skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I think people underestimate how complex these things are when they are learning C++, and how complex their interactions are. Then there’s the preprocessor.

And then there is arcane stuff like this:

* https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/eval_order

* https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/copy_elision

That does make the language feel very complex even without the whole templates depth.
I really recommend this book:
https://www.amazon.com/Healing-America-Global-Better-Cheaper...

It goes into comparing health systems around the world and understanding the history of why they went into effect.

There is a cheeky answer to your question: we have _all_ the main systems that are used in Europe and other places in the world.

There are 4 main systems
1. Beveridge (public health care providers and insurance rolled into one, like the NHS in UK): The VA and healthcare systems used for native americans use this system

2. National health insurance (private healthcare providers and public insurance funded by the government, like Canada's system): Medicare was copied from the Canadian system (even the name!).

3. Bismarck Model: (private healthcare providers and mostly private insurance, along with an individual mandate and heavy regulation of insurance companies: this is used in Germany and Japan). Obamacare was an incomplete attempt to move more towards this model.

4 Out of pocket model: (fully private: a non-system used by most poor countries in the world). This is what the uninsured fall back on.

A less cheeky answer involves looking at the common factor in the rise of systems 1, 2 and 3 in countries around the world. The fundamental political driving force behind this was a moral and ethical decision that healthcare is a human right that the government should provide. When Clinton attempted healthcare reform in 1994 he couched the politics of it in economic terms saying that we need to reduce costs, and it failed. Obamacare only began to make some headway once the politics and debate around it started focusing more on the basic moral and ethical question of whether our society should provide universal access to healthcare.

So it's this weird situation where maybe some people want it for economic reasons (our system is by far the worst in terms of costs per outcome), but politically the best thing is to make this a fundamental moral question of healthcare as a human right. Most constitutions written in the second half of the century include some kind of reference to healthcare as a human right.
Review of Clean Architecture book
Yes, but the very fact that this needs to be said proves how bad BT is, really. In what other connection type would it ever be stated that somebody actually managed to get it working all the way?
One of your examples is reversed.

It's not illegal to possess destructive devices on the federal level. There's a $200 NFA transfer tax to pay, but that aside, you can own a perfectly legal grenade launcher, or even a tank with an operational main gun. Some people do.

In CA, on the other hand, these things are explicitly prohibited (18710 PC).
"Silenced" is one thing. Reasoned with, another. Many are incapable of reason. Silencing will often drive the unreasonable to worse acts, and always the reasonable to more complex methods. If one finds oneself incapable of reasoning, either due to a lack of explanation or being unsure how it will be received, one should examine one's own motivations.

-The objection to Puritans is not that they try to make us think as they do, but that they try to make us do as they think. H.L. Mencken
"The reason most people have this misconception is confirmation bias. Children are almost always eating sugar, and almost always "hyperactive"."

wow... just wow.

See, that right there is where the disconnect is. Children were not "always eating sugar, and almost always "hyperactive".

You may have been as a child, and your children may be now, but no, not even close was I, or my children, or my parents, or my grandparents, or those before them.

We didn't run around all day hyperactive. This is not "normal". It's pervasive, but not normal.
So-called hate speech doesn’t cause harm other than to feelings. It’s constitutionally protected in the US, and Facebook is going down the wrong path trying to eliminate it.
I guess the standard response here would be that means you’re not pushing yourself hard enough to try bigger and riskier things.
Well that is socialism. (As is our conflation of insurance and charity.) Being a form of price control, it also happens to not work very well.

EDIT: and if anyone can explain why forcing doctors and hospitals to provide their services at a loss, is not socialism, then feel free to reply; as that will be assuredly more enlightening than a simple downvote.
Lord no, I would not argue that they have a responsibility to try to enforce speech codes.
Not true, I found an online doctor who offered California medical marijuana recommendations at $39/pop 'or your money back' - and I got one while passing through San Francisco for a conference. At the time I was a resident of another State and the doctor even shipped my official medical recommendation to my home state.
This article says the trading was up ".. on Wednesday. Literally, the first day after that call was made. I can’t make this up."

Apparently the author did make this up, because the call occurred on Sunday [0], and yet the trading was down on Monday, which was the day after the call.

[0] https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/24/treasury-was-not-concerned-a...
The F-150 has a base price of $28k. The Chevy Silverado also has a base price of $28k. Those are MSRPs, so you can get them cheaper with bargaining, though of course the average person ends up paying more because they're adding on options.

I have no idea where you're getting those $43k figures from??
I am going to read this later
The Prime Number Conspiracy, Heretics of Dune, and Im looking for an investment book to read.
I was reminded of Knuth, too. The code/comment blend encourages reading it like a white paper.
What? Just use a relative path.
> Is it worth reporting a panic over usb3, or is it a duplicate of the others?

