skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> it is still impermissible to (falsely) shout fire in a crowded theater, right?

The underlying point is that, it's a complicated topic that is not easily answered. This is like saying "Shooting someone is illegal, right?" Well, it's complicated. You have Murder 1, Murder 2, (sometimes more), Manslaughter (Voluntary, or Involuntary), and you have shootings of self-defense which are legal. It entirely depends on the circumstances under which you shout "Fire!" and the outcome of that situation.

There are legal principles involving whether or not you caused harm, whether or not you intended to cause harm, whether or not you reasonably knew it could cause harm but proceeded anyway. These questions will have outcome on which charges are applicable, if any are at all.

Should you shout fire in a crowded theater, and folks stampede. Expect to be charged for inciting a riot or at least disturbing the peace. Should nothing happen? You might be asked to leave and not come back by staff and have a no-trespass order, you may even get picked up on a disturbing the peace charge. One of the "You can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride" situations.
Bitcoin is a cryptocurrency.

Bitcoin is a blockchain.

Not every cryptocurrency is a blockchain

So not every cryptocurrency is Bitcoin

And not every blockchain is Bitcoin
An option is to just leave out all vowels except at the beginning of words. It's quite easy to read, however it might not be worth it for just thirty percent increase in word density.
> [bar(x) for z in stuff if (x := foo(z))]

Someone showed me this in a previous thread:

>> [bar(foo_z) for z in stuff for foo_z in [foo(z)] if foo_z]

Not a common idiom, though. Neither snippet is perfectly clear to me, but yours is closer.
? LedgerX isn't your counterparty. They are facilitating two parties to the trade I believe.
It's crazy to automatically indemnify people for acting in their own best interest. If I could steal a million dollars today and get away with it, it's in my best interest to do so rather than spend however many years working for it.

By this logic, as long as a politician makes such a deal in order to garner public support or votes, with no concern for the wellbeing of their constituents, we can't blame them either. They're not doing anything wrong, just responding to political incentives!
Meh.

There is statistics for the purpose of uncovering Truth, and statistics for the purpose of making a business decision. The difference is that when we talk about Truth, a small error is still an error. When we make business decisions, it is fine to make a decision that is probably right, and we know isn't far wrong.

Here is a perfectly valid test procedure that illustrates the difference. Decide the most time you would be willing to spend to get a test result. Multiply that by current conversion rates to get N, the number of conversions that you expect to see by the end of the test.

Start running the test with two variations. Stop at any point if one variation is at least sqrt(N) conversions ahead of the other. Stop at N if there is no clear winner and go with whoever is ahead, even by a hair.

Here are features of this test procedure.

o You always make a decision.

o Running a test has a known fixed cost. You know how long it takes. And a bad idea will cost you no more than sqrt(N) conversions to test.

o The results are very simple and easy to understand.

o Your answers are usually right.

o Your bad decisions are not very bad. If the true conversion rate for one version is better by 1/sqrt(N), you've got a 95% chance of making the right choice. You will probably never make a mistake as big as 2/sqrt(N).

The result is a test procedure that is a horrible approach for doing science, but an excellent tool for improving a business. You'll never find it in a statistics class. And I'm sure it would horrify your analytics team.
I don't see that second picture on the cv dazzle site at all. All the pictures I see on cv are unquestionably neutral in disposition.
It’s infowars on both sides. /r/anarchycringe vs /r/latestagecapitalism
All the millionaires and billionaires I know in real life are solo founders.
Why does the blame always lie with "politicians"? That's unhelpfully reductionist... we are a democracy. Businesses, private citizens, and representives all come together to define our public policy.

Those "perverse" tax incentives were a reasonable compromise between voters and businesses within a state. The perversion only exists at the interstate level, so which politician is "at fault"? The Washington legislature, responsible for all of Washington? Individual WA representatives, who get one vote regardless of their constituent's distance from the border? Or is it on the Oregon side?

If either state copied the other, there's no problem - but which one "wins", and how do those changes get implemented?
Maybe it seems that way to you because the second person has very different facial features and the lighting is much more dramatic?
> The experience of Guido, and it's one that I share, is that too much functional tooling drives a style that favors expressive writing at the expense of ease of reading.

This is absolutely dead on accurate. As a Clojure developer, using one of the most expressive -- dare I say, artistic -- programming languages ever created, I can say that I am totally in the zone writing code which is elegant and terse and really packs a punch, does clever things.... and then just a few days later, it is very hard for my own brain to parse my own code and figure out what it does.

For each line of code you write once, it will be read dozens of times by you or others. Code is for reading. Languages that get this right make things a lot easier for everyone.
That's great to hear that you're forcing yourself to keep communication in the open, when at all possible. That's one of the best ways to keep a community healthy.

In my experience with a particular open source project, more than half of new contributors started by communicating privately with myself or some other leader in the project. This is only bad if the communication never moves out of private conversation. I've found it normally takes a few nudges to get people to build their confidence and participate publicly.

Interestingly, it's not only new contributors who suffer from this. I've been told by some of the most prolific contributors to our project that they are still intimidated to speak out publicly. Many times these feelings come from deep-seated cultural norms that don't really fit with traditional Western/American ways of communicating. And that's ok! We all learn together how to best communicate with each other. And we get a healthier community and better code out of it.
Up and Running with Ubuntu 18.04, Nvidia, Cuda, CuDNN, TensorFlow, and PyTorch
Wow, where can we get this easy disposable $10k - $20k ?
> Your second example is great except that any error messages that get raised from inside getattr are going to be inscrutable. The traceback will be uninformative, and you'll be forced to drop into a debugger to figure out what's going on.

I started to agree with that but then I realized: I don't think you can get getattr to raise an error here at all. The keys are strings, the default value is provided, I don't think there's a fault path here.

In general though, I totally agree with you. I use less-cute code shamelessly when it will aid debugging. I write for the debugger. ;-)

> At runtime, your second example is actually significantly less explicit because so much is hidden away in mutable state.

Yeah, I see what you mean. You don't know which "F" or "reductor" triggered the error because it doesn't show up in the traceback because each assignment doesn't have its own line in the code. That's a good point. I've been there, and it sucks.

In this specific case I would actually most likely write out the three if.. else.. chain. If there were four or more I would use the gadget style. It's right on the borderline, and I would suspect that there won't be a fourth option in the future (although usually that would be a bad assumption; in this case I speculate the the object model isn't going to change any time soon.)
Quite.

6 booleans can just be a way to represent 6 flags - it might be modeled as a state-machine - but depending on the language and code base passing in 6 booleans to a function (or procedure) might be a fine way to isolate the entry point.

Now given that you have such a function, you need to be able to concentrate in order to refractor it.

I've recently untangled some hairy old front-end js code that takes in parameters from an "advanced" search form in order to validate the input, and construct a proper search.

Basically the same thing, but with much more than six inputs.

After squinting at it for an hour and trying a few things, it boiled down to a few simple checks and a map() over the remaining parameters.
My bank doesn't operate any prisons?
XmlUnit with assertJ
... with water balloons.
In another thread[1] on HN today there was discussion over developers selling out their web extensions to marketing corporations which end up filling them with tracking scripts and malware. Someone suggested that google should be much more aggressive at filtering out said extensions, and one of the responses was a sarcastic comment over a future article about Google attacking extension developers and the free web.

And less than 24 hours later, here we are.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17447816
Ah, you're lucky. That would definitely be an HR incident here.
I agree that I would have preferred "as"...but that said I am struggling to think of a reason this is needed.

while (bytes := io.get(x)):

Would currently be written:

bytes = io.get(x)
while bytes:

And likewise:

[bar(x) for z in stuff if (x := foo(z))]

is equivalently:

[bar(foo(z)) for z in stuff if foo(z)]

Perhaps this is just my personal opinion but I don't really think the ":=" (or "as" for that matter) adds much in the way of clarity or functionality. I guess at the end of the day I am neutral about this addition...but if there isn't a clear upside I usually think it's better to have less rather than add more.
http://www.mayofamily.com/RLM/txt_Clarke_Superiority.html

Link to the story online.
> I expect that many financial institutions will be using private blockchain in the future.

What for? If you have trusted parties, why do yo need a blockchain?
>Push options too long, and all your money decays away.

Assume you let all options expire OTM the following still holds:

>The premium:payout ratio of such a trade requires him to be right only once in 5-10 years for him to walk away profitable.

Minimizing theta exposure extends that duration.
> For example, the witch trials are suspected to be a reaction to the citizen's fears of brutal native attacks that were happening around that time.

The vast majority of witch trials were in Europe, and not New England.

edit: Change "Britain" to "Europe"; citation:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch_trials_in_the_early_mode...
Why hasn't food been delivered?
I don't know about linters but GCC warns me about that every time I make that typo. They could just require parenthesis when assignment value is used as boolean.
13: An Unlucky Number but Lucky Business Developments
> What do you mean you don't know how much the other end receives?

I am sending you 1 BTC, how much money do you have? Calling a Nakamoto scheme a "cyber"currency is just part of the scam. Money is like USD. So, how much money do you have?
Show HN: Get a refer-a-program like Uber for your own web app (code demo)
I believe I found the text of the proposed law, though this may be an older version: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A...

>Article 11 of the proposed law requires online platforms to pay publishers a fee if they link to their news content.

I don't see how the law does this. The proposal states, under section 33:

>This protection does not extend to acts of hyperlinking which do not constitute communication to the public.

This is the only mention of linking that I could find in the law.

