skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>> Wow, they (Google) really keep everything.. They've still got my trip to Europe from 5 years ago on there, not sure how that's useful to them at this point haha.

> They know you've traveled to Europe, they know all the places you went and how long you were in each one. How is that not useful?

But how is deriving those facts from 5 year old location data actually useful to them? AFAIK, they don't try to drive "engagement" by inducing nostalgia with push notifications [1]. I don't really see the use of old data like that for ad-targeting beyond a coarse "travels internationally"-type categories that don't really require keeping the data around.

[1] Remember when you were in Europe? Wasn't it fun? We were there too, following you. Please, please log on now to see what we tracked!
I can already imagine storage systems where the blocks are just written to memory before acknowledging as a synchronous commit, and reads occurring completely from this cache or for one direct hop from this cache. It's going to be amazing in the future as this tech matures. A persistent RAM will change a lot of our architectures for the better.
>I'm not sure what changed in the incentive structure for this to happen, and I would like to find out.

People started getting paid more for doing this because managers have no idea what programming actually is.
Definitely. Most of my Dell machines take 2-5 minutes to get to the "booting OS" part of the process, but a couple of them have at times taken 3 hours.

The latter is probably a firmware bug, but the best Dell ProSupport has been able to do to solve it is "flea drain" (unplug, hold the power button for 60 seconds, plug back in).
In my experience the app tends to evolve around jQuery selectors and event handlers, rather than having a well defined structure. This is not a fault of jQuery, as it never intended to solve those problems. Like you said, it is purely meant to solve the DOM issue.
Give me the rule "every source language load of a structure member, array or global variable, or anything loaded indirectly through a pointer results in an actual load" and I will still crank out fast code, by explicitly using local variables for caching the values coming from those places.
LoopBack Doc Search Powered by Watson
This problem is way deeper than web front ends. There were/are dozens of frameworks for Windows and Unix front ends too, before browsers were invented. Every year or two some new tool became popular which made all the previous ones obsolete.
Torrenting requires software and seeders which means your throttled by the seeding parties internet connection. Torrenting can be a good option but you can run into port issues or for restrictive IT policies it can be blocked. ISP's frequently throttle torrents as well. It all depends on what environment you have and the network of the recipient. MASV is intended to require nothing but a browser and enable transfers in a clean, easy to use user interface. In other words it's client-proof which many freelancers or service companies would understand it's not meant to be a replacement for major repeatable workflows that are happening from the same controlled networks it's meant for adhoc deliveries from on-set locations or project based work.
How does this solution compare to, say, Slack in your experience?
That's pretty much how SANs used to work.
Taking the addresses of variables defined register is denied; that's the only modern meaning of the specifier.
The fact that you're keeping track of your actual DOM and event handling at all? That's what I got sick of. Going from jQuery to React was a huge breath of fresh air.
http://gminton.org/choreo.html lets you doodle an orbital path and finds a stable configuration close to it!
Case in point: Buffet recently sold all their IBM holdings.

“Buffett’s stake in IBM plunges 94% to about 2 million shares”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-14/warren-bu...
There is an interesting take on this by a Reddit user named 'jerf' over on the Reddit discussion:

https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/8n00k2/why_is_...

I think this is the same as the HN user 'jerf', but am not certain.
Not that I care much about signalling, but you can't signal your education unless you bring you degree with you. You can signal your wealth.

Wealth generally signals success, and if you're successful no one cares about your education. Formal education also doesn't mean intelligence. You can be super smart and have no degree, and be successful.
Once you finally break free of the office/corporate mentality, suddenly the world opens up. The possibilities are so vast (but not all possibilities mean income).

Breaking free from the golden handcuffs (or in my case, aluminum handcuffs), you start to realize that high income and lots of stuff really doesn't matter as much as experiences. And then you might even consider doing work that doesn't leverage your brain and career experience. That's actually freeing, because it means you're allowed to go do a manual labor job for a week if you want to. You stop comparing effective hourly rates (which usually suck you back into a corporate or consulting world).

