skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is very common issue; I've personally helped a company after they lost much more than this, and had to help prove to insurance/govt agencies/etc. Turn on DKIM, DMARC, and SPF records for your mail domain. Also, never send invoices over email that contain any payment terms (eg: accounts, addresses to mail check to, etc) they should always be in some sort of protected portal. Tell every customer never to accept payment term details from you over email, phone, etc. If you or your client has insurance, start documenting every part of your case with screenshots into a file, and document everything you know NOW, including timestamps, etc.

EDIT: Also, I'd suggest taking orders via a secured portal, and also autheticating large orders by calling a number for a client you already have (never trust their website, or an email from them). Unfortunately, you're out of luck that money.
Message passing is less coupled than functions or "objects" that share bits of state.
You can use functions without knowing their inputs and outputs, and your functions don't need environments that somehow allow them to lookup the other functions they're going to call?

Messages and function calls aren't quite isomorphic, but they're pretty close. (They get really close if you include coroutines and coroutine-like things, to cover the non-1-to-1 relationship between messages and replies that messages can have.) I'm not sure the difference can sustain the implication you're trying to draw. Especially if you include RPC in the function world.
Lectures aren't just boring, they're Ineffective, too, study finds
so that $6 a year. at $6 a year, it could be better to just buy a replacement in the future.
I'm already being downvoted, hopefully mostly for my tone rather than content, so by all rational means I should abandon this and go complain another day, but this really gets my goat.

A/B testing and measuring -- are you kidding me? That's how you go from 35% conversion to 36% conversion, not from 2 daily active users to 1e7 daily active users. Refinement only works if you're exploring a space that has productive alternatives in low dimensions, which is almost never the case. No amount of "progressive refinement" is going to turn Farmville into Candy Crush or Candy Crush into Fortnite. You have to look no further than those examples to see what I mean -- "Oh, look, Zygna has figured out a formula to hook users" followed by "Zygna can't repeat its success".
He's not saying it's impossible. He's saying the number of people doing it is so small as to be irrelevant to general arguments. While a much larger percentage (relatively) of people may have used this path ("reading into the law") a hundred years ago, it has largely faded from relevance in modern times.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reading_law
I disagree with your last point.

Technology will always be "just a tool." By its nature, it is morally neutral. The use of technology for good or for evil reflects the morality of the people deploying it.

Explosives, baseball bats, water, radios, software. All have been used for noble purposes and for evil. That does not impart morality to the technology.
Paranormal Voodoo items at Spookbid
Maybe. But today's Microsoft is not that of your parents. 10 years ago, could you imagine them being the owners of the hub of the open source community?
You've dismissed the potential benefits, so it's a hard argument to make, but I very much like the idea of the style of machine that let's you pick electronically, then prints a paper ballot displayed to you - you accept it and it goes into the same sort of secure container ballots always have, or you reject it and it is trashed.

We get the benefits of electronics with the benefits of a tried and tested paper ballot system. We no longer have people arguing over stray pencil marks or trying to cross out mistakes.

We even get some extra checks on the paper system: today, if there is a discrepancy between the count of people coming to vote and the number of ballots we don't know which is wrong - this would introduce a third number to compare against.

Electronic voting machines were rushed in following the whole "hanging chad" thing, and were done terribly, with credible accusations of corruption involved (see Diebold, who are still out there under a different name) when a better ballot design process would have done the trick, but that doesn't mean we cant get some benefits from electronics, so long as we put accuracy and verifiability first.

At some point we will want voting from home (outside of mail in) and I'd rather shake out bugs gradually than expect some future generation to get it right the first time
I tried and it does not work with the custom formatting. Could we have that too?
This is great stuff!!
A sea wall is more likely: https://www.businessinsider.com/new-york-city-flooding-manha...
7 Tips for Better Developer-Designer Relations
As adults however, we are old enough to decide for our self if we want to commit to bad habits. Kids are not attributed that judgment. There is a difference between restricting the diet of a child and restricting the diet of an adult.
I was addicted to video games into my 20s. Even now I have urges to fire up some MMO. It was only when I started working in UX design and researched human behavior that I understood how incredibly addictive video games are. Well designed video games go above and beyond to make you keep playing them. Even as a professional designer I frequently look to games to get ideas about how to hook visitors to spend more time in sites and apps. It's very ironic that the system that gamed me (pun intended) is now something I'm actively part of.
4M Euros in 5 Days, with Elm and Drupal
I reason I work in fields that require multitaskers is because I have very poor memory. The code I was given to work with is incredibly complicated. Few people can work with it. Not having good explicit memory forces me to organize my own work and detect patterns. I describe my ADHD not as being aware of one thing then another thing, but rather, being aware of all things at the same time. Do they compare memory before multitasking and then after multitasking?
edit: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/26/style/phones-children-sil...

