skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
From a certain level of abstraction, if countries always did the economically rational thing, we wouldn't be in this mess at all. Building out solar capacity requires planning and foresightedness and political will. Hell, America could transition entirely to solar power for a fraction of the price of the Iraq war - in that sense, sustainable power is already cheaper than carbon-based, once you factor in the externalities of middle-eastern instability. If you factor in all the externalities - pollution, environmental destruction etc - then sustainable has been "cheaper" for a very long time.

The trouble is that countries are not purely rational, and do not factor in all externalities.
Or what people just died tragically without a savior -- regardless of whether they were authors or directors...
Put that on top of the damage to immune system that traditional ways to deal with cancer do. This does seem to have quite a potential in my untrained eyes.
To be clear, you can make a reasonable pastiche of all of those cuisines recipes using a few ingredients with a lot of variations.
> Before we prove our code is correct, we need to know what is “correct”. This means having some form of specification

I suspect that most bugs are introduced because programmers do not have a clear idea of what their code is supposed to do. There are simply too many levels to keep track of at the same time. E.g., in C you are manually keeping track of resource ownership and data representation at the low-level, while at the same time keeping the overarching architecture present in your head. The latter typically has several moving pieces (different threads, processes, machines) and keeping a clear picture of all possible interactions is a nightmare.

Formal specifications can help with this, by first specifying the full system and then deriving precise local (i.e. modular) specifications. In my experience, programming is typically easy once I have a problem broken down into isolated pieces with clear requirements. It's just that most systems are so large that getting to this point takes serious effort.

Here you run into a cultural problem. You need to convince people to put effort into something that they do not implicitly regard as valuable. It makes sense to me that people aren't using formal methods, unless there is very little friction when getting started.
IIRC it was common knowledge, as it was an "obvious improvement" over C-style undeclared variables. Have in mind that type inference applied only to local values, not propagated globally through the code structure as in ML.
If we get rid of cancer, are you going to object to getting rid of heart attacks?
If we get rid of heart attacks, are you going to object to getting rid of telomere shrinking, an equally pernicious disease?
There won't be an immortality pill, it'll just be lots of preventative treatments that eventually add up.
Many diesel BMWs can be retrofitted to be compliant with Euro 6 NOx norms
http://mediathek.daserste.de/Hart-aber-fair/Grenzwerte-geschätzt-Motoren-manipulier/Video?bcastId=561146&documentId=59596466 From 41:00 (Video only available in Germany possibly)

Yesterday the German TV Program, Hart aber Fair (Hard but Fair) took a look at affected diesel cars and had a discussion about NOx, electric cars and so on. Currently, many cities are discussing banning or have banned diesel cars that don't comply with the latest Euro 6 pollution norms and many people are affected.

Unlike the USA, VW and other manufacturers who were caught lying didn't get so much as a slap on the wrist and all they had to do was offer a rebate on a new car of their own brand if you trade in an old diesel.

One of the segments showed that these diesel BMW models can be retrofitted with a part that brings particulate emissions under the Euro 6 norms, but that part is only fitted to US-bound BMWs. In the program, this was defended by the sentence "We outfit our models differently based on different laws and obligations in different countries" -- implying that since Europe was too easy on particulates until now, its their own fault.
I can't say I have experience with them but Art of Living (hard cringe) likes to peddle pseudoscientific garbage to the gulible upper middle class.
No, it would just make no sense.
Yes.

IIRC Softwarefoundations grew out of a course the author of
TAPL has been teaching at U Penn.
They had programmable thermostats that didn't tell everyone who had access what you're up to. They fit the use cases of almost everyone.
Why were news outlets pissed about an imbalanced budget? They don’t seem to have an issue with AOC proposing un-funded programs.
Why was it so important to you to say something so perversely selfish that you felt compelled to make a throwaway account to do so?
You're attempting to argue with nothing to offer? hmm looks like your mind is made up but you have nothing to show for it?

The main points I presented are provable, leaving only the Bitfinex'ed theory up to the evidence and allegations presented which have been backed up with additional university studies. [1]

A] Bitcoin hyperinflation and low cost ROI/CAPEX/OPEX supply acquisition by Satoshi's Bitcoin mining rule set can be understood by reading the original Bitcoin white paper and factoring in the low difficulty and tiny user base during the initial period of hyper inflation.

B] The current inflation rate for the United States is 1.9% for the 12 months ended December 2018, as published on January 11, 2019 by the U.S. Labor Department.

Bitcoin inflation rate per annum:	3.83% [3]

C] Control of the Bitcoin supply being owned by an oligarchy. This is provable by looking though any of the Blockchain explorer APIs or by analyzing the blockchain yourself.

Even if we were to assume the 4.11% of Bitcoin users (addresses) who control 96.53% of all bitcoins in circulation were actually the main exchanges, this is still much worse than the traditional banking/financial markets due to the current unaccountable nature of how those exchanges operate. An ongoing trend in the Bitcoin markets is the famous BART phenomenon, presumably one of the largest owners of Bitcoins is manipulating the entire market though short squeezes which last a few minutes before the market returns to where nearly exactly where it was before. The most plausible explanation is one or more exchange operators are capable of mixing fractional reserve deposits with manipulation of the futures markets to fraudulently terminate market contracts with those extreme temporary spikes in volatility and minimize their risk by returning the market price back to where it was prior before any deposits/withdraws can be confirmed between exchanges.

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-13/professor...

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3195066&...

[2] https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-infl...

[3] https://www.bitcoinblockhalf.com/
If you export your bookmarks you could autoparse them and ipfs pin and ipfs links to a longer lived archival node running on you main host or offsite/cloud.
At the same time, this pales in comparison to what took place under the Spartan agoge system (at least to modern minds):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agoge
>There is nothing wrong with men's rights activism.

In the abstract, no... but in practice, men's rights activism is so wrapped up in anti-feminist conspiracy theory and incel misogyny that it does harm both to women and men.
At Imandra (https://www.imandra.ai/) we've been collaborating with a few big names in finance, from our website: "In 2017 Aesthetic Integration partnered with Goldman Sachs to help deliver the SIGMA X MTF Auction Book, a new orderbook venue implementing periodic auctions. Aesthetic Integration used Imandra, our own automated reasoning engine, to formally model the Goldman Sachs design of the SIGMA X MTF Auction Book, verify its key properties, and automate rigorous testing. Now that the venue is live, Imandra is being used to perform ongoing validations of trading operations."
If by REST you mean full on HATEOAS then I definitely would not use that as an interview test. Advocates tend to be religious in their intensity, yet few real world APIs are full REST in that sense. Discussions around HATEOAS could be enlightening but requiring people to buy into it not IMO.

I would structure interview questions around APIs rather about distributed systems/transactions, circuit breakers, etc. - practical aspects of running multiple systems talking to each other through pipes.
Over time as they reduce the amount of spectrum allocated to 3G though reallocating spectrum to 4G, I suspect you'll find you're better off using 4G.

Here in New Zealand the telcos have, for some time, been reducing their 3G capacity to the bare minimum and using freed up spectrum for 4G.

Before: 10–60 MHz allocated to 3G (across 850/900/2100 bands) and 20 MHz allocated to 4G (1800 band only).

Now: 5–10 MHz allocated to 3G (either one of 850 or 900 bands only) and 20–60+ MHz allocated to 4G (across any number of 700/900/1800/2100/2300/2600 bands).

4G has improved here not only due to capacity being refarmed from 2G/3G (e.g. 2degrees NZ dropped 2G to provide 4G capacity at 900MHz, and Vodafone NZ has swapped their 3G 2100 MHz out for 4G 2100 MHz) but also 4G supports a wider range of frequencies including 700MHz which has improved rural signal strength.

I understand generally what is happening other countries is not too much different to what's happening here. I know UK and Australia have seen similar strategies being implemented.

UK Note: O2 UK shares their network with Vodafone UK, so you might like to have a look at EE UK/Three UK who also operates a shared network. In the UK most sites are operated by either one or the other (sometimes both groups cooperate and all networks are served from the same site).
My perspective, having sold a company: security isn’t that important until you’re big. When you’re small you’re a small target, your resources are better spent on features and sales, and if you get hacked you can change your name and pretend you’re a new entity. I know this isn’t the ethical answer but it is the realpolitik answer. Invested maybe 50 dev-hours in security over 4 years.
Normally, one also thinks that Achilles will reach the tortoise.

Number 3 is the world in which said chosen author does not die. The set of (both positive or all) real numbers less than 2 or the set of rational numbers less than 2 would be the set of uncountable and countable worlds that exist, respectively.

These are two examples of overarching multiverses in which one has infinite possible worlds, but said chosen author always dies anyway.
If company culture is your primary goal, start a charity or a country club.

There's a depressingly small amount of daylight between the pools of investor capital available on good terms and the language this guy speaks. I imagine he'll shake the money loose like few others because this is the exact language many of the target market speaks.

Put a shotgun clause on his share and remember that a 5-10% minority of your company is not your company. If you want to do some "actual good", you're not going to do it while broke.

Hate the game, not the player. Don't begrudge your truffle pig his table manners.
So your example isn't germane at all to the comment you replied to. The reason is that the function you quoted is an API call, it crosses a boundary in the code base. As such it separates two concerns. And actually reduces dependency. (Whatever function calls get_machine_id() shouldn't know anything about how that bit of sausage get made.)

OP is talking about about tying disparate parts of code together via a function call. This creates dependency. Creating dependencies without a really good reason is BAD.
mouse, crow, worm, human, all running on neurons. You simulate one you can simulate a berzillion.
Good stuff! Especially the ORM.

And work on your logs. Tweak the info/error/debug levels so that the log files read nice. Too often we find that a common error/exception will spew hundreds of lines of shite into the log files over and over again, obfuscating the real information. Take pride in having meaningful, concise but informative log files.
I think the mistake that people make with DRY is that they apply it at the textual level. They think that if they see the same particular sequence of characters in multiple places that they've violated the principle and need to refactor.

I rather see it at the behavioural level. Important domain logic ought to have a single implementation to avoid discrepencies that can put the system in an inconsistent state. For example your e-commerce platform really ought to just have one way of calculating the total cost of an order.

But, if you've copy pasted the boilerplate code that sets up your logging subsystem in a dozen different places, who cares?
World's Writing Systems
>If we develop a set of working scripts to indicate availability, then women will still go for men who are "bold" enough to deviate from the script and seize the day.

Some will, some won't, some will in some circumstances and won't in others. Women aren't actors playing roles to deceive men or buggy data sets for which a properly efficient sexual algorithm has to be discovered, they're just human beings and you just need to deal with them as individuals, get to know them as people, and communicate with them. And accept that if they don't find you attractive, or don't want to sleep with you, that's fine.
They didn’t hold opposite views. Rabois was being a free speech edgelord.
This is fundamentally a complaint about some fairly specific language use. A lot of articles I've seen talking about formal methods contain some varient of "rigorously verified the correctness [of the program]". Anyone who is half-unsure about what is happening is going to write that off, because we all know programs can't be formally verified as correct in the common meaning of 'correct' because bugs are everywhere, at every level of the stack, and what people ask for probably isn't what they wanted anyway.

That is an abuse of language. What is happening is (and this is a good article because it is quite clear on the point) that "We’re ... prov[ing] ... conform[ance] to some spec.".

Now I'm quite excited at the prospect of automatic checking of conformance against a spec. Looking foward to the non-alpha release of spec in Clojure, in fact. But I'm going to ignore anyone who talks about "proving correctness" on the assumption that they (a) can't prove a program is correct in the abstract, (b) sound pretentious and (c) I'd be worried they are more worried about proving things than scoping and testing which is where most of the value sits.

Basically, I'm not saying formal methods are bad; quite the contrary; but the word 'proof' is not a safe word. It means very different things to different people. Most people outside software would surely assume bugs in the spec disprove 'correctness', but that isn't what the language seems to mean to formal methods people.

> the hardware conforms to its spec

Not a safe assumption. Spectre and Meltdown happened just last year; and I assume caused a lot of programs which were required to be high-certainty to become uncertain in practice.

The Software Engineering implications of a 'proof' are _different_ from a mathematician's standard of proof. If a mathematician uses a prooved fact, as long as the proof is correct then they have certainty. If an engineer uses a prooven program, they still don't have certainty because they are working in the real world.

I've opened news.ycombinator.com in firefox quite a few times over the years; every time I've either gotten the web page or a network error. That is a proof of correctness to the standards of 90% of the academic disciplines.
We know some people are smarter than others, and that our brains are limited by the width of the pelvic floor. So who knows what a hypothetical human with a bigger brain could do?
And dns 53/udp otherwise you do not get far.
Spreedly and Omnivore
A reusable library in C would be more useful.
> And I think this answers the question of the OP

Do you realize that the OP is actually linking to an article explaining this (and a bunch of other aspects) in great detail?
The article references a few studies that conclude that there is "no significant difference" between a low carb and a low fat diet. It also suggests that whether a keto (or any other) diet will work is an individual thing:

> In this regard, saying that “diet X is the best way to lose weight” is probably not a globally-correct statement given the evidence so far. Instead, it should be the much less interesting: “no diet performs meaningfully better on average, but there exists some diet that is the best way to lose weight for you.”

This matches up with my experience. I know a lot of people like yourself who swear by a low-carb/keto diet, whereas I find I have no problem maintaining a healthy weight (BMI=22) with a fairly high-carb diet with a lot of rice, noodles, pasta, oats and bread. I actually feel very unsatiated when I'm just eating meat/vegetables alone.

I love to eat, and once or twice a week I'll literally eat until my stomach physically hurts (and I do mean literally, kind of like how some people feel after a Thanksgiving dinner). I exercise, but not a lot - probably 3-4 hours a week. I'm not saying this to brag, or to make overweight people feel bad (I'm sorry if I do), but just to give some anaecdata to balance out what the keto people are saying.

One thing that I should mention is that I don't really eat much sugar, apart from fruit, and sports drinks and energy bars when I'm doing long bike rides. I just don't enjoy the taste of soft drinks (I almost exclusively drink water, and sometimes coffee or tea), or most heavily processed foods (most of my meals are home cooked, or at non-fast-food restaurants). I also find the sauces that most restaurants slather on food to be overpowering and over-sugared, so I don't eat a lot of that either (although this seems to be a US-only problem).
#define machine_id() (readl(mgr->regs + OFF_MACHINE_ID) & 0xff)
This sounds like a source. http://www.gwern.net/docs/melatonin/2009-burkhart.pdf

But it seems to be very subjective. And the group that started limiting blue-light before sleep seems to have percieved their sleep quality as quite low, so the improvement might be only correlated?
You have to post links or else it’s a red flag.
Show HN: Auto-Translating Hilarious Keyboard w/ over 11 Dialects
If I could write a specification that satisfied all those properties I'd be happy if it was even remotely as simple as writing the code.
This is so fundamental (and has many years/decades still left) that I would go back to one of the sources e.g. https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Database-Systems-8th-Edi...
Long before endless Windows vs Linux debate there was "object-oriented vs functional" debate. But even before that there was a debate on Usenet about subroutines vs inlining in Fortran. It is weird to see this ancient debate back.
So many downvotes. Never criticize our corporate overlords.
I wonder if OP is confusing factories getting a carrier to install a cell site (whether it be a pico/microcell or a proper macrocell site) on/near the factory property. It's not unusual for that to happen (especially if said factory is a big customer for the carrier) but it wouldn't be their own 4G network. Would be interested if any actual examples of real life non-carrier 4G networks could be provided.
> Could you give me a little insight into your use case?

