skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Used CVS with my team for years, say what you like, it was rock solid on branches.

I was appalled first time I had to pick apart a mess made by SVN on a branch.

I’ve made peace with git now, but struggled with the many different ways of getting things done in git.
The point is political judo. They've already advocated for ID cards, so they can't very well openly object to modifying them in a way that obviously increases freedom, at least not without tipping their hand in a more obvious way. They can't do it without cooperation, so it's possible to ensure that it can't be implemented in a disenfranchising way if the opposition wanted to, which frankly is evidence they don't.

And really, it's not an unreasonable idea. Other countries do this just fine. We just need to not mess it up.
When the Panama Canal was nearing completion, there was talk of adding decoration, and a group of artists and sculptors was sent to look at the locks. They came back with a report. The entire project had been designed to be purely functional with no attention to decoration. Adding any decoration would be superfluous and would make it look worse. So, no stone lions or fluted columns or brass eagles or obelisks. Just the huge masses of poured concrete and steel, and the whitewashed control buildings with tan tile roofs. They still look good after a century of operation.
Isn’t a big part of Git overwhelmingly “winning” is Linus making it? The same sort of situation won’t be true in many other cases.
In a morbid vein, you only get to die once. Wouldn't you want to be able to experience it fully?
I can't look at Solarized for more than a couple seconds, my eyes don't know where to look for some reason. I'm a big fan of the simple Monokai.
Oh, that's a good one. Also W3C documents.
> but nobody's up in arms about our caffeine dependence, precisely because it has very little in the way of social harms associated with it.

Caffeine is associated with reducing the amount of sleep[0], which is associated with almost all illnesses [1].

[0] https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/sleep-newzzz/20131...
[1] https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/10/16/5580588...
>We're only now just waking up to the reality that type-2 diabetes can be reversed w/ carbohydrate restriction

I don’t think this is a new/recent revelation at all (and in fairness, I cut the next part of your quote that acknowledges decades old research).

And while not all cases of type 2 can be reversed (most can) but maybe more importantly 100% of cases can be prevented through diet/exercise.
Maybe we have reached peak-fighter-plane? If it can cost so much to develop the next gen, maybe we are better off spending half of that developing better surface to air missiles and the other half buying older gen planes.
Yes, and there are often transaction costs. The bankers that introduced the buyer to the seller, the lawyers that have to go over the deal terms, and the accountants and due diligence people.
I've now googled it and learned it's a controversial term not embraced by the medical community. Thanks.
Agree that he's "thinking like a computer programmer" with respect to the distinction between periods and colons, slashes, and so forth. But Unicode is different. If you can't type it on a keyboard, it doesn't belong in a filename.
Fitness app Polar exposed locations of spies and military personnel
I am inclined to think that it will last at least as long as the current family of languages. Of course, I also consider this to be a tragedy since it's not a particularly good layout.
Do you want to talk immigration or internet shaming and productive conversations?

I'd love to talk about immigration. I know a lot about it and would love to learn more. But the question here is whether or not this kind of internet behavior is productive or not. The title of the article is "Maybe We Should Go Easy On Uncle Bob". So the topic at hand is how we treat one another, especially people that say things that drive us nuts.

I've allowed myself to get a little more emotional than usual on this because I know a lot of the people involved and I care about the issue. I need to ask myself, just like everybody else needs to ask themselves: how do I publicly treat people I feel to be acting immorally or saying things I find horrible and/or disgusting? Especially when I'm upset.

It's a simple question, and it forms the foundation of this topic, whether it's immigration, Bob, whatever.

For five years I kept on my office wall a picture of SWAT team members taking little Elián González from his family in Florida in the 90s. There's this false dichotomy that political weasels want you to believe: if you don't speak out and publicly moralize, it's because you don't care enough. That's complete crap. I believe in open, civil, and honest discourse exactly because I care so much about these issues. I don't want the internet to operate like some giant church group. I don't want to go back to the 1950s where there were some things that were okay to talk about in polite society and some things that weren't. Too many people have struggled for far too long to make speech open for us to head back into that abyss again.

https://img.thedailybeast.com/image/upload/c_crop,d_placehol...
ClearCase was as delightfully terrible before IBM bought it and before Rational bought it. Writing off all software from IBM because they sell some lame software just seems weird. It's a huge company. I'm sure some people who enjoy soup have written bad software but it's saner to evaluate whether software is actually good or bad rather than checking if the authors like soup.
It sounds like what I did at Boy Scout Camp in the 1990s more closely resembled your Girl Scout Camp experience 30 years prior.
And then what is the problem with continuing this but reinforcing this business structure? Because shitty registrars could now be more shitty?

