skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>There is no “modern discussion” around if autism is a mental illness. It is settled scientific consensus that Autism is a cognitive disability and NOT a mental illness.

Actually autism is officially described and classified in the DSM-5 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of _Mental Disorders_.

The rest of ad hominem, I will ignore. For one, I find the language insulting to people with mental health issues (even if one considers autistic people to not be among them), as if they're lesser people.

E.g. "They are going to wonder if I am a danger to them, and in turn, that mentality is going to cause direct harm and danger to me and other people on the spectrum." -- because people with mental illnesses are necessarily of "danger" to others?

>They are going to wonder if I’m going to exhibit symptoms of mental illnesses since I am autistic.

Well, they will be right to wonder it.

Even for the mental illness issues that you would agree to qualify as such (from depression to OCD), are commonly associated with autism, much more so than in the general population.
I do think that the realm of experimental particle physics and astrophysics have sort of fallen behind the theory. It will take some new technology or breakthrough I think before we see more big strides in these fundamental areas.

As eigenspace pointed out though there is still a lot of good physics in more applied (or at least less fundamental domains). There are still a LOT of physicsal phenomena we don't understand fully that doesn't require a new fundamental theory of everything to make progress.
Linkerd2 went GA. How does it compare to Istio and Consul?
> I'm a bit tired of this reasoning here on HN: If it isn't perfect it is worthless.

This argument (that "If it isn't perfect it is worthless" does not hold) is suitable for many topics in life, but in my opinion not for IT security. I can conceive that this might be one reason, why so many people (explicitly including politicians) make such bad decisions about IT security.

I might be somewhat paranoid regarding this topic (which is not a bad trait if you want to work in this area), but let me give my arguments:

First: the fight for secure systems is deeply asymmetric. The attacker side just needs one working exploit, while the defender side has to ensure that there exists no security hole. This strong asymmetry really makes it necessary that the security is as perfect as possible.

Second: if the device is connected to the internet, everyone/every device that exists in the world can be an attacker. So what you are fighting against is the whole world. Or in other words: the security of the system that you use has to withstand the smartness of some of the smartest people in the world.

Let it be stated clearly that this fight is not hopeless as it looks based on these arguments: for designing the security of your system, you can resort to the knowledge of many really, really smart people, too: this is what the various standards (e.g. for cryptography) are about. What you cannot afford is to tolerate the slightest bit of imperfection in the security architecture of the system.

TLDR: In security, at least "If it isn't at least nearly perfect, it is worthless" does indeed hold.
I wish this list also mentioned what these orgs mean by remote. Waaay too many companies have conditions where the term "remote" mean +- 3 hours (which in most cases is US companies hiring remote US employees or +- 5 hours which brings some parts of Europe into consideration.

People on the other side of the globe are completely left out of this (APAC, India, Eastern Europe for example)

I'm not complaining about this. I understand why this happens and do admit that having a decent time overlap between all employees is useful for a lot of people, but truly remote companies get lost in the 600+ list of companies who are conditionally remote. So would be great to have a filter of some sort for this
You need to look under which title that is, and take the context into consideration. That is one of the reasons used to justify why the community is more active that the Rails one.
Mics that record in 3D ambisonics are the next big thing
Really sorry to hear you've had that experience. I'm the PM for CI and we're really proud of how our CI product in particular has been rated by industry analysts, and how we've maintained interoperability, though of course that doesn't speak to where you've struggled with our solution. If you'd like to chat about it sometime I'd definitely be up for it.
You’re not part of the target customer base just as someone who loves walking is not a target customer for any car maker. It’s as simple as that.

If you do use a smartphone, then a smart watch is quite close to the tracking part (except for some additional data collection about heart rate that you may consider invasive).
Haptic feedback is huge. I think it is one of the most important ui innovations in the last few years, and the occasional ridicule apple receives for putting so much effort into it is extremely misguided.

