skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Why aren't these studies being performed in other countries with less restrictive laws?
Be Careful Setting a Project's Birthday on Twitter
Interesting. I had the opposite idea a while back, inspired by a coworker who struggled greatly with indirection.

In my scenario I’d like to extend the code folding mechanism to show inherited methods and macro expansions inline, folded by default. Then you could drill into a five function and/or macro code flow, without ever leaving the current editor window, if the code has good cohesion.

And if it doesn’t, then this is more incentive to fix your code.
What’s an example of something that’s not an abstract concept?
I think you're being both too cynical and not cynical enough here, in that the more important causes are stupider and more petty than you're making out.

Nixon did very much like that he was screwing over black people and hippies with the war on drugs but the main reason he pursued this was that rising crime rates were freaking out voters. They wanted to vote for people with a plan to fix this but crime was mostly a state and local issue. By claiming that cracking down on drugs would solve crime Nixon was able to claim that he had a solution to crime.

But the reason we have such weird laws about marijuana in particular is that "marijuana induced insanity" was a popular criminal defense in some places prior to criminalization and that led most people at the time to think of marijuana primarily in terms of inducing violent crime.
I think you should re-examine your premise / first principles.

Why should we automatically view shaming in and of itself bad?

How about instead of calling it shaming, simply label it "holding companies accountable"?

Why should "a painful feeling of humiliation or distress caused by the consciousness of wrong or foolish behavior" be something people are prevented from ever feeling? Is it not sometimes merited?

Bad feelings, pain, suffering... if these should be avoided at all cost, what about the people whose private information can be stolen and is then put at risk by bad practices... some which are clung to even in the face of overwhelming evidence presented?

In other words, someone might have to suffer to some degree, if mistakes are acknowledged or if they are not, It's just a matter of whom... should it not be the companies and, to a much lesser extent, (causing some slight embarrassment to) those representing the company and arguing with people providing helpful advice, instead of innocent customers paying a business to secure their information, wealth, livelihoods etc?

Or avoid all shaming, consequences be damned?
Hey, feel free to go fuck yourself. Ignorant racist troll.
Study of wash trading at Bitcoin exchanges
How I learned to stop worrying and love version control in data science
> USPS last mile

This so much. USPS is literally the worst service I have ever used. If I see an Amazon package switch over to USPS I immediately email and get them to send it again and switch it to FedEx or UPS. You're right though that it is becoming harder to get them to switch it back to a delivery service that actually cares about delivery.
Yes, it would be very nice if people just measured the emission spectrum of their light bulb (compared to incandescent and daylight)... but there is no incentive to do that or for it to be correct.

I agree that CRI is just a number that doesn't have any objective or subjective meaning.
Strip the javascript engine out of the Tor browser, it has no reason to be there. It beats the purpose of using Tor if you're gonna allow Javascript to run.

It'd be much easier to just strip it all out, despite breaking site support in the process. Especially since Tor is usually used to access hidden services instead of the clearnet.
Estimated number of homeless in the US is around 500k (554k was the 2017 HUD estimate). That gives $35k-40k/year to spend on them if you only set aside $20 billion.
That's what paid pro accounts are for. Your product is good enough to merit people giving you money, which lets you develop the features that pro user benefit from, and free users get a taste of, to convince them to switch to a pro account.

Ads as your kickstarter in the absence of a pro account user base? Sure, if you have no other capital to work with, go for it. Still ads even after you have a pro account system in place generating cashflow? Now you're just being bad human beings.
Check out clipboard.js.
That thread costed me 38, edit, 50 karma points. Well spent ones, bring it on :))
Have you ever looked at the federal budget? I'd say we're demanding plenty of both...and we're going bankrupt.
How about this: it’s both true, and with the addition of other information about rapes the individual doesn’t notice, is evidence of their racism?
What would you all recommend as a good book in forecasting and time series analysis using Python?
As noted in the article, they're a public face of the company. If they don't know the actual answers to questions being posed, they should reach out to someone in their organization who does, not make stuff up.
Unless you're at the tiniest of startups, no one picks their own title.
Correct me if i'm wrong, but I thought it was illegal to do this in the US: at least if you want to do it with commercial purposes. Make stuff illegal, and it won't happen. simple as that.
Firefox doesn't work without a JavaScript engine.
For ceremony it's legal. [0]

[0] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1996a

Edit: wrong subject
There was also an Aadhar breach in the sense of the data being stolen, reported on earlier this year. By the same journalists, even!

https://thewire.in/government/data-breach-aadhaar-details-gr...
As someone who does both a lot of interviewing (at Google) and gives a lot of advice on interviewing to people just starting out, this rhymes with my intuition about why some people get into interviews: even without the use of brainteasers (which, for the record, are not used at Google), the interview process is hard. People rarely come out of it without at least a twinge of frustration of humiliation. I'm not immune to this, I got hired at Google despite having a few interviews where I thought "God damn that was horrible," and I didn't get offers at places I know I was good enough to work at because I wasn't performing at my best for whatever reason and nuked the interviews.

