skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> But, the point I was making was that the class definitions for bg color can be contained within a single file in your application.

But that doesn't matter because it's not an abstraction. If you have 10 HTML files and 1 CSS file, you can make a class called "warning" and have it be a background color red you've simplified those HTML files because you have less style information in the HTML.

But if you are using classes like "bg-red" or "pt-10" then you're not actually reducing the style content of your 10 HTML files. You've just renamed a style to a class. Sure you've reduced some possibilities but you've actually made the situation worse because now you have 11 files with style information. You've added new names for basic styles which adds even more complexity.

If you take that idea of reducing style possibilities to the logic extreme then you wouldn't be using classes like "bg-red" and "pt-10" anyway. You'd just do what everyone already does with CSS and abstract your styles appropriately.
See my OP: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18094991

"Barring some major unforeseen revolution in our understanding of physics..."
I'm not sure either but it looks something to do with domain authority as the pages are hosted on amazon s3 and the domain is related to amazon maybe it makes Googlebot think the pages are affiliated to amazon so it ranks them higher (just like articles on wikipedia.org rank higher with less effort). This is all conjecture though because I'm not an expert so maybe somebody can correct me or add to it.
> As with conveyancing or transfer fees, a downpayment can be negotiated into a mortgage loan

Sure, but it drives up the mortgage cost (both because the principal is higher and because interest rates are higher with lower downpayment), so the rent being higher than the actual landlord's mortgage doesn't mean that it is higher than your mortgage for an equivalent property purchased at the same time.

> Extra expenses should remain with the owner, since it is their asset.

Whethe it should or not, those costs can be a reason to prefer renting over ownership even with a slight premium of rent over mortgage cost.
Human beings with their millennia of evolution still have quite the edge over any robot ;)

But launching a human is still more expensive than launching several robots.

Right now, launching humans is getting cheaper every year.
Space missions are projected to become more profitable over time as people start space mining and later space fabrication.

So I agree with you that launching robots right now has a higher ROI than launching robots.

I think we also agree there's a crossover point.

Where I think we disagree on is when that crossover point might. You say 100 years; I think with current trends it could be under 50 years, maybe under 25 years.

Why do you think it'll take 100 years to hit crossover?
NASA Captures Polluted Carolina Rivers Spilling into the Ocean After Florence
Personally, if I am checking out and I see a place for a coupon code and I can't find one, I feel like I'm overpaying. It usually wouldnt save me more than a couple of bucks but if it's something I was on the fence about buying anyway it can make me abandon my cart.
The amazon domain is the 'how'.
But it is aided by tail-call optimization. Suppose you have a function as follows:

int foo(int x) {
if (test(x)) return C;
return evaluate(x) + foo(adjust(x));
}

I can turn that function into:

int foo(int x) {
int accum = C;
for ( ; !test(x); x = adjust(x)) {
accum += evaluate(x);
}
return accum;
}

In the case of fibonacci, that equates to:

int fib(int x) {
int accum = 1;
for (; x > 1; x -= 2) {
accum += fib(x - 1);
}
return accum;
}

We still turned the recursive call (or one of them, at least), into a while loop.

And this idiom is recognized by both gcc and llvm. In fact. llvm has a test that specifically makes sure fib is transformed as thus: https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/blob/30fa583f8430bfc7935...
Yes, but you must acknowledge having a seat manufacturing company design and manufacture the seats probably would have resulted in a better, cheaper seat that was available sooner and with less trouble... after all, it's the only thing the seat manufacturer does as a business.

(I also don't believe the forces were so great that no seat could be bought or made by another company... some of the Tesla models have good performance... but they aren't alone in that arena)

The seat is a flagship example of NIH Syndrome - the same syndrome that has led to bloated costs, reduced profitability and poor quality and craftsmanship of Tesla vehicles. Tesla is figuring out how to do things for the first time - solving problems that have already been solved, and solved well by others. Looking towards the heavy-weights in the field and learning a few things could go a long way...

Also, they've had a lot of executive turnover... we've all heard the stories about what it's like to work for Mr. Musk...
A nearby post repeats the claim as if it were true nationwide, claiming that those who weren't given time off had to be supplied an absentee ballot. On its face it doesn't make sense unless we're talking about state employees, and we're not talking about state employees.
EDIT copyedit
any reason why you guys are on the front page of hn every single day?
It's not impossible to do good, that's not what I'm claiming at all, and that's why the last line is there.

I'm pretty sure you can do good even within facebook, doing your utmost to keep the company accountable (from my experience in another big corp, we don't see 1% of what's happening inside it, and how many people are facepalming - and we'll never know if many things were just humans being stupid or actual calculated decisions).
You can also keep your guard up from outside and force facebook to fix itself (obviously, as much as its business allows) from outside, for example pushing it to hire more moderators and get as better so to prevent things like myanmar from happening again.

