skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Thanks for replying in that spirit. I should have realised there was a very good chance that the original author would read my comment. Subconsciously I suppose I did else my fingers wouldn't have insisted on the "(sorry)" they put in there. I am culpable in the sense that I wanted my instant fix of Tokyo alternative culture and wasn't prepared for a longer read. That's largely on me. Of course if you did find a McDonalds on Mars that would be totally awesome and well worth writing about - a Starbucks in Tokyo, well. Maybe structurally you could add the western brands stuff as a kind of blog appendix, after putting all your Tokyo goodness out front. Just my $0.02 Thanks again for being a good sport, upvoted.
Wow that's terribly vague. Insulting people publicly is illegal?
From my own experience, Haskell is hard to learn. I have no grounding in maths, but that hasn't stopped me learning most languages. It's a pretty massive barrier to Haskell though, and I find that a lot of the community really struggle to explain things in terms that non-haskellers will understand.

The biggest problem I've found is a real inability to explain _why_ the things it does are cool, or what real-world applications they have.

I must admit that I also don't think it's a very pretty language. I like my code to be easy to read, and I just don't feel like Haskell fills that requirement. But that's obviously very subjective.

At the end of the day, I've found Rust more fun to learn and use, so I've been putting my time into that lately. Haskell is cool, but the time investment is high and the community is small, and I like to build things, rather than spend hours trying to figure out what a string of symbols mean.
I spent a large amount of personal time becoming an intermediate Haskell developer from 2009-2015, culminating in landing a job doing exclusively functional programming for an analytics team in a large company.

My experience made me give up on Haskell & functional programming entirel, despite my feeling that the principles of functional programming are often “better” than object orientation and other paradigms.

The only language-specific thing that turned me off of Haskell in a significant way was that so many important concepts in Haskell are implemented via pragmas that extend the language and either enforce syntax restructions, enable totally new (and often esoteric) syntax, or change the meaning of existing syntax.

This is really painful and makes you generally avoid great mew features and artificially limit yourself to more basic designs because of the learning curve and how committed to one siloed set of patterns you can become.

It reminds me of Dennis’s coffee shop idea in 30 Rock:

Dennis: One word. Coffee. One problem. Where do you get it?

Liz: Anywhere, you get it anywhere.

Dennis: Wrong. You get it at my coffee vending machine.
in the basement at K-mart. You just go downstairs. You get the key from David. And boom, you plug-in the machine.

^^ that’s what it feels like reading Haskell tutorials when all you want to do is multiple dispatch or heterogeneously type some built-in container, simple things in so many languages.

This alone wasn’t what put me off though. The real problem is sociological.

Most companies hardwire a feedback loop between development teams and product or business managers that teaches developers they will be rewarded for their ability to unsafely hack things into a Jenga tower of system components for the sake of rapidly addressing ad hoc business questions even when, perhaps especially when, nobody has the slightest idea if answering the ad hoc business request is likely to be worth the additional instability the hacks will put into the Jenga tower.

This is very nearly philosophically at odds with the spirit of functional programming, from a first principles level, which means even if you eke out a platform capable of dealing with this in a functional paradigm, youknow for sure that the business willnot see your work as valuable, and safety guarantees, correctness proofs, automatic parallelization, etc., will often notbe rewarded, meanwhile just hacking stuff into some C++ or Python codebase that “just works” will be rewarded.

It’s not a satisfying phenomenon, but it convinced me that it’s not worth investing any more of my time into functional programming.
http://swartz-report.mit.edu
Would they be able to clean up all the plastic and trash in the oceans? That's the robot I want :)
GHC can produce native libraries just like C or Rust.
Unfortunately we don't know what her overall tuition was- $95000 would be cheap for BA&MA pretty much anywhere. And that's another part of the problem- the universities price themselves like airlines. You hand the school all of your financial information and they set a tuition price just enough out of reach that a loan seems reasonable.

And while comparative literature seems extravagant, she could have gotten her degrees in physics and be facing basically the same problem.
The server is a proxy between a client library and a browser (or a browser driver like ChromeDriver). Like all good proxies, it can add some cool features to your workflow, but is not required for basic usage.

For example, you can download the Selenium client library for Python and drive Chome (via the ChromeDriver executable provided by Google). No Java required.

Removing the Java requirement for basic point-to-point (e.g. Python to Firefox, Ruby to Chrome, etc.) automation was a key feature of the Selenium 2 (aka WebDriver) architecture when Simon Stewart first released it back in 2011.
But... "don't be evil" now!
This is the kind of logic that can attribute anything to "toxic masculinity". Terroism! It exist because our society was built on the needs and wants of men. Low birth rates in wester countries. Its because our society was built on the needs and wants of men. High birthrates in other countries. Must be because our society was built on the needs and wants of men. Cancer, earthquakes and global warming. Toxic masculinity.