I have a pet theory that when people interview they bring this buried frustration into the room with them and use the interviewing process to play the part of the people they feel humiliated them. It's conceivable that people with latent meanness, or as this abstract calls it tendencies for "narcissism and sadism" who aren't aware enough of their biases to try to counteract them, will use these sorts of questions to make themselves feel better.

Also, and this is probably more specific, there's a bit of a mythos around companies like Google and friends that have tough interviews and high standards: they hire the best people, they're doing the best work, they're the smartest, etc. I can tell you from experience, that mythos doesn't hold up once you're doing you day to day job. I've seen people with stunning credentials doing what most would consider exciting work become genuinely bored. Perhaps for some of them interviewing is a way of reminding themselves of how desirable and high status their workplace is, to the detriment of the poor candidate.

And of course, as a disclaimer, this isn't even anecdote, these are my own personal musings on psychology. Don't confuse this with insight into the Google hiring process.
I think putting it in per-person or per-household terms is the best way to maximize relatability:

$1.5T / 320M = ~$4700 per US citizen, or ~$275 per person per year since 2001

$1.5T / 126M (number of US households in 2017) = ~$12000, or ~$700 per household per year since 2001

To me, an obvious interesting question is "If I had a choice, would I willingly pay this much for these results?"
Ehh, Marcus's analysis is off on some of the details and his prediction of a 3rd party JS (which he strangely originally kept referring to as XSS, which makes me question his thoughts even more) ended up being wrong.
There's a saying about trust that's worth remembering anytime a decision is made that prioritizes KPI over all else:

> Trust takes years to build, seconds to break, and forever to repair
Mozilla and Microsoft both agreed that the web needs standards that are easy to implement multiple times, otherwise you wind up with another IE6 compatibility nightmare situation. Even though SQLite is open source, there's still only one SQLite. If browsers had to embed SQLite, then the web would have to deal with compatibility issues from SQLite bugs for decades.

It doesn't matter that IndexedDB is less capable than SQLite, it matters that IndexedDB is a well defined standard that can be easily implemented and optimized independently by each browser. It was polyfillable on day one on Chrome's SQLite install, and the other browsers were free to choose where and how to implement IndexedDB.

Also, IndexedDB has gotten quite fast in recent browser versions and is only getting faster, thanks to the browsers being able to compete on how they optimize it (versus all of them trying to pass competing PRs to SQLite, or working on increasingly divergent forks of it).

A goal for IndexedDB was that it might be low level enough that you could build RDBMS database APIs on top of it (whereas you're hard pressed to build certain types of key/value stores or document stores more directly on top of SQLite). The Browsers weren't anti-RDBMS, they were anti-lock-in to a single vendor's bugs. Microsoft learned from their IE mistakes, and don't want Chrome to repeat them (as hard as Google sometimes seems to be trying to make the same mistakes).
As a company, yes. As a customer experience, not really.

At Walmart, I have to interact with employees who never seem happy to be there. A good quarter have no real reason to do more than minimum. I have to wait in line most times. Now, it has been over 5 years since I've had a walmart in the same country as I am, but I remember the horribleness of 2am walmart, mostly because they would only open one or two registers, no matter line length. I also have to deal with other customers. That can be worse.

Amazon? I click a few times, possibly put in some information, and I wait for my package.
There's no need to go that far. Just do what Mozilla already did for legacy addons: kill them.
There's also Plain Text Offenders, for those who clearly store passwords in plaintext.

http://plaintextoffenders.com/
Laws can be changed, though.

But changing it would take an act of Congress. Congress currently can't legislate its way out of a paper bag, let alone a crisis. And passing legislation that reduces money going to people who have been promised it... that's going to take courage to take the hit from voters, and that has been conspicuously lacking in Congress for a while.

On the other hand, bankrupting SS would be worse. That might concentrate minds.
4G mobile standard was LTE from 3GPP, which competed against WiMax from IEEE and won in the late 00s.

5G mobile standard is NR (stands for New Radio) from 3GPP. There is no competing mobile standard from anyone else.

Biggest change compared to LTE is the formal standard for millimeter wave communication for mobile. Previously it's been used for fixed wireless access and/or satellites. We'll see how it plays out in a mobile consumer environment.
B&H or Adorama are really the only two places on the internet worth buying camera gear on. Any other place I have used I have gotten fake gear or gear that is not what was advertised (like the cheaper version of a lens for example).
You’re right, a biometric check with a passport check is in fact more secure. But what they’ve done here is replace the passport check with a biometric check.
I have a better idea. Leave the coal in the ground. You get the same result with literally no work!
Amazon has basically become an overpriced version of the discount bin.
Interviewing others can certainly expose your own faults. In our last round of interviews, I certainly could have done better by our candidates. I learned, and will do better next time.

