skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
When a mentally capable human kills another human, they do so with the understanding that killing that human will cause other humans to grieve the death of that human, and will remove that human's productivity from the world. They've made that connection and have decided to end that human's life anyway, so they are held responsible for the outcome of that. This is why people who are mentally incapable of understanding this are not punished the same way as people who are mentally capable.

A lion is not, to the best of our understanding, capable of understanding that killing another animal will cause grief to that other animal's family. If that other animal's family is even capable of understanding and/or grieving their death. And then we'd have to prove the killing was done with malicious intent, because just merely being responsible for someone's death, even as a human, is not immediately a criminal offense.

But it's a silly argument anyway because humans are often not prosecuted for the death of non-human animals, especially when that non-human animal is killed for food. So the idea that we would prosecute a lion for killing and eating an antelope is laughable when we don't prosecute a farmer for killing a cow for food.
Hypothetically speaking, if one is opposed to some or all aspects of the "One China" doctrine, what can one do locally/globally to effect change? Or is the annexation of Taiwan a near-certainty via the forces of economics?
What's the precedent in cases like these? Tech companies obviously have to care about their security, but it just seems a bit ridiculous that the boy will be persecuted and sentenced in the circumstances that he's in. (age, blind passion for Apple, etc.) Aren't there examples where the hacker gets a job at the company for discovering vulnerabilities?
I think in US culture there isn't generally much regard for taste or aesthetics for some reason. You can see in cities, public places, transport, offices, people's homes, clothing, packaging. Aesthetics or function is either not considered at all, or done with a horrible taste (think most airports, government offices).

In general, at least in Northern Europe, we have beautiful well kept and functioning cities, libraries and I think it's some kind pride or attitude in the culture, that while things are necessary, they can be also be beautiful, it doesn't necessarily have to cost more.
> Before I go any further, I’ll continue my story.

It seems to me that that sentence has no significance at all and can be removed safely ;)
Hey, you guys that are submitting these China related links. It really doesn't matter. Most articles that discuss bad things about current China will be flagged into oblivion. (but articles talking how bad US is are still ok).

But fluff articles discussing ancient Chinese stuff like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17792329 are perfectly fine. Haven't you heard? YC is in China helping to create startups for Chinese government??
DotLisp
it's definitely less used nowadays, partially because vue/react take care about a lot of work themselves, but also partially because virtual DOMs and component scopes make it complicated to work with DOM directly. I often run into little eye-candy things that jQ could take care of efficiently in a few lines of code, but because of everything else you end up building Animation components and HOCs instead that are in the end much more complex...
Slap a tiny solar-powered GPS unit and transmitter on each block. ~$10 of electronics is marginal compared to the $2000 of concrete for each block. If any break, you already have a crane that you can use to move the block out of the way for repair; just hand it over to an operator who can do the special-case operation by hand. If you get a beacon unit with a MTBF of 10 years and not awful clustering you might get one to five failing per stack per day, so you'd probably be able to handle a hundred stacks with a single operator dedicated to remote failure-handling.
It's not just the FAANG companies; it's a lot of startups and unicorns that compete with FAANG for talent (though generally Amazon pays less than the rest so it is more like FANG) as well.

But it's certainly true that in the broader US job market, everyone is complaining about a shortage in job-seekers, but refusing to raise wages to attract the employees they so desperately need. In fact, last time I checked, wages went up by less than inflation, year over year. There seems to be some sort of reverse unionization where employers are keeping wages sticky and unwilling to raise wages even when doing so is necessary.
i hope contemporary libertarians on the moon and mars will be OK with with some of the worst rankings in everything from infant mortality to diabetes to education, because that is the legacy of this type of extremist social experiment.
Netflix. Microsoft pays way less (except LinkedIn, and probably Github as well now).
Yes, I was profoundly disturbed at the thought of this being an elimination question.
Bad meetings are often the result of having meetings to discuss things that could/should have been done in email before the meeting. Send out a meeting agenda so people can come to the meeting with answers instead of being blindsided.

Bad meeting: Sue: "Could you get me the figures for bugs-over-time?" Bob: "I'll have to get back to you on that."

Good meeting: Sue: "Bob investigate our bugs-over-time metric. Can you share with us what you found out?"

If you are asking a question in a meeting that could have been asked before the meeting just as easily, you're wasting expensive "meeting time".
An Introduction to LLL for Ethereum Smart Contract Development
> It seems like some theory that doing anything beyond the functional minimum is a waste of the taxpayer's money

No, I don’t think that’s the cause.

The cause is that we are in a period of financial intermediation. Every sip of coffee, every home construction, every dentists office needs to be a financial instrument, easily tracked so that the markets can be made.

