skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I can understand that line of thinking, but I don't know that I agree with it. At least not fully. The biggest problem with OOP from a data perspective is that it shleps state around and that state can change in goofy ways, especially when you introduce threads. I think this is where immutable functional programming really shines. I do realize there's a lot more to consider though when architecting a particular solution.
Granted I haven't looked too deeply into this in a while, but this article seems to imply usage of modules in a way that is fundamentally incompatible with the actual goals of modules.

For example,according to the clang documentation for modules [1], they are meant to obviate the necessity of #including headers of libraries you are linking to.

When you link with libraries, you expect them to be compiled already. If the library is a dependency of your current project (in Visual Studio solution parlance), then it will be recompiled if needed before your project is compiled, if your build system is set up correctly. You will also take care to point your build system to the correct version of the library you want to link to, including versions that change depending on CPP flags etc.

I don't see how modules are any different.

Please enlighten me if I'm not fully grasping the point of the article.

[1] https://clang.llvm.org/docs/Modules.html
In my country every bank has the exact same authorization methods available.
Patent trolls market themselves as exactly this.
1. The filename characters have to be valid D identifier characters. This annoys some people.

2. Because Windows has case-insensitive filenames, and Linux, etc., have case sensitive filenames, we recommend that path/filenames be in lower case for portability. This annoys some people.

3. There are command line switches to map from module names to filenames for special purposes. They're very rarely needed, but invaluable when they are.

Overall, it's been very successful.
Yep. It’s too much the Alