skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> It is entirely unclear to me that a bot that might make simple reservations at small group of establishments that include only restaurants and hair salons is in any way revolutionary.

If it is an extensible technology that requires relatively minor tweaks to expand the domain of applicability, then it is revolutionary thougj the effect won't be fully felt until it has been more broadly applied.

If it is narrowly tailored such that the next two domains will cost nearly as much time and money to build out as restaurants and hair salons, then, sure, it's minimally useful.

Google's been promoting it as the first, and that seems in character with what Google does.
And that is really what I was hoping for - maybe something that I'd not heard of or contemplated. Not even a suggestion.
Math notation is simple because it's heavily overloaded. For example, it does me no good to know about exponentials when a superscript is used in a different context. Reading any nontrivial math requires knowing what the notation means in the particular context of the work. IME mathematicians typically assume the reader is familiar already and usually don't explain.

Anyone targeting their work at non-experts should explain even what seems like trivial notation to them since they can't know what other meanings the reader may think the notation holds.
Because it worked damn well for a long time?
It really depends on the vendor. Big names are at least careful enough to do that. The bottom of the barrel white-label vendors often don't care. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if some of those Windows installations are using pirated keys.

It's perpetually concerning how bad the state of systems like this is. A grocery store near me recently deployed a brand new set of self check-out counters...running Windows XP.

Amusingly the credit card/debit card reader is running Linux and shows the old-school penguin image on boot.
Yes, as I said, you can cherry-pick various trade issues. Heck I can even find long-running trade disputes on certain products -- one that immediately comes to mind is the long-running dispute between Canada and the US over lumber (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada%E2%80%93United_States_s...). What's "fair" in these type of disputes of course depends on which side you are on, of course.

I just wasn't aware of any major outstanding issue that required a "trade war" type scenario with these countries (EU/Canada/Mexico) now.

The issue with trade wars is that the tariffs that result can end up lasting far longer than one might expect, and from what I see most economists consider the overall impact negative. The 25 percent tariff on light trucks in the US for instance comes as a direct result of a minor "trade war" between West Germany and France on chickens from approx. 1961-1964. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_tax)

Generally speaking, if a tariff another nation imposes is bothersome, removing tariffs in a negotiated deal is what has tended to work over the last several decades. That 10 percent auto tariff was recently negotiated away in Japan, for instance, with Japan likewise removing some tariffs they applied on EU products. (http://europe.autonews.com/article/20171208/ANE/171209797/eu...)

In the case of China, where they are more prone to violating WTO rules, that approach might not work, and a more aggressive stance might be justified. But the EU, Mexico, and Canada? Not so sure there.
Personally, I find the first version easier to read since it makes the structure explicit. I.e. there are two blocks and you will execute one or the other.

To me the second version makes it more difficult to differentiate the structure:

if (...) {
foo()
return ...
}

return bar()

from:

if (...) {
foo()
}

return bar()

I find that when I'm reading code I'm generally more interested in the overall structure than in the specific implementation details. Especially since if the first block was complicated enough to tax my cognitive overhead, then I would probably extract it into a function anyways.
My ISP no longer issues a new IP address upon router change. I'd probably have to go offline for at least a few hours or simultaneously change modem and router. In the meantime my household would notice, our phones would consume more of our cellular quota, my IP phone wouldn't ring, and even my thermostat would lose remote control functionality.

I'm not sure if it's the IPv4 shortage or copyright infringement/government surveillance pressure to maintain tight linkage between IP address, account, and legally liable person or address to raid.
The compiler will not break this example, because it cannot put restrictions on the values of a and b. The only thing it can do is assume that a + b < INT_MAX, in which case the program will work as expected.
How it feels to be hit by lightning
Thanks for the kind words! Thanks also for the bug - we're working on fixing it asap.

We want to move to tech later on - we think the right move is to win in one industry and move onto others. Also, this is the industry we have more domain expertise in and that has seen much less innovation than tech for example.

But we're definitely planning to expand soon!
Really interesting post, thanks! You mentioned a few recommended readings (High Output Management, The Score Takes Care of Itself), which are all great general management books. Have you noticed much divergence from their advice when specifically applied to engineering management at high-growth startups?
That doesn't make the program incorrect, it just means that you can't provide that particular input to the program.
That doesn't mean your mail provider isn't GDPR compliant. And with the proper agreements and technical steps in place, a business sending personal data via e-mail could be totally fine to. (a big one would be requiring transport encryption, which is a sensible choice for ActivityPub too, and made by implementations, e.g. Mastodon)

It's specific to the use case and what guarantees you have, and not a strict property of a protocol.
I guess you mean Julia, or to pick three from the past Common Lisp, Dylan and Strongtalk.
Enterprises are more demanding and have a lower tolerance for error. I have no doubt Duplex will be rolled out to enterprise once the technology is ready and has been thoroughly tested on consumers.
hey maxtynan! appreciate the kind words. I'm glad you see the problem we're trying to solve, most of our users tell us the same thing and you'd be surprised how many users even in target schools need more help.

