skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm not terribly comforted by this. The outcome would still be a disaster on a scale never seen before, and would wreck modern civilization.

It baffles me how the threat of nuclear war has essentially disappeared from the public consciousness. People seem to think that the danger evaporated with the USSR, but it's still there, as likely as it ever was, quite possibly more so now that there are so many more nuclear powers.
One other datapoint - I ported flatbush to C++, and I got a 2.6x speedup on the "Insert 1 million boxes" benchmark. C++ port is at https://github.com/IMQS/flatbush
Forbes becomes the first major publishing company experimenting with blockchain
I’d enroll in this class in an instant if I could.

Fun fact: the instructor, Robert Morris, co-founded YC and was one of the first people to be indicted for a computer crime.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Tappan_Morris
Naming Names, Turks Turn Up Heat on Saudis in Consulate Case
It has worse ergonomics, though. Most obviously, every time you want to access data through an index ‘reference’, you need to name two things: the array and the index. With a pointer you only have to name one thing. Thus, you might have to write `self.widgets[widget].foo` instead of `widget.foo`: not the end of the world, but annoying if you have a lot of references floating around.

Further, even if Rust guarantees memory safety, the approach is still less safe in the broader sense of guaranteeing program correctness. For one thing, if you just use raw integers for your indices, you basically have the equivalent of a C void pointer, a pointer to some unknown type. The compiler doesn’t know what the index is for and can’t catch you if you accidentally index into the wrong array. You can partially solve this by making a newtype wrapper for indices into each type of array, but even that can’t differentiate between multiple arrays of the same type.

Also, if you have a system for ‘freeing’ array indices and reusing those array slots for new data, you run the risk of keeping an index around too long and causing a semantic use-after-free: not as bad as a traditional memory use-after-free, usually, but certainly a source of incorrect and unpredictable behavior. And whereas tools like ASan let you ‘flip a switch’ to catch traditional use-after-frees if they happen in development builds, with arrays you have to add the extra checking manually. (On the other hand, if you do design extra checks, they might be cheap enough to run in production, where ASan is probably not. And yes, I know, when it comes to security, “if they happen in development builds” is quite meager comfort.)

But I’m not saying all this just to be negative. Personally, it’s my hope that someday in the future, Niko and co. will find ways to make the borrow checker more expressive when it comes to parent-child relationships, and in other situations where it currently struggles. If so, it won’t just help with pointers, but with array-based designs as well: it’ll become a more viable approach to have the borrow checker check array indices, by adding lifetimes to those array index newtypes. That would remove all of the aforementioned safety issues, while keeping the performance benefit of arrays – indeed, increasing it, since with the right design you would be able to safely disable the bounds check when indexing.
Looks like the link is broken, I believe you can find a mirror here: https://ccl.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/The%20Trouble...
Inertial guidance can be quite accurate when you only have 30 minutes to build up errors. Land-based missiles know exactly where they're starting from. Submarine-based missiles not so much, but they are given targets which don't need as much accuracy.
These projects suck, because they try to renovate existing system, which is a total failure in o so many ways. Best approach is just to adopt the standard German/Swedish/Italian phonetic spelling just in one shock move. "Dis is ön eksample öf renoveited Inglish spelling foor joor vjuving plesöre".
Sure, all twelve of them. It's a cottage industry, but I think you understood the point I was making.
If X is saying "that story is misleading", X is not saying "that story is flat-out wrong".

The counter-stories I have seen around the Bloomberg story has been "let us parse these press releases to be certain that they say 'yes, this is flat-out wrong, there is no substance to this at all'".

If someone is saying "misleading", that someone is saying that denials as such can't be true.

"True but I'm angry 'cause the spin is so wrong" is actually quite a "head turner", whatever the actual situation.
Lots of people hate on TCL, yet, it is still a scripting language used in routers and in NaviServer, which is used by TU-Wien to teach over 40K people, with Gustaf Neumann spearheading it https://dblp.uni-trier.de/pers/hd/n/Neumann:Gustaf . It is used heavily in many other places as well to do useful work.

