skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> "I have to pay: First and main concern being that the standard study materials for reading about C++ are not free."

I don't think this is more than a minor issue. If you can't afford it, the book is very easy to obtain online for free, either through piracy or a paid / free trial Safari Books Online subscription. If you felt so inclined, you could pay for the book after making money with the C++ it taught you.
Confusingly, you can statically link a dynamic library (i.e. the dynamic library includes all its dependencies statically instead of recursively depending on more dynamic libraries). You can even link it in such a way that the dynamic library gets its own version of each dependency regardless of what the main executable is linked to (otherwise the main executable's links could override yours).

I did this once with a ruby gem that had particular c++ dependencies that kept breaking when the build machine had different library versions than the production machines. If you aren't integrated directly with the development of a linux distro, it's best not to use their packages as runtime dependencies, since they really only consider their own use before changing things up.
Well, for some value of 'worked'. Few people would actually want to go back to early 70s Britain. And note that the UK was in EFTA back then; it was not as isolated as it will be in a no-deal scenario.
My point is that none of us can say. Any such anecdote will be affected by biases and post-rationalisations and we even have no reason to assume we remember them correctly.

On the contrary, we have very much every reason to believe things probably happened somewhat like but still different in ways to how we remember them; I have memories of events from that age that I know for a fact can't be real. Why? Because in some of them I remember myself in the third person.

The idea that we can reliably assess how a certain action affected us is a nice fantasy, but that's also all it is. Sometimes we get it right. The problem is we can't be sure when.
I started learning C++ about 1993 or so, and I feel like I know less about it now than I did in 2001. Of course I haven't written a line of C++ in anger since about 2003, so there's been ~15 years of changes that I haven't kept up with. Part of me wants to dive in and really re-learn modern C++, but finding time is always the challenge.

Just for context, I was such a C++ bigot at one time that my car's license plate read C++HACKR and my personal website was on the cpphacker.org domain. But somehow I drifted into doing more Java and wound up mostly leaving the C++ world.

Edit: heck, this conversation triggered such a pang of nostalgia that I just re-registered cpphacker.org. Maybe I'll go back to having a personal website there. I've been thinking hard about setting up a new personal site and ditching Facebook anyway...
I think it's highly likely we'll see the SE return (or it's spritual successor).

Remember, the SE was released outside of the usual iPhone release cycle in March 2016, so I think intent for a longer cycle was clear.

Lots of people predicted between 2 and 3 years before the SE got an update, so if March 2019 passes without an announcement, then who knows what's next.

Also, I think there's a high probability they're trying to work out the kinks in an SE-sized phone that is all screen. I'd be surprised if they released the SE2 and it has a home button.
> No it isn't and people seem to have this misconception that you cannot be addicted to marijuana

Who claims this? This is just obviously false. Weather there is a physical addiction has yet to be studied, but there is def a possibility of psychological addiction.

> It is nowhere near as destructive as some drugs including alcohol, but there are psychological problems that come along with habitual use depending on how much that need to be studied and addressed.

What psychological problems? Where is your proof?
That's great to hear, thanks for pointing it out.
I think you might have missed the joke...
Then stop playing with words and say what you mean.

Point charges make sense without qualification in EM, that much is true.

But that doesn't mean that there is something strange or fishy going on here. You can formulate Lorentz forces using mass distributions and you're fine (it's right there in the next subsection of the wiki). The pathologies don't appear. Of course the resulting equations are non-linear, and that is the origin of the failure of point sources to make sense.

If you then try to recover point sources by taking a limit, the details of the assumptions you make matter a great deal [1]. For a very easy example, your point source might have a dipole.

This problem is kind of well known and studied in the General Relativity literature where the non-linearity of the field equations forces you to confront similar type of problems already when trying to derive geodesic motion [2].

I suspect all this is familiar to you. I would phrase the conclusion as such: The Newtonian idea of focusing exclusively on the motion of the centre of mass, which reflects the influence of distributed forces on a rigid body, breaks down in any relativistic theory. This is simply because the notion of a rigid body breaks down. As such the point mass, which was a conceptual cornerstone of Newtonian mechanics, along with the notion of a force acting on it, are relegated to a technical tool useful only when non-linearities are neglected.

[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/0905.2391

When googling for this paper I found a nice set of slides by Wald about this whole business: http://www.math.utk.edu/~fernando/barrett/bwald1.pdf

[2] https://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0309074
I like your tire analogy. While it is probably true that the risks would be lower with battery swaps, it is also true that the marginal benefit isn't so great as people tend to perceive.

Would you take the marginal risk of a battery swap (plus the costs of all those batteries in inventory throughout the country) in order to save 60 minutes on a 600 mile trip?