As for article 13, it does seem far too broad. There needs to be explicit exemptions for what we call "fair use" in the US. Educational, research, transformative uses, parody, etc, must be preserved.
Or the most senior people will put an idea forward and all the juniors will spend their time kissing ass and saying what a great idea it is.
California has a homestead exemption of about $7000 of assessed value; or about $70 savings annually. I don't think this gets adjusted ever, or if it was ever a meaningful amount. It's also tied into a renter's income tax credit, so I suspect it's fairly difficult to change.

My opinion is that Prop 13 provides useful planning benefits to property owners and municipalities, and the rate of increase could be adjusted to still give those benefits, without having quite the same distortion. 5% annual assessment increase cap would probably be much too high, but 3% or 4% might be enough to stay within throwing distance of current values.

As a soon to be former CA property owner it was nice to be able to know for sure my taxes would basically grow at 2% once prices started climt. Municipalities could count on property tax revenues staying flat or even continuing to grow during the housing market collapse because so many owners had their assessments constrained, and many of the sellers had assessments below even the depressed market value. Having constrained assessments also reduces the burden of assessment appeals, which I've heard is significant in locales without constraints.
Basically, order of a tensor is the number of dimensions of an array of data.
Vector - one dimensional array or a tensor of order 1
Matrix - two dimensional array of data or a tensor of order 2
Three and more dimensional arrays of data are tensors of higher order.
The first example would actually be equivalent to something like

while True:
bytes = io.get(x)
if not bytes:
break
...

which I think is objectively less readable.

In the second example, you have an extra call to foo for every element of stuff. If foo(z) is expensive, you'd probably want to write this as

[bar(x) for x in map(foo, stuff) if x]

instead - which I personally don't mind, but it's arguably not as clear as having the in-line assignment expression.
Winning the game but losing the meta-game.
I got within a hair. Stupid, stupid, stupid. In a nutshell: I was working with a backhoe that was older than I was, early 60's model and a hydraulic line developed a very small puncture, enough that I could see the line start to sweat. Instead of backing off I got closer to see if the drop I saw on the line was really oil or maybe water. Fortunately before I could reach for it but after I got way too close the line exploded. Blinded me for about 15 minutes completely, the oil got infused into the fabric of my sweater so deep that even 12 years later (yes, I hate throwing stuff away) you can still clearly see where it hit. And that was just a hydraulic line bursting, we're not into accidents with buckets and blades territory.
Ok, here's an example from the cvdazzle site: https://cvdazzle.com/assets/img/coreana/coreana-04-copyright...
Poorly in other ways as well - https://deadspin.com/faa-gives-pilots-thumbs-up-to-fly-rude-...

The highlight - "However, the FAA only grants TFRs for stadiums and arenas that hold 30,000 or more, and since the StubHub Center capacity is under 30,000 — the Chargers announced a sellout at 25,386 during their game with the Kansas City Chiefs last Sunday — the FAA will not grant the TFR."
Oh ok. Misunderstood that point. I dont remember what version.
In the study of many mental health conditions, tracking changes in location are markers for depression. By understanding mobility patterns, we can learn more about how to better deliver care just-in-time.

Companies like ginger.io have been doing this with success for many years.

Some scientific papers on the matter:
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5571235/
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4526997/
A turntable wouldn’t be sufficient, as one important feature of the belt is that it ejects parts which are stuck to it when the part is pushed past the roller.

Perhaps the burden is small in some cases, but it is nonetheless a burden placed on individuals. You claim the law doesn’t prevent people from sharing improvements may be true (you sound knowledgeable) but this was lost on the community members who wanted to design upgrades. I specifically remember mailing list discussions where individuals believed that sharing infringing designs was a violation of the law. Which is something it seems you verified (inducing infringement). I reiterate that this is a legal restriction placed on free individuals operating outside of commercial interests, and so I continue to believe this is a civil rights issue. I will also say that upgrades to the original device are of limited utility because the original device was small. It also does not help that the largest community for sharing 3D designs is owned by the patent holder.

It seems as though you’ve confirmed that knowingly inducing infringement by sharing infringing designs would be a violation of the law, so I find it puzzling that you continue to insist that this primarily affects businesses. Certainly it affects individuals as well, yes?
He was sending the message because he'd already been blocked and didn't know why.
> Unsurprisingly, USA near the top

Not sure which chart you're looking at, but the US is squarely in the middle here.
What I'm reading here is that the best thing it does is tell us whether someone is introverted or extroverted. Well, that's also the most obvious one and I don't agree that that justifies using such a flawed test. If you have a test where half the results and half are bad the test is more or less useless.

Consider this also: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/give-and-take/201309...

