skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
So, instead of dozens of copies of a snippet (which can typically be identified with tooling), the repo ends up with half as many dozens of partial abstractions? I guess it could also end up with a Frankenstein's Monster of an abstraction with more arguments and conditionals than the original code.

Like walking through a doorway, descending into a function can make you lose the context surrounding that function, making it difficult to see what is actually common between the 2, 3, or 4 different invocations of that seemingly common code.
My reading of it is also that many of these were used for what a lot of food trucks are still used for (depending on the city of course): late night food cravings (especially for the "afterparty" crowds). "Night Lunch" seems such a decent descriptor for a "Midnight Snack", that I might adopt it for that purpose.
Feeling Good by David Burns

Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking by Susan Cain
> ...Up to one-fifth of all drugs are prescribed off-label and amongst psychiatric drugs, off-label use rises to 31%.[3]

So, in other words, psychiatric medicine is non-scientific voodoo? Cause that certainly doesn't sound scientific. At best, it's 10 minutes per patient anecdotal 'evidence'.
Agree--there's a sweet spot in distance and terrain as well. I bike to work every day because the round trip is a smooth 6 miles on dedicated bike paths. If this were any longer, or on the city streets with traffic lights every block, I'd think twice. Perhaps part of China's situation wasn't just the prestige of owning cars, but that most people's commute ranges expanded alongside the economy, beyond practical range for (pedal) bikes?
I don't think a human in 500 BC had the intellectual tools to understand a modern CPU or computer program. An electronic circuit would have been absolutely inscrutable to them. A time traveler might be able to talk them through it, but a time traveler would have the benefit of future intellectual tools not available at the time. It's one thing to teach what is already understood (to you) and another to comprehend for the very first time in history.

I've thought for many years that there are new intellectual tools waiting to be discovered here that will be as big as arithmetic, calculus, or logic. There was a time when humanity had no idea what mathematics -- the whole field -- was, and today there are probably whole analogues to mathematics waiting to be discovered.

Unfortunately we are still in the phase of trying to attack this problem with old ways of thinking. We probably won't even try until we finally come to terms with the fact that the tools we have at our disposal right now do not work to truly understand the genome. This will take a while as humans become emotionally attached to their tools and cling to them. Try debating a programmer on OSes, languages, or editors to see a simple example. :)

Bonus is that once we understand the genome we'll probably understand a lot of other unknown unknowns we didn't even realize we didn't understand. Maybe this is why physics seems stuck. Maybe the cognitive tools we have right now are simply not up to the task of understanding the whole thing.

Edit:

I actually think Stephen Wolfram's doorstop A New Kind of Science was groping in this direction. The book was problematic because of Wolfram's almost comical narcissism (Wolfram sort of tries to take credit for a lot of things he didn't invent), and the techniques it discusses don't seem to have delivered much fruit in and of themselves. Nevertheless at the "meta" level the notion of trying to invent fundamentally new intellectual tools is absolutely what we should be doing. We will of course fail a lot, but that's what happens when you try to do something new.
A nice article for someone who knows nothing about Burning Man. If you've been, you will learn little that you don't already know. Burners choose to play in a difficult, often uncomfortable environment. They have a higher than average desire to be challenged - by everything from esoteric math and physics discussions to learning (as novices) moderately advanced contradancing (a radically inclusive danceform [1] that has been analyzed with matrices [2], disclaimer - my camp).

1 http://www.burningmancontradance.com/home/contraintro

2 https://ida.mtholyoke.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10166/679/4...
You've gotta keep relativity in mind here. If a species can develop a means of simply traveling at roughly 1g acceleration indefinitely, they will become -in terms of time- practically immortal. A single human can travel literally billions of light years in a single lifetime by continuing to accelerate at 1g for years at a time. Here [1] is a calculator to determine how long it would take to travel a given distance at a given acceleration. A common misunderstanding is the difference between observed mass increases and perceived. Your mass does not increase as you approach the speed of light relative to something else. But your observed mass does.

Anyhow, the point here is that once a species reaches this level of technology, if it's possible, they will start to move beyond anything like the borders of time as we understand them.

In my opinion, the most simple and probable explanation is technology (we don't know what's out there), but that's closely followed by the terrifying great filter being complete and unadulterated pleasure. As lives become easier and more pleasurable, the inherent drive towards procreation becomes less and less of a factor. If that reaches below a certain point, that's lights out for a species. Create a guaranteed means of subsistence on a planet, perhaps entirely automated, and now create a technology that becomes more inherently enjoyable and rewarding than procreation itself. Congrats you evil villain, you've destroyed your species in a far more effective way than any weapon ever could. Society goes out not with a bang, but also not with a whimper; they go out with a moan of pleasure.

