skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If you're an employee (no equity), be assured your employers don't care about you when the money starts to dry up

Plot twist: they don’t care about anyone holding mere common stock. That’s why “preferred stock” became a thing.
Euler identity looks very bizarre if you don’t understand the proof. Why should exponentiation, the imaginary unit and pi be related?

In mathematics there’s absolutely no place for judging the bizarreness of statements, either they are right or wrong, and of course such a judgement cannot be made by someone who admittedly doesn’t have the necessary background.

As I already said, often in the Academia saying that a result is bizarre is a not-so-subtle way of implying something is wrong by appealing to authority.
Check out the truth behind Instagram's post resharing rumor
Most likely a friend who is also a HN user. But who knows — he is calling for people to meet up after all.
Actor model is even worse, you have no gerentee of a response or error status
There are some very cute videos of some of the "kids helping" research:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-eU5xZW7cU
There aren't that many ways you can mess up a message queue.
14-30month old want to help, but are not useful. You doing it alone goes much faster then you doing it with kid. Also, they loose attention quick and change activity. 3 years old wI'll pick apples and will loose attention in 10 minutes or sooner. So you can't really use them.

They also loose natural interest in activity (cleaning) pretty much when they learned it enough to be useful. It is interesting as long as it is challenge I guess.

Kids learn simple activities this way, but they won't learn complicated ones. That is why all larger civilizations had tutors or schools for those expected to do non-simple work (read not poor).
> I suspect by now most Washington/New York based journalists hate his guts.

Not so - he is a regular guest on Fox News.

He's become very partisan over the years, and you can guess the slant based on the media where he chooses to appear.

I wouldn't say he is so much pro-Republican as anti-Democrat but it's getting really hard to say. Pro-Russian and pro-Republican politics have gotten all mixed up together since 2016.

I wouldn't say he is outwardly pro-trump, but he certainly doesn't seem to criticize him to anywhere near the extent he lavishes on the Democrats. Nor does he seem to be particularly concerned with criticizing American foreign policy now that Republicans are in the drivers' seat, which was his fig-leaf back in the early teens.

And in fact, he spends most of his time justifying the exact same types of behavior from the Russians. So much for "questioning the politics of the status quo and the corruption of empires".

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
the HN crowd, and that is being both very wrong and very appealing at the same time

I suppose like Paul Krugman is to the economics crowd
It's not?
I actually am mostly in agreement with you, I'm just explaining the perspective of the people who _hate_ him.

The New Yorker article is actually very interesting and pretty generous towards Glenn.
You can't have an an infinitely long key. Eventually the decripting process slows everything down to nothing.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_X._Cohen is actually David S. Cohen but the name was already taken.
And yet in that same time they managed to introduce successful innovations such as Rust, and made Firefox enormously faster.
Also, map images pulled from facebook to the bodies of pornstars. The creepiness and invasion of ... personal image(?) this enables is horrifying.
A quantum computer with threatinging amounts of qubits could already exist as a secret military project today.
Just to be clear, do you understand what it means to say that the incarceration rate is six times higher in the US?
Aren't large impressive numbers exactly what we expect at the peak?
Probably much simpler to get a lookalike, and that's been possible for a long time.
I never said that there was a contradiction. I simply said that theory is suggesting a reality at odds with my experience. That does not mean it is a contradiction. It means that my experience is not a faithful representation of reality.

And that's fine, but the idea that this is simpler than a theory which says my experience is a reasonable reflection of reality, is not. Occam's razor is not about number of equations, it is about what is simplest. I experience a single "me". A theory which supports that experience directly and obviously is simpler than a theory which does not.

This is particularly true when the "extra" equations are simple and obviously a part of the other equations.
Regular German army was part of ethnic cleansing and committed a lot of atrocities. It was not just camps, it was also random violence against citizens.

They did not missed on purpose. They burned whole villages.

You did not needed to be on the frontline to be killed by them, anywhere in occupied territory was enough.
PgAdmin recently became an in-browser tool, and is much improved - in particular, it no longer uses GBs of memory and 90% of my CPU!
Am I crazy for loving R as a general-purpose high-level language?
Yeah, three days seems a reasonable time to wait before having another go after using the first nuclear bomb offensively in the history of mankind.

Stupid Japanese for not surrendering immediately...
> If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

So the anti-war, anti-domestic spying, gay progressive duck is a conservative Trump-lover?

What ducks are you looking at?
This is the proof that war really brings out the worst or the best in people. Unfortunately most of the time it is the worst.
I encountered the same limitations as you while implementing partitioning a few months ago and it's possible to use ON CONFLICT if the unique index is set on the partitioned table.

