skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
They aren't used much in the US. I'm a bit surprised they aren't used more for storing/communicating keys. An app I was contemplating would use them to pass around ed25519 keys (public for others, private for yourself AES'd).
Ugh, I'm sure no one will really care about this comment but tumblr absolutely has a terrible child porn problem.

I basically stopped using tumblr for porn because of how much nude, as well as non nude pictures of kids I've reported to tumblr.

It's a big issue. It's also incredibly easy to find child porn on there and despite reporting it, it always seems to pop back up.

I get that people will post shit regardless but it really seems like they don't try to do anything but delete the single blog that has been reported.

This is a site that's based around people "liking" and "reblogging" content. It's insane to see a picture of some kid being exploited, see how many blogs have reblogged and/or liked the picture, and then see how tumblr doesn't even attempt to address these blogs that clearly are doing the same thing, clearly liking the same things, and clearly reblogging the same pictures as the reported blog.

I've reported blogs for harm to minors well over 20 times. It's a drag.
Just talk loud, talk a lot, smile a lot, keep complimenting your superiors and berate your subordinates often; that makes you look tough and your superiors will love it.
Dead people don't fret about soft skills.
Napster was written by a 19yrs old.
Bram wrote bittorent when he was 26yrs old.
Justin Frankel was 22yrs old when he wrote gnutella with Tom who was 25yrs old.

I mention these systems, because these were apps that needed to operate at scale.
Inb4 “darned execs”: Pixar did basically the same with Toy Story 2, throwing out 90% of the movie with barely a year to go before release date, and it worked out. Sometimes reworking it is the right thing to do.
How Political Opinions Change
Some attempts have been made in the form of Bayesian model reduction [1].

The idea is to 'carve' out the structure of your model using free energy minimization.

[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/1805.07092
> go to it, drink, lose your inhibitions and talk to people.

Be careful, this can go sooooo badly!
Fun fact: Anthrax is naturally occurring, and not really that deadly if correctly diagnosed.

Your primary care doctor can treat you for Anthrax, and you'd likely be fine. The only difficulty in 2001 was that individuals were in contact with it that didn't realize, and mistook it for a common cold or flu.

Edit: The motivation of that attack was the fear, not the deadliness. In 2001 only 5 people died, and only 17 were infected. As we've seen, a single gunman can do a lot worse without requiring special training or equipment.
I'm not vegan anymore due to a change in ethical reasoning, but I still love cashew cheese: http://wallflowerkitchen.com/cashew-cheese-sauce/
You likely have a functioning sewer system and fresh water taps to your home.

Americans always underestimate the amount of effort and wealth it takes for the infrastructure that maintains their normalcy.
I haven't been following OpenStack closely enough to understand the way you feel that it's gone or what I assume is an implication that it failed to work (in which sense?).
“The 's' is sad”: 4-year-old submits Linux kernel doc patch (2014)
The CEO of a company the size of Ford making statements about the future direction of the company w/r/t digital assets seems newsworthy, no matter the venue.
Firstly Be above the politics. Do your job and just be yourself and be nice and polite to your work mates.

You lack communication.

When you get a crap spec like the ones you have obviously got. You should reject it with the exact reasons why the spec was insufficient.

Tell them politely and clearly what is insufficient about it. If you have a direct superior approach them first with your concerns about each spec and get them to help you to setup a meeting where you hash out the specifics.

There is no magical answer to getting this right. You just need to learn when to be assertive and just be clear, concise, logical and polite and ask for clarification if something is unclear.

It works wonders.
> I built a k8s cluster in 3 days with zero experience after spending a week playing with minikube, reading the docs are kuberentes.io

I'm pretty sure I can do it in an afternoon from scripts on github. But if something goes wrong all bets are off. Just getting something setup is not building a competence around it.
Can someone explain what this is doing please?
Having installed Openstack many times before, often having issues with it running:

> t k8s will go the way of Open Stack since it does actually work,

_ohh shit__!
If you're buzzword compliant, you can fail forward. Your last product may not have worked out, but you've become an expert in Docker, Kubernetes, AWS, OpenShift, and Terraform which means that companies who are committed to the cloud (i.e., everybody) won't pass you over.

Built an app that works before the cloud hype hit? Congratulations. You're a specialist in legacy technologies. We'll call you if we have a COBOL or Perl app that needs maintenance. snicker
#3 I would go further: any time your instinct is to say no, ask yourself two questions:

“Is this really impossible, or am I prejudging the acceptability to the questioner of the cost/effort needed?” and

“Is it likely that the questioner has prejudged a solution to their actual problem, and how can I get them to step back to the real problem, which may have a more-viable solution than the one they seem to be asking about?” (A lot of time, if you are familiar with the business domain, you can see the likely underlying problem yourself and just get them to confirm it, but otherwise you can try to walk them back to it.)

“Yes, it is possible, but it will take X, Y, and Z,” from which the client can decide it is not worth it is usually more honest, as well as more socially acceptable, than “no”.

And, “That would be difficult—but if you want to acheive X, A would provide the same benefit and be much easier to implement.” Can be better than both “no” and explaining the difficulty in th suggested course without exploring alternatives.
The megaliths of Bolivia and structures all over the world which man could not replicate prove this. It would seem that the more we turn our back on the natural world and our history, the more we hold ourselves back from break throughs in many areas.
> The importance of this is almost nil, because you'll never find someone else who understands any of these at a time when it would actually be useful.

No one understands AM/FM radio, NOAA weather radios, CB radio, walkie talkies, or ham radio?

Search and rescue pilots do not understand the body signals and ground symbols given in the FAA's Aeronautical Information Manual (also part of the Convention on International Civil Aviation), which should be studied as part of basic pilot training?

A bit of Googling turns up that three or six regularly spaced flashes of light, blasts from an airhorn, tweets on a whistle, gunshots, etc., is an internationally recognized distress signal in mountain regions, and seems to be well known among the relevant populations.

86% of all people age 15 and above in the world can read, so finding someone who can understand a physical message board should not be a problem. Physical message boards are in fact often used in disaster situations when other communications is down.
I've often tried to find better methods of communicating with people, but I'm still struggling with one major problem:

What do you do when someone literally does not react to anything you say in any way whatsoever? I could tell them "Yeah, X sounds like a great idea!" or "Please don't do that, I think X would be very harmful to the project", and their reaction would be the same "OK thanks, guess I'll go do X now".

Then if doing X results in failure and they learn nothing from the experience.
VB and Excel have the advantage of having full blown programming language behind them so you can implement very complex things. I compare this to Labview where everything is visual and things get out of control pretty quickly.
Treat that sentence as an awkward summation of personal experience then. That's how I took it, and it reflects perfectly my own.
There are a lot of very complicated documents and visual displays that can be built by a collaboration of 2 or 3 people where word of mouth suffices to deal with problems of simultaneous edit. Effectively it's ad-hoc optimistic locking with a coordination phase.

None of these models scale to teams of 10, 20, 100 people. Even at 4 they begin to become tedious.

The biggest problem with software developers is confusing "successful" with "applicable to everybody", and this is a prime example. It doesn't matter if it's successful. It's not applicable to my work. Excepting, perhaps, for Wiki-like workflows, which are less than 10% of my duties.
Most organizations don't need to manage servers or Ansible playbooks either.

The reason Kubernetes became so popular is because the API was largely application-centric, as opposed to server-centric. Instead of conflating the patching and configuration of ssh and kernels with the configuration of an application, you had clearly separate objects meant to solve different application needs.

The problem with Kubernetes is that to gain that API you need deploy and manage etcd. To bring your API objects to life you need the rest of the control plane, and to let your objects grow into your application you need worker nodes and a good grasp of networking.

This is a huge burden in order to gain access to K8's simple semantics.

GKE helps greatly, but the cluster semantics still come to the forefront whenever there's a problem, or upgrade, or deprecation, or credential rotation.

Of course there's always a time for worrying about those semantics. Specialized workloads might have some crazy requirements that nothing off the shelf will run. However I think the mass market is ready for a K8s implementation that just takes Deployments and Services, and hides the rest from you.

In lieu of that, people will just continue adoption of App Engine and other highly-managed platforms, because while you might not need Kubernetes, you almost certainly don't need to go back to Ansible.
Wait, what's entirely unregulated about it, if there's a criminal probe? There aren't criminal probes on something that's unregulated; well, at least anything that deals in USD has to deal with U.S. law, regardless of tax haven locale in the world. And Tether claimed to be a USD peg, which means they claimed to own USD, and as an institution that deals in USD they're subject to laws.
I'm not a visual programming proponent, but I don't think this article does a very good job of supporting its thesis. It exclusively makes claims about current VP implementations and tries to extrapolate them to VP in the abstract, but I think these are all non-sequiturs. I specifically think the article fails to distinguish between the dual problems of _modeling a program_ (hard) and representing that model visually vs textually.

For example, the article claims that the idea behind scratch is that programming is fundamentally easy but text makes it hard. I don't think that's the idea at all, but rather that programming (i.e., modeling a program) is fundamentally hard, but the difficulty is compounded because text is not a natural way for the current crop of humans to think about a program.