Essentially: as long as every endeavor is a private money-making endeavor, we can only do one thing at a time.

How would you even do the accounting on some sort of pedestrian walkway that both covered your liability and provided a public right of way? That’s some sort of public/private partnership... how would you short something like that?

Integrated systems are not amenable to finance so we have to wait.

In a few years we might have software that could efficiently underwrite multi-purpose projects like that, but it’s just not possible on today’s markets.
One crane can store 20 megawatt hours. The wholesale price of a megawatt hour varies between US$-40 and US$120, normally being around US$60; if you manage to hit those peaks and valleys, which usually happen once a day, you make US$160. If you manage to do this 20 days a month, you make US$3200 a month or US$38400 a year. Given saulrh's comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17790442 that each tower crane requires US$500 a month in parts to keep it running, it seems plausible that this could be economically viable.
I never understood this line everyone parrots about not giving the first number. That tactic works best only in situations where both parties have no clue what ballpark the other party has in mind. Which is definitely not the situation when you're one of 1000 similarly qualified engineers applying for a well-established job role.

In situations where both parties have a reasonable idea of what ballpark they are playing in, it's far better to toss the first number, because you get to set the baseline for the rest of the negotiation. Unless you're a very experienced negotiator, that initial baseline plays an outsized role in where the negotiation winds up finishing. For example, suppose both you and your counterparty know that the negotiation is going to be within the 100-150k ballpark. You tossing out 145k as the first number, will play much more to your benefit than allowing the recruiter to toss out 105k as the first number.

Obviously this tactic only works if you're well aware of what ballpark you're playing in. But that should be achievable by simply talking to your classmates, or perusing the many salary aggregators and discussion forums online. The only caveat I would add is to wait until all interviews are over and you've received confirmation that the company wants to make you an offer. At that point, no one is going to reject you for being too optimistic with your initial offer. Worst case scenario: you're going to get a much lower counteroffer. But at least you get the benefits associated with setting the baseline.

https://www.pon.harvard.edu/daily/negotiation-skills-daily/w...
Windows vs. Linux Scaling Performance Up to 64 Threads with the AMD 2990WX
Sure, and compilers do now sometimes emit warnings like "shift amount is always out of range".

Overall though, this isn't how compilers work: they aren't "fucking around" with code they know for sure is broken and will be executed. They are just applying a large series of optimization passes which includes passes like removing unreachable code, and that interacts with an analysis of paths that cannot be take for various reasons (including that end in UB) to remove "big chunks of code".

The same passes that screw you over in any of these famous examples are the ones that help code generation in the 99% of remaining cases including many "obvious" optimizations that you'd want the compiler to perform.

I know the situation with undefined behavior is distressing and the examples make it look like the compiler writers are out to get you, but that's not really the case.
Can you talk more about the opportunities and how dev process is related to product and where the opportunity lies? Sound like a provacative yet vacuous statement to me?
> not for shielding pedestrians from car accidents

I think you're making two separate distinctions here. Bollards are not appropriate as a first defense on motorways because they present a great risk to motorists. Bollards are however often built to shield pedestrians from car accidents (and other situations where cars enter pedestrian space inappropriately, like ram raids and vehicular terror attacks), they're just not good for protecting motorists when they do so. The most common bollards in major American and Canadian cities are explicitly specified and built to protect against fast-moving vehicles of a certain weight and center of gravity).
>That said, I've never really seen a consistent argument against _protecting_ prey animals from lions (and letting lions die out).

You might begin your research into this subject with reading about the reintroduction of wolves into various locations where they had been eliminated. The prey populations always fare better when there are predators around them. Without the pressure of predators to balance the population, deer and beaver and other prey animals tend to over-populate, which results in damage to the environment (over-grazing) and then eventually starvation of the prey animals.

The deer are either going to be killed by a wolf, killed by a human, or killed by disease and starvation. At least the first two options don't also cause extensive damage to the environment before they happen.

https://www.yellowstonepark.com/things-to-do/wolf-reintroduc...
By trial and error. Seriously.
ShadowNode implemented NAPI 10.6 and support node-gyp
My strategy in my recent job search was to provide my walkaway number (the minimum I'd need to bother leaving my existing employment), and state that I was looking for an offer that would be competitive with other offers. It helped that I was positioning myself to have offers from multiple companies I would be happy to work at, so offer competitiveness could be a major factor in making my decision.
These are all bad photos. The authors seem nice and well-intentioned but I'd take their advice more seriously if the work result was at all decent.
I’m relieved that it wasn’t a cockroach this time.
First of all, if you have never worked in a restaurant in any capacity (chef, waiter, manager, host, whatever), I would say the chances of starting a successful restaurant are much, much lower than someone with some experience. And it’s easy to understand why, as even a short one year stint in a well run restaurant is probably enough to pick up industry best practices (that are centuries in the making) and make a handful of connections.

