skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I already accepted that blockchain offers value in criminal money transfers. Obviously censorship resistance is criminal in repressive regimes. It just is a bit difficult in western world to sell a product whose only actual value proposition is criminal money transfer.
Thanks! This diagram generated by rails-erd is indeed very nice. Something we should definitely look into to improve our visualization.

I think both tools serve slightly different purpose. How we're different is that we started by being a tool to help you draw databae diagrams by typing code. And adding Rails support was added rather quickly recently.
We'll see. Often talk like that is just buzzword soup. What matters to large companies like IBM is money from services, not owning the coolest tech stack. If it is clearly contributing lots of money or it has a champion in IBM they'll keep it.

In progress greenfield projects with no obvious monetisation are just the sort of thing that gets cut in this sort of merger, after the assurances that redhat will be run as a completely independent unit are forgotten and a new manager comes in looking to trim fat.

I use coreos and am now very concerned about its future.
HTTP Error 502: Bad Gateway
Have you read Gab's twitter feed? The whole "We're just for free speech" spiel would be a whole lot more believable if they weren't also constantly spewing reprehensible rhetoric.

https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1056266704148262912
https://twitter.com/ClenchedFisk/status/1027690034718224384?...

(Note, they started deleting a lot of their own old posts)
6 Steps to Write a Winning Sales Proposal
Java's Insecure Parallelism [pdf] (1999)
It's literally one of the main jobs of the bank to make sure that it can get back the money that it lends!

A family borrowing too much is their problem, banks not doing their jobs is a national problem which should not be rewarded by bailouts, but by jail time and bankruptcies.
> I support lots of initiatives from the EU resulting from the tech world being unable to self-regulate.

I agree for the GDPR but not with this copyright directive, it's a massive disaster lobbied by the large copyright holders.
Not too expensive if you're Beijing. 75% of hashpower is centralized within the PRC. All Beijing has to do is inform the miners they now do their bidding. This kind of thing happens all the time in the PRC. The 'community' lost this fight ages ago, at this point Bitcoin effectively operates at the pleasure of Beijing, and one day that may very well change.
React hooks (overview)
A lot of those businesses listet will just be another legal arrangement that replaces employees with sub contractors or something else (trucking, construction, etc)
Well....There is a stark difference in appreciation for TCP/IP the computer science protocol versus the Cesspool that is the internet or the early AOL crap...
Clojure.spec Beginner's FAQ
How Google AdWords works
I don't understand how google AdWords works, but I thought the top CPCs hovered around $90†. How is that different from a "lead" and who is paying $700 for that?
https://www.iqinfotech.co.in/marketing-services/google-adwords/
They used horses, generally.
Deeply regrettable. One of my colleagues identified and fixed an issue with Duplicity while he was working on a backups subsystem for our server estate, and after a quick check with a Director I was able to sign off the work for release back to the Duplicity project.
iCE40 ICs have both 10kHz and 48MHz oscillators built-in, as well as multiply/divide capable PLLs that work up to 250 MHz.
In the land of zero privacy the banks weren't able to figure out if an individual would be able to pay back a loan? Or they didn't want to?
Black SSBBW and White SSBBW, Which One Are More Popular?
I'm looking forward to seeing what they do but right now my impression is that they're still getting on their feet.

If you go to the page an select builds from the drop down half of them weren't available last I checked. They're new so I'd give them some space for maturation.
Lehman was insolvant, short sellers didn't create the crash nor the recession. 2008 isn't the story of a malicious rumor that went wrong.
I mean, a lot of individual churches have closed or shutdown in recent years, especially so in some part of the US and Europe.
The most bothering part is not the objective, or the nature of the law. That we can argue.

But it's the absurdity of the fact that the EU can pass a law which has such massive and widespread implications - where the wording is unclear, bizarre, makes little sense, and can hardly be applied.

Surely there are smart people working on this, but collectively they are morons. Utter idiots.