Honest and good registrars don't have a problem with WHOIS services, you claim they would since the emails they forward could lead to lost sales.

The WHOIS service is just as incentivized to filter out certain mails since they are paid by the registrar and thus get profit of sold domains.
Technical people like to ignore branding to the point that it becomes ridiculous. I'm not calling you out, BTW, just using you as an example. Audi vs BMW... does it really matter? There are minor differences here and there, but really it's another place where you're paying for the brand. When it comes to performance/build quality/technology, a Toyota Camry is by and large the same as any luxury car you can buy. The difference is the brand name and the "feel" (which is hard to quantify, so much so that it kinda comes back to the value of the brand).

When I bought my first luxury car, I had friends recommending an Audi. Seemed like marginally better value for the money, a little better MPG, some marginally nicer interior features, etc. But in the end I went with the BMW because every time I look at the A4, all I see is a Jetta for twice the price. The fact that Audi is owned by VW and the cars are based off the same platform is a turn-off for me. It has nothing to do with the features or the performance or the "feel" of the car... it's just a brand image in my mind. A Lexus is an expensive Toyota. An Audi is an expensive VW. But a BMW is a BMW, they don't make anything else. My 3-Series isn't anything but a 3-Series.

I know that sounds ridiculous, but when it comes to premium products, it's not always easy to quantify why you like one over the other. A lot of the time it comes down to irrational things like adjacent brands or the way it makes you "feel". Everyone can discount that as much as they want and say JVC has better sound for half the price of Beats, but it doesn't change the fact that the people buying Beats don't care about the sound, they care about the intangible benefits that the brand gives them.
The robot asking for help doesn't look credible to me. It's too far beyond cheap commercial offerings, and as it us unattended it is likely not a research robot in true distress. Were I passing by that, I think I would be on the defensive; assuming the robot to be a decoy or distraction in the worst case, but at a minimum a prank. Maybe my kids--who have seen short circuit--would provide a more genuine response. But I don't think you're getting a good read on actual empathy from adults here.
Youtube's algorithm is designed to give the viewer stuff similar to what they have already seen. Be it Goto Conference videos, Nazi rants, or wacky people doing fingernail designs. Youtube's AI is not designed take chances and offer up something 'surprising'. 'Surprising' might be offensive not enlightening.
* Google search (esp. the non-JS version)

* GitHub

* ia.net and some of their work

* dict.cc
IIRC SVN merges only created conflicts if the same lines were changed. If I edited line 10 and another developer edited line 200 there was no problem. It's been a while, but I also never encountered any serious issues with branching and merging in SVN.
Please don't break the site guidelines by replying to a bad comment with an even worse one. That's exactly the wrong direction to head.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> If the children decide for mom,

Where are you living that children are allowed to make medical decisions for their dying parent? What legal powers are the hospitals using to follow the wishes of the children? I guess the brother can't sue if those legal powers are in place.
employee stocks are engineered to be lower gain (impossible to sell, liquidation preferences etc.), take the cash and use it to take some risk you can control. You like risk? take the money and go to Las Vegas.
Taken out of context, my "shaming" tweet looks like a horrible overreaction. And I agree! Shaming someone for a mild tweet about a historical analogy is just weird.

Look at the context and it makes more sense. Unfortunately, TFA left that context out. The context was:

a) Bob's attempt to deflect criticism of a child-separation policy, which is going to cause lasting harm to thousands of children, mostly by repeating right-wing pundits that were outright defending the policy.

b) Five hours of tweets before mine, most of which were people trying to engage in good faith with Bob and being ignored.

c) Bob's history of engaging in bad faith mockery of people who criticized his attitude towards women.

All that led to a situation where a) I wanted to tell Bob I agreed with people saying he was in the wrong; b) I felt every point I wanted to make had already been made by other people replying to Bob, who he had largely ignored; and c) I didn't want to engage in further discussion with Bob.

Finally: I'm not far-left, politically speaking. I'm registered independent and fairly centrist in terms of the historical American political spectrum. (That puts me on the right-wing/conservative side by European standards.) I believe in market-based solutions, personal freedom, and minimal regulation sufficient to counterbalance the wealthy and powerful.

I am also someone who sees racists, holocaust deniers, and overt Nazis coming out of the woodwork. In my home town of Portland, a very left-wing city, the Proud Boys (a white supremacist group) are inciting violence and beating people up [1]. Holocaust deniers and self-proclaimed Nazis are running for GOP office [2]. Lifelong Republican voices are abandoning the party [3].

