skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
True, consumption of drugs generally makes the user happy without necessarily impacting anyone else. Use of this vidya cheat makes the buyer happy in a way that worsens the experience for large numbers of other players, kinda like if I decided to hold a paintball game at a shopping mall.

to be frank, I don't care about the troubles of a software company very much, or think this is an important legal fight for them to win. But people who use cheat software to get more enjoyment out of multiplayer games are essentially selfish losers. I mean, there are game mods which were developed specifically for humorous free-for-all play where players have infinite everything and can clown off to their hearts' content, but cheaters and griefers don't seem to enjoy those games because winning and losing are irrelevant.

I don't play a lot of games these days and the games I do play aren't that social, but I've noticed that when I do play socially the people who spend money on special item sales and the like also tend to be verbally abusive when defeated in PvP.
So you don't really know what I was originally talking about yet you continue to act like you do? My point was in a response to the OP's implication that somehow the original OOP literature was perverted by misunderstandings and wrong implementations of the current generation, as if the original OOP documents were somehow "pure".

I pointed out that just because the literature is original doesn't mean it can't be superseded. I gave generics as an example that was later implemented in OOP languages and fail to see how implementing these perverted the original intentions.

I was then told that OOP intentions were originally meant to be dynamically typed and that the static typing of generics was meant to put it towards the original intentions of this dynamic structure (this is untrue because Alan Kay just didn't like static typing, but didn't make dynamic typing a requirement for OOP). Upon further research, the earliest OOP concepts were explained in the 1960's and the first OO language (Simula) was statically typed and a superset of ALGOL 60 which was a language made in 1960, with Simula following in 1965. Smalltalk came in at 1972 (around the time of generics) and is considered the definitive OOP language which is dynamically typed.

So its hard to say, without direct sources, what the original intentions of OOP were, but considering OOP appeared before the first languages that contained generics (i.e. 1970's), generics is an idea that superseded OOP.

Considering the utility of generics, its clear that later concepts that were added to OOP did not somehow perverse the original literature.

So we've established the following:
1) The earliest OOP language (Simula) was statically typed.
2) Generics came in after Simula
3) The original intention of OOP could probably be attributed to Alan Kay, who created Smalltalk, but it borrowed heavily from Simula. And while Alan Kay coined the term OOP, the idea was not created in a vacuum as OOP concepts predate Smalltalk.

Hopefully this provides some clarification. But my guess is people will continue to misinterpret what I meant.
What bothers me is that this has to be designed under the assumption that the other car could be malicious and that any input received could be intentionally deceptive. I'm just not convinced that auto (or aerospace) companies have a high level of competency in thinking like this. They're used to thinking about physical defects, weather effects, bad users, and the like. It's very different if you have internet connected cars that could be (possibly in bulk) remotely hacked and given instructions to intentionally disrupt other cars.

Everything I have ever seen about vulnerabilities in car software systems has indicated a very poor understanding of the threat landscape on the part of car manufacturers and an embarrassingly weak ability to competently deal with these threats. So far this has been understandable since cars have been minimally networked, but going forward, I agree with GP that the appropriate term is "terrifying".
The combination of democracy and term limits means that iterative change should be the norm. But something isn’t working right.
Ruling the majority of OO code out there as "bad" is hubris and ignores reality. It is easy to do OOP wrong and hard to get it right.

It wasn't the inherent nature of OOP that caused that terrible style to become dominant. It's a style that was actively taught and promoted since at least the mid-1990s. It was taught, and taken for granted, that objects were containers for mutable values. Deep inheritance hierarchies were taught as the norm, not the exception. Java was built around this model and then became one of the most popular programming languages in industry, and learning materials for Java reinforced the style. Everyone interviewing for a Java programming position from the late 1990s through the mid 2000s had to learn special jargon related to this style and regurgitate it in interviews. We're suffering through a hangover from decades of this horrible version of OOP being promoted as the "right" way to write software in industry and academia.
They don't know how much you're tipping in the beginning so you're almost never going to get "superior" service on the first go. Also highly dependent on context. Moving some food around doesn't have a big spectrum of quality.

