skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I wasn't harsh yet. While prompted by your comment, below I'm not directing any of this towards you but GoF book the icon. Excuse the rant.

"Composite, Command and of course Observer"

Each of which is trivially obvious way to structure your program when that need arises. You said it the best - GoF tried to attack a very real problem - the unwieldiness of C++ and Java - but they did really not come up with any actual solutions. And they extend this non-value-adding gibberish into a tome, that somehow has become a cultural icon of some sort.

The basic premise of the book is this: "We looked out how people use object oriented languages and found this and this and this". Congratulations. By that approach they've enumerated a bunch of gobbledygook. They've not invented anything new. Nor have they done any deep analysis of the fundamental underlying concepts, and by their chosen approach I'm taking a guess they would lack the capacity to add anything of value to that discussion if they tried. Which is totally ok, most people, like me, are mediocrities.

Reading gang of four is painfull, because it reads like the work of a very clever first year CS student who is over eager to create contrived examples of these nuggets of things he has discovered among the work of his fellow first year CS students. Without actually bothering to do a literature survey, or - most critically writing any massive programs or doing any complex abstract work of any worth.

In other words, it reads like it was written by a clever, verbose, and over-eager novice.

As an excuse, it was written in the dark ages in the 90's - a period of large scale communal lobotomization and attempts to forget the lessons of history. As such I would not judge it too harshly, if not for the fact that people keep bringing it up as some sort of book of actual wisdom like Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs - which it really, really, really is not.

The last reason why I don't like GoF book:

In their title they steal Christopher Alexander's notion of Pattern Language in architecture, and totally and completely misapproriate it. Christopher Alexander's books are totally awesome. "Notes on the Synthesis of Form" and "Timeless way of building" are really beautiful books for anyone to read who has to design complex systems.

Christopher Alexander's patterns are not piecemeal lego parts you can put together - they describe parts of a whole and each pattern is a composition of elements that - and this is the key part - fits to it's surroundings and the design constraints of the original problem to be solved.

Gof book is borderline clueless, it confuses people, and it mis-introduced a totally awesome concept from another domain, thus effectively squatting on the concept and hindering any attempts to use those concepts in discussion of systems design since when you say "patterns" in CS context people automatically context switch to the GoF bastardized definition of the concept.
The point is that we are a long way to have a common EU intelligence service. Even if services are cooperating, every nation state wants to keep some cards in hands.
A colleague of mine tried Vivaldi 1.5 years ago, while he liked the split screen feature he found it way too slow and it had serious lagging issues from time to time. Much can happen in 1.5 years and I don't know if they were using V8 back then. But yeah, what I saw wasn't really that impressive. And no open source? Yeah, I think I'll stick with Firefox and my tinfoil hat extensions a while longer.
I just made this submission:

------

I am a business owner, an employer, a technologist, a programmer and a company director.

I oppose this proposed bill on the basis of it weakening the effective security of Australian Internet service providers, which would be bad for national security. I would like to raise the following points:

1) The proposed bill will inevitably lead to the creation of systemic weaknesses in the security of Australian companies that provide Internet services or products.

The burden of complying with voluntary requests will lead to new, exploitable "backdoors", despite what the home affairs department asserts.

Whether these backdoors are electronic, or process based (i.e. responding to a fraudulent request), the bill would mandate companies to effectively create new attack surfaces; weaknesses in operational security introduced to comply with the bill.

2) The Internet can only facilitate services like payments, banking and communication because of encryption. Encryption is based on mathematics.

You do not need to understand the mathematics to understand that if you provide an alternative to the encryption, you provide a weaker level of security.

As a result, Australian financial, communication or payment services are less secure than international counterparts not burdened by this backdoor.

3) Any crime under investigation can be investigated by existing legal procedures. It is proper for a warrant to be required to access any secure or private information.

4) Providing a "back door" for law enforcement is not necessary. This bill is akin to providing a backdoor for law enforcement to enter a persons home or business without seeking a warrant from a court.

5) Encryption is good. Encryption makes the Internet work.

Australia has critical infrastructure that can only function with proper encryption. Encryption is easily invalidated by inadequate process or procedure. This bill would encourage (or require) Australian companies to compromise their security practices.

Please don't assume that the laws of mathematics can be overruled by the laws of Australia. This would be foolhardy, and not in the interest of Australia's national security.
Does keybase sell could storage packages?

Btw, I really love the idea of keybase, I hope they take off.
I have the same reaction. I'd sooner use Firefox with a few privacy-enhancing extensions.
> Nobody in my village reads or watches TV. They only get updates from WhatsApp

> two burly police officers marched into the tiny newsroom of AE Vision, a local cable news channel...Write down this text, and broadcast it to your viewers.

Strange strategy from the local authorities if they want to fight this threat effectively. What happens after the 24 hours Internet ban?