What I'm saying is that it's impossible (and in my opinion, pointless) to claim moral superiority and to accuse people of being morally bankrupt because they work for corp X.
Disumbrationism, a Hoax Art Movement of the 1920s
What exactly would be "copernican" about it? Also 3 of the 4 "copernican" revolutions outlined have nothing to do with copernics. Even copernicus's "revolution" was just a rehash of ancient greek idea of heliocentrism ( aristarchus of samos ).
Billions of years is a gross understatement.
> I'm not saying they should never be hired, I'm saying that you cannot discount human bias, and unfortunately a lot of the time the person working at the bank will toss that resume.

It sounded more like you were advocating for them not being hired. "Humans have biases" could be read as referring to the applicant or the employer. I think many are reading it as referring to the former, when you intended the latter.

> That is just the reality we live in.

That is the culture we live in. There is a lot of behavior we take for granted as inherent when it's really learned. Look at Germany and Japan for example to see perspectives on working and employment that don't align with ours. If different countries can have different cultures, can't we strive to improve our culture instead of simply giving up because "That is just the reality we live in"?
And ? The efficiency of an electric car is much higher than a gasoline car.

So please, stop spreading bullshit
The concept of domain authority has been proven, time and time again, that domain authority just doesn't exist. Here's a recent explanation: https://www.searchenginejournal.com/domain-authority/246515/
Redpoint invests in Gremlin
> DTA uses a cost-base search, which means it needs to estimate the costs using some indexes it hasn’t actually built yet. The “what-if” API is used to simulate such hypothetical indexes.

Reminds me of https://github.com/ankane/dexter with https://github.com/HypoPG/hypopg.
We need to run elections through something like the finance system, digital, data always present and researchable, always able to be looked up that your vote was counted and correct, and fraud day one can be reversed as well as anomalies.

Finance systems expect fraud, and systems in place to detect and revert it. Voting has none of those protections.

The problem is so many voting systems, so many ways to fix the vote, recounts are impossible to trust.

People trust their money in their accounts and they trust that the financial system and software can track that. We need to move to something like that pronto with receipts, digital voting, ability to check your vote, data tracking, ability for researchers to get access to it, fraud protection and more.
We had that experience with Spring, which was pretty painless. One FTE, 3 weeks, ~1/2 mio LOC, and included a Java major version bump.
> I am genuinely curious about the passion of anti C++ commenters - could you comment on your journey towards your current antipathy towards C++? Did you use it and get burnt? What did you use it for? What were the short comings? How long did you use it for? When did you use it (ie which C++ standard version)?

I don't usually write negative comments about C++ but I sure sympathize with them.

I write C++ at my day job (and have for years). My team's codebase is in its teenage years. It's code-reviewed and has decent test coverage, but in many cases the author doesn't know C++ as well as the reviewer, and the reviewer is rushed / trying to not be a huge bottleneck, so stuff slips through. New code gets written to mostly C++11 standards (soon, mostly C++17) and the newest company practices. Old code...still exists...and the new code still has to use it. We've modernized some pieces but not as much as we'd like. Company-wide people do a pretty good job of modernizing a lot of the libraries we use, but my team hasn't kept up as well for various reasons.

I hate memory errors. They're super hard to track down. I've spent significant time doing so. Thank god for ASAN and TSAN at least.

I also don't like crashes in general; my service has to be quite reliable (some operations are critical to big parts of the company and have a 99.9995% success within a certain deadline). And fast, so I can't just rewrite it in Java or Go.

A few examples of the sort of foot-guns C++ has:

* Data races: no equivalent of Rust's Send+Sync auto traits.

* string_view/reference/pointer outliving their backing memory: no lifetime annotations. Even the new proposal for them is very incomplete.

* std::optional and equivalents dereferenced incorrectly: no pattern-matching syntax, the decision for the most obvious way to deference (operator*) to be undefined behavior instead of a crash.

I wish the whole thing were written in Rust. Then the parts I have to pay super close attention to would all say "unsafe" in them. That covers memory safety (including data races). I'd also know to pay pretty close attention to "expect" and "unwrap", which cover most (not all) panics. Of course, more mundane logic errors can exist in any language, but freedom from those problems would be a huge relief.
Dancing with the devil. Violence in Rio's favelas
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt1379064/plotsummary?ref_=m_tt_ov_...
"defrydrated" is the commonly used term.
I would argue that it depends on the Cryptocurrency you are looking at. While yes, Bitcoin has almost no privacy when it comes to watching a transaction take place from Address A to Address B, if you look into the white paper of Monero [0] or ZCash [1], you will find that they are almost impossible to trace from a technical perspective. They have essentially solved this problem and you can achieve full privacy and anonymity.

If Cryptocurrency takes off and society accepts it enough to take it as a ordinary medium of exchange, I would imagine it would almost be impossible to prevent people from routing a subset of their transactions through privacy coins.

