skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In my opinion, the confusion that arises when programmers get results from floating-point computations that are not what they expect stems from this:

> Floats represent continuous values.

But as you probably know, this isn't possible. The concept of infinite precision is interesting in theory, but disappears when any actual calculation needs to be made, whether on a digital electric computer or not.

I wonder if this is not a flaw in the crude mechanical representation of numbers, but a flaw in the decision to base floating-point computation on the concept of continuous numbers. I believe that a better model for floating-point computational representation and manipulation would be to reflect the rules of scientific measurements - that each number includes an explicit amount of precision that is preserved during mathematical operations.

This would not only keep JavaScript newbies from freaking out when they add 0.1 and 0.2, but prevent problems of thinking calculation results are correct, when they are not.

If you aren't getting what I am saying, let me give an example. Let's say, for some reason, you want to measure the diameter of a ball. You have a measuring tape so you wrap it around the widest part and record that it is 23.5cm. To calculate the radius, you should divide by π. If you do this in double-precision floating point, you will get 7.480282325319081, but this is nonsense. You can't create a result that is magically more precise than your initial measurement though division or multiplication. The correct answer is 7.48cm. This preserves the amount of precision in the least precise operand, and is arguably the most correct result.
Gender Trouble by J. Butler and
Precarious Life by J. Butler

These two allowed me to adopt a whole new perspective on not just gender but life and liberty in general. Also, great writing style!
For me personally the limiting factor is the keyboard. If it's a PITA to write something, I'm not encouraged to write productive things on a smartphone.
I believe the running containers share the host's kernel, so maybe if you were doing certain low level kernel level stuff, maybe the version of the kernel matching would matter?
That may well be why. There are tons of reports of FF being unusably slow even on the newest processors.
6 Reasons Why Review Sites Need Blockchain
Propagating a dream: Little Apples
Sure, all software tends to have bugs and using multiple layers of security is a defense against this. But the assumption of bugs is not a logical foundation for a discussion of the design. Sure, if it's practical Alpine should deploy SSL. I'm just dispelling the idea that the PGP-based approach is insecure.
Have to agree with most of this list. My thyroid stopped working when I was a kid and despite many doctor's visits it went undiagnosed for about 2 years. It was ultimately diagnosed by my mother's coworker, a ticket booth attendant, who recognized the symptoms as being similar to her dog's. After enough badgering by my mother a simple blood test confirmed her diagnosis.

I can't say that my experience with doctors since then has improved my opinion of them. I've met with only about 2 physicians in my entire life that actually seemed genuinely interested in solving problems.
It's a mixed bag. Some of it was probably improper setup. With mounts and docker exec and such it's easy to go into the container and rails s or rails console and do what you need to do. But you have to deal with user permissions if your app creates files and some other things but you can just use a docker container as a very lightweight VM.

On the other side you have to track down and figure out how to install or build whatever obscure old Ruby version they're using and dirty your machine installing and running services to support the app. All of which is also painful.

I do client work and I'd rather not dirty my machine installing old or random software to work on a project. So having portable local environments works well for me. But they do take some thought to set up and people often don't take enough care in either case to document the procedure for getting things set up to work on it.
SpaceX to send BFR around the moon. Some time. With Someone
>Prince Charles patches holes in clothes that he's had for decades.

Which is also a status-signal ("hey, I've got good tailored clothes which are sentimentally important to me and I am beyond consumerism") from someone with a huge estate...
It's the most elegant code, sure. But it also creates more work for me to read it, because I need to build up a mental map memorizing {letter => meaning, letter => meaning, ...}.

If you create a meaningful name, then that means I can understand the code more quickly with less effort, and save that mental effort for more productive tasks.

If you're programming professionally, why would you prefer greater elegance and conciseness... over less work? It feels like a harmful over-optimization.
If you rotate your signing subkey then this would work as expected.

Rotating primary/master keys is a problem in OpenPGP in general (not just Github).
No, you don't need any special privileges to bind to a low port, just set the right capability:

# setcap cap_net_bind_service=+ep /usr/sbin/httpd

You should never run servers with privileges, period.
These are both very good points, though I want to point out that the first doesn't lead to RCE, which is a much more severe problem that information disclosure. I think Alpine should add SSL, but my message is that I don't think that the problem on display here is result of a flaw in the current design.
Depends on how you measure success. I'm not sure output is all it's cracked up to be.
Which is why Monero values its obligatory confidential transactions! For anyone seeking fungibility, check out Monero
That doesn't sound very smart- when I change phone numbers, or if some one steals my number, I would rather not have to deal with the possibility of them buying stuff with my money!
> While millennials may not own cars or homes, three-quarters of Americans in their 30s have dogs. A little more than half own cats

Does anyone else find this very hard to believe? I tried to track down the source [0, 1, 2] but I'm unsure how reliable "American Pet Products Association". It's describes itself as "The leading not-for-profit trade association serving the interests of pet product manufacturers and importers"

[0] https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/9/12/17831948/rover-wag-d...