Whatever it is, it has to be clean, simple, effective, spelled out ... or else there just shouldn't be a law.
That's great news! Kudos to everyone who made it possible!
Today’s college students have been raised to view discomfort as intolerable
The government does not have opportunity cost for money that it prints out of thin air.
Taking on the big ones on their own turf isn't going to work, I think. By that turf I mean supporting years old versions running in dusty custom data centers.

I'd suggest building an auto-upgrade system on top of Arch (or Alpine), and go for immutable infrastructure as the selling point. That's stepping on CoreOS's toes a bit, but I haven't seen any progress from that crowd ever since Red Hat bought them, so it'll probably get even worse now.

That way you can target AWS/Azure/$OTHER_MODERN_STUFF in a more focused way, and you won't be stuck on supporting months/years old versions of the OS.
I still fail to see how this will help Red Hat achieve "even more", as they claim in the statement. Sad day!
Show HN: Sorting Algorithms with Sound in JavaScript
That's not an assumption you can make in general. For example, paint.net is not found at paint.net.
> and argue with them about why they're wrong.

It's hard to argue with people that are not even wrong. For example, some hold beliefs like "Women are subhuman and only exist to serve men and were created for that purpose."

How do you even argue against something like that?
> > If it is, why don't Conservative just create their own tech stuff?

> That's literally what Gab is.

You're doing "conservatives" a disservice if you claim that anything with a conservative bent would have to end up as the racist cesspool Gab is, and where Gab constantly makes crazy statements themselves (FFS, https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1056266704148262912 )
If they want that sort of dedication they can give me equity or back off.
"My airlines is the worst in the world, but you have no choice." — the founder.

https://ekonomi.kompas.com/read/2015/02/21/152425026/Rusdi.K...

(sorry I can't find equivalent story in English)
Hi Bred, This is really nice work. Will play with it for sure.

Is this heavily coupled with python? Or can it be extended to any other language like C++ or Java easily?
More Tollways Option for Funding – Toll Free Roads – Alliance Toll Free
Same situation with the bus.
It is and it has been? They've open sourced a ton just this last year removing most differences between OracleJDK and OpenJDK. I think it's just a few small compatibility variences left.
Open offices with library rules often work fine. The problem is more when you have no rules, at which point it's an interruption free for all.

Libraries are the ultimate open offices after all. Tons of work used to and still gets done in libraries, and they're pretty much all open tables.
Lots of court filings and records are sealed. Its really not surprising at all. It's not really unwritten law just because it wasn't public.
I don't know what you're talking about but you appear to be expressing insecurity of some kind.
I am ignorant of this particular aspect of C and most of C in general, but shouldn't the kernel developers try to follow the C standard instead of just a compiler's?
Quick, get ride of RHEL
⸮ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony_punctuation
Code reviews, aka opportunities for dickheads to demonstrate how clever they are.

"Did you know you can replace that entire function with a regex?"
Thank you for the feedback, you make very reasonable points. Here are a couple thoughts!

1. I'll be the first to admit that excluding the financials was largely due to the lack of my web design experience – creating pretty tables on WP is harder than I wish!

2. I'll make a wild guess that 90% of the general public doesn't know how to read an income statement. For the 10% of those who do, and read SEC documents regularly, there are existing paid tools like BAMSEC that you can use to improve the usability of the SEC website. BAMSEC has power features like ability to download financial statements directly as Excel spreadsheets.

What I'd like to know is if there is an interested readership among the 90% that are intellectually curious - HN readers, for example - and find the S-1 language readable and interesting, when presented without the baggage of 1) navigating through the dense SEC EDGAR search system and 2) legal template language that represents bulk of the S-1 doc.
Experiment with free versions of enterprise software? For example Nutanix [0] or setup a Openshift/OKD cluster [1]. Install a Hypervisor [2][3] and start rolling out virtual machines for smaller projects, use a devops approach automating everything with Ansible for example (Infrastructure as Code)... And many more possibilities, or donate the hardware to me so I can use it to do all this ;)

[0] https://www.nutanix.com/products/community-edition/
[1] https://www.okd.io/
[2] https://my.vmware.com/web/vmware/evalcenter?p=free-esxi6
[3] https://www.ovirt.org/
Actually it's categorized as "Serverless" on their blog, and it appears 4 times in the article.
We should go old-school, and call serverless-functions "CGI". It's not too far off the mark ..
In the end this boils down to the problem of interruptions.

