skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ask HN: Is there a space in the tech scene for the not numerically-inclined?
As I was going through a brain teaser today, I realized that I just may not have the numerically-inclined type of brain.

I've never been good at math. I do well with languages and can write up a storm, however. Is there space in the tech scene for someone like me? I am interested in everything data, but it seems that that field requires a numerical brain. Is the analytical part of your brain something you can build and improve?
Not really, at least for me because even if someone else "doesn't use it," you still have the satisfaction of knowing you're following your well defined value system to the letter, and there's nothing you could have done anyway without acting outside your value system.

Dale Carnegie was writing about this stuff decades ago, so another way to look at it, if you really need a reason other than "feels good," is it gives you a tremendous advantage in social situations of all kinds. You're more likely to "get what you want" in the end, though that kind of thinking is not really the point imo.
The Grim Reaper Does Not Care About the Longevity Study You Saw on Facebook
> One could even argue that an event of this magnitude is likely to cause significant improvements in reliability.

Doesn't happen in practice and usually the whole thing is just blamed on "process" with subsequent "process changes".
The Postal Illuminati [podcast]
MacBook Pro LCD Backlight Issue – Flexgate
Ha! Great example.
A related issue: the best answer may have a link to the documentation, which may rot. Now people will down-vote the answer because broken link.

This could happen if somebody asks how to do something using some library. If the library actually has a builtin facility to solve the problem, but then the answer gets down-voted due to documentation link rot; then another answer explaining how to built that facility from scratch may become the 'best' answer, even though the re-implementation of existing library functionality is a bad idea.
I was in until they asked me to join their stupid rewards program to get an API key.
I don't mind the Accepted label, however they are sorted at the top by default. They probably should change that to "sort by votes," so the best answer can change over time.
I found the Mojo docs to be better than most Perl frameworks, but Perl web frameworks, in general, suffer from a severe lack of good examples and docs. There's just not as many people using them as Node or Ruby or Python or PHP or whatever, so you don't find as many videos and tutorials and such for anything outside of the most basic stuff. I think there's also a bit of bias toward expertise; most people still using Perl have years of experience, and so there tends to be a lot less hand-holding, which is a problem if (like me) you haven't followed Perl web development closely, and only have a sort of old school understanding of it. There's quite a bit of "now draw the rest of the fucking owl", situations, for me, in dealing with modern Perl concepts.

But, I like Mojo, nonetheless. It's really concise and does a heck of a lot with a vanishingly small amount of code (it's inspiring to see Perl excelling at something pretty modern, honestly).
Thieves steal a Tesla Model S by hacking the entry fob
Amen. It's about using it judiciously and doing your best to communicate with / be seen by the regular users / available.
tenpoundhammer isn't talking about the normal evolution of language, but rather about people trying to change the definitions of words to make their positions seem more reasonable/acceptable. That also is not a new thing, but it's different from "the evolution of language".
Just another opinion on this: I don't think "Category Theory for Programmers" is that great from a pedagogical perspective. I get that its freely accessible, but like the "Haskell from First Principles" book, the quality of the exposition is a bit questionable.

Call me old-fashioned, but when it comes to learning math, I believe it pays to seek out people who really know how to teach the subject, rather than (what might uncharitably be described as) self-promoters churning out half-baked introductory materials. This goes for the "Catsters" video series as well. Everybody points to them as if they're brilliant, but compared to what standard? Sometimes it feels as if the people who blithely link to these resources are indifferent to whether the teaching is good or bad.

Even Mac Lane's book "Categories for the Working Mathematician" has been credibly criticised for being poorly written—but because it's so famous/prestigious it still gets loads of five-star reviews.

Personally, I'd recommend Categories and Computer Science by RFC Walters, or Steve Awodey's Category Theory for a more general overview.

(This might all sound peevish, but it feels like a real hazard of trying to learn difficult things from the web: the most conspicuous and superficially charismatic offerings/lecture notes/blogs don't always turn out to be reliable or well thought-out when it comes to an average person actually trying to learn the material.

Monads are a good example of this bad situation. A good way to learn about monads would be to have a few, shortish, interactive conversations with an expert. Ten thousand cute online monad analogy tutorials is the opposite of this: it's actively counterproductive because each new analogy just creates more vagueness and FUD.)
That's probably the case for valley-style startups where the whole team can fit in a room and they all hack on the same handful of repos, but most "enterprise" customers will have hundreds of repos with not necessarily anybody hacking on most of them at any given moment. It's very good policy for such organizations to have a plan in place to "break glass in case Github is down" with local mirroring of all data and a tested process for doing deploys without Github.
"Koretize"?
I understand your skepticism however soon we will be able to also show the credibility of our processing system and also we will be audited by the German Government (BaFin).

