skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There's some degree of competitive play that I think is healthy. People like to be right, and "the bulls" vs "the bears" is a common theme among investors.

Where things get unhealthy is when people start to push conspiracy theories with "the shorts" controlling media. And Tesla discussions consistently cross the line into conspiracies.

With that being said, this particular comment you've replied to seems relatively tame compared to what I normally see around the internet (and its tame even by the standards of this Hacker News discussion! I'm seeing some "conspiracy level" comments elsewhere in this discussion right now...) . There's nothing really wrong with claiming that the shorts were wrong on Q3 predictions IMO, as long as the author doesn't go full-on conspiracy theorist... it isn't too bad to push the classical bulls vs bears discussion which have gone on for over a century.
If you have a fixed money supply that is infinitely divisible, prices would be expected to fall due to deflation and increased purchasing power. Relative values of bread, hour of work, barrel of oil and a house should remain the same (with the caveat that their real values actually change - eg if we become an electric car economy then the relative price of oil in big macs will change). This makes no difference to anything of substance, it is just mathematics and psychology. The only real substantive issue is with debt repayments with deflationary currency, in which case I'd advise thinking hard about your loan terms.
Technically, this would be more efficient:

#include <iostream>
using namespace std;

int main() {
for (int i = 1; i <= 100; i++) {
bool t = (i % 3 == 0);
bool f = (i % 5 == 0);

if (!t && !f) { cout << i << endl; continue; }
if (t) cout << "Fizz";
if (f) cout << "Buzz";
cout << endl;
}
}

But most interviewers are interested in the basic logic of the process.
> but due to pure greed will become a 5x $800K property for someone.

When you put 5 units where there was 1, the value generally doesn't multiply like that. The individual units aren't worth the same as the single original, assuming the same time frame, comparable features and condition. And going from 1 to 5 units seems like a pretty incremental change - it's not like a house being converted to a high-rise building.

> But, when you tear down perfectly charming houses

Given that the project fits local zoning laws, I don't see what the relevance of the existing house's "charm" is. Unless the house is of local historical or cultural importance - which planning commissions consider - it's nobody's right to prevent its replacement on the basis of such a perception.

If opinions on the charm are important, one should advocate their planning commission to establish aesthetic guidelines.
>Officials said the president has two official iPhones that have been altered by the National Security Agency to limit their capabilities — and vulnerabilities — and a third personal phone that is no different from hundreds of millions of iPhones in use around the world. Mr. Trump keeps the personal phone, White House officials said, because unlike his other two phones, he can store his contacts in it.

If this is truly the root cause of the issue, it should be relatively simple to rectify.

ETA: aside from the obvious solution of getting his contacts on the secure phones, is there any reason he couldn't use a satellite phone to bypass insecure cell networks altogether?
I mean, there's a risk/reward ratio. if I was in a country with 1bn people, I probably wouldn't risk moving to a market with less people that are suspicious of Chinese manufactured cars at this point either
Why do we need a library to store data reliably? Aren't browsers API already reliable? Does the LocalStorage API for example sometimes fails to store its data properly?
There were a lot more cubes in the olden days and people hated those as well. Please, don't forget that historical knowledge. But open plan is not better.

I think what happened is, very basically, we saw that water cooler / hallway conversations were so much easier than going and bothering someone in their cube or office. You knew in that context that you were not bothering someone so much, just mentioning something at lunch. At lot more cross pollination. So people took that and ran with it, thinking that tearing down the walls would increase collaboration.

But what the missed was the context. Hallway context = you're not bothering too much. Open plan context = now you're bothering not only that person but everyone around them as well. It wasn't the walls, it was expectations for focus in a given space.