In my opinion, the messages inciting violence should have been countered from the start (1 month ago?) with factual videos on the same media. If Whatsapp (or any similar app), can be used for evil, then it can also, as effectively be used for good. Why wasn't it done? Is the police really unaware of how things work in these rural areas (no literacy, no tv watching)?
Sorry, DE/WM? I assume WM is Window Manager, but can't think of what DE is, except Desktop something?

I'm using macOS and unfortunately not familiar with how I'd do that, but I'm sure it would be easy with something like i3wm on linux (which I still miss after moving away from linux 3 years ago :/), but I don't know what I could use in macOS.

Maybe I could find some third-party solution just to show/hide a particular application. I think if I had that + if I could figure out tabbing/tiling behaviour of Kitty, I would switch to it. Those two things are the main things that I need from iterm.
EU is not a unified entity in terms of defense. Thought they might try to stay away from a close tie with US under current administration, I doubt that they can or want to get rid as an ally as whole.
Title should mention that its a web scraping framework
This seems to miss the problem completely to me. The internet essentially solved the problem of _distribution_. That meant disintermediating away from publishers, and allowed anyone to publish.

The problem then moved onto being one of _curation_. Companies such as google, facebook, amazon are in the business of providing curation: i.e. taking away the leg-work of what we should attend to.

A de-centralized web doesn't appear to decentralize the problem of curation at all, which means we are going to still end up with centralized curation and the same or similar monopolies on attention that we have now.
It used to be unlimited but most of the users ultimately desired to offload data and access it on demand. It should be configurable but currently isn’t.
I'm not disputing any of that. I'm just not necessarily convinced that the mapping of light and dark to good and evil was connected to skin color.

And the 'black magic' traditions of the middle ages almost certainly drew their inspiration from the rituals of the Hellenistic mystery cults and related groups rather than any African tradition or cultures.

All the being said, I'm straying quite far out of my area of expertise here, so I'm certainly open to be proven wrong.
Uhm... Why? I don't see any gaps here. And the potential ammount of work is immense.

> Over time, the Encyclopedia should be organized using ontological services supporting programmatic interfaces for a knowledge graph.

And this phrase shows how quickly this encyclopedia will become a memorial to itself rather than a source of up-to-date knowledge.
Well, the EU is just the largest economy in the wold.
Living in the EU? Time running out to save the internet
I'm running Chromium with HTTPS everywhere, uBlock Origin, Wappalyzer (curiosity purpose) & Bitwarden (password manager). It's the best setup I found regarding performances & energy consumption for my GNU/Linux laptops.
But are writes and reads really 100% local or do they require synchronous networking?
I moved back to Firefox after an update to Vivaldi started lagging badly when I woke up my PC. Maybe it was an extension, but after disabling some of them I realised I don't really have time or inclination to find out.

Another thing I didn't like was the re-purposing of the F6 button so it didn't highlight the URL any more (I guess I could change this; not sure) and the history page, which seemed quite confusing whenever I tried to use it.

It's not a bad browser but neither is it so good I want to put up with those times it breaks or does something gratuitously different.
Humans aren't divided into races.
I'm missing a "Why we are doing this" section on the website. It's not open-source and I wonder what their motivation is. How are they making money?
From the description :

> designed to keep the best of the legacy languages but are re-engineered from the ground up to meet the challenges of the modern wired world.

So they're not really disruptive...
Try to use metadata sections and hope they won't be dropped during the re-save?
Yes, but it's SO impractical as to be unusable (remeber, that E=mc^2, so m=E/c^2, which means m is REALLY small).

Edit: You will get very small amounts of matter from energy. Small amounts of matter will mean very low thrust. Much better use of that amounts of energy is just collecting interstellar medium and accelerating it.
No, that is the point, and mentioned in the article.

"-"(Reject/Hard Fail) for SPF is broken and should be avoided. SPF only considers the sender and not the transport and recipient. It does not consider recipients' forwarding alias rules, backup MXs, multi relay domain setups, etc. I.e. normal email infrastructure and usage patterns.

I have subset of users that uses Gmail as their client, SPF with "-" from a random valid sender would not allow me to redirect those emails to Google's servers.

Also many aliases on my domains forwards to other addresses not on hosted by my servers (subsidiaries, personal accounts, mailing lists, etc), Spf with "-" will force the end SMTP server to block those emails as doubtful your SPF listing has listed my SMTP servers.

And if a recipient domain has a more complex SMTP setup with mutiple SMTP servers acting as incomming, outgoing, bastions, backups, webmail, sharded storage, etc then any redirecting between them would again break with a strict SPF.

As said before use: DKIM, DMARC but make sure SPF is set to not Fail as it is broken. Use Greylisting, Spamassassin etc to score spam to avoid false positives that are not obvious rubbish enough to reject on envelope details alone.

