skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It is interesting to note the overhead it has to define such simple construct in JavaScript. Pages and pages of a spec, all the work to herd ppl behind the proposal, etc.

In Clojure, the threading macros are awesome and they are not even a language construct, just some ~10 lines of code per macro! [1]

In ML, the pipe operator is even shorter:

`let (|>) x f = f x`

1: https://github.com/clojure/clojure/blob/4ef4b1ed7a2e8bb0aaaa...
I would say modern C++ encourages unique_ptrs and naked pointers for ephemeral references much more than shared_ptr. C++11 invented it after all while shared_ptr has been around longer.

Some projects have gone as far as to say shared_ptr is code smell since you never declared who the actual owner is. The memory may not be free’d but that doesn’t mean it isn’t stale.
Yes, it's R. Not necessarily the ideal language for this but I had an RStudio window open.
God and discipline.

I also used time blocking to do things even when I wasn't in the mood to.
Interesting, though I don't see the price or any other purchasing details (at least on that page).
I sounds counter-intuitive, but it must be satisfying because you move from worrying/wondering to knowing. Not unlike finding out your partner has had an affair. Obviously that's a terrible thing to discover, but finally knowing allows you to start the process of healing.
Agreed, I don't think he was trying for pseudo-intellectual writing. But the fact that he was largely self-taught tends to shine through. He didn't have a mentor to teach him that writing simply doesn't diminish the importance of the subject.

That said, plenty of his ideas could stand an honest critique.
I'm a fan of the engage sound but I'd definitely like to hear the sound when it's going slowly in real life.
Devices for measuring the concentration of particulates (PM10, PM2.5, and maybe PM1.0), TVOC (total volatile organic compounds), and HCHO (formaldehyde) are fairly affordable nowadays. You could get one of those.

The air quality indoors is usually even worse than the air outside if you aren't using some filtration system. New-ish buildings release formaldehyde, laser printers release particulates and ozone, 3d printers release VOCs and particulates, and there is lots of dust generated by inhabitants and their pets.

Sadly, the Trump administration did a rollback of emission and fuel efficiency standards. It's a big step in the wrong direction.

Personally, I'd even ban combustion engines within city limits. It's completely insane that we poison the air we breathe 24/7.
Alright then, what physical object isn't a weapon then? A brick is a weapon, a chair, a hand even.

We've just redefined everything as a "weapon", not sure if that is useful. Though, I think we are slightly more afraid than before, which might be the intended goal here.
weird... when I reloaded without content blockers on my phone there weren't any ads, but checking on my big computer I saw them.

I guess that's what I get for assuming.
I'm sorry, but Timsort is a bit of a hack. It's a "this seems to work well" algorithm, and it shows. It took 13 years until its claimed running time was finally proven in 2015. The four (originally three) rules for merging sequences from the stack are rather arbitrary. Multiple issues were found well after it was already widely deployed.

Recently, it was also shown that Timsort doesn't optimally use the information it has about runs. As an alternative, powersort was proposed, which seems to outperform Timsort both on randomly ordered inputs as well as inputs with long runs: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1805.04154.pdf
"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster." - Nietzsche
I think that's what he was referring to by "bottom-up programming". Essentially, make your abstractions air-tight and grok-able and you never have to worry about what the abstraction contains again.
Does running on 3-5 machines give you the advantage of being able to apply kernel patches and restart machines without bringing down the whole system? That might matter to people with paying customers, even if in theory they could've replaced their 3 machines with one bigger one.
Timing Column Indexing in R
>Note: It still isnt comfy and your bits will go numb, but you can easily survive 5-20 minutes in various cold water temps.

It really doesn't matter your mental toughness, your body has a physical reaction to that kind of water temperature. It seizes up and you can go into shock. People die all the time from falling or jumping into cold water that would be bearable if you eased into it and had training.