More than likely it is a duplicate of an already-existing one. Check the list here: https://dev.haiku-os.org/query?status=!closed&component=Driv... -- but if you don't see it in there, then please do file a new ticket.

Display flickering/lag/etc. sounds like the intel_extreme driver being broken; there is a ticket about this also. You can avoid that for the time being by blacklisting the driver or forcing "fail-safe graphics" (VESA).
HN: this is amazing! Everyone should be writing code like this!

Also HN: c++ and java are awful! They're so verbose and I have to type so much!
> I know a business coach who regularly asks his audience "Who here makes better burgers than McDonalds?". When half the audience raises their hand, he asks them why they don't outsell this giant company.

Because I'm not in the business of making hamburgers nor am I interested in doing so.

Struggling to see this business coach's point. Is he saying that McDonalds makes better burgers than me because I'm not selling a million burgers a day? Because that's a load of crap.
Sure, by spec the quality is bad... but my experience using them has been great (aside from drop outs in crowded areas). Audio and calls are clear.
Ask HN: If you're a CTO, how would you describe your role?
I find it interesting how the role of CTO varies greatly between companies depending on their size, industry, etc.

Nearly 12 years ago, Werner Vogels wrote the following blog in which he defined 4 different types of CTOs.
https://www.allthingsdistributed.com/2007/07/the_different_cto_roles.html

Do you fall into one of these buckets? Into multiple buckets? Or is none of these books?

How would you define your role?
Maybe they always put the standard path first, and the negative `if !found {` lines are places where `found` is usually false.
Surfider Foundation Releases State of the Beach Report Card 2018 [pdf]
Interesting! Is there a convention to follow?
I don't understand the objection to having more, smaller files, at least in Go where they can all be in the same package.

Once two functions are too far apart to be on screen at the same time, jumping back and forth between two functions in the same file doesn't seem any easier than switching between different files. If anything, switching between two different files is easier since they each get an editor tab.

On the other hand, being wary about extracting functions (which moves things logically together further apart) makes more sense.
And caffeine
My knee-jerk reaction is write this off as ageism, but considering the social-movement trends of this demographic, it is probably a recipe for disaster.

To give an example, at a meetup hosted by a large game corp, some college children presented a project aimed at logging the speaking time of business-meeting participants based on superficial details (primarily sex, race), with the goal of equalizing the amount of speaking time based on such. The fact that my objection to such will be perceived as sexism/racism is my other objection.
What more specific response do you want? "Personal computing", i.e. use as a "daily driver", is the entire reason Haiku exists.
It says "Emacs-inspired" on the tin. So, it shouldn't really be just an editor. It should be an editor-shaped interactive environment for some language. Sure, it would be nice for this environment to contain a good enough editor to be mistaken for one, like GNU Emacs sometimes is. Liquid is much younger and doesn't seem to have gotten to this part of wishlist yet.
I like folks who drink at work
This. The code base should be the authoritative source of the behavior of the system. The comments should be the authoritative source of what is expected of the system.
White House considers new year executive order to bar Huawei, ZTE purchases
Let's back up and make this a statistic instead.

In 2016 there were 770,000 people who were bankrupted due to medical costs.

Around 45,000 people a year die from a lack of health insurance.

In every country that has universal coverage reform has started with a push to ask a basic moral and ethical question: should we consider healthcare a basic human right?

In the U.S. we pay 18% of our GDP on healthcare, yet we rank ~ 37th in terms of death due to preventable causes, and 31st in terms of overall life expectancy. If you look at how healthcare works in other countries there are many different systems but what they all have in common is a commitment to provide access to healthcare for all citizens. There are different mixes of private and public, and we have already implemented most of them to some degree:

There are 4 main systems 1. Beveridge (public health care providers and insurance rolled into one, like the NHS in UK): The VA and healthcare systems used for native americans use this system

2. National health insurance (private healthcare providers and public insurance funded by the government, like Canada's system): Medicare was copied from the Canadian system (even the name!).

3. Bismarck Model: (private healthcare providers and mostly private insurance, along with an individual mandate and heavy regulation of insurance companies: this is used in Germany and Japan). Obamacare was an incomplete attempt to move more towards this model.

4 Out of pocket model: (fully private: a non-system used by most poor countries in the world). This is what the uninsured fall back on.

The main piece that is missing is we haven't committed to scaling either systems 1, 2 or 3 in order to provide universal access to healthcare and so we have an incredibly fragmented and complex system with soaring costs. American for-profit insurance companies are bloated by ~20% administration fees whereas in most countries they are non-profit entities with 5% or less.