I envy the people who are born into entrepreneurial families. They may or may not go to college, but they usually do not start with the idea of "I go learn X in school so I can get a high paying job doing X". Instead, they seem more likely to seize opportunities with an expectation of success rather than a pessimistic view of cost/benefit. They will surely have more thin times, but they also have much greater chance of both hitting it big (selling a company) as well as actually filling their years with interesting experiences.
Take a Virtual Trip to a Strange New World with NASA – NASA
Ask HN: Is the word 'Frankly' too popular in TEDx talks?
To be Frankly I never heard so many times the word "Frankly" anywhere else than TEDx talks.

Don't you think so? Why?

P.S. Try and google 'tedx frankly'
It's a problem for other communities, like Python. I read a blog post recently from a well known python dev where he talks about explicitly cultivating "fame" around his open source tools. My experience, as one who has tried to promote my own tools, is that literally nothing good will come of it for the community as a whole. It's a bad practice in my opinion.

For example: https://github.com/pypa/pipenv/issues/2228
When I learned about the concept of "just barely good enough" I was thrilled by it. Lots of people been using the expression "good enough" and to me it feels like a defeatist idea. "They did their best! It's good enough, isn't it?"

http://agilemodeling.com/essays/barelyGoodEnough.html

Given the constraints of the estimate we've made for a story that could really go much longer, except that we've only allocated two days... I think the problem you're hinting at is that different people have different ideas of what the Minimum Viable Product should look like.

Accordingly, on my team where we're all under-trained with respect to Project Management and mostly just making this shit up as we go along, we've identified several other points on the curve.

It's suggested that one should make some nominal efforts to identify, and stop for a sniff along the way to JBGE:

"that's definitely not good enough, try again"

"I'll know it when I see it, but I'm sure that isn't it"

"kinda-sorta good enough"

"that's nearly good enough, except for this one thing..."

Identifying some of these points along the way (and making sure you notice when you've arrived at them) in my opinion is a great way to help ensure you're not actually aiming for points somewhere deep on the wrong side of the curve.

The mediocre team also may have trouble getting to Just Barely Good Enough because of overshooting. But in my experience that's usually not the problem. Nobody is working far past JBGE into the wee hours of the "OMG this is too much, I love it but how long did it actually take?"

If anything, the feature has to be shelved or scrapped, or handed off to someone else, because it's taking too long due to an error in calculation of trajectory. Spending too much time on the wrong things. Incremental progress is the goal, and perfect is the mortal enemy of good.
I second this -- actually writing is critical to finding and refining your voice. That, and actively soliciting feedback. Submit your posts to the relevant subreddits and HN, and don't shy away from constructive negative feedback.
Surprisingly the default setting for both Google and Facebook's location history is off for me, so I guess they haven't been collecting my location data after all?
Pixel android made by Google launch, specification
This is exactly what linux distributions do. Big ones with lots of contributors package around 10k libraries themselves. Small one-man shows package at least a few hundred common c / c++ libraries.

This is also why I'm not terribly interested in these language-ecosystem package managers. Good C libraries, such as I use in my own C projects, keep a stable backwards-compatible interface for years.
What is wrong with legacy code? Isn't every code that is deployed to production legacy? Because you cannot just change it.
> That said, I really wish proponents of other languages would get their
> stuff together about creating libraries that can be used from other languages.
> A library written in C can be used by anyone else. Many other languages are
> avid consumers of this functionality, many advertise it as a key feature, but
> very few return the favor by producing reusable code.

I kind of agree with you on this. I have a bidirectional binding process in my hobbes project at Morgan Stanley (https://github.com/Morgan-Stanley/hobbes) such that C/C++ functions can be viewed as hobbes functions and hobbes functions can be viewed as C/C++ functions (without translation).