But judging a company based on their questions may be expecting too much. Nobody is perfect, and if you expect perfection from someone who will end up being a member of your team, you might be setting everyone up for disappointment. Or you might be walking away from a good team or product just because they are not good at interviewing.

Instead, if they ask questions that imply cultural problems or personality conflicts, ask about it. Find out if they are just bad interviewers, or if they do have deeper problems. Because bad interviewers are not always a bad sign -- it could mean they don't have to do it often. It could also mean they are trying to expand the skills of people new to interviewing by giving them opportunities to do something new. Also, companies who have mastered the interview process means they do it often, which could be a sign of high turnover.

In short, it is good to notice problems, ask about them, then think through all the implications of the answers before making decisions.
I would highly recommend you read the book. It's not that simple.

Keep in mind this is not just a question of greedy banks this is a question of politicians allowing for people to buy houses because they know for many that's the only way they will ever be able to save up for retirement. It's also a question of how Central Banks are run and used and attemps to keep the economy stable.

In other words many many many factors are involved in this giant system.

That there are people who were doing fraudulent things is obvious but those things do not explain the crash in itself.

The mistake many do is put the moral analysis in front of the system analysis and yes then you will end up with moral solutions without addressing the underlying systemic problems with keeping a world economy going.

The book dives deep into this and shows how it can be structured differently because it's more concerned with solving the systemic problem which one could argue is a more ethical position than pointing fingers at human nature.

The point of the book is that the crash was not the result of some mastermind but rather a consequence of a lot of good intended decisions which simply had unintented conequences.
correct its one of many solutions, some of which probably work in tandem

but without reinventing the wheel, medallions can probably be reimplemented in a better way. instead of turning the drivers into debt serfs, Uber and Lyft can buy all the medallions until the municipality stops issuing them.

it is an anti-spam prevention, anti congestion in this case. it'll also likely force the ride hailing companies to likely be even more discerning about their drivers

the negative? well yes the egalitarian side job that "anybody" can do is probably going away now. fares may also go up. this was inevitable.
Why are so many borrowing money to get a college degree in a field which won't pay off? For that matter, why are we paying for so many to get high school degrees which don't pay off? The driver of a semi truck, or the cashier at a fast food restaurant, doesn't need to spend four years reading Catcher in the Rye and studying algebra.

That's not saying anything bad about those people or those jobs: they are no doubt good people and those jobs are important and valuable. What I am saying is that rather than automatically paying for everyone's college, we might instead ask what the point of education is, and whether everyone needs to spend four more years at school.

As you might guess, I think the answer is 'no,' and I think that the way that high school changed from something optional for a few to something required of all is instructive.

A better result, I think, would be to make government assistance equally applicable to vocational school, and to outright not offer government assistance (loans or scholarships) for certain degrees in fields with low employment prospects.
The HN crowd are probably 5x more savvy to this sort of thing than the average user. Amazon is the Wal-Mart of e-commerce, it now has generic brand association with a large majority of consumers. So it's working for them, and it's going to keep working for them even if every HN reader shops elsewhere. It will take some serious competition to get them to change their behavior, and I don't think Jet is going to get there, unfortunately.
The city of San Francisco is spending 240m on its ~7k homeless so about 30k/y per. It doesn't appear the homeless problem there is getting better at all least being solved.
Using C++17 Parallel Algorithms for Better Performance
How to Build Techno Music Robots
> I get that this isn't a unique problem and other forms of "green" power generation also suffer from this such as wind turbines or even photovoltaic panels.

Is there any form of energy storage/generation for which this isn't true? No one every talks about the environmental costs of Lithium batteries, but they're certainly not nil. Pumped storage requires substantial infrastructure as well.
How the NYT Verifies Eyewitness Videos
Intel’s Next Move
This would have been my explanation too, but to my surprise, wood is only about 1/3 of the energy density of diesel fuel. I'm not sure why i expected it to be an order of magnitude difference.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density#Energy_densitie...
It's like military academy (or fraternity) hazing. You've been abused, therefore you want to pass the load of that abuse on. Maybe you delude yourself into calling it "tradition" or "high standards" or maybe you're just honest and enjoy the sadism of it all.
We're all certainly products of our culture (if you want a quick illustration of this spend some time in a distant culture).
All that has to happen to fix this vulnerability is to remove support for legacy addons—which is what Firefox Quantum already did.