Another example is his criticism of the failure of enterprise UML tools--presumably the problem with these is that UML is just not a very good way of _modeling a computer program_, regardless of whether the interface to UML is visual or textual.

Another example is the criticism that the current crop of VP tools are procedural. Why can't a visual programming language be functional?

Another is the claim that VP is bad because the current crop of tools combines visual and textual programming (I'm not sure this is even true; I don't recall LabVIEW requiring text, for example). Is there any fundamental reason a programming model can't be purely visual? Why can't you represent a whole programming model (all the way down to primitives) visually?

I think most of these would be solved with more trial and error and more investment; none of these support the thesis that VP is fundamentally a bad idea.

To be clear, I think this article has a lot to offer people who are trying to solve visual programming issues, but it doesn't make the case that it sets out to do--that visual programming is fundamentally a waste of time.
Here's the official status twitter: https://twitter.com/hnstatus
What an interesting question. Kudos to you for your self-awareness and being willing to tackle this. There's a lot of good advice in the comments (and a couple of clunkers).

I found it interesting that you phrased your interest as "learn workplace politics." From what you describe, it sounds more like this is more an issue of communications and process. I work in the consulting industry, where communications and process are often both critical to successful outcomes.

When I was starting out, I found Gerry Weinberg's books Becoming a Technical Leader, Secrets of Consulting, and The Psychology of Computer Programming to be very interesting and helpful. In fact, in one of them (I think it's Becoming a Technical Leader), Weinberg talks about how an "introvert" may actually turn out to be the more effective technical leader because they focus on solving problems instead of talking about them.

Weinberg also talks about not saying "no" (suggested in another comment), and this is something I've found to be very valuable in consulting. Rather than just telling someone their request can't be done, or accepting it mutely, tell them how much it will cost to do it (Weinberg explains this as the "Orange Juice Test" in Secrets of Consulting).

I do agree with the comment about using wireframes to confirm your understanding/spec with your users. There are other techniques that can also work (e.g., creating user stories with your stakeholders), but the common element is that you must communicate clearly, concisely, and cooperatively with others.

Sorry this comment is a little scattershot, but best of luck with your efforts.
I do my level best to stay away from containers. I don't think most people even need them. It's a fad of sorts. I tend to stick with the tried and true and not follow trends, cloud or otherwise. Nothing worse than having your data on someone else's HW and losing connectivity through no fault of your own.
Years ago, I worked for UUNET in Reston/Ashburn, VA, and built web servers and the attendant HW/SW that ran them (usually Sun Solaris/Apache/Oracle). We always had a "back net" into every device. Now? One NIC, one way in. I always like having more than one way to get to a device, be it local or remote. With the cloud, you tend to give this up. I recommend VMs over the cloud using someone else's data and data centre.
Nothing worse than going to a tech conference with your boss, and him being the "deer in the headlights" as it were with regard to buying into what's being sold by the vendors. Last time we went, it took me the entire 3-hour car ride home to convince him we didn't need half of what was on offer.
I tend to be old school and prefer to make do with Linux/FreeBSD VMs, and whatever software is needed to make something work. I like being in control of my own architecture.
Was going to say this, most office offsites have alcohol. Drink coffee with it if it makes you sleepy. Don't have more than one drink with each course. Don't drink while actually in the office (!), if you socialize enough at the offsites and smile at people, they won't care that you don't small talk at the coffee machine.
No, no one is concerned by this. Not every toy website needs to have JS.
The No Free Lunch Theorem is irrelevant to the real world [0][1]. It assumes all functions, even those with infinite algorithmic complexity, are equally likely.

You should look into algorithmic probability for a better foundation.

[0] http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.540....

[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3846.pdf
I find LabView absolutely horrible once you reach a certain level of complexity. We are converting most LabView code to C# and Measurement Studio and it's so much easier to deal with.
I think it really depends on how you define a programming language. Simulink can generate a variety of codes from models, the most common being C as you mentioned, but Simulink models can also be compiled into an executable using the Real-Time Workshop toolbox. This packages the simulation engine into the model. You're right about needing code scaffolding like S-functions to compile into C but those physical model simulations are often used directly in the control system program.

While not efficient, thanks to Turing completeness and it's analog relatives, anything you can implement in code you could implement in Simulink flow. It took me about an hour to gin up Pong for example. I think that if it is fair to consider Scratch a visual programming language, then Simulink fits the bill.
A few things come to mind:

1. I agree with the others who said it's a thing you need to practice. While talking to people can be stressful, talking to people about things you're interested in is much less stressful. Find something in common and talk about that.