> I began to read through the evidence, and I found that the MBTI is about as useful as a polygraph for detecting lies. One researcher even called it an “act of irresponsible armchair philosophy.” When it comes to accuracy, if you put a horoscope on one end and a heart monitor on the other, the MBTI falls about halfway in between. [...] Research shows “that as many as three-quarters of test takers achieve a different personality type when tested again,” writes Annie Murphy Paul in The Cult of Personality Testing, “and the sixteen distinctive types described by the Myers-Briggs have no scientific basis whatsoever.” In a recent article, Roman Krznaric adds that “if you retake the test after only a five-week gap, there's around a 50% chance that you will fall into a different personality category.”
I find it kind of frustrating that Google does nothing about extensions tracking your browser history, and quickly takes action against extensions like these. I hope Google has their Cambridge moment soon.
As someone who moved from a developed country with single payer healthcare, it's actually better. No more waiting 3 months to see a specialist. The pay differential makes up the difference plus way more.
Do you have a reason to assume that the poster is outright lying? I mean, I can't actually prove that anything in the article really happened, but it seems odd to just assume that it's false.
It sounds like your problem is with the article, not with me. I did not misrepresent what the article said.
Fursuit?
I was with you until "your point is intellectually bankrupt" which is unnecessarily insulting

This is part of being an intellectual: I can insult your point all day. That's perfectly fine. Taking that personally -- not good form.

there has been no progress towards it recently. The dates are correct.

If you were an alien observing earth from orbit, you could have made the same observation ("no progress towards it recently") about ocean going exploration at multiple points, prior to it changing history irrevocably and then exploding in economic and political importance.

There's nothing inevitable about it, it depends on what people want.

In that case, it's likely to happen.
> Titan is the best place with lots of resources.

Ideally, you'd want to manufacture computers and equipment using local materials and Titan's surface is mostly water ice and hydrocarbons. You may get away with graphene-based electronics, using ice as a building material and nuclear power shipped from elsewhere. Every location will eventually evolve manufacturing processes that are adapted to local chemistry (and import what isn't)
The outlier here is that the new Rams/Chargers stadium (and retail/residential/office that it includes) in LA is privately funded. (Actually, CA in general doesn't spend as much on stadiums as other places have been.)

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-chargers-taxes-nfl-201...

>For decades, Angelenos went without a hometown NFL team in part because they were notoriously loath to spend taxes on one. Rams owner Stan Kroenke, worth $7.4 billion according to Forbes, made the league's return to Los Angeles possible because he was game to use his own money to develop the $2.66-billion Inglewood stadium that, starting in 2019, will be home base of his team and the Chargers.

>Inglewood will ultimately pay the project an estimated $60 million as a reimbursement for the development of roadwork, utilities and public parks on the site of the property.

>James T. Butts Jr., mayor of Inglewood, said he would not have agreed to a new NFL stadium if it required fans to chip in.

>"From our first talks, we made it clear that was not something we were going to do," Butts said. "We wanted a model that basically insulated the city from the buffeting winds of both the economy and ticket sales, and we have that now."

It's an open question who it'll work out for: both the Chargers and Rams were in LA before, before leaving for perceived greener pastures. The Rams' owners seem to be hedging their bets this time with the multi-purpose real-estate nature of the stadium. But will STL or SD really be that badly off? We'll see if they end up spending money in the future to get a team back... LA didn't, though.
Everyone has different needs of course,

My home setup:

hardwired all the desktops and a few access points via cheap 1gbit hardware (literally found some at the thrift store/ebay), usually using tomato/shibby.

have a backup router.

battery backup on main routers/modem.

large external battery wire nutted to my desktop UPS.

NAS is an old laptop with battery intact, doubles as second display/machine.

use my phone via usb on my desktop if all else fails.

total cost, probably less than $100.

Oh, and I use a $5/month server for stuff that absolutely needs to be on full time. Otherwise the only external access is me occasionally remoting into my desktop and I am happy to stop and smell the flowers if that is interrupted briefly.
This also makes these little routers extremely powerful. Since those switches have VLANs as well you can create very interesting topologies that would require much more expensive managed switches to achieve. I run an extra VLAN from my router, to one of my APs, to a dedicated wifi SSID to another wireless router to ethernet to a TV box so I can have the TV signal in a place I can't run ethernet to. Doing it through the normal Wifi would be a bad idea because the provider uses multicast IPTV and if you put that on your wifi every connected devices receives it. And this is all done with 3 50€ routers running LEDE, each with different VLANs and wifi SSIDs configured. They make for a really flexible setup.
maybe, but quill can verify queries at compile time, plus you can view generated sql
On a bike, you maintain a steady speed by matching drag losses with the energy you're putting into the pedals. Braking and other actions cost you energy you've put in.

Which is exactly why bicycles are so fond of rolling through stop signs. When you're riding one, it is obvious to you that going from 20 mph down to 10, then back up to 20 is reasonably safe and only takes half the effort as going from 20 mph down to 0 and then back up to 20.