Tipping voluntarily as you say is just building up a relationship with money. Neither unique nor special, but it's not exactly what's being discussed here.
Actually, iPhone pricing from US telcos used to only show the discounted price, with the carrier subsidy. You paid sales tax on the full price, but that number was in the fine print.

These days you can buy it either way, so it's more obvious.
> And I wouldn't share internals anyway.

No matter how disturbing they would be to the broader public?
Cake has some interesting concepts. Scobleizer wrote about it (https://www.cake.co/conversations/t2MT5Yr/can-cake-clean-up-...)
If cross-cutting concerns are making your architecture unwieldy, you likely haven't used composition enough / are doing OOP the bad way (tm).
US inequality is worse for the same reason the US produces unusually gigantic corporations that other developed nations can't produce.

If you come up with a great business in the US, you can relatively rapidly scale it into the world's largest economy (typically within one generation), and it will make you extraordinarily wealthy. There's nowhere else on earth that you can so easily do that, except for recently in China.

The fortunes of Gates, Buffett, Bezos, Zuckerberg, Page, Brin, Ellison, Waltons, Ballmer, Koch, Knight, Bloomberg, Dell, Jobs, Musk, Hamm, et al. are so epic precisely because of this effect. In Europe, their wealth at the top is heavily dominated by dynasties that took multiple generations to build up. You can more easily accomplish the same thing in one generation in the US.

Sam Walton faced off against huge retail competitors like Sears and Kmart, starting from the middle of nowhere and one store. In his lifetime he was able to scale it across the US, replace Sears as the largest retailer, and make himself the richest person in the US.

If you wanted to tamp down on this effect, you'd have to apply an aggressive living wealth tax. Otherwise it will continue to exist perpetually no matter what (income taxes won't work, the US already has one of the most progressive tax systems; death taxes won't work, that only cuts into dynastic wealth transfer, not wealth built up in one generation).
Did I Make a Mistake Selling My Social-Media Darling to Yahoo?
A good chunk of Olympic National Park seems to be an opportunity zone. Can anyone fill me in on what an 'investment' there might entail? IIRC, commercial activities are usually heavily restricted in national parks.
This. I was born the year that the Sesame Street premiered and it was part of my morning toddler routine in the early 1970s. Watching the show with my daughter in the 1990s, I noticed Elmo's presence transmogrify from just another Muppet character to having his own segment. As his airtime expanded, that scratchy, helium-stricken voice could no longer be borne by my sensitive ears. To me, that was the death knell for Sesame Street. Kudos to Mr. Rogers for not giving Henrietta Pussycat her own segment ("Meow meow I'm da meow meow bomb meow meow").
Looks like they still don't have the "standard interior" option available, so that's extra $5k. Once (or if) they offer standard interior, we're talking $40k. If they're calling this battery option mid-range and it's 260mi range, then it's sounds like we're yet to see the 200+mi (maybe 210-220) $35k car. They're probably not able to produce the $35k car yet without losing money.
"A house is a machine for living in."

I hold largely to this view, and it is reflected in the design of this house, and indeed the design of my own house.

But it's also important to introduce some elements of style, whimsy, randomness, impracticality. Especially for an engineer, it's important to not let practicality be the sole design value.

The Eames's house and Alvar Aalto's house are some guideposts I've found valuable.
it's a bit complicated, because the US is also increasing the threat that those countries are under. With a military presence in 100 around the globe, the biggest stockpile of nuclear weapons, the diplomacy of a punk band, and operations to de-stabilize multiple countries, there is a lot that get reflected on the allies.
The devil is in the details. What's the definition of an "opportunity zone", for instance?

We already have a similar program for EB-5 visas; the definition of economically challenged area is often an up-and-coming area gerrymandered to include just enough poor people.

Source with rather clickbaity introduction: https://www.citylab.com/equity/2017/05/kushner-companies-rea...
We came to the same conclusion! Hidden state does make debugging difficult. Glad to hear our data points corroborate.
I have only one question: How did they validated this? For grand claims like this you need to run controlled experiment for many years. The reason I say this is because typically these studies are funded by commercial interests with the goal to cite these studies in their marketing material.
And those services exist without any exchange of money?
I have a (horrible) solution for that as well. Make the board criminally liable for the actions of employees, contractors, or other agents where such actions are a condition to the employment or contract.