This works as far as C/C++ types are adequate for your programming language, which obviously does cover a huge space, but there are types that don't translate well and there are staging considerations that don't translate either (e.g. there is a logical type that can be decided, but it's not decided until what might be regarded as "run time").

There are interesting problems to be considered in this area though, happy to discuss further out of band if anyone is interested (discussions on hacker news tend to be short-lived and shallow IME).
Change is good, the issue is instability and volatility. Things have breaking changes far too quickly.
I love this because im closer to being right about my claim that eventually a restricted javascript will replace arch specific assemblies >:D
Web frameworks are churn-y because they are incredibly leaky abstractions covering really awkward impedance mismatches. This means that they are never quite satisfactory - and that just to use one, you need to be capable of building a new one yourself.

Think of a typical web app. Your data exists:

1. As rows in a database, accessed via SQL

2. As model objects on the server, accessed via method calls and attributes

3. As JSON, accessed via many HTTP endpoints with a limited set of verbs (GET/PUT/POST/DELETE)

4. As Javascript objects, accessed via (a different set of) method calls and attributes

5. As HTML tags, accessed via the DOM API

6. As pixels, styled by CSS.

--

Each time you translate from one layer to the next, there's a nasty impedance mismatch. This, in turn, attracts "magic": ORMs (DB<->Object); Angular Resources (REST<->JS Object); templating engines (JS Object<->DOM); etc. Each of these translation layers shares two characteristics:

(A) It is "magic": It abuses the semantics of one layer (eg DB model objects) in an attempt to interface with another (eg SQL).

(B) It's a terribly leaky abstraction.

This means that (a) every translation layer is prone to unintuitive failures, and (b) every advanced user of it needs to know enough to build one themselves. So when the impedance mismatch bites you on the ass, some fraction of users are going to flip the table, swear they could do better, and write their own. Which, of course, can't solve the underlying mismatch, and therefore won't be satisfactory...and so the cycle continues.

Of these nasty transitions, 4/5 are associated with the front end, so the front end gets the rap.

(I gave a lightning talk at PyCon two weeks ago, about exactly this - stacking this up against the "Zen of Python" and talking about some of the ways we avoid this in Anvil: https://anvil.works/blog/pycon18-making-the-web-more-pythoni...)
> by creating an expectation that every engineer ought to be trained as a full-stack engineer,

This is false. Scrum requires the TEAM to be cross functional for the product it develops. It does not require each TEAM MEMBER to be cross-functional. Even 'full stack' (a concept not from Scrum) does not mean 'expert on everything'. Full stack means able to work with front- and backend frameworks for websites. A 'full stack' developer for example will not be expected to be a NLP or a ML expert. The full-stack-developer might have no idea about automated performance tests and he/she usually will not have deep UX skills.

I usually use 'T-shaped' or π-shaped as a requirement for team members. Horizontal skills enable the person to work in a Scrum team with all the added stuff (like automated testing, software repositories, task system, continuous integration, ...). Vertical skills add depths in one or two fields: backend development with Java, frontend development with JavaScript, agile testing, business analysis, database admin/programming, cloud infrastructure, etc.

Looks like you are setting up strawmans - another fallacy.
FWIW I don't think companies are allowed to purchase consulting services from their auditor, specifically because of this conflict of interest. In my experience, companies will have one of the big four as their primary auditor, than use some combination of the other three for consulting (in addition to MBB or any other firms).

In no way defending the value of these services though - their primary function is to shift culpability off of the executives IMO
> "The individual" was not held, by those people who enacted those laws, or by the majority of people who voted for those people, to be above the rule of law.

Correct. And had individual rights been upheld we could have avoided the costly lessons and lives destroyed by those rights-trampling laws.

> Nor was the individual held to be above the rule of law in Enlightenment thought.