In further details we want to remove this card based system that currently exists be it AMEX card or any other royalty system and the only way is if we go from source to consumption (bank acc to service partner providers)
ctrl-f revealed no mention of its product placement on Judge Ito's desk in the OJ Simpson trial.

Edit: Really? You don't think all that advertising in such an iconic situation had any relation to its becoming a design icon?
Pulumi Wants to Change the Way You Manage Application Infrastructure
Take a Tour of the New Govinfo API
Why is probably explained somewhere on codinghorror.com. Probably in many places.

The issue isn't why that is, but the very fact that it is so. It's not obvious, and it's not really how people use StackOverflow, in the same way Kickstarter used to believe (probably still does) it was about investing in indie creators, whereas people really used it as a preorder store and a marketing platform.
Which is the biggest shift from when Sears catalog homes were most sold: most of the were clustered together in neighborhoods where that sort of kit home, or similar DIY projects, were precisely the norm. Most major cities you can sort of tell which ones were the "Sears catalog neighborhoods".

(It's funny now how some of those very neighborhoods have grown increasingly conservative in their old age by nature of gentrification and often being closer to urban centers than the exurbs that replaced them in people's minds as "suburbs".)
I'm talking more about different pseudonames and siloing personal information rather than full on different identites. I'm as authentic here as I am on my Reddit or professional GitHub accounts, and yet it still will require corporate level shenanigans to find and link them all together
If in a discussion someone brings up a tangent to the topic at hand, please keep the discussion on track by focusing on the current topic rather than the tangent. This is not to say that the tangent is bad, or not interesting to discuss—only that it shouldn't interfere with discussion of the issue at hand. In most cases, it is also off-topic, so those interested ought to discuss it somewhere else.
Such a study would be extremely difficult to interpret, given societal pressure on men to "close off" their emotions, and societal pressure on women teaching them that they are "emotional creatures."

I guess if it was treated like an anthropological analysis of Western culture, sure, but as a psychological or physiological one dealing with actual brain chemistry, no way.
I thought it was pretty obvious. tenpoundhammer's claim is that Lessig is using a nonstandard definition of "corruption" in order to make his argument work.
Just wanted to say that I wish that this was how kernels were made - out of modular, reusable blocks. Would this scale? In other words, could Redox and the OS described in the system share IRQ code from the same crate and ultimately grow into two different systems that are built of mostly the same crates for low-level stuff, just wired differently?
SCART is another disgusting connector that European readers will be familiar with. I like the idea of combining multiple video formats with sound as a predecessor to HDMI, but the least they could have done was put a decent D-sub or the Amphenol-style ribbon connector.
Hi I'm a recent convert to OSX and found the animations of 3-finger-swiping between desktops annoying.

Recently found the "reduce motion" checkbox in System Preferences > Accessibility and instead of sliding it just does fade-in-place which is way less annoying and I think feels faster because you start to see the other window right away, even if there's a window fading away on top of it. The slide from desktop to desktop feels like I need a split second to orient myself after being spun in a chair.
> “I expected farmers to be quite luddite about the adoption of new technology,” he [Ben Scott-Robinson] says, as he packs Rachel away.

I actually assume farmers are very welcoming of technology. They are hard workers and good business men. Usually technology makes them more efficient and more money.
Xgl was attempt to do the same thing by SuSE, which led to lot of opposition from other Linux distributors. This spawned competing AIGLX project (mostly associated with RedHat in that times), which solved the same "problem" from the other end and enabled such graphical effects mostly as an side effect and in contrast to Xgl without degrading performance of OpenGL applications (Xgl did not allow it's clients to use hardware acceleration).

The difference is that both Looking Glass and Xgl works as an proxy X server. While AIGLX was an effort to make client-side libgl implementations usable from the X server itself, which is good for Acceleration of GLX in Indirect mode (hence AIGLX) but also as a general HW acceleration backend for things like XRender and XVideo (for example intel driver emulates XVideo in terms of OpenGL) and with addition of one simple OpenGL extension (ability to create GL texture from contents of X11 window/pixmap) allows all the 3D window manager tricks.
Anyone remember Bumptop

description from wikipedia

BumpTop was a skeuomorphic desktop environment app that simulates the normal behavior and physical properties of a real-world desk and enhances it with automatic tools to organize its contents. It is aimed at stylus interaction, making it more suitable for tablet computers and handheld PCs. It was created at the University of Toronto as Anand Agarawala's master's thesis. Anand Agarawala also gave a presentation at the TED conference about his idea. The 1.0 version was released on April 8, 2009, along with a fully featured pro version as a paid upgrade.[1] On April 30, 2010 the author announced that BumpTop was being discontinued and that they were taking the software "in an exciting new direction."[2] Two days later, it was announced that the company had been acquired by Google. On January 5, 2011, Google released a sneak preview video of Android 3.0 Honeycomb[3] showing a 3D desktop with features purportedly taken from BumpTop.[4][5]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0ODskdEPnQ
What's stopping people from doing that?
And many plants are poisonous at readily-achievable accidental exposure levels. So without any specific references to inform your dismissal, I suspect that you have mistaken specific cases for a general truth.
> I wasn't trying to attract them per se

If you read his comment, it's actually what he tell him to do.