I don't know what the best response to this is. I'm just somebody who's never gotten involved in politics before. To me, it seems like a situation where social norms [4] are breaking down--where, previously, racist views were something you hesitated to share in mixed company, now more and more people think it's okay.

In my mind, our country needs to reset social norms. Making it socially uncomfortable to deflect criticism of a cruel and unjust policy is one small step.

[1] https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/04/rauner-cruz-nazi-a...

[2] http://www.wweek.com/news/2018/06/30/portland-police-declare...

[3] https://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/george-will-leaves-go...

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_norm

PS: I'm leaving for a vacation today, so I may not respond to replies.
So you have no idea what it was but you’re certain it’s Python’s fault?!
The things we have created aren't even at rodent level intelligence yet, never mind dogs.
For the sake of adding to my own discussion, my issues (specific to AWS) were:

1. Installing dependencies became complicated. When Chalice worked, it was great. Certain dependencies (in my case lxml) required a precompiled bundle that someone had thankfully already taken care of packaging.

2. Visibility into the process was poor. It felt hard to get into the system and really introspect it once it was deployed.

3. I felt pushed to other "serverless" solutions within AWS that I wasn't comfortable with. I understand the inherent vendor lock-in with the current serverless offerings, but I felt like I was doubly locked in when e.g. the "best" choice for a db was Amazon Dynamo.

4. Current serverless frameworks feel very minimal. I'm a big fan of both Django (batteries included) and Express (bring everything on your own). The tech that is out there now feels like Express, except that there isn't a lot of extensions to layer on top. You sort of have to cobble your own together still.

5. Lack of Best Practices. I just didn't see a ton of thought leadership on how to do things the right way in a serverless environment. I might have just missed this though.

----

Overall, I've come away impressed but I feel like building something entirely on serverless isn't quite as fleshed out as it needs to be yet. I think it's very close though.
Ask HN: Those of you who started companies.  Where did you get your idea?
I have started working in Enterprise software and am very interested in soaking up ideas for potential new companies. Where did you guys get your ideas for a company? Did the idea pan out?
This is another way to look at it, for sure - but the same would hold true of Google's "Materials", in the digital realms everything is just a metaphor.

But the idea of "barebones" in brutalism really means to embrace the scaffolding and raw form of what you build. The comparison of css to the facade or to "ornament" in architecture can't be made here, as css also takes up a big part in the actual "shape of the building".

The reference to brutalism in regards of css can therefore be understood as a directive to moderation, paint, not marble.

But what disturbs the concept of brutalism to me is building the dom with js - this is where we leave the "building block of the web" part of js and go off the original intention of the brutalist metaphor.

As i said, why not? But it does feel like a bandwagon thing, defiant of the general idea
I'm digging the rise of well designed, friendly online books about programming. Between Crafting Interpreters, Beautiful Racket and this, there's enough material for a programmer to go very far. Plus it's a lot less intimidating than your usual tome.
If my electrician installed half of the single switch circuits with the switch upside down I wouldn't ask him to come back for the next job.
ah, it looks like the post has been changed to read "software vendors".
OTOH, if you use panniers, the heavy load is borne on the bike rather than your back.
Or any language grammar, in fact.
Why is it so hard to say that both sides can be right? Kratom definitely helps many people, much the same as cannabis, amphetamines, and other opioids. It has a clear medical purpose and maybe even a recreational purpose. We have not seen a huge epidemic of kratom-related deaths after all. Yet it is still an addictive drug at the end of the day, and anyone who argues that it isn't (or that weed isn't) is just hurting our ability to have rational conversations over these things. Alcoholism is a thing, yet it's clear that blanket bans of alcohol do far more harm than good. As much as people try to paint kratom as a magical cure for every disease under the sun, it's irrational to argue that it has no harmful effects. Getting to the point where we can accept this type of nuance is necessary if drug policy reform is a serious goal of ours. Simply trying to shut out the other side with phony pseudo-science juju shit about cannabis reversing the effects of smoke inhalation and being some magical gateway into another realm is just reinforcing their beliefs.
Or last week's "DOJ lawyer delays court hearing on reuniting children with families due to weekend dog-sitting responsibilities"...
> I mention it because if we classify it as default, not inherent, it means we can and should be doing something about it.

Should? You're assuming that mortality is a problem. Extreme longevity or immortality would certainly change the human condition, but it's purely speculative to think it would be better in some objective, widely-accepted sense. Not every "default" is something waiting to be fixed.
I teach intro programming using python, and use it regularly for various projects.

But I agree with the author's central point that the language has a number of issues.

He mentions the python2 vs python3 issues, but doesn't discuss what is to me the biggest problem of all that: there is no standard simple way to identify within the code what version of python it needs or is written for. Coming originally from the perl world, that has always seemed like a significant oversight.