Fastmail has a very good default recommendations: https://www.fastmail.com/help/technical/senderauthentication...

My own Postfix doc's DKIM section: http://flurdy.com/docs/postfix/#ext_dkim
I'm not aware of any occult texts which claim this, much less of "many." Can you specify?
Cool! Do you have a link?
1 in 4 Americans Really Have Deleted Facebook's App, Pew Study Finds
I think Puppeteer also downloads a recent version of Chrome/Chromium that is guaranteed to work with the API. Why is this out of the ordinary for a headless web scraping framework?
nilenso | Engineer | Bangalore, India | ONSITE, REMOTE | http://nilenso.com

nilenso is an employee-owned software cooperative. We're looking for people we'd really like to work with.

We work on problems that are technically deep, large scale, in domains with high impact, and we have an affinity to work with functional languages: Clojure, Elixir, Haskell et.al.

You can read more about working at nilenso here: https://nilenso.com/careers.html. Write to us (moshimoshi@nilenso.com) if you're interested.
Originally said "coming soon" to see if anyone was interested. Turns out they are!
A bunch of comments on this post give pretty good advice about what to expect, and if you're in your first commercial job it's probably worth going with the flow. However, one thing I'll add is that it's worth watching out for the "academic bad, commercial practices good" mindset. Keep your eyes open, form your own opinions about what is and isn't working. Don't necessarily kick up a fuss about the things you don't like right now but do file them away for the future.

https://yosefk.com/blog/why-bad-scientific-code-beats-code-f... is an interesting counter-point to some of the usual commercial-vs-academic thinking.
> if you showed me a mixed room of hundreds of
> native Danes and Sentinelese - I could classify them

What relevance does that have? Could you reliably tell a Dane from a Greek? How about a Sentinelese from a Pakistani?

When people say "race" is a social construct, they don't - well, unless they're morons - mean that people aren't more different, the more distantly-related they are. It's the categories that are the social construction. Because anyone who really thinks about it carefully enough, can see those categories are arbitrary.

If history had been a bit different, and we hadn't come to lump brown- and blue-eyed people into the same "race," you might have written this...

> if you showed me a mixed room of hundreds of
> native Brundanes and Bladanes - I could classify them
Things you probably don't want on your [airline] website's payment pages
$ curl -s http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/squirrel/ | file -
/dev/stdin: JPEG image data, JFIF standard 1.01, resolution (DPI), density 300x300, segment length 16, comment: "<html><body><style>body { visibility: hidden; } .n { visibility: visible; position: absolute; ", baseline, precision 8, 1000x667, frames 3

file(1) version 5.32-2ubuntu0.1.
I wrote a long rant as a response to another comment above. To quote myself:

"It reads like it was written by a clever, verbose, and 'over-eager novice."

Design patterns are a really usefull concept. The GoF book just totally botches up that concept by dwelving deep in trivial language details while missing the big picture.

Christopher Alexander's "A timeless way of building", and "Notes on the Synthesis of Form" are the books in architecture that prompted a lot of dicussion in software design circles, and from which I presume GoF got their idea of software design patterns.

What are good design patterns in software? IMO they are composed from the programming models exposed in a basic CS book like Aho and Ullman's "Foundations of Computer Science" and further developed in a books like Structure And Intrepretation of Computer Programs.

GoF is an ok anecdotal reference after those, but it really is not suitable as a didactic resource.

Peter Norvig wryly commented that 16 of the 23 pattern are either invisible or non-existent in lisp Lisp[0].

[0] http://www.norvig.com/design-patterns/design-patterns.pdf
Ask HN: How to Promote a Competition?
Hi HN,

At heart, we’re a group of designers and engineers. Together we're Mobile Jazz, a devshop for mobile apps and websites. We have a product called Bugfender, a tool to help developers remotely debug their mobile apps. We think it’s great, but we always struggle when it comes to marketing, despite knowing exactly who our audience are.

To help encourage new users we’re planning a giveaway, and I’m here today to ask for your advice or tips and tricks on how to promote it.

The competition is for a new mobile device. Without going into the technical details of using Bugfender, the rules are simple:

1) You must be a new user and sign up
2) You must start using the product (sending logs from your application to our servers)

Naturally, we want to spread the word. So we’ve come up with a few ideas to help promote it:

• Created a dedicated landing page
• Written a blog post announcement
• Written other blog posts where we are able to mention the competition
• Create images and banners to promote on social

But we know there must be more ways to promote it - so I’m here to ask for help!