Haptic feedback removes the most crippling weakness of the touchscreen, the inability to use it without looking.
Given the way the code works, I don't see how you could be affected if your transaction went through PayPal (ie you didn't enter any payment information, such as a credit card).
And that as C++ developers before that.
I love the spirit of this, but there are so many industries where it would be nearly impossible to pay daily or even weekly. The administrative overhead would be huge and costs to customers would go up to accommodate. I'm thinking about my own past experiences, where trying to automate away (the only solution here to more frequent billing + payroll) would be tremendously challenging and industry / company specific.
Right? This whole thing comes down to the most basic of economic questions: "How do we distribute a scarce resource where demand is greater than supply?"

We have an amazing system for this - a market. Why don't we just accept that price is based on supply and demand and let the market (secondary markets included) determine the price freely.
Sometimes, maybe. Perhaps at insolvency. Worldcom looked pretty healthy in 2002, then they were chapter 11.
Facebook Mired in Controversy Around Gender Biased Jobs: Reports
Have you considered that it's not about when they get paid but how much they get paid, and how much money they are spending each month?

If you get $300 on the 1st or you get $10 a day you'll have the same amount on the 30th. If that amount is less than your monthly expenses you're in trouble and payday loans start to look attractive.

A lot of people in the seedier parts of time are working jobs that don't pay a livable wage, and a lot of people are also spending more than what they should be. Sometimes irresponsibly, sometimes out of necessity (see: the boot theory of economics).

Paying irresponsible people more often will exacerbate their problems.

Paying poor people more often won't make them not poor any more.
i pay my way, create jobs for people, fund/promote things i consider valuable for humanity (e.g. medical tech).

i have never claimed a medical, educational, unemployment etc. benefit in my life. and i am a citizen of a country that will never give me any such benefits anyway.

my approach adds more value to society than funding inefficient social programs, armies of bureaucrats and bloated spy agencies.

yeah, i glorify this.
I really don't find it convincing. If you pay as much as your competitors, why would talents in expensive areas would be discouraged to apply to your company and go to your competitors?

If you're assuming that big city people would feel bad because the small city people get paid more in terms of cost of living, then I'd say that's a bad assumption. People living in any city should know its pros and cons, why is it up to you to decide that the cost of living is the metric?
> doesn't get the percentages they're looking for

What does that mean? Not selling out the venue?
Irony: In trying to win, the Chinese leaders are enforcing a death spiral. History judges with brutal honesty, and not on intentions.

Play it through:
- they can't back down
--> means they can't not lose half a trillion per year in current revenue
--> means they don't get to spend that money on "Chinese advancement", but they might foolishly think they look "tough".

I can think of five ways out of this where they win. If they are too stupid to do so, then they don't really deserve to be in power, do they. One of the big arguments for the authoritarian structure is that they get fewer pretty faces, and 3/4 the way up the chain of command they should get higher levels of actual capability.
One indication that this isn't B2B is the use of WorkMarket instead of dealing with gig workers in a B2B fashion. The stated value-add of WorkMarket is to allow businesses to manage their "freelancers and independent contractors".

So businesses take a cut out of the budget to hand it over to a "management" company to sort out the paperwork, and they require their gig workers to provide liquidity to the client business via net30/60/90 terms.

One has to be blind or stupid to call this a B2B relationship in the sense of two equals dealing with each other.
It appears to be fixed at HEAD and in Safari Technology Preview per https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=188794
This was only an issue for those that are ideologically against installing Sun/Oracle's JDK versions or any other commercial JDK like IBM's, as the rendering code was never part of OpenJDK, hence why InteliJ started bundling their own variant of OpenJDK.

