skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm not trying be argumentative, but I honestly don't see how you conclude that 7.5x more packages === 7.5x more usuable.

I don't have a huge amount of experience with pip or artisan, but they seemed roughly similar to both rpm and bundler in terms of concept and operation. You have a file with a list of modules to require, an executable tool that downloads all of those modules and their dependencies and finally a generated file that tracks the snapshot state of all dependencies.

I don't perceive npm bringing 7.5x game to that evaluation.

Don't get me wrong: I'm thrilled that it's working for so many people. Java was officially working for people when Rails became popular, too. However, popularity is a dangerous way to measure whether something is actually objectively better. Sometimes the most popular thing really is better. And sometimes Putin is super popular. It's complicated. :)
That fits my limited experience in that industry. A TV on the box certainly doesn't protect it against abuse.

When I was a teenager (around 1990 I think) I had a very short (surprisingly well-paying for a teenager) summer job unloading trucks at a warehouse. The first truck contained Atari monitors. One guy showed how it's done: remove the bottom box, and the rest comes tumbling after. Stack them on a pallet, race them through the warehouse on a forklift, take a tight turn so they all fall off again, etc.

My main takeaway was not to buy an Atari monitor that summer.
A lot of these are glorified and complicated "rock paper scissors" games. Each race has a set of units, some air, some land. Most can attack anything but others are specialized and can only attack land or air. Some have really long range, but other hindrances to balance them.

Yes this is a mass simplilfication of the game. There is a lot to resource management and production capacity to train/build/grow/call in more troops.

I cannot speak to the competitive side of it.
The US, unlike Germany and China (which is still aggressively expanding its coal use), hasn't needed such a plan to end coal.

With existing environmental restrictions and costs on coal, we've already seen a massive reduction in coal use in the US over the last ~11 years. That persistent decline continues under a supposedly coal-friendly administration. What does it mean? Nobody can stop what's happening as things are now (it would take a law requiring coal to be a minimum share of the generation base). The natural gas industry is thrilled to kill off coal and take their business. The natural gas business is far stronger than coal is now and that imbalance will get a lot worse over the next decade (especially as it's a rider on the shale oil boom).
GCC used to use bison. I don't think GCC became a major project recently. But you're correct that recursive descent is more efficient. Not everything is efficiency though (parsers are usually 1% of compile time since they're dirt cheap compared to code generator and especially static analyzer and optimizer). Bison makes parsing extremely simple. I can't see why anyone would use recursive descent unless they're a super major project and need to squeeze every ms.
>For all their flaws, at least Republicans constantly brought bills to repeal the ACA to a vote over and over for years under Obama.

That's because they didn't care about actually passing anything because they knew they couldn't. Passing bills they knew Obama wouldn't sign didn't distract from what they were actually trying to accomplish.

When the Democrats controlled both houses, they were trying to pass the ACA, and spending time pushing show bills that have a 0% chance of passing wasn't what they wanted to focus on.

There's no evidence these kind of political stunts are effective, much less the only moral strategy as you are suggesting.

>Its why the US Democratic party isn't seen as just objectively better than Republicans even in intellectual circles

I don't know what "intellectual circles" you run in, but most "intellectuals" I know understand there is a clear difference between parties.
Yes, so if we can do it, other places should be able to do it easily. The USA or Canada have far more coasts than Germany, the USA has far more sun, and both have far more area to put solar collectors at.
The computers see and can click the whole battle field and the humans have a view port at a specific area. Star Craft is very micro oriented (give orders in real time to units rather than just clicking attack and wait), so the computers have a huge, unfair, advantage in being able to see everything at once and micro everywhere at once and react faster on emerging enemy units, since they are always looking everywhere.

Zooming out for a human player would be considered cheating. It would be easier to see hit and run attacks and react in time etc.
Let's look at the bright side of this article: (almost) nobody cares.
Um, the C64 sold 25 million units to the Apple II's 6 million. The VIC 20 was the first computer to sell a million units.

The problem was that the C64 never really sold to businesses. If you were buying Visicalc, you bought an Apple II.
> - Does every person, adult and child, have access to world-class education/training they want or need, including private tutoring if they wish?

The well-resourced organizations seem to be backing broad-based ongoing PR and political campaigns to do exactly the opposite of providing people with a good education:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZGVR1-4Gqs
Git-change-object:change the downstream objects inside all branched staged packs
By 2015, Samsung already moved more than half of smartphone manufacturing from China to Vietnam. All others are late to the party.
AlphaStar played 11 games. In 10 of those games, it played in a mode where it didn't have to manage the camera, so it didn't have to context-switch between things going on in different parts of the map, the way a human would. It won all 10 of those games, using a strategy which a human would not have been able to pull off. In the 11th game, it played with the same camera restrictions a human would have. It lost that game.
This does not surprise me much. I think it comes down to incentives. The package handlers only have a certain amount of time per package. There are few if any consequences for being rough, and it saves time, so of course the package handlers end up being rough.