I worked as a river guide for a few years on a high altitude stretch of canyons where the water was coming directly off alpine snowpack at ~34 degrees, and people would die every year. Not from drowning in the rapids or prolonged exposure, but just going into shock and having a heart attack immediately after falling in.
In particular, if a node is completely down, that's likely a lot better than a network partition because it eliminates the possibility that it's going to be accepting read and write requests that could have stale data or create inconsistent data (respectively).
The moment es6 classes showed up without automatic method binding was the moment I fell out of love with JavaScript.

I can't imagine that there would EVER be a good reason not to have a method bound to the class. Now we've all been forced to learn this new property initializer syntax and add yet another babel dependency to facilitate it.
Disclaimer: I work for Google. I also think that there is an anti-Google bias on hacker news, holding Google to a standard not applied to others and taking any excuse to roll out the same old tired rants in response to almost any Google post (DAE Google Reader etc).

If what I read is true then this is the first thing that has truly rocked my confidence that the company generally tries to do the right thing (while making money of course, we're not a charity). I expect significant internal backlash if they proceed and I hope they learn from this.
Because Google doesn't come to your house, take you in for questioning and then pressuring you into confessing that you did something wrong which disturbed civil order.

Stories about what happens in China: https://chinachange.org/
Nontrivial regexes should be treated as their own language. I.e., either the team agrees to use them freely, in which case, team members are obligated to actually learn them. Or, if not, then team members agree not to use them.

If you were working on a Python-only codebase and someone opened a merge request to add a C++ file, you'd smack them down. Complex regexes should be no different.
Chromium has many of the same problems as Chrome. I don't think Google can be trusted to not abuse their position any more.
Do you have a link to Google's website where I can buy someone's browsing history? You did say they would sell it to anyone.
When you say "JIT compilers are notoriously tricky to implement" what, I think, you actually mean is "optimizations for dynamically typed languages are notoriously tricky to implement".

If the language you need to compile is Lua - then it does matter whether you are trying to compile it just-in-time or ahead-of-time. Both would be hard to implement if you care about performance (and implementing an AOT compiler that produces fast code would probably be even harder than JIT).

Similarly if your language is like Pallene - which reminds me of Oberon-2 of all things, then you can implement both AOT and JIT with much less effort.

That does not however mean that AOT is trivial to write - as you increase the expressivity of the language and add more ways to write abstract code so does the complexity of optimizing away the cost of those abstractions (eliminating indirections and allocations, resolving polymorphic calls statically, etc)

Finally at some point, even a language like Pallene might benefit from a JIT - because of JITs' ability to see the execution and focus on actually taken execution paths, rather then looking at the program as whole and not knowing which paths would actually be taken.
It may be 'international law', but I'm pretty sure it has never been enforced, and probably never will be unless there's an intentional aggressive action against some other country outside a time of war.
You're correct, it's mentioned in the next/ accompanying post https://blog.cloudflare.com/rpki-details/

Some small corrections if I may

1. I don't know of any issuer key compromises detected with CT. Such compromises are rare. DigiNotar is an obvious example, but can you think of any recent ones? Mostly CA incompetence is more subtle that "Oops we left the root keys on a train" and I'd hope the same is true for RIRs.

2. Technically CT is still not required. You can choose to obtain certificates which aren't logged from a CA that will issue them without logging. Neither Google nor Mozilla require you to log all certificates as a condition of their root programmes and both recently confirmed they do not intend to make that a requirement. Chrome will mark your cert as untrustworthy if it hasn't got an SCT and so it would always make sense to log certificates for a site Chrome users will access on the public Web, but not every TLS certificate is for a web site accessed with Chrome.

