skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It was interesting in an earlier time. Today, that's just fancy clothes on a reactionary/right-wing philosophy, a really cynical worldview that creates nasty outcomes.

Translation:

- "Communist at the family level": I like total control.

- "Socialist at the club level.": I like my religious denomination/tribe

- "Democrat at the city level.": Bread and circus for the plebes, but no money or power.

- "Republican at the state level.": Make sure my friends can make money.

- "Libertarian at the national level": Keep government out of our lives, except when I want it in your life.

- "Libertarian at the global level": These barbarians won't subscribe to our ideals of liberty. But, we have tanks to help deliver liberty to them. <enter fascism>
Well then that would just be silly. A large number of YC companies don't get in the first few times they apply with an idea. Getting rejected from YC doesn't mean your startup isn't viable - it may just mean it's not ready for investment (from them) yet.
> Reality may be deceptive, but I certainly prefer to start with theories in which our experience is explained in a pretty simple and straightforward way: it looks like stuff is over there because there is stuff over there. We have singular experiences because a single experience is what actually happens.

This assertion does not make sense to me. The Everett Interpretation and the Bohm Interpretation are experimentally indistinguishable from each other, as I understand things. Consequently, there is no mystery at all with the Everett Interpretation as to why things appear to us the way that they do.

Since the Everett Interpretation is a significantly simpler theory than Bohm's, we should prefer it due to Occam's Razor. On the other hand, since they are experimentally indistinguishable from each other, we can never scientifically assert which of the two is correct, no matter how much evidence we have.
> It seems to me that the only reason we do things any other way, is that juries don't have encyclopedic knowledge of the criminal code, and so you have to teach them about what the requirements are for guilt in the particular case.

The reason is more involved, because:

(1) law, like facts, is subject to question and answering those questions is out of scope of the jury, which is the trier of fact alone. Your model would necessarily transfer the judge's responsibility to the jury.

(2) The law creates permission for prosecution (bit civil and criminal , though only the latter is relevant here), but that permission is not a mandate. Judgement of the cake of prosecution is given to the offended party (in criminal law, the executive on behalf of the government). Your model would necessarily transfer the executives authority largely to the jury (though prosecutors could withhold inculpatory evidence to avoid undesired charges being triggered.)

(3) But, most critically, your model would provide the defendant with a vast surface to defend against, and require the defense to provide evidence against any offense the jury might infer from the evidence. The use of specific charges and specifications putd the defense on notice of the specific charges they must defend against.

(4) Related to (3), without specific charges, any trial is essentially a trial for all potential criminal conduct occurring before that point, which creates double jeopardy problems if concealed evidence of an early crime comes to light, as distinguishing between a trial addressing other charges (which would not foreclose a new trial for double jeopardy reasons) and a trial addressing the offense indicated by the new evidence but which merely failed to convict (which would foreclose a new trial) is impossible. Meaningful protection against double jeopardy while permitting trials for newly discovered offenses requires something like the current specific-charge model.

> Given that the court system doesn't like jury nullification,

The court system may not like it, but it has repeatedly been found to be part of the Constitutional order of government. By the court system, I might add, so obviously they like it enough to keep protecting it.
Pijul is definitely inspired by darcs and from what I've seen most of its team is very familiar with darcs.
Google project dependant on another Google project. Which one will go puff first after the people involved get their promotion, Dart or Flutter?
Clustrix had a great team and technology but nearly everyone responsible for building the product left the company long ago. Even Sergei, the founding CTO, eventually left for Dropbox a few years ago.

It'll be interesting to see if this acquisition results in the interesting clustrix bits becoming libre software.
> following 3D Lissajous curves

The only problem with that is that it creates predictability, which is what you want to avoid.

That said, my entire argument was that it's not helpful to imagine swords as having been specifically designed for causing damage to other swords or even withstanding repeat blade-on-blade strikes for extended period of times. And we seem to agree on that.
Kotlin 1.3 RC is here
You're ignoring the effects of motion blur. Consider a smoothly panning camera in a poorly lit scene. OIS can move the lens to cancel out the pan so you don't get blurring.

EIS can only do it if you take multiple photos at a much higher frame rate (I think the Pixel 2 does this but it is very uncommon, and probably too power intensive to do for 4K video).
Auctus Experts – An investment platform made for the digital age
Jai is another popular one that originally compiled to C and is aimed at game development. Any thoughts on that?

EDIT: Your responses in these threads have been great, by the way!
Both rockets and knives are tools. Granted, rockets had more money to back up the military intent instead of scientific or exploratory, but at least they're here for the curious to use and not just for the generals.
Vapid, to me, is like an agressive ignorance or boredom. Someone uninteresting and yet proud of their 'basic-ness'. Someone concerned with the valueless superficial representation over the real article.
That's remarkable. Looking at some of the marker points (e.g. a self-sustaining martian colony by 2035), it feels like Elon Musk is attempting to singlehandedly bring us back on track.
So by your metric the global banking industry, which uses several orders of magnitude more electricity than the bitcoin network, also isn't sustainable.

