skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There are a couple things about this perspective that don't sit right with me. It's heavy on detail but low on facts. And most of it is an attempt to pidgeonhole massive quantities of people into 13 groups "based on what [the author has] seen, and [the author's] limited understanding of the macroeconomics of income in the United States."

The bit that made me kind of boggle my eyes was this:

>These are the very rich, powerful, and deeply uncultured barbarians from all over the world who start wars in the Middle East for sport, make asses of themselves in American casinos, rape ski bunnies at Davos, and run the world

It's harmful to describe the behavior of ~60,000 people (or ~60,000 of anything really) so specifically. Globally, the struggle for power is a free-for-all even at the highest levels of play. Even in America, super-wealth does not automatically make someone the bastard spawn of hitler and skeletor. The Rockefeller Family Fund and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund have both divested from fossil fuels, and the family as a whole (even John Sr.) has made massive contributions to conserving America's wilderness.

I don't see what this article adds to the discussion of how power works and how it can be harnessed to produce socially optimal outcomes.
That's kind of my point - people know the rules for maths, and Python's function call notation is the same, so it's familiar and unambiguous to outsiders.

I understand that other languages make different choices regarding syntax and readability. This particular choice, while not inherently a bad choice, makes things more difficult for most people, and led to eximius's comment at the start of the thread:

> It makes code much more difficult to read
They also make a wonderful push lawnmower.
Agreed that the constitutional ratifiers wouldn't agree on a lot of modern constitutional cases; and that their original intent (what they were thinking of, specifically) when they wrote it would not fully suffice to provide application in modern cases, since they couldn't have thought of all the situations we're dealing with.

However, it's clear that the ratifiers had particular principles in mind, and that those principles are both discernible with careful textual criticism and applicable to modern cases.

> Even just the idea that the text holds some singular, original, unchanging intent, seems bonkers.

To think the text doesn't hold an unchanging meaning seems bonkers to me. How can the principles expressed in a legal document change over time? Sure, its application will change (or it ought to), but IMO to allow a text's interpretation to change is to (a) allow room for the text's principles to be ignored, (b) erroneously conflate legal interpretation and application, and (c) allow ourselves the freedom to "go with the flow" of modern trends and become unfaithful to the text.

I don't see how one can faithfully uphold the US Constitution (or any legal text, for that matter) without interpreting towards the authors' evident intent, analysing the principles behind it, and applying those principles. The text didn't arise out of a vacuum, and our interpretation doesn't have to either. We have a lot of help in the Federalist Papers, letters the ratifiers wrote, etc. -- all of which provide a helpful, reliable commentary.

In attempting to sever the real author from the text, postmodern literary criticism really dealt a hard blow to truth in textual interpretation. "Open text" legal jurisprudence is only one part of the fallout.
What people tend to not realize is that Apple has flagship models (iMac, MacBook, MacBook Pro) and secondary models (MacBook Air, Mac mini, Mac Pro).

The flagship models used to be upgraded as technology came available, but are now typically upgraded yearly. There's a suspicion that Apple held back the hardware refresh from WWDC partially because they weren't ready w.r.t. the keyboard repair program announced today.

MacBook Air is a zombie. I believe they want to kill it, but the retina MacBook is too expensive to replace it, and it sells extremely well (at high margins).

The Mac mini is a zombie, or perhaps a bit of a square peg. It was meant as the desktop switcher computer, where you plug in your old PC K/V/M and go. Then it kinda sorta rebranded to be upgradable as a server circa 2012 (with products like xServe discontinued), before actually losing those higher end upgrade options in 2013. I think most people don't expect it to be usable as a pro desktop, but Apple has a huge gap there since their desktop focus is on the All-in-One iMac. So like the MacBook Air, the focus is on low cost and good margins, not technology.

