skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's hard because you often don't know what you don't need before you don't need it.

Duplication for < n is good in principle until you realize some coworker decided to make their own system or went way past n with end result being it'll take more effort to refactor than to have initially designed something robust.
We don't even want it to become affordable to the masses because it uses exponentially more fuel. That's part of the problem.
In the days of Pascal, where multiple returns didn't exist, I used to write a nested function that expected sanitized inputs and the outer function had the input checking logic.
oops $200 cpm. Still, $1-2 per day is nothing to fret about for most ppl in the west
By "rule of three" you mean if code exists three or more times you deduplicate? Because wikipedia says this about rule of three: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_three_(writing)]
I recommend Vue as the default for frond end. It's done right with a dedicated leader, comprehensible design.

JSX is the worst invention of the decade. It's ugly, useless and solves a non-issue. I don't recommend it at all.
I'm guessing Google will start using some sort of steganography to prevent this from happening.
Reminds me of what an attorney once said to me (I'm a retired neurosurgical anesthesiologist with 38 years experience; I occasionally served as an expert witness): "The client's story never sounds better than the first time you hear it."
I think you guys are arguing on whether a spoon is superior to a fork. They are both made of metal and are used to eat, but they serve different purposes and require different modes of operation. Give a fork to somebody who only eats soup, and he’ll curse you; give a spoon to a steak lover, and he’ll respond in the same way.

It took a bit to click for me, but I understand now that the mobile/touch approach serves a segment of the population with different approaches to computational needs. It doesn’t mean it’s a superior approach, even if it sold more devices; it’s just another approach. You can argue that it isn’t the case until you’re blue in the face, because “underneath it’s all the same”, but it’s the reality. It’s like saying a Ferrari and a Fiat 500 both have engines and gearbox, so they serve the same transportation needs and you can determine an objectively superior car - it’s false and you can’t. Doing the weekly grocery shopping with a Ferrari is as hellish as trying to race with a 500.

Computational devices will become more different in shape and uses, not less. Convergence is a production-driven myth that will never fully materialize. We never really reached convergence even when the operational modes were just two (desktop and server), it certainly won’t happen now that you can put computers in glasses and watches.
You can be dismissive by saying it's equivocal, but I explicitly mentioned that I was broadly considering all definitions of integrity that I've personally used.

It may not be a dishonest company, but lots of harm can be done honestly.
There is a very good podcast episode on IRS Tax Refund fraud using identity theft: https://darknetdiaries.com/episode/26/

BTW, Darknet Diaries is very informative and entertaining podcast. Highly recommended!
Tell that to the shareholders of Google! We’re not talking about a company set up to manage a water feature in a town square here!
Slow-Motion Footage Captures Rubber Band Ripples
They do two things. First, you get right of way (so highest priority). Second, the only cars they do not stop are right turns. As other commenters have mentioned, the point is to improve efficiency, both since cars can turn right once there are no pedestrians, but also since pedestrians can cross for a longer period of time. On the other hand, it can also be annoying for cars, since they often never get a dedicated right turn without pedestrians.

Honestly I think stop lights aren't a big danger for pedestrians. Crossing at intersections with stop signs is far, far worse -- drivers have to pay attention to multiple directions of traffic as well as pedestrians.
> Sometimes comments are useful to split stuff up

So often when I see this I wish people would have used another function. Its hard to argue that a function which requires splitting things up using comments is "doing one thing".
Defeating Google's ReCaptcha Using Google's Speech2Text API
Use gatsbyjs - it uses react under the covers (and you get the advantage of the whole ecosystem). But it generates static html that you can just throw on netlify...or even github.com and have a website up
This is not just a language thing: CPython is reference-counted, so `__del__` is deterministic (in the absence of cycles at which point all bets are off, especially since the cycle breaker bails out then) however pypy or jython are not refcounted, and `__del__` is thus very much non-deterministic.

In fact, this implementation divergence is most of the reason why `with` got added to the language, the reliance on reference counting for deterministic release of resource was ultimately seen as an issue for alternative implementations as they'd face non-memory resource exhaustion issues when trying to run existing software.
> One should not feel embarrassed for not knowing something and then asking more in order to learn.

The point is not that you should feel embarassed by your ignorance, but that you should not feel proud about it.
Comments becoming stale is a real problem. But it is one that is solved by code review and culture, not by fewer comments.

In a team setting, comments like these are even more important, as it gives context and higher level meaning to the code without forcing you to jump all over the place through small functions (which would be an alternative way to make this self documenting.
I think you could come up with a list of features and line them up and say that the iPad is basically reinventing the Mac.

