skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I truly have never seen this. In fact, I'd say I often see a rather careless culture of doing DOM manipulation here and there because it solves an immediate problem, albeit by short-circuiting the abstractions that may be in place and are now a bit more fragile.

Uggghhh, somehow you have somehow never seen DOM fear while simultaneously describing your own DOM fear. To say this behavior is prolific underscores the prolificness of it.

---

Some anecdotal stories of DOM fear:

I remember trying to hire my replacement when I was the A/B test engineer for Travelocity. This was when jQuery was at its religious height before querySelectors were a standard. jQuery wouldn't work well in this context because it was too slow, required an external library, and developers spent more time debugging their crappy jQuery code than simply solving the business problem. I remember warning applications they could not use jQuery in this position and it would not be available for consideration in the interview. Half the candidates dropped out.

Before I became the A/B test engineer for Travelocity I remember a principle engineer telling me they had to use jQuery because the DOM was too hard. Its because of stupid crap like that the company had no trouble promoting me to more senior positions.

I remember being temporarily banned from an IRC channel because I described jQuery as slow. They are thousands of times slower on all browsers except Firefox where they are millions to billions times slower. It sounds like there should be more to this, such as a demonstration of bad behavior on my part, but I promise describing jQuery as slow was all it took to elicit an immediate emotional response that touched on multiple people.

I remember being continuously flamed on Reddit for describing that WASM is not a DOM replacement. I have since deleted my Reddit account. On Reddit's r/programming the emotions are especially raw on this subject.

I remember going into job interviews for JavaScript development and opening the conversation with my thoughts on jQuery or DOM access. Every time the interview would have to recollect themselves from being immediately disoriented and completely lost. Strange as that sounds it never stopped me from winning the job.

I could go on and on, but fear of the DOM is real. People justify all manners of strange behaviors to qualify their defensiveness on this matter to the point of exercising extreme effort to avoid the subject at great expense to their business products and even their career decisions. Its really weird because the DOM is the standard and its stupid simple.
That's misleading. It will only raise an exception of the actual value is not matched. Haskell generates a compile error before even running if that's something that might happen. It is the old distinction between static and dynamic typing applied to pattern matching.
I know nothing about the two authors of this paper, but when talking about statistics and physics, the first two names coming to my mind are Delbrück and Luria, founding fathers of molecular biology and had a physics background. Also Luria's A Slot Machine, a Broken Test Tube is a joyful autobiography about his journey into science.
It pretty clearly is arguing that manufacturing in the US is a bad idea, apparently because it "lacks a manufacturing culture" to quote Gassee. Whether or not that is true, it really isn't a news article.
Why is no one talking about alternative means to cooling the planet, like aerosols?

https://edition-m.cnn.com/2018/11/23/health/sun-dimming-aero...

This would be a great opportunity for stalling (or even reverting) part of the problem till batteries and other clean products get crazy cheap.

Edit: I think this is important because it's much more doable. It is a much easier sell - fits the general story of economic growth, that almost everyone believes that economies (especially their economy) should expand. This would be a cross-national collaboration in which many people would take pride (we own the planet, and we're handling it well) and could have technological side effects like the flight to the moon. The current ideas which find it hard to get themselves divorced from slowing down economies are simply much less palatable.
Wow, what an illuminating talk, no pun intended. Jun Ye clearly demonstrates in fairly layman terms (among other things) how the art of measuring time at the most minuscule level and beyond is key to major technological advances that we can expect in coming years.

Yet, I'm close to raging mad at all the resources that go into this kind of research because of the potential military utility, compared to the trickle we put into research aiming to reduce poverty, increase people/planet health and overall well being. It's gotta change.
Author here, thanks! What I'm doing in the code is outputting 1 to the VCC pin and 0 to GND, and that seems to be enough:

https://github.com/pwmarcz/fpga-chip8/blob/2168aeea3b1cef3ba...
I like to rsync into a BTRFS volume, and then take a snapshot.

It's simple, fine-grained (you can use .rsyncignore files like .gitignore files) and versioned.
The question is valid if you intend to stick with one paradigm and keep it pure. For any practical purposes, that's useless crap.

Nothing wrong with writing the gist of your program written in functional way, keeping things immutable, allowing for orderless execution and lazy evaluation. But because your program interfaces with the real, consequential world it must realise all that computation at the pivot points where there is I/O and it suddenly matters that the lazy evaluation is complete.

Have a procedural loop to drive your events and other practical stuff and, from there, launch functional computations to calculate a completely or partially new state for your program. Keep things mostly immutable but do mutation in certain specific locations where it makes sense.

Clojure is good at drawing the line where the programmer sees it fit best. Multi-paradigm has always beaten pure ideologies hands down when it comes to delivering useful programs that actually work without making programmers do mental gymnastics for the sake of purity. (They should reserve their efforts to be mentally gymnast in the real-world problem they're solving.)