The Mac Pro they simply didn't predict the market well enough on. The GPU-heavy design they were going for and external peripherals might actually fly if it was coming out today, but general purpose computing didn't embrace using multithreading or OpenCL for getting better performance. So, the ability to use the power of the machine was a bit hit-or-miss depending on the application you were using. Worse, the thermal profile both had a max amount of power and required an even distribution of heat. GPU processing power and power consumption has scaled up due to the highly parallel nature, while Intel's power consumption has stayed relatively the same. The design didn't allow for them to swap out components for the newer ones that hit the market after release.

iMac Pro is relatively new and likely a specialty product, although I imagine Apple to take it seriously. So probably not a predictable once-per-year release schedule, but I don't see a reason for that design to get silently shelved and the line to stagnate.
> I am almost sure that both would be faster than Numpy; that would be a good comparison.

This seems a little unfair :). I’m pretty sure that if you’re using NumPy linked against MKL, it would be exactly as fast as Neanderthal running on MKL.

Matrix multiplication benchmarks themselves just aren’t that interesting when all they are doing is testing an underlying library.
Apple unofficially / officially said the failure rate was less then 5%. There was later some investigative work by a few Apple media that repair at Apple Retail and third party to confirm that figure. Failure ( Or Repair Rate ) or roughly 3 - 4%.

You see, that is the problem. I expect Keyboard failure to be LESS then 0.03% - 0.04%. Thanks to Apple, people finally realise how important the keyboard is, especially in these days and age, where Mac / PC are more for professional and business / work usage. 4% Repair meant 4 in every 100 Mac, even 0.04% is 4 in every 10,000. For Keyboard!

For every IBM / Lenovo, Dell, HP single Keyboard failure I have seen in the past decade of my professional career, there is like 10 MacBook Keyboard failed in the past 2-3 years. It doesn't mean other brand don't fail, but they are much less often, 5 times cheaper to repair, and many had three year warranty included. While All Mac only comes with a single year warranty.

I wish Apple bump the price by a small percentage, and include at least 2 years warranty, or even Apple Care by default. ( I know in EU this is included already ) We don't upgrade our Mac every 2 - 3 years any more. They have much longer life time. This will hopefully force Apple to think about design that is easier to repair for themselves, and much higher reliability so they do less repair.
How the success of the Chrysler PT Cruiser prefigured the 2008 economic crash
Agen Judi Dominoqq Online Terbaik 2018 – Asiapoker303
You don't have to agree that they have ownership. There are some people who disagree. It's an emergent phenomenon. There is no committee that decides this. But you would be fighting a difficult uphill battle, one that doesn't seem to have much upside (from my perspective).

The word's complex meaning is found in its enormously rich historical and cultural contexts.
OMG~ turns out the modification packs the pig's meat with gluten!!!
I would wait, they will announce some level of refresh in September, possibly with new auxiliary Apple designed chips or Face ID etc. and they will have fixed keyboard gate by then.
JVM Language Summit Agenda
Tell and share stories with cards
Is any one else going to call bull on Madagascar being described as "One Island" It's the size of the entire North East. It's twice the size of Britain.

The rest of the article's fine, but, really, click-bait much.
Red Letter Media’s Plan to Save Star Wars
hahaha I first read "federal pigs"
There's plenty of obvious cognates. Without thinking too much, with rather rusty German, and from your comment:

I = ich

have = habe

hear = hören

before = bevor [in some meanings to be fair]

and = und

[Your first half sentence is a good example :)]

is = ist

can = können [and in general the whole can/können, shall/sollen, will/wollen connection - though the meanings
have drifted a bit apart]

when = wenn

learn = lernen

see = seeen

word = wort

More generally, my experience is that literal (i.e., word-for-word) translations from German to English sound weird, but often comprehensible, while literal translations from French usually end up as gibberish.
I thought the question was asking whether there are any reds that are blue.

Edit: This isn't as clear as it could be if I was better with GIMP, but it should illustrate the idea. https://imgur.com/a/cRWhdTJ
A top Netflix executive is out after using the N-word
If we take the following questions:

P: "Is there life after death?"

Q: "Is X the same as not-X?"

