skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Before you spend some time doing mostly functional it's easy to ignore just how much meaningless state you might have floating around. You're right that any non-trivial endeavour will necessitate quite a lot of information being kept around. But in my experience most of the state you produce in languages that don't support functional patterns isn't even related to the domain. You're often forced to put thing into variables, objects and all sorts of things that might not make a lot of sense.
> In order to write effective tests, a programmer has to think of the piece of software's entire input domain, carve it up into a set of equivalence classes, and then determine what the expected behavior should be for a piece of input from each of those classes.

OK, so let's revise the statement to "in order to write effective tests, you must know how your software should behave in the face of all kinds of inputs".

In my mind, that's an equivalent, or nearly equivalent* proposition. It's still above and beyond the capabilities or available resources of people developing very complex software. That's not excusing anyone. Just saying that your correction isn't that different from the original statement.

* Sure, "someone unplugged the computer while it was running my code" is a failure mode that's not a function of (what most people would consider to be) the input domain. Genuinely external failures like that, while damaging, are rare. What you usually end up defending against are the downstream results of those failures (i.e. "a network partition meant that half of my input dataset was null pointers").
This is AWESOME! Thank you Chrome!

On a completely unrelated topic, there is a bug I'm noticing: ICANN doesn't allow emojis in TLDs.

What? That's ridiculous-- I can put them in the main part of the domain name along with an enormous number of cute homoglyphs. So why not smileys and homoglyphs in TLDs? If users can deal with smileys in the main domain that tells where the site is, surely they can deal with them in the little extra part that comes at the end. Everything's just .com underneath anyway so what would problem be?

Google has done the work to remove the unsafe part of domains. Now our domains can really shine. So give us more bling to put in there, ICANN! C'mon.

Also-- why not www as tld? I love "biz" and "pizza" as much as anyone, but excuse me they got nuthin on the world wide web. C'mon ICANN give us "www" in the Trailing Little Domain! We're ready for it now! :)

Best,
Your Userbase
Unfortunately this is not in Safari for iOS.
The behavior of safari is quite as bad and very confusing. Want to copy the url you see? Nope, you copied https as well.

What you see is not what you get seems counter-intuitive imho.
As in you don't know you are thirsty or you don't have access to water?
> The prize, FWIW, wasn't just for the discovery of pulsars but for the aperture synthesis interferometry technique that made it possible.

Ryle's participation in the prize was for aperture synthesis interferometry while Hewish's was for the discovery of pulsars. From [0]:

> The Nobel Prize in Physics 1974 was awarded jointly to Sir Martin Ryle and Antony Hewish "for their pioneering research in radio astrophysics: Ryle for his observations and inventions, in particular of the aperture synthesis technique, and Hewish for his decisive role in the discovery of pulsars."

Aperture synthesis is useful for achieving higher angular resolutions than would otherwise be possible. But pulsars are unresolved and so angular resolution isn't as important for their study (the localization of pulsars can be done very precisely from the modeling of the arrival times of individual pulses). Collecting area (overall sensitivity of the telescope) is the driving consideration for pulsar science.

[0] https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1974/summary/
Downvotes are cool but counter-arguments are more convincing.
One class of examples would be problems where probing the environment is expensive. In many robotics applications, this can be tricky because the robot might break or not return to a suitable initial condition without human oversight. Moreover, the physical experiment can relatively slow so little data is generated, and what is generated may not generalize well. That being said, how to overcome these challenges is a very active research topic in the community.
The coefficient of performance (efficiency) of an AC at that temperature range would still be well over 1. Probably around 3-4 depending on the unit and refrigerant. [0] ACs are very efficient for the same reason heat pumps are efficient. They are just moving energy around.

[0] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/242172797_A_Compari...
If you look at the spaces where ASICs are still successful, one thing that is clearly important that you don't mention is the software kit around the chip(s). Half the team (or more) will be software guys. It's not about fabbing (since these companies are fabless and typically TSMC), it's about software support.
So we should have a limited control medium requiring extremely high levels of capital and regulation to provide content in a limited set of locations that can only be consumed by the user?

I suppose this change does get to this exact point since it obfuscates the page location so far as to be totally inaccurate, just as channel numbers obscure the frequencies and data transmission methods do on television.
And how would the client distinguish the part that goes to DNS from the HTTP path?
I’m pretty sure this advice is aimed at coping emotionally with the unwarranted hostility and exclusion of a biased workplace; not about dismissing constructive criticism out of hand.
When you tell me to "refer to the primary documents when you see articles like the one you posted", it's relevant that Barton Gellman is one of a few people who have reviewed Snowden documents directly, including documents that the Post chose not to publish.