Meanwhile with the transition to OpenJDK as official JDK the code has been merged into OpenJDK.

http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/discuss/2017-November...
Or petrify it and cover it with hot grits.
Thanks to lobbying from the ticket industry, this isn't allowed in some states including NY: https://www.stubhubconcourse.com/en/learn-more/blog/virginia...
I've read the Welsh being described as loquacious, dissemblers, immoral liars, stunted, bigoted, dark, ugly, pugnacious little trolls, but I cannot confirm its truth or otherwise.
Do you have any evidence to suggest "that code safety and security" was NOT "prioritized over profit"? How would you falsify this? Are we to assume that every security breach indicates that profit was prioritized over security? Doubtful.

Also, "profit" is the reward for doing things efficiently, it is not some kind of scoreboard for how much a company is ripping off consumers. NewEgg is in such a hyper-competitive & mature space with margins in the low single-digits on average. Incidents like this can absolutely tank them, especially this close to the holiday season.

E-commerce companies do not make money on security breaches, they lose it. Lots of it. I think you should be a little more open-minded to how businesses operate, that's all.
> receive either a stream of particles with collapsed wave functions, or a stream of uncollapsed ones

I don’t think there’s any way for Bob to determine whether the particle stream has been measured by Alice or not.
Sorry, I'm new to HN and not sure about posting it here. I could contact you offline via email or some other means.
> The thing above the n in the Spanish spelling of vicuna is actually a miniature “n”.

“originated as” is vastly more accurate than “is”; you wouldn't say that thing between the numbers in “1 + 2” is a ligature for the letter pair “et”, would you?
To add on, we are actively working on balancing how we deliver new and deep solutions, CI in particular is an area where we want to provide better solutions for more complex problems (as well as address some of the challenges like hung builds or other issues people are running into.) You can read about our vision for CI here: https://about.gitlab.com/direction/verify/

I'd also be up for a chat sometime if you'd like to talk about some of the issues that are impacting you and what we might be able to do to help. twitter.com/j4lenn
Scalpers can just buy tickets with prepaid credit cards and send those to the buyers
Thanks for asking. One of our big goals is to address the awareness-gap about the GitLab offering.

So instead of a version control system that lets people try out different integrations, GitLab provides an opinionated (yet flexible with key integrations and the option to opt out of anything you don't want) way to run the entire software development and deployment lifecycle. You can start with planning your issues, then you create the code (usually in your editor of choice but there's a web IDE that makes quick fixes much faster in GitLab), then you store your code with our version control. Using the GitLab CI you can set up automated jobs that include all kinds of tests (we provide the Auto DevOps pipeline for a set of best practices to automatically do tests and security scans and also provide Prometheus metrics without you having to do a thing). Then comes the CD part, followed by monitoring via Prometheus and tracing with Jaeger. You can deploy the code to k8s clusters directly on GitLab making k8s a lot more accessible to developers and then run it on any cloud. Our GKE integration is pretty dope. I personally am working on bringing similar serverless functionality to the product soon as well. This is by no means an exhaustive list but I covered the main aspects from my perspective. You can learn more here - https://about.gitlab.com/features/
Do you think it is immoral to live off on other people's labor?
Isn’t things like “outbound sourcing exclusively for female candidates” is direct violation of California anti-discrimination laws?

A company can not discriminate candidates based, among others, on gender, sexual orientation, etc.
This record is like having a record for bench pressing with the aid of hydraulic lifts. How much do the hydraulic lifts help? How much is the person contributing? The whole premise just seems really stupid, and it's even dumber if they were to make the headlines "Woman smashes world record bench press at 23 tons". Just throw someone in Elon's hyperloop vacuum tubes on a bicycle fixed to the rails, make them wear a pressurized diving suit, and let them go to town. I'm sure they'd break 184MPH and it would be an equally pointless dick measuring contest.
I got the update for Safari yesterday, and i'm still running High Sierra
Here's my writeup, this is a first-attempt so please offer constructive criticism if wrong:

2 labs (L1 and L2), these are like the box of shrodingers cat, they are in quantum uncertainty.

2 lab workers (Alice, Jane)

2 outside observers (Bob, Frank)

Time is denoted as T0, T1, ...

