skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
- You think you can't do sales? Have you ever applied for a job, sold yourself to your current girlfriend, husband or wife, challenge a friend with fact or a value creation discussion? You have done sales...

This thinking is quite freeform. The following opinion is not one I hold strongly.

Selling myself to a girlfriend feels very different though. First, I need to define my target market. I like women who are quite like myself. I value intelligence and wisdom above everything else. So I screen for that heavily. One of the things I do is I look in their eyes, do they look intense and conscious? If so, it might be that they are my type, so I go up and talk to them and am my playful geeky self. If they like that and respond back in kind then I continue for asking their number and go on a date to drill down further on intelligence and wisdom. I mostly care about their learning ability after that.

Hmm, I suppose it isn't very different. Though, to be fair it sounds like a cross-over between sales and hiring good people.

I feel the difference in sales is that my girlfriend needs to add value to my life. Sales doesn't necessarily need to add direct value in life as long as it can add financial value through other ways.

I think you're quite right.

Hey you're in Amsterdam (or so I hope)! Want to grab a coffee? I created a new email for HN people to email me at, see my bio.
You’ll Never Be a Prophet in Your Own Town
Thanks for the summary. I don't know how accurate it is, of course—but I'll accept it, as five minutes into the article I still had no idea what it's about other than “cryptocurrencies.”
You might have missed these:

> First of all, love the Lord God with your whole heart, your whole soul, and your whole strength.

> Deny oneself in order to follow Christ.

> Prefer nothing more than the love of Christ.

> Put your hope in God.

> Attribute to God, and not to self, whatever good you see in yourself.

> Fear the Day of Judgment.

> Be in dread of hell.

> Know for certain that God sees you everywhere.

> When wrongful thoughts come into your heart, dash them against Christ immediately.

> Devote yourself frequently to prayer.

> Daily in your prayers, with tears and sighs, confess your past sins to God, and amend them for the future.

> Obey in all things the commands of those whom God has placed in authority over you even though they (which God forbid) should act otherwise, mindful of the Lord's precept, "Do what they say, but not what they do." (!!!)

> Do not wish to be called holy before one is holy; but first to be holy, that you may be truly so called.

> Fulfill God's commandments daily in your deeds.

> Pray for your enemies in the love of Christ.

> Never despair of God's mercy.
Evergreen Skills for Software Developers (Talk)
Surely there is already a lot of Olivine on the ocean floor?

How does adding it to the ocean differ from the stuff on the ocean floor?
I think you are very wrong. Uber and Lyft are better positioned than the taxi companies. They are bigger, have more money, and could even let other people buy the cars, and let them run them. Taxi's have nothing but people, which is something you don't need, and old cars.
What "control" has Samsung given Google that they regret?
How to use Linkedin to generate leads for your startup
Conversely, it's frustrating that you reference some definition instead of just stating it. Are you referring to stateless (web) applications? Wouldn't that also exactly fit your other "ephemeral storage" definition? You surely don't propose that those applications don't keep state while processing a single request. This proposed laptop only keeps state for a single boot.
Please add me too liza.susanto@gmail.com, thanks :)
eval is not evil per se. eval is mostly a necessary feature to do macros, i.e. compile-time evaluation in proper syntax. (called BEGIN blocks in perl). The only problem with eval is it's internal slow implementation, compared to a proper language. Two big stacks of structs (~10 words) on the heap, compared to one word on the stack. longjmp for exceptions. For perl being a 20x slower scripting language it's fine though.

rust on the other hand is an even more hype driven language than perl6. Their documentation is full of hype and lies. perl6 is at least honest about its limitations, but rust is hyping about its safeties and performance while there's none. rust has no type safety (unsafe keyword), memory safety (refcounting. only stack or external heap allocations, both are unsafe) and fearless concurrency safety (requiring manual locks. dangerous and unsafe). perl6 is much safer than this, and parrot had even proper lockless concurrency and safety. rust is a nice language, I use it also, but never trust liars and hype-driven development.
For proper performance and safeties use pony. ATS is also fine, and there some new parallel languages cropping up. For slow and safety alone there are also many nice copying languages around, like Go, Erlang, Scala, Akka or Lisp.

