skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
How does a government agency assign a $150m+ contract to a one man band?

If anything, the fault is more on the government than it is on the person bidding for the contract.
I haven't been in that precise position, but I have been in other leadership positions. The biggest lesson I've had to learn is: it's all about the people. First and foremost, leading is a social skill (although there are of course technical components involved too). As a leader, your job is to care for your followers. For a person who is as task-oriented as I used to be (and you seem to be similar), that is a tedious lesson to learn. But once you've learnt it, it turns out to also be very rewarding to you personally.

Two books that really helped me:

- The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership (John Maxwell)

- Leaders Eat Last (Simon Sinek)
"The problem with defending the purity of
the English language is that English is
about as pure as a cribhouse whore.

We don't just borrow words; on occasion,
English has pursued other languages down
alleyways to beat them unconscious
and rifle their pockets for
new vocabulary."

- James Nicoll
The Condition of takeoff fighter jet on the aircraft [USS Harry S. Truman]
Maybe all the market in East Germany but in USSR proper Zenit (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zenit_(camera)) was the absolute market leader.
Perfect occasion to ask something that I didn't know who to ask: does anyone here knows if it has ever been tried to "simplify" the visual aspect of Esperanto, by getting rid of all accents? (ĉ, ĝ, ŭ, etc.)

I'm a French speaker and I know some Spanish, so I should be used to accents and maybe biased towards the idea of having them as part of a language, but on the contrary, I love that English has none:

- Accents make a language look more complex at first glance, and therefore less appealing to beginners (my opinion).

- They make it harder to learn and type in the language on a keyboard, even a virtual one. In my case, choosing a language for a keyboard is a big deal.. French one so that accents are easy to type, or English so that code is easy to type? (I chose the latter).

I'm gonna risk a comparison here: it's a bit like programming languages syntax, you can build an app with either Objective-C or Swift, but I suspect many beginners would find Swift's syntax a bit less intimidating. Similarly, someone looking at Esperanto might be immediately put off by seeing that they will have to learn to type ĉ, ĝ, ŭ, etc.

I would love to see someone refactor Esperanto's syntax to remove its accent while still keeping its capabilities.

1. Is that even technically possible, or would that imply making words too complex or adding new letters?

2. Has this idea ever been debated, could I read about it anywhere? (on a public forum/wiki maybe?)

Thanks!

----------------------------

Edit: Thank you for your answers! So Esperanto has indeed been changed, and each "constructed language derived from Esperanto" is called an Esperantido.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reformed_Esperanto
(this version has been created by Zamenhof himself and removing the accents is part of the proposal.

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ido_language

Would love to see a new crowdsourced and open-source reform on Github, in 2019!
Especially since this is effectively what is happening - when I speak English with someone from a non-native country I essentially drop into much simpler non-idiomatic vocab set.
Yes, that is a known negative of that type of society. Returning back to the subject, people on a whole are physically safe in that society as long as you follow their draconian rules. That is a benefit of a total surveillance society.
Sure, now write this same comment in Spanish without using Google Translate and then may be someone can start believing you.
I haven't been traveling quite as long as GP but here's my two cents. Even as an introvert getting social interaction improves travel so much.

In a new city try to find a 'social hostel' (not a party hostel, unless that's your thing) with organized walking/food tours. Go on said tours and chat with everyone. After the tour see if anyone wants to get dinner/drinks/sight-see together.

Basically everyone in common areas at a hostel will be open to conversation at least. Be the initiator, chat with people, organize a group to go get dinner, etc.

If you aren't good at being the initiator, try to find someone who is and befriend them. Add people on whatsapp/messenger and setup a hostel group chat.

Befriend people who are also traveling longer term, they're usually more open to change plans a bit.

Socializing takes more effort and most relationships will be fleeting, that's the nature of the beast. But nothing makes a trip like organizing a small group of friends to travel together to a few different cities. You can create much stronger bonds and even some life-long friends.
Founder’s Club is a good example of the mid-tier concierge services, as it exists exclusively to provide concierge-like discounts for a specific demographic target at a significant enough to overcome the “not enough volume” concern that banks face.

These discount services have one critical weakness for most of us: you must spend at least 10x the membership fee each year on compatible services to benefit from the discounts. If you don’t spend at least $2000/year on eligble costs, paying $200/year for discounts rarely makes any sense once you add up the money saved.

Credit cards try to democratize through “points” but the same math applies when comparing to a debit card.
It is mainly a matter of decision making. In my case, no refactoring was ever sanctioned by itself. Devs were having been allowed to refactor anything on a small scale and always backed up by a feature request. So when the desire to somehow "heal" the codebase is met, it is usually because it is already too "dead" to work with in the first place.
The approach obviously only works for read access and not for mutation. However those are the most often required operations. For owned strings and mutations different APIs are required. C++ string_view vs string, and Rusts str slices vs owned Strings work like this.
1. The same variety of languages they use now. Remember, most developers/engineers are not 'trendy'. Most companies are not on top of the latest trends and fad frameworks.

