth, it should be the same answer for them as for you.
Nonetheless, the option exists. Meaning the data on the statement is really of no use to RH & isn't part of their business model.
> I believe the book's been out of print for sometime.

Hmm, I did not know that (I have a print copy of that book).

> I wouldn't post a link to a pirated anything.

OK. But just in case, someone still wants a physical book, they can get it used from Amazon (can talk about Amazon in US) for ~$3.
Silicon Valley Faces Regulatory Fight on Its Home Turf
Because returning void means that, on most platform, return whatever is left in %eax at the time of function termination.
> is almost a foregone conclusion

I agree. I think an economic singularity should be a given, based on the fact that all economic ROI is at least exponential (pe^(rt)) and has consistently performed exponentially for over 100 years.

The notion that this will mean a happiness singularity, complete freedom of choice for everyone, or even human survival are up for debate.
At work we use story points (Fibonacci series) to estimate tasks. At first, when we were deciding between time and story points, I wasn't totally on board with the idea of story points because the size of a point seemed completely ambiguous--you could even define 1 point to be an hour or day making them equivalent. Some argued a benefit was that our estimates couldn't be used against us if a task took longer than estimated. However, since a team velocity is tracked it seemed that the story points could still be converted to a time estimate. In the end though I have come to appreciate using story points, specifically Fibonacci points, for three main reasons: 1) Time estimates never seemed to be accurate; 2) In my experience it's easier to gauge relative complexity; 3) Using Fibonacci numbers inherently models the "fact" that larger tasks are harder to estimate.

We use JIRA for tracking.

I must say though in the end estimating things still always seems like a waste of time to some extent. I think it's more important to just have a prioritized backlog. I'm also always reminded of the following excerpt from the book Peopleware: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14371140.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGXbiSwcqtM

Tom Scott on the 'Protected Views' or 'Sightlines' of London. It explains some of the legal issues about heights in London.

TLDW (even though is 3 frickin min. long): You have to be able to see St. Paul's (and have nothing behind it) from a few special vantage points. Something he didn't mention is the issues about London vs. The City of London, which also affects building heights, though less so.
I think you're right on. A lot of my friends are of various ages and backgrounds with different hobbies. Some friends I only see once a month when we want to get together for some beers and catch up. Some less than that - and there's nothing wrong with relationships like that. In fact I would argue that those relationships tend to be more sincere.
It seems like there's reasonable evidence that this is true: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28768080
I have both the OSTC4 and OSTC3 Plus. The screens are extremely visible underwater, with the OSTC4 having a better resolution and much larger screen (equivalent brightness). There are quite a few YouTube videos of other computers to compare - these stood out. As far as computers go, they have all the features needed (even up to tech). I find having a nice piece of technology on my wrist provides some intangible comfort, especially on Blackwater dives :) The screen is so vivid I even managed to spot a battery warning (forgot to charge it) on my buddies computer from distance!
Yeah, this article actually confused me a bit, too. I always thought the common understanding of Luddite was "doesn't understand / doesn't care about" technology. Did nothing to dissuade that notion, either.
> Over time, Big Pharma learned how to game the law. As the patent for the original drug approached expiration, companies added wrinkles — a new coating for the pill, a time-release version, and so on — that they then patented. If the patents were approved, and they usually were, the exclusivity clock would start ticking all over again.

This is so misleading. When this happens, only the new "wrinkles" are patented. The drug itself becomes free for everyone to use.

> Hatch-Waxman worked exactly the way it was supposed to for a long time. For many high-priced drugs, once the generics flooded the market, the price went down by as much as 90 percent. Statins are a good example: The price of generic Lipitor is about $19 for 90 tablets, while the price of branded Lipitor is $165 for 30 tablets. The market share for the branded drug often dropped by 75 percent or more. Over time, Big Pharma learned how to game the law. ... The rheumatoid arthritis drug Humira is a perfect example of what has happened.

Humira is not an example of "gaming" Hatch-Waxman. Hatch-Waxman assumes that the secret sauce is a drug's chemical formula. It creates a process for generics to be created when the patent on that formula expires. Humira is what's called a biologic, where the secret sauce is not only the active ingredient, but the process of manipulating bacterial cells into manufacturing the drug: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-09-07/why-the-b.... AbbVie has another five years left on those patents.

The Hatch Waxman equivalent for biologics ("BPCIA") was only enacted in 2010: https://www.fda.gov/drugs/developmentapprovalprocess/howdrug.... Because the law is so new, it will take time before the generics industry figures out how to navigate the new process.

The article's list of policy recommendations is also ignorant:

> First, shorten the patent exclusivity period to 10 years. (Drug companies say they need the longer time to recoup their research and development costs, but the truth is most companies spend more on marketing than R&D.)

Drug companies have similar SG&A (overhead) to R&D ratios as tech companies: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16585194. The point, though oft-repeated, is completely nonsensical. Nobody wants to spend money on marketing. If drug companies could recoup their investment faster by spending less on marketing, they would.

> Second, outlaw the practice of paying companies to keep generics off the market and similar forms of gamesmanship.

It's already a violation of antitrust law: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/media-resources/mergers-comp....

> Third — and most important of all — don’t allow companies to extend the period of exclusivity beyond the original 10 years.

That incorrectly assumes that patenting improvements to a drug extends the period of exclusivity of the original drug.
Legitimate question; if you're not American, why do you think the NSA would be impacting your individual freedom, or perhaps the freedom made available by the state(s) of your citizenship(s)? Or were you more referencing that it is violating your privacy?
Another interesting example I forgot to reference is Typeform's interactive blog post.

https://www.typeform.com/blog/human-experience/cui/

The bot experience gives it kind of a rap genius commentary from the original author. So it almost feels like you're reading the post with the author present next to you.
>"Once the traffic was detected, the signature was sent to a second system that was a series of hardware optimized for layer 7 packet inspection."

Was this custom DPI hardware or something from a vendor?
I don't believe for a second that they can make the data "sufficiently anonymized". That is extremely hard and pretty much every time "sufficiently anonymized" data gets leaked it turns out it weasn't sufficiently anonymized after all.
Discussion at dupe post:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17061411
"...made simple" might be a bit of an overstatement.