If you want to start a company which makes software, actually knowing about software is going to do wonders for your chances of success.

As for your flipped question, “business” is not a background. Other than perhaps Math, English, and common sense, there is no knowledge that is so abstract that it can be usefully applied to any kind of business.
And if you rely on one of my packages and I delete it from github or make it private, your build stops working, right?

Everyone was up in arms about npm allowing this a few months back. Rightfully so, I think, but I feel like it's going to be easy to hit this issue when pulling straight from github.
I never heard "tweet" being a word for a bodily function largely considered indecent and/or hilarious. Is it?
This is so wrong. America is full of beauty, and many have great taste.

Maybe America is not to your taste.
I wish SJC could do something more about the noise pollution. At every hour of the day starting at 6 AM sharp (and often at night past the "curfew"), there are deafeningly loud jets taking off and landing overhead to the point where it even disrupts indoor conversation. When I lived there in Santa Clara, I had to wear earplugs to sleep at night, and needless to say, I was out of there once my lease was up.
There's no citation for that, so it could be what WP calls "original research". It is, however, pretty likely the right OOM.

That would put the storage capacity at around 1000x, and, if the estimates of the cranes' generating capacity elsewhere in the thread are correct, approximately proportional to that, as well.
The problem with tone policing is that it encourages groupthink, because deviating from consensus assumptions is intrinsically aggressive (no matter how well-couched) while extremely-low-effort agreeable comments pass right through the radar.

I understand if the point is simply to keep threads from devolving into sequences of "no yuo", but I did substantiate my call-out with the larger meta-intellectual point being brushed aside. What makes this story "interesting" is the editorialization of services that have traditionally been viewed as conduits, not because it's a place to pile on anti-discrimination piety.
With recruiters there's simply one rule to go by: Either you're feeling the pain, or they are.

If there's a trick in this, it's to make the recruiter feel just enough pain that they hate to say no, because they lose their commission.

So when you're asked salary first, go ahead and answer it and highball it. Either one of three things will happen:

1. They will tell you it's fine (and it might be), in which case, you didn't ask high enough.

2. They will say you're way too high and hang up.

3. They will reveal what their highest salary is for the position (or something close to that).

Number 3 is what you're looking for. Because then you can negotiate off your high ball answer and look like you're being reasonable, if they refuse to come up, then it's time to hang up the phone.
Meet BotBox the Robot Boxing Trainer
It's theoretically optimal not to give the first number.

The employer doesn't know how much you're making now, and can't legally ask (not in CA and NY anyway).

They have a theoretical top comp they're willing to offer for the position. Once you give them your number, their top offer becomes min(your_goal, their_top), which cannot be higher than their_top.

In simple terms, if you know your market value, and you tell them that number, you will never know of or benefit from their willingness to pay above that (often for good reason).

> For example, suppose both you and your counterparty know that the negotiation is going to be within the 100-150k ballpark. You tossing out 145k as the first number, will play much more to your benefit than allowing the recruiter to toss out 105k as the first number.

That would be the recruiter messing up. His initial goal is to get you in the door, unless your expected pay ranges do not overlap. In this case, they do, so saying a low number just means he's encouraging a potential fit to walk away.

A recruiter in this situation will typically state a range, and definitely won't just quote a number near the bottom of the range.
Hi fellow Hoofddorper :)

It’s relatively new, it was built between 2011 and 2013.
That was a great story - but the ending was a bit of a let down.

Tip to the reader: There absolutely nothing supernatural, or extrahuman, going on whatsoever.
Most professions don't eg when you have passed your bar exams taken silk or what have you - you do have cpd but these are self certified.
It will be interesting to see if/when China moves to economically censure a G8 country for engaging in trade with Taiwan.
Handstand
> Pilfered Pollen

> Bees and butterflies are praised for their pollination prowess.

> before they ever flirted with a flower, beetles were one of the world’s pre-eminent pollinators.

I'm pretty sure writers at the NY Times hold alliteration competitions.
The 500.000$ release (2017)
>I wonder if most engineers now are just permanent amateurs hopping around between tools and projects, learning just enough to make it work without breaking, but not knowing how to build things properly. How many years would it take to really become expert in that language? Even if you focused all your time on that, by the time you have mastered it another language will have come along to replace it, or the language itself will have been transformed into something new.