And is the infrastructure to do all of that really less expensive than putting a charger at enough restaurants for you to just stop and eat while the car charges?
They should put that on a side of a red bus and drive it around
> have shifted at least £800 billion ($1 trillion) worth of assets out of the country

And what's the significance of that? Suppose I had $100 in a bank in UK and I moved it to a bank in Germany. Neither country is better or worse because of that. The article doesn't bother to explain the ramifications.

Deals are made in UK because English law is really, really good. Having to maintain offices in EU will surely increase the capital requirements of the banks but it's not a straightforward "Britain is XYZ poorer because banks shuffled some stuff around" situation.
It is the only use I’ve yet to find for the remote camera app in Apple Watch. Shove the phone into the blind crevice, view it using the watch. Take a few pics for reference if I like.
From what I remember, early Tesla models offered something similar as well. It was mostly just to reassure early buyers, though, from what I remember.
Forthcoming: “Modelling Medieval Hands: Practical OCR for Caroline Minuscule”
Honestly, I have no idea what the differences between those models are.

I presume there are some processor differences and such, I think the X models don't have the home button, I think all the X models have the notch as it's where the camera/ir module for the face unlock is located.
Money gave me stability.

Stability allowed me to have time for introspection.

Introspection allowed me to target issues in my life.

Fixing those issues is lowering my discomfort in life.

Money won't fix anything for you but it will provide you an environment where you can.
> To me, Rust is nearly the same thing as steveklabnik

That widespread perception could have been part of the problem.
That's the problem though. From the outside, there's no way to know if you're going to end up in the "good" part of the company or not. Sure, you can do your best to screen the company, but it's not too hard in the short interview process to mask a lot of the warts.

You could say this is true at any company, but it feels like more of a problem when comparing a company with lots of really good reviews/testimonials to one with very few good ones.

I think I'd have to have a close friend, or someone who I trust internally, to convince me of the quality of a particular team at this point, and I haven't got that. Also, I've moved off the career path, I think, that would be of value at Mozilla.
Understanding non-altered History, science communication, one-or-more scientific fields, marketing, and the human mind is much more than almost anyone can hope to achieve.

This means that both bad science and improper understanding of science will continue.
Some wouldn't agree:
http://wiki.c2.com/?StlSucks

Personally, I find Scala standard library much easier to work with and at the same time much more flexible and powerful.
Off the top of my head the book Manthropology by Peter McAllister covers some of this, as far as what was expected of the ancient solider.

Also look into the history of Special Forces in the United States. WWI was in large part trench warfare, the Civil War was largely fought in open fields in lines not unlike trench warfare. Marching was something you did for parades and pageantry.

Basically though if you look at ancient armies like the Romans had you needed to be able to march 15-20 miles in full kit over most terrains and this is how you trained.

If you want to dive into the current Special Forces community you need to start with the First Special Service Force where you first start seeing long marches (on a 60 mile course) as well as learning things like hand to hand combat, skiing, mountain climbing, parachuting. Then go look at Darby's Rangers and Merrill's Marauders. From there jump to to Vietnam and the 5th SFG[A] and look at some of their feats.

Today you have stuff like Robin Sage and Operator Training Course which, special tactics aside, some ancient soldiers would felt right at home with the long range marches and covering unimproved terrain as well as handling shelter and meeting their basic needs.

If you really dive into the history of special forces and the backgrounds of the original trainers/leaders, you'll see men with well rounded knowledge of ancient tactics/warfare as well as knowledge/training in more modern, yet primitive, tactics like guerrilla warfare and taking on much larger forces (again, something that there are great examples of in ancient warfare like the Battle of Marathon, Battle of Julu, Battle of Badr) as well as ancient units/groups (Medjay, Akkadian, Spartan, Sacred Band of Thebes, Dacian, Varangian Guard etc).
By "fizzbuzz" I wasn't referring to the "divide by 3 and 5" one that seems common, but something much worse. I once interviewed at a place where they presented a jumble of characters, and about 8 rules, and I was on the phone being watched (after an hour of successfully troubleshooting a broken AWS instance with a bunch of quirky Linux issues). The 8 or so rules involved something like, "You must print each line with one character longer than the last / c must never come right before vowel / x's must be on alternate rows / f's and z's ... " while parsing all of this stuff, I had 10 minutes total since we were almost out of time when we started the questioning. The interviewer said, "Don't worry, just do it in pseudocode."

That's bad interviewing.

I can do the problem easily without someone looking over my shoulder, and I need more than 10 minutes just to think about the 8 or whatever rules he gave me.