The Big Thing to remember here is that we still need regular workday contexts where we do lower the threshold to team collaboration. Many of us engineers here on HN love to get on these thread and say stuff like, total isolation and concentration all day long? Sounds great! Maximize my productivity! That brings us back to cubes. But it's actually important to strike a balance with team productivity and cross pollination as well. Open plan is not it though. Maybe we need to bring back the water cooler with the tiny cups.[1]

[1] Just kidding, that would be terribly wasteful.
That's what they say when getting it wrong. Yes it's complicated, I agree, and all predictions should be taken with a boulder of salt
How do you envision things getting crazier?
It's worth keeping in mind too that Protobuf isn't tied to gRPC. Conceptually simpler RPC libraries can exist. Twirp is a good example of this, imo
I did some evaluation of (Linux based) OpenCL implementations two years ago (but I don't think anything changed significantly since then).

I had a few takeaways:

- OpenCL on GPUs and CPUs have little to do with each other (in terms of performance characteristics) and if you tune well for one of them, the other one will suffer.

- Vectorization of work items doesn't really work well unless your kernel is so simple that normal compiler auto vectorization with a loop would have probably worked just as well if not better.

- Nvidia intentionally makes OpenCL a second class citizen vs. CUDA. I had nearly identical (simple) kernels running on both platforms and only the CUDA one managed to saturate memory throughput.

- The whole ecosystem is mostly more effort than it's worth. Portability between different OpenCL implementations is a gamble, some will even silently compute invalid results (I'm looking at you Intel...). I had kernel hangs with both Nvidia and AMD.
In rust this looks rather painful. Might I suggest trying this in Julia, might be a good comparison of performance, ease of use, and readability. Julia does a very nice job of compiling directly to SIMD instruction and lets you inspect the low level code generated.

inline function sin9_shaper(x)
c0 = 6.28308759
c1 = -41.33318707
c2 = 81.39900205
c3 = -74.66884436
c4 = 33.15324345

a = abs(x - round(x)) - 0.25
a2 = a * a
((((a2 * c4 + c3) * a2 + c2) * a2 + c1) * a2 + c0) * a

end

function gen_sinwave(freq, init=0.0, step=0.1)
wave = [sin9_shaper(x) for x = init:step:freq]
end

julia> @code_native gen_sinwave(1113.0);
.section __TEXT,__text,regular,pure_instructions
; Function gen_sinwave {
; Location: REPL[60]:2
pushl %ebx
decl %eax
subl $48, %esp
vmovaps %xmm0, %xmm2
; Function gen_sinwave; {
; Location: REPL[60]:2
decl %eax
movl $769501344, %eax ## imm = 0x2DDDA8A0
addl %eax, (%eax)
addb %al, (%eax)
decl %eax
movl $773805120, %ecx ## imm = 0x2E1F5440
addl %eax, (%eax)
addb %al, (%eax)
vmovsd (%ecx), %xmm1 ## xmm1 = mem[0],zero
decl %eax
movl %esp, %ebx
vxorps %xmm0, %xmm0, %xmm0
decl %eax
movl %ebx, %edi
calll %eax
decl %eax
movl $769544608, %eax ## imm = 0x2DDE51A0
addl %eax, (%eax)
addb %al, (%eax)
decl %eax
movl %ebx, %edi
calll %eax
;}
decl %eax
addl $48, %esp
popl %ebx
retl
nopw %cs:(%eax,%eax)
;}

end # module
I read an article that made the case that lithium of batteries are sensitive to the direction of the heat gradient. Tried looking, can't find it. But the upshot was you want the gradient parallel to the electrode layers not perpendicular. Which means you want to remove the heat from the ends of the cell.
Option<T>.

Protobuf "supports" this particular case via other means: messages are always implicitly nullable, and the WKTs cover primitives, which don't count as messages.

Map<K, V>: Protobuf has dedicated syntax for this case.
The share price is below some highs, but still... talking about memory, the stock was ~$35 5 years ago, and now trading at ~$300. Yes, some stocks did better during that time, but it is not that bad.
We've been experimenting with using VR for remote meetings and it really does work in making physical presence more relevant. I think Spatial is really onto something but they can simplify the product even more. My main "immediate" use cases are actually

a) meetings while taking notes or dealing with Trello and,

b) pair programming,

So, all I want is to stream my desktop and some aspects of my physical self (face and hand-movements are enough).There is no real need to bring in aspects of individual desktop apps into immersion (as they show with notes or 3D design tools), just stream my desktop and let everyone see. For pair programming, this would need to work seamlessly hours at a time.