You can have the best content in the world, if no one know it exist, no one will read it. We all believe they will come by themselves and sure it may happens from time to time, but they are the exception, not the rule.
My understanding is that Saudi Arabia went from a dictature but where power was held together by 100 princes, taking decisions with committees, to a dictature with a single strong man (MBS). That's pretty different.
I was very influenced when I read Paul Graham’s assertion that comment quality tends to be inversely proportional to reply depth.

I can’t find the reference but I really took that to heart, and try as hard as I can to avoid replying to a reply to one of my comments, here and elsewhere. The exception would be if I was very unclear originally, or if someone asks something specific that only I can answer.

What’s interesting is how effective this seems to be. If my original statement is worth defending usually someone else will chime in.

Otherwise it’s a great mental exercise to just let the criticism stand, and try to think how to be more airtight in the future.
I did a "wget" on that, and found this:

<!--
/((((((\\\\
=======((((((((((\\\\\
(( \\\\\\\
( (* _/ \\\\\\\
\ / \ \\\\\\________________
| | | </ ((\\\\
o_| / / \ \\\\ \\\\\\\
| ._ ( \ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
| / / / \\\\\\\ \\
.______/\/ / / / \\\
/ __.____/ _/ ________( /\
/ / / ________/`---------' \ / \_
/ / \ \ \ \ \_ \
( < \ \ > / \ \
\/ \\_ / / > )
\_| / / / /
_// _//
/_| /_|
-->

Nice.
That's why we have a representative process to decide on a single course of action when not literally everyone agrees.
Not on stackoverflow, but on some other pages of the stackexchange networks my comments sometimed got deleted without any feedback by whom or why.
I'm not a hardware guy, so I don't know if this is feasible or has ever been implemented, but:

I could imagine "polite" interrupts—where instead of the processor immediately jumping into the ISR's code, it simply places the address of the ISR that "wants to" run into an in-memory ring-buffer via a system register, and then the OS can handle things from there (by e.g. dedicating a core to interrupt-handling by reading the ring-buffer, or just having all cores poll the ring-buffer and atomically update its pointer, etc.)

The major difference with this approach is that pushing the interrupt onto the ring-buffer wouldn't steal cycles from any of the cores; it would be handled by its own dedicated DMA-like logic that either has its own L1 cache lines, or is associated to a particular core's L1 cache (making that core into a conventional interrupt-handling core.) Therefore, you could run hard-real-time code on any cores you like, without needing to disable/mask interrupts; delivering interrupts would become the job of the OS, which could do so any way it liked (e.g. as a POSIX signal, a Mach message, a UDP datagram over an OS-provided domain socket, etc.) Most such mechanisms would come down to "shared memory that the process's runtime is expected to read from eventually."

There would still be one "impolite" hardware interrupt, of course: a pre-emption interrupt, so that the OS can de-schedule a process, or cause a process to jump to something like a POSIX signal handler. However, these "interrupts" would be entirely internal to the CPU—it'd always be one core [running in kernel code] interrupting another [running in userland code.] So this mechanism could be completely divorced from the PIC, which would only deliver "polite" interrupts. (And even this single "impolite" interrupt you could get away from, if the OS's userland processes aren't running on the metal, but rather running off an abstract machine with a reduction-based scheduler, like that of Erlang.)
I agree but very large companies go to extreme lengths to minimize risk in their code so number of stars makes sense from that perspective. What annoys me more is when statups refuse to use a library because it's not being used by any well known company. Then the open source library never gets any opportunity at all to prove itself; not even in a niche of small startups... It's like being homeless; nobody will give you a job no matter how good you are because you stink like failure.
Apple has far more control over their platform than they did in previous platform migrations. They'll more likely announce a 'little checkbox' in the developer tools, put minimal effort into emulation performance, and mandate that applications going forward comply. Problem solved.
> We really need of these dreamers

I don't think that's the way causation flows. We got the dreamers because we did ambitious things. If our country put its mind to establishing a permanent colony on the Moon or on Mars, it would light a fire in us all.
Person Retrieval in Surveillance Video using Height, Color and Gender
I did the math and even if I don't make that much money as the other guy here in this thread, I view it as an investment in terms of a peace of mind and future-proofing.

Computing is plateauing. Provided the machine is durable and doesn't break for at least 10 years, it makes a lot of sense to have something that you won't have to upgrade for a while -- and be very well prepared for everything your work can throw at you.