And it is, to some extent. I don't think that's a bad thing to happen right now.

All I can say with absolute certainty is that it feels different to work and code on my iPad and iPhone than it does on my Mac.

You outline very specific features that have since come (or will come) to iPad. But there are many less tangible "features" that really influence how it feels to use these computing devices.

For example, I edit all my photos on my phone. I never thought I'd do that a decade ago, but I do. The screen is better there. The photos are already there. The editing tools are great. The phone is faster. They get shared easier from there. There's now an entirely different emotional context around editing photos.

Another example is that it's far easier to turn on my phone or iPad. Opening my laptop is a heavy operation, often I'm sitting at my desk. It's work time. But just two days ago I was at the playground with my kids, I had some time to myself so I edited the very blog post we're commenting on, on my phone. I even edited some of the videos there.

That's another one that I just keep doing on the phone. Editing videos. I keep using Apple's Clips app instead of Final Cut Pro because it's just so instant, and fun, and light-weight. And no one notices or cares about what the resulting video was made in if it's good.

So by using git, and Codea, and building shaders on these devices we start to find out how we can differently fit more creative tasks into our lives. The Mac may never be replaced. But I might find that prototyping a game idea happens more often on my iPad or iPhone, simply because it's there when my laptop is not there.

If that means we end up reinventing some of the Mac UI paradigms for iOS, so what? The physical devices themselves are so much more pervasive and instant that they are creating new use cases just because of how we hold them and feel about holding them.
The government believes the law, with its checks and balances, is not strong enough to prevent attacks. The law prefers letting 9 guilty people walk free if that prevents one innocent person from being unfairly punished. You can’t allow 9 hijackers to attack just to avoid not allowing one person to fly.

As the government is limited by the law they use tricks to go around it, in this case by using a secret list with secret rules and contents. You’re not allowed to know the list exists so you can’t contest if you are on it by mistake. There can be no precedent that allows people to remove themselves from the list.
> Clicking a menu item, or even better, knowing the keyboard shortcut, is the most superior method of getting shit done

That is certainly true on general purpose computers (those running a standard Windows, macOS or Desktop Linux distro).

But most special purpose computers do not have a keyboard and a mouse. For example:

- a hospital sonography station has a screen, a lot of quick access function keys, a trackball for moving a crosshair, lots of sliders for adjusting things, etc.

- a cashier desk has a barcode scanner with a trigger and a num pad for manually entering codes

- a musician might use a (musical) keyboard, and a mixing board with lots of knobs and sliders

There are a lot of input devices that are a lot better for special purposes like a mouse and keyboard.

The magic of touch is that you can simulate specialized user interfaces for a lot of things. Just look at those DJ apps for the iPad! They have a pretty sweet interface that would be really hard to implement with mouse and keyboard.

So I don't think that mouse/keyboard is the ultimate input device combo. I haven't seen anything better for programming yet, but who knows, maybe some day someone comes up with an idea that works better than traditional windows + menus + buttons.
We're writing 2048^24 poems
https://hn.algolia.com/?query=learn%20data%20science&sort=by...

https://www.google.com/search?q=data+science+resources
Well, I have over 40 non-Google apps, and I had to download them all again when I got a new phone last year (which I rarely do, but many switch every couple of years). And I probably downloaded and uninstalled 8 or 10 more - when I want do do something new, I often try a bunch of apps before settling on one. Also, some apps follow the model of using a "virtual app" as a key to unlock paid features, so that's two downloads for a single app.
Reading the examples given and trying to generalize, I wonder if anyone else has some thoughts on the ideas of more explicitly tracking state and objects in GUI applications. It's common in GUI frameworks to have a backing class for each complex GUI element (it could be a screen, or a panel/frame, or a complex widget). In some frameworks, we control invoking the backing classes (as in, we call the initializer/constructor), and in other frameworks, we tell the framework which class to build an instance of for us.

In nearly all cases, when we're "done" with a GUI object, we just let go of it, and let the framework or language runtime handle it. If the framework is good, it'll give you some sort of "on_gui_element_undraw" event or something you can handle to trigger your "destructor".

This results in some weirdness. For example, if you have a long living socket that is only suppose to be active for say... 3 of 5 screens of an application, now you're counting "on_gui_element_undraw" events to track GUI state to control backend state.

I've sometimes played around with the idea of wrapping these frameworks with -something- (I don't know what...) that somehow gives you like... the "history vector" of the GUI...

I don't really have fully developed thoughts on this (notably, I really only write native GUIs, and only for smallish internal tooling), but has anyone played with frameworks with more powerful state management?
Remember that NNs do inference forward but learning happens backwards.
A hypothetical health care system could be designed in all sorts of ways.