I don't just find such theories utterly tiresome just because they don't have any anchoring in history, but untestable theories are worth exactly as much as any other untestable theory.
Discussed at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13450828.
> What exactly do these publishers do that causes them to charge so much?

Bean Counting. Captive audiences are always at risk of extortion.

> Aren't they just hosting some pdfs

The internet has been happy to provide that particular component of their empire for free.

> keeping editors on staff to look over the papers?

That's mostly outsourced (for free) to other researchers.
You're probably aware of John C. Lilly, if not worth reading some of his work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._Lilly#Exploration_of_h...
My experience at the U of MD (probably dated, but man your summary sounds familiar...): http://www.dadhacker.com/blog/?p=755
You ask why Elbakyan is politically protected but Swatrz was not. Does Russia have no publishing conglomerates?
>The only language-specific thing that turned me off of Haskell in a significant way was that so many important concepts in Haskell are implemented via pragmas that extend the language and either enforce syntax restructions, enable totally new (and often esoteric) syntax, or change the meaning of existing syntax.

god the ghc extensions. good luck figuring out why something is happening that you don't expect.
I agree with this from my limited experience. However it feels like this ends abruptly. Did I skip over something or did I miss how we could remove composability boundaries at IO?
> The government could certainly choose to subsidize those students explicitly by providing loans on better terms itself. It's not like there are no other solutions.

Sorry if I gave the impression that I was trying to exhaustively enumerate the solution space. I was not! Thanks for the discussion.
Tearing apart printf()
Since when does "good software engineering" mean that you won't make any money?
"The left" is not some sort of grand organization with common leadership and common goals.

I certainly don't support tankies nor the USSR dictatorship and oppression, nor do the vast majority of people with left-wing views.
I don't think any CS education teaches language ecosystems. Students learn them on their own for whatever language they want. The choice they make is probably much more influenced by the popularity of the language or a job market, but not in which language they have to do all those tiny mostly algorithmic assignments.
Too late :)

http://www.justmediadesign.com.au/experiments/facebook-ad-pr...
But you carry around a runtime with managed objects that can’t be freely traded across the boundary to C libraries.
So, if I want to use the feature for what it's intended for, and post some code, people on mobile won't be able to read that, either.

But we're told that it's the user's problem, not HN's, and that we should quietly accept half-assed broken features and be grateful for them.

OK, got it.
Because imperative languages require less optimization (hw wise) at first sight.
The following is a video of someone installing Doom II on DOS, upgrading the operating system in-place 11 times, and running Doom on Windows 7 (around 24 years of upgrades).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPnehDhGa14
In the "battery" section, perhaps it is useful to mention that if you have a phone with a removable battery, you can buy extra batteries (normally $5 each on eBay) and a battery charger (also $5) to charge two batteries at once. You can carry multiple batteries to extend your battery life to a week if you want.
This got more upvotes than any of my technical HN comments. Proving the adage that sex sells!

P.S. I thought about including the link to the online trailer. But I'd probably end up banned. It's definitely NSFW.
> The Hydrogen One is very big. The prototype used we looked at was larger than an iPhone 8 Plus

Glad to see a review of this and know the dimensions more but the reviewer doesn’t mention when the phone is supposed to be made available by AT&T / Verizon
You'd be surprise how much weirder it gets when everything is evaluated eagerly.
But you have to link in the runtime, including the garbage collector.
Bitcoin is consuming as much energy as the country of Ireland
Tech Adoption: Design for experts; accomodate beginners (2016)
OK, let's try switching to from https://readonlymemory.vg/the-making-of-lemmings/. Both are great, but that has had larger and more recent threads (2016 and 2015):

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12527519

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9684830

while this has had smaller and older ones (2010 and 2009):

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1729348

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=876436
There is a non-subscription, licence-purchase model. They basically obfuscate it, (ok: kinder is "don't market it strongly") But there IS a licence model.

So mainly, the issue is how "hard" they make it to find. That, and the 'dont be evil, but hey, we changed our minds a bit' aspect to what was said in the past and now emerges.

The APP store doesn't help, but I think its ass-backwards to use that to "sell" the subscription model. Honestly? I could come into this now and not care, but as a licence holder, the way its being done irks me.

Just make it easier to find the licence option on the web page and in your apps, and I'll be good.
This project wouldn't exist without valuable feedback in conversation on HN and from someone "met" via the HN networking thingy called Kismet, which intros members here via email.

Thank you for making this possible. It has been rattling around in my head for years and failing to go anywhere until I got a smidgeon of valuable feedback.
Kroger automating its operations to challenge Amazon
You can't compile GHC unless you already have a GHC, so why don't you just use the one you have?
Thanks. I am just going to quote you direct for now and maybe edit it later. (If you object to that, I can remove it.)
because the world is too short
> Because the industry isn’t dominated by well thought out solutions. Most programmers I talk to love the idea of spending time and using the perfect tools to design outstanding solutions to problems. They discuss how much they supposedly like to learn.