To back up and sum it all up the fundamental question we need to ask ourselves is: do we want to provide universal access to healthcare?
Words are used to spread ideas and tell stories, no? That much we can agree on?

Do we agree that stories are a powerful medium for spreading good stories that make people happy? What about making people sad? What about educating people?

If 'words' can do all of this, then surely 'words' can also incite harm?
I suspect you are right. Your comment reminds me when Google and others were paying people to review sites on a contract basis for matching content to category. This was many moons ago before basically "mechanical turk" took off.
Ha, same. That’s always the first thing that comes to mind.

I was programming before ZZT, but it definitely solidified some things in my head, despite its limitations.
First Class Macros
It's constitutionally protected from the government infringing upon it. As Facebook is not the government, they are perfectly free to limit speech in any way they choose.
If I were to post here linking your legal name and identifying information and residence to this post and issuing a call to have you disemployed and harassed at home; evicted if possible and subjected to a general boycott covering everything from sex to food.

You would object strenuously.

Yet I would only be engaging in "free speech".
I came to US ~5 years ago and spent most of my time in SF. In my home country we had no homeless (ok, probably not like 0 but nowhere near close to SF, I've never seen a homeless person in my childhood) ao I thought this is an American problem. Now I'm living in Boston and there are surprisingly few homeless people. It's obviously not 0, I still get to see homeless sleeping in subway, streets etc but the difference between SF and Boston is day and night. SF has a ridiculously concentrated homeless population.
Recall the early FB stories where Zuckerberg was pretty gung-ho about eaves dropping (and the company as a whole did) on people's private info. Said behavior has probably been moderated due to legal and financial ramifications, but I don't doubt it's still there in some lax form.
Not that I'm aware of. If the iXsystems people want to do this, I'll be happy to help.
Random Rothkos
And hate speech is illegal in some societies, which is just as irrelevant as the US First Amendment because Facebook isn't a government organization.
You’re talking about hate speech as if it were a universally agreed upon concept. Hate speech is entirely in the eye of the beholder. Any speech I consider to be hateful is hate speech, any speech you consider to be hateful is hate speech, and there are 7.5 billion other unique sets of criteria out there for defining hate speech that are no more or no less valid.
Martin Fowler of the Agile world, and Garret Smith of the Erlang community, are both excellent programmers whom I respect, and they both take the approach of breaking code into lots of extremely small functions.

Having tried that style, I notice that I don't particularly favor it, and for the very reason you site: the code is no longer all in one place.

I've switched to moderately sized methods/functions with comments every few lines. Some say that comments like this are a smell, and that you should refactor the commented section of code into it's own function, but honestly comments are easier to read than method names (and again, there's the benefit of locality).

I'll have to take a look at the book.
Discovers a secret "Vaporwave Mode", calls it a bug, not a feature. Heretic!
Yet even here on HN it is possible to get banned for what you type.
> The attack that people were worried about was the government creating a whole bunch of currency and insisting that it was all valuable. They couldn't do that with gold, so gold was trusted.

I don't think this is accurate at all. Gold was valued as a trade good, and used to create majestic artworks. Government-created currency occurs a long time after gold becomes a major element of international trade. So, (1), the value of gold has nothing to do with a worry that the government will debase the currency.

(2), governments frequently did debase their currency, including gold-based currency. In the west, they did that by mixing precious metals with base metals and claiming the whole coin was pure precious metal. (Or, in the case of Croesus, by mixing precious silver with precious gold in a percentage that could be adjusted to meet current monetary needs.) In the east, they did it by issuing... paper currency. In general, governments were totally incapable of issuing fiat currency without issuing far too much and experiencing massive collapses in its value. But they still did it. Note that gold can be used to resist inflationary paper currency (though it wasn't), but it can't be used to resist debased coins that purport to be gold while actually being partly gold and partly lead. Such coins are a reason to distrust gold.
> San Francisco, maybe? Or if you're buying organic, free-range, ultra-filtered, sustainable milk

I don't think it's legal to sell regular milk there - it has to be either nut milk or raw milk.
Ask HN: Advice for an aging software developer?
I am pushing 40 this year. I've been a PHP dev for the past few years - it is neither challenging nor interesting. For a bunch of reasons, changing jobs isn't that easy at the moment.

I am worn out, tired and depressed. While I still love learning and still love coding, I am not good enough to compete with younger, hipper crowd and I am not FAANG material.

I'd be happy if I can make 4-5k USD after taxes, if I can work less than 30 hours a week, on my own schedule and stress free.

Given this background, any advice on what avenues to pursue? What to learn?

I am a decent writer, very good product designer, average coder - if this helps in you giving me recommendations
As one of the authors of the original code here, this was the result of several days of intense works by a half dozen people working through every corner case we could dream up, and a bunch we thought of on the spot.