I'm done with this conversation; it's clear you're not acting in good faith.
The Subway Doesn't Have to Be Hot and Gross
I think they know it's still a gamble...
I'm thinking the better question is: What would it take for Google to be "Google for research data"? I have to presume the answer is: not much.
Do androids see electric blue? Visualizing the latent space of color perception
No, I'm saying "don't undermine the president" applies, at most, to the people in the executive branch of the government.
I'd like a dataset which maps (zip code, age, single) to a distribution of incomes. E.g. (60642, 18, single) is likely <$20k income. Ideally it would return a big list of (age, zip code, income, year, single) entries.

Is it possible to find this data using Google's dataset search? If not, making an easier frontend for it might be one way to add novelty.

It's also hard to figure out whether the data exists or whether your search terms are poor.
Let me clarify: since the subdomain is hidden, I now have to munge with the URL input field to just get the full url to show up so that I can then modify the subdomain.
Plenty of people can afford to retire, but they spend money like fools and then wonder why they don't have any. Read The Millionaire Next Door or listen to Dave Ramsey and you'll quickly learn that you can save plenty on a low income or go broke on a high income. Savings, income, and wealth building are in fact three distinct and also interrelated things.
or access your own retirement money without penalties

My own?! Holy crap, and I'm bitchin' here in the U. S. because I can't touch the 401K until 59.5.
I agree, but I'm a lot more fine with disruption, delays, and anything constitutionally allowed coming from outside the executive branch.
Yes it does feel like Smalltalk and Scheme. I never really liked Lisp (I feel like a heretic saying that on HN) but having this for Python of JavaScript would be infinitely more useful to me.
On a higher level, all those considerations are about a single question: Is the Web about communication (then it's probably OK as it is), or about a viable business platform with an entry-level as low as it can be?

Who's without interest may throw the first stone, er, browser extension.
Grey is usually understood as greyed out: not selectable, non-functional and therefore counter-intuitive as well.
Why would I use "dominatrix" when "dom" is shorter? Seriously though, "dom", and "master" are fairly generic terms. "dominatrix" and "torturer" are needlessly specific to point that they don't accurately describe the relationship anymore.

>And is your project a popular open-source project?

Yeah I'm Linus lol.
I have many websites which I don't let Google to index, how would my users access them?
3 Rivers; 2 Startups; 1 Uni; Pittsburgh's Route to 0-Driver Cars
I don't get what you mean, I'm talking about opening an "m.facebook.com" link on my desktop computer Chrome. So not sure why "Show desktop version" is relevant.

>Very few sites actually use www. vs m.

Well, facebook does that.
No, users expect to type what they see in the address bar, and get the same result every time.

Can we even call them address bars anymore?

And blaming website owners for working within the bounds of published standards is ridiculous and you know it.
I live in Germany. Here, for example, the government threatens to fine companies who don't censor "hate speech" - with no way to appeal and no exact definitions. So even if you just operate your own node, you might be liable for fines if you don't censor at the whim of the government.

Maybe a decentralized Twitter, with some kind of magic anonymization that is usable for normal people, could work around that. But then I guess decentralized approaches never achieved a good performance so far?

A decentralized alternative seems like the only hope, but it might be very difficult or impossible to implement.
Sometimes, the big lotteries like Powerball and Megamillions do get to EV > 1. Not only is it unreasonable to buy the 240 million tickets for every combination (financially and logistically), but even if you did, if you end up sharing the winnings, then you lose millions. EV > 1 is still not horrible.
Impossible. These are special people. The most important people in a company. They are so important that when they fail they get rich. They can't lose.

Us mere mortals could never understand them, let alone code them.
Are you a native speaker of English?
The most efficient way to heat would still be generating electricity from gas. You lose 50% of the energy (well, you can still use part of the residual heat for heating, too), but with the electricity, you can run a heat pump that heats with about 400% efficiency. 50% × 400% is still 200%, so twice as good as burning gas for heat.
And part of my argument is that the lie is in the word "neutrality," not their enforcement policies, which by all accounts are evenly uneven.
> People have always said to host your site at www and redirect to it, something I have never understood nor heard a convincing argument for.

It comes from the long-lost days when people actually ran their own servers, and would have [www,mail,ns1,ns2,intranet,chat].example.com servers. If you already have a lot of special-purpose domains, it seems weird to privilege "www" as the real example.com, so the recommendation was to redirect from it.
Add eyeball tracking into this mix, and we can "allow" users to "experience" unskippable ads.

In all seriousness, I have no doubt this is due largely to Google's frustration at Ad Blockers. If there is no URL, and you're in the Google Garden protocol, there is no way to block ads, or at least no way to NOT download them.
yeah I read that site a while back. The ideas espoused there seem to line up at least roughly with the philosophy 3301 spoke about, and it's theoretically interesting, though it seems to have a generous dose of speculation and esotericism thrown in too - not that that's uncommon when it comes to 3301 theories.