P.S: Incidentally AR vs. VR is less of an issue here, however, if it was real MR (i.e. I can see my real laptop screen exactly where it is) and I don't have to stream my own laptop that would be great.
Err... they have $3B cash and that increased $731M Q3. So I don't see why there would be any short term issues with those other numbers.
Because it is the most shorted stock in the history of the stock market.
I'm not sure why this comment is being downvoted, but its true. Tesla's moment of profitability has come, but it was SUPPOSED to come Dec 2017. Or at least, by the original plans.

Tesla's debt structure over the next year is complicated, with March 2019 convertibles coming in soon. But in either case, Tesla has to build $920 Million to pay back that loan... among many others in the coming years.

Elon Musk really needs another round of capital raises, either stock offerings or bond offerings. If those are successful, then the company will be in a much better spot. Their cash-on-hand is very weak and is definitely a valid point of criticism at the moment.
Congrats Elon. Now go get some sleep
Google "PISA scores"
Why is this #1 article of HN front page?
It would be interesting if they bought Workhorse, the electric delivery drone and pickup and van company. Low market cap, lots of good projects out, and possibly complementary capabilities.
The performance benefits of Protobuf serialization and deserialization are extremely variable by language; JSON is faster in Python while Protobuf is significantly faster in Java and Golang. JSON is pretty fast in JS (unsurprisingly) but perhaps Google is working on optimizing protobuf in JS.
Wow is electricity seriously that expensive in CA? I pay 11c/kWh in Chicago and looove charging my 3.
> Is there evidence of this? I’ve only ever heard of cases where companies succeeded in spite of the open plan office, meanwhile you’ve got a place like Stack Overflow that is succeeding even when footing the bill for private offices in Manhattan. Nobody’s copying them...

Stack Overflow is going out of business...
> While superchargers are great, I don't think they as big an advantage as you are making them to be. How often do you drive more than 200 miles in a day? 3 times a year? I am not going to buy a specific car for that reason.

So every time you go on a road trip, what do you do? Get a ride to a rental car place, initial a stack of paperwork denying a half-dozen $10-25/day charges on top of whatever base rate you agreed to, finally get the keys to a super-bare-base-model of some car that looked good from the outside, drive it back to your house, then load everything up and hope for the best?

Or would you rather just load up in the car you already own, and are comfortable and familiar with driving, and not need to budget an extra hour or two on either end of the drive for rental company nonsense?

> Besides using supercharger is not free as well. As more and more cars go electric, charging stations are going to be as common as gas stations and there will be competition with pricing etc. Not sure if I want to rely on one company's charging network.

Tesla's supercharger network is a huge advantage precisely because no one else has anything like it. It also now has a fair amount of redundancy along major routes. It would be wonderful if competing networks actually existed, but they meaningfully don't. Tesla realizes that you actually need the network, and that having it allows a Tesla car to be your only car. Everyone else just thinks they can sell something with X miles of range, wipe their hands, and thinks spending 8 hours at a ChargePoint station in a grocery store parking lot is actually acceptable.
To see what's right in front of you, your brain may need some rewiring
Little Rock’s dangerous and illegal drug war
Advertisers would pay me to watch the add in its entirety. Consider an example: timeshare sellers actually pay people to listen to their pitches.
How are U.S. schools failing students? What should they be doing/teaching instead?

Where did you go to school? How did your education differ from what you've seen in America?
I found gRPC to be exciting when I was writing something in Go. The tooling around that is pretty decent and it sets a certain expectation about how it works.

Then I had to write a client in a different language, and the generated code was utterly intuitive. gRPC itself adds extensions to Protobuf to handle code-gen nuances but of course they're deployed in Go-land, not relevant-language-land.

That's a small niggle that's easily solved one way or another. What was frustrating was that the `protobuf` CLI could handle language extensions, but you couldn't make use of that without a hell of a lot of faff. If you want to add a gRPC client to your Rails app you can't use the protobuf CLI, that you might already have.... you have to add a gem that includes a different version of the protobuf CLI that is guaranteed to be not compatible. Even the command and its args aren't compatible.