People often discuss the topic with smalltalk and such in mind: https://heeris.id.au/trinkets/ProgrammerInterrupted.png

The code reviews go more to the core of the problem. Interruptions are often necessary but, for the person being interrupted, they always suck.

How much should we try to learn to multitask? Where's the boundary where it stops being useful and starts being toxic?
>The actions of a mentally ill person has triggered full on censorship

How do you know he was mentally ill? Lot of non-mentally ill people commit crimes. Were all the Nazis mentally ill? Was Hitler mentally ill?
"However, if a reviewer comes back with significant comments on the code I sent out"...

This is what I see day in day out: we have a lot of tooling for the reviewing process but don't seem to have any or very little tooling for the design/discussion phase _before_ someone starts implementing...
I've found that favoring full time pair programming and not reviewing work that was soloed upon unless the author explicitly asked for it because of self-identified uncertainty or caution has resulted in a better workflow with little to no actual hit to quality.

Additionally, proper test-driving and testing practices are incredibly effective ways to enforce high quality code. Again, this comes down to culture and practices. Teaching and encouraging good testing will pay off far more than enforcing "two pairs of eyes" type rules.

My experience is that code review is great at linting, nit-picking, and causing arguments about idiom. The times a bug was okayed with 8 different :thumbs-up: or "lgtm" on the PR in github are uncountable. It's not that code review doesn't work, because I'm sure it often catches plenty of bugs, it's just that I have no reason to believe it's more reliable than pairing or letting authors ask for help explicitly when they need it.

Disclaimer: I spent my formative years at Pivotal Labs. Yadah Yadah Yadah it's a cult of pair programmers so something about a grain of salt.
ĐẤT+NỀN+BÌNH+CHÁNH+│+DỰ+ÁN+ĐẤT+NỀN+BÌNH+CHÁNH
I love code-reviews. With the right people, they can be useful both to achieve high-standards of code quality and also improve your own engineering process. The requirements are quite high, I think you need some combination of the following:

1. Both reviewer and reviewee are focusing on getting the best outcome possible, in good faith and with generosity.

2. The reviewer concedes that there can be equally valid approaches to a given problem or taste wrt. aesthetics. They do not try to gratuitously force their style upon the reviewee. The reciprocal must hold as well.

3.The reviewer makes practical suggestions and ideally accompany their comments with snippets of code. They involve themselves into being part of the solution.

4. The reviewer focuses on the substance of the pull request. That means putting in the time to understand the real logic, putting themselves in the shoes of the reviewee (with their help), and trying to challenge it so that the limitations of the approach are known and documented.

5. The reviewee makes an effort at slicing their request into readable and compact sub-PRs if needed. Similarly, the reviewer makes a best-effort attempt at starting their review within a reasonable time.

Those are central aspects of a productive engineering culture anyway. You only need to find someone else that shares those "values" (i.e focusing on the best outcome possible as a sort of devotion to Engineering - so to speak) to grow this attitude within your company.
Churches (in America) are like lotteries and other fantasy businesses. When they get boring, churches go out of business and they get replaced by other churches that promise a chance at a better prize. There are parts of USA where many old church buildings are for sale and can be had for a song.
I seem to recall Gil Amelio once saying something similar...
Besides the battles over efficiency (it's bad) and novelty (it's not really), there are some truly fundamental blockers to adopting cryptocurrencies. For instance, this poor Redditor lost the keys to a wallet with $40,000 of crypto in it [1]. This happens all the time. Being your own bank is literally the worst. Plenty of jokes ensued:

"It's just like the time I lost my car keys and need to buy a new car next day."