This is the most important decision of your life at any given time (maybe except for who you marry) and we still rely on generic forums, our own networks, or spamming people on LinkedIn. We hope this makes it more efficient & accessible.
the goal is to decouple users from servers.

the idea is to move the key that AP uses to sign JSON-LD objects to the client and do all of the crypto operations there.

a server in this model is an always-on relay for replicating data. you can submit a message to any relay and expect to have it show up on all interested servers.

unfortunately, this will also break compat with HTTP/DNS-based AP servers, but hopefully this is something that the maintainers will be open to supporting.

relevant threads:

https://b.9chan.lol/notice/279590

https://b.9chan.lol/notice/226866

https://b.9chan.lol/notice/212397

https://shitposter.club/notice/9830850
Interstellar Mystery Object Now Thought to Be a Comet
Can the people downvoting this comment provide a reason why? It seems perfectly reasonable to me.
> I don't know that you have to hand full control over to the programmer, but if you're randomly flinging values on the heap everywhere (a.k.a. "hash tables"), you're gonna hit a wall long before you get to "C performance".

Rule of Python: Everything is at least two pointers away.

--

> and CPython is hopping through all these hoops for every such lookup.

Actually CPython has a cache for that. This becomes apparent if you improperly replace methods in the class dictionary.

I think the bane of Python specifically is a bit different. It's not so much that it's very dynamic, because JITs can clearly deal with that. It's that CPython exposes all kinds of interpreter state that's off-limits in other languages, which makes it way harder to JIT. In JavaScript there are at most a handful ways how you can mutate a prototype, but in CPython you don't have enough fingers to count them, even if you only consider Python and not the C API.
Public key encryption has solved this via signing. What needs to happen is collective marketing to promote some kind of "email 2.0" that requires public keys with the option to tie them to social media (perhaps the government, but they have a bad track record with technology) . That protocol would return a message saying "your email was not delivered because you didn't sign it with a public key".

Others suggest computational tokens as well to prevent mass spam. This might work too. Instead of "trusted" email addresses being passive on the receiver, trusted would mean "don't send a difficult auth token to the sender". Whereas if someone I've never communicated with before emails me, send them a computation that requires the server to do 30 seconds or more of work. Every subsequent message would have an easier token unless I flagged it as spam. Again, if the sender doesnt do the work, they get a "message rejected" failure.

No I don't think the blockchain would help here. It might be nice to upload your public key to it, and have a public "reputation score" about accusations of spam for each key, but keys need to be replaceable in the event of compromise and an attacker could replace someone's blockchain profile and there would be nothing anyone could do.
In one project company x had to pay an avg calculated loss to company y. Both did business in a joint venture. 5 figures per hour.

In our SLA in another company it was written in every big contract because customer companies where asking for it.

Some specific SLA meant oncall duty. Something like this cost money and affect the monthly support and operations price.
Isn't there some kind of static analysis possible for such cases?
>Utterly and completely unbelievable...

I think we all understand that it's terrible down there, but there are many, many places in the world where there is tragedy. And in my own experience, there is, and always has been, tragedies consistently happening in my own local area.

Discussing a tertiary topic does not diminish the the value of the main topic.

And food for thought, maybe if that site hadn't made such a poor technical and artistic/design choices, they would have made more of a difference, and caused more people to get the information correctly. (and certainly would less likely to have detracted the discussions from the main point)
Render JSON, JSONP, XML, YAML, HTML, File Easily in Golang
While I agree with that order of operations so to speak, I'm not sure why the responsibility is pushed onto consumers. It's hard to make a choice when it comes down to plastic, plastic, or plastic.

What is being/can be done to get companies to stop using plastic in packaging? I understand that it is necessary for a lot of modern conveniences, but surely there is something that can be done to curb the production and use on the manufacturing side.
The OS already has the push notification connection open, so having more stuff go over it is effectively free (when considering the case where there's no new data, it's literally free, and when there is new data it's presumably no less efficient than fetching the data via another mechanism).

In any case, my inclination here is to believe that Apple doesn't have IMAP Idle because it drains more battery than fetching every 15 or 30 minutes, as I can't think of any other reason why Apple would refuse to implement it (and they've implemented it already in desktop Mail.app, so it's not just laziness). And what's more, I'm inclined to believe Apple has actually tested this out rather than just assuming it to be the case. Apple cares more about power efficiency than any other major software vendor I know of, and email is such a fundamental piece of functionality for the device, if they could actually get better power efficiency by implementing IMAP Idle, they'd have done that years ago.

Now, it's certainly possible that on some networks, keepalive pings could be infrequent enough that IMAP Idle would not use any more power than fetching. But having that be true for some networks doesn't really matter because Apple's not likely to implement a mode that says "use IMAP Idle if it's efficient to do so, otherwise fetch" due to the potential user confusion.

In an ideal world, Apple would standardize some way for mail servers to deliver push notifications to clients (and what's more, do it in a way that allows 3rd-party clients to register to receive these pushes too, not just the built-in Mail.app¹). I don't know why this hasn't happened; maybe nobody cares enough, or maybe Apple can't convince Google to care about having push support for Mail.app² and if they can't convince Google then it's not really worth pursuing as Google accounts for such a huge percentage of the world's email accounts at this point. However, I do know it's possible for mail servers to support Mail.app push notifications, as FastMail rolled out support for it some time ago³.

¹I actually use a 3rd-party client called Spark that gets push email, but to do so, Readdle actually runs a server themselves that logs into my mail account, uses IMAP Idle, and sends the client a push every time new messages come in. This is of course a potential privacy and security violation, though I've chosen to trust Readdle and trust that they abide by their privacy policy (which, among other things, states that they throw away the email data after delivering the push notification, and don't use this data for any other purposes).

²I have to assume this is Google deliberately making the Mail.app experience inferior in order to convince people to use their own Gmail client.

³FastMail had to actually send some engineers to Infinite Loop to talk to Apple engineers directly in order to figure out how to do this integration. I'm really curious what the technical details are here.
I don't know enough about optimizing Ada code to comment competently on your assertion, but part of the reason it's very hard to compete with C/C++ is simply because of the immense effort that's gone into improving the compilers. These days the only languages that are remotely comparable to C/C++ in terms of performance directly benefit from that effort - they either use the LLVM (Rust, Julia, the LDC compiler for D, etc.) or transpile to C (like Nim). The only real differentiation comes from the semantics they expose and any additional machinery they offer on top of that stack (like the Julia JIT).
I'm unfamiliar, what does NFSv4 add that Cloud Filestore users will be missing out on?
It's gambling, the customer loses money when he bets on the wrong instances.
Oh, Javascript creates the <img> tag when you click the arrow, it's not present beforehand.
Contracts work fine if they are common. Suppose you are in a bar buying one drink at a time. Each time you buy a drink you enter a new contract. Is that a problem? No.

The 'click here to agree and continue to the article' is a problem in the context of the GDPR because consent has to be given freely and cannot be a requirement to obtain a service.

That's a big departure from the cookie law, where this kind of forced consent is allowed.
Welcome to the Statrix
The Solid-State Lithium-Ion Battery – Has John Goodenough Finally Done It?
I used to live in central New Jersey, where the people of Waste Management would send out quarterly fliers telling people "When in doubt throw it out"[0]

I now live in Seattle, and when I tell people this campaign, they get extremely preachy and judgmental. Then when I try to explain that no, it's actually better for the environment, things really go no where. I should probably just give up on that.

[0] http://www.hamiltonnj.com/filestorage/228309/252258/Calendar...
How Deep Learning Helped Reducing Variability in Cardiovascular Imaging
Everything Commerzbank Is Doing with Blockchains
I tried Bash on Windows and it was absolutely not good enough. Not yet.
I mean the existence of subjective experience in the first place. The jump is not just as Wittgenstein suggested that we might not be able to communicate a subjective experience, it's also that we don't understand how a subjective experience exists to communicate in the first place.

From a purely physical perspective, there shouldn't be such a thing as subjective experience.

We don't, strictly speaking, need to solve that problem right now. We could wait and cross that bridge later. We could just leave it at "it's an emergent property, and it works somehow." In the same way we could also say, "well, big objects attract each other, and we're gonna leave gravity at that."

But for various reasons, philosophers and scientists find that kind of answer unsatisfying.
Google Home Speakers and Chromecast Are Down Worldwide, Company Confirms
I just bought my 2nd 4000 edition, what do you mean they don't make it? The super updated "surface" one is a bit too much, don't love the keys or the separated number pad so I didn't spring for it.
Why don't you want your business to get money for your products and services?
Perfect example of the mismatch between (some) programmers' expectations and what language standards and/compilers require/implement.

> C has perfecly well defined semantics for (eg) null pointer dereference: read or write memory location zero, and consequently probably crash.

C does have "perfectly well-defined semantics" for null pointer dereference, but it's undefined behavior. Sure, the null pointer happens to be 0 on the vast majority of architectures most programmers work with, but apparently non-zero null pointers are still used these days (at least in the admgcn LLVM target, from what I understand after a quick glance at the linked page), so it's not even a "all sane modern machines" thing [0].