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2016/09/13/m...

[2] https://americanpetproducts.org/Uploads/MemServices/GPE2017_...
I'm quite surprised the article makes no comparison to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), also a dopaminergic condition affecting executive function, which can positively affect creativity.
Can you attach data to the event ?
LineageOS 15.1 is great, except it STILL doesn't have exchange support, and yes a bug/regression has been logged. That's a pretty big thing to be missing, since all the competitors (Outlook, GMail, Nine) are closed source.
Wrappers for LMDB are available for nearly every language as well. https://symas.com/lmdb/technical/#wrappers
Exactly, these statistics don't represent the 'average' driver, let alone a 'good' driver.
What's finally helped me fall asleep pretty consistently is listening to hypnosis videos with a pair of those sleep headphones (flat padded speakers embedded in a soft headband). I used to listen to podcasts, and it helped to have something other than my thoughts to focus on, but I'd still frequently be awake 3-4 hours after lying down. With the hypnosis tracks, I'm consistently out within an hour after lying down.

I'm particularly fond of this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFqEWrw6jyg

Of course, my wife still falls asleep within 10 minutes (I'm so jealous of her ability to just roll over and be out), versus my 45-60, but it's a vast improvement to not be lying awake for hours every night.
You are correct, and that should tell you all you need to know.
Number 6 (DRY), and number 9 (use libraries), both lead to problem 16 (leaking abstractions). Personally, I follow a rule I read in a blog some time ago and don't try to de-duplicate code until I've copy and pasted it three times. That way I know what the actual pattern that's being repeated is, not just what I think the pattern is.

As for number 9, I'll agree with this, so long as it's in the standard libraries (which are slow to change and unlikely to break/change functionality when they do change). But when you use 3rd party libraries, you are still responsible for that code in the long run. You'll have to ensure it remains up-to-date, ensure that you're testing that it's doing what you intend for it to do, and when it's eventually compromised or removed, you'll have to deal with that too.

See: Left Pad.
That is the real problem I see. The networks and tech required to connect to cell towers are too closed. Even when you do get a open phone going the bits and parts that connect to the network are often small computers themselves that allow very little control.

At least in the US the people sort of own the airwaves, maybe we can push for our government to enforce open protocols for connecting to cell networks?
Mapping China's Global Investments and Inequality
Not on Android v8 as I just checked.
>What replaced cool? Genuine enthusiasm.

I had to LOL hard at that one.

Yeah, as if in the age of the selfie, Instagram celebrities, vanity blogging, social media status games, and so on, "genuine enthusiasm" even had a chance...

>Now entertainers rise up through skill, passion, and endless hours of self-promotion. Now artists and athletes have access to their fans, and their fans see their dedication and associate it with status.

LOL again. The music industry is more entrenched than ever, and 99.99% of those musicians with "skill, passion, and endless hours of self-promotion" are totally niche. Big success comes from huge label promotion and media bombardment even more so than before.

>To get a sense of this change, watch a few early 2000s Scarlett Johansson interviews, then watch a few current Jenifer Lawremce interviews. The new cool is engaged and open, a tightly-packaged version of the qualities of Youtube star or professional athlete.

Jenifer Lawrence has had tens of millions of promotion thrown at her. Just because the mood of the day is to give a "casual" personality vibe in interviews doesn't mean anything substantial changed.

>* The new cool is engaged and open, a tightly-packaged version of the qualities of Youtube star or professional athlete.*

Yeah, the "genuine enthusiasm" of Logan Paul...
https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/09/the-scientific-7-m...

https://journals.lww.com/acsm-healthfitness/Fulltext/2013/05...
Apple is just as involved in data collection. Just mostly for internal consumption and they are moving heavily into ad space.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/apple-looks-to-expand-advertisi...

There aren't any saints in the corporate world.
…and on your precise definition of "action and a distance", yes.

But there is something like standard textbook quantum mechanics which most physicists subscribe to, i.e. the Copenhagen interpretation, and while I'm not saying this is the interpretation everyone should follow and believe in (in fact, there are good reasons to be dissatisfied with this interpretation), the term "action at a distance" was coined in the context of the Copenhagen interpretation, so I think should therefore also be interpreted in this context.

Now, Copenhagen is a local and non-realist theory, the latter of which meaning among other things that the wave function is not believed to be an object of reality. Therefore, in this interpretation, the collapse of the wave function is merely a tool for predicting the outcome of a measurement and not something that's believed to actually happen. The same thing goes for an "instantaneous collapse" at a distance — this action does not exist in reality.