Then you could argue that question P (and all "metaphysical" questions) amounts to or really has the structure of something like question Q, and that it's therefore paradoxical, trivial, or uninteresting because the answer is obviously "no" ("by definition", as you point out).

I would disagree for the following reasons:

First, if you interrogate people who ask question P what they mean by it, you're likely to find out that they're not asking anything like question Q, but rather something like the following question:

R: "Can one continue to exist in some form after your physical body stops functioning?"

Now, it's true that question P and R are different on the surface, but when most people ask P what they mean by that question is R. So underneath the surface, at the meaning level, they intend to ask R. Question R is not paradoxical, trivial, or uninteresting, and it has no obvious answer that could be arrived at "by definition".

Second, I believe even trivial-seeming questions and paradoxes are frequently much deeper and more interesting than they appear. Careful study and analysis of them could yield profound insights and areas of future research. Witness all the progress in logic from studying paradoxes and other "trivial" corner cases (like the Liar's Paradox[1], Russell's Paradox[2], etc). From such study you get things like Paraconsistent logics[3] and dialetheism,[4] which can fruitfully deal with contradictions.

Third, even things that are "true by definition" can be useful and interesting. Wittgenstein argued that all logical truths are tautologies. Well, if so, they're still worthy of study and have proven to be interesting and useful.

Finally, I am not convinced that all, most, or even many "metaphysical" questions can be charitably reduced to paradoxes, nor that they are trivially answerable "by definition".

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liar%27s_paradox

[2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_paradox

[2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraconsistent_logic

[3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialetheism
Weird that people haven't heard of them, they were super common here on the West Coast USA when I was in school.
Okay. I know a lot of languages, but not really functional ones (I have used Haskell, OCaml and Lisp (though that's not like this), but not much and long ago).

Maths is more type-dependent in the absence of parentheses. E.g. sin cos⁻¹ x = sin(cos⁻¹(x)), but A cos⁻¹ x = A × cos⁻¹(x).

By "ambiguous" I mean to people looking at the code. Obviously it's unambiguous and well-defined to the computer.
>I can give you an example of semiconductor manufacturing and its supply chain. Say, I am a company with X billions to throw at building a Fab. You could probably build one, but finding lithography suppliers, automation, building long term relationships with them and being able to do it in a cost effective manner is a monumental challenge.

Okay, all that sounds logical, but they're not building a fab from scratch here. They already have (IIRC) 30 operational fabs in China. If you said this in 1999 or 2000 when China had no fabs you could have had a point - but they would have proven you wrong because they did precisely what you said they couldn't do by throwing money at the problem.

>Another example is Tesla. They will and in the past have throw billions of dollars to build a solid manufacturing lines, suppliers and personnel; but you can see the challenge today when theyre trying to ramp up.

Tesla had never built a single car before they got started, I do not think its a comparable example.
very good point, thanks.

Getting a warrant is "easy" (far too easy) -- unless you want to get one on every person in your jurisdiction, forever.
It's $100k or 200 transactions. 200 transactions is just 17 customers with a monthly subscription.
Hard to be sure, but the Golf is occupying the same niche, small hatchback, that it was 40 years ago. Half a tonne of extra weight is hard to explain easily though. Wikipedia shows basic dimensions, but doesn't really explain where the weight went. But it's all cars, in all categories, getting bigger and heavier and almost becoming the next model up. There's nothing in what used to be small any more. A BMW 1 series is bigger than the old 3.

Today even downmarket brands like Kia and Daewoo don't have 70s and 80s era lack of equipment - everything comes with air bags, electric windows, ABS, GPS and so on. You used to buy a car and get a heater, maybe a radio. Pay extra for electric windows, sometimes even for mirrors and fog lights. That and more legroom doesn't explain hundreds of kilos and half tonne gains in cars of all types. I think the rest must be structural for crash resistance. Side impact protection needing thicker heavier doors, etc.

Random find: https://www.carthrottle.com/post/10-images-that-show-just-ho...

