skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
For pop music marketing is everything. The major labels are the curators of pop music.
Spotify owning/promoting artists would be a big change and it’s probably too early for pure social media promotion.

For ambient/classical music Spotify is already doing it. Placing an order on music they believe their subscribers would like from unknown artists.
I hear people say they broke up with their friend all the time.
I always wondered why there is no emoji for "fan".
Interesting because stolen cars are sometimes broken for parts, but perhaps there's no profit in that in US? There was an 'OEM+' car modding craze here a few years back where certain top-end Audis were being targeted solely for their front seats, which would then be fitted to older VWs.
If you fix the semicolon I'll try to upvote this twice.
How the Shared Family Computer Protected Us from Our Worst Selves
Can confirm that mikeash knows a lot about this stuff and posted a lot about it.

Also bbum, he does a lot of posts on SO about this stuff, and I thought he wrote blog posts on the subject too but can't seem to find them.
juno doesn't seem to work on windows with 1.0
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html, especially the “Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents. ” part. If you want to be corrected about what the GDPR does you could find a thread on that topic.
It... requires Flash? Is this the challenge?
It would be too much to really go into, but what I will say is that almost all of your assumptions are misguided.

I don't mean that in a mean way, but for example using GPS for AR anchoring is not viable and will never be. So we have to build computer vision systems for localizing content, and those are complex and expensive and have hardware, bandwidth and other constraints.

BIM is ubiquitous, but not easily integrated with other hardware, and the hardware best suited for it (HMD) are expensive and not yet everywhere - or even widely adopted.
>The properties of the simulating universe, including foundational things like rules of logic and mathematics, could be literally unimaginable (by design or accident) within the simulation.

This could be the quadrillionth iteration by which point they'd be pretty confident though.
Just wish they would add encrypted messaging. To me that's Discord's most important missing feature.
> the last commit as of today is July 4, 2018

That's not terribly surprising. Clojure is incredibly stable. It's a pattern you'll see across the ecosystem. There are libraries that haven't seen a change in 2+ years which still see heavy usage and downloads. In that regard, it's unlike any other ecosystem I've seen. Don't let it dissuade you-- after a while, you'll get used to it and see it as a strength, and by comparison most other languages will seem insanely churny.
More Insight into How and What Convolutional Neural Networks Learn
The price and price gains or losses on stocks are not related at all to the profits.

Perhaps not in the short term, but they definitely are in the long term.
> In practice there is for most situations. Are you going to get a static IP and go through the work of finding one of the rare cert authorities to get an HTTPS cert for it authorized?

You don't need DNS to check whether the server purporting to be messenger.com has a valid certificate for messenger.com. An attacker who controls the network can of course cut you off entirely, but an attacker who controls DNS can't intercept you messages because that doesn't get them any closer to having a certificate.

> I agree that one of the layers should be HTTPS if the context allows for it, because it has a lot of eyes on it, as you mention; but I fail to see how layering encryption is bad from a privacy standpoint.

Do you feel safer behind two locked doors than one? I guess it can't hurt, but the effort would surely be better spent on virtually any other aspect of the system. E.g. if you double the key length in a single layer of encryption you've made it 2^128 (or whatever your key length was) times harder to crack, whereas if you stack two layers then you've only made it twice as hard.

Beyond that my argument would be: many security breaches happen because someone got confused about where the security boundary was. If you use one layer of encryption then everyone knows that the encrypted data is untrusted and the decrypted data is trusted. If you have two layers it's very easy to get lazy and introduce a small hole into one layer assuming the other will cover it, then you do the same for the other layer, and then an attacker figures out how to connect those two holes in a way you hadn't thought of and suddenly you're doomed.
I think if you compare R's tidyverse to Julia, you aren't at all in Julia's wheelhouse. Julia's value comes from algorithm development primarily, not from interacting with data.frame type objects. If you really want to speed up that, use data.table in R. It'll provide you with the fastest data.frame implementation around.
It makes you someone that can't listen. The most important part of communication is listening. When the interviewer asks you to whiteboard a problem, they aren't asking you to "solve it". Obviously, you only have a whiteboard and you only have 15 minutes max. You might throw out some comment about size vs. time (eg) but make the decision and move on, quickly. The interviewer might decide to latch on but if not, you have to cover this in 15 minutes so you limit the depth so as to do that. Stub out all the deep functionality and then dig into each part of it as time permits and as the interviewer leads you in those directions.

As an experienced and good programmer candidate, the most important part of an interview is for you to evaluate the company. So the whiteboard is a great way to see if they understand what can be accomplished in 15 minutes on the whiteboard.

If they don't get it, you can end the interview short. Time saved today as well as the next several years working for a shite company.