Part of the reason is that showing a child a TV screen isn't the same as injecting heroin directly into their brainstem; the effects aren't super drastic, and researchers are reluctant to come out and say that X absolutely causes Y, when there's only some correlation, and it's not obvious.

We _know_ that eating a bunch of cyanide will kill you. We don't know exactly what sort of effects watching TV will have on you, because it's not quite so directly causative.

Anyway, we do know and suspect a lot of stuff:

https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2014/08/28/343735856/kids-an...

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/behind-online-behavi...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2018/04/16/how-too...
I think you're assuming side-effect free functions (and apparently ones whose interfaces are automatically known, since the interface to a function is just like the message handling in an actor; in fact, Smalltalk, the original OO language, didn't have 'methods', it had 'message passing'). But, you can still write libs and share them in Elixir, to benefit from any argument you'd care to make re: functions.

Actors are all about managing state. It's when state starts leaking around or being modified unexpectedly ('wait, why is that being called there?!') that a more typical language (Java, say) starts to get tightly coupled, and sharing that state is the norm, and expected. And I agree, if you have pure functions, that issue is largely controlled for too. Just, that's a really hard paradigm to stay inside of and still be productive.

I think that's why microservices are even a thing; it forces you to decouple state from different 'functional' parts of your system; by creating separate systems you have to be very intentional about what state you share, and how you share it (database or redis or an API call or similar depending on need).

Actors do that automatically for you; the state is contained within them; there's no chance(1) it will accidentally be changed by some other process/code, and the 'controlling' process gets to decide what messages affect changes, and how those changes occur. Or, in other words, all state changes relating to a context happen in one place, rather than state being passed around to be changed anywhere willy nilly across contexts.

1 Technically there are system level things that allow you to munge state inside of an actor. This is more frowned upon than using reflection for arbitrary reasons in Java, however, so the only reason you'll ever do it is because you're debugging what's going on in something, or you have decided you absolutely -hate- your toes and need to footgun them off.
Not quite true. The ciliary muscles and suspensory ligaments in your eye are largely responsible for ensuring the accommodation-convergence reflex (the process by which your eye focuses on objects at different distances) works properly. It's not a priori non-sensical to assume that actions (exercises, drugs, etc.) that affect the ciliary muscles could change the accommodative properties of the eye sufficiently to decrease the effects of myopia - in fact, that's a part of what happens when you get atropine drops during an eye exam.

Note that this is not an endorsement of Bates' or any other method supposed to implement this in practice. I'm just noting that putting "muscles" and "myopia" in the same sentence isn't non-sensical.
What Is a Business Model? 30 Successful Types of Business to Know
Haven't looked, but I distinctly remember AWS Lambda +Dynamo DB based solution long back on a Show HN. I'm on mobile now, but will find and post a link later
And that matters. In the grand scheme of things. That may be all that matters.

For that, I take my hat off to him.
Check also his other books: Algorithms and Data Structures, Programming in Oberon, Project Oberon, etc.

They are all available on the ETH website and his homepage (in various revisions). Basically everything you need to know about imperative programming on CS bachelor level for free.
To be honest statements like "before we know it a combine will run through an elementary school." could be considered a bit extreme / trollish don't you think?
How many cities have been raised like this?

I was shocked when I found out Seattle's streets were raised, but not the buildings, which led to the Seattle Underground [1]. If you tour it, you can see the original first floor of buildings while you're under the roads.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_Underground
Well, I didn't know changing skin tone would melt your lip, make you bald and change your gender.

https://imgur.com/a/vc5dz0L

AI magic.
True, but based on the fact that hardly anyone has actual HDR capable displays, the net effect of the output is mostly the same.
Just double-checking the part of the presentation where they cite Plan 9's C compiler as "predictable" because it doesn't optimize away a useless loop... that's because the compiler is missing a bunch of useful optimizations isn't it?

Specifically they say GCC requires this form for the busy loop to be emitted:

for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++)
asm volatile ("" ::: "memory");

Where 9c will output a bunch of useless code when you tell it this:

for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++);

And this is... a good thing?
I got a Forth for my C64, and it was the PERFECT language for the machine: fast, compact, structured, extensible. Generally much easier to understand the code than C64 Basic, but you could also easily call into assembly language if you needed a bit more speed.
>2. Decouple real money from in-game money. If you can buy something for real money, you should not be able to acquire it with in game money. If you can acquire something in game, you should not be able to buy it with real money instead.