While your gut feeling is likely correct, they could implement a system has reduced benefits for people deemed to costly to support. Or prioritize treatment of critical problems and not count preexisting conditions as critical.

It is much more likely that everyone would be covered in the same exact way in my opinion though.
BE: Node, Express, PostgreSQL
FE: React
Node gets bad rap but it's a decent option for many projects I deviate from Node if there are specific needs that it will not meet. I was not a fan of node but grew tired of projects with multiple languages.
Be careful with __del__ also in the context of multithreading. __del__ can be called in any thread, where ever the GC currently executes. Some resources however can only be accessed (and also be cleaned up) from a specific thread (some GUI APIs e.g. only from the main thread, or some other things only from the same thread where they were created).

See e.g. also this bug: https://github.com/tensorflow/tensorflow/issues/22770

Which is still not really resolved. Maybe this is actually some of the problems with circular refs, and then Swig is also involved, and also multi-threading.
FWIW, my psychiatrist calls in my medication Rx (3 drugs taken PO daily) every December, with 11 refills. I've been on exactly the same Rx for 18 years, so it's not as if he's going out on a limb. Sure cuts down on appointments to see him.
Credit Specialist
Hello everyone Jason by name. I want to express my endless gratitude to Ghost for helping out with credit repair and also increasing my score 479 to a high 790. If you need help fixing your credit and lessons on maintaining a good credit Ghost got you covered contact them via mail (Ghostvirus789@gmail.com text (205) 418 0498) Happy Holidays.
I don't think using the generator solve's the author's specific problem which is to figure out when to send that "close" sentinel event. The author is looking for a way to "know" when an instance of a large and complex class is "done".
There is a cultural factor too in addition to economic one. E.g. in India, packed lunches are very common and even movie stars get their, admittedly elaborate, lunches packed from home. It is getting somewhat less common for double-income-no-kids type families but still quite prevalent in general. The dabba[0] system used to deliver home-made packed-lunches from home to the office desk gained international fame.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dabbawala
To me, insisting on using `__del__` is just a sign of someone trying to write C++ in Python. If cleanup needs to happen, the Pythonic way is to make the lifetime of a resource explicit with a context manager. In the cases where that doesn't make sense, there is usually nothing to explicitly clean up anyway.

I honestly don't remember ever having to write a __del__ method in the decade I've been using Python.
The article also reminded me about Simulacra and Simulation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulacra_and_Simulation

How what we create ends up shaping us. For example, what we think of "reality" today, is the fiction we created in sitcoms and television shows that shaped our view of the world when we grew up. We dress like "cool" people, we dance like "cool" people, we imitate one another.. so in the end we become the fiction.

But to be honest I don't know which way to read the article. Besides the main "emergent / unplanned" idea I'm not sure what his point is. edit: I guess he meant to say that the "digital revolution" promised more control over our lives, and instead it is becoming something completely unplanned.
A lot of the startups we build we start off with a Vue stack for the Frontend and a Kotlin + Spring Boot stack for the backend, running on k8s and with Postgres as a DB. Incredibly productive stack from day one and something that can be confidently built upon for years.
This article is highly disingenuous.

23andMe ask you during sign up if you wish to take part of anonymized research. They ask you again for each person whose sample you submit. You can also opt out at any time.

The article author even knows this, since when they asked Ancestry (23AndMe's owner) that was exactly what they were told. So why does the article have such a hyperbolic tone and misleading information?

I don't have high expectations for Business Insider but this article still disappoints me. This is tabloid level "journalism."
Anybody who puts one of these devices in their home and expects to be fully in control of it or not being spied on is deluded.

I'm not saying they're wrong in their expectations, I definitely have an expectation that I won't be spied or eaves dropped on in my own home as well. But that's why I don't put an always on mic that is sending everything it records off to a US company on us servers, running software no-one can see the source code of.

Seriously, it boggled my mind how you an expect the Facebook telescreen or the google/amazon spy mic to respect your privacy when we know the business model of these companies and the potential for abuse. Even assuming they didn't want to spy, they could easily be compelled to by an alphabet agency and you'd never know.

And for what? So you can order more coffee from Amazon without lifting a finger, or so you can pause Spotify without pressing on the remote? Come on...
If the app is MVC-structured you can store global state in the application object. Here's a simple example:
https://github.com/edman3d/mvc-router/blob/master/DemoApp/Co...
Some frameworks provide session state and cache to store global state. No need for actions, reducers etc.
Japan's bento seem way more on the crafted and enjoyable side of things though. I'm certain there's a lot of variations, but I've seen folks wax poetic about bento and ekiben (train station bentos).
The book isn't loading that page, but if it's referring to old English mortgages I believe those were loans from the property owner themself. And the buyer wouldn't get the house until they finished the payments. If they failed, they lost everything.
Entire articles and Twitter battles being fought over a simple iota keyword.

Sometimes I think the software industry is deeply silly.

Actually, I think that a lot of the time.
At that point, from a medical perspective, I don't believe so. The other main issue would be privacy, which would not at all be affected. Under the third-party doctrine, there is no expectation of privacy when individuals share information with a third party. Therefore, that information can be demanded by police without a warrant.

Having the information collected into a central location (the insurance companies) would make it easier for a large number of these requests to be filed, rather than needing to track down individual services for each investigation.
We are using https://github.com/jeremyevans/roda as a default Ruby framework right now, maybe will be using Go for some parts of the service later

Vue.js for the frontend.
Yes, like if you see the same few lines of code in two different places, you leave it, but in three different places, you make a separate function.
Johann Strauss II - The Blue Danube Waltz
Cancer research largely proceeds in the wrong direction, towards ever more personalization to mechanisms specific to one tiny fraction of cancer types, or tiny fraction of tumors in that cancer type. Then people are surprised at the low cost-effectiveness of the expenditure. Which is not to mention that cancers will cheerfully evolve around an attack on any mechanism not vital to their operation.

Insofar as anything needs hacking, it is this wasteful focus in the research community. The research community needs a dramatic refocusing onto mechanisms that cannot be evaded and which occur in most or all cancers. The canonical example is to interfere in telomerase and ALT telomere lengthening. That can't be evaded, and all cancers do it. Shut these things down and cancer stops. Any cancer, any type, any stage, using exactly the same therapy. Yet the amount of work in this area is tiny in comparison to projects that verge on personalized medicine per tumor.
Info warfare is all about making your adversaries attacks too expensive
There's a lot of other non-health related insurances and more that depends on an assumed average lifespan. Mortgage/Loans, employment etc. One could become an second class citizen in such a dystopian future.
There's also Falkon, now a KDE project, which I prefer. The UI is more like Firefox, and it's QtWebEngine-only, which is maintained, unlike QtWebKit these days.

https://www.falkon.org/
Main rule for writing less code: only write the code you need to solve the actual problem you have.

It is fine to write towards future problems, but all to often trying to be generic explodes the codebase and leads to bugs.
23AndMe/Ancestry don't reveal DNA information to insurance companies. Even if you opt into providing your DNA for research purposes, it is anonymized.
Same problem for me on Android with Firefox.
> By embarrassed I meant as when you are in a foreign country and you can’t remember the native words for please or thank you.

The reason why this is embarrassing is because it might imply a certain disrespect for the country you are visiting. But neither does a programming language and its community deserve the same level of respect as a country and its people, nor is the history of iota() comparable to knowing the word for thank you.

No visitor to England should ever feel embarrassed in any meaning of the word for not knowing why some food words have french origin and others don't. Nor should they need to apologise for stating that they find that confusing.
> relational DBs are great but should never be the default

What??? Relational DBs are the cornerstone of storage for we applications. And with postgres, you can add jsonb columns when you need unstructured. What could possibly be the default that dethrones relational DBs?
Use what you know.

The technology fashion show continues on at full tilt.

PHP, asp.net, node, go, etc.

Angular, react, Vue, etc

MySQL, sqlserver, postgres, nosql, etc.

I've used all of these and more to build systems.

I'd stick with what you know and look at what your requirements are, SEO, massive scaling, needs to be cheap, needs to run on multiple platforms, et.
This can be put in the object’s del method though, so that when the object holding the connection goes out of scope, it still uses a context manager as the means of cleaning up the resource.

I agree this isn’t easy all the time, but it is a good trick for library writers, since you control del in that case and can design it this way so that del has no complex logic and the “real” mechanism is still just a behind the scenes context manager.
... which also crops up in 2001 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muPNlnm_i44
Is it just me who thought this was about the itoa C function?
Just looked at stimulus. Really cool framework. circa 2008 or so there was this concept of non-intrusive javascript where you bind js to elements. So you could wysiwyg html and then inject js where you need it. Thought that was a neat idea and like what stimulus does it. Any real life experience from anyone ?
Apple’s Biggest Problem? My Mom
Why all this costly nonsense? Executing the person on the spot would surely be more time and resource effective. It would also serve as a better deterrent.