Tax rates will probably need to go down and this is obviously just a thought experiment because no change is possible as we are too comfortable being hypocrites.
Yes, very helpful, thank you! I'd like to see methods like this go mainstream. The prevalent view these days seems to be that software construction begins and ends with unit tests... I don't know how Uncle Bob and his ilk managed to drown out all of the other approaches to construction, but it's always bothered me that even lightweight approaches to verification (like Design by Contract) haven't gotten the same traction. (I suspect it's because formal verification involves more requirements gathering and design work up front, but a lot of teams short-change that because "we're doing agile!!")

Anyway, thank you for putting this out there. I took a look at your first couple of chapters on Safari and your treatment of the subject is much more approachable to me than the wall of math I encountered in Leslie Lamport's stuff.
FWIW "The Box" is on the current CNO reading list:

https://www.navy.mil/ah_online/cno-readingprogram/hvo.html
The problem is not wealth inequality. The problem is lack of wealth. Even if you taxed every last billionaire in this country at 100% and stole every single asset from them, it still wouldn't get you anywhere: 2.7 trillion/ 300 million = roughly 8000$ per head, after that you'd get only tiny fraction, you couldn't squeeze any more out of them because they don't have it.

Even those at the 1% mark may struggle to afford a home because if you're earning that income, it means your paying through the nose on housing: 1.5M or more for a mediocre housing.

It's time we faced facts. We're not nearly as wealthy as we think we are. and it's time we started asking why? this question isn't easily answered and has many many many reasons, many due to economics and our lack of understanding of economics.
> The disclosure when you pay for it is very clear.

IMO their marketing probably leads customers to be more optimistic about the expected payout of their $x,000 investment than is justified. Though that is not necessarily deliberate deception, they may be unrealistically optimistic themselves.

Misleading marketing or not, I'd say it's sketchy in the sense that it's an over-promise. If they eventually have to face a reality where their hardware doesn't it cut it, they might be on the hook for thousands of customers' respective thousands of dollars of pre-orders, which is a huge capital liability. Quite possibly 10 figures.
The fact the the original code is a straw-man is discussed. The fact the flexibility is being removed is discussed too, along with why it was there and hits on better ways to re-achieve it later. It's mentioned that these were going to be covered in a follow-up.
You need to work on your speed reading skills before throwing shade...
Dropbox can now be accessed while writing on Gmail
I've been reading a book on the philosophy of statistics, and what is interesting is that the statistical community has been, historically, completely divided on that question.

The only thing they agree on is the equations. Once you ask the question of "and what situation are we facing in the real world" consensus starts to break down.

Interestingly, the core of probability - the "Random Variable" is almost completely unobservable in the world of science. Everything in classical mechanics turned out to be deterministic. The parts that were grappled with statistics were probably not random effects, but unpredictable deterministic effects. For example, the measurement errors could be treated as random variables, but ultimately were not expected to be random in cause.

Compare this to geometry and algebra, where I would argue it is easier to find a 'real' example right from the get go. Opinions, obviously, vary.
Here's a map showing all the OZ's: https://www.policymap.com/maps?i=9964345&btd=6&period=2018&l...

Anything purple on there is designated an OZ.
I know you're arguing for "words are communication", and I'm a writer, so I certainly I agree with that. In general.

OOP is not a word, though. It's a jargon term. You can't redefine those. They mean what they originally meant, because if they don't, then you lose the ability to understand what the people doing real work using the word by its proper definition are doing. Jargon terms don't drift.

To be clear, I'm mostly talking about the same thing that is true of the term "Begging the question." Laymen can use it to mean whatever they want—and I don't begrudge them that, it's a phrase in a language and people will do what they like with it. But that lay-usage will never change what the phrase means in the context of formal deductive reasoning.