He failed me, and I ended up working there anyway a year later after the guy quit (true story).
Auto-Keras: Automatic Deep Learning in Python (requires Little/no ML Experience)
Talk about moving the goal posts. Tesla's are way less flammable than gasoline cars and some have more range (my dad's Ford has like 250 miles of range)
To borrow from the Harry Potter universe, early stage startups need Gryffindors and Ravenclaws, but then as the company grows more and more Hufflepuffs get hired, and sooner or later the company ends up on the radar of Slytherins, who are focused mostly on obtaining fame and renown, and who are more likely to have what muggles call "dark triad" personality traits.

What's most fascinating about the Hogwarts metaphor is that members of each house each bring some useful value, but the core values of each are often in conflict with the core values of the others.

At some point Mozilla went from being a heroic struggle that appealed to people who had a specific vision for the future of the internet, and turned into a status symbol like having Harvard on your résumé. This happens to any successful startup. A company that would never have appealed to a lot of workers suddenly becomes desirable (all else being equal) because of the status associated with it. Not to bash MBAs, but this is why I advise a "absolutely no MBAs" policy for startups.

MBA diplomas are simply status symbols and most people who have the degree joke about how easy it was to obtain and how much partying/networking they did while in school. They also graduate expecting to be placed in a leadership role due to the degree, even though young MBAs typically have little to no actual work experience or hard skills. I've seen overly confident MBAs nearly sink funding rounds for startups because they thought they were being clever with accounting and the investors saw right through it.
This. If parents expect their kids to obey for fear of punishment, they’re teaching the lesson that you obey people who are stronger than you.

Out in the real world, when someone tells you to obey because they are stronger, you tell them to stuff it. It is widely agreed that in society, people need better reasons to be obeyed than that (even if the strong do tend to get their way more often...).

I think what you said about understanding future actions and disconnecting them from punishment is spot on.
The some that would argue that, are easily refuted by the facts.

Bill Clinton came from poverty, had no father, was a nobody governor for Arkansas with a mixed record of success in politics. He defeated a very powerful patriarch of the Bush dynasty - former CIA head, former Vice President, WW2 hero, former member of Congress - who was backed by Ronald Reagan (an extraordinarily popular President). He also defeated one of the richest and most famous people in the country at the time in Ross Perot (of course some would say Perot actually defeated Bush, which is interesting as well as Perot was a political outsider).

Barack Obama had no father in a similar manner as Bill Clinton. Grew up in a still difficult time to be half white and half black, raised by a white family. He didn't come from a dynasty or impressive wealth. He admitted doing drugs, admitted being interested in alternative culture and Marxist ideas in his youth. He got soundly elected by knocking the more conservative Clinton dynasty out of the way, despite the enormity of the money and support behind Hillary Clinton.

Donald Trump, a billionaire, was opposed by nearly every layer of power in the US, including nearly all of the media, nearly all celebrities, nearly all journalists, and including nearly the entire Republican Party and most of its big money backers. He's the first political outsider to win the Presidency in more than a century and is still openly opposed at every step by the same forces that opposed his candidacy.

Bernie Sanders - openly a Socialist in a nation that has historically aggressively rejected most variations of Socialism - came one step away from competing with Trump for the Presidency. He had to be thwarted by his own party, sabotaged in numerous ways, to prevent that outcome. That is a case where the more powerful group prevailed using under-handed tactics. However it's non-the-less impressive how far Sanders got, when most of the system clearly opposed him and his policies.

It's blatantly clear the US system isn't only different by appearances. It still enables outcomes that would be impossible if it were truly only an oligarchy style pre-selected system (this is where I acknowledge that the US does have aspects of pre-selection and some oligarchy-like power structures, it's obvious). All the power structures in the US opposed Trump and still do, including essentially all of its wealthiest persons; he flat-out was not supposed to win. Hillary Clinton, as the more powerful dynastic insider candidate, would have won against either Obama or Trump if the US primarily operated by pre-selection (Trump would have never gotten beyond Jeb Bush in that case).
By aether, do you mean an underlying medium that allows forces to be propagated? I guess that using that definition, there is an 'aether'.

The difference with the rejected concept of aether is that this "aether" is deformable by gravity, whereas the rejected one is not.
Don't mistake easy with simple.

https://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy

JavaScript is a simple language that can be made extremely complicated via "simple" tooling. You can open the node_modules folder and see how sausages are made. :-)

C++ is dealing with essential complexities, there is no silver bullet:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Silver_Bullet
I admit that I can get off the base when it comes to critique from outsiders uninvolved in the project, and appreciate cross-checks from others.