So after initialising a new partition, I also create a unique index attached to that partition directly instead of the parent table.
Is that really true? Postgres is great, but it doesn't cater for _all_ use cases. For example, horizontal scalability is -- understandably for an ACID RDBMS -- not as trivial as it is for some document stores.
That’s called the ‘money multiplier model’, it’s an incorrect model that doesn’t actually describe how any modern bank works. It’s basically a myth at this point.

I’m not confusing anything. Believe it or not, banks actually have to follow double entry accounting rules, and follow regulations about capital adequacy. Most countries don’t even have a reserve requirement, deposits generally don’t factor into lending at all.
Xiaomi Offers a Phone, Laptop, Mi Band 3, BT Headset for the Price of an iPhone
A Programming Language Underdog
A company that needs to be protected from the market to be successful in this very same market, isn't this a fallacy?

Trying to create a startup that can't at least compete with the existing solutions isn't a very good business strategy in my opinion.

That's what academia is for. Research that is still too far away from being profitable but that has it's merits in the long run.
> They learn what to do and how to do it with very, very little in the way of explicit instruction [..]

> [..] both teaching and learning are unnatural behaviour that absolutely have to be taught.

Something isn't right.
Being neither an experienced drug user nor American, I misread that similarly (Department of Motor Transport?) before remembering that DMT is a drug because I saw it in the title of a documentary on Netflix.

I don't know if my life has just been too sheltered, or not sheltered enough, because I wouldn't even know where to begin if I wanted to buy anything not available over the counter.
> For example, most modern processors lack the ability to cleanly express the memory model found in Multics, with fine-grained sharing and transparent virtualized access to memory-mapped I/O devices.
As a separate point, I've heard some complain that access to talent is more difficult for tech companies than access to capital. Raleigh-Durham has the second highest number of CS PhDs(1)

(1)https://www.citylab.com/life/2015/12/where-us-brainpower-ten...
You say 'pretty obvious artifacts' but that is because you have some clue about the process and know what you are looking for and are interested enough to look.

I tried pointing out to some friends some really bad artifacts in a video we watched, and they just could not grasp it. They couldn't see what I was seeing as it didn't look out of place to them. It isn't for lack of intelligence, they just didn't care enough to understand. That pretty much describes vast swathes of the population.

You show a video using the above technique to anyone with strongly held political/ideologic beliefs and an inclination to accept 'alternative facts' over actual facts and videos using these techniques will be like a wildfire and almost impossible to refute!
> Galileo was friends with the pope, but then called him an idiot in one of his books (named a character "the idiot" that used the Pope's arguments). That is why he got imprisoned.

No. That would be just blaming the victim.

1) The character was named "Simplicio" as "simple", but it didn't really represent the pope:

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogue_Concerning_the_Two_Ch...

"Simplicio is modeled on two contemporary conservative philosophers, Lodovico delle Colombe (1565–1616?), Galileo's opponent, and Cesare Cremonini"

2) Being friend with the Pope earlier just protected him from Inquisition between 1616 and 1632. But even as Galileo was in better relations he was already in danger. In 1632 the trial depended on the statement that Galileo was already "ordered" in 1616, that is, 16 years earlier:

"... to abandon completely... the opinion that the sun stands still at the center of the world and the earth moves, and henceforth not to hold, teach, or defend it in any way whatever, either orally or in writing"

So once Galileo lost the support at the highest level the Church did what it did.

I don't understand why there are even today so much people trying to defend the Catholic Church of these times. The facts are plain and clear. To compare with more modern times, the leader on Nazi Germany also intervened to protect one Jew from Holocaust (Ernest Hess) but it doesn't make any argument that Nazism or the "Leader" were otherwise not mass killing Jews by a clear policy. Or that those who were killed somehow caused it themselves by lacking social skills.
Basic security precautions for non-profits and journalists (2017)
"we" sadly means all of humanity. This is a problem of government forces in general:

Here's the other side in that same war doing it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_at_Hu%E1%BA%BF

Here's UN forces: https://www.apnews.com/69e56ab46cab400f9f4b3753bd79c930

The Dutch army: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rawagede_massacre

Saudi forces: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/a-saudi-coal...

The French army: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Bab_El_Oued

Japan: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731
Interesting, I wonder if Vim is able to use this protocol as well.
I don't know anything about Alex Jones and never listen to his shows. But this is the second time now I've investigated an apparently absurd statement from him and discovered it's being selectively quoted to make him look bad.

The page you link to has a clip of the audio in question:

https://soundcloud.com/rightwingwatch/jones-hillary-personal...

Let me complete the rest of what he says:

"Am I talking about [snip some reference to a devil worshipping story], oh no, I don't mean that, I'm not talking about that, I mean 200,000+ dead Christians, with her operation with Syria, and her operation in Libya, and not let the Christians get out, and directing Al Queda and ISIS, who target and murder children and put them through sex slavery, and throw Catholic priests off cliffs, and kill people en-masse, and murder gays, and everything else you can imagine, because they don't like peaceful people."

Obviously Alex Jones is very far from being a precise user of language. Clinton has not "personally murdered" anyone. That accusation on its own is clearly absurd, but put in context as a reference to her support for various wars in the Middle East it merely becomes the sort of dumb overblown rhetoric that you tend to find at the political extremes. Likewise for the claim she directed ISIS. Clinton was/still is a supporter of the various militant groups that are allied against both Assad and ISIS, although from what I've read there wasn't that much between these groups and ISIS religiously or behaviourally. So his grip on the situation in Syria is also pretty bad.

But this is hardly unique to Alex Jones. For example here's an article that claims "For profit, Tony Blair murdered over a million humans in Iraq and Afghanistan":

https://www.dailysquib.co.uk/world/26825-the-evil-of-tony-bl...

The author of that article, Louis Cypher, is a nobody. But if I had claimed Louis Cypher said "Tony Blair murdered over a million humans" and omitted the rest he'd obviously sound totally crazy. Making someone look bad by deleting parts of what they say is just that easy.

Anyway, I have to admit, this is apparently becoming some sort of pattern - I read someone explaining on Hacker News why Alex Jones must obviously be suppressed and crushed by providing some idiotic sounding quote, I spend about 30 seconds finding the source of the quote and then I discover his words have been maliciously chopped up in order to manipulate me. I don't like this.
This might actually be one of those edge cases where commercial is better, but the government's secret version is by far the best.
There are tons of tools like phpMyAdmin for Postgres.
I'm not entirely sure, but it would be interesting to read this bug report from mozilla as some what of a follow on for anyone trying to answer this: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53880
"the default is: it belongs to you and you choose to exclusively publish your work on that website. Just because there's no license info doesn't mean it's public domain. You have the right to cite the content properly (meaning attribution) as part of anther work under fair use."

Interesting, thanks. (I presume there is jurisprudence to substantiate this statement)

If true, it opens up a way to question fair-use: Suppose Apple now properly cites JGuitar.com as the source, and otherwise continues its implementation unchanged, would that be fair-use? Hmmm.
Actually, that is pretty much exactly how it works. Banknotes (i.e. cash), are explicitly IOUs from a bank. Usually, it is a central bank, such as the Bank of England, but sometimes, it could be another bank. There are three retail banks in Scotland that are authorised to issue banknotes:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banknotes_of_Scotland
I think this ignores the historical context. The US had air control and been bombing the mainland relentlessly for a while. The firebombing of Tokyo had already caused bigger loss of life than the Hiroshima bomb did. So it was clear to both parties that the US did have the destructive capability and were willing to use it. This did not cause the Japanese to surrender. Why would it have made any difference to "demonstrate" the bomb, if actually bombing the capital and killing 100000 did not have that effect?

Even after the second bomb, just before announcing the surrender, there was an attempted coup d'etat by high ranking officers to prevent the surrender. So its not like surrender was a given after seeing a nuclear bomb.

It is only in retrospect it seems obvious that the nuclear bomb would lead to surrender. Even taking about "the decision to drop the bomb" as it was some unique moral dilemma is kind of anachronistic. Of course they were going to drop the bomb, just like they used any other weapon at their disposal.
> To be clear, what are you trying to convince me of? The target keeps moving. Are you trying to convince me that a blockchain is needed instead of Git for a currency like Bitcoin? In that case I agree. In fact I conjecture that blockchains are only useful for cryptocurrency. Or, are you trying to convince me that a blockchain is useful for businesses for something like “the supply chain” or whatever, without any cryptocurrency? If so, then I disagree.

I just went on explaining why you want to use a blockchain (private or not) instead of git. It's a broad question so you'll get a broad answer. This is the only thing I went into:

> Exercise for the blockchain advocates: explain as simply as possible why a “private blockchain” is better than Git.

I haven't talked about anything else. If you want to know what people think about using blockchains for A and B, you should ask that instead. My target hasn't moved at all.

> try to explain to me as simply as possible how a blockchain with “proof of authority” is better to Git with signed commits.

I specifically explained where an append-only merkle tree doesn't cut it in the comment you just replied to (my previous one). Note that git is an append-only merkle tree. You are more than welcome to go into my points.

> It’s not particularly novel, and replicating the database across all nodes of the network and constantly engaging on a consensus protocol to agree on the state of the network while all peers are trusted anyway with proof of authority seems quite useless.

If all peers are completely trusted you are 100% correct, if you trust everyone completely you don't need a blockchain. However in the real world trust isn't binary. If a bunch of banks KYC each other and go into a blockchain consortium, they do this specifically because they don't trust each other enough. Else they would have gone with a straight forward solution like git a decade ago.
They talk so much about Material Guidelines. If only Google themselves followed them, https://grumpy.website/post/0QcZsPBJl
Again, that’s just a popular misconception. The document I linked to before from the Bank of England [1] is all about how what you describe, while commonly believed, is not how modern, real world banks work.

1. https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/quarterly-bulletin/2014/q1/m...
Sure, of course QUEL still worked... but Postgres was one of the last databases to use QUEL. It was pretty clear SQL won even when Postgre was just getting started (mid-80s). The Ingres project (that developed QUEL) ended by the time Postgres started (obviously, since the name is Postgres = Post Ingres). Ingres influenced Sybase, which switched to SQL in the late 80s. Ingres Corp even switched to SQL in the late 80s. What other databases using QUEL existed in the mid-90s?

POSTQUEL was definitely the primary interface to postgres. The navigational interface was an early Postgres feature. See page 3 and page 10 ("fast path") of Stonebraker's 1990 paper on the implementation of postgres: http://db.cs.berkeley.edu/papers/ERL-M90-34.pdf
Oh, well, if he's gay then it's cool. /s

Poltics makes for strange bedfellows. The enemy of my enemy can easily become my friend. There is a certain segment of the left that seamlessly transitioned from criticizing Democrats and American foreign policy into cheering Russian propagandizing and backing Russian foreign policy goals ("as a counterweight to American power" or similar). Greenwald is one of them.

If his critical of the power of empire, now would be a good time to start criticizing the other side too. Democrats haven't held power for almost 2 years now and spending all his breath criticizing them isn't really helpful. It is, however, revealing about his agenda.

Again, I don't think he was always like this. He used to be doing legitimate journalism, deep dives into American abuses of power that nobody else was doing. It was good work, regardless of whether the expose happened under a Democratic administration.

That journalism is still happening, while Greenwald is off doing Fox News segments on how bad Democrats are. He's just not involved in it.

His decline from investigative journalist into partisan shill is very, very blatant. And I do feel from him, there is no question the media gave him a very rough go after Showden. But it doesn't excuse his "activism" since 2016. One good expose doesn't beatify everything you do for the rest of your life.

I think it's probably mostly him burying his head in the sand about the consequences of his activism. I don't think he consciously wants to trade American empire for Russian empire, he just can't get past the whole "enemy of my enemy is my friend" thing, or viewing Russia as a counterbalance to American power, however you want to put it.

I hope he gets back on the horse, but right now he's definitely kinda broke-brained. C'mon, the guy spends his time on his farm caring for the 40 dogs he's rescued, nobody does that who's not at least a little broke-brained. I wish him a speedy recovery (dogs help with that!), but right now you really shouldn't be taking him overly seriously.
What an epic collection! Isn't this output from one person something of a record?
If you are working in an immutable context, meaning that you are building immutable data structures to contain immutable values, there are many useful structures that you can use.

For instance, the "single linked list" or simply "list" has constant-time push and pop operations. Here such a list of 3 elements (NIL is a special value that says "no more list")

L = (((v1, (v2, (v3, NIL)))

To add v0 in front, you just create a new "cell" that reuses the old list (which remains valid by itself) as the "tail" of the new list:

L2 = (v0, L)

L2 = (v0, (((v1, (v2, (v3, NIL))))

Depending on your requirements, there are more complicated and smarter data structures that can make the operations you care about either constant, or at most logarithmic.

I recommend this free book to learn more and get better at Computer Science in general: https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/sicp/full-text/...
The history of ODroid
Hi,

Can someone provide a link that describes
the history of the ODroid ARM based development platform.

From what I've gleaned so far, it was launched in 2010 per ARM's website

and there is a forum for it's development at droid.com

but I cant figure out who actually came up with the idea and who ran with it.
Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal covered this:

https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/the-fundamental-equation
What you seek is actually something a bit different.

It is the observation that all software is built of 3 layers -

Inbound IO, what you call imperative shell
Business logic core, what you call functional core
Outbound IO, what you call again imperative shell.

The problem with the terms in functional programming is that when they say side effects, in most cases they mean IO.

The functional core does not have to be functional for you to get the benefits - easy testing, easy to reason about, easy to develop. In fact, in some cases, functional programing is the wrong tool while having a business logic core that is separated from IO is still a very valid architecture.
It depends on what is the goal. To take advantage of multicore for computations one can use explicitly parallel functional algorithms. To improve response under load one can do load balancing within application and schedule at the very top (shell level) several independent functional pipelines.
What is the name of the aforementioned acquired Startup?
That's already happened. Search for deep fakes. We already have face substitution in videos which is working surprisingly well sometimes.

There's been r/deepfakes where around 30% of the content was porn with swapped faces. It was banned though.
Find cool shortcuts and share shortcuts with the community
Not really - Korea protected Samsung et al for years before they were capable of competing globally.