T0 Alice in Lab1 randomly selects heads / tails

T1 Alice uses heads / tails to setup a quantum particle S

T2 Jane in Lab2 reads the state of S, infers heads / tails and stores this information in a new particle Z

T3 Frank reads the state of Lab2 to infer Z, S, heads/tails and determines pass / fail (pass == was heads), lets call this variable W_frank

T4 Bob reads the state of Lab1 to infer S, heads / tails, and then makes his own pass / fail (pass == was heads) and that's variable W_bob

Since these are separate readings on untangled particles by Bob and Frank, they can get disparate readings W_frank != W_bob

This is a problem since we "collapsed" the state of W_frank -> Z -> S -> Coin, but this doesn't necessarily imply that we can known with certainty that W_bob will match (i.e. forward collapsed Coin -> S -> W_bob).

Basically its just that each lab is in a quantum uncertainty (Quantum Coin is heads/tails, S is in either state, Z is in either state until measured). And making the measurement should reveal this, but there's no guarantee both collapses will result in the same outcome (so in one case the coin was heads, and the other it was tails).

My conclusions:

1. There is no randomness, we just suck at measuring still

2. We are in the "many worlds" but impossible branches can't happen (reality stays consistent somehow) -- so it won't happen even though its theoretically possible

3. The forward collapse does happen, we just haven't done the experiment to verify it. In other words, the pass/fail result would change to keep things consistent (the whole system is entangled). Including the memories everyone would have about it. So maybe this is happening constantly but we just don't know it because it changes even our memories about it.

4. This experiment fractures reality, and we realize we all live in a simulation and that's where "white holes" come from :P
this is me: http://medium.com/@sergefaguet/

YC alum so pretty sure this is not a fake HN ID :)

i wish people didn't see this stuff as Bond villainy though. this is clearly a failure on my part in terms of communication... thinking on how to remain authentic but reduce that effect.
It's not just graft, though. The article also talks about environmental damage.

Now, construction can also cause environmental damage worldwide. (By definition, it has to cause environmental change in some way.) But some may do better at limiting the environmental damage than this company does.
There are still a lot of tradeoffs in the space. The Garmin Fenix is arguably better for serious runners and backpackers in part because of better battery life and probably being more rugged.

But they're huge even for 6 ft. large-limbed me.

And I could never get my remanufactured Fenix 3 to consistently measure distance accurately on twisty turny trails no matter what settings I played with.

Battery life is definitely still an issue. In fact, I often travel with just a cheap Timex so it's one less thing I need to bother with.
But these are still contracts, subject to the basics of contract law. Contracts are not meant to be gotcha moments where one side leverages the mistakes of another.
Look to the booking of flights. A small error here and there on price will be enforced. But a monumental error leveraged by people who would otherwise not fly will nullify the contract (ie hundreds of people suddenly booking first class travel London-Johannesburg because the website underpriced such tickets).

So in this case, where the remarkable odds were spotted by someone who knew it was a probable error, and would not have otherwise made the bet except for the error, I think a court will nullify.

What if it were billion-to-one odds? Should a company be destroyed because of a single numerical mistake? There is a line and I think this situation crosses it.
There is a clear incentive for gambling operators to claim “error” anytime they might lose money.

That makes it somewhat different, no?
That's an interesting approach. San Diego Comic Con takes the approach of making you jump through so many hoops that only obsessives can make it through the processes.

To buy a ticket, you have to create an account to buy a ticket before the ticket sale date is announced. Once the date is announced, you are no longer allowed to create a new account for that year's sales. Then you get assigned an hour-long time slot in the far future during which you have to be actively present online to enter a lottery to see if you have the chance to even buy a ticket. Then you have to buy the kind of ticket you want before that batch sells out.

And if you went the previous year, there's a whole different set of rules to figure out of how to maintain your eligibility to buy a ticket the next year with it's own different set of dates and forms to fill out.