And don't forget "expect" which is based on TCL also.
I figured it out, it's because Debian enables PIE and that somehow causes GCC not to be able to satisfy its own rules for allowing inline-assembly to modify %rsp to the value required by this program.
While you're right, I'd like to point out that an employee earning 120k in wages costs an employer a lot more than 120k. Social security tax, Medicare tax, Federal Unemployment Tax Act tax, possibly state unemployment tax, health insurance, and some states have something called workers' compensation insurance. At Google, I'm sure there's also a lot of benefits included that would count towards the cost of each employee.
The other article doesn't comply with wikipedia standards and those changes would be reverted
> Raw pointers—if they're single heap allocations—are also runtime validity-checked

I prefer my runtime validity checking to not come with CVE numbers, the corruption of instances of completely unrelated types, and other such heisenbugs.

> I feel like raw pointers and indices are about the same

On a large codebases with lots of contributors, there's several orders of magnitude of difference - between the number of bounds checked indices that could be "corrupting" your instances of type T (only those used to index arrays of T or things containing them), vs the number of pointers that could be corrupting your instances of type T (basically any pointer in the program whatsoever.)

Frequently with a similar "several orders of magnitude" difference in debug times.

Conceptually similar, practically not.
Is there a production database where I can encode facts and logical policies in prolog style syntax then perform inference via the database?
> Raw pointers—if they're single heap allocations—are also runtime validity-checked, in the sense that violations will (probabilistically) result in a General Protection Fault, given a large address space and ASLR.

Not for off-by-constant-offset errors it won't. Even with address sanitization there's still a significant chance your overflowed offset will correspond with a valid part of some other a array--not really detectable at runtime in C.
Is the 30-Year-Long Styrofoam War Nearing Its End?
Typo in there, the question is - name one widely used collaboration tool that is open sourced specifically in enterprise customers? I’d follow that up with, of the major enterprise collaboration tools, which have support for Linux natively? Teams and others work within Browesers.
a nice side effect - index can now be "compressed" - e.g. just 1 bytes, 2, 4 or more. Such approach comes useful in GC languages too, as you limit the work a GC has to do, going through the roots, checking anything that can be a pointer.
I'd suggest reading The Driver, by Garet Garrett
I was just saying I hadn't experienced it myself nor tested it.

For the rest, I agree. This behavior is unacceptable, on the part of FB.
Personally, I wouldn't mind banning ice-cream trucks. Where I used to live in queens, at about 8:30-9:00PM an ice-cream truck would drive down our street with ear piercingly loud music, and start our kids complaining that they want some after we'd just got them to settle down for the night.
> there is nothing replacing pullups for upper back strength

From a theoretical biomechanical perspective I would agree. My own subjective data, though, suggests that deadlifts cover approximately all of those muscles, and more. Also a barbell and some weights might be cheaper than a pullup bar -- at least if you plan on periodically repairing the door frame the pullup bar attaches to.
I completely agree that nuclear weapons are the major reason there hasn't been a world war since 1945. The world has been remarkably peaceful since then, and that's very much a good thing.

But what is the cost? We've traded frequent massive wars for an ongoing chance of complete catastrophe. What is that chance? If it's one in a million then maybe it's worth it. If it's one in a hundred per year, then we'll have purchased a few decades of peace at the cost of civilization.

Based on the various near misses over the decades, I suspect the actual probability is closer to the latter.