Nor does he mention several of my other biggest issues with the language, such as the arbitrary assignment of some operations to global functions (i.e. a=[3,2,1]; len(a)) while others are method calls (i.e. a.reverse()) which return nothing. And then there's list(reversed(a)) and all the iterator awkwardness ...

Explaining to students learning programming for the first time why neither of these do what they expect is never fun.

>>> print(a.reverse())
>>> print(reversed(a))
Although applications changing is still a problem, I quite strongly disagree that Linux desktops are always changing. Unlike NT and Darwin, Linux lets you run whatever desktop environment you want, including all the old ones. I have a co-worker who has been using some offshoot of twm (I forget which) for literally decades with almost no changes.
Agreed. I hadn't really thought of that either and consider me convinced of the point made.
Let's say following: all the urban infrastructure is car-centric, period. Even in most developed European cities the car drivers are privileged. Why should we bike riders use side lanes/walks and not main lanes for example? On rare sundays when vehicles traffic is nearly absent in my town, we do really enjoy cycling the main roads - it is much faster to get to any place even if my town is relatively good place for bicyclists - there are many separate cycling-only roads and bridges.
401(k) plans of many large companies are heavily concentrated in employer stock
OK and all I’m saying is that you have not presented any evidence for your claim at all.
> off all software from IBM because they sell some lame software just seems weird

If you disregard their bully sales and "promotion" tactics ando how much the "Rational" suite of products cost

So no, I'm happy that github took over and I'm happy to boycott it as much as I can
I disagree. A CA's actual product (what you pay money for) is some magic bits that put a padlock in the browser URL bar or, alternately, allow you to do HTTPS with browsers without your visitors getting scary warnings from the browser (and attackers being able to MITM your visitors). Since it is extremely rare that CA's are de-trusted by browsers, especially on short notice, any CA that can create this good today is basically as good as any other CA. 'Trust' doesn't come into it as such, and to the extent that you must trust your CA, you cannot feasibly verify that it actually is trustworthy and will remain trustworthy, and thus that certificates it has signed for you will remain trusted by browsers for their duration.

(DigiNotar was trustworthy right up until people discovered that it had been compromised. StartComm actively hid that it had been bought by WoSign; it took people some digging to turn this up and verify it. Other CAs have routinely denied that they had problems when they did.)

Even if you could, picking an especially trustworthy CA doesn't add any extra security for your website, because you are actually dependent on the security of all of the CAs out there, any of which can in theory mis-issue a TLS certificate for your site. Sure, there's CAA records, but this only helps if the CA actually follows the rules properly; CAs can fail here at both a technical and a business level. (One CA recently proposed that it should be allowed to ignore CAA records if the domain owner told it to.)

Even attempting to do basic checking of a CA probably doesn't make sense at a business level unless you're buying certificates in bulk. Suppose that you're buying four TLS certificates and the best price you can get is $30 per certificate per year, or $120 in total for a year. How much engineer time does it make sense to spend in order to pick the most 'trustworthy' CA (ie one that is likely to remain trusted by browsers for a year), given that CA de-trusting is an extremely rare event and if it happens, you're only out another $120 to buy certificates from the next CA?

(I'm the author of the linked-to entry and as you can tell, I have opinions on CAs and the TLS ecosystem. One of them is that Certificate Transparency is a really big deal because it removes a lot of the 'trust me' from the whole CA ecosystem.)
Something to consider is that your experience may not be representative of the norm.
> Have you ever made a graphql server with apollo-tools?

Have I ever mentioned apollo or graphql tools? Let me check: no

> There's a lot less noise, and it's _much_ friendlier for (most) designers.

I love how you could find exactly one thing out of a whole list of things that may be just ever so slightly better than JSX.

And of course, it's not better than JSX for very obvious reason that you chose to ignore: how { } in JSX accepts plain JS with the only exception that it has to be an expression. And (and it's the most important part): curly braces in JSX mean and accept the same thing everywhere in JSX.

In Vue though: What do @ attributes accept? What do : attributes accept? What do curly braces accept? etc.
There once was (still is?) a proposal for this: https://github.com/jakearchibald/navigation-transitions
I think you may not realise the size of the F35 black hole. According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_governmen... there are only six countries in the world whose total state budget is bigger than the F35 budget.

The F35 is equivalent to two or three months of the total expenses of the US federal budget, depending on what you count as expense. You can't say that about every expensive gadget. Even if you tried you couldn't have ten such projects per year.

There's only one word to describe the F35, and the word is awesome.