Comparing current and Mk1 Golf GTI's: http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/volkswagen/golf/87232/long-term... Amazing even the premium GTI had no power steering and no electric windows in the mk1.
> The constitution was written by visionaries who intentionally wrote it as a framework to serve as the foundation of a revolutionary new nation. It is vague by design so as to be forever relevant.

This in turn makes no sense to me.

Why would they go through the immense trouble to make this constitution, if they thought it could mean anything people wanted in the future?

How would that be different from the normal state of the time, that had no constitution?
The History of Adaptive Backoff Algorithms for Multiple Access
Directly no. Company was a partnership and I kept getting told they couldn't offer options.

Indirectly though my pay doubled in two years and then I got hired by Apple because of the resume I built.
Quite right, which is exactly why the article was just a brief summary, not including anything that didn't meet their standards, right?
Three Steps to Scaled Agile
Interesting to note that there is only two choices - city or commuter suburb with cars.
The third choice is villages and towns where people live with their own front door onto the street and still walk to work.
Move the work where the people are. Decentralise
> companies had no incentive to worry anymore

I know what you are saying, but I want to add that it's insane: The owners of the companies have to live in this world, as do their decedents. Also, they are not all sociopaths who don't care if people die and suffer.

I think it's a mistake to think they cannot be persuaded otherwise. Perhaps it's the powerful propaganda machine that runs through the WSJ and other business publications, but whatever the cause, it's a problem that I think can be overcome.
Why can't the bees be cultivated/bred?
I guess the craftspeople making scissors don't agree.

From occasional hobbies I find the sense of achievement from a manual or engineering task done well is actually far higher than from software. See Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.
A short introduction to Vue.js Props
It should be noted that you will run plenty of programs in the wild that don't respect this convention.
Can't the CIA hide trojans on unused sectors of storage that can't be detected by any known anti virus program?

You don't think they can't fake a VM?
Apple won't remove OGL support for years, but in the meantime now you know they aren't going to put engineering time in newer OGL features or specs.

Microsoft OGL on Windows Classic is a shim to whatever the graphics card maker provides. Effectively there are no OS that ship legitimate and non-deprecated OGL support today.

Android AFAIK is the only platform that ships/mandates OGL ES. There are shims to support OGL ES based on the platform 3D support, such as one GitHub project Microsoft published that uses DirectX or one that I believe ships as part of Steam on Mac platforms.

AFAIK there is no platform that ships and mandates Vulkan. Unfortunately Android does not require it on new devices yet.

This is really more like Apple deprecating their OpenSSL libraries - they are telling people that Apple isn't going to maintain it going forward, so you should stop using their copy and bundle your own.
Claims in an Internet forum aren't evidence. Also, rape victims back out of accusations all the time because of the trauma involved. Is there evidence?
Neighborhoods with good school districts also tend to have lower crime rates so that probably accounts for much of the difference.
> Exact divisors are not what they are cracked up to be.

They’re pretty nice if you use base 60, in which case you can figure out how to almost always approximate any division problem by something you already have in your reciprocal table.
I just realized that my 2nd reference died in an accident two years ago. No HR or head hunter complained do far, so I guess the problem is not a real problem.
I wouldn't reach out, let HR reach out. If they want to give reference, fine. If not, HR will ask for another reference.
I don't know anything about Rails but most memory leaks in managed languages are stuff like lists growing infinitely large, parts of them pointing to data that is no longer relevant. Think badly implemented caches, stuff like that.

If you have enough not-perfectly-cleanly-separated layers of data management interacting, then this gets hard to debug pretty fast.
I didn't say it was unambiguous, just hard to read. Literally visually parsing it is more difficult than with parens.

Depending on how dense the code is, it isn't that bad. But it is another barrier to understanding.
> If you're making $100k to each 50 states,

Isn't it $100k or 200 transactions?

200 transactions is just 17 customers with a year of monthly subscription payments.
> Who's to say they are "privileged"

The employee who is familiar with them.
Link please? I'm clearly not as well versed with him as I should be. I always thought of him as a harmless, albeit eccentric, goof. I was honestly concerned when I read the title.
This really isn't as bad and people make it seem. If you're trusting the vendor and aren't going to read the code anyway it's no less safe than installing a package.