[0] https://lab.getmonero.org/pubs/MRL-0001.pdf

[1] http://zerocash-project.org/media/pdf/zerocash-extended-2014...
yeah, I've also used my personal gmail account, Really glad that one more platform showed up.
Yeah, if they actually wanted to censor something they would do it silently, by not showing it in people's news feeds. Proving such practice exists would probably be near impossible without having access to the source code or core usage statistics.
My employer, for example, probably can't live with the single thread perf regression that the combination of reduced IPC and steeper remote memory latency causes. We would love to pay less for CPUs, but they aren't the dominant cost in our platform (TBs of flash costs $$$$$) so the savings is marginal. (I don't really want to name my employer here, though.)
Honestly, either is fine. It depends on your learning style and priorities. If you want to jump quickly to getting state of the art results with rich datasets like images and natural language text, then start with the deep learning course. If you want to get a deeper understanding of feature engineering, model interpretation, and (especially) techniques for tabular data, start with the machine learning course.

Also, the machine learning course was originally the initial introduction for a masters program, so it is a little less intensive and fast moving. But it also assumes a little more math background in parts, since everyone in the program already was pretty familiar with linear algebra, probability, and statistics.

In the end, the two courses go together pretty well, so I don't think it matters too much what order you do them in.
The main argument made, concerning the second law of thermodynamics can explain why we age but I am not sure it proves that aging is incurable. The second law of thermodynamics says that entropy increases in closed systems. A human is not a closed system. The second law does not prevent a conceptual procedure where, through an operation/cure we decrease the entropy of a patient/human. Of necessity that procedure would produce a bigger increase of entropy in the environment with which the patient/human interacts, but that's not a problem.

As an example of the above imagine a fetus 2 weeks old and a fetus 20 weeks old. The is much more order in the 20 week fetus, therefore less entropy. It's also easy to realise that the fetus is not a closed system since it interacts heavily with it's mother.
Which means that it is exactly as meaningful as the event horizon of a black hole. The last point where the external observer (ie us) can see what happens. But in a different coordinate system, not particularly special at all.
Red Spark is Hiring a Lead Data Scientist / Machine Learning Engineer (Phila.)
Same incentive as everywhere. They get paid. ;-)

Even the most automated of robotic factories on earth still have a number of humans in an oversight role, where they make themselves quite useful.

The same would be true of any space industry. People would be hired on for a tour in space, and they'd be paid sufficient salary to make it worth their while.
> Use of the platform is entirely voluntary

No it's not. Do you know Facebook creates shadow profiles of you by tracking your online activities?

Even if you discount that, what about when all your friends use Facebook? Then you are going to be forced into a situation where you either use Facebook or stay disconnected from you friends.
That's a reasonable question to ask.

I think in general, there are lots of reasons to like a language outside of its runtime performance.

I love working with Go and Rust due to their performance. Any I work every day in C#, which ends up nice and quick, too.

But I still love Ruby due to its expressiveness, and the way it works just seems to align with the way I think. But that's poetically because I used Smalltalk in the past and I like the bits of it that Ruby borrowed. :)

To answer to original question, though. I'd say it's irrational to hate languages that are slower than necessary because it's irrational to hate a programming language at all. No matter what language it is, it's just a bunch of words on a screen. Use the ones you like and don't waste any brain cycles thinking about the ones you don't.

Unless you're locked in a cube farm and forced to write Cobol at gunpoint all day. Hate might be rational then.
PoWA, the PostgreSQL Workload Analyzer
Do you have more information on that claim? It seems difficult to believe given the plethora of VC-funded companies selling products below cost in order to grow market share.
Skipping the "UX Pro" creds, I trust that the rest of your post is correct: Google has well-paid UX engineers from the best places.

That's precisely what I find scary about those UX changes: they to run counter-current of everything I value in UX (clean and compact vs. bloated and spread out).
The "implicit opt-out" is noImplicitAny[1]. That code of yours won't compile with this opt-out enabled. Edit: the "dynamic opt-in" is `any` (and is `dynamic` in C#).

[1]: https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/compiler-option...
Where can I learn more about the monero nsa mining botnet?
Totally agree. I like the old gmail UI. It's more cleaner and easier to navigate.