Plus, I also tried to calculate the price of that iMac Pro if I assemble a similar machine myself. It came out to almost the same price so Apple is not actually charging a lot of premium on that machine in particular. They are more interested in having you as a long-term customer there (and vendor-lock you) and are not charging you exorbitant amounts of money just because -- at least not in that instance.
Seem a great way to get fans to write their promotional stuff for them, and also potentially profit from it.
I've written a blog about this:
https://www.scylladb.com/2018/10/22/the-dark-side-of-mongodb...
Spoiler: It's a big nono
Disclosure: I'm ScyllaDB co-founder
There are a number of comments here who seem genuinely happy about this. This is a perspective that is hard for me to understand, largely because I'm strongly in the pro-privacy, anti-tracking ideology.

So if you are part of the group who sees this as a good thing, I'm genuinely interested to understand why you see this as a good thing and whether you view the mass surveillance of the general public by advertising companies as bad?
"Autodesk is supplying the cloud services that will power the bridge’s data collection and processing"
So the first question is what happens when all these services eventually become obsolete over the bridges life time or if autodesk goes bankrupt?(Of course that may be unlikely if this proposed 'infrastructure as a service' business takes off)
"These sensors will collect structural measurements such as strain, displacement and vibration,"
Now since the bridge has vibration sensors, could one not potentially do gait recognition on people walking across the bridge? And since all this data is stored in 'the cloud,' we now have a bridge which could potentially leak user data. Now to make a ridiculous slippery slope argument, the end result of this may be the house of cards construction building use in Vernor Vinge's Rainbow's End[0], where building s are literally constructed like a house of cards and computer controlled stabilization is used to prevent them from falling over.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbows_End
where is that from?
You are completely correct, I wonder why folks downvoted this.
Ah, but it doesn't state you should love those of equal age or standing - depending on how you interpret 'junior' and 'senior' so there is still some room for complaints here.

Not serious, of course, if any 'CoC' is needed I'd say "just behave" or "do not do unto others what you wouldn't have done upon yourself" should suffice. Rule #9 in the Rule of St. Benedict already states something similar, now just get rid of the rest and you're done.
Framing is useful in politics, but I think the underlying limitation here isn't preconceived notions that you're trying to overcome but the inherent complexity of the system you're suggesting.

Say for instance you make the unit of design the unit of update. Then any breaking changes means the unit needs to support both old and new methods of access. This is often appropriate for something like a public API used by thousands of people. But if used at every resolution, it would add too much complexity and need for legacy handling of access patterns.

So if the unit of update is instead a self-contained ecosystem of components, then the components can all be simultaneously updated, reducing their internal complexity. The external interface should still probably be versioned.

And...well, you've just again wrapped up something in that self-contained ecosystem that could very well be called a "program." In fact, it could also be called an object oriented program: Each component is an object that has an API and hidden data.

I'm a fan of static typing, so I'd answer a firm yes to that question. How they communicate -- message passing seems the right paradigm in most situations. So the interesting (to me) solution would be to standardize static types over a message passing architecture. Something like Google's Protobuf? Or JSON with JSON Schemas? Who knows. Depends on the nature of the problem you're trying to solve.

And that gets to one final point: Most programmers aren't capable of thinking in big systemic terms like this. Probably 90% of developers are going to be restricted to operating within a component. I think this is why React and other web client component architectures are so popular today: They are great enablers of average developers (and, to be fair, can be high leverage for great developers as well -- at least up until the point where they get in the way).
The Dark Side of MongoDB’s New License
Yeah....I don't trust Intel to tell the truth at this point. With their recent i9 Principled Technologies shenanigans, and before that the "Hey look at this new CPU coming" *But we forgot to mention that the demo we showed you was using an industrial chiller. Sure you are still working on 10nm, I believe you. If by "still working on it" you mean you have a skeleton crew figuring out how to dismantle and sell or repurpose your 10nm fabrication line.
IPFS Pinbot
Quick - is 'seconds' a valid value for the second parameter? You don't know; there's no easy way to know.

If they're constants you can look at all constants available for Intl.RelativeTimeFormat, IDEs can do autocomplete, analysers can check if the value is valid and alert if not. That's just off the top of my head; I imagine there are even more reasons.
Please don't argue unceasingly for your preferred course of action when a decision for some other course has already been made. That tends to block the activity's progress.
Ask HN: Subscription management as service with cryptocurrency acceptance
Any subscription as management service with ability for manual transfer ( wire transfers ) and cryptocurrency.

Somtimes, customers do not trust us with their card in which case, we want to offer wire and crypto but stripe etc...seem to have no support for this.

Any opensource project or paid service?
Quick summary of that Medium post for everyone - Some unknown people accused a SE site of... something on Twitter. People got mad about it. A SE employee weighed in in support of the tweeter. Some other people claim the accusation of whatever it is is nonsense. And I don't have the slightest idea what happened or whose side to take.