I find that it's because "Well-thought-out" means different things to different developers. To developers who are familiar with Haskell, well thought out means sound categorical mapping from program almost in a Hask-is-a-category way. To enterprise developers, well-thought-out means UML diagrams. To a grey beard, well thought out means fitting everything nicely into 256 bytes.

I'm exaggerating in every way of course, and yes, the more mathematically minded will see that they're quite essentially the same (UML, categories, and even some sort of goedelization).

More importantly I think it's because there are different ways of expressing "well-thought-out"ness that developers tend towards the things they are familiar with - unit tests are easy to understand. Hindley Milner not so much - I find from teaching, it requires that conceptual leap to making formal inductions.
It's wild that you put this resource up to help combat FUD, only to have it run so rampant in your immediate comments.
It's not an uncommon meme that programmers and mathematicians possess a weird twist in the mind that allows them [in the strong form of the meme] to do, and [in the weak form of the meme] to enjoy doing, what they do. If you grant that, then it's a small step to admitting the existence of different sub-twists that incline you towards different parts of the abstract space. If you don't grant that, then consider it a rhetorical device for pointing out that comparatively few people like Haskell versus JS.
You're going off on a tangent.

The question wasn't "is it harder to figure out what the code does by reading it than reading well written documentation?", it was "how can you submit a pull request for documentation when there’s no documentation for you to understand the code with", and the obvious answer is: by reading the code—in fact, that's ongoing work by some of the project's contributors.
Couldn't have put it better myself - this article was clearly written by someone who's worked in an entirely disfunctional environment - or has read an article on "five why's" and missed the whole rest of the problem management framework.
Just an advice: read the article before writing a comment.
There is a relatively simple alternative. Just declare that if the government pays for most of the research, resulting articles cannot be copyrighted. It is already the case in the United States that most works by US government employees cannot be copyrighted. Once there is no copyright, there is no way to prevent distribution. If people paid to do the research, they should be able to get the results. There really is no excuse anymore for the old publishing System. It was important at one time, but its time has passed.
Stop using sticky notes to remember stuff
A simple solution to end the encryption debate
There are no perfect solutions, but dismissing all of them because they are imperfect (or mocking them as 'fun' and outdated) is a failure of thinking. Everyone's code is imperfect and has bugs, but that doesn't mean we should dismiss all code as unreliable. The reality is that some things are much more reliable than others, and critical thought is required to distinguish between them.

> doing the work oneself and make original meta research

It's extremely inefficient, and often impossible to do without domain expertise. Also, there's no reason to think that you are less biased than others.
Remembering the ‘Knocker-Ups’ Hired to Wake Workers with Pea Shooters
Part of this is that Haskell is seen as a language by and for academics. You can't even read about the history of Haskell because it is only published through the ACM for a steep fee. So unless you are part of the academic circle you won't be exposed to it unless you are ready to invest.

The biggest growth driver for Haskell is the financial world where it has seen quite a bit of adoption.
I feel like this is an unfair analogy. AirBnb and Yelp charge reasonable prices and take a mostly reasonable cut, if any at all. The publishing houses are charging enormous amounts, far beyond the value they add. Or so the argument goes.
Could I summarize your objection to Functional Programming in business setting as the fact that Object Orientation makes it simpler to model the businesses and thus easier to solve their problems?

If you think about a Function it does just one thing. But real world "agents" that run a business do many things. An OO-class has many methods, not just a single input and a single output.

And inheritance: Businesses differ from others incrementally. Inheritance is a way of modeling such incremental differences to a degree, explicitly. Even if inheritance is not perfect and can cause problems, it helps in many cases.
2017: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13825225

2015: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10483857
I've done a 9-5 in mostly Haskell since 2013. If you have specific questions about using Haskell in production, I can share my experience.

If you've had a bad experience with a piece of tech and draw a broad conclusion, I think it's reasonable if unfortunate that it left a bad taste in your mouth. But I also think there's a brighter picture to paint :)
Thanks for the pointer - I've just skimmed the last 2 chapters and looks like a good book but don't think it solves my specific problem (just to give more context, when I said amateur I'm doing this for fun not money, but have previously built an image processing pipeline from raw sensor output and I get the basics of wavelets, Fourier etc )

My specific question is "If I am matching a RAW stereo block (say 8x8 or 16x16 block), for sub-pixel resolution matching from two similar cameras, why (if at all) is it better to use DCT/Fourier matching e.g. matlab normxcorr2 or the elphel guys https://blog.elphel.com/2018/01/complex-lapped-transform-bay... , rather than try to match in the spatial domain (linear algebra). On writing this I suppose I better look at the H.264 and HEVC algos and see if they work in the frequency or spatial domain when they are looking at sub-pixel matches.
I did not ask that. She's on the run as far as I know.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/meet-the-w...

And it is 'Swartz'.
Certainly it isn't the most attractive solution - still it is possible and works well.

When it comes to moving things across FFI barrier, that is also very possible as there are all kinds of types (including stable pointers) in the Foreign.* modules that map onto C types.
I love that this is a blogspot page :) what are your goals with this project?
I see what you mean- you're saying that you can find 79mil cat videos on youtube, so you have 79 million examples of cat behaviours.

That might sound like a lot - but it's still not nearly enough to model a cat's behaviour. To convince yourself that this is the case, subtract 79 million from infinity. The number remaining is the number of cat behaviours that a model trained on 79 million youtube videos would never have seen and therefore not know how to deal with.

See, the point is not how much data you have- it's how much data you're missing. If the amount of data you have is a tiny part of the whole, then you can't model the whole very well.

It's already hard enough to train an image classifier to recognise still images (video frames) of cats. You're proposing to train some kind of model (it wouldn't be a classifier anymore) to recognise -and reason about- not only the likeness of a cat, but the relation of a cat with its environment; with arbitrary environments and arbitrary entities in those environments. And the cat is interacting with those arbitrary entities in the arbitrary environments in arbitrary ways.

Seriously, you're looking at an extravagantly large number that nothing we have right now can handle.

What is the quote about grandfathers? ~.^
Not really: https://www.dkia.at/en/node/180

Interesting enough you can still mark a code segment as 16 Bit and the CPU will execute it in 16 Bit mode.

https://www.wine-staging.com/news/2016-02-10-blog-wine-16bit...

The tricky part is that a LDT entry also contains flags which define if a segment contains 16 bit, 32 bit or 64 bit code. If you change to a segment, the CPU will automatically start interpreting the code inside the segment according to this value.

In other words, 16, 32, and 64-bit code can all coexist simultaneously and the CPU can switch between those automatically --- MS just decided not to implement it. Linux with WINE does, however.
> Other Western nations came in after that.

Which ones and when? I'm pretty certain that isn't the case.
A very young language that is (to my knowledge) not derivative of older ones unless you count Excel: https://www.luna-lang.org

It comes with C, JS, and Haskell interoperability, and it's implemented in Haskell, but the heart of the language is its visual representation. I have personally never seen anything like it before.
travel indeed.
I don't see how that is a big problem.
There's a big difference between kicking downwards (ala fascism), and kicking upwards (ala socialism).
Hehe. I left out that I was thinking of a system that used all the environmental monitoring to deploy such a disposable contraption only in calm/good weather - but then it would not be a substitute for satellite data - mote an opportunistic system for bulk backup.
You are completely free to not use Yelp or AirBnB, not the case for Elsevier. They can charge too much because they have a monopoly.
I got really tired of using the default sticky note widget on my Mac, so I created an app which I can use to remember stuff in between checking Hacker News, Twitter and Product Hunt.
Sure, I think we both agree that the price is not proportional to the service as I already stated. The grantparent post (and other posts here) was asking in a way that implied they weren't doing more than hosting pdfs. I was just pointing out that many of our lauded startups basically are just nothing more than network effect and content hosting as well. And in fact, if they could get away with charging Elsevier-like prices, they would immediately do so and be celebrated for it.
But for off-the-grid austerity, no place surpasses Tassajara. There is no electricity, no A-C and only basic heat in the cabins, and no cell coverage or Wi-Fi at all. There is one public telephone. Cabins are outfitted with one cold-water faucet and are lit at night, when needed, by kerosene lamps.

I was entertained that the author could not imagine anything more austere than heat, running water, and a shared telephone.

Here's a cheap tip for a stunning California retreat. Go to Yosemite, skip the valley, and spend a few days backpacking in the less-trafficked parts like Hetch Hetchy or Wawona. You won't have heat or the public telephone, though ;-)
Apparently you can. Note to self: Do not antagonize government by appropriating stuff that you can reasonably expect might belong to them and if you do hand it over at the first opportunity to do so with your hide in one piece.
I still think the US is unlikely to enforce a judgment for behavior that would have been lawful under US law. The existence of Privacy Shield (a program where US companies can voluntarily subject themselves to EU-style privacy regulations) seems to imply that, since it wouldn't be necessary otherwise. But no one can say for sure until the judge rules, so I can see not wanting to roll the dice...
My two cents: because, more often than not, worse is better.

And, recognizing that worse often wins, maybe we should consider the possibility that what we were categorizing as worse, was actually solving a different, more concrete problem.
> So even if an American court would never have ordered the domain transferred

American courts are typically quite sensitive to arguments made based on trademark law.
TeenSafe phone monitoring app leaked thousands of user passwords
30 Brand New Design Tools