[1] - http://convertalot.com/relativistic_star_ship_calculator.htm...
>I'll never understand how turning a society into a surveillance state is the better alternative to thoroughly checking who you let into a country/region and deporting people who don't follow the law and make no effort to integrate.

You can control and observe your population and make sure they don't start finding & participating in ideas that don't fit well with the established Overton Window, and then easily deploy things like cointelpro to rid of those ideas.
The comment example tells what I intend the code to do, in this case provide the sum. Not how it does it. Maybe my example was to trivial to justify a comment I agree with that, a proper function name would have sufficed.

The main point I'm getting at is the intention. All coding is is a translation of your intention to something machine executable. And often mistakes are made in that. That's why I comment to keep the intention close to the implementation.
There's no end to your moral policing of Amazon's wearhouse policies. No matter what they do, you'll find a reason to demonize them.

But just to play along with your line of attack - the answer is obvious - it would affect their bottom line. Their retail is legendary for being unprofitable, there's very little wiggle room for increasing costs. What
would you rather have - a large army of employed, productive wearhouse workers, whose experience at Amazon opens up further opportunities, or an army of unemployed?

Like I cited initially, the permutations have played out before, at etsy. Etsy's flat growth, and reduction in employment, while simultaneously cutting back on previously granted generous endowments is what will result if Amazon does what the social media lynch mobs of Justice seek
The Dutch cycling culture is worthy of praise, but people frequently forget or ignore a key element of its success: Amsterdam is pancake flat. I live outside of Denver, and my neighborhood is very cycling friendly, but my 8-year old daughter can't make it up the hill on our street without walking.
There is a beautiful irony in an employee at a company which makes its revenue from advertising, deciding his values are now at risk.
The first step to improving bikeability is not closing traffic lanes, it's improving density. For example be taxing parking space appropriately. There is no good reason why supermarkets should be so far apart from each other in a city or why commutes need to be two hours long. Where I live I can reach five supermarkets in less than ten minutes on a bike.
They show ads every few games if I remember correctly. They offer a subscription to remove theses ads and only a single person of the group need to have one.

It's fun but thing is, paying 5$ a month is too much for the fun I got from it. It would be better if it worked like Jackbox with a single higher fee.
I’m going a bit further and suggesting that free time ought to be incorporated into “wealth” somehow. After all, time is money.
Who is this "they" you speak of? Is it the normal people horrified by the harassment that he unleashed on people?

Trolling has been a problem for internet platforms since the Usenet days. The solution has always ended up being banning that individual from the place they are doing the harassing.

That's just sensible community management.
The ship sailed on low-density suburbs 60 years ago. We're past the point of return on those. Outside of San Francisco, Manhattan, and downtown Chicago, most people live in the 'burbs and that's not changing. We will be living with this housing stock for decades--if not centuries--to come. It's best to engineer around that reality, not to daydream of an Amsterdam-like utopia that will never happen for 99% of this country.
As long as the "ghost writers" are actually involved in at minimum reviewing the research.
Where I live [not the US] gas cooking is very common but heating is most commonly done by either heat pump (air conditioner set to reverse) or kerosene.
Something similar happened in Chicago in 1992.

https://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/blowing-smoke/Content?...
Nah, you have to take into account the probability of the upside and downside. For most people in most places and most situations, it's the upside. But that rare downside where a bad map can kill you? That's REALLY bad :-)
Sort example doesn't take into account Javascript does lexicographical sorting?

javascript:

someList = [ 40, 2, 1, 3, 7, 99]
someList.sort()
Array(6) [ 1, 2, 3, 40, 7, 99 ]

python:

someList = [ 40, 2, 1, 3, 7, 99]
sorted(someList)
[1, 2, 3, 7, 40, 99]
The extreme range in the US is specifically driven by a few counties are either all, or mostly, Native American Reservations with very specific issues around unemployment, alcoholism, etc.
> casual party games you can run on most smart TVs these days.

Like what? The only similar game I know is Jackbox Party games and it certainly won't run on any smart tv, you need a proper computer/console to run it.
The Ultimate Guide to Content Marketing in WordPress
Are Bitcoin a security? If so, would the SEC see this promotion as violating any rules?

I'm assuming Novogratz holds Bitcoin.
+1 for Drawful and the other one that is basically Baulderdash with phones. super fun for large groups of silly people.
I have a question about point #12. Are most people in agreement that the if else loop is preferrable over a ternary operator?

One of my worst professional programming experiences was having a senior developer who took apart usage of map, filter, reduce, and replaced them with if else loops, and sometimes breaking things in the process.

The idea that you would one day have a junior who would fail to understand a relatively simple concept seems like fantasy. Let them get stumped once, and then teach!
More like I don't truly consider ChromeOS a viable OS. I do own a Chromebook, and for me it's more like a dumbed down tablet (Like a Nook) with a keyboard. But you're right, it's not right that Google does it either.
Couldn’t agree more about the negative impact of this rule on a big team / large old codebase. The “copy once” rule pushes back against abstractions rather than the real problem of wrong abstractions, too big abstractions, or too complex interfaces to abstractions.