"It’s just like the time that I lost my house keys and had to move into a homeless shelter."

"It's just like the time I forgot my personal question to my 401k account and I got locked out forever, nobody could help me, and I lost the entire balance."

Unlike all the efficiency and speed questions, this part here is a stated, inalienable objective of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. This is the expected behavior. Some clown designed it to work like this. Imagine grandma trying to use this. Remember that time PayPal locked your account and you were so mad you couldn't get at your $600 for a few weeks? Now imagine you lost your life savings because you can't remember your password and literally nobody can help you now, or ever again - and thats the point.

I'd imagine it'll destroy itself anyways, it seems like any random walk ends in 100% of coins lost to human inability to preserve access.

Who cares how amazing the system is technically? It's designed to be actively hostile to human users.

[1] https://i.imgur.com/RP7ighy.jpg
Not if it's a goosebumps novel (they have you jump to specific pages based on choices you make).
I assume it was private because it would hurt JP Morgan's stock price if it was made public. You could say investors have a right to know but my guess is JPMorgan wanted to keep it private.
Wasn't removal of VLA also a requirement for building the kernel with clang/llvm ?

Does this mean that mainline now builds with llvm?
,,Reviewing code is one of those things that I would enjoy if I had infinite time, but that I find a nuisance when I don't.''

I can't really imagine any work that can be more important than code review for other people. This is the way Linus can have a 100x leverage on the Linux code base. This is the most important and hardest work in the Bitcoin code base as well, probably apart from cryptography research. I think the bigger problem is that code reviewing may be not well compensated, not that it's not important.
React Hooks App Template for Dart, Bundled with TypeScript, HMR, Docker, SSR And
The C standard covers a lot of details and cases that the kernel doesn't need to worry about. That makes the C standard a lot more restricted and constrained. GNUC has some convenient features and extensions because it makes assumptions not guaranteed by the C standard that happen to work for all the platforms that Linux cares about, and also, not beeing driven by a comittee, it can generally iterate and improve the language in a more agressive and fast way.
Every implementation of close, except on HP/UX, will close the file descriptor before returning upon a signal. But POSIX has actually approved posix_close, which will guarantee the proper, desired semantics. See http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=529

The semantics of POSIX advisory locks were inherited; they codified the most widely used existing implementation. The ergonomics suck, but they offer one distinct advantage: you can query the PID of the lock holder, something not possible when a lock can be inherited. This can be useful for PID file locks where you can query the PID directly rather than trying to write and read it from the PID file; there's no loaded gun lying around, although there's still the TOCTTOU race between querying and kill'ing. In any event, "file-private" advisory locks are likely to be standardized and are already implemented by both Linux and FreeBSD. See http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=768 The semantics are not coincidentally very similar to BSD flock, and the types similar to POSIX. Which is noteworthy because it's an example of how paying attention to POSIX and portability issues can help you triangulate the evolution of Linux interfaces down the road.

It's not like Linux is without its warts. The kernel's implementation of setuid & friends is per thread. That's not only horribly inconvenient semantics for 99% of use cases, it's a security nightmare. And glibc and musl must implement an obscenely complex dance to get process-wide, atomic behavior. There are also many legacy Linux interfaces that the project is committed to supporting because of its commitment to backwards compatibility. I don't understand the logic of pointing out all the anachronisms of POSIX (e.g. advisory locks) while ignoring the anachronisms of Linux.

I never said POSIX was perfect, and I'm not arguing to only stick to POSIX. There's no substitute for using your own good judgment. I'm simply saying that too many people don't appreciate the benefits of POSIX and portability more generally, which are substantial. The benefits aren't just the standard itself or the ability to use an alternative OS like FreeBSD--if you didn't care before you're almost certainly never going to--but the fact that every Unix vendor tracks the standard and, to a lesser extent, avoids gratuitous incompatibilities with other POSIX environments. Standardization signals important information about the stability of an interface, and the process of standardization channels the evolution of interfaces long before they become standardized (if ever). POSIX and the BSDs matter to Linux development; and they should matter to Linux developers even if they'll never run code outside of a Linux environment.