You don't want to write all of your program in object-oriented, procedural, functional, declarative, or whatever paradigm you have a thing for. They all do some things well and suck at others. Use them like tools, the right one for the right job.
Wouldn't it be a good solution for certain use cases like games, if you introduce a special mode with just one canvas?

So you allways have one and only one canvas for the output in which you write directly, via webgl or without.
No need for a gc here as that canvas inly gets removed qhen the site closes.
Because we're probably going to screw it up even worse, I guess.
That's the worst possible thing you can do. Citation: I did this.
Seasonal Associate
That's great to hear! Just don't take my code as an example of any good practices, I have no background in HDLs and this is my first big project, so it's all very hacky.
I always find the Gödel representations using powers of primes too strange. It's technically correct, I can follow the proof, but there is a small corner of my mind that can't believe it.

The GEB book doesn't have all the details, but it uses the ASCII representations (actually base 20 but whatever). With the ASCII representation the theorem feels obvious.
Maybe not the best examples, since the companies don’t exist anymore, but weren’t NeXT and Sun Micros built in the bay area in the early days? I think Sun hung on to the newark facilities nearly to their shuttering. Were they a mess too?
1980s Amiga has been running the AC and heat in 19 schools for 30 years
Why was it such a bad experience for you?
When exactly are you expecting Python, an interpreted language, to raise a compiler error?
The distinction is one of size and number. An npm for C would make no sense.
A little bit of a misnomer. You have to mention that IO and driver interaction is still being done in kernel. Just intermediary buffers are remaining MMAPed in both kernel and userspace.

That's a step forward from syscalls and excessively frequent context switching, but it is not a real case of userspace driving hardware directly. The later still holds a lot of promise, but it will require hardware to be more smart on its own, and be able to support access concurrency.

Something like that is already being done by hardware supporting virtualisable I/O
Nvidia's $1,100 AI brain for robots goes on sale
Order is not always necessary. For an example, just consider why SIMD instructions and GPUs are so powerful: they can do the same operation on a lot of data at the same time. A different example would be the async/await patten. Independent calculations can proceed concurrently. So no, a specific order of every operation is not part of the definition of algorithm. Indeed, if that was the case CPUs could not do out-of-order execution optimizations.
It's not at all unusual for our HFT and other realtime customers to dedicate cores to particular tasks. They often boot with isolcpus to reduce the number of CPUs visible to the scheduler, then dedicate those CPUs to servicing interrupts or running critical programs. They also turn off all power management so the CPUs are burning at 100% all the time.
As someone else pointed out what you really want is the implementation of strspn/strcspn which is where the loop is. You don't "carry" that code along. You just write

while (i < len && !is_token_begin(buf[i]))
i++;
if (i == len)
error("End of input\n");
start_token(tok);
while (i < len && is_token_char(buf[i])) {
i++;
add_to_token(tok, buf[i]);
}
end_token(tok);

or something along those lines. Whatever you need. It's not rocket science. Putting highly fluctuating and project-specific code like this in a library would only have disadvantages. Not everything should be in a library. In fact, most things should not be.
That we couldn't possibly put any stinky, messy factories up and manufacture in the US. Because Gassée had a hard time with screwdrivers and "you can't bring manufacturing back." All that must be done in China now you see, because reasons

It's definitely an agenda, definitely pushed, and fairly absurd.
So, I'm guess maybe this one: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/snp/rs25531#frequency_tab

...and despite: "According to David Hinds of 23andMe on community forums, "nearly everyone (99.97%) is getting called as CC, and there is no clear heterozygote cluster" ... "the genotype calls for rs25531 on our platform are not meaningful." Looking at OpenSNP frequency data, this seems to be universal for direct to consumer genotyping services at this stage.... "

... but went looking for this in my own data anyway, and couldn't even find the rs#.

disclaimer: I have no idea what i'm doing.
These apps are horrible. They function as a crutch for people who just don't know any better (not necessarily their own fault) and what they teach isn't even actual 'meditation'.

And that makes it even worse because then you get all these people saying 'ooh I meditate' when no, they've not even meditated once.

It's all western BS about making money, not about helping anyone. And people are too stupid/lazy/dumb to know any better, it's the same with 'learn to code in 24 hours', '6 abs in 6 weeks' etc.

If you want to meditate - actually meditate - get rid of the apps. Just go sit somewhere and turn your attention inwards, it's so simple, children should know this.

There's also a world of difference between 'being present' (which should be your default mental state) and actually meditating, they're as different as night and day, that's something else people don't get.

</rant>

The constructive part, if you're actually interested check out Raja Yoga, again 'yoga' that westerners do is a bastardized form of Hatha Yoga which was nothing more than a warm up in itself. There's a good series of lessons from the 1940s. You'll find them if you're meant too.
“four oil and gas exporting countries — the U.S., Saudi Arabia, Russia and Kuwait — rejected formally welcoming the report”

This part is just enraging. I mean, for USA, who won’t even participate in the paris agreement, to show up at the meeting at all, just to sabotage and try to derail the entire process.

It’s bad enough to not want to participate, but actively throw wrenches at the people who do is just evil.
What do you mean? There are working devices today.
The trigger mechanisms aren't throwing away "data which doesn't fit" - they're throwing away data which does. That's the point - the vast majority of CERN's output is going to be extremely common events we'd expect to see all the time.

No one is setting these things up to go "hmm a particle on a totally unusual trajectory - but not where the Higgs should be so junk it".
Glad to hear things worked out for your client. The key thing is, YOU had to create an exit strategy just for your client.

If the specifications for the serverless platform were "open" then the client could move their stack to different vendor with insignificant planning/risk.

An analogy would be vendors somehow changing machine virtualization such that your code was required to be very hypervisor-aware to function, and porting from vmware to xen imposed significant cost and risk.
BackupPC is the best one: https://backuppc.github.io/backuppc/

You get every professional features out of the box (full/inc backups, deduplication, compression...) & everything is automated.
https://www.reddit.com/r/backup
OK, it's some useless script that phys.org runs.[0]

If I create a custom NoScript rule, which blocks scripts (and webgl, which I block by default) phys.org sites render just fine.

But damn, I am curious what scripts phys.org is running that use so much RAM. Maybe it's a DoS against ad-blockers ;)

0) https://mozilla.logbot.info/firefox/20180907
How a red dot kept Chinese-Canadian readers from getting the full Huawei story
Traditionally the upper class made a living based on what they owned and the lower class (barely) made a living based on the work they did. There were nobles and serfs. Labor and capital. This distinction worked for many centuries.

The rise of the middle class is a modern phenomenon, whereby a new class was created who still essentially worked for a living but were able to achieve a measure of security and prosperity that led to a dramatically more stable society.

Of course that development has caused some consternation within the upper classes, who are presently trying quite hard to roll that back.
Your opinion is unnecessarily spoiling this discussion.
Here's a list of CERN's member state, observers and non-members with cooperation agreements:

https://home.cern/about/who-we-are/our-governance/member-sta...

It's basically every developed country on the planet, including US, Russia and China. And if you had ever visited CERN, you would know that anyone can go pretty much anywhere; the strongest deterrent you are likely to encounter are signs warning about possible radiation exposure.

It's hard to imagine a worse place to try doing military research.
$56,727 commission to purchasers of 18511 Montpere Saratoga CA for $2,388,880
Out of the country now, should be back at around CNY
> You represent a vector by giving two pieces of data, (1) an ordered list of coordinates, and (2) a basis.

Ok, I understand. But as used in computer languages, a vector can be simply 2 numbers. No coordinates or basis are implied. That's what I meant.
ByteConf React Native videos (dec 2018)
The 200000 vs 10000 (and therefore the 20 vs. 780 man days) come straight from your example.
Which is part of the problem: while I know for sure that are a lot of things that should be refactored/changed/improved/cut off it would be very difficult for me to give an estimate of "how much resources we save over the next year" - as a simple example, I could revamp significantly the GUI (God knows how much it needs it)... and in the next six months I get 85% of the requests for changes having to do with business logic, financial batches running at the end of the month and stuff like that, maybe because there are new regulatory hurdles to clear like GDPR or The EU Travel Directive.
Then the promised extra resources that would have become "available" fail to materialize, and the whole initiative is considered a failure. Good luck trying this again on the next year.
Except it had nothing to do with physics and was not a research project, just yet another hypertext system.
Yes, but unfortunately our own SOX-influenced rules require KU signed approval for most changes.
Less subtle with a hammer but true and fair enough.
Something I don't understand is how come can it cost so much to relace an old Amiga to control AC? What about a regular PC with some smart software? Is this the cost of other hardware that is so expensive?
LIGO Gravitational Wave Signals Were Real
Do you see another way to do whatever research you want to do, while not being in academia?

Or do you mean, just don't do research on your own?
That's exactly what I am doing now. I have been enrolled as a PhD student in computer science and working at the same time for almost 3 years.

I cannot really recommend it, mainly because of the workload. However there are things to be learnt both from academia and from the private sector. Moreover, being a PhD student won't make you earn any real money any time soon, nor give you any valuable work experience, IMO.

> You can work on whatever you want with no pressure.

Nor being a PhD candidate, nor being a freelancer guarantee that you can work on whatever you want with no pressure. And doing both at the same time will only make things harder to manage your time and actually do it "with no pressure".
Are there any specific facts in the article that are wrong? Because otherwise, you just seem to be arguing that any facts that may be used to advance some side of some argument must not be published? That would seem to succeed only if the NYT were to ship a bunch of blank pages, seven times a week.