This isn't the only time you see this sort of selfish behavior from delivery companies. As a cyclist I commonly encounter delivery trucks parked in the bike lane. This is a common problem: http://upshatescyclists.com/

If you call UPS or Fedex you'll often hear things like "This shouldn't happen." But the drivers are basically incentivized to break the law, regardless of "company policy". They don't have much time per package, so if blocking a bike lane saves them 10 seconds, they don't care if it is really dangerous for others.

Given this knowledge, I hypothesized that an effective way to make a delivery driver avoid the bike lane would be to slow them down if they park in the bike lane. I did once try to block a UPS driver from exiting their vehicle as a test. I recall that I said something like "You're blocking me, so I'm blocking you. You can park over there if you want a legal spot."

It wasn't the worst reaction I've seen from a UPS driver, but it was among the worst. Not recommended, but if enough cyclists did this then I suspect delivery drivers would start to avoid the bike lane.
Makes me wonder whether it might actually save money to pay those people better.
In our increasingly IPed world where every copyright seemingly has to be enforced. Who would own the copyright in this instance? The postman? They 'created' it, they weren't instructed to make the piece. Surely postman 1 could sue postman 2 for damaging their 'art'?

I suppose you could argue the 'artist' is akin to a photographer?

But what if another artist joined fedex specifically to 'create' art. Which artist would take precedence? If one broke a box to create art, and one wanted the same box breaking to create art???
Yeah, but it's still a helluva lot easier with a Coach or a Champion than it is without.
But they already offered a solution to that.
Yep, been there, suffered under that.
Coin Circle- Crypto and Games
Not having to move the camera around is massive. High level starcraft has been likened to something like poker by many pros. Except, instead of getting a steady trickle of information in terms of the cards being put down you have control over what information you gather. But the information is spread out across space and time and the viewport only gives you a small slice. And the human eye only lets you look at a small portion of the screen as well. If you check your minerals, gas, and supply, you cannot be checking your minimap at the same time. Alpha starcraft can look at the minimap constantly while knowing the position and health of every single unit not in the fog of war.

For human players maintaining this map awareness is definitely the hardest part of starcraft. The micro isn't really that hard, you can train on special custom maps and get most of the tricks down pretty quickly. The build orders and meta level strategies aren't very hard to wrap your head around either, the possibility space is actually pretty small here.

What is hard is constantly task switching, not hyper focusing on a couple of units, knowing what you should be focusing on at any given point in time... Well, those are all pretty much the same, it is, "how should I spend my very limited attention".

If your opponent has infinite attention resources some strategies that work against humans dont really make sense. Drops for instance are balanced around the idea that if the opponent recognizes that they are being dropped they will be able to pretty easily defend against it. Against a computer that will instantly see the drop the millisecond it comes out of the fog of war... Well, you just gave away the hard part for free. A human player would either have to a) get lucky and happen to glance at the minimap in the small window to counter the drop. or b) anticipate the drop and make the conscious choice to spend precious attention rescources to catch it.
My GX is 15 years old. I had to repair some of the things the previous owner left broken, or had repaired badly. But so far there have been only a few age-related items needing work, like the radiator. Everything else has been just fluid changes and normal wear parts. It also helps that it's a California/Texas/Carolinas vehicle, with no rust.
The only thing I'd send through Hermes is a crash test dummy, it's a cheap way to find out if it'll stand up to a 60mph head on crash with a concrete mass.

If it survives Hermes it's tough enough.
So what? I personally am a fan of recursive descent parsing for most programming languages, and if it works with recursive descent, why would it be troubling that it's actually an LL(4) grammar?

Now it would only be troubling if the grammar itself is intended to be widely usable across different languages, say JSON or XML. A parser generator really shines because it can generate code to parse this grammar in multiple languages. For programming languages intended to be written by humans, I value things like good error reporting far more.
After I used Go channels (https://go101.org/article/channel-use-cases.html), I feel async/await is much like a rigid toy. :)
The right isn't really to "remain silent", it's the right to avoid self incrimination. If you have immunity, you still have that right, you just can't incriminate yourself.
Because people are more comfortable dealing with image files than .enc files or whatever extension one might use. Plus you dont just have to encode text. You can encode any file type. Look, I don't know what this is to the various participants in this thread but to me it's been really sad. I feel like I'm arguing politics. I don't think I've said anything unduly disrespectful or even incorrect yet I've been arguing about this with people who apparently think they know better but consistently get basic facts wrong or appear to be disingenuous to help win a debate. I'm not here to connect every dot for you. You're not holding my ideas up to the light of truth or whatever you think you may be doing. I really regret logging on to hackernews today.
Too little, too late, sadly.
Quote from "The myth of the dark side of Germany’s Energiewende" [1] :

The narrative of Germany’s dirty Energiewende rests on the idea that renewables could not live up to their promise to fill the gap of retiring nuclear reactors. Consequently, that gap needed to be closed by power generation from coal.

But if we look at the figures we get quite a different picture. The yellow line in Figure 2 above depicts how the amount of electricity from nuclear declined from 2000 to 2014. Due to the decommissioning of old plants, nuclear power had been declining steadily. When the German government decided on the phase-out, in 2011, some nuclear power stations were shut down immediately and the output went down more quickly. Afterwards, the steady decline continued once more.

The green line shows the steady rise of renewable energy in the same period. In 2011, more electric energy was provided from renewable sources than from all nuclear facilities. In 2014, renewables achieved a share of approximately 29% in total electricity generation. So renewables have substituted the falling nuclear production in terms of total annual power generation and are very likely to continue doing so until 2022 when the last nuclear plant will be shut down.

[1] https://reneweconomy.com.au/the-myth-of-the-dark-side-of-ger...

(I would encourage you to read the whole thing).
Probably not with the same owner, though. People who buy a new luxury car are probably going to buy another new luxury car before they make it to 15 years no matter how well the old one still runs.
Centuries
Let's take your argument to the extreme then: If increasing population -> more traffic -> more pollution, then the obvious thing should be to reduce the birth rate in America which is a far more pressing issue than immigration if we're talking pure population growth.

Not only that but by your own argument since we need 'above average people' who 'give more than they take', the end result should be forcing people out of rural areas (the dense metropolitan areas tend to be more economically powerful) while also ensuring they can't procreate. What I'm getting at is essentially using population growth as an excuse for restricting immigration is itself an excuse, because there are many ways in which the issues of population growth are stymied and more effective at doing so.

And yes, I do want studies and citations. You're essentially begging the question in lieu of actually providing evidence for your own claims. I want you to give me explicit citations for your claims and your 'model of reality', because you're assuming that your model of reality is correct without any factual basis.
Aside from the great comment below there is another reason why this is unfair. A new technology emerged. Society so thoroughly embraced it we may as well call it a utility. Now, they monetize it in ways which - had they done before they established market dominance - would likely have made society flee Facebook instead of embrace it.

Society was conned. Suckered in and now — once our society has become almost dependent on FB - we are being exploited!
Clever, although with an accelerometer you may also keep track of which stretch of the journey they get handled the roughest.
I can't see the problem here. To use stdlib `rand` you need to understand that you should first `srand(seed)` and why, and that that seed needs to be unique for each program. Then, in order to use it correctly (e.g. not in a physics simulation) you should understand it's algorithm. Using programming tools require reading manual, and sometimes understanding algorithms.
I think this is a good idea but, on the flipside of that coin, would it be too little, too late? Honest question: Would it even, conceivably, be ready in the next 10 years?

Coal isn't without it's drawbacks[0], no matter how much it's praised but the fallout[1] (no pun intended) from nuclear disasters has much longer and farther-reaching implications, which we have no way to really recover from - still to this day.

As others have pointed out, the disasters have caused a bit of uneasiness with the public and it's understandable, when the general consensus in modern-day society is, "It's not my problem, so I don't care."

If we treated it as a "human problem" and not "x" society's problem, we'd probably get a lot further; of course, this assumes that people believe the environment is in serious danger but, alas, there are people who do not. (Did these same people exist during the CFC/Ozone-hole problem?)

[0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingston_Fossil_Plant_coal_fly...

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster#The_Exclusi...
IANAL, but I think the checkpoints are legal as long as they aren't year round or 'permanent'. When I was visiting friends in Sierra Vista, AZ they told me the story of the 364 days a year checkpoint run down the road.
Microelectronics Tutor (1992)
I've always wished John Williams would just include this piece straight up in a Star Wars movie. Both to acknowledge the inspiration and just because it would be perfect sad, brooding music as the camera panned across across a smashed rebel base or whatever.
... which was a very great year for lignite mining: https://www.oeko.de/fileadmin/oekodoc/BET2017-Hermann-Oeko-I...
Wow - that first statistic is terrifying, I had no idea things were turning so fast.
I heard about also over 10 years ago, some airplane maintenance companys print things like cars and houses on spare parts, so people know about what they cost.
This unfortunately all comes down to what you mean by "basically" and what they meant by "limited".