I know there is probably going to be someone who objects to me saying that Copenhagen is non-realist and local. But those people will have to explain to me how they would bring the actual existence of the wave function and its collapse into agreement with relativity and, in particular, with different observers who come to different conclusions about when the wave function collapses. For instance, for one observer, it might be Alice who causes the wave function to collapse and, thus, Bob to measure a certain outcome but then there is always going to be another observer who will say the exact opposite, namely that Bob caused the collapse. So, essentially, if you really think the wave function is an object of reality, all hell breaks lose.

Needless to say, even if you completely disregard these issues and still want to think of Copenhagen as a realist but then necessarily non-local theory (in which case I'd say you should really give your theory a different name), this is all just splitting hairs because the only thing that matters is that there's no FTL transfer of information. This is the only experimentally verifiable statement we can make.
How to Fight the Growing Scourge of Algorithmic Bias in AI
Doen't using indexes into arrays introduce, more or less, the same problems with C pointers? after all, a C pointer is an index into a huge array, the current process' memory space.
Github can't fake the sigs
You do not need to memorize anything if your function fits in a single screen and you have less than 10 variables at the same time (which are good conventions as well).
Don't forget that the above includes multi-datacenter, multi-region redundancy / failover. Could be important sometimes.

Waking on items in queue would be better, though, and AWS has it built-in; the authors just did not use it for some reason.
1984 - George Orwell

Makes you think we closer to that than we think
I am wondering if Watch_Dogs-style cellphone-controlled terror might become reality soon if hackers manage to control gas companies' pressure systems; they could truly cause devastating blows to arbitrary cities with very little defense against and limited tracking back to perpetrators.
Humana | Software Engineer – Full Stack| Boston, MA | Full-time, ONSITE, 8-5

Grow with a company that is transforming lives - a culture that puts employees first. Humana studio_h is looking to add 10 Software Engineers with development experience in a variety of contemporary programming languages. We focus on pair-programming and test-driven development, working together in a collaborative and positive atmosphere.

Join us as we embark on the journey of a lifetime to transform healthcare!

Only persons w/authorization to work permanently in the U.S. need apply. EEO. No agencies please. #HUMemployee

https://humana.wd5.myworkdayjobs.com/Humana_External_Career_...
I mostly liked your comment and certainly related to it (and I didn't downvote it).

But after years of feeling resentful and contemptuous towards "everyone else", I've recently come to learn how unnecessary and counter-productive that is.

On an evolutionary level, there are important reasons why disruptive new ideas face resistance, and our task is to figure out how to communicate our insights in a way that can be understood and embraced by others.

In order to do that, one must have respect and compassion for their audience and their community.

You'll do be better to find a way to share your ideas with humility and warmth. At worst, even if others don't listen, you'll still feel happier.
Skyrealms of Jorune
I agree with you but it’s worth acknowledging that setting capabilities and making sure they persist across updates (e.g. your example breaks the first time a package update is installed) isn’t always trivial, especially in bureaucratic enterprise IT environments, and although the risk is lower an attacker could still potentially find interesting things to do using other low ports unless you’ve also setup something like authbind to limit it to just port 80/443.
In legacy “low pressure” systems, regulators aren’t used at the residential end at all. Our neighborhood was recently upgraded to a “high pressure” system, and regulators were introduced, along with vents cut through the foundation to the outdoors.

Our neighborhood was built in 1950. This system upgrade included replacing all the mains in the road as well.
Setting a cookie translates to writing a header down the socket but it isn't written when SetCookie is called. It is written when you use the ResponseWriter as a parameter for a writer method (io.WriteString, for instance).

As SetCookie just adds a new header to an aliased map (Headers) and setting to a map shouldn't fail (how it could?), it makes sense to report any error when the HTTP response is written serialized to the socket, not before. At least, for me, as you can manipulate the response as you wish and you only need to worry about errors on write.
This list applies to all domains.
Thanks for that! Do you have a link by any chance?
I just soak everything in asserts.

That way there is no need to scroll up for preconditions, be it a nested tree or some returns at the start.

And when you move a small piece of code, you're told exactly what you should be thinking about, you need to decide what to do with that assert that represents an assumption.
#14 fits into a fairly well-established trend of thought on object-oriented programming. A lot of us have noticed, over the 20-ish years since OOP really got popular, that doing it in the way most of us were taught in CS 101 (or wherever) tends to produce code that is difficult to maintain over time.

In the particular case of mixing data storage and data manipulation in a single class: It tends to yield classes that continuously accumulate new functionality over time. They also tend to be difficult to refactor int a set of smaller classes. The level of impact on consuming code is very high, because splitting those classes tends to also force major changes to anything that interacts closely with them. And, since all that functionality lived inside a single class, it's likely to be internally resistant to change, too. It's really easy to treat "encapsulation" as a reason to not worry overmuch about shared use of glo^H^H^H instance variables.