I read about CAKES and the brood system, but it seems like the 1 or 2 years they managed to get people together (that are publicly known about), they sacked off the brood fairly quickly.
So now they've added "Restrict-AddIssueComment-EditIssue" to the bug. [Edit: This means that only users with EditIssue permissions may comment on it] Apparently we've complained too loudly for their liking.
Of course I wasn't talking about you. I'm sure you can singlehandedly beat RenTec, DE Shaw, Two Sigma, Citadel, Bridgewater, PDT, Tower, TGS, Headlands, AQR and DWR; all without any professional experience in finance. And naturally it makes more sense for you to work with a vastly smaller amount of capital, on your own, instead of simply joining one of those firms. After all you routinely beat their archaic and inefficient systems. You're a walking argument for active trading instead of index investing! Buffett should check in with you.

But you have to admit your skill is extraordinary, and I'm not talking about people like you in my earlier comment. I'm talking about most people, who cannot do the things that you can do. They probably come easily to you but you're just gifted with exceptional talent and work ethic. Most people can't trade profitably even with all the resources of a firm behind them; that you can do it while making all those other firms look silly is astounding and remarkable. So please don't feel as though I was downplaying your impressive accomplishments.
How is that different from my examples where they protect against certain common dangers but don’t even attempt to protect against all the ways you can hurt or kill yourself with them?
> This seems to be a common trope lately.

That's because it has only become self-evident lately. It has become much harder to believe that reason and truth will prevail on the internet. Back in the 1990s, it was easier to be idealistic.
> If they don't make money, then why would they need to collect and share data about their users?

If you've ever developed a website you should absolutely know why you might need to collect and share data. Google analytics is considered sharing btw.
Automatic Punctuation for YouTube Lecture Transcripts
Figure this is an appropriate time to share this story: went to Whole Foods a little while back and the cashier seemed nearly terrified that she'd be terminated if she didn't make sure to ask before checkout if the customer was a Prime member. I'm pretty sure she said that other people had been for forgetting.
> >$250,000/annum

> it is bare minimum that you'd have to pay to an engineer, and i'm still not sure that you can find somebody able to do hardware design in AI space on that kind of low money today.

Maybe in SV. In Dallas, only top analog and digital designers are commanding that kind of salary. There's plenty of fab and board shop capacity there, too.

Also, I don't see why you specifically need "somebody able to do hardware design in [the] AI space". Experienced digital and mixed-signal designers should be sufficient.
Also, if you go into about:config and turn off keyword.enabled, the address bar will no longer search.

It's very useful if you don't want to Google internal/client URLs just because you accidentally copied a space at the start or the hostname doesn't resolve in your current environment, etc.
This is the same script. The Rust code is just invoking Perl to generate it.
Honestly, I would worry that the idea of a compensation package based mostly around bonuses just leads to a massive amount of infighting and politicking and other nastiness from people jockeying for an extra 20k. If I get stuck doing some bug fixes and refactoring for a couple months am I going to lose out to the person who launched 2 new features?

Not trying to be a jerk about it, but as a potential applicant that is my concern. d
It's possible I've been living under a rock, but while I'm aware of rat being pejorative, I'm finding out in this thread for the first time about the anti-semitic undertones.

It's pretty clear that the difference is context, but I also don't think there can be clear guidelines if Twitter is expected to delve into the context for each tweet its users make.

In fairness, context typically doesn't provide smoking guns as pungent as this one. I'd still say it's not beyond reasonable doubt (and I'd guess most would be ok with that for a Twitter ban -- it's not prison or death).

So, sure, everyone should call it a dog whistle on the preponderance of evidence, but there were almost certainly better grounds for the ban. I doubt there will ever be a good ban target whose only giveaway is dog whistles.
If there’s one job that robots are certainly going to take, it is solar panel squeegee guy.
The team that implemented this change, also talk about how women confuse the padlock with an icon of a purse...

https://www.wired.com/2016/11/googles-chrome-hackers-flip-we...
> If you care about usability this is clearly an improvement.

This is a false dichotomy. There are tons of ways to improve the implementation without just hacking parts of the URL out of the "omnibar."

You could split the omnibar and/or allow it to be resized so both pieces of information can be shown. You can use differential color highlighting and/or text formatting to convey which parts google considers "trusted." You could implement an "expert mode" button somewhere that turns all of these "improvements" off. You could add an extra field that shows security-critical information not just about the URL but about the resulting connection(s) to the host.

This is hardly exhaustive, which is also a good description for Google's effort on this one.
With imaging help from Dr. Spiers
I've never seen him, nor has the poster I replied to. There is no need to ban people so that people don't have to see them.
Can you get away with just having the terminal open the path in WSL? I'm not sure what your workflow is though. I change mine to use msys bash (installed via git for windows) instead of powershell in windows. Not sure if it'd be too much more difficult to do similar with WSL.