The theory of natural rights, which was central to the Enlightenment, held that the laws and governments were formed only to secure individual rights and could not be made to supersede them. A constitutional convention is voting on how to best uphold and respect those rights, not overrule them.
Ah well. That sadly makes it uninteresting for me :(
What the f*** Google?
Why in hell does Google, after sending me a verification code that I enter successfully, and enter one of the bleeping backup codes that I got a couple of years ago, want to know when the F I created the account? How the F am I supposed to remember that, and what bleeping relevance does it have?
While there is no requirement to rotate the firm, it is a requirement in the US (via SOX) to rotate the lead engagement partner every 5 years.
This sort of sarcastic, content-free comment doesn't contribute much, and isn't a great fit for this community.
Just to be clear we are not just using the default Azure setup. We have our own proprietary TCP acceleration technology in use on the Azure network and have 9 servers globally enabling acceleration. This test just shows you regular upload to Azure not a routed upload through our network.
Not really - those things exist in native frontend as well but it's more stable than js. Writing GUI is not trivial, people take stuff like data binding/templates/MVC etc. for granted nowadays, go check out early desktop UI libraries like say win32/MFC/winforms/gtk+. Took a long time to get to stuff like WPF, Qt quick, etc.

With browser there were several constraints :

ES5 is extremely error prone and scales very poorly to larger codebases

slow JS VMs

missingt for sane layout like flexbox

1. Got better with npm, we pack, es6 transpilers, typescript/flow and tooling built along the way

2./3. Got solved by finally depricating everything < IE9 (IE in general if you're lucky) and tooling

I'd say angular is relatively stable now and decently productive once you get a hang of their patterns, I've been using it for different frontend projects since early betas, written ionic apps for mobile with it - have very few complaints about the framework, some of the stuff didn't always work along the way (like ahead of time compilation, i18n) but recently (5+) I've had 0 issues with the framework and I'm quite productive with it. I think the alternatives will mature as well and things will settle.
> All of this generality made it hard to say anything useful in some areas, so you end up in some cases just calling it Undefined, since there was no consensus on how it should be defined.

This is a very valid justification of implementation defined. Maybe even unspecified. But undefined? How could you justify that?

Even if some platform does not support something at all, and goes bananas whenever you do it (say, signed overflow that traps), what would stopped the standard to say that whether the stuff is undefined or not is platform dependent?

Perhaps the committee didn't anticipate how unreasonable compiler writers turned out to be?
Internet Trends 2018 [pdf]
Latter. So college graduates but woefully weak in even basic math.

At the time, the school (which was a moderately elite one) even had a "math camp" prior to classes beginning for those who weren't comfortable with their math skills. But obviously there's not a lot you can do for students who are essentially at a grade school level.
Attackintel – Tool to Query the MITRE ATT&CK API for Tactics, Techniques, M
Related to this is the idea that people believe front-end software development is easy. In reality, it's one of the most challenging, chaotic and difficult parts of the development chain, especially when talking about web development.
> > the article complains that unsigned integer overflow is defined in C while signed integer overflow is not.

> The article complains that signed integer overflow is undefined, while unsigned integer overflow is not. There's a difference.

You are correct.

> > the Clang team believes this makes loops up to 20% faster

> I'd love to see the benchmarks they conducted.

It wouldn’t surprise me if they have micro benchmarks. I convinced myself they were telling the truth based on crude instruction counting: a loop must be converted into something like:

- loop body (assume it contains at least one machine instruction)

- increment loop variable

- (for unsigned): clear overflow flag

- test loop variable, exit loop if appropriate

- goto beginning of loop

I believe they don’t have to actually check the overflow flag, it’s OK to let the overflow happen. But they do have to clear the flag to avoid a spurious error if the flag gets looked at later.

I’m no expert, so it’s possible this oversimplifies things, but removing the instruction to clear the flag does remove a big chunk of this loop. But it’s a big chunk only because it’s a tight loop.