We instinctually abstract by fitting n use cases into 1 abstraction, when in fact we should be inverting the dependency graph and writing or reusing n abstractions for each use case.
There's this weird thing that happens in northern climates where all the bikers and scooter riders magically disappear sometime around October and don't reappear until sometime in April. I can't figure out why this happens, we should really aim to understand that before we push bikes and scooters on half the human population. I don't think it's the car lobby that causes this disappearance.
A couple more native X11 client implementations:

Common Lisp: https://github.com/sharplispers/clx

Go: https://github.com/BurntSushi/xgb

Any others?

(Looking for implementations of the X11 protocol in $LANGUAGE, not bindings to the C Xlib)
I know it's fashionable both to lionize Piketty and criticize him as a huckster. But he did play really fast and loose with statistics in his best-seller.
> Diamond is making some _very_ broad claims to describe the general trend of human history.

This is precisely why so many have a problem with it. Diamond waxes on about these grand history ideas and they're not backed by facts. He's generalizing highly complex topics and losing all accuracy in doing so.

Diamond's GG&S effectively minimizes the agency of entire groups of people by providing a false interpretation of history.
The people pushing the agenda are the big companies profiting from all this. 100's and 100's of billions of dollars to "fight terror". More people die every year from crazy white kids with guns than brown people[0] with bombs. And yet, we aren't even having the discussion about mental health issues or gun control.

[0] I'm using this not to offend, but to show there's a racial aspect to this as well.
Great!

in fact my theme is already in tmTheme format because it came from ST2, which could always load Textmate themes
Low density does not mean low cost if you actually factor in the cost of public infrastructure, which we do not currently. Suburbs require much more miles of pipe and road per person, all of which must be funded by local taxes and federal subsidies. Most of them only appear cheap because the initial setup is funded by developers and federal grants. There are "cheap" suburbs in the US that wouldn't be able to meet their future infrastructure maintenance costs with a 100% tax rate.

So they're not cheap, they're just structured in a way to hide how expensive they are in the long run.

The housing pricing crisis in the US is also being driven by other factors, such as zoning laws and NIMBYism from current property holders. Also we need to repeal Prop 13 badly.
To help those who may not be able to read between the lines, or know a time before the app store:

Externally initiated and unattended changes to my phone only impact the ability to trust and rely on my phone. This is a battery setting today, but might it be the last thing?

Windows forced updates and reboots come to mind of where we could end up.
People who casually read conspiracy and alternative news (e.g. not hardcore conspiracy theorists who read David Icke), might believe some crazy crap (that doesn't hurt anyone, just discredits themselves)

Well that is simply not true.

For example, the Sandy Hook harassment brigade caused real harm, eg: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-florida-crime-sandyhook-i...
Cache API for Cloudflare Workers Is Now in Beta
I've had similar experiences in my life as well. Purely anecdotal, but I've found NP's and PA's tend to listen more and just be more personable in general. I sometimes wonder if the extreme hours physicians have to work beat the compassion right out of them.
Not quite; you can't cause memory unsafety with the indexing version.
I have some hope for the movement that installs a bike path along a restored LA River! [1]

[1] https://www.railstotrails.org/trailblog/2017/october/02/bike...

Edit:

The webpage for the LA River project: http://lariver.org/

The webpage for the LA River Trail: https://www.traillink.com/trail/los-angeles-river-trail/
This is probably the first time I've been in the position of being a defender of Prince Charles, but I think your comment is at best ill-informed, at worst cynical:

'I happen to mind deeply about the poisoned legacy we are leaving our children and grandchildren and have been attempting to invest in their futures through reminding people of the urgent need to work in harmony with nature, rather than against her.'
I am a physician in the US. I think the article has valid points (esp. inpatient glucose control) but it also oversimplifies and glosses over some of medicine's more arcane aspects.

To give a tangible example I'll start with the unnecessary ankle x-ray. There is a set of guidelines called the Ottowa Ankle Rules[1] which we use to justify ordering plain films for a suspected fracture, but there are plenty of reasons why a doctor would still get them if the criteria weren't met.

One reason is clinical judgment and experience. Guidelines are just guidelines. Ultimately the doctor is the one making the call, as well as suffering the blame for that call if things go sideways. If everything were as simple as following algorithms and checklists, medical training wouldn't take 7+ years of post-undergraduate work.

But probably the most important reason has to do with the "patient satisfaction" (customer service) aspect. Ideally medicine wouldn't be a business, but it is and there's not much we can do about that.

