skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I am probably an outlier (I have experience with both compiler development and lazy languages) but I found the graph model to be very natural. Much of the struggles I saw people having conceptually I had already had years before.

The reason I bet on Tensorflow originally I admit was it was built by Google. But another really strong reason is it had a fully integrated toolchain from research to production. That toolchain has gotten much stronger with the continued investment in tf.data and tensorflow-serving. There was a binary alternative to CSVs (TFRecords). Also given some of our needs with some pretty esoteric components the tf community is actually quite deep.

I had only minor python experience before starting with tensorflow so I literally did not want a python-numpy environment. I am still sad that the world has converged on python as the language of choice but that ship seems to have sailed.

I will say tf.while is something I won't miss, as is tf.cond. I didn't find either really difficult, but it was more typing than was necessary. If there is something I really think should be invested in it is documentation. What should be in a SessionRunHook and what is the best way to write them? If you dig through some of google's repos that use TF estimators you find a lot of useful hooks as well as utility functions to help build them. But learning how to use them was more painful than it should have been.

All that said I am not a researcher. I would suspect that some of my workflow overlaps with researchers as I have found myself implementing a number of papers. I also need the ability to rapidly move a model from training to production.
The HN audience is ripe for this kind of knowledge.
You start in the south where the weather is easy and work your way north. I think the hope is that by the time they get to Manhattan, global warming will have improved the weather.
I'm not sure why you are getting downvoted, tbh. LIDAR helps, but is certainly not sufficient for many of the reasons that you mention.

There is a reason that these will be severely geographically restricted for a significant period of time.
That was my point - a lot more people know C
Waymo does the R&D for the autonomous driver.

Then separate companies build a business around each use case to monetize the driver.

1) Consumer rideshare

2) Courier / delivery

3) Corporate / fleet / trucking

4) License driver tech to OEMs

5) Lease self-driving vehicles outright

6) ???
Funny, medium suggested this message to me.
To be fair, his ride is 20 miles, wearing jeans 40 miles a day would be very sweaty, and they'll only last a few months before the seat is too worn and they rip.

I ride 2 miles each way, so wearing bike clothes is unnecessary.
His S-100 computer was a beast (in a good way). The narrative provided by Jerry Pournelle's Chaos Manor column in Byte really gave great insights. This is just sad.
Nice synchronicity that this was posted the same evening I got a ~160 USD Xiaomi Air Purifier 2 (https://www.mi.com/global/air2/) delivered home. Might be a good alternative for those who want an off-the-shelf product, a pretty design and "smartness" like scheduling.
This: https://twitter.com/fchollet/status/1052228463300493312
> I keep coming across references to is the S-100 bus.

The S-100 bus originated in the Altair 8800, essentially as a direct copy of the 8080 (CPU) bus. From there, it took on a life of it's own, very much like the IBM PC's ISA bus did a few years later... there were companies building S-100 expansion boards for existing computers, new computer backplanes built around S-100, faster CPU's, etc. (IIRC, there were CPU's at least as fast as a Motorola 68020... so quite away from it's more humble 8080 origins.)

S-100 was very important for it's time...
> Some of the problems which she is expected to solve are pretty simple problems, but I just can't seem to get the hang of any of them on my own.

So what are some examples of those problems? No one can really tell you if this is something unusual or not without having an idea of what the problems are. And CS courses and algorithms vary from pretty simple to actually really hard.
Another city offering $10000 to remote workers to relocate
It's certainly good if you know how trees and linked lists are implemented, but as you point out most app devs are working on a higher level of abstraction. All of that nitty gritty implementation details are already available to application developers in convenient, well tested wrappers. You can easily go through your entire career without ever having to worry about how doubly-linked lists or B-Trees actually work.
The seat of the pants gets threadbare from riding, and eventually you get a blow out. That's no fun.
You were actually in that thread.

That's kinda trippy. It's like I was a different person. Also, I was working on the predecessor system to the one I'm currently working on. Back then, the thing was written in Clojure. I later ported it to Go. The design philosophy has changed a heck of a lot as well. Back then, I was going to have everything on the same very large and fast virtual instance, with modest goals for the largest population/scale. Now my system is scalable by adding more "workers," which I've spread out onto small AWS instances.
Serious question: How do you know that in the applications that you have written in the past 14 years, there aren't any spots that could be considerably improved in runtime behavior and cost?

I remember being a programmer before studying formal computer science, I definitely wrote some slow and bad code that I just didn't know could be much better, and/or simpler.
I currently pay money to Ars Technica, Wired and kottke.

I would pay money to The NY Times but the last time I did, they required me to call to cancel and it felt really shady so I won’t pay them until this is fixed and publicized.

The rest fall into 2 categories: sites that I would pay for but that are asking too much (any site asking for as much or more than NY Times is delusional) and sites that are just not worth any amount of money. For the former I sometimes feel like I am missing out on content when I hit their paywall, for the latter I just move on without feeling like I missed out on anything other than the few seconds it took to click back.
This is really neat. I changed the quality value to 6: clang took ~20 minutes to compile and it used around 32GB of RAM. The resulting executable is 13KB, and it generates a 4KB image as output.

Here's a link of the output image: https://imgur.com/cUdForu
I'll take that as positive feedback.
Thanks for taking the time to do this counting, very interesting result.
I think that code bloat, especially in GNU, is a huge problem in our software because it makes programs difficult to maintain, to understand and modify. I feel like most people I interacted with online (present company excepted) don't care about it and don't see it as a problem. I can get that it doesn't affect them because they only use these projects as black boxes and don't maintain them, so it isn't relevant to their work.

I created a wiki page to measure the number of lines of code* of various types of software https://softwarecrisis.miraheze.org/wiki/Linecount - LOC is a very very rough proxy for what I actually want to measure, but the results are so stunning that even a inaccurate indirect measurement tells a lot. You can see that for 2 projects that do essentially the same thing there might be a 1000x difference in LOC.

It's fascinating what can happen to such a simple program like 'cat'. The same effect is amplified further when you look at projects like gcc. I tried to ask the question on a couple sites like stackexchange and reddit why does gcc take half an hour to build instead of a fraction of a second but this question was not taken well. I got a lot of resistance to it, X-Y answers, deleted etc. I don't think that the common software engineer wants to take the idea seriously that the day to day tools we use have a million fold inefficiency built into them by accident. I also noticed that 'make' has no profiler, nobody has even really done a breakdown of what takes how long to build in the gcc tree.

There are a lot of brilliant engineers who understand this problem and want to solve it though. We see that in Alan Kay's STEPS project, aligrudi's work, musl, toybox, maybe sbase and many of the independent bootstrapping projects that have popped up. There's a lot of inertia and weight to the standard GNU toolkit to push back against but I believe these problems are all solvable and by solving them we can create programming languages and tools with leverage far beyond what currently exists. I just hope such projects can be integrated rather than be forgotten.
Of course it's not the same, but it's also not incredibly easy. I drove around Phoenix for about 7 hours recently. Definitely not the easiest roads, nor the most considerate drivers. I'm curious to see how these cars will figure out all the weird lane closures, double-lane turn-right-on-red, blind intersections, etc. I almost got creamed turning left near the Heard museum, and there was a bunch of confusing construction downtown. And the highway merging can be... exciting. Not saying it's the most difficult driving in the states, but it's also not the easiest.
It's a service, like Uber, you're not expected to ditch the car at this stage
This seems silly to me--if an idea or subject _is_ difficult, then so be it. If something difficult to read is worth it to somebody, then that person will read it. I don't understand the fascination with difficulty--whatever that means, as an independent metric. To me, the value of writing is the idea or set of ideas the writing expresses.
Agreed, endgame (all cars self driving) it's gonna be better. But when there's a mix on the road, I imagine a lot of awkwardness. I feel like they should throw a little LCD panel on each side of the car so it can just display a message like "yielding to pedestrian" or whatever.
"Post-modern" C++? Finally someone admits that the language was all a huge prank.
Well, Linux seems to be the Unix of today.
Environments like phoenix are also where cars are the most useful.
The weather is the least of your worries in a place like Manhattan.
there are a few books you can get:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1565923987/
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0262033844/

A lot of "classic" problems are so embedded into CS professors that they don't even see them as problems anymore (lazy caterer, pick's theorem, etc) so if you didn't study these classics explicitly in school you have to discover them on your own.
Are you ok with white noise while you're sleeping and air flowing in the room? If you're ok with those things, run it while you're at home and sleeping. If you go to work during the day turn it off then, and turn it back on when you get home. It should rapidly clean up the air in a small bedroom.

The only real issue is any continual air flow into the room. There will be a big impact from what kind of air system you have in the greater building. For example, central air without a good filter on that system will make your fan-filter's job a lot harder.

The filters are relatively cheap to replace and will last a long time filtering a small bedroom. I get a solid year out of the filter on my central air system and it's filtering an entire home (non-smoking, no pets). Outside of the small electrical cost or annoyance from having the fan running, there's no reason not to run it very frequently if you derive a benefit. If you don't desperately need purified air for eg allergy purposes and your small bedroom isn't receiving inbound air (eg from a central air system), run it for 20-30 minutes, a few times per day, and that should easily do the job. If that's a hassle, just let it run more often than not.
At an average cost of $150k fully-loaded (rough guess), they're losing ~$40m / year. Not sure that warrants a victory lap.
I worked at a firm in the UK where this happened. Due to the UK having fairly strong data protection laws, the salesman ended up being arrested and charged.
I've heard the Nobility claimed to trace their lineage back to the serpent gods
This is a strange common sense ruling from the EU, which is most often the lapdog of copyright trolls.
I believe you're referring to an issue that Teslas have experienced? Waymo cars are way more sophisticated, both in software and hardware. They use LIDAR to see large static obstacles and don't ignore them.
Everybody says this all the time, to such an extent that an article was written to express the contrary view

I'm also pretty sure that given a famous "highbrow" literature or art work, you could easily find plenty of respected critics who think it's shit, and vice versa for "lowbrow" works.
I had a similar experience at work.

We used to be a TensorFlow shop. Last year we started playing around with Pytorch, only for R&D projects at first... and it felt like a breath of fresh air. Whereas TensorFlow always felt like it was designed and engineered from day one for massive scalability and deployment flexibility (at the expense of easy/fast development), Pytorch felt instantly like it was designed for easy/fast development by AI researchers who need to experiment and iterate through models as quickly as possible with as little hassle as possible. Almost overnight, we stopped tinkering and experimenting with TensorFlow.

Earlier this year, after a blog post announcing the production-friendly features of Pytorch 1.0[a], we decided to switch our production systems from TensorFlow to Pytorch. So far we're happy with the decision.

[a] https://pytorch.org/2018/05/02/road-to-1.0.html
Im away from my usual PCs, and Im here just to say when I realized this exact same thing it all clicked for me on why to use immutable objects
(1) Programming and Computer Science are not the same thing.

(2) Doing similar things over and over may not transfer experience to other things.
This is generally an issue with loops that involve memory accesses, because it causes annoying problems when optimizing: https://gist.github.com/rygorous/e0f055bfb74e3d5f0af20690759...
Ask HN: The three kinds of engineers throughout a company's life
I'm trying to find an article (and related comments) that I could have sworn I originally saw on HN. I've tried HN search to no success.

From what I remember, it described the three(?) types of engineers that are needed at a company throughout the company's lifetime of startup, growth, mature. Does this sound familiar to anyone?
How is that a click-bait headline? Waymo is launching a commercial driverless car service, just as the headline says.

Of course they're starting in one of the easier places to operate driverless cars. Why would they introduce more risk than necessary to the launch of an extremely complex new technology?
Huh! I independently "invented" this myself a couple of days ago when the Camp Fire blanketed the bay area in smoke. I got a 20x20 filter and some duct tape from Home Depot and a box fan from Target. (After discovering that Home Depot only sells fans in the summer.)

I don't think I was the only one, though. HD was doing a brisk trade in 20x20 filters, and I think I bought the last box fan at any Target in the entire bay area.

My "creation": https://i.imgur.com/jeJfqeW.jpg
Why not raise and discuss these points on the mailing list instead of a (much more public) WebKit blog post?

Unfortunately it seems many developers have interpreted the blog post to mean that WHLSL has been selected as the ingestion format, which is incorrect.
This website has some tests for Dylos, Kaiterra Laser Egg and AirVisual: https://smartairfilters.com/en/blog/are-cheap-particle-count...
LGA itself tends to be inconvenient. Getting there from LIC is no worse than from anywhere else, but you're still ending up at LGA. The construction crews sincerely apologize for any unexpected convenience you may experience.
It can be fun. It can also be fun to come up with some sort of breadcrumb system and movement planning.

Exploration in proc gen worlds is mostly pointless anyway. Build roads to everywhere you want to go and you'll never get lost.
> most app devs are working on a higher level of abstraction.

Until they don't, because for some reason the abstraction cannot be applied in a particular scenario (or actually could be, but it's not understood), or just does not scale anymore.
From what I can tell the quoted proposed amendment was a line in an interview, and meant to get across the general principle, I don't know if he fleshed it out elsewhere in a more exact manner. So your comments about the inadequacy or clumsiness of the wording, or inadequate sourcing are fair. As are criticisms of my own clumsiness in trying to connect the principle of equal treatment under law to the idea that taxes and regulations should also be equally applied as written.

> under the Due Process Clause of the 5th Amendment and the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the 14th Amendment.

It should be admitted that the existing federal amendments weren't enough to convince the proponents of the ERA that there was enough protection from laws discriminating on sex. You can add the uniformity clause of article 1 to constitutional provisions that could have limited the ability of the federal government to subsidize some businesses at the expense of others, but neither it or the 14th amendment did.

The constitution-as-interpreted does not stop congress, state, and local governments from being able to grant exemptions from a range of taxation and regulations to specific businesses by name. Courts don't believe that this violates any existing constitutional restriction, though I'm arguing that it does violate the spirit or principle of non-discrimination and equal treatment under law. It's the source of a great deal of corruption and abuse of the powers of government, and would seem to require a constitutional constraint on congress to reduce it since democratic incentives don't seem to work and actually seem to make it worse. Existing constraints aren't broad enough, and perhaps Hayek's is too broad for your taste, or perhaps you believe the goal can be achieved without resort to the constitution. It doesn't change the argument that there are inadequate restrictions on the worst forms of corporate welfare, if you agree that we should have less of that sort of thing.

Is your argument that there is no possible amendment that would thread the needle of preventing corporate welfare like the Amazon subsidies without severely restricting all congressional action? Or do you have wording that you think might?

Maybe Jack Markell's proposed law which is mentioned in the article is good enough, but I'd like to see something that restricts the transfer of money from the general population to the best off and that would prevent moral travesties like giving billions of taxpayers' money to one of the most successful companies in history or professional sports teams.
And yet, I interview recent Comp Sci grads from upper tier University of California schools with 3.75 and above GPAs who try and tell me that a null pointer in a struct takes up zero memory. Then, when I ask them to correct themselves, I sometimes find out they have no idea how much data a pointer takes up.
The only way to learn some lessons is to have something you care about blow up in your face. That's the cost of the lesson. Sometimes it's not worth the price of admission.

Steve Blank is a celebrity of sorts around here, but who is to say that that experience, as terrible as it was at the time, wasn't responsible for setting him up for his future successes?

I'm somewhat earlier in my career, and undoubtedly have similarly devastating events waiting for me, in addition to the select few behind me. Framing those as "learning experiences" softens the blow considerably when things don't go as they "should".
I think you're agreeing with the article if I understand your point correctly?
This theory doesn't make sense because whether there is a human driving an Uber or a machine driving a waymo taxi, the person in the backseat has the same amount of internet time.

The situation is categorically different than the fiber situation because fiber was about being vertically integrated. Theoretically a middle man (ISPs) can gang up on google and cut google out. It wasn't just about getting 'more time'.
That is not a rumor. Google and Fiat announced the deal. Remember, the entire game for self-driving-car journalists is finding new and creative ways to ignore the fact that Waymo is obviously far ahead of everyone else. They ordered 62000 vans, but Cruise's big advantage is partnership with GM. Uber kills people while Waymo has been shuttling hundreds of people around Arizona for months, but keep writing about how it's a horse race.

https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/chrysler/2018/05/31/w...
Getting

"virtual memory exhausted: Cannot allocate memory"

when trying to compile :/
A couple things to add about lights at night:

1. Don't use a blinking light (front or rear) as your sole light. A blinking light is bad for driver depth perception, they'll be able to see that you're there somewhere, but it will be hard for them to localize exactly where you are and how far away you are - use at least one steady light.

2. At night, more lumens is not always better. You may think that when it comes to lights, brighter is better, but you really don't need that 1000+ lumen light in the front or that "Can be seen for 5 miles" eye searing taillight for most road riding.

Most bike lights have terrible beam patterns -- sending as much light above the road and into driver's eyes as they do down at the road where you need it. So while you may be able to see, you're blinding everyone else. And because this pattern lights up the road just in front of you more than farther away, you're making it harder to see people and objects farther away.

I highly recommend an StVZO approved (German bike regulation) head light -- it will have a beam pattern with a sharp cutoff so you can illuminate the road without blinding other riders and drivers. Busch and Muller makes some great lights with this beam pattern.

In the daytime, however, feel free to go with bright and flashing.
I imagine it would help with particulate matter (such as smoke, whether visible or not), but I do not think it would have any effect on gases such as ozone, sulfur dioxide or nitrous oxide.
I don't know about 0.3 micron, but all the different sizes tend to come together. Presence of PM2.5 implies PM0.3

I've got a foobot, I like it. It was benchmarked by some gov't agencies and found to track pretty well.
We're gonna need some examples here. One person's fizz-buzz is another's constant-time radix tree with one register and vice versa.
That's surprising. Smells to distinguish your brand seems more like a trademark than a copyright...