Here’s also a story, just three weeks old, that paints manufacturing in the US in a positive light: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/23/nyregion/the-brooklyn-arm...

The NYT seems to (also) suck at coordinating their “agenda pushing”. It’s almost as if it’s a newspaper publishing ideas that don’t always neatly align to ideology.
Why does this need to be centralised like this? Why not a normal consumer thermostat or manual control in each building?
Yeah I get that fear, but the truth is we'd already be over 2*C if not the aerosols that humans released:
https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/img/figure/figure2_1.png

These took out much of the heat from greenhouse gasses. And in my opinion you either buy the climate change models (which are very aware of aerosols), or you don't. It doesn't make sense to believe that the planet will heat up more, that it is due to humans, but aerosols are not a part of the story.
We thought the Paris Accord was already signed and everybody was happy with each other except the US. But at least it was signed. Now we learn that there's the implementation agreement on how to make the previous agreement work. My question: when's the next meeting?
I had the good fortune to watch the lectures some years ago and the helped my understanding greatly. Just would like to share this and encourage everyone to take a close look.
"The original system was programmed by a high school student in the ’80s, and he’s the only one who knows how to fix software glitches. "

Wow ... That is beyond irresponsible ...
It’s neat that Python allows writing such things, but it’d be nice to see what the effect on debugging and stack traces are before writing anything with it.
For orphaned drugs, companies have a monopoly status on it and clients litteraly can’t forgo buying, and will do whatever research is needed to find the product. There is no nudging or bribing the doctor or whatever is needed to take an edge.

Considering it’s long argued that one of the main cost of a drug is marketing [0], for any drug where it’s significantly more than 100 people we shoudn’t get these crazy prices.

[0] http://naturalsociety.com/research-development-new-drugs-not...
I don't know what you are saying here. Can you elaborate?
Hopefully this one-sided, web damaging framework will die a death like IE finally did, with its awful standards.
Very hard for legal reasons: i.e. you go to a hotel, but they can't accept you because they have to blanks for police registration of foreigners, or PSB not being able to register your household simply because they have no computer system to do so, and there are no option for a foreigner to file for a residence registration on paper. Not to say, your Mandarin should be as good as that of locals, along the knowledge of local dialect if you venture far inland.
It seems match checking requires static typing, so that’ll be a job for a mypy extension.
I see Bret Victor more as a historian where he finds old ideas and re-introduces them to people who haven’t seen them before. Presumably in the hope that enough about the world has changed that this time the ideas will catch on.

I work with 40 year old ideas that are so advanced that people think it’s futuristic alien tech when they see it. Unfortunately the ideas will never be popular because of problems with culture and fundamental limitations of the median human comprehension.

So I see the achievement here as not one of technology but of creating a culturally isolated and elitist institution.
Not OP, but I considered doing something similar.

I believe the problem is that you cannot well concentrate on either, constant switching of completely different mental tasks will be very taxing.

Also, when you're "in the flow" in one area it's difficult to suddenly switch to the other. So it's hard to manage that time split.
Those that decide to stay in the race, are not necessarily the smartest. Maybe they are the most focussed, more blind to external impulses and "distractions". Plus they are more likely, being in the field, to be affected by these biases.

It would be unwise for any field, even that of brilliant physicists, to ignore external opinions and inputs.
> It's hard to imagine a worse place to try doing military research.

You are right of course. I don't mean overt military research. They can develop all kinds of high vacuum and laser technologies to search for elusive particles then it's trivial to turn that research into laser guns. But this is a guess. To me, you need to suspend disbelief to believe that a government, any government, will spend money to add few more particles to the Standard Model unless there is something in it for themselves. This is only a guess. I might be wrong.
While agreeing that there is room for improvement in the practice of scientific research, I would think it is better to leave the scientists alone to explore without too much interference ... Unwanted interference would poison things and drive people away from doing research which would not be good for mankind as a whole ...
Sent from NetSurf on OpenBSD. Seems to work well on this platform, or at least as well as something that does not support javascript can...
Young folks with great imagination and endless optimism about the human race will not see these as problems that don't work in practice, that cause more strife than they solve. Even some adults...
Do not think that. Think in a manner less philosophising.

Fairly well worded constitutions work, plainly and simple, there is no second thought about this.
https://techvella.com/elgato-stream-deck/
Neither of those seem like "wicked" problems in the sense the article presents. Hard, certainly. Technically challenging and expensive. But lacking the complex multilayered competing social and political tension that defines a "wicked" problem.
That’s correct, and to the best of my knowledge such traffic does indeed use post quantum encryption.
RIP, MT AI Y M.