For the record, I happily use the foreach loop constructs in C++, D, Java, C#, Python, Perl, etc. but I originally avoided them until I saw a comment by Walter Bright that there is no performance penalty in D (the compiler rewrites the loop appropriately; there may be a penalty in Java because the feature might be defined in terms of their relatively heavy iterators).
Likewise, Ember holds the record on that list at 6.5 years, it was forked from SproutCore which goes back even further.
Pointers are a red herring; misuses of pointer dereferences are the manageable form of UB that programmers understand well, in reference to memory models that are straightforward. It's all the nasty gratuitous UB that wrecks the C language: behavior that could be well-defined without changing the character of the C language, or making incorrect any existing programs that are correct.

Like UB in the preprocessor. WTF? Processing a bunch of tokens at compile time should be totally safe. But no: if the ## token pasting operator glues together two tokens which do not look like one token, the behavior is undefined.

It worked differently on different compilers 35 years ago and was coded as undefined. It being undefined gave the compiler writers no incentive to fix their implementations to some common behavior (like diagnosis of an invalid token paste).
Got any citations?

Web search shows the opposite:

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/25/what-the-20-largest-retailer...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-25/target-wi...

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/11/walmart-to-boost-starting-wa...
As a patient, I'd love to be able to archive/hold my own comprehensive copy of all of my health records.
$1+

Science and Philosophy - Alfred North Whitehead

The Genome - Sergei Lukyyaneko

Mind: A Unified Theory of Life and Intelligence - Frank T. Vertosick Jr.

On Shaky Ground - John J. Nance

Atomic Accidents - Jim Mahaffey

Martian Summer - Andrew Kessler

The Goldilock's Enigma - Paul Davies

Water: The Fate of our Most Precious Resource - Marq de Villiers

$8+

In the beginning... - Issac Asimov

Absolute Zero and the Conquest of Cold - Tom Shachtman

How to Cool the Planet - Jeff Goodell

Louis Agassiz: Creator of American Science - Christoph Irmscher

No Turning Back - Richard Ellis

The Edge of Physics - Anil Ananthaswamy

The Boy Who Played with Fusion - Tom Clynes

X-15 Diary - Richard Tregaskis

Essays in Science - Albert Einstein

A Devil's Chaplan - Richard Dawkins

$15+

The Canon - Natalie Angier

Earth: An Alien Enterprise - Timothy Good

The Sphinx at Dawn - Madeleine L'Engle

Genius: The Life and Science of Richard Feynman - James Gleick

Unnatural Selection - Mark Roeder

Chaos: Making a New Science - James Gleick

Dinosaurs Without Bones - Anthony J. Martin

Strange Angel - George Pendle

Farewell to Reality - Jim Baggott

Moon Shot - Jay Barbree, Alan Shepard, Deke Slayton

Seven Elements That Changed the World - John Browne

Time Travel in Einstein's Universe - J. Richard Gott
Yeah.

Reddit Gold used to go into funding infrastructure. Gold buyers used to be able to name servers and all.
You could actually make a reasonable argument for the opposite of a winter, that we are heading into an unprecedented AI boom.

The article's main argument for a winter is that deep learning is becoming played out. But this misses the once in history event of computer hardware reaching approximate parity with and overtaking the computing power of the human brain. I remember writing about that for my uni entrance exam 35 years ago and have been following things a bit since and the time is roughly now. You can make a reasonable argument the the computational equivalent of the brain is about 100 TFLOPS which was hard to access or not available in the past but you can now rent a 180 TFLOP TPU from Google for $6.50/hr. While the current algorithms may be limited there are probably going to be loads of bright people trying new stuff on the newly powerful hardware, perhaps including the authors PVM and some of that will likely get interesting results.
At least we've been moving glacially in that direction, thanks to UEFI & faster booting. POST, device initialization, etc has begun to stick out, and is slowly being improved.
Exactly. You need the end-to-end backbone working so that you can start adding end-to-end user-visible behaviors on it, a few at a time.
It's a status symbol. To them the Rolex is like a code base written in idiomatic Haskell, the Casio is a code base for a pet shop written in php sprinkled across a dozen html files.