So while there will be inevitably be a fair few using completely new languages and frameworks we can't even currently imagine, there will also be people using the exact same stuff they're using now, or have been using for decades. We'll have people still using React and Angular and Vue. People still using PHP and MySQL and .NET and Python. Hell, some people will still likely be using Cobol or Fortran or assembly code 5 years from now. Hell, some people will be writing ASM in 2050.

2. Every type of stack imaginable today, plus various others created in the 5 years from now. There are still many devs out there using Apache and a LAMP stack for their work, likely even with CPanel or Plesk still running on it to boot.

3. Don't have much experience with hardware, so won't guess about that.

4. What kind of software are you speaking of? The kind the dev uses to write code, or the kind that runs on the server/servers? For the former, probably Visual Studio Code or Brackets or what not, with Git for version control and Mac OS/Windows/some Linux distro as the operating system. Don't see much of that stuff being replaced any time soon.

5. Exactly what they're developing now. 99.9% CRUD apps and sites for businesses, 0.01% more interesting things for startups and FANG companies.

Hope that doesn't come across as too negative, it's just that from my experience, people always assume the future is going to be far more different than it actually is and that tech will be uniformly replaced in some major revolution. That's usually not how it works. Usually it's the old and new co existing, and both tech and business models being unevenly distrubuted among people and organisations.
Same problem. Our biggest issue while dating. My wife said she wanted to stay permanently in the South to be near family but agreed to move for a few years if a really good job became available.

Well, we got married, and shortly afterward one of the well known tech companies made a really good offer. My wife threw an absolute fit and said she had taken a gamble while dating and didn't believe I would ever actually get a job offer at one of those companies. I nearly filed for divorce because of how horrible she was treating me, but instead I accepted the job and told her I was moving to the Bay Area regardless. Soon after, she agreed to honor her promise and came too, but every single day here she complains about how much she hates California.

When my few years are "up" I'm really dreading going back to a non-tech region. The company I'm at doesn't generally allow fully remote work, so I am somewhat seriously floating the idea of commuting to their office in the Northeast by plane each day from Atlanta. Sounds expensive but the plane tickets would be balanced out by the much lower cost of living. I don't know if the idea is actually feasible; I'd have to test it for a week.
'Stardew Valley' creator is working on more content and a new game
Given the OEMs cited, would it be a reasonable estimation to suggest that the _majority_ of MIPS-based systems are affected?
Strange, I send the same link 1 day before. 3 points...
I'm somewhat familiar with 'homeschooling', and I wonder if a lot of the problems described in the article re: social integration could be mitigated with a one-on-one education where a parent is working with the child. Since it seems like a lot of the issues described came out of a (for the child) hostile learning environment.

(yes, I know this is not always practical)
A bit off-topic but: what made you go to Javascript specifically?
The Hidden Costs of Starting an E-Commerce Business
I think the "undiscovered scope" part is where most people trip.

You can think of software and how it fits with its users purposes as having multiple layers of features, interactions and details.

The top few features usually each have a few sub features that you have to tailor correctly to your users work flows, each of these sub feature often have sub details, interactions with other features, corner cases, data formats or cross compatibility considerations.

It's a fundamentally mathematical issue. Adding a layer of detail is an exponential proposition and the exponential function is explosive in nature. If your software only has 3 major features and each have 3 sub features, that is 9 things to consider. If each sub feature has 3 corner cases you need to get right, that is 27 things. And if each of these 27 things have 3 details that gets you to 81 considerations. The next level is 243. Each of the 243 points tend to take a similar ammount of time to plan out and build weather it's at the top or the bottom of the pyramid.

As a piece of software evolves over the years, the intricate details at the bottom get sculpted out. The software's fit to its purposes can become very fine.

The thing is, people tend to think of software in terms of its top 2-3 layers of details, its 27 most important features. The finer complexity is often not as visible and it's just difficult for humans to keep so many items in mind.

This is true of any complex technologies. People tend to think of cars as machines that have properties concerning speed and direction and suspensions and breaking but rarely think of the complex chemistry of the fuel aeration and combustion process, the complex internal forces and velocities of parts in the transmission, the carefully tweaked metallurgic alloy work that has gone in each of the thousands of metal parts, the carefully chosen properties of the plastics and the rubbers, the thermal properties of everything, the hundreds of electronic systems, the analog circuits, the thousands of specification lines of many dozens of communication protocols for controlling all these parts, the entertainment system, acoustic properties etc, etc, etc. All these things took decades to evolve and refine.

It's easy when planning a rewrite, to plan out the few dozen items visible at the top of the iceberg and underestimate the amount of important details hiding bellow.

Sometimes, some of the details might not be important, but often times they are the essence of your business case and at the core of the favourable economics of your product. It's the years of knowledge accumulated in the subtle details that provide you with a moat and makes it difficult for your product to be copied.

If you rebuild with mostly the top few dozens of features in mind, and only vague ideas about everything else, you are likely to be creating a commodity solution, one that your competitors will have a much easier time to copy than your older finely tailored solution.
>but I can’t imagine trying to raise a child through to the end of school (with western concepts/mindset) here.

Why not?
Other animations in the article (changing color on touchDown) are far less distracting ... certainly should not cause motion sickness (to address another point in the comments).
when I used esperanto on IRC (many years ago), people wrote "cx", "gx" "ux", etc. This seems very standard usage when you are writing on limited charsets. Nowadays, you can just type the actual letters, it's not a big deal. I actually find the choice of accents cute and I love them.
The paper was laborious to read.

The short of it seems to be that Linux used to perform floating point emulation on MIPS by writing instructions to run to the usermode stack. The stack therefore had to be executable. This is known to be a bad idea.

A couple of years ago, this code was moved from the stack to a new segment, but this segment is still writable and executable, and the address is fixed. This is known to be a bad idea.

And of course the stacks are still executable because the commonly-used compilers haven’t been updated to request non-executable stacks.

The paper does not propose a solution.
Tell that to the guys in Riverside, CA doing time for mail theft right now. See, we get these nice e-mail updates from the police regarding our specific neighborhood (because it is a rich one, the Wood Streets.) They busted four people following FedEx and UPS trucks and stealing packages right off the front porch. Federal charges, right there. Mail is mail is mail, period.
Tech Companies Are Moving East, but Don't Cry for Silicon Valley
Smaller, less "glamorous" cities are often the best option for remote workers in my opinion; there are a lot of cities out there in places like e.g. Ohio or Western NY that are looked down on as "boring", but which actually have a lot of culture and fun things to do, and are still large enough to have a decent amount of nice restaurants/amenities/etc... And at the same time, they also have very low cost of living and avoid a lot of the overcrowding problems you see in bigger, trendier urban areas.

Personally, I live in Rochester, NY, and I absolutely love it. There are definitely some neighborhoods that I avoid, but there are also extremely nice areas in the city with beautiful yet affordable housing and lots to do. There are all kinds of fun events, concerts, and festivals going on all year; lots of nice restaurants, bars, and coffee shops; an assortment of beautiful parks; the list goes on. The community of friends I've met here is also much more tight knit than anything I've encountered in bigger, busier cities.

I think a lot of people tend to gravitate toward extremes: I see a lot of answers in this thread pointing to very large cities, or super-rural areas out in nature, or far-away international metropolises. There's definitely something to be said for picking a middle ground, though - I feel like I get to have my cake and eat it too, and if I want to occasionally go to a Michelin star restaurant or climb a mountain, I can always do that on vacation (which, of course, is easy to fit in the budget too, given the amount of money I save by living here).
I came here to say what you'd already said. I'd just add that we have to read enough already to do our work.

If you're going to write, respect your reader's time as part of your writing.
Oh, I know I'm hell-banned. That's okay, Mr. Paul Graham will be getting his comeuppance in PUBLIC very soon. :) I know some secrets and I can't wait for him to be anywhere near my area so I can publicly expose him.
> The heap is slower than the call stack

Is this true in Python? I thought the call stack was on the heap as well.
Why Python Is the Most Popular Language for Machine Learning
But in what ways is it implemented that doesn't lead to this?

Most countries with material wealth that are advertised as being "socialist" or "social democratic" are actually bog standard capitalism, perhaps with a marginally better funded welfare system than average.
I can imagine that a fork of GNU APL, re-written in FORTRAN with multi-threaded and maybe distributed computing support, would be an amazing mathematical tool. Something that's super fast and scales really well, and makes mathematical operations really easy.
They had the same panel houses on the outskirts of Leningrad. Sometimes I'd conspire with a girl to skip school and we'd hang out on those flat roofs.
Ask HN: Undo/Redo – Two- or three-finger REDO gesture?
Recently ProCreate was lauded by Apple for their undo gesture (two-finger-single-tap). https://procreate.art/insight/2018/take-our-undo-gesture

The Redo counterpart is a three-finger-single-tap, which imho is technically difficult and hard to perform on a small screen.

A modified implementation could be:
Undo: two-finger-single-tap (same as ProCreate)
Redo: two-finger-double-tap

What are arguments for or against two-finger-double-tap to undo?
That is not true. In Bulgaria there were generally full shelves in the grocery stores during socialism. There were some hard to get things like coca kola that caused lines but otherwise all basic foodstuffs were easy to get and quite affordable.

However I have heard from other people that grew up in socialist countries that Bulgaria had it easier than most in that respect.

In the transition to capitalism things got quite worse. Then there were empty shelves there was rationing, prices went up drastically, etc.
Several years ago I rented an apartment in which you could hear people through the walls, and the cherry-on-the-top was a neighbor from below who early on weekend mornings played wartime songs on a bayan.

I'm not an early bird.
Awesome man! Glad to hear about that. I love the concept!
Then I think the good criteria to apply here is: what was the goal of the project?

If it was a quick cash-grab then obviously a long and expensive rewrite is deemed unsuccessful. If you go for the long haul and want to bring real value to your customers and the rewrite helped you do that, then it was a success.

Nothing is ever cheap in IT in my opinion. I found that being very upfront with the people with the money landed me more projects than trying to lie about it and reveal the extra expenses one by one over a course of a year.

"No, that's gonna be very far from 50k euros. Be prepared to pay 300k and it's not gonna be a year. Optimisically, two, realistically, two and half to three."

It works surprisingly well with experienced businessmen. They applaud the honesty and we move directly to the next point -- what are the tradeoffs and compromises.
A very reasonable question, and there is still some controversy over that in the medical community.

For me, it's because it comes with a whole host of classically autistic symptoms like struggling with eye contact, overload from sensory processing, difficulty understanding social norms, etc, but only at times when I'm stressed or otherwise in a low energy mood. I also had to put a lot of effort into learning other people's social norms - my intuitive ones were different in ways which seem similar to other people on the autism spectrum - but unlike some forms of autism, I have been able to learn the rules of neurotypical people to the point that you probably wouldn't be able to tell I was autistic if you met me. I still find a lot of these rules utterly bizarre.
Thank you so much for the great video!

Key takeaway:

Thanks to progress in superconductive magnets, a new reactor type developed by the MIT called SPARC might likely become the first Fusion Reactor to achieve net energy output before 2030, producing 200MW in 1/65th the volume of the ITER design, at a fraction of the costs.

All based on very solid physics with only littly uncertainty remaining. Wow.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARC_(tokamak)

Also: all other designs don't even come close to fulfilling this promise.
If emphasizing rational discussion (even if it flaunts someone's non-empirical belief) is wrong, then I don't really want to be right.
Hmm. The tweet, and thread on Twitter, has more actual information on the vulnerability than the page you linked to. You have to click through to the actual paper to get the additional information. I feel like the Twitter link gives a better quick summary information.
How about changing the ABI to something like the ARM soft float ABI. Yeah, it's got a few problems, but it's way better than all this crap.
Statistics don’t tell the whole story, but Indianapolis is pretty consistently ranked as one of the top 20 most high-crime cities in the nation.
I don't understand why people have to otherize each other. No, again opposition to regulations has nothing to do with some ambiguous opposition to nanny stating in and of itself. That is tangential to the real issue. Before getting to that, let's take a really quick digression.

Tax payer funded systems are one of the most controversial things we have. You'll find sharp disagreement on topics like e.g. public vs private funding for everything from education to medical and a wide array of other issues. Yet you'll find most of nobody that wants to privatize e.g. the fire department. This is because most of everybody would agree that the fire department does a good job, does it efficiently, and does it cheaply.

The point of this is that if there were a regulatory framework that was unambiguously and intrinsically superior to any alternative you'd find next to no opposition to it. Everybody wants the same thing in the end -- we just disagree on what's more likely to get you there. In many ways, I think lemonade stands are just a timeless and perfect example. In many states in the US today it is literally illegal, or at least unlawful, for a kid to go sell lemonade in their front yard. They can [and have] faced ticketing, confiscation, and so on. This is clearly idiotic by any standard, yet the very rules and regulations the produced this were all at some point created with good intentions. Perhaps ensuring food safety, or avoiding money laundering, or whatever other rule they happen to be breaking by selling a cup of lemonade for a quarter.

A rule that would generally stand to impose substantial penalties for writing bad code is something that would have unimaginably vast consequences at the lower level. And I think you're looking more at destroying small business in the tech industry than in suddenly having a world where all code is "good". By contrast the companies at the top can afford to greatly expand their staff and create factory lines of code review, extensive internal penetration testing, general audits, and so on. And perhaps most importantly, when they do end up violating the rule they have the resources to manage this just fine. And so it's very possible that the regulation could have an overall net positive effect there. But if it were applied to society as a whole (instead of just large companies), I think you'd be effectively killing off tech industry competition.
that's a neat trick!