This is basically why I continually fail to make it as a web developer, at the times I'm forced to try. Even though I enjoy the work just fine, I don't have anywhere near the passion to keep up with every new framework on my own time.
No, that dot in the domain name of the URL is not a mistake. (2004)
Nothing sneaky is involved. Like you and most people, I believe I am fair minded. There's no pretending involved, either.

It is very surprising users would have even seen a comment buried deep in an old thread within minutes, but it is possible and I'm inclined to believe you in this case (though the next most likely case is a 五毛党 vote brigade). Nothing in the comment was a violation of guidelines, nor was the previous comment at all what it was maligned as.

That said, it's now clear that the very attempt "to voice minority opinions I believe to be true" is counter to the goals of the forum. While they're ideas and issues where one voice has a relative chance of making a difference, they're also very likely to lead to flamewars. It's hard to let go of the human rights issues, especially those I've seen some of first hand, but it's not productive here.

I'd be lying if I said YC's recent moves weren't terrifying, but I'll give up on voicing it in this way.
Name the first number AFTER you receive the offer, at that point they are salivating to have you. Not before, if you name your number before then you are generally just turning them off and giving them a reason to filter you out.
Reliability of a system is the reliability of each component multiplied together. It gets exponentially less reliable as you add components
I agrret with you, but want to say I think it's important to write code that is "brittle" enough to just satisfy the requirements. I've seen a lot of "edge case that probably never happens" code that ends up causing problems down the line because it does get hit, but for a unexpected situation and ends up mangling data.

Especially in the paradime of black box/microservices, if something comes in that doesn't line up with a known senario, there should only be enough code to log the data and raise an alert/error. Having something bad happen, and handling it so it becomes 'less bad' and doesn't get flagged, escalated, and tested properly is going to cause issues.
As this essay does, it always helps to dig deeper into what a word such as loneliness actually means.

I've written about this a bit below[1,2]. I'm interested in what the ingredients of these deep relationships are, both emotionally (eg. interests, vulnerability) and logistically (eg. time, proximity) so that we can better create and maintain them. I think that if we can influence these factors, we can have better control of our natural degree of loneliness (and to emphasize, some amount is completely natural).

---

I think the word “loneliness” is loaded with a ton of baggage, so maybe a better way to frame it is as “a lack of deep relationships.” I have a couple of thoughts here.

First, defined in this way, you can have one close friend and not be lonely. You can have a ton of “friends” and still be lonely. This seems much more intuitively correct.

Second, deep relationships are hard, and things which are hard are generally rare. It’s hard to get out of the house, leave what is comfortable and go meet strangers. On top of that, we’ve all had times where we meet new people, have a lot in common - and yet, nothing “deeper” materializes. And on top of that, strengthening and maintaining a relationship takes a lot of work. Without investment of time or effort, relationships atrophy. Deep relationships should necessarily be uncommon.

[1] https://alexpetralia.github.io/2018/04/02/NL-2018-04-02.html

[2] https://alexpetralia.github.io/2018/03/19/NL-2018-03-19.html
Case in point, I extensively use !important in the very rare situation I'm doing front-end work, because I struggle immensely with CSS and can never seem to get it to render properly. And in almost every situation, !important leads to more problems than it solves. Yet I keep doing it, because I fundamentally don't understand CSS.

If you use !important, you either understand CSS very well, or don't understand it at all.
They have not recently been working at the TSB :-)

The TSB a medium size UK bank had a very well publicised disaster - when doing a one way no roll back possible switch from an legacy IBM system to a Java based one
The answer is sort of yes, digital fentanyl is in our future. It’s a simple ML model that tells you what you want to hear based on your previous reactions and cross-person prior training data. Whatever your hidden insecurities are, that’s where it will bind. Once it becomes variative enough to keep you on your toes and precise enough to strike in yout heart you will no longer care that’s it obviously failing the Turing test.

Otherwise fully functional adults often succumb to sexual advances of sweet-taking suitors even if they rationally know the sweet-talk is bunk. And so it will be with this - humanity will fall to an AI before the AI can even develop consciousness.
Yeah, others provided good links.

I think your comment somewhat proves my point :) Nobody remembers this stuff!
You’re right there will be a change, but I don’t think it’ll be, as you suggest, towards fascism.

The notion of a centralized namespace is obselete. We will just have thousands of packages called “Squeak” and we will socially key packages by universe/name instead of name. In the default case the universe will be implied so it won’t even look that different from today.

But there will be infinite universes. We will spread out. Just like what’s happening in culture now. (The recent Twitter/Facebook/YouTube bannings being a perfect example of namespace fracturing)
Direct action: Book a vacation to Palau. Tip the locals, generously.
My President's too loud, and I think there's a red star on him.