The old addon system made it far too easy to make catastrophic mistakes like this. Web Extensions, which are an API that was actually designed with security in mind, constitute a huge security improvement.
Why would this be a modern phenomenon? Nothing I've read of history leads me to believe this is a modern phenomenon. People in the modern world just have more of a voice.
Absolutely this happens and for a variety of reasons. It's technical term is brigading. It doesn't have to be government-backed, just a group or sub-group banding together in a 'brigade' to downvote comments.

Two things to caveat this though -

1) Reddit is a public forum with relatively low barriers to entry. As such you should take anything that happens on it with a pinch of salt. The popularity of a comment indicated by its score is not a true indication of its popularity, simply popularity of people who have seen it and bothered to click an up or down vote, plus it's more than open to abuse.

2) You have a single data point of evidence, plus a gut feeling through some observations. You're not doing anything wrong by questioning this, quite the opposite, but keep track of your own objectivity. Don't let the observed pattern turn into a conspiracy theory before you've determined how you've tried to falsify your own assertions and gather more evidence.

NB - I think you meant "pattern" not "patent"?
The theory would be that it allows the interviewee to demonstrate abstract reasoning skills, which are useful in many domains.
A New Test for the Leading Big Bang Theory
How does this compare to Spotify's recommendation and audio features API?
> hasn't Robin Hood always been upfront that they make money on the discrepancy between what buyers are willing to pay versus what sellers are willing to take?

No, they are quite clear on how they make money and that is not it. They, officially, make money on interests and a subscription service [1].

[1] https://support.robinhood.com/hc/en-us/articles/360001226106...
I remember a lot of grassroots opposition to the invasion of Iraq. But then I was in San Francisco at the time.

Also worth noting most of the Democratic Party supported the Iraq invasion, as did the New York Times. The "establishment" was firmly behind that war until it started to fail.
Biologists checked out Shawn Bradley's DNA for clues to his immense height
The absolutely astronomical cost of housing a homeless person, the amount of graft that goes into a y program designed for charity on that scale, and the knock-on effects on the housing economy by pouring that money in.

$1100 will buy you cheap rent and basic food. It will not buy you the ability to put our homeless into those houses or to run the kitchens to feed them. If you give it as direct subsidy, the money will go straight into the hands of drug lords. If you administer it, you will spend 50% more than that on just the administration costs of tracking down the homeless and offering them services.

The marginal value of a dollar decreases substantially as you give something more funding. We already have shelters and programs - they're ineffective at keeping people off the streets long term. Adding more shelters until there's always large quantities of empty beds will not help. Well meaning though it may be, it's giving a man a fish, one who doesn't want to be taught.
Netflix Tech Blog - Keystone Real-Time Stream Processing Platform
On premise login for free? Auth0 is done
Not sure why anyone would pay for Auth0 or Okta when you can run FusionAuth on your dev box for free. https://fusionauth.io/
The U.S. does that. Loan interest and capital gains are treated much differently by the U.S. tax system if they are on a primary residence rather than on other assets.

(More often than not, I see criticism of this on HN.)
I agree they didn't do the right thing but even if they had would most likely still have had a crash as the problems aren't just isolated to people buying houses.

There were many bad actors in this the point is that it was the system in itself that's at fault not the fact that it was missused as that should be assumed (we are humans after all)

Personally at least I think that's a much more fruitful position.

That does not mean I think no one is at blame, there were obviously people doing wrong things and they should be punished but it's not necessarily the people we think that are guilty.

Again just my personal opinion.
An important takeaway from this is that legacy addons in Firefox were dangerous. The API was too large and powerful for most developers to use safely.

Web Extensions were designed with security in mind and are much safer as a result.
How about this?

Create an Africa-sized algae bloom with iron and urea fertilization, in the middle of the waste-plastic zone in the north Pacific gyre.

Krill eat the algae. Baleen whales eat the krill and the plastic. Then we train/drug the older whales, so they swim far away from the continental shelf, dive deep, and commit suicide on the bottom. We solve two problems with one stroke. (Then the gorillas just freeze to death when winter comes.) ~

I think the only workable schemes for active carbon sequestration involve artificially weathering calcium and magnesium containing oxide rocks to expose more surface area, and turn them into carbonates. That has to be done on a scale that far exceeds the entire global demand for concrete. Like building a 1:1 scale replica of the white cliffs of Dover, every year, for no economically exploitable reason. Grind up olivines, pyroxenes, calcium-rich plagioclases, periclases, perovskites, spinels, etc. into sand, eventually get chalk.
Writing a JIT Compiler in C#
Fall Foliage for Introvert Travel Personalities
You also have hdom & co. coming from the i-am-not-a-framework side - https://github.com/thi-ng/umbrella/

Production size and evaluation times are a thing with react apps.
i agree, i don't shop at Amazon anymore. I constantly get free shipping on ebay items. Some with fast shipping too. Not to mention the price is cheaper most of the times. I was also questioning why Amazon suddenly had such high prices for the same item!