So there is a standard argument developers make for this. They're wrong, but I'll articulate it because I think it's worth articulating.

Some people have more time than money and for other people it's reversed. You design a game to meter out rewards based on time spent for the former group and provide a fast-track for the latter group. Allowing people to spend money to get certain rewards is just a way to allow people who are too busy to sink that kind of time into the game to also be able to participate. Moreover, if the desire to buy stuff for real money is there, the market will provide. If we, the developers, don't build that function in then the niche will be occupied by dodgy black and gray market deals like those gold farming outfits in Diablo II and World of Warcraft.

The counterpoint, of course, is that they're designing the games to meter out "fun" as a function of time spent specifically because they're trying to keep you stuck in an addiction loop. The "just use real money as a shortcut through the nonsense" takes Skinner box game design as a given, but the Skinner box is what we're trying to discourage, not the exchange of money.
Could the word you are looking for be "condescending"?

Maybe there's a hint of that, but it's so over the top and a famous quote to boot (from Game of Thrones) that I wouldn't ascribe malice to the poster.

PS: not a native speaker either.
It's very interesting and kinda creepy. The controls behave randomly, if you decrease "age" it might start changing skin color, etc.
I feel like this is a fairly weird argument. Bigger screens are not more addictive by themselves.
Unless I am missing something I dont see a hack here, just some spoofed emails.
Agreeing with both of you but want to chime in with some conspiracy theory stuff.

The only way you beat Musk is by going somewhere that his idealism won't allow him to go, while still maintaining positive public opinion of yourself as his competitor.

I am looking directly at the Oil and Big Auto companies when I say people have incentivized bloggers (aka "journalists") and paid online trolls to make him look like the bad guy, and that they will likely then go a "step too far" in order to beat him. His Twitter tirades have either been a poor attempt at refuting this, or a game of chicken on that front as well.

Oil and Big Auto do have something to lose. Musk's bet is also on human goodness, that greater society will allow him to win because he is genuine. That whole "the truth will come out" or "good always wins in the end" trope.

One could easily see him in an orange jumpsuit one day just for daring to upset industries that have created so much evil.
No -- a thousand people fell down the stairs, nine hundred and ninety nine of them found no link between their KPIs and engagement metrics, and the one that did thought that they figured out how the human brain works, instead of just realizing that they were successful for reasons that they likely will never understand or be able to replicate.

And a thousand of those .1%'ers will try a second time, and the .1% that succeed that time will be hailed as geniuses and people will set about copying their open plan offices and terrible management styles in the hopes of replicating their success.
Appreciate your thoughts here Dave, agree with what you say. A quick point of clarification on my situation (author of the post), I didn't take a failing bootstrapped company and get it funding. I stepped away entirely from the bootstrapped work I was doing, for personal reasons (to focus on things other than working all the time), and then an entirely separate opportunity came up to start a startup with funding, which I took because of the autonomy (mostly self-directed work), mastery (learning a tonne in a role I've never done before, alongside super smart people) and purpose (creating a company culture that isn't "crush it" startup bro style + attempting to help the news industry adjust to today's culture).

Hope that makes sense, just wanted to clarify that.
So, I'm a frequent multitasker, but I generally arrange my tasks by likeness - so I'll do programming, then documentation, then design, then reading, and then perhaps troubleshooting. I guess it's a form of pipelining.

The context switch penalty between like tasks is small, the context switch between dissimilar tasks is enormous and generally will cause me to completely lose state on whatever I was working on, which requires me to rethread the needle, and restart.
Cf. "Compiling to categories" http://conal.net/papers/compiling-to-categories/

Also http://www.autodiff.org/
Echoing some of the existing comments: Games and sites today are vastly different than they were 20 years ago.

In the old days, the focus was on playability. Games were fun. But a new genre has emerged particularly in mobile gaming that does something strange: it compels play even when it isn't fun anymore. In the old days when a game stopped being fun, you would stop playing. But these games, when they stop being fun, you make an in-game purchase...
Yup; I know they've shown them a few Youtube videos, mostly a few funny songs. I'm fine with that; she's very happy to try and sing along, and they don't just plop them down in front of a TV for hours at a time.
This is actually why I want to get my 6yo a real, old-fashioned boot-to-BASIC computer.

We've minimized her screen time (she gets ~1hr TV per week and no phone/tablet/computer time outside school) and the result is she knows how to entertain herself with drawing, writing, reading, or just playing.

My kid is still entertained by typing words and sentences onto my computer (the one computer activity I've occasionally let her do). It feels like the window for her to be entertained by typing in commands and seeing them do something is still open ... but maybe not for long.