When I found myself working against that I just gave up. It's a solution that sounds elegant, but you're going to get a feature out of the door much quicker if you steer away from that layer altogether. There's nothing wrong with an ad-hoc HTTP API if you're confident about the interface.

Technical purity isn't technical excellence and nor is it user value. Just like K8S, you're not gonna need RPC on the web unless you can justify the scale and have the firepower to handle it.
What’s the Best Way to Take Notes?
It's a different topic because the OP dispute (whether to give credit to data generation/creation as comprehensively as to data analysis) is logically distinct from the OP dispute (whether to give different amounts credit to the same sort of contribution based on where/whether it was formally published). The fact that the people you criticize continue to not properly give credit even when a formal publication exists demonstrates this starkly.

For what it's worth, I agree with your criticism.
And how the heck does a charging station, at a car dealership in the middle of a city, actually help you when you're on a highway trying to actually drive between cities?
Agree - Tesla had an existential incentive to build chargers, but other car makers would prefer to wait and see (and let someone else build out the commodity chargers).
What Companies Have No Women on Their Board?
Similarly to how agreed-upon overflights increase security (as your opponent knows you're not preparing an attack and/or are keeping to treaty obligations) one could consider this a good thing.

Of course China is not currently a military threat to the US, at least at the level deserving attention of a US president (e.g. random encounters in the Spratleys are jostling, not escalation).

I certainly don't think this is a responsible practice but it's interesting to consider it in a game theoretic context.
Netcraft ranked them as the second largest web-facing hosting provider a couple of years back, and they seem to be growing rapidly.

https://news.netcraft.com/archives/2015/05/01/digitalocean-b...

I suspect that DO is a factor in AWS introducing Lightsail.
> Apple also has the right business model: it can sell barely good-enough devices at a premium to a userbase that will buy simply because they are from Apple, and from there figure out a use case without the need to reach everyone.

As far as I can tell, this is only really true for Apple Watch. I don’t think this can be called a “business model”.
Be a leader and help them write better code.

And as others have mentioned; code reviews shouldnt ever be brutal. You need to look at code reviews as a way to improve your team's performance. It shouldn't be a roast.
On Tue, 22 Oct 1996, Julian Assange wrote:

> Does anyone know what is happening with the delegation of the
> postgres domains? Indirect.com was going to hand them over,
> but as yet has not.

Not a name i was expecting to see! He seems to have made a few commits to psql:

http://mat.caminos.upm.es/~iht/pased2011/
Gah, you’re right. I need sleep.
Facebook@Work?
And who should decide who gets impeached? The New York Times?
You are pretty much making my point, you know that, right ?

I'm talking about people who are one of the or the only persons with any technical knowledge in their companies, who's job it is to interpret and understand whatever the requirements are and deliver on the products, wether it's apps, web or mobile, back-ends or both.

They need to know how to make good software products, they definitely should know how to understand and meet specifications, etc, etc, etc. They just don't. And yet, they have the positions they have. And what they're most lacking, contrary to the point you were making earlier, definitely isn't compiler theory or the ability to build shell scripting parsers, but the very abilities you just listed.

So no, we are talking about the exact same thing, you just seem lucky enough not to have encountered this kind of people in that kind of position, and I'm glad we have finally come to an understanding.
Yes, mixing terminology. Apologies.
> They have to be happy with those numbers, interesting question of whether they continue to sell the S,X,3's and generate a pile of cash before they start burning it on model Y development.

That's not how Elon works. He's likely to get a capital raise to fund Model Y development.

The Gigafactory was built on millions-of-shares being sold between 2013 and 2015, plus some loans (the 2014 5-year convertible which is now due 2019).