I don't like installations like this because they're messy, hard to track, harder to clean up, don't lend themselves to mass deployments, don't provide any integrity verification, the list goes on, but they're not particularly unsafe.

These things exist because there aren't good package that don't require root. Maybe we'll get there eventually.
There are many reasons to say that 'he seemed fine' which is why I think people say it so often. They rarely say that 'he seemed happy' though...
so I got this line ... what does it mean ? (I vaguely remember having about 2 BTC there ... ) 1384381780866513,"2013-11-13 22:29:40",716300,94b5ad4c-2a91-4e16-bb00-7c95a13a522b,456130f6a84dff2ee89fcb3d9a21c64a,NJP,sell,USD,1.99,875.6199,99.665,87268.639,5.25372,99.665,523.612,0,0,IL,02
TL;DR People resist to change.
My last visit was 4 days ago.

I can confirm that the same top case part number has been used in all cases.
Just to add to this, my 8 (not plus) is the same. It’s also the only one I’ve used a case on, and in a short time is more scratched than any previous iPhone I’ve had.
The Edit link should still be active.
From 2003:

"Los Angeles officials have asked that manufacturers, suppliers and contractors stop using the terms 'master' and 'slave' on computer equipment, saying such terms are unacceptable and offensive."

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/ptech/11/26/master.term.reut/
I wonder if someone in China was thinking the same? Because the reality is now it is Chinese.
Every large company I've visited in Europe seems to have an ex-pat group, based around the cultural identity of "foreigner".

I don't see why a (say) large French company would blink at (say) Swedish employees having an employee group of people interested in Swedish culture, who have a Swedish-style coffee break once a month, and organize events around midsummer and other holidays.

Do you think a Swedish employee group at Crédit Agricole is a problem?

You make "internal corporate tribalism" sound like a bad thing. Is a photography club also internal corporate tribalism?
Agreed that GitLab could really do with some development of boring, unsexy, wholly necessary features now that they're seeing some well-earned adoption. Please, please, please add batch review.

Add to that list that big diffs with many files (which are a bad practice, but do happen) causes the entire browser tab to freeze up.
You can use git for these "core" features?
During a security clearance investigation your computer and other personal effects aren't searched.
If I were a database, I would be more offended about being summed up as a cylinder icon, since I power all of the world's apps.
I use mutt. It's a big increase in security compared to the typical email client exactly because it's below the common denominator. And yet it does what a startup executive needs, except for the occasional message I forward to Other Devices to view. With one keystroke.

Then again, if you want to equate the badness of IRC and FTP, which is much earlier than IRC and much more of a security problem, you're making a poor quality argument anyway. Dumpster fires and garbage dump fires are different orders of magnitude.
Your aunt doesn't know better then. As some others have pointed out, it's now Chinese made and the Q&A on all products out of mainland China is just a gamble.
Lenovo is pretty terrible with parts availability. It's not uncommon for parts for an enterprise-class, in warranty laptop to be unavailable/on a long lead time.

Dell is far better with parts availability, although (much as I personally don't like them), Apple is better than either.
PulseAudio 12 Open-Source Sound System Released with AirPlay, A2DP Improvements
They've already done the first 2. Though the chat app part was done by someone else.
“Wait, why are we deregulating again? It didn’t even work the last time.”

“Oh ... well ... we just didn’t deregulate enough last time. Let’s just deregulate a little more, and we’ll see the results!”
IRC, FTP, and SMTP are all decentralized. That's the good part about them.
I love Rails for certain projects, but it's definitely true that at a certain point things start to break down. Maintaining a large complex application with Rails is not fun at all. ActiveRecord is amazing, until it's not.

IMO, you can still learn tons of great practices with Rails, and for certain projects I still think it's a great choice... But you have to know when to drop it and move on to more robust solutions.

Like most engineering tools, it makes certain tradeoffs, and you have to know how to pick the right one for your job.