1) Has anyone ran a successful competition? What went well?
2) Has anyone ran an unsuccessful competition? Want went wrong?
3) Do you have any tips or ideas on how to promote a giveaway?
4) How can we encourage sharing? People won’t likely want to share this, as the more entries the less their chance.
5) What duration should we run the competition for? We need to find a good balance between a sense of urgency and also enough time for us to get sufficient sign ups.
6) Giveaway directories - do developer focused ones exist? Would it be beneficial publishing it there? Any recommendations?
7) Aside from Twitter and Facebook, are there any other social networks worth posting this on? Does anyone use Google +?

Any help or ideas you can share would be greatly appreciated. Let me know if you have any questions.

Many thanks,

Adam
I think we agree, more or less.
Now, to add a corollary to this discussion, consider that existential threats are usually perceived, if not necessarily as sub-human, as non-human. Because somebody who doesn't just disagree with you on some issues but wants to destroy you must be necessarily lacking some fundamental human quality.

So once you've set a narrative of the "it's us or them" type, it's easy to place the blame of your necessary defensive action on the enemy: because the enemy has already renounced its humanity when it set itself on enslaving or destroying you.
Data-mining medieval text reveals medically bioactive ingredients
> Otherwise we will become a laughing stock in front of the scientific community

All peoples have mythology and legends. Very rarely does this create the expectation that those stories are fact. Religion in general being one of those major exceptions. And regular people believe all kinds of "unbelievable" stuff anyway. So I wouldn't worry too much about it as long as scientists don't start claiming (all?) mythology is science.

Greek mythology had a huge influence on many things in every field you can imagine but nobody really thinks it has more than maybe a grain of truth. Certainly not a basis for science.
The fine line between a well designed system to an over engineered one
I have a saved screenshot of when I was watching gaming videos (XCOM2) and all the recommendations were also XCOM2 videos .. and a live stream of UK far-right rabble-rouser Tommy Robinson.

I suspect (but of course can't prove without secret youtube data) that there's enough of a crossover between gaming and the far right that any gamer will eventually see far right videos, far more likely than they will be shown "far left" videos (these must exist, but I've no idea who they might be?)
> With LGPL, you can't statically link the library though.

no, that's tiresomely false. You can link proprietary code statically with LGPL code. LGPL does not give a shit about static or dynamic libraries because LGPL is not a language-specific license.

Right from the source: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#LGPLStaticVsDynami...
> you might find that the men have IQ 105.14 on average and the women 105.13

Why would you look at the average?

Lots of jobs have an IQ floor.
The 'Mona Lisa' Allure: Could It Be the Result of Thyroid Disease?
Closed-Source. No thank you.
Now that I'm out of my 20s I wouldn't want to be interviewing at almost any startup, anywhere in the world.

I'm now wiser. Startup culture is toxic and I prefer to stay away ...
Actually, almost 250 years:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schiehallion_experiment
> Just hit random until something nice comes out.

well, congrats, you're an artist ?
races are a mythical artifact from Victorian times
> so maybe our society just isn't mature enough yet to have that conversation.

Basically you're telling us that "maybe" you should have the power to censor us. For some values of (you, us).

Maybe not. Definitely not.

(I also think that you're factually wrong in 1)
It might be in terms of performance and energy consumption, but it is clearly not when it comes to privacy.
That seems interesting in theory but I have a hard time imagining what it would look like in practice. In my experience micro-optimizing C code looks like what you describe: when you write your algorithm you have a pretty clear idea about what the machine code should look like. You compile it and check the assembly output to see if the compiler understood what you were going for. If it doesn't look like what you were expecting you need to make sure that the compiler didn't manage to actually generate better code than you exepected (because it might know things about the underlying architecture that you don't) and if it turns out that it's genuinely sub-optimal then you refactor your code a bit until you manage to get the compiler to do what you want. It can be a frustrating process.

Now we do have a few language constructs to help us here, although sometimes it's not enough. We have inline, restrict, register as well, although that one is not really used a lot in practice in my experience (at least not for its original purpose). We have compiler extensions for computed GOTOs, alignment constraints etc...

In this context what would "an interactive program-manipulation system" look like? Personally I think we could use more standardized constraints in languages like C to be able to annotate code in a way that could be useful to optimizer, such as tagging "cold" code, having control of the prefetcher and being able to write SIMD code without using intrinsics (a very complex problem admittedly). Standardizing computed gotos would be nice as well.

Beyond that, in my experience a big problem with modern architectures is that it's very much non-trivial to figure out what's the fastest way to implement an algorithm. You have to consider which CPU model you're using, the cache architecture, RAM speed ... Second-guessing the compiler is pretty hard if you don't have a lot of experience optimizing for a particular architecture.
Performance is just fine, no issues running dozens of tabs daily, no "lagging" whatsoever. And split screen is amazing, yes.
They could also easily differentiate between brown eyed and blue eyed people. The social construct part comes in when you try to explain why one differentiation is more 'important' than the other.