The thing about Q3 profitability was that it was necessary for Elon to achieve Q3 profitability... so that he can now start to push for the Model Y funding. Shareholders/ Investors need to be convinced that giving more money to Elon is worthwhile. So I think this Q3 profitability is very important to the message and plan that Elon is trying to build here.
What’s Wrong with the 2 Percent Inflation Target
Disagreeing with Tyler Cowen about Stagnation and Innovation
We ran into this same problem. The RDS team fixed this earlier this month when they launched support for 10.5. It's buried in this blog post: https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2018/10/rds-postg...
And that's a shame. People are scared to debate values because they don't want the value structures that their lives center around to crumble. Without debating values, you might end up spending a huge proportion of your life on something that later doesn't matter to you...
Just send your employees all their work through an app that has a take it or leave it option on the price you'd pay them with no negotiation. Now they are all magically contractors while still acting like FTEs
At my last job, I was in the room when my boss interviewed a new candidate. My job was to guide the new candidate with the paid homework that was to be returned for all the team to evaluate. He did not believe in the Q and A tech interview. He felt it was unfair and mostly useless.

The one thing he always did was disqualify any candidate that could not answer the basic questions about our in-house stack. If you did not know at least the basics, my boss moved on to the next candidate.

Fair or unfair it did not matter. He had enough experience to know that it takes time for people to learn a new framework and language plus our in-house procedures. It was always more productive to grab someone with experience.

I suspect most employers think the same way.

At one time, employers would take a chance and time to bring someone up to speed since it was harder to find the right person. The developer pool has expanded so much that now it's easier to find someone with experience.
Cash (profit share?) would be better no? Equity can't be spent now.
So they just eliminated the cupboard? They must not have a whole lot of dishes!
Neuromancer is what made me. Cyberpunk was what i was in the late 80s through today.

But I see the dystopian dark nature of it. I helped, along with everyone on HN, build this monster we have now.

I tried Gibson's latest story, and I wasnt too into it...
My understanding is that Tesla short sellers are more visible because of the amount of money betting against Tesla. With an estimated ~$11B of short position (https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2018/04/15/tesla-has...), that is not fictitious.
With so much money at stake, some short sellers might be tempted to start false rumors or even damage the company, in order to recoup some of their money.
> It should be obvoius that hash table lookups are above O(1) as long as collisions exist.

This doesn't follow at all. If the average number of lookups is 2 instead of 1, then it's O(2), which is O(1) because it's just a constant factor. The number of collisions needs to grow proportionally to the total number of elements being stored, which does not happen because the hashtable itself is also grown to keep the average number of collisions constant and low.

A hashtable that is 80% full has the same small number of collisions regardless of whether the hashtable has a thousand elements in it or a billion. Meanwhile, a BST would have to make 10 lookups in the first case and 30 in the second case -- that's logarithmic for you.

Your link shows lots of real performance figures which are dominated by CPU cache misses and other non-intrinsic factors. That's what's responsible for the reduction in performance on larger data sets, not anything intrinsic to hashtables themselves. If you look at the aforementioned first graph, the best hashmap performs at around at worst around 10ns up through ~200K elements, whereupon it blows out the fastest CPU cache and then takes around a max of 25 ns for the max size tested (~700M?). Factoring out the cache issue, it definitely does not look super-logarithmic to me. It might not even be logarithmic; I'd need to see raw data to know for sure (it's hard to tell by estimating from the graph).
I did. Digital watches were cool! But then then were bulky blocks of plastic on my wrist, and when I was carrying a phone anyway I did away with the watch.

Years later I got the original Pebble, and while it was great for seeing who was calling me or getting a quick text, or banishing phantom buzz...my primary use was to check the time.
Configuring a CI/CD Pipeline for Serverless
It's interesting to watch Google's moves to control every part of the stack. Browser: Chrome. Frontend: Closure compiler -> obfuscated SPAs. Transport: gRPC. Backend: Proprietary Google software written in Golang. Orchestration: Kubernetes. Hosting: Google Cloud. Etc. You can imagine a future where Google services are no longer just web apps on the same footing as anything else in the web ecosystem, but where every step of the development, deployment, and end-use is managed by Google. Can't blame them for doing that, I'm sure it's more efficient, but it's definitely moving the web in a different direction, one where Google has more control at the expense of everyone else (end users, competitors).