c/c++ speed is an explicit non-goal for perl 11. We have no chance to catch up to javascript, only to php7. But even this is not easy because the perl5 API is as fucked up as the ruby and python API, exposing its bloated inner structs instead of functions only. You only get proper performance by optimizing those fat structs to single words, "unboxing" data, slimming down the code and runloop. With an exposed API like that based on structs you are doomed to be 10x slower.
Additionally there are so many exposed globals in the API, that proper threading is almost impossible.

gperl has no eval and was about 200x faster. The goal of gperl was to add proper eval but it's not easy, and he already went away from perl5 to go and java, as most asians did recently. There's spvm though, a new asian perl5 attempt to create a proper VM.

The goal of perl11 is simply to add most perl6 features to the perl5 codebase without breaking backcompat. This is what perl5 should have done, but refused to do and is not able to do.
Iron fertilization!

1 kg of iron can fix 83000 kg of carbon dioxide and turn it into biomass.

The idea is that you give algae the one ingredient to growth which is very sparse in the oceans yet over-abundant on land.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_fertilization

"Give me a half a tanker of iron and I will give you another ice age"
I actually live in a city a few blocks from work, don't own a car, and only eat poultry/eggs which have a lower carbon footprint than red meat. On the other hand I do order a lot of crap from Amazon.

It's not so much about offsetting my personal carbon emissions - it's more about supporting projects that could potentially slow down runaway global warming. There are a lot of feedback loops in the pipeline in the next 20 years that will accelerate climate change (arctic ice melts, more heat gets absorbed etc). Those feedback loops are going to kick in even if we stopped all human emissions today. So when that happens and drastic environmental changes start occurring, I'm hoping we'll have some demonstrated solutions like advanced weathering we could scale up.
While this point of view is a neat idea and part of me really likes it, I'm afraid those people just want to make as much cash as possible. Also, if they make 750M$, that's 750M$ they deprived other parts of society of (e.g. app developers who could have had about 5000 more employees).
Can you do a real calculation?

I can save up 2k€/month because I want to work part-time (1-2 weeks a month) and will only make 6.5k€/month pre-tax (3.5k€ after taxes). Unfortunately we have heavy taxing here in Germany (42% income tax).

I need to invest a million to make 70k€/year pre-tax (premise: 7% ROI).

This doesn't sound remotely possible - saving up 25-30k€/year is not going to cut it for significant gains in the markets. I can increase my income by working full-time, but if I know that I have to do it for many years I get demotivated.

- - -

Maybe it's a mistake that I'm located in Germany, the taxing makes it impossible for me to save up enough money although I'm in the top 10-20% of incomes.

Due to progressive taxing, going from 100k€ to 120k€/year increases my net income from 55k€ (this is nearly half of the 100k) to 64k€. It feels like that's a bit too much because people making a million also pay 42% income tax (most of them pay 25% because capital gains are taxed differently). Having money is rewarded more than working, so I'm getting demotivated a bit by knowing that most of the money I make will be eaten by progressive taxes, anyways.

edit: There's a way to pay around 20-25% of taxes - having a family where one person works with two kids (two working parents is not encouraged, however - very subtle nudging). It's like we've ingrained our values into our tax system. For me as a 20y/o, this doesn't help and I'm not gonna marry somebody to save some taxes.
The eXpress Data Path: Fast Programmable Packet Processing in the OS Kernel [pdf]
Why Do You Need a Scrum Master?
probably not warehouse workers then
The author is a well-known computer security developer, I'm sure they're aware of the alternative meanings of state when deciding on the term.
It's just planned maintenance.
Very interesting presentation. The question your research is attempting to answer is certainly a valid one for major sites, where people might be on the site anyway without having clicked on a given ad. In my specific case, most of the sites/offers we market through Facebook ads wouldn't have attracted many organic visitors, let alone conversions, on their own, so it's not a question I need to answer. These sites rely almost entirely on paid traffic, and if they don't get it they are out of business.