Patients who present to an urgent care center or ED generally carry an implicit "something is seriously wrong with me or I would have just made an appointment with my PCP" vibe. These patients often don't like it when you explain that based on your history and exam, they most likely have a sprain/strain injury and an xray is not appropriate since we want to avoid unnecessary costs/radiation exposure-- as opposed to being relieved that they only suffered a minor injury. Even when spoken in a compassionate, straightforward manner, this explanation can come across to the patient as "nothing is wrong with you / you are malingering / your concerns aren't valid / I don't care about your symptoms", etc.

Sometimes patients outright demand tests, or worse, they'll say nothing but then complain to your employers that you medically neglected them, or you are incompetent, or what have you. Now if they had the audacity to file a malpractice suit, you'd (ideally) have no problem justifying your actions in a courtroom or deposition. But say they complain to the MBA (or some other person with no medical training) who runs the clinic or care center employing you. Your argument will likely fall on deaf ears, and be countered with some diatribe about how you're causing them to lose money. In that case it's a lot easier to just order the unnecessary xray.

Basically, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. There are plenty of other examples like this, and they all come down to choosing your battles wisely. I think it's kind of hard to blame the over-worked and behind-schedule doctor who orders something like an xray or lab test rather than taking an extra 10-15 minutes discussing the pros and cons with the patient, after which the patient might still not be convinced.

Having said that, there is a problem with superfluous testing in EDs, especially ones that rely on "standing orders" where e.g. virtually any patient presenting with abdominal pain might get a CT scan before the physician even sees them (something I strongly disagree with and can't think of a legitimate excuse for).

[1] http://www.theottawarules.ca/ankle_rules
Or, decentralize, and stop being controlled.
I agree, nothing is a hard and fast rule. And sometimes, an attempt to generalize copied-but-customized code can result in much less readable code than just leaving the originals in place.
I think a major factor in the rise of the micro-brew in the US was removal of "government intervention". Brewing your own beer was illegal from Prohibition until Congress and Carter changed the law and 1978. Home brewing was no longer outlawed and now one can legally brew up to 100 gallons of beer a year without paperwork. Much easier to get interested in brewing beer if you can easily do it legally.
Thanks for the site! Do you have thoughts on removing all the print/console.logs calls on every line? It feels like there's a lot of visual noise there, that can still be met with the comments showing state/output.
filed under "no shit", but the fatties dont wana hear it. fatties want their SUVs and mcdonalds drive thrus
Uggh.. don't get me started on Bixby... it's like a modern day Clippy... "I see you accidentally pressed the hardware button to awaken me the 10th time. how can i take over your screen today?"
> but why use this over duckduckgo?

If history showed us anything is that we need a lot of competition in this area
In a deductive context, yes, that's exactly what you have to do. This is a consequence of the principle of explosion:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_explosion

Let's say your "knowledge" is a set of propositions which you believe to be true. This set is continually expanding for two different reasons:

1. You're acquiring new facts about the world through direct observation (emperical knowledge)

2. You are thinking: making valid arguments which start from your current knowledge and lead to new propositions (analytic knowledge)

At some point, a false fact creeps in. Your system is now "exploded" - the whole system is inconsistent and with a few lines of perfectly valid argument, you can now arrive at any conclusion. You now believe both "A" and "not A" for all values of A in the set of all well-formed formulas. Obviously this is not ideal. So we need to remove the false fact. But in the mean time, your mind has been at work, adding new propositions to your knowledge set. It is necessary to remove not only the offending bad fact that crept in, but any new proposition resulting from a valid argument which used that bad fact as a premise. Computationally, the easiest way to do this is to maintain a graph where the nodes are propositions and edges connect to their premises. For example, we would record in this graph structure that we now believe X because we deduced it from A, B, and C. If this structure, which the parent comment called "knowledge tree," exists, we can quickly remove all invalid propositions from our knowledge set and return to an consistent system. In practice its a very good idea to also store the arguments themselves. The metamath project does this, and can verify the entirety of its knowledge (which includes set theory, some calculus, complex numbers, trignometry, etc.) all the way back to axiomatic first principles in just a few minutes.

http://us.metamath.org/

Humans, of course, do not do this in their ordinary lives. They often believe propositions without being able to recall or reproduce the arguments, or cite the facts, which first led them to believe that proposition. This leads to a great deal of intellectual inertia. In mathematics and the sciences the situation is a little better: researchers certainly strive for this as an ideal, and largely succeed - a good research scientist has a deep understanding of the crucial experiments, theorems, and approximations that underpin their own work, and a rigorous practice of citing sources helps keep track of these dependencies. Therefore, if one paper is found fraudulent, other papers which cite it can be reviewed. But it is a difficult, even overwhelming project and no one can do it outside their own narrow area of expertise.
Not even. Reading their news about NHS, all they talk about are cuts and the controversies of having to ration service based on postcodes.