In any case, I'd love to see some good benchmarks showing the effect of the more "controversial" optimizations. Compiler writers say they're important, people who don't like these optimizations tend to say that they don't make a significant difference. I don't really feel comfortable taking a side until I at least see what these optimizations enable (or fail to enable). I lean towards agreeing with the compiler writers, but perhaps that's because I haven't been bitten by one of these bugs yet...

[0]: https://reviews.llvm.org/D26196
Datadog Is Hiring an Open-Source Software Engineer – PHP (NYC, Paris, Remote)
If you could perform static analysis on these cases, why couldn’t the JIT just do so itself and not have any issues?
Port of the original Pokemon Red/Blue for Gameboy to modern C++
>Do you expect me to carry the wrapper back to my home or carry a small dustbin along with me every time?

Yes. I don't know you and my comment isn't directed to you. But this is what I meant by 'confused' in my post... It seems many from that culture genuinely think it is absurd to clean up after oneself. The distinction between public and private property has no bearing on how a westerner feels about littering. Indeed, a westerner would be LESS inclined to litter on public property than on his own.

In the West, when one drops a piece of paper or bottle, the thought is (or should be) that you are making life harder for someone else who will eventually have to pick it up.

It's the reason you can rely on Westerners, generally, to clean their own tables and toss out their own trash at fast food restaurants. (Or at least briefly feel guilty about it if they don't). It's the reason you can rely on Westerners to return their grocery carts to the collection points. It's empathy... we don't want to make life harder for the poor worker. I do not believe this feeling of empathy is pervasive in Indian cultures... maybe just a left-over from the caste system...
Meh. Doing the right thing for the wrong reason is still doing the right thing. If everyone benefits from their additions, it's immaterial to me what the intent of those additions were.
The linked nostarch page shows only 13 of 20 chapters as (AVAILABLE NOW). How is the printed book finished already?
Let's look at the third one you linked as an example. It's the one I referred to in my initial comment:

https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20180509.as...

(Investigation page https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/pages/HWY18FH013.aspx)

The focus is on the response because the fire isn't the kind of fire most response teams are used to dealing with. It's not necessarily focused on the car.

Clickbaiting is a legitimate though devious tactic. Per my comment referencing one of the same examples you cited, I wouldn't consider it clickbait to focus on the investigation when the investigation's true intent is highlighted. "NTSB investigating response to Tesla crash" and "NTSB investigating Tesla crash" are vastly, vastly different.

I went ahead and edited one of your examples into my post. Thanks for finding it; I was wondering why I wasn't able to dig it up while searching for NHTSA.
Thanks for the feedback. I should be a bit more clear - the calls today are not really meant as a way for you to refer the person to your company. We started that way, and learned it was both shady and really ineffective (i.e. what are the odds that if I choose to speak with someone at team A in Goldman Sachs that they will want to refer me, and that that referral will result in an interview or a job).

Instead, today this is mainly coaching and practice. Later, we're aiming to get insiders to "Rate" the candidates they speak with and have the best-rated ones get sent over to 10,20,100 companies that we partner with as qualified leads.

This helps candidates get noticed more and "credentialize" themselves because someone (or many) in the industry screened them over 30m calls and thought they were a good fit. This lets companies see an added signal that is not their resume, their school, their GPA, or their LinkedIn.

It also helps companies discover diverse & non-obvious talent, something we know first-hand is an important issue to them. Even for the companies who don't care about diversity in the traditional sense, they need to diversify their pool because everyone is going after the same 2% of "good-on-paper" candidates from Harvard and Stanford, because no one can cost effectively vet candidates from the much larger rest.

Interviewees pay because this is time-consuming and valuable insight from the insiders, and because otherwise we rely on altruism which we feel does not scale.
As an enterprise product, Google would require all audio be sent to their servers, which I'm guessing most businesses would not be too keen on doing.
I don't think you understand what this product is. Looking at your bio/comment history, I don't think you work in a field that this product is targeted to.
I use Gusto and like it for it's simplicity. It makes a complicated part of running a company much smoother.

That said, I'm very curious what exactly all those engineers are doing every day. What's the most meaty part? Payroll? Dealing with govt? Keeping the servers up?

I think unexpected scaling pains are one of the most interesting and unsolved issues with being a CTO and would love to hear more about that at Gusto.
Detroit may as well have suffered an Allied bombing campaign for the way it looks now.
Because that’s equivalent to bribery?
I agree, but I won’t not disagree. We are due a resurgence in responsible Hegelian dialectics, but it’s easier said than done. I think both arguments fail the test in this case.
Performance tuning as the art of weather forecast (2013)
I think I could handle one bin for plastic, one bin for metal+glass, one bin for paper. Anything more complicated I don't really trust myself do right without a lot of vigilance.

And I've heard that things as typical as staples in the cardboard/paper stream ruin everything cost-wise, which makes it all seem sort of lost-cause-ish.