Besides, a warning shot won't hurt anyone.
> I also thought his work in evangelizing Rust on HN, Reddit and a million other places was hugely important, and a big part of why there's a lot of positive buzz around the language.

Yeah. As someone working in Scala I honestly think I'm in the right language technically, but I wish we had even half the community spirit that Rust does, and Klabnik is a huge part of that.
Yep, this was added at the end of the article:

> Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated the value of assets moving in pounds.
> You don't support Windows XP and Windows 10 either with the same binary.

I think you picked a terrible example there, because quite often people do; certainly Vista upwards is quite normal (that was the transition point for lots of APIs).

Windows is much clearer about how you're supposed to solve "DLL hell". You have the OS libraries, which provide a stable API; COM, where interfacing is done at runtime dynamically; and for everything else you put it in your application's directory.

Theoretically if COM components aren't interchangeable - the API has expanded - they should have a different CLSID and therefore not clash.
Yeah, I've been using it since 1992 and am now thinking of "relearning" it as well, having drifted off into C# and Python. It'll be interesting to see how things that seem natural in those languages feel in modern C++.
Is that good or bad news for Britons? Most tangible assets won't be leaving any time soon and nobody but banks will miss this amount in the banks' accounts. It's very likely that real assets, like real estate will become a little more affordable.

Car registrations fell here in Austria as well, despite good economic indicators, it's not a big deal.
Why do you think Mozilla was paying you less than your peers?
> It is not legal JS as of January 2019.

Ah, true. I keep forgetting class fields are not standardized yet since eve ryone is using them anyway just because they are so damn handy.

> Even if your definition of `x` generated an attribute of instances of C, using an arrow function would defeat your apparent intention: arrow functions take their surrounding lexical scope's `this`, which in this case is the class, not any instance you define from the class.

For the current implementations of class fields this works. If they change that behaviour, what good are classes?
What? Cars today are way more fuel efficient and have way fewer emission than they did even 10 years ago, let alone 50 years ago.

I'd say that investment turned out to be very valuable.
Similar experience here ... it took no time to learn c++ because it’s not the pre C11 language.

You can make whole applications without touching memory management with RAII patterns; and C++ APIs are usually not the Java OOP monstrosities everyone hates.

Operator overloading is just so damn useful . You can make very elegant APIs in C++ as a result.
But the conversation we should be having is legalization. Right now it is still illegal in most states, and people are going to jail on a daily basis because of it.

Tell me, how does an article like this improve the actual problem at hand at all? It doesn't, and by doing so, it shifts the conversation from what should be illegal to a conversation that is totally irrelevant.

I'm bringing it back to the core of the issue.

Prohibition is bad. It doesn't work. We fund drug cartels because of it. We fund drug dealers. And ultimately, it is up to the individual to make his own choices over what he should or should not do with his body.
The Humble Bundle statistics reject your affirmation ;)
http://cheesetalks.net/humble/

Linux users are paying more per bundle than other OSes users
That was when the other EU countries weren’t a giant block though, it’ll be harder to do things like pit France against Germany to cut a better deal.
Amazon devices record breaking sale this holiday season
Mike Franklin Moves to UChicago
I don't want to and can't prevent Steve from blogging about whatever he wants. But I want him to know that the vague hints feels sour and not particularly professional.
By my experience (which might not apply to you), those that are in frequent/constant move, and always seek improvement are usually the ones that are and never will be properly, long-term happy in life. Always something bugging them, always looking for greener grass.

It is an art to realize when to work hard on achieving something, and it is an art to realize you've reached your goals, life is really good and enjoy fruits of your efforts (at least for some time). Or even not reaching them after trying, but to be happy, long term. Life is indeed very short.

I think I managed to mix this in a good way - I am one of those happy people, but know enough about me & the world to motivate myself from time to time to push myself further. Its true that as one ages this becomes harder (but maybe its not related to the age but simple exposure to that cushy comfort zone)
No. Many private companies routinely disclose much less to investors [1].

Technical information rights go beyond standard and statutory investor information rights, and are typically reserved for strategic investors, knowledgeable lead investors and board members.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-palantir-technologies-law...
It is, but like all poetry, its interpretation is in the eye of the beholder. This 2015 article suggests the poem is actually NOT about boldly taking the path less traveled.

"
The poem isn’t a salute to can-do individualism; it’s a commentary on the self-deception we practice when constructing the story of our own lives. “The Road Not Taken” may be, as the critic Frank Lentricchia memorably put it, “the best example in all of American poetry of a wolf in sheep’s clothing.” But we could go further: It may be the best example in all of American culture of a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
"

https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2015/09/11/the-most-misr...
>Americans are becoming too rational

...maybe you have not noticed who is currently the US president?