It's also worth mentioning that Red Hat basically steers POSIX, now, judging by the Austin Group Bugs issue tracker. So while some teams are rather antagonistic toward POSIX (e.g. Poettering and systemd team), others put considerable effort into it.
There is a terminating NULL at the end of the array to stop the iteration.
You know what I hate more than code review?

Shipping bugs.

The author of this piece admits that they have to change the code they write in response to comments. This means the code review is flagging areas of improvement. Surely the resulting code is better than the original code (otherwise I'd expect the author to push back on the comments instead of implementing bad suggestion).

Similarly, when acting as the code reviewer, the author is giving feedback to others (rather than just rubber-stamping the PR), and presumably that feedback is implemented.

So code review seems to be doing its job here. It's producing better code. Ultimately I think the problem is revealed at the end, where the author says they feel like code review is optional. If you think it's optional, then the delays inherent in review are going to feel like artificial slowdowns.

The better way to think about it is that code review simply isn't optional. Yes it can be a pain, and there's a lot of friction in the process, and our tooling kinda sucks for it. But it's a necessary step. I can't even begin to count how many bugs my team has avoided shipping due to code review. And I always get really annoyed when I run across a bug that should have been caught in code review but wasn't for whatever reason (perhaps a more junior coder did the review and therefore missed stuff that a more senior coder would have caught). Code review stops bugs before they happen. And the best bug is the one that was never shipped to customers.
Ferris is a marketing man and he's good at that (proof: You bought his book, and even read it. QED)
The History of Russian Terrorism
this won't work with non Americans, good luck identifying local European products with different diet and home cooking

they would never guess i have children because there is zero children targeted products in my fridge and only products for children there are yogurts, fruit and vegetables
I use Qubes OS [0] and keep things strictly separated to minimize damage as much as possible. Besides that be careful what I download or visit online and use the standard tools if by chance I would think the system is compromised.

[0] https://www.qubes-os.org/
For me, I've never had an issue context switching from various branches and PRs. After a moment or two of looking through my notes and my code I can quickly get back up to speed with what I was doing.

The issue I end up taking with code review is cases where reviewers end up forcing their own stylistic choices to the detriment of my time. Insisting that all equal signs be lined up, insisting that variables must be spaced in a very certain way etc. I'm diligent at following the style guide for whatever language I'm working in, but the most annoying code reviewer I had to deal with would specifically call out things that were up to the individual developers.
This sort of thing is why I'm all in on strictly, program-enforced code-style. It closes off the single most common, most useless line of argument in code reviews that there is.

What I do wonder about is what else can be done to bring tooling into the process in a productive way. I'm imagining something like the Go and Rust playgrounds where reviewers actually contribute test-cases or something to the real code base.
According to the article, a step isn't skipped because it had a transient failure, it's skipped because it returns a special error code ENOSYS that means the syscall hasn't even been implemented, and therefore there's no point in ever trying it again.
I guess I am not. Something about a duck in a bow tie doesn’t sit well with me.
What eating avocados a day can do for you
Far-right candidate Jair Bolsonaro won Brazil's presidential election
During that time period I held investments in JPM. This was material information that should have been available to investors.
tl;dr: "Sorry about the crash. Please don't contact us".
A Private Tutor Survival Guide to the Summer Holidays
This is why I wrote...

> But its entirely possible that the depression is a result of the day-to-day suffering. And the improvement reported with SSRIs isn't just a result of the sufferer's generally improved disposition.

Though I meant is where I wrote isn't there.
It takes a special kind of something to think that there's no correlation between intelligence and having a PhD.