Likewise, programmers can use "objects" and "OOP" to mean whatever they want it to mean—but when having a formal academic discussion about programming language theory, an "object" refers to a specific thing (that came about in LISP at MIT before even Kay; Kay just was the first to write down his observations of the properties of "objects") and "OOP" refers to programming that focuses on such "objects" (as implemented in Smalltalk, CLOS, POSIX processes, Erlang processes, bacteria sharing plasmids, or computers on a network; but not by C++ or Java class-instances.)

I don't think we disagree, here; you're arguing that the lay-usage is X, and the lay-usage is X. I'm just pointing out that the lay-usage is irrelevant in the context of a discussion that requires formal academic analysis of the concept.
Exactly what I was looking for. Thank you.
Here is the catch in your statement:

"giving them some sort of responsibility to complete those tasks"

1) Why do you have to give this on a daily basis? Assuming everyone in your team is dedicated and responsible, then why.

2) asking for help and advice should not wait for the next standup. If someone is stuck, they should reach out for help right away than waiting for next standup.
Are you hiring? Where are these mythical FP jobs?
Given that the delivery dates are 6-10 weeks in the future, they have plenty of time to put the correct size battery packs in. The previous examples of software-limited packs were in situations where they offered a bunch of sizes, more than 2, in a much lower volume product, and didn't want to produce or keep producing all of them. This time it's only 2 sizes in a higher volume product.
It is easy to control the security of a traffic lights system.

It is near impossible to control all vehicles for the introduction of malicious actors.
> Bad code is bad code, no matter which language.

It’s easier to write bad code in some languages than others.

> Languages won't save you from poor design choices.

They do. They save you from entire classes of bugs, and make it less easy to shoot yourself in the foot.

Do we need to have this conversation every time we talk about language design? Do you think the tool you use to achieve a task doesn’t matter?
> The misogyny, the militarism, all of it remains unexamined.

I think two things you absolutely can't defensibly say about Heinlein is that his views about gender roles and relations, or about the relationship of society to it's military in either an institutional or individual sense are “unexamined”.

There may have been blind spots nonetheless—I don't think anyone can be free of those—but “unexamined”, no.
> We urgently need frontend dev support :)

Tell them you are you are a frontend dev ;-)
> the shrimp evolved a two-layered structure: one made of ceramic, which is brittle only when under tension but here is compressed heavily; and the other made of a polymer, which is stronger under tension as it is here

That's pretty much how a composite bow works, as i understand it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_bow
Tesla releases lower cost, mid-range Tesla Model 3
I had assumed he already left. His voice seems pretty different from the 80s when I watched.
> More likely, the author built something he found useful, and contributed it to the project.

It required a service set up by the project itself. And this after years (decades?) of explicitly rejecting the concept of automated patching (because it supposedly engendered "a false sense of security"). Come on.
Obviously they didn't. Why are you so mean and assume the worst?
As NASA's prized telescopes falter, astronomers fear losing their eyes in space
is fasting really not enough?
Automatically Finding Patches Using Genetic Programming
It's because every single article that's promoting ECS does so by comparing it against incorrect inheritance-based code.
The amount of time you see newbies jumping on the ECS bandwagon because inheritance is bad, while they don't yet understand OOP, ECS, procedural, relational, or functional... is infuriating.

Do both. Teach how to use composition. Teach how to use the relational model. Don't avoid teaching either by using misleading sales tactics.
Yeah, DROP PARTITION is definitely going to be much more efficient than DELETE + cleanup. No doubt about that.

Not sure what postgresql.conf tuning you've tried, but in general we recommend making autovacuum more frequent, but performing the cleanup in smaller chunks. Also, batching inserts usually helps a lot. But maybe you've already tried all that. There's definitely a limit - a balance between ingestion and cleanup.
Paper airplanes are generally symmetrical, which means you can begin by folding the paper in half and using that fold to determine where the nose is. Unless you mean something else?
Using FOSSA to check open source licenses
congratulations to a lifetime achievement.
give the man a cookie!
A DIY mobile phone
Interesting view.
How should i, as a sysadmin who just writes bash and powershell scripts, start to learn _serious_ programming? Is it still worth to force myself into OOP?
On the plus side, the Model 3 is much better with the cooling issues that S/X have when track racing. What cars this inexpensive have good downforce?
I think it's a mistake to view “explored in fiction” with “endorsed”.
Sort of an obituary for the house: https://www.contrapositivediary.com/?p=652