I think what they said is closer to the truth. I've used flex/bison a few times to create simple languages, and as long as they're parsed correctly, which is quick/easy to roughly check with a REPL (mine were in that form), conflicts can be ignored. Mine worked fine. It was a joy to use - having both flex and bison program windows open, plus bash to run the makefile, I could add a feature and test it within seconds. I'd say I have very limited knowledge of parsing, but read a few flex/bison books, enough to grasp what that message means. It's not necessary to have no conflicts, from what I understand. And it seems you have a more....professional language in mind, like in a commercial situation.

But then again, Yacc/bison isn't very important because it allows etc.... (i.e. that's not the reason it's important)
I doubt I'm the only person in their 30's+ who can remember warning people that giving so much data to Facebook is a bad idea, and the response was just outright, sanctimonious screeching and accusations of unreasonable paranoia. I'm talking borderline religious zealotry from hipsters who consider themselves progressive and free-thinking.
Scientists are working on a pill for loneliness
It lost a password for me when I were offline and pressed "Yes, save password" on the bar dialogue, don't discount the possibility of bugs existing.
More importantly, that advertises its presence to the handlers
A big part of why tools move away from Bison and ANTLR isn’t performance, but UX (especially error reporting)
Yeah, and similarly nobody needed to bring him up in this thread at all. But don't think too hard about that.
For this kind of problem you don't want breadboard. But on the other hand board with ATtiny, 12bit PIC or smallest MSP430 and few relays and optocouplers would solve the problem. And on the griping hand random chinese PLC exists and does not involve few man-days of NRE involved in designing such a thing.
Or, how quickly will we exhaust the geothermal sites, the dam-able rivers, and the rare minerals that go into batteries and solar panels?

With present technology geothermal is going to be a niche source. Hydroelectric generation is not, but most of its potential in developed countries is already tapped. When I speak of large scale renewable growth I mean utility-scale photovoltaics and wind.

Neither solar panels nor batteries for stationary energy storage require rare minerals. Lithium ion batteries that maximize energy density, like those in cars and portable electronic devices, usually contain the comparatively rare element cobalt, but this is not required if lower energy density is acceptable. Batteries that stay in one place don't need maximum energy density and can eliminate cobalt. Lithium itself is not rare; lithium iron phosphate is a perfectly fine battery chemistry for stationary applications and requires no rare minerals.

My estimates of labor intensity for renewables do not include storage or overproduction (to diminish reliance on storage). The numbers I've provided are for incremental nearer-term goals achievable without storage, like "displace the 28% of American electricity that comes from coal with renewables." Storage is immature and I'd be piling speculation on top of speculation if I tried to estimate how much storage and/or overproduction a zero-fossil energy system needs, and how much labor that will require. Note that a zero-fossil energy system built on nuclear foundations will need to deal with these questions too eventually; the difference between peak and average demand for electricity means that nuclear reactors too would need to be overbuilt or coupled with storage to take the place of fossil peakers.

I think that nuclear power is quite safe enough, certainly safer than continued fossil combustion. I don't have any grudge against nuclear apart from the high costs and unpredictable schedules that have attended attempts to build new units. 15 years ago I thought it was obvious that building even the cheapest solar farms was a more expensive way to generate electricity than building an average nuclear reactor. But the numbers changed, and I changed my mind along with them.
The US Cites That Need More Electric-Car Charging Stations
I don’t know if I break your car windows and the unique shape increases the value of the car do I have any claim to the added value?
The web is dominated by Chrome, not Chromium.

And Microsoft changing its dying and meaningless browser to a Chromiun fork won’t do them any good. In fact they’ve lost what little leverage they had left in this space.

For a taste of how Google can break your web, checkout the changes in Manifest v3, changes that if approved will be automatically adopted by all Chromium forks. That’s what a monoculture looks like.

I rest my case.
Not sure what he means by "train", but Simula 67 included a module for performing "simulations", which was the original point of the language (Simula 1 was a simulation-specific language; Simula 67 was a general-purpose language with simulation in the standard library.)

The simulation module was a framework for defining parallel processes that worked with discrete, scheduled events, a bit like actors. This was intended to model real-world problems such as traffic systems or factories, that complex interactions and dependencies. A simulation had a time axis, so it ran the processes in simulated time, instead of real time. This may be what Hoare was referring to.

Further reading:

http://simula67.at.ifi.uio.no/Archive/Intro-simula/intro.pdf

http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~steinkr/papers/HiNC1-webversion-simu...
I refuse to look at being informed upon from a purely capitalist perspective. A perspective that reduces such essential and intangible concepts like privacy, down to mere questions of property - what belongs to whom.

You can argue all you want that nothing was 'taken' from you, yet at the end of the day you will not be able to take a single step without your corporate masters knowing about it.
More coming in .NET Core 3.0 as it get access to all the SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2 and FMA cpu intrinsics

https://github.com/dotnet/corefx/tree/master/src/Common/src/...
DeepMind Beats Pros at StarCraft in Another Triumph for Bots