I love the whiteboard interview.
HashiCorp Terraform 0.12 Preview: Template Syntax
Using Storybook with React Native
This basically filters out those who already have a job or getting multiple offers. Most candidates don't want to spend more than a day on an interview.
Isn't that what you tried to do to me? You asked me this: "is there actual factual standing behind the positions I listed?" First of all, why are you asking me about the factual standings of your examples? And second, you didn't just allege that the ideas you listed were 'silly'. You said they do "actual damage" despite being out in the open and actively refuted. Is it so much to ask that you provide proof? Had you just said "I think these are silly ideas" we wouldn't be having this conversation.
I'm using html and surge.sh. It's been great. Deployment is a breeze with their CLI.
Is your problem the labeling of the company as racist because the CEO is (presumably) racist, because I really don't see much of a difference between Pewdiepie "being racist" and Pewdiepie doing racist things (like using the n-word ... repeatedly). Is it any better if we say the company is ran by a racist and supports racist employees rather than itself "being racist"?

I don't know Marc DeForest or S2, I've never played HoN, I don't know the history here, and none of this directly matters to me, but my immediate comparison is to James Gunn/Dan Harmon -- both of them said some offensive things years ago, and both of them have apologized. Whether you think it was right for Disney to fire Gunn or for Adult Swim to retain Harmon, there's been atonement for that. Has DeForest atoned for his behavior, or is he continuing to make a lot of money being racist?
Parents Warned About Mesothelioma as Crayons Test Positive for Asbestos
Imagine if you were to program a video game in which players could interact with in-game computers, which were implemented as genuine full-feature emulations of working computers. It seems plausible that a memory-bit in one of the in-game computers would have its value stored in a memory-bit in the real computer on which the game was running.
So the entire Dublin office is only using lazy American slurs now? No one said something like you damn wanker, git, twit, bieber, maggot, fucker, tosser, daft, chav, prat, knob, sod, ninny, oaf, muppet or slag?
>No it doesn't: it depends on whether it's dysfunctional or not. Even if the people involved don't see the dysfunction.

“It’s dysfunctional because it’s dysfunctional.”

I hope I don’t have to explain why this is, again, begging the question.

What is “dysfunctional”? That’s largely culturally determined, because what’s “functional” is relative to the environmental you’re in.

You seem to conflating morality or human rights with mental dysfunction. I suspect you are doing this because it’s easier than addressing the comment thread I was replying to regarding “open” vs “closed” cultures. What is the objectively correct “functional” mode of human interaction?
There's an old saying about not committing more than one crime at a time.
Until I started forcing them to when I quit Facebook, I had no acquaintances that used SMS, they all use FB Messenger. This is the problem.
Multi-national corporations are counting on the disparity to essentially play arbitrage with labour. Nationalism feeds into that, so it's in their interest to stoke nationalist sentiments.
Whilst $176k of IT services wouldn't get you far, it would likely be enough to buy user seats on a SaaS product. Not to mention this software probably sucks and there is a big opportunity cost with detectives wasting time on using dated software. If you spend $2M on software that saves you $3M in payroll on overtime because your detectives are wasting hours per week on case management, then $176k isn't a bargain anymore.
I believe you answered your own question. When there aren't many individuals left in the world with the associated expertise, and when a younger developer sees no growth potential for learning this expertise, you probably will have to pay more a la supply & demand. That said, this doesn't seem particularly high. My guess is a migration would easily cost seven figures. However, sometimes delaying the problem is really kicking the can down the road to when there are even fewer people with lotus expertise.
Go seems like a bad venue to compare the value- and jump- based approaches to error handling, because its value-based error handling is so poor that it ends up pushing people towards jump-based handling. I'd be more interested in reading about this in Haskell or Rust or whatever.

I also don't think anyone should be allowed to write, or read, about error handling unless they've read and digested 'The Error Model':

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11054912

And if they have, they should be required to say so at the start of their article, so i know i'm not wasting my time reading it! :)

I would say that one of the lessons from the evolutions of errors in Rust is a sort of negative-space analogue of Animats' story - that with sufficient syntactic sugar, value-based error handling behaves pretty much the same as jump-based error handling, and that we shouldn't think of them as alternatives, but as directions on a continuum. A bit like how we realised that garbage collection and reference counting are on a continuum:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14823054

The most interesting thing i've read on this recently is the proposal for "Herbceptions" in C++:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17059297

This defines a do-over of exceptions in C++ in such a way that they can be implemented as return values, and lose the usual disadvantages of exceptions. Particularly with the optional bit in section 4.5, where you have to explicitly (but tersely) mark calls to functions which can throw, so you never have exceptions unexpectedly appearing out of nowhere.
With the alarm disabled, they could wait a month.
The whole library has 199 lines (with comments), and the code is very clear (at least, for me). You can give a try to read it.
I'll stop short of saying whiteboard interviews, with or without coding, are suboptimal. I will say that any interview question which attempt to see how I think is suboptimal. How I think when on the spot does not reflect how I think on the job.