Also, no idea on integrating tasks... Would be nice to see more in the box. Only windows machine I have now is my work laptop, and we're only targeting windows deploys, so cannot answer more specifically.
> Like, who actually runs separate HTTP servers on example.com and www.example.com anyway? Everyone is hyperventilating over contrived "the principle of it all" examples.

I do. Over and over again. Having been doing that for 2 decades, and with a limited budget, I require things like SNI[1] to work. But of course, I could just triple the tech budget...

EDIT: And wrt "Time for a modicum of historical perspective." - please give it to me. I am keen to learn what I did wrong all the time.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Name_Indication
We should expect increases in efficiency vs the US to /increase/ energy use relative to US levels.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
I did a weird double-take when I asked why a sale (yellow-labeled) item didn't ring up as discounted and the cashier asked if I had Prime. He then asked me to search "whole foods QR code" on my Amazon app. I just ... didn't love it.
I think I need to quote guy who inspired 3blue1brown's video now too: "Physics is like sex: sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it." R.P. Feynamn, you are missed.
Speak for yourself, friend.

You weren't born entitled to anything. I'm in better circumstances than you for my generation but it's unlikely I'll live to retirement age (disease). Grousing about 'capitalism' or the 'corporation' (or The Man, man) isn't going to change a single thing.

I envy your clear vision of who to blame and where the problem lies but unless you get into a career in politics you're not changing anything. Easier to become an astronaut.
Great response. I will add: Do not give in to these people, even an inch. If you do, they will never be satisfied, but will find the next hill of offense to conquer, and eventually your entire project will forget its purpose.
Oh come on.

"www." was used as a way of delineating what was a web address. Hence the fashion of putting that there so people knew you had to do it in the browser. Before then people used to also put the "http://" on there, and the combination of the two on vehicles/signs was ridiculous.

We're now in a web world. People know what a URL is. "domain.com" isn't ambiguous, it's obvious to man, beast or child that you type it in the browser. Most decent websites revert "www." or without to whichever is the canonical version; the one without should be that tbf.

The 'm.' is ridiculous too and ruins shareability. If the link was the bare domain, and the frontend does any switch that's needed, we'd all be better off.
How will this work in a consumption-driven economy?
“These are very innovative studies, but they are preliminary findings that need replicating.”
Google took a much tighter hold of the reins with regard to Wear hardware. Google releases the firmware binaries, unlike in Android.
I think the implication is that they achieved the goal they had, to grow a company. Note that goal doesn't mention code at all.

It depends what you think software engineering is - a means to an end, e.g. to grow a company, or as a craft you want to perfect and do for your whole career.

I think there are more craft coders, because most jobs are at companies that have survived and there is more to lose from errors than gain from moving fast. The craft attitude may not be ideal when you want to go from zero to something, and avoid going back to zero very quickly. Or, perhaps more importantly, if you want to go from zero -> something wrong -> something wrong again -> something almost correct -> Product Market fit.
Memory, as I understand it, is contextual. So it's not the doorway per se, but the fact that the context changed. This is why after "forgetting", your return to the original room helps you to remember.

As a side note, again as I understand it, context can be things other than physical location. It can be your emotional state (i.e., when you're happy you're more wired to recall things that happen when you were in the same / similar state of mind.

And yes, context of state of mind can be the chemical based (e.g., alcohol). Yup. The brain is a crazy and complex work of art.
C'mooon

> The IRA won’t make anyone rich. A calculator on the site estimates that if you’re 22 years old and making $14 an hour–saving around $120 a month–you could end up with around $230,000 by the time you’re 65

1. $14 / hour? The median household (yes, I know, household, but wait) income is the highest it's been since at least 1985 [1] at $59k/year. So $14 is definitely a bit lower than "normal".

2. Saving $120/month on that salary is saving just 5%! Nobody is suggesting saving 5% is appropriate. 10% is the bare minimum anyone recommends. Doing that, an IRA at 65 would be worth > $763,000, enough to spend $30k each year for the rest of their lives.

Standard statement I feel like I always need to make: this is in no way a defense of our economic system. We absolutely need to raise taxes on the highest earners. We probably need a wealth tax as well. But we middle classers need to cool it with the defeatist attitudes. The poor have it hard. We, for the most part, do not. We spend too much and save too little. If you've got a car loan, eat anything but rice and beans, drink anything but water, have cable tv, a > $30/month cell phone bill, and complain about being broke, you've got some very obvious improvements you can make to get out of that dilemma.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United...
NYT Trump Column: Linguistic Clues to White House Insider?
I would guess this makes Chrome and non-standards compliant browser.
Such a bizarre juxtaposition, it feels like it came out of The Onion.
Well, I understood it did not only display differently, but make the actual request to the stripped URL.

I don't know.