[ Also, Google actually makes use of the fact that certs can exist without being logged for some systems. Suppose they're about to launch amazing.example.com, but even the Amazing name would give away what it is. They can order the cert for amazing.example.com with no logging and stockpile it, and when the brass signs off on actually announcing Amazing they log this cert, almost instantly getting back SCTs, and configure a suitably modern web server to send the SCTs separately alongside the certificate. Where ordering a certificate internally might take hours or days, these final steps can be done in a few minutes and need no special permission. Any subscriber whose CA is willing to issue unlogged certificates can do this, but just make sure you have all the steps correct or you'll look really dumb, even Google got this wrong at least once since they began doing it ]

[edited to fix typo that reversed my meaning]
A rational way of explaining it is -- what is my service level objective? If my SLO is for two nines of uptime, then I can be down for 3.65 days a year, and I can get away with single-homing something, or going with a simple hot-failover replicated setup. I just need to be pretty confident that I can fix it if it breaks within a few hours.

If I need more nines of uptime than a single system could provide (and think about the MTBF numbers for the various parts in a computer, a single machine is not going to give you even three nines of uptime), then I'm literally forced to go distributed with N >= 3 and geographical redundancy (we stay up if any k of these machines fail, or if network to "us-east-4" goes down). Things get worse (and you need to be more paranoid) if your service level obligation turns into a service level agreement, because then it usually costs you money when you mess up.

Of course, the more distributed you are, the slower and more complicated your system becomes, and the more you expose yourself to the additional associated downtime risks ("oops, the lock service lost quorum"). They usually cost more to run, obviously. C'est la vie. There is no magic bullet in software engineering.

It used to be that you could spend 3X or more in engineering effort getting a distributed system up and running vs its singly-homed alternative. These days with cloud deployments (and Kubernetes for on-prem) you get a lot of labor-saving devices that make rolling out a distributed system a lot easier than it used to be. You still need to do a cost/benefit analysis!
Then -- back to my question -- would you agree to pay $600 for an iPad of the size of the iPhone, with no network capability?
I always got the impression that Firestore is more aimed towards mobile apps rather than backend applications, and as such more or less a different kind of product. Is this not the case?
Thank you for your work. It's really enjoyable and inspiring.
Romanian Ransomware Suspect Pleads Guilty to Hacking CCTVs in Washington DC
In terms of tracking everything and having a file on everyone Google and Western governments are already there. The only saving grace is that they don't use that information all the time to get people in trouble -- but they could, just look at the whole airport security thing. However, in terms of the ability to abuse, they are already well at par with anything China can do. And really it does not matter if they help China or not, China is more than capable of doing it all themselves given enough time. The difference will be that Western companies and governments will be left out of all of that... which to them is not good.
The interview of Petrov and Boshirov on Russia Today. They basically confirm that all evidence previously revealed by UK side is not made up, but was actually real all along. And their excuses for their itinerary are laughable. This was basically Russian government confirming "yes, we did it, and we don't give a shit". There's no way to spin that interview into Russia not being somehow involved with the poisoning.
Can anyone summarise the article for those of us in Europe?

We can't get the LA Times here.

What has changed this year - wild fires? Or is it the problem of ten million cars pissing in the pool with no wind to clear the air. Do tell.
> This whole thing feels like it's going to hit Google straight in the face like a ton of bricks.

Does it? I feel like Google has been doing similar stuff for a long time and nobody really cares.
While I cannot speak for user comments after this one, nobody is referencing Google Reader here. The stakes are higher here than general "Google ain't what they was back in the Good Old Days", they are "People could be detained, tortured, (please just be hyperbole...) killed because of searches they made that were tracked by this Google Joint Venture and handed over to a repressive government".
Honestly, I think the worries about AI taking jobs are overblown. Will AI get better? Yes. Will some jobs be doable by AI? Yes. May that eventually end up being all jobs? Guess so.

But that doesn't mean people won't be able to find work or make money. I mean, you don't have to be the 'best' at something to get rich off of it, nor to even simply earn a living at it. I mean, think about it. Objectively the majority of products, services and businesses out there now are worse than at least one competitor. If people were always rational about what they were buying, said businesses/products/services would go broke.