It does seem likely that there's no going back, but we should try really hard to make sure that the chance of catastrophe is as low as possible.
This is the classic static vs dynamic typing question. Suffice to say, I don't think there is sufficient science or anecdata on the issue to really give a solid answer.
Sure, we on the sidelines remember, but do the current crop of cabinet officers and military personnel?
Is there actually an advantage of the new process for those applications? Will any leading-edge company actually choose to use an older process because it performs better for them?
CSE455 – Computer Vision course taught by creator of YOLO algorithm
I think the larger issue here will eventually be that the concept of 'the code is law' breaks down when you need to rely on the actual law and law enforcement to to enforce your 'code law'.
For better or worse, he is not far off although Ponzi scheme is a harsh word. It has become clock work routine for most startups to get some users, get some angel funding, hire, scale, get VC money, pour more money and get more users, ???? , then profit!

Launching a startup used to be something that entrepreneurs loved. And now I see all my acquaintances are either pounding the pavement begging for angel money or dreading the routing morning phone calls from their own startup.

Make Bootstrapping Great Again
What you are observing is basically just the fact that "rich and white" is extremely highly correlated with "well-educated" in this country. The other, related, correlation is extremely unfortunate.

Hence the last paragraph of my parent post, btw.
It seems this is the preferred URL: https://github.com/xoreaxeaxeax/sandsifter - for example the issue tracker is enabled, and has 45 issues, whereas the other URL has the issue tracker disabled.

Can one of the admins fix?
Simplest are carbon credits.
As for the performance aspect, these kinds of simulations (typically using fixed time steps and with per-agent decision-making) are a natural fit for many-core devices. We recently did a survey on that subject [1]. There is a lot of work being done along these lines right now.

Some groups are also trying to target sequential, parallel and, say, GPU execution from the same model specification language, which could actually help with the usability of running such simulations in practice.

[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/1807.01014
Since India is the most racist country in the world many qualified/talented people are leaving it.

https://businesstech.co.za/news/lifestyle/116644/the-most-ra...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2325502/Map-shows-wo...
It's only a political problem if you make it one. Better politics requires less technological innovation, and better technology requires less political innovation.

The political barrier suddenly becomes much less intimidating if an extremely efficient way to such CO2 out of the atmosphere manually was found tomorrow.
It's a form of classism that mostly serves to ensure that it's the rich who get fleeced with wealth management and hedge fund schemes, most of which underperform broad market investment vehicles that have never been cheaper for retail investors.
Well it kind of reminds me of this - back when BASIC had just plain arrays (DIM), one had to do tree structures using indices. Later (with Pascal/C/C++) you would tend to use pointers, but then back in SQL land you would go back to indices (foreign keys?).

So if SQL can deal with it, BASIC too, what would be the issue in Rust? Even in Pascal/C/C++, especially in 64-bit platforms, encoding index maybe the better thing to do, and then in GC collected languages - the less pointers to explore the less work the GC has to do.
Cloning is not always possible (performance reasons, non-cloneable data, etc) and would not necessarily remove lifetime (for example, it could be a struct, defined somewhere else, with a lifetime parameter).
I used to get injured a lot, now never. I swear by mobility exercises[1] -- they constitute the only change of habit I can pin that result on. They are distinct from both stretches and warming up (neither of which seem very necessary to me any more, except to the extent that I "warm up" by starting at a lower weight than what I'm eventually lifting.)

http://www.trainingdimensions.net/Training/ready_made_progs/...
Can't edit or delete at this point, so I'll note that I see this is against the "no snark" rule, and what I wanted to do was link to the c2.com wiki page "JustIsaDangerousWord" - a page that's now offline - about how a sentence gets better if you remove the word "just".

"Prolog is just a brute force search" -> "Prolog is a brute force search"

and then reference the Gary Larson comic ( https://pics.me.me/the-far-side-by-gary-larson-3-23-hey-wait... ) where the cow suddenly realises what they've been eating is /grass/.

All libraries are "just" some code which does something so you don't have to. Even if Prolog is "just a brute force search", well in the same kind of way, regex is "just" a state machine brute-force matching against a string. It's still a useful tool.
It was an intervention in the Libyan civil war by 19 countries. And Gaddafi was killed by Libyan rebels. Blaming Obama as "single handedly" killing Gaddafi is anti-historical, you also left out that the outcome Obama considered to be his biggest regret.