A single bitcoin may be pricey, but fortunately there are eight decimal places after that first coin, enabling users to spend however much or however little they want.

You're right about the lightning network, it stands to revolutionize the bitcoin network by providing an instantaneous zero-confirmation payment layer on top of the bitcoin blockchain. Critically, though, it wouldn't work at all without the security provided by all that "wasted" electricity. Think of the lightning network like the HTTP protocol layer resting on top of the TCP/IP communication layer. HTTP wouldn't work without TCP/IP and TCP/IP wouldn't be nearly as useful without the myriad of protocol layers which it enables. This is still early times for bitcoin, and you ain't seen nothin' yet.
I've never experienced a non-performant cross-platform UI.

Well, to be honest I've heard of folks complaining about Electron apps, but are easy enough to avoid. Oh yeah and Swing was a bit sluggish… in the 90s.

What am I missing?
Really good writing style. So much info in such short, simple sentences.
I did a 10 second google. Here's a couple where the NYT issued their little correction as unobtrusively as possible, which happens often, after they enjoy the click-bait traffic the erroneous story give them.

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2018/05/30/new-york-tim...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2017/08/...

Small print corrections issued days later, are not effective in undoing the damage an erroneous blaring headline did.
Well, I haven't tried the software, and won't, since I all my needs are already met and I tend to avoid proprietary software anyway.
Nevertheless, I think this is a clever strategy from Jon Skinner and his team.
As I have gotten older, this is a good way to judge potential employers, especially if they cannot articulate the mission.
Yes, Exactly! mercurial is not THAT MUCH better, so it doesn't worth spreading. If it contain good ideas, we should try to incorporate some into Git, instead of making every tool more complex.
Nothing "happened to" the Semantic Web. It's here, and it's growing in utility and capability as the technology matures. What isn't necessarily growing is understanding of what the Semantic Web really is, who it's for, how to use SemWeb capabilities, etc.

I'll accept some responsibility for that last bit, as somebody who has been active in promoting, and advocating for the adoption of, SemWeb tech. I could do more / do a better job in that regard.
OSM is open, but it is still centralized. It doesn't come to your webpage and get the information about your hours from you (as far as I can tell)
Yeah, semantic web really hacked the brains of academic-facing bureaucrats. It fell into this giant gap between what administrators don't know about business and what they don't know about technology... a gap big enough to shove every utopian idea about "an effortlessly integrated, data driven society" into.

There's no such thing as "right" way to represent any given data stream, just ways that are more or less suitable to specific tasks and interests. That's why HTML failed as descriptive language (and has become fine-grained-formatting language), and it's why symantic web was doa.
Show HN: TechLoaf – Disrupting the disruptors
I paid attention to the part of the article that mentioned that the pizza slice comes packaged with a protein shake. That sounds just like veggie crackers to me.
That probably would have been cleaner back in the day, but with rich UIs being what they are, I think JSON + client side templating logic is probably simpler (and composes well).

I never had much luck using XSLT for anything non-trivial, and I imagine that experience isn't uncommon.
That "hierarchy" of beliefs just sounds selfish, with an interest in disproportionately consolidating resources in your proximity, but then demanding permissive access to them once they're at arms length.

Of course, policies must be crafted differently to create a benefit at different levels, but that doesn't mean you can't have consistent philosophies.
As a hater of the EVM and person directly trying to replace this shit, here is my rebuttal:

First, smart contracts don't have a private key, at least not in the meaning of the word. They do the equivalent of signing by sending a message from their address to another address, or expose a function to indicate that a particular message is authorized by the contract code... but it's impossible to send some packet of data to a contract and (without external communication) have it verify "this data was provably sent by this contract"

Every other system I know of puts contract addresses in some other different namespace. Even looking at Bitcoin, they use the "3" address version for pay-to-scripthash, while "1" is for pay-to-pubkey. Internally Ethereum actually DOES namespace these two different address types implicitly. A normal address has no code and has a public key. A contract address has code and no public key. There are many many if-statements with this logic to handle the multitude of edge cases that come up from using the same address namespace for person-addresses and contracts... and beyond that, this has been the direct cause of several smart contract bugs because checking if a sender is person or contract is not trivial. Even for your purported benefit of being able to send coins to contracts in the same way as a person doesn't really work. You must attach some data when sending to a contract, whereas sending to a person should never contain data.