The importance of being able to figure out what actually led to conversions is not lost on me though. One unique technology I created allows us to do something that I have never seen anyone else in the online marketing world do: track conversions back to the initial click and ad campaign, even if someone just texts, emails, or uses an instant messenger to send the URL to a friend. So let's say someone visits the site, sees that the offer isn't for them but texts it to a friend. A month later, that friend finally gets around to looking at it, but decides it isn't for them either but knows someone else who might be interested, and they email it to someone else, who ultimately converts. We can track that conversion and all the steps in between back to the initial click and attribute it to the initial ad campaign, which gives us a much better sense of what each ad campaign is actually producing. The technology also lets us create custom Facebook audiences of anyone that has shared a link from the site - regardless of how they shared - text, email, Facebook - doesn't matter. We can then customize campaigns to encourage those people to share again.
I don't know the exact numbers, Eternal September has probably happened two or three times in the cryptocurrency community by now, but there was a time where the majority of people involved didn't give a rats ass about their "investment", but the ideology behind cryptocurrency itself.

If the coins weren't issued from a central authority, I would welcome the USDC stablecoin as an addition to the crypto market.
Sure. My comment was in reply to a comment which said that this:

> This code of conduct that requires members to honor Christ

was not true.
Java always had hash maps as one of their map implementations. (I did use both languages years ago, so maybe that's why I noticed)
If there is a conflict between national security and SEC rules, I am not convinced any court would go for the SEC rules.
Would you say that everyones grandparents (which mostly could use that setting) are capable of googling tutorials?

Even most young people I know are not able to google things (even if it's some important information they urgently need). Or maybe they just don't get the idea of even asking the internet.
The thing about perl which people really don't appreciate is that it scales. From a thow-away oneliner to a few hundred thousand lines of code [1]. But achieving that coherently takes a depth of knowledge of the language[2] and a reluctance to reinvent the wheel.

My main problems with perl is that I haven't found any normal programming activity I can't do with it, and that it's sucked enough of my time up over the past decade that people pay me and give me good working conditions in which to use it.

[1] But if you get to "a few hundred thousand lines of code" it's likely that there's some significant architectural mistake in your code. Architectural mistakes are not a perl-specific thing. Perl's biggest strength is also its biggest weakness - it's flexible.

[2] Depth of knowledge of a language is something that seems to be quite unfashionable in the industry at the moment, and some of perl's design decisions seem to be optimised for a style of knowledge that's also unfashionable.
That happens all the time. Yes it sucks but it is a legal and common tactic (I hope you don't use chrome...), but also completey irrelevant in this case. What matters in this case is probably that they allow app stores, just aptoide was targeted. That is a huge difference.
The better question is - why are so many in such a hurry to defend billionaires?
These things are on the roadmap atm.

Better WASM/JS interop is on the way, though atleast on Firefox nightly you can get this for fairly low cost for some functions.

GC is also on the todo list and IIRC might get an early preview in Firefox Nightly.

Once the GC is done, DOM integration will happen, people are eager for that and that would eliminate a lot of the necessary JS glue code.
Just got the rejection mail, good luck everybody!
It might though. When ice age ended, whole species went extinct (saber-toothed tigers, mammoths etc). Our species somehow clinged on but the population was decimated to couple of hundred individuals at the worst point. Back then we were hunter gatherers so we were much better at surviving out in the wild.

If something like what happened 10,000 years ago happened today, I'm less optimistic about our ability to survive very long. If we were reduced to couple of hundred people back then when we were used to living in the wild, we might go to 0 this time. There are some small tribes of indigenous people in Amazon rain forrest and couple other places who might be better equipped to survive but that is not guaranteed.

I think you are overestimating resilience of our species, we have not yet been tested by any serious cataclysm since modern civilisation, compared to our ancestors, who were much tougher than us though, and they only barely survived.
Yeah but sunglasses form factor won't just appear, without lesser implementations first.

My favorit way to think about this is DooM from -93. It had tons of tech limitations but dint stop me and other geeks from enjoying it. Today FPS games are several magnitudes more advanced, and accessible for the average joe in his couch.
Also highly recommended: Anything by Jason Turner and Ben Deane.

Examples:

- Ben Deane - Using Types Effectively [0]

- Jason Turner - Rich Code for Tiny Computers: A Simple Commodore 64 Game in C++17 [1]

- Ben Deane & Jason Turner - constexpr ALL the Things! [2]

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojZbFIQSdl8

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBkNBP00wJE

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJwd4JLYJJY
We will see growth in the adoption of thin terminals and desktop running in the cloud.
84 percent of cryptocurrencies are not really decentralized: report
Chomsky's Profit over People is also a fantastic read.
This problem is readily solvable though so I don't consider it a showstopper.
As far as I know the Fairphone 2 is the only phone with a score of 10. Coincidentally, I have one, and it's pretty amazing. I can detach and replace the screen of the phone without even needing a screwdriver.
I'm generally in agreement with everything you state. I do think, however, that with the appropriate amount of engineering, one could build an incremental JIT compiler that sped up common base idioms meaningfully while executing the whacky stuff using the old perl VM. (Ie. more like psycho, as opposited to a full reimplementation such as PyPy.)

Yes, there's a while slew of things you can't do in the case - the old guts and data structures would permeate it. It would be a bit of a horrible maintenance burden. And it's generally not worth it (anymore). There's simply better options available.

I played around with something like that, wow, the better part of a decade ago. The approach was to go from the OP tree back to something that had a few of the execution specifics undone such that it resembled an AST a bit more. Then find sections that could be compiled by the partial implementation and convert those. Tracing facilities were there just at a function level. We'd settled on optional type annotations using a keyword plugin that would populate a structure attached to the CV (function struct) with that information as it went through regular perl compilation.
Of course, this falls short of any sort of interesting complier work.

Anyway, my point is that I think it'd be doable for a sufficiently motivated and skilled (and funded) team of folks, but there's very little economic incentive to do so.
That's also the model of the popular anonymity OS Tails, but if you'd read the paper OS-level state is not being discussed at all.
Not sure who downvoted you, sounds like you have good points.

Do you have some links/examples on that scoping & how you can avoid accessor/constructor in perl?
I don't think Aptoide is distributed through the google play store as google doesn't allow app stores in there so if the user installed it manually to their system then google has no right to be messing with that.
That's an easy one.

- (1) With an admirable humanitarian intention, the government forces hospitals to treat patients whose life is immediately in danger, and figure out later whether they'll be able to pay. If 1/10 people have the means to pay for the treatment they receive, then you're paying for your treatment, plus the expensive life-saving treatment of nine other destitute people who couldn't pay.

- (2) It's a monopoly. If your choice is letting your daughter possibly lose a finger, or taking her to the hospital, you'll take her to the hospital. Because you don't really have a satisfactory alternative.

- (3) It's opaque. You have no idea what treatment she'll need or how much it'll cost going in. They're loth to make promises about this up-front ahead of a diagnosis.

- (4) Because they can. Why would they ever charge $400 when they could charge $4000? The only surprise here is that it's not $40,000 or $400,000 or $40,000,000.
Best Halloween-Themed Games Events and Makeovers (2018 Edition)
Having used both languages for maybe 7 years each, you can write unreadable code in both. I have seen some absolute disasters in Python, its really about the skill and motivation of the developer to produce readable code.