Speaking for myself, I like pair programming interviews.
Does anyone know if there is a way to run Android apps on GNU/Linux right now? If so, would the librem be able to run that?
It's really an umbrella term for a class of theories, some of which do make testable predictions (like anisotropy of space or, in this case, a minimum bound on memory error rate with zero radiation.) It's like the term "string theory".

One thing that all simulation theories predict is that our universe is interesting. It's an alternative to anthropic theories to explain why our universe is one with life and not one that re-collapsed to a singularity or expanded out into a thin hydrogen plasma. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-structure_constant#Anthro... for one reason why it's only a small range of possible universes that are interesting.
> Can confirm that mikeash knows a lot about this stuff

Well, he works on Apple’s runtime team now, so it would be bad if he didn’t ;)
It's not arbitrary. It's English. In the list [apple, orange, tree] which element is orange? It's the second element.

I have taught Python quite a bit, and I have gotten good at explaining 0 based indexing and slicing based on it. When I switched to Julia there was nothing to explain. And my code has about as many +/- 1s as before...
I love these kinds of post. It's like saying:

"Highways: Yay or nay?"

"Food: Yay or nay?"

"Air: Yay or nay?"

Hate on whiteboard interviews all you want, but that attitude is going to put you a massive disadvantage in the current rigmarole of software engineering interviews. It's not a thing 99% have any interviewees have control over. Nor is there a way to tell the interviewer: Hey, I prefer not to do whiteboard interviews. It doesn't work like that.
Whiteboards, in practice, are never used for writing strict code. They're used for high-level diagramming and high-level pseudocode.

The only time I've used whiteboards in my job is either when I need to hash out a solution or approach with my coworkers, because I'm confused or don't understand the problem, or when I need to understand high-level architecture for a system. It's a tool for clearing one's thoughts and for getting a team "on the same page".

If you're hiring someone to code-monkey a bunch of JIRA bugs, then whiteboarding might not be a relevant test for them. If you are hiring someone to build out new features efficiently or redesign architecture, then whiteboarding may be useful for having them describe at a high-level how they would solve problems. In both cases, writing syntactically flawless solutions on a whiteboard is a waste of time for both the interviewer and interviewee.
I think Sangermaine is right. While the example you gave is certainly, obviously, deleterious, what about countries where the work week is culturally < 40 hours per week? What about those who, on average, work 80+ hours. At what degree is it a "dysfunction". The decision of what is or is not a dysfunction is not as cut and dry as you assume because you are assuming the parameters by which such dysfunctions are determined are as universal as the claims of dysfunction themselves. This cannot be the case, it dismisses too many shades of gray by saying only the colors of black and white are "real" colors.
A common argument in philosophy is that bad ideas should occur in the open - where everyone may ridicule them. When they are cast to the shadows they can grow, under everyone's noses, in private where only there are they allowed to exist. In private, these bad ideas cannot be challenged by others and people will be convinced to believe in them, with nobody challenging the idea as a genuinely terrible idea.

I used to subscribe to this position, but now consider it wrong for several reasons.

First, ridicule of a bad idea will have that effect anyway - people who like the idea but not the ridicule will form and gather in niche communities to incubate whatever weird ideas they hold. This is not a bad thing, as such, and can often be productive of new cultural or scientific ideas.

Second, everyone is not a rational philosopher. Some people are easily tricked by fallacious arguments, and other people are willing to treat a threshold level of social proof as equivalent to logical validation. Hence the wide currency of 'skeptical' responses to climate change, the dangers of smoking, or evolution - for a suitable fee, you can find some people who are willing to rent out their reputation or credentials and you can then manufacture the appearance of scientific controversy.

Third, proponents of bad ideas tend to make bad faith arguments, so challenging a bad idea is treated as equivalent to trying to suppress it anyway. Of course, such weak arguments don't hold up very well in philosophy journals or social fora, but that's because people in those contexts generally have academic degrees or equivalent study and there are fairly well established standards of discourse. If someone consistently makes fallacious arguments or recycles debunked ones eventually they will be ignored. In broader social fora those institutional safeguards are absent, while nontrivial socioeconomic payoffs for the production of bad faith arguments are present - in other words, you can make a good living out of pretending to believe the earth is flat because there's a market for comforting lies that help to relieve people's existential anxieties, and the cost of repeating the false ideas is relatively low compared to the cost of debunking them over and over.