I'm not the OP but a use case I might find useful is if you have a blog, want to comment on a news article, and want to have a cached copy of that news article. Since web pages often go way after some time, making sure the news article stays up might be useful. This is particularly true if the entity writing the news article decides it is embarrasing to them and wants to flush it down a memory hole.
Wavy URL – An Animated URL
Distinct quanta ... variable?
Create a Folder Hierarchy in PST Files Using String Notation inside .NET Apps
Why not? Many people research their ancestry at some point in their lives and the name does not seem to be very common.
Future that holds for robotics and Artificial Intelligence
well if I read you correctly he IS making a good point:

> 2) Projects with people inexperienced in formal methods (most projects today)

which is exactly what matters and what adds a lot of time to dev.

1) cannot be addressed by formal method and is one of the most important things when building software.
This does not seam like a legitimate article. This is most likely fake news. The website cant even spell Nutrition right.
I'd be perfectly happy to see what effectively is 3 optionsn "pay with money" "pay with info" or "leave". Whether or not people choose the same option anyway doesn't matter, it's now a much more informed choice than before as it's obvious how much your information is actually worth.

Also, sites that can't be bothered to set up premium/paid access mihgt do go the LA Times route and block access in Europe which I also think is completely OK.
One more very important signal that I haven’t noticed anyone else mention is whether it has a test suite.
I'm selling Zetapush: realtime back end as a service
Hi there,

I'm sick of France! Technological innovation cannot find an investor here. After 4 years of effort, a platform in production, customers, innovations by hundred, I'm fed up.

What does ZetaPush do (www.zetapush.com)? It is a platform that allows you to connect all your devices in real time, in Web, in MQTT,... In addition to the real-time connection, technical services are available such as NoSQL storage, SQL, search engine, email, push notifications, etc.
The platform can be installed on any cloud or any baremetal servers. And the platform can be sold On premise with a licence server.

And finally, ZetaPush's technical services can be extended with JavaScript / TypeScript and even our proprietary language, Zms. Developers work is reduced by 50 %!

If you are interested in the full techno ( source code of ZetaPush, 400 k lines of Java, Spring, fully documented), make me an offer by email to morvan (at) zetapush (dot) com

Mikaël Morvan, ZetaPush CEO
In the list of useful functions I'd accumulated over a few years of JS, there are `[].last` and `[].lastIndex()`.

The former is a property getter/setter implanted into the Array object¹. The latter is a function that returns `[].length - 1 || 0`.

¹ I know planting properties and functions directly onto the basic objects is generally frowned upon, but I see no harm in doing that for personal projects. Using it in the big-web production might be verboten, but it doesn't I can't make my coding life a bit easier.

Meanwhile, I have a problem with the "web compatibility naming safeguard" argument over the names of the proposed properties/functions. Surely, the websites using `[].last` override the namespace to begin with. If, say, `[].last` were to be accepted, how could it break the sites using the override version?

Outside of that, the fact that new proposals have to cow before a widespread conventional use of the names renders me confused. I feel like the JS engine should take priority over mere convention. Sure, some websites might be hurt in the process, but at least the generations of current and future coders would have few problems figuring out what the new functions do.

Exhibit 1: `globalThis`. Nuff said?

Exhibit 2: `[].smoosh`, which apparently was in the books [https://github.com/staltz/prevent-smoosh]. No longer is: it's now `[].flat`.

Exhibit 3: `Math.clamp()`, in questions [https://github.com/rwaldron/proposal-math-extensions#questio...] for the `Math` extension proposal. (Yet undecided-upon.)

`[].last` just makes sense.
I'd love to see the list of apps your teacher parents approved. :)
Do you have any examples of failures? I’d like to know what specifically is not working.