Does this kind of stuff mean that OOP didn't turn out to be all it was cracked up to be? Yup. Does this mean we're throwing the whole idea out? Nah, it's just evolving. The original idea's been augmented with other useful ideas like the interface segregation principle, the Liskov substitution principle (mixing behavior with data makes obeying LSP very difficult), and acknowledging the value of referential transparency.
I ran into it in Japan. Found it an interesting way to be clear that the restaurant was open past midnight.
My point was that you rarely need to write test to catch type errors. You write tests to determine if a unit of code works as expected. In doing so you tend to exercise the conditions that cause type errors as a side effect.

Let's say foo() internally calls bar(). If I pass a given valid input to foo() it passes the wrong type to bar(). If I pass another valid input to foo() it passes the wrong value but of the right type to bar().

If you ensure full test coverage of foo() you will catch both. Type checking in your compiler will only cover the first case, so you still need the same test coverage anyway to have confidence in the code.
It's actually a real problem. Most browser games are still Flash - meaning I can't play most of them.
The Omnigenic Model as Metaphor for Life
>How large an area would you need to cover to accuratly dim a star's output to an array at another star, say 100 light years away

Jupiter-sized is good enough for some 3700 light-years with 2016-era technology [1]. We know because that's one of the current methods of detecting exoplanets [2].

--

[1] http://www.sci-news.com/astronomy/kepler-1647b-circumbinary-...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methods_of_detecting_exoplanet...
Lying can be perfectly okay under consequentialism, which also goes way back. Personally I'm not very convinced of ethical theories where lying is unethical in all circumstances (sorry Kant), and I suspect I'm not the only one. Stating that there exists an ethical theory that supports your point just isn't very convincing for people who don't subscribe to that particular theory.
I started with some comparison of cost of big IaaS instances vs. mainframe vs. commodity HW and then got sidetracked on the reliability and ended up deleting the first paragraph :)

That said I believe that when your workload really necessitates such a big systems and if you can use all of the mainframes capability and have the capability to manage the mainframe (which requires Ops team with totally different skillset and mainly willingness to do such a thing), I believe that cost of mainframe will be comparable to IaaS, with self-hosted commodity HW being somewhat cheaper.

It is anecdotal, but when I used to work in more of an Ops role I cannot remember single time when server hardware failed in production without external environmental cause (there were flooded servers and servers that were DoA from manufacturer), it is somewhat surprising that this experience even extends to spinning rust harddrives, where most common causes of failure I've seen were flaky SATA/SAS connetors, followed by simply bad series (eg. Constellation ES.2) and then by extreme overheating.
This is precisely why using neutrinos would be an attractive idea - the signal could travel over extremely long distances with very little diffusion/attenuation. (I.e., as long as you have a narrowly focused beam, to control dispersal, the beam itself won't be weakened by any intervening debris.)
They tend to be more performant in handling connections / request queueing, HTTPS termination, and serving static files among other things.
> Compare creating a one line fix for a project on github and having a discussion and review to sending a properly formatted patch to a mailing list and following up on that.

For the former:

* Create a Github account

* Fork the repository

* Set up the new git remote

* Push to that remote

* Open the pull request

* Wait for notifications via email

* Go back to the webpage and find the comment

* Modify the code, add, commit, push, and type a comment

* Repeat

Versus

* Configure git to use one's ISP's email server

* Run git format-patch

* Run git send-email

* Check email for replies

* Amend the commit, run git format-patch, and git send-email

* Reply to the maintainer email

* Repeat

To reply to emails, you can use any email client or even do that in the browser. You only need to use the format-patch and send-email commands to send patches.
Probably add another login type. At least google, if you won’t support classic email/password.
I wish I knew of any, but after having tried Gmail again after this announcement, I really don't want to go back. If I can't find any I might be forced to write my own.
As a european married to an american and possibly looking to move to the States, thank you. You give me hope again.
Excellent! Thanks for mentioning this.
I don't think so. The idea that they should pay anything back will probably be very hard for them to wrap their head around. ;-)
Isn't this similar to how a silicon wafer is made, i.e. pulling an ingot from a melt, except you're now doing things upside down?
Paris has also a rather big rat problem, even if they are usually hidding in the sewers/subways, but one can easily see them at dusk going through the trash. Also we had a few rats in our (19 century) flat, according to a person living above us.
I have already been recommended the bruce lee book, I'd order it now but I've literally just fired off an order for some of the books in this thread.
As others point out: it's the click bait title.

You open the article because you want to know about the cure. But the article is about insomnia.

So you start skimming the article until you give up.

If the title created an expectation to learn more about insomnia you might have read the whole article.
Nvidia's Turing Architecture Whitepaper [pdf]