Unfortunately, many of the "hackable computer for kids" products like Kano assume a full UI, Internet access, etc. Which seem like a counterproductive distraction.

Relevant HN discussion about boot-to-BASIC: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18228740
This is actually a very different piece of code.

puts and gets are string functions. read and print are code deserializers and serializers.

eval is a function that takes a data structure representing code (as deserialized by read) and computes its value as a data structure, and serializes it.

While you might get the same effect as a user, the mechanics and metacircularity are lost.
> This is "you piss in the pool wherever you go, please stay away from our pool." This isn't NIMBY in any meaningful way and the comparison is downright mendacious

It's also the same line of thinking behind Trump's wall and hostility to immigration in general: "people I don't like should stay out."
Epic Games Gets $1.25B Investment from Seven Firms
YouTube's stream bitrate is pretty low compared to Blu-ray. It's very obvious (to me at least) at any dynamic scenes.
North’s Focals Laser Beam Scanning AR Glasses – “Color Intel Vaunt”
We try and do all this - the hard thing I find is what limits to put in place and how when they do find stuff that feels less worthwhile or on the addictive side, which they obviously do. It's actually harder than it sounds I have found to set time limits - particularly with siblings as they play together, look over eachother's shoulders etc. and if your daily schedule isn't completely regular due to other activities. We've gone for making one day at the weekend screen-free but it often feels like that isn't enough.
I think it's 2^12 = 4096 in size.
Fortnite’s Epic Games Gets $1.25B from New Investor Group
Very very rad!

I've got a similar algorithm https://bit.ly/2ELVG50

To use, upload a photo with the #ageme command. This is beta though, so will take a while to return. The other thing this bot does (the #showage command) runs instantly.

Example output:
https://bit.ly/2PXKTWu

Your model seems to produce much higher quality output. I think I played a penalty by putting the users face into latent space, which is a difficult optimization to perform.
This is a fundamentally different function that works with strings and not symbolic data structures.
That's still a $12,000-$22,000 car. Nobody can build one for $5,000 like anoncoward111 wants or needs, and it probably will be nowhere as reliable as a 10-year old Honda.
> As a consequence of this, analysts rightly discounted TSLA's stock price

TIL some of the wildest, most speculative short selling in history is "rightly discounting" a stock price.

That's revisionist. I mean, yes, you're right that they could have operated more in line with traditional accounting. But that's not why their stock price was held incorrectly low.
MOOC’s aren’t the future of education
It's not just a random spoof email. Someone was aware of the entire conversation and send a spoof email at the exact situation resulting in my loss.
And yet the tech industry overwhelmingly supports Democrats? Partisan politics has nothing to do with the topic at hand. But, if you want to go there, I might suggest that Cato is a libertarian organization and libertarianism is about the rights of the individual to make their own choices rather than having the state dictate those choices. Bringing the Koch brothers into a debate over addictive screens is just silly.
Even though modern gasoline especially in California burns quite clean, it's easy to forget that every bus and truck out there is burning horrendous diesel.

The NY MTA has been running natural gas buses and hybrid-electric buses since before Tesla was a twinkle in its original founders' eyes. It hasn't fully converted it's entire fleet yet (the process began in 2000!) but it's one of the largest alternative fuel fleets in the world.

LA Metro's fleet has been almost 90% clean air for years, and has been testing EV buses for almost a decade.

Let's give Tesla some credit for making EVs fashionable, but public transit systems have been going green for much longer and Tesla's never been part of that conversation.
plus, it's a gepl, not a repl.
There is absolutely no reason that TSLA shouldn't have raised cash with a relatively inexpensive bond issuance or moderate share issuance in the lead-up to the large expenditures required to begin Model 3 production.

Well, apart from the fact that TSLA already has $10b of Debt to pay back over the next few-to-ten years. I believe Tesla did borrow heavily to begin Model 3 production, but then production took longer than expected to get off the ground and Musk decided it was now or never and that they would try to break even with what they had rather than taking on even more debt. At some point they had to demonstrate they could make money, and they've already left it a long time. I'm very glad that it looks like they're going to pull it off.
Oh, yeah, I totally agree with that.

People tend to work hard and accept a lot of crap as long as they are making a lot of money, or hoping to.

Once those prospect dim, hell does tend to break loose. People suddenly lose patience with bad policies, with politics, with people they only barely tolerated before, with high levels of stress at work...

The same people who soldiered on like good boyscouts when the money was pouring in, will become fed up and recalcitrant once they run out of financial reasons to take shit from management.
You need to speak to the bank regulators an consider talking the press

In the UK the Daily Telegraph finance team they have been covering this in their weekend issues and have had some success in getting things changed here.