The connection doesn't need to be done entirely in person. For example, if you and your coworker share an interest in some area (space flight; unit testing; a particular video game; etc.), and you come across an interesting article, write a quick note to that person saying "Hey, saw this, thought you might find it interesting. I like how..." Then when you see that person, there's a good chance they'll say "thanks for sending me the article on Topic X that we both enjoy!" and a relatively low-stress conversation will follow.

2. On the other hand, it helps to set limits. If the sales people you work with tend to be more challenging, see if you can involve your boss, a product manager, or someone like that as a filter. Set-up time on your calendar blocking off meetings. Meet people half way, certainly, but also make it clear what you need to be successful.
Why Things Get Better – Steven Pinker
If you want to break into AI, these Deep Learning Courses will help you do so
It could put on a nice show as one did for Kepler (https://astrobob.areavoices.com/2013/03/24/hey-where-are-all...) but generally it wouldn't be much more than a curiosity for non-astronomers[1].

If it does generate a gamma ray burst, then that is a more interesting phenomena. Depending on whether or not it is pointed in our direction, we might see more or less energy from it directly. After travelling 8000 light years and passing through all the dust between us and the planet, it would be seriously attenuated and unlikely to cause any destruction or even noticeable effects on earth.

[1] Astrologers on the other hand, it could be the sign that the end of the world is nigh :-)
Yep, but the issue is that in "modern times" the two professions were divided.

Up to roughly the end of the 19th century (and in some cases even in the early 1900's) an architect was also a structural engineer, and a structural engineer also an architect (and BTW in the classical times the architect was also the structural engineer and the site director, in some cases even the builder/contractor).

The gap between the two professions has become - in my experience - wider, and with the (needed) addition of other professional and "specialized" figures (geologists, plant engineers, etc.) each profession has become narrower in scope, to the point that sometimes it is difficult to have an architect and a structural engineer communicate properly, as they each lack a "global" vision on a project.
https://forestry.io just launched beta support for Gatsby (like today). Forestry.io is a CMS for markdown + Git, where all edits get committed to your repo.

If you want access to the beta, message the folks at support@forestry.io.
If you Like XDP you may check AF_XDP! It's like PCAP but EXTREMELY fast!

It require kernel 4.18+ and you can use my guide to build test application very fast: https://github.com/pavel-odintsov/fastnetmon/wiki/af_xdp-tes...
Obviously these are sweeping statements, but the problem with this generalization is that successful DSLs become invisible because we take them for granted. Regular expressions are a DSL. SQL is a DSL. LaTeX is a DSL. The Wikipedia page on domain-specific languages even lists HTML as an example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain-specific_language#Examp...

With regard to LaTeX or HTML, you could even argue that their goals could be better accomplished with some sort of graphical interface, which sounds a lot like… visual programming!
If you don't believe in bit flips, try this!

http://dinaburg.org/bitsquatting.html

I did that for a bit on cloudfront.net and got dozens of them in a short amount of time.
What do you think about Gwern's article on Bitcoin from 2011?

https://www.gwern.net/Bitcoin-is-Worse-is-Better
>> Right now, I try to use static sites wherever I can because of their reduced complexity.

> you're telling me webpack + react + node_module hell + graphql reduces complexity?

You are using the word _complexity_ in a different sense. The complexity you are talking about is the complexity of developing and building web pages. However, once they are built they are simple static files that can be served from anywhere. As opposed to the complexity mentioned in the parent post, which is the complexity of running a typical web application that includes a backend server and likely a database. Even such plain and commonplace technology as a Wordpress installation has a higher complexity of running than a Gatsby-based site.
That is called "not happened yet" in our lightcone.

It's an easy concept to grasp, but many people resist considering an event to have not yet happened when it has not yet crossed our lightcone. If you are really interested, then I suggest Stephen Hawking's book A Brief History of Time.
please dont turn this into reddit please
The only link on the page links to the explanation.
Blame Fox News for Fake News, Not Facebook
Not a good example as it is currently 502'ing: https://i.imgur.com/sU8Zn5v.png
For me personally, I can see a theoretical benefit to visual programming languages - because I already think of code mostly in terms of shapes created be the flow of data. I've just never seen one that really matches my mental model, and trying to see myself using one of them seems like it would end more as a fight with the language than any actual benefit.
>502 Bad Gateway

maybe a $5 instance isn't enough
This article is poorly researched (the only "visual" tool it mentions is scratch???) and pretty lazy in considering the merits of extratextual programming. It's worrying that something of this quality resonates with people.
How machine learning is supercharging content management
In 20 Years, China Will Be on Mars – And the U.S. Will Be an Island