And what nuclear disarmament with Iran? They're already disarmed. All of the highly enriched uranium has been given up. The JCPOA was specifically designed with the expectation of Iran cheating. That unilateral withdrawal is far worse for nuclear non-proliferation going forward. But this is completely consistent with John Bolton who was likewise involved when DPRK withdrew from the NPT. But it's OK, we have a "very stable genius" in office who can only make himself look better by saying everyone else over the past 50 years has done a terrible job, and will never admit he made a mistake.
I'm not sure if this is serious, but I'll risk the miss and say that they addressed this in TNG, saying that humanity evolved past the economies of earlier times.
Nuclear disarmament wasn't the only reason Russia was able to "annex" Crimea. A massive media blitz convinced many of the civilian population that they were being overrun by revolutionists, thugs, immigrants, etc and that only Russia could save them. I believe it's highly likely Russia would have succeeded even if Ukraine had all of their nuclear weapons in hand. Firing even one at Russia would have resulted in the rest of Ukraine being wiped off the map.
Ariana impressed me with their automated testing. Prices are very reasonable too.
> If public money is invested, it should be done based on ROI. If there is no ROI, that’s welfare, and welfare should go to those with the greatest need.

The problem we're currently facing -- on full display in this article -- is the wide-spread delusion that confuses "ROI" with "performance on one extraordinarily poorly designed multiple-choice test from the 70's".
Control Theory: World Heavyweight Championship Fight
We called them offices, complete with walls and doors.

But apparently people were too productive, so that had to come to an end.
Goodness. My memory failed me last night. You're absolutely right.
The Chinese phone giant that beat Apple to Africa
GraphQL is more or less a data description language. It describes queries and mutations. There are JS libraries that take a GraphQL query/mutation, convert it into the spec'd JSON payload, send it to the backend (single endpoint), and map the requested fields back into a JS object to be used. This is super nice when paired with React -- it's hard to overstate how nice it is.

On the backend, there are libraries that process that JSON payload into whatever your framework wants (dicts in Python, for example). From that decoded payload, you have to figure out what to do. If you're using Django and you get something like

{'name': 'Ruth', 'age': 85}

to your 'People' query, you need to ask your ORM for People named Ruth who are 85 years old, and return them. It is essentially exactly like REST API design, with a few important differences:

- You don't have to worry about irrelevant HTTP stuff. What status code is appropriate? What HTTP action? Isn't this URL a little wrong? All irrelevant.

- There is no standard for pagination or ordering. In fairness, REST's answer (do it in query params... just like everything else!) is a little unsatisfying. But REST never made grandiose claims about data description. You go through the whole GraphQL site and it's more or less just an exposition in how great it is to just _describe_ the fields you want to retrieve/change, but nothing about "what if I just want the first 10,000 results?" This is, as you might imagine, an important and common issue.

- There is no (meaningful) standard for errors.

I think it's a step in the right direction from REST. URL-based APIs really just never earn their keep, HTTP actions are too limiting, versioning weirds everything, query params naturally grow to contain/become their own DSLs.
But as far as backend engineering goes, GraphQL really only addresses the problems we didn't really mind (URLs/HTTP actions) anyway. To answer your question directly: the benefit of GraphQL is... 98% realized only by API clients. The backend is still doing everything it used to.
Telling a person they can't own something because they might create too much value, sure seems antithetical to western values of personal freedom.

And why not take your idea further. Only one person per truck? Per acre of farmland? Per airplane? Per computer? Per pencil? Per lathe?

Why shed a tear over lost crappy factory jobs when those people might be better employed fixing the robots, at a higher wage and skill set?
If there's any lesson to be learned from the current administration, it's that "the law" doesn't mean anything without institutions to enforce it.