Also, you keep making non-sequitur arguments, going from claiming that bad ideas will fester unnoticed in private spaces to slippery-slope 'you're next' arguments within the same paragraph. The latter does not follow from the former, and in fact implies that it is not possible to distinguish between good and bad ideas and that if bad ones are driven to the margins good ones will suffer the same fate despite their merits.
We can't stop everyone from killing, so let's just let everyone kill?
If you have a car that has keyless entry store your keys in a metal box and confirm it wont unlock the vehicle even if you take the box and put it next to your door. Also if you drive a modern ford do everything you can to block access to odbii port as they can clone a key in seconds using special tools.
> The point is that the job is essentially data management.

You might be right, but you could so easily be wrong. You really have no idea what the job entails. The software might be great, it might be a nightmare to maintain/operate.

What I do know is $88K/year for any consultant typically doesn't get you much.
Yes, it is well known there are a certain number of mutations (indels, point mutations, chromosomal rearrangements, etc) per division and cells in a dish divide many, many times.

Why would anyone think they would not harbour significant levels of genetic variation? This makes it sound like they just spent 40 years misinterpreting data because they didnt do some basic algebra.
IBM-Maersk blockchain alliance cuts oceanic shipping times by 40%
May I submit as evidence against that assertion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoPFkjF-Bdo

You don't get that reaction if its not a pejorative.
Denial. Exceptions are bad and no one needs them.

Anger. Ugh, we've got manual error-handling code everywhere. It's awful!

Bargaining. What if we just add a couple of really limited features to handle really exceptional errors...

Depression. Oh, God, now we have all of the trouble of exceptions along with our previous weird half-baked error-handling mechanism.

Acceptance. Well, we've got too many users, so now we're stuck with it. At least people seem to be able to muddle through anyway.
Ask HN: Is there software to manage hundreds of containers per CPU core?
e.g. a 32-core host running 8,192 containers.

Such containers would require a small CPU & RAM footprint :-)

This implies it's possible:
[1] https://blog.ubuntu.com/2015/06/11/how-many-containers-can-you-run-on-your-machine

Kubernetes has a default limit of 110 pods/node, and perhaps a max of ~250:
[2] https://prefetch.net/blog/2018/02/10/the-kubernetes-110-pod-limit-per-node/

K8s permits numerous containers/pod but its unit of mgmt is the pod, IIUC.
And environmental protection laws, and human rights laws, and civil rights laws, you name it, globalization has effectively undermined.

The best lie that America ever told the world (best exemplified by the 1939 World’s Fair[1]) was that democracy and capitalism go hand in hand. But when the U.S. blinked after the 1989 Tienanmen Square massacre and kept on buying cheap goods from China, it became clear that the Western world - the only long term bastion of democracy - cared more about capitalism than democracy, and China showed the world that you don’t need democracy for capitalism. Democracy has been in decline ever since, along with human rights.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1939_New_York_World's_Fair
It's disconcerting to see how many tech and free speech people are clamoring for the censorship of dissenting opinion and are jubilant when it happens.

Free speech has always been a very counter-intuitive process. Opinions that directly oppose yours or even your very person will rub you the wrong way, and to be intent on defending the right of your opponent to voice his opinion seems paradoxical, but we nevertheless conceded that this serves the greater good.

The recent Alex Jones incident was legitimized on the basis of dissemination of dangerous ideas. With Gab, the argument is that it is hate speech. The most compelling argument for free speech is that it removes the subjective and variable limits of speech and by extension, slippery slopes.

If you must know, while I do consider myself a political conservative, I cannot bear to listen to Alex Jones and I've never used Gab. I'm radically free speech which means I enjoy living in a world where literally everyone can say quite literally everything. Whether there is a slippery slope angle to all this is not even relevant for me. I want to hear the ideas of everyone who is broadcasting.

The very arguments I am expounding on are already controversial, but they weren't very long ago. Makes you think.
I don't believe there are any insurmountable issues with NPM currently.

The current major issue, as it stands, is that it's very easily for a malicious bit of code to sneak into a heavily used JS package and have oversized effects - this happened very recently with a very popular linting-support package.

The other issue is general posting of malicious packages under mistyped names, or takeover of existing packages with malicious updates by new owners.

At the same time, nobody wants to have NPM (the org) manually vet every upload ever made. So, there's that.

Many JS packages are extremely dep heavy, overwhelmingly for minor features (checking something is an array, promise-fying FS, etc) which makes it very easy to infiltrate packages and very hard to vet a package entirely.

Finally, npm (the program) runs into a fair bit of caching woes and it's own dumb bugs which feel like they shouldn't slip into production nowadays. Oh, and sometimes npm (the website) goes down.

The answer for JS, unfortunately, is probably segmentation - as better managed and more secure package repos come up, likely with their own package managers, npm will probably have to up their game. That, I am sure, will bring a whole fresh set of issues.
They are talking about the Baltimore Sun website.
Could someone with expertise explain how this is different than just breaking off the part of the US Air Force that handles space? My understanding was the USAF was already our 'Space Force'...