All of this is incredibly hard to figure out if you don't spend your life trying to figure out how to buy Comic Con tickets. There are multiple dates you have to plan around and you have to show up during your 1-hour purchase window even if it's in the middle of the night for your location.

So while it prevents most scalping effectively, I personally think it's a crappy experience and a crappy solution.
These are both up to date at the moment, but it's not entirely clear which one of these will be used for future development:

https://github.com/RhodiumToad/pllua-ng
https://github.com/pllua/pllua-ng
So any code?

Great collection of info you posted about it (and a shame about legal happenings that can hamstring capable people) but I'm even more curious now as to whether there was any code at all written!
This is honestly my least favorite part of js and the reason I use ts. ES6 has so many syntax tricks that sometimes I delve into a new codebase and it's almost like reading a different language. Code golf is fun, I get it, but sometimes you gotta code for the next developer that'll be maintaining your shit.
Considering how frequently this idea is trotted out(I count 4 times in this hn post), are the artists really fooling anyone?
Because Windows (roughly speaking) doesn't use the fork/exec model for process spawning, it doesn't need overcommit. If you use fork/exec, then overcommit is the least bad of all the bad options.

Anyway, whether overcommit is a good idea is somewhat tangential. The point is that portable programs cannot rely on being able to detect and recover from OOM in the same process. That's why you see so few programs try. (The programs that do try frequently suffer from security vulnerabilities in their OOM handling paths, ironically enough.)
Machine Learning by Kaggle
If we agree on net-60 and they actually pay net-60, then everybody is good. The problem is that anything > net-30 tends to be signaling that you'll get your money when we darn feel like it, maybe never. Yes, I understand that the larger the company, the longer the payment terms, but its that risk factor of the unknown that is the squeeze on the little guy. Ironically I was just discussing this with my partner this morning as I seek to collect on a debt of > 365 days... feels like there should be lots of opportunity for disruption around getting paid, as contract law (which should be the cornerstone of civilization) is not really helping me collect with any degree of speed.
I'm not sure how the dollar amount makes Ticketmaster's actions more acceptable, and I don't think you're using "conspicuous consumption" correctly.
It seems from the code snippets that DataViews are strongly typed. So what happens when you load data with the wrong type? Does JavaScript have "undefined behavior"?
So to clarify one info flow is:

Alice: Coin -> S, Jane: Z, Frank: Pass / Fail

The other is:
Alice: Coin -> S, Bob: Pass / Fail
CTO and co-founder of Gusto here. This has actually been on our mind for many years now, and it's a problem we've seen that hurts paycheck to paycheck employees the most. We've recently taken a first step towards rethinking how payroll should be for a modern workforce, and launched a pilot for a new product called Flexible Pay (https://gusto.com/flexible-pay).

Flexible Pay enables employees to cash out unpaid earned wages, without any changes to how payroll runs. Happy to answer any questions about it. Also, if this is a space you're passionate about, we're actively hiring engineers for that team!
Even something like the Halting Problem does not rule out as much as people impute it to. It just proves you can't write a program that can analyze all programs, but doesn't mean you can't analyze some programs. However I disagree with your concluding sentence - the whole point of a proof is that we are sure of it now, there is no way around. I would instead phrase it as, we may in the future find that the things we're interested in doing need not run into this barrier, because we refine the notion of what we actually want to accomplish.
Utilizing custom search engines, I have a full post about it on my blog here: https://zekehernandez.com/post/omnibox/

EDIT: I just realized you had already included that in your list. I would still encourage reading what I put, because there may be some fun uses you may have not thought of before.
Be careful when considering the market share of these vendors based on anecdotal SaaS experience. A large portion of their revenue comes from their enterprise editions which are hosted in-house. We're seeing significant growth by GitLab in this area with our enterprise clients.
Is it just me or is the light-blue link color very hard to read against a white background?