And for your idea of a contract having multiple addresses, what would be the purpose of this? Technically this is possible but not exposed today by making it so that an address contains both the location of a contract in the blockchain as well as encoding some data. Could be done simply by allowing an ethereum address to have more than 160 bits. The first 160 bits is contract address, the remaining is data to send to the contract.

I can understand Ethereum's design being not great. It was the first one to exist and the designers were not fully aware how it would be used.. but I will never understand the people that defend the design as "oh you just don't understand why this is a good thing"
> That's an extraordinary claim to make without any evidence. The entire business model of a newspaper is that they report facts.

You've never regularly read UK newspapers I take it?

I wish that was their primary purpose, a few of them never let a story get in the way of their agenda.
Yep, bedstand charger does the trick for me too. I never think about my Series 1’s battery.
Customers want problems solved. Tech people (me included) assume that once the hard part is done (the product/software), the rest is a minimal effort.

This is usually false. Customers are not familiar with the software, they may have a tech knowledge gap, its usage may entail organizational change. There are many possible reasons for adoption to be a very relevant factor.

Consulting means you are responsible for the whole process, not just providing software.
How about everyone who sticks it to their windshield with the velcro the ez-pass comes with?
Because people hoard stuff with a "limited amount" (i.e. gold and silver) when they are afraid of hyper-inflation.
Grav is in use on many production sites and their support is amazing. When I run into an issue they resolve it like I'm on a paid contract. I have a shared environment with one grav install and a dozen sites which is not a normal install. Here's a really simple blog: https://www.sendthemtomir.com/
Depends on the officer. Overall (from law school and friends from law school who practice in that area), my understanding is that your chance of getting a ticket is slightly (if at all) higher, but your chance of getting out of the ticket increases drastically. There's a reason "tell your clients not to speak to the police, period" was one of the very few practical pieces of client advice that regularly gets taught in law school.
Early decision plans for colleges are not without their disadvantages, the biggest being that it forces a decision before the student has the time to know what all of their options and offers may be. This is frequently mitigated by financial aid packages that compensate for the loss of choice, but even so, such plans have the downside of not knowing what other packages might have come to fruition.

YC seems to be walking that same path - seeking a commitment before the student knows all the choices that may be available post-graduation. Is there an intent to also give some incentive to compensate for that? Or is YC not asking for a commitment, and instead just making it an invitation that can be taken or not?
> What is it about politics that makes it go that way

It's not “politics”, it's the US electoral system, and particular:

(1) single-winner majority or plurality legislative (and state executive) elections and

(2) Indirect federal executive elections where the voters are elected in winner-take-all plurality elections at either state or a mix of state and district levels.

Together, this strongly encouraged a system of two major national factions, each of which strives to acheive a winning coalition with as little compromise on policy priorities as possible, which in effect means minimal size to acheive victory.
> This may have been true pre-fb acquisition but there has been changes to how WhatsApp behaves, especially server side storage.

WhatsApp messages are encrypted end-to-end between each person using it. The whole point of end-to-end encryption is not having to trust the server-side storage.

Furthermore, WhatsApp uses the Signal Protocol-- the state-of-the-art for secure messaging protocols.

The worst that WhatsApp can see is "who's talking to who?"

Finally, the adoption of the Signal Protocol in WhatsApp came long after the Facebook acquisition.

So, no. It wasn't better off pre-fb.
Using GANs for art is not necessarily limited to training on a collection of famous artists to replicate their style.

Some artists use them as another tool to process and transform their artwork https://thegradient.pub/playing-a-game-of-ganstruction/

I'm pretty sure that the invention of photography was also greeted with complaints that it lacked "real inspiration" because a photographer "just" had to choose what to take a picture of. But the real inspiration is always in what you choose your art to be, and not whether you create it by applying paint to a canvas.
It's kinda nice, how you can take a bunch of metal wires to make a tree trunk, and start separating them and folding them into branches, and separating and folding into smaller branches, and this can give pretty realistic looking trees.

https://diyjoy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/WireTree.jpg

https://www.thisiscolossal.com/2014/10/dense-wire-tree-sculp...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0tj_ZLpv80
Beautiful as expected Jon, thanks.

Your UI kit feels really nice, good job.
That comparisong is not fair, but anyway, no need for new languages today, we should improve the existing ones. See UncleBob's opinion on these: http://blog.cleancoder.com/uncle-bob/2015/08/06/LetTheMagicD...

C is just terrible, it has to be improved, but the "Git vs Mercurial" is not the same topic, because Mercurial is not THAT MUCH better to worth to replace it or make thing more complex.
You need a -i, they have PGP in upper case, with a public key.
The thing that makes this hard is the security model in browsers. You either keep the XSLT scripts in the same directory as the XML or need to turn off the check for cross-site scripts.
This is easy to say before you've been kidnapped. A bit harder to stick to, especially if you see no representation on the horizon, and think you can avoid escalating the situation.