But they're not rational. People buy things and use products because of many things, whether that's convenience, location, price, name recognition/branding, marketing, word of mouth type marketing, social proof, quality of service/employees/whatever, pure luck or heck, without even thinking at all.

So even if every market in existence gets AI involved in, it still won't necessarily mean old fashioned human run businesses can't compete and win customers.

There's also the additional effect of branding that people never really think about here too. People don't just watch 'a' TV show or film or what not, they watch Star Wars or Game of Thrones or what not. Same with music, games, books, art, internet media and basically anything celebrity related in general. Eventually, the greats sell on their name alone, and that's one barrier that even the best use of AI may not compete with. Just look at a popular book for example, in some cases the author's name is literally more than double the size of the title!

So that may also be another area where robots won't eventually come for jobs/take all the jobs. Perhaps we'll end up in a world where the 'Patreon' style model is the norm and the standards for success are how well you market your own brand rather than the exact quality of what you do...
Monitoring is totally passive.

"better safe than sorry" is a stifling maxim to live by.
> This proposal and Rust's guarantees are different.

A little different, but only in the sense of being, for the moment, less ambitious (than Rust) about the completeness of the checker's implementation. But I think it substantially demonstrates a straightforward path to achieving the same level of memory safety in C++ as Rust.

> For example:
> > We do not attempt to address all aliasing cases

It seems to me that a main principle behind the design of the Rust language was to eliminate the aliasing issue, by imposing the "mutable references are exclusive" restriction, as a prerequisite to addressing the memory safety issue. And there was an implication (and sometimes more than that) that as long as C++ can't address the aliasing issue it can't address the memory safety issue (like Rust can).

I think the key thing that the lifetime checker demonstrates is that this premise is not (quite) right. You don't need to completely eliminate the aliasing issue to achieve (efficient) memory safety, you just need to address it "enough". And that can be done for C++.

Now, whether the complete elimination of the aliasing issue is, apart from the memory safety implications, a virtue that's worth the (flexibility) cost of the "mutable references are exclusive" restriction, is as far as I'm aware, still a matter of opinion. (Given the existence of the RefCell wrapper in Rust, and the ease (if not elegance) of implementing an "anti-RefCell" wrapper in C++, I'm guessing it's mostly a wash.)

> > or make concurrency safety guarantees. Programmers are still responsible for eliminating race conditions.

Data races are a separate issue, but relative to the (single-threaded) memory safety issue, I think there'd be less controversy that it can be addressed in C++ in vaguely similar fashion to Rust. [1]

But both in the case of Rust and the C++ lifetime checker, I don't think that the cost of the imposed (compile-time) restrictions in terms of code/algorithmic flexibility is being adequately acknowledged. For example, say you have a list (or whatever container) of references to (pre-)existing objects. In both cases, the restrictions require that all the objects must (be known to) outlive the list container even if there is a reference to them in the list for only a short time [2]. Imo this is an impractical restriction. In C++, you could use run-time checked pointers[3][4] to alleviate the restriction without sacrificing memory safety [5]. It's not immediately obvious to me that Rust couldn't have such a run-time checked reference as well. But others would be more qualified to make that assessment.

[1] shameless plug: https://github.com/duneroadrunner/SaferCPlusPlus#multithread...

[2] https://github.com/duneroadrunner/misc/blob/master/201/8/Jul...

[3] https://github.com/duneroadrunner/SaferCPlusPlus#registered-...

[4] https://github.com/duneroadrunner/SaferCPlusPlus#norad-point...

[5] https://github.com/duneroadrunner/misc/blob/master/201/8/Jul...
Ask HN: Why can't we have an open android and apple store
Create a stocks application for Android with push notifications
I think you're reading too much into it.

Seems more likely that it's a lack of instruction on the comment page. Discord manages to fit all of its formatting into the whitespace under the chat input....
A better place to start would be: accessible with notifications.
Does it bother you that those 'free' tests are just another unnecessary cost burden on our medical system?
This is a very impactful book, but challenging for those new to the topic. I would recommend reading his "The Ethics of Liberty" first.
You must be young.