Perl has a lot more syntax which makes it harder for people who don't know Perl, but if you know the language I don't think its inherently worse.
> Python is nothing like perl (by design)

Which is ironic because python and perl are extremely similar. I like to say that "python is perl for bureaucrats". I've been doing a bit of python for (?:recre|educ)ational purposes recently due to its superior maths libraries. I can't say I see the advantages, but that's probably just me.
The Education System and the Proliferation of Reductive Thinking
Yeah! Got their response.
But have you thought about the children? you can always pile on more legislation if talk about the children, u can even regulate the games they play and the porn they see. I don't think that barrel has a bottom.
I guess that makes it OK? "Whataboutism" at its finest.
> Anyway, next time I go for a quick script, I should go for Haskell, not Python, nor Perl (5 or 6, whatever). But I will probably go for Python, because it's painless enough and I don't know Haskell's shell integration by hearth.

I've started using rust for short scripting tasks, helps me get acquainted with the stdlib & ecosystem, and `cargo script` works really neatly, seamlessly allowing adding dependencies to a single-file script with not issue. Plus if you want to scale the script out to a proper project you can just take and promote the generated cargo project.
OK, I'll bite. How do you get O(1) lookup without using a hashtable?
Python's variables spring into existence at the moment of first assignment and are function-scoped (or module-scoped). The scope can also be terminated with the "del" statement. This has three problems:

1. The lifetime of a variable depends on control flow, and is not statically determined (in the general case). The exact scope is dynamic.

2. Many variables are not used throughout a function, but only within a small region of a function, e.g. an "else" block. Python's variables have a too large scope. To add confusion, a few Python constructs like "except" clauses or list comprehensions are block-scoped.

3. Working with nested functions is extra complicated. While you can read variables from outer scopes, you cannot assign them, unless you declare them as "nonlocal" or "global" in the nested function.

As a special case of 3, consider closures that are declared within a loop:

adders = []
for x in range(10):
adders.append(lambda y: x + y)

All these lambdas close over the same "x" variable which is reassigned. After the loop terminates, "x = 9" for all lambdas.

Python's common workaround is to use an immediately invoked function that binds the value to a scoped argument. In lambda calculus terms, we have to desugar the "let" abstraction to function application:

...
adders.append((lambda x_: lambda y: x_ + y)(x))

(Another alternative is to capture by value by using default arguments, as the defaults are executed at function definition time: "lambda y, x=x: x + y".)

A similar language that shares Python's problems is PHP, where a nested function has to explicitly "use" outer variables it wants to capture.

Perl (like most languages since Algol, Scheme, and C) requires explicit variable declaration (unless "use strict" is not enabled). In Perl, "my" declares a local/block-scoped variable. Consequences:

1. The lifetime of a variable is easy to determine statically: from the declaration to the end of the current scope (in Perl: to the next "}" that marks the end of the current block). This is called "lexical" scope.

2. I can restrict a variable to the smallest scope where it is needed, thus simplifying my code.

3. Nested functions are much easier. If I assign a variable, it uses existing (outer) bindings, unless I explicitly shadow the variable with a local declaration.

If we return to the closures in loops problem, Perl creates a new variable for each loop iteration, thus avoiding Python's problems:

my @adders;
for my $x (0..9) {
push @adders, sub ($y) { $x + $y };
}
Bash / PHP / Perl superficially look like each other. Python code looks different.

But Perl has many strange operators and conventions that do not do as expected, or are foreign to the point of being unreadable to those who don't use Perl regularly. Additionally, Perl can be made concise (one-liner) to the point of being unreadable. It's been said that Perl is a write-only language for a reason.

Contrast with Python, which I've had six-year-olds tell me what a program does after only a few minutes' introduction to Python syntax. Though to be fair, Python's List Comprehensions are in fact just as unreadable as Perl is.
Right; it's based on the assumption (which I share) that laws aren't perfect, and that the prime way of finding out whether they are is by people breaking them.

The other requirement is the ability to change laws, otherwise this would indeed only enable selective (i.e. seemingly random) enforcement.
Who knows what the original play store apps did to begin with. Most of the top apps are basically malware. Maybe someone added a bitcoin miner to the existing spyware that came from the original app but it just comes back to the same thing that you can't trust proprietary software to be safe.