You should of course still watch this video and follow its advice. Just don't let it preclude you from having empathy for the people who haven't.
I agree. While it didn't turn out to be the solution to all our Problems and not every webpage is chock full of semantic markup that anyone can scrape, there are still a lot of bits and pieces that stuck around.

I always felt that one problem of more widespread adaption by users was missing software. There were and still are all these great microdata pieces out there, but can my browser save an address, add an event to my calender etc.? If these things were easily possible to even an inexperienced user, I think we would see much more semantic markup. But in the meantime, search engines and social networks sure have an easier time scraping information then before we talked about the semantic web.
Thank you so much for the offer. I will reach out today!
Yeah, this is one of the real secrets of Silicon Valley. The biggest unicorns of the post-Facebook era were all created because of regulatory capture, not despite it.

Here are the pre-2010 VC investments: https://www.calpers.ca.gov/page/investments/asset-classes/pr...

And then in 2012, they moved into managed VC/PE through Blackrock, so it's a lot harder to trace, but... https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tech-uber-idUSKBN0EH21I20...

CALPERS didn't 'start' Uber/AirBnB, but they did make huge bets on them at right about the time when regulation was threatening their existence, and then magically they became legal.

Not to mention all of Elon Musk's companies. He may not have needed the money, but easy passage through regulatory barriers definitely secured success.
I'm really asking you not to publicly accuse someone of being a jerk when you don't actually have many facts.

Elsewhere it was posted that the previous record-holder was in attendance and they are, apparently, at least acquaintances.
Not really. That stuff does relate to "semantics" in the "Semantic Markup" sense, but it doesn't actually have much to do with the "Semantic Web" per-se. I mean, yeah, there is a weak sort of connection there, but when people talk about the "Semantic Web" they are mostly talking about RDF, whether it's encoded using RDF/XML, N3, Turtle, JSON-LD, or "other". And along with RDF are related technologies like OWL, inference engines that reason over a triplestore, etc.
Circumstantial evidence isn't necessarily bad evidence at all. The proverbial "smoking gun" is circumstantial evidence.
Which unfortunately many companies don't comply with. See: http://gdprhallofshame.com/

Hopefully we'll start seeing a wave of enforcement actions against these companies soon, too.
This has happened with other, much smaller, cryptocurrencies. The choice usually agreed upon by exchanges, developers, and community is to pick a known good block before the attack and fork the chain backwards from that point. It requires significant downtime and is of course very complicated, but several different cryptocurrencies have used this method and recovered to a functioning blockchain
I know many people that take the %120 approach, but I take the 80/20 approach. I have a lot of kids and volunteer a lot outside of work so I don't want to make time for 120.
I have mixed feelings on that advice. Sometimes, keeping a pair of old clients that have a closer relationship with your company provides priceless feedback on the product.

The advice is, in general terms, correct. It is not an absolute, though.
These are definitely interesting things that semantic web influenced, but they're definitely not what semantic web aspired to be. The differences are a good laundry list of things that make standardized data models viable in the wild:

They are organized around use cases, not data origins. They are opt-in, rather relying on distribution via some discovery standard. They are only used by subsets of the industry they serve, and that's ok. They aren't integrated with regulation in ways that force their use. (list continues)
Why Google Built an AI-Powered Lion Statue That Spits Out Poems
You can reverse engineer any Android app in very little time. Professionals use frameworks like Lobotomy, but you can get by with dex2jar and JD-GUI for most of it.

It not being open source is a political argument, not a technical one.

EDIT: I ended up doing just that. It took roughly 5 minutes (most of that was making sure I had my PATH for Java set up correctly on this machine) to get decompiled Java code ready to inspect.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DnkFaKxU8AE4mFn.jpg
Well, I guess I can't argue with an unscientific poll, but it kind of boggles my mind that any scientist could take the Copenhagen Interpretation seriously.

I mean it builds the term "measurement", which is an undefined and unscientific concept, right into the laws of physics. Personally, I find this to be virtually nonsensical.
Yes, because your time is not free, which you will be forced to spent while fighting the OS.
I spent a lot of time getting a distributed team that was on a terrible proprietary source control system onto mercurial. Being able to just have them force push their changes and then fix it on my end was a great way to get people on board with it, while my experiences getting a team onto git included a lot of lost code.
In philosophy, you sometimes hear an idea along the lines of "the least useful (or useless) map is that which has a 1:1 scale. This is a nice counterexample.
It's at the top of the thread [0]:

> All of Office 365 is (almost finished) being completely rewritten in this little scripting language called #JavaScript.

[0]: https://twitter.com/TheLarkInn/status/1006746626617008128
Or the hundreds of license plate cameras on poles, or mounted on the trunk of a good portion of the 9600 patrol cars.