In this case, if the President spins the globe and orders a strike and his Cabinet members tell him "uh, no," then the law doesn't matter. The strike does not happen.

This problem is normally averted by displaying leadership and earning loyalty so that your subordinates will obey you when the time comes. Failing that, you can fire people until you get to someone who will obey (e.g. the Saturday Night Massacre), but of course that only works if there is such a person to be had.
Yeah, this is still at the top for me. Moving it along! I wonder how far it would have to go before it starts having problems. Or before apps start having problems. Doing this from my phone, and the comments are starting to get fairly difficult to read.
Genetic science is attempting to predict our fates
What problems do they run into to make it not work?

If the tech people are married to non-tech people, would that change the equation?
There are already two mechanisms available to remove a mentally incompetent President. The problem is that the people with the power to use those mechanisms don't actually want to remove him. That is a much harder problem to solve.
The problem with game theory is it does not take into account human psychology and often assumes everyone has perfect knowledge. Some people will buy from the lowest priced shop even when they know they could have bought at the guaranteed price shop instead. They will knowingly walk straight past the guaranteed shop. Why? Because they are shy about asking for the lower price and do not want to make a fuss. So to avoid any possibility of conflict they made a longer and less convenient journey. Someone else might be cynical and avoid the guaranteed priced shop because they think these statements mark out the shop as underhanded. People are not always rational and do not have perfect knowledge.
Yeah EDN is a great format. It should be a lot more popular than it is.
You ought to update your pull request, then! I'm not sure why they don't accept regular issues.
True, but making credential theft a prerequisite is helpful.
https://www.cockroachlabs.com/blog/sql-fmt-online-sql-format... was on here last week. It's a sql formatter based on the same paper prettier is.
Programming languages are tools, not religions. If a project like this can help people use and understand their tools that is a good thing. Reacting as if the infidel language is defiling the sacred is absurd and indefensible from a practical standpoint.
For companies, those who have much bigger stakes in China are suffering (e.g., Foxconn). But there are also companies benefiting from the trade war since they don't incur the extra cost like their China-based competitors. The companies like TSMC are barely affected since they have a reasonably low percentage of yields in China. For labor/domestic businesses in general, they benefit from it like India and other SEA countries because the global supply chains are coming to diversify and they are attracting more manufacturing investment now.
A Beginner's Self Starter Guide to Machine Learning
I did a couple projects in undergrad using it. I had to implement my own trig functions from scratch! I think they had sin and cos and that was it? It’s a really a neat little environment for throwing together a proof of concept quickly, not a system in which to do computationally intensive work.
According to this, you still have to throw it in the website: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8169040
sqlfmt gets pretty close to this: https://sqlfum.pt/?n=30&indent=4&spaces=1&simplify=1&align=2...
I want to be quoted. I am angry and I am nervous and I hate what happened to the story.

This could be said as "I hate what kind of story I read from those true facts that I told you." Which may well be - true. Apple and Amazon may have done real-denials but this sentence, at least, is maximum non-denial-denial. Bloomberg may well have burned the relationship that Appleboum had with the various people involved in this story and he's ready to say he very much hates how his name is here.

Which, if that's the only complaint, tends to give greater credence to the story. If X people are saying "false, completely!" and another portion are saying "true but spin, completely wrong focus" only one of these groups can be telling the true.

And sure, that doesn't keep Bloomberg's story from being propaganda.
"Aviation in itself is not inherently dangerous. But to an even greater degree
than the sea, it is terribly unforgiving of any carelessness, incapacity or neglect."

— Captain A. G. Lamplugh, British Aviation Insurance Group, London. 1930's

I'm going to hold my misgivings about a flying car playing out like people want for a while longer. I don't know how they're going to combine economy, speed, and payload while keeping a safety margin against people who think it'll be just like driving.

Aircraft aren't terribly hard to fly. However, the decision making process surrounding aviation has been honed over multiple lifetimes. To add another adage: there are no old, bold pilots.