<img src=“https://internal.google.com/track” width=“1” height=“1” />
This. Try to find a single diagnosis, treatment, or illness listed in their claims.
> High frequency trading based on quantum prediction algorithms. (Quantum information theory)

...???
I can see how building a process directly into a building can lead to an inflexibility with changing the process.

I think the argument you're making lends itself well to a criticism of any pre-planned system.
I prefer Linux the most, but Mac is my current laptop because I can build for iOS.
The problem is, once something gets on your credit report, it can often be a hassle to get it off. And the onus is completely on you to do so. You end up playing phone tag, potentially for years, with the firm that opened the fraudulent account, as well as all the reporting agencies.

So personally I feel it better to prevent the whole thing to begin with.

Also I'm not familiar with those free credit monitoring apps, but it seems like in all likelihood a "free" credit monitoring app is going to sell your data...
> We can't get the LA Times here.

You should let your MEP know how upset you are about that...

TL;DR: We don't know why exactly, but it's a bad sign and action should be taken. But it's only slightly out of normal for this time of year.
This is not news, it's an advertisement.

It's all fluff, vague nonsense about what quantum computers might supposedly do, and mostly wrong. The implied assumption is that a quantum computer can solve any NP problem in polynomial time, and that doesn't seem likely. And then, all of a sudden, the purpose of this nonsense becomes clear:

> For its part, ISARA has developed a new method of creating a compound or hybrid digital certificate

This is followed by lots of marketing buzzwords. Disgusting, really.
How would you propose lenders evaluate credit in such a situation?
You're right. I was thinking of it from the point of lowering it from a hypothetical hardware device to the manual process instead of raising it from the current system.
Not the only one. It's a proprietary IRC derivative, attached to an absurdly bloated GUI.

Apparently this, uh, 'innovation', is worth around $3bn.
ML with ML?

I occasionally have to double check, yes.
New SEC Rules Expand Definition of 'Accredited Investor', Relax IPO Regulations
Options for moving a C# application off of Windows?
I'm looking to port a C# application into a Linux environment. I can't find any success stories of businesses moving large applications to run on .NET Core so I'm wondering if it's not straight forward.
https://books.google.com/talktobooks/
This is great resource for studying breadth.

Also learn about generative design, it will help you get a feeling on what is a searchspace.
> Should we rely on the Inquisition's records as reference to judge Giordano Bruno

Internal records of an organization with little opposition and little reason to falsify them at the time? Do you have other sources that paint a different picture? The church certainly did not have a monopoly on paper.

> you know, the very similar arguments for which Galileo was persecuted by the Inquisition during 20 years.

So arguments for which Galileo was never executed? Arguments for which Galileo was merely put under house arrest after years of disputes and insults exchanged between him an the highest offices of the church? Your example doesn't help to prove your point.

> Bruno relentlessly argued that thinkers should be free to inquire, reason, and speak

From which you get such things like "vaccines cause autism", there is a need for someone to keep an eye on self proclaimed "thinkers", especially the ones spouting nonsense. It doesn't help that (afaik) the Copernican model was too simple to account for various observations and could be shown to be worse than the complex models used for the geocentric model, which caused even Galileo some trouble.
I’d do just that but I’m not sure if it’s legal in Europe either ;)

Jokes, full article: https://outline.com/CrmCSK
One blog post on my own crappy blog - turned into ~$1M so far.
this is one of the reasons why I left MS working on Bing (though, not the most important at that time)
Meet the Simple Device That Can Save You Money on Energy Bills
>presumably lenders need some way to evaluate the "trustworthiness" of who they're lending to, yea?

Well, that's kind of, like, their whole job description. If you can't evaluate peoples' trustworthiness, you shouldn't be in the business of professionally loaning money!