The new gmail UI is so cluttered. Full of unnecessary stuff. Hope they bring back the option to revert back to classic UI. Mine is missing already.
It all depends on having a source of low-entropy energy. For Earth that would be sunlight. Other ingredients are needed, naturally, namely: an environment full of the things that are needed to turn low-entropy sunlight into local low-entropy systems that externalize their entropy production (life). First we have photosynthetic, and then we have all the lifeforms that depend on them. (Yes, there's also chemosynthetic lifeforms that use other a different path to locally reducing entropy.)
Wow, I didn't even like Stardew Valley very much, but there is a level of polish to that game that is unbelievable for a single person to have accomplished.
On one hand pre-money SAFEs diluting pre-money SAFEs is helpful to founders. On the other hand it makes it impossible to calculate dilution. As a result, a large number of companies are raising money without understanding their ownership. Once they get to Series A they get a rude awakening when they end up owning less than 50% of their company. By moving to post-money SAFEs every founder will have a clear understanding of their cap table which will allow them to better plan for future funding rounds. The negative effect that you describe can easily be accounted for by slightly increasing the cap at which you raise the SAFE. Needless to say, we are both trying to accomplish the same goal: founders raising money at financial terms that won't result in over-dilution.
> still don't understand why people bother with template metaprogramming

Speed.
>Gold is not controlled by a government, but it's a poor currency given its physical characteristics, although it has been used as a common currency in the past.

It still is used as a currency, particularly in Islamic parts of the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_gold_dinar
I imagine you just "replay" the issued/signed JWT to Facebook, so you can act like that user.
Man this post made me angry.

Being human is a morally brankrupt position. Accumulating wealth is a morally brankrupt pastime.

If you want to be a morally pure human, starve yourself -- that's the only way.
I wouldn't limit that 80% to the technology industry. Capitalism isn't optimized for human or societal welfare, it's optimized for resource extraction and the production of disposable goods.
Why? That would not make sense with the rest of the sentence ("not biology" what?)
> A whole world currency that is potentially immune to inflation and government manipulation.

There are lots of ways that powerful governments can still put their thumb on the scale. US taxes still need to be paid with US dollars, and they can squeeze / regulate the exchanges, or influence, for example, the devs working on bitcoin.

Also, the design of bitcoin is inherently deflationary, which isn't inflation, but has its own set of problems. Saying that nobody is going to have the power to fix those problems isn't a huge selling point.

> No current conversion fees.

Well, I guess if everyone in the world settled on a single cryptocurrency. But that's also true of any other currency in the same situation.

> The ability to send funds to anyone with no middle man and no fee (besides the miners).

What is the importance of not having a middleman? Is it so that you can avoid regulations/fees that you'd otherwise be subject to? To me, this seems like the entire value proposition of cryptocurrency.

> Also the removal of business and corporate surveillance.

This is a good point.
Under the same argument made in the article, a room can never be tidied. It can only become messier and messier. And yet, somehow, my house is set right every other Friday after the cleaning people come through.

To me, it seems obvious that the second law is at most a contributory factor. The real reason we age is that indefinite longevity is energy-intensive and not favorable for the propagation of the information patterns in our genes. Our genes have optimized for propagation, because information patterns that didn't have died out or been dominated. Anything else, including whether you live a day beyond the minimum required to help your children propagate their genes, is ancillary.

Here's a thought experiment. Imagine you created a niche where the minimum reproductive age were gradually raised by artificial means. I suspect that in such a niche, you'd begin to see adaptations that would lead to longer lifespans. If you ran the experiment long enough on a large enough population, I'd bet natural selection would figure out how to get the average lifespan well above its current level. We could try it on some small animals [ed: not bacteria, since they do not reproduce sexually and it would be infeasible] to figure out if this is true, but it's hard for me to imagine it isn't. (How much human suffering would be involved, and whether we'd even recognize the result of this process as human, is also beside the point!)
>Employee at Google says domain authority doesn't exist.

I'm sure they wish we'd forget PageRank ever existed too.
Great answer!.
Something similar happened 8 years ago. https://techcrunch.com/2010/05/05/video-major-facebook-secur...
It's astounding that educated tech journalists think this is malicious. Clearly, this is an algorithm.

Just like as a thought experiment, wouldn't it make more sense to allow the post to go through and then prevent everyone on Facebook from seeing it? Obviously, FB doesn't do that, but wouldn't that be a more sensible approach if they did do that type of thing?
Facebook's goal: Connect all the people

Google's goal: Organize all the information

Amazon's goal: Sell all the merchandise

-----------

Taken at face value, all those companies were/are all trying to make the world a better place in the ways available to them. But when the externalities of those goals affect other people, they will become hated. Everyone has a different opinion of what 'better' means.

Since giant companies are most able to execute their vision of better, they will get most of the hate from people who have a different opinion of better.

Looks to me like its all just a battle for power: People with ideas but lacking implementation and execution, vs Companies with ideas, implementation, execution, AND momentum. Let's not forget all the different forms of government either...
Looking at some of the tweets it seems FB has a mechanism that autoflags article links as spam if "too many people are trying to share" it.

This just makes me wonder exactly how automated that feature is, because surely a non-nominal number of people share current event links all the time about something political, sporting event, natural disaster. I wonder if it happens then, or is this a matter of recency....Streisand (there's got to be a better word for it than that) following the news of those 50million accounts being breached.