Which apparently was completely remodeled in 1995. Sad, but not entirely unexpected.
Tesla releases Mid-Range Model 3
"Big data" is anything that's too big to cram into a standard database and still access in reasonable times. There's a practical definition, it doesn't just mean "YUUUGE".
Url changed from http://front.math.ucdavis.edu/1810.07304.
Oh! I honestly haven't realized we already have release notes for 12 ...
Latest ToS update revokes your right to sue Discord [arbitration]
Good  deal
We are a group comprised of certified hackers, crackers
and developers. we guarantee succcess HAMZABEN.D@HACKERMAIL.COM

in the job done as fast as possible and we provide of
the job done ...we have an office and HAMZABEN.D@HACKERMAIL.COM

return policy WE LOAD MONEY TO ALL USA BANK ACOUNT AND CREDIT CARD SAME TO
CANADA NOUPFRONT FEE ON THAT ONE WE SHARE 5050 PERCENTAGE

HACK INTO ANY SCHOOL DATABASE AND CHANGE UNIVERSITY GRADES, no matter
how secured, the school site is lawyer@presidency.com

Our hackers are capable of following hacking services also:
Facebook hacking
HACK INTO SECURITY AGENCY WEBSITE AND ERASE CRIMINAL RECORDS
Website Hacking by pro hackers
Social Networks Hacks
Email Hacking lawyer@presidency.com
Clients based Customization
Hacking Servers
Hacking Iphone
Real Time Hacking
Premium backdoor service
HAMZABEN.D@HACKERMAIL.COM
Hi-jack Domain
UNTRACEABLE INTERNET PROTOCOL etc
hamzaben.d@hackermail.com
There are a ton of tech companies in Pioneer Square. Geekwire has this 5 year out of date map, https://www.geekwire.com/2013/pioneer-square-tech-map-techie... but just walking through there, Pioneer Square is tech city during the day. From trendy bars to expensive boutique clothing stores. Other startups, such as Real Self, have come into being since that (ancient) list was made.

There are multiple co-working spaces within blocks of each other, The Pioneer Collective, Galvanize, Impact Hub, and at least 2 accelerators that I know of are based near Pioneer Square.
Exactly this. Unless of course you became an Iridium level donor with the caveat that someone promised to build a Docker clone for you.

Edit: And in response to toyg's comment, here is a link to a video of a talk by the developer in question, who mentions in passing that he builds things for OpenBSD that help him put it into production. This is less than a minute into his talk. Please educate yourself about the project before making ridiculous demands on the devs' time and falsely assigning wrong motives to them. It's unfriendly.

https://archive.fosdem.org/2018/schedule/event/openbsd_base_...
We are a group comprised of certified hackers, crackers
and developers. we guarantee succcess HAMZABEN.D@HACKERMAIL.COM

in the job done as fast as possible and we provide of
the job done ...we have an office and HAMZABEN.D@HACKERMAIL.COM

return policy WE LOAD MONEY TO ALL USA BANK ACOUNT AND CREDIT CARD SAME TO
CANADA NOUPFRONT FEE ON THAT ONE WE SHARE 5050 PERCENTAGE

HACK INTO ANY SCHOOL DATABASE AND CHANGE UNIVERSITY GRADES, no matter
how secured, the school site is lawyer@presidency.com

Our hackers are capable of following hacking services also:
Facebook hacking
HACK INTO SECURITY AGENCY WEBSITE AND ERASE CRIMINAL RECORDS
Website Hacking by pro hackers
Social Networks Hacks
Email Hacking lawyer@presidency.com
Clients based Customization
Hacking Servers
Hacking Iphone
Real Time Hacking
Premium backdoor service
HAMZABEN.D@HACKERMAIL.COM
Hi-jack Domain
UNTRACEABLE INTERNET PROTOCOL etc
hamzaben.d@hackermail.com
Missed that. Fixed now. Thanks!