It is in no way a guarantee that we got them all, but after spending so much time reason in through why those 'else' clauses were correctly empty, we thought it would be rude not to write it down.

In truth it was as much for future-me as anyone. My memory is know. To be spotty. :)
There's plenty of good reasons to not write 95% of code with big walls of explanation. The first is a matter of cost: Writing a good explanation around everything is very expensive to do at first. A whole lot of the custom code you find in random companies, from the shiny SV startup to the old enterprise, is unimportant, cobbled together pieces. We have no idea of whether we are writing code that will be thrown away in a week, a month, a year or whether it will last two decades. Context can change fast enough that the comments become worse than useless, as the terminology might have changed, or had been misguided in the first place, turning the long comments into outright unintended deception. This gets even worse as we do not evaluate all the comments in all the files whenever there's a code change: It's crazy how a large comment block in one place can become harmful after it's forgotten, and someone else makes a correct, business critical change in another file. No matter where I am working, it's rare for me to not find multiple examples every year where the code and the comments provide very different impressions of what is going on, and it's the code that is accurate.

This is not to say that there aren't reasons to write large comment blocks, or architecture documents, but that they are often better written not while the system is being first built, but later, in a maintenance cycle, when someone already had wished for the comments, and has regained the knowledge the hard way. By then, it's clear which part of the system are dangerous, suspicious and unclear. Where there's more need for high quality error handling, and where thousands of lines of error handling never get hit, because the failing case that was originally considered doesn't really happen in this dimension anymore.

Writing code so that someone, even a future you, can pick it back up and improve it when it's needed, while still delivering the code at a good pace is a kind of skill that many just don't learn, either because they are always in greenfield teams that never pay for their mistakes, or have an approach to maintenance that involves not becoming intimate familiar with a system, and instead either hack or rewrite.

But nobody looks great in a resume by saying that they are a specialist in software maintenance.
If you want money and have money, then options are fun to play with. Just beat the stock market.
I can choose who to serve in my pub. If you start mouthing off at the other patrons, you will be asked to leave.

That is not censorship or silencing, it’s simply advising you that my place is not the place for that kind of behaviour.
This bothered me too. Fortunately you can reconfigure key bindings the way you want.
The CPC will never do anything to materially harm Apple because their only real concern is their continued rule of China. Assembly of Apple products employs hundreds of thousands of workers and having that many people unemployed and angry is a threat to their regime. Not to mention the immediate capital flight that would occur, irreparably damaging FDI in China. This political juice Apple has is the same reason why iMessage and FaceTime aren't blocked in China, despite being end-to-end encrypted.

Apple is assembling in India for the same reason they assemble in Brazil, to satisfy protectionist policies.
I assume every word of what you wrote is true and it still does not mean he’s not a journalist. Sarah Jeong is a racist and harasser and she’s on the board of the New York Times.

More importantly, some nobody with a twitter account did a better job of investigative journalism than the New York Times and you’re criticising the nobody?
> A stupidly obvious example is farming. Small scale manure production is a net benefit to the local soil. Factory farming destroys rivers, lakes and small seas.

Small scale farming is literally destroying the Chesapeake Bay--manure is the single biggest source of pollution.

The advantage of large-scale production is that you can apply centralized remediation efforts. It's easy to make a sewage treatment plant that handles 100 million gallons of water a day clean up all of its toxicity before dumping the water out. It's hard to tell 10 million people to stop dumping so much manure on their farms, especially when they're all going to say "eh, what is adding 50 extra pounds of manure going to do?" What may be safe on the scale of an individual use may not be so safe when it is repeated for millions of individual uses.
Gold was valued for its use in ornamentation. For example, we have correspondence between a Mesopotamian city-king and an Egyptian pharaoh; the king sends many letters expressing his need for unworked gold and hoping the pharaoh will let him know of a need -- any need -- of Egypt's that he might be able to satisfy.

In the end, he earns a tribute from Egypt by sending his daughter to marry the pharaoh. He receives several truckloads of gold -- but writes to express his disappointment that it has already been worked into statues.

So yes, you can use gold or you can spend it, but, like everything else, you can't do both.
Anti Reverse Engineering Techniques
Typical cryptocurrency hardware wallet is horribly insecure as far as typical requirements for HSM go, which is at least to me somewhat expected and understandable.

The reason for that is that such devices are primarily designed to move the key materialoutside of the effectively allways online client device and thus the typical HSM-style threat models are outside of the design scope.

This is somewhat understandable because designing truly secure HSM is borderline impossible and certainly not economically meaningful for most of the target market.
If you want to get into a semantics argument on the definition of hate speech, then here's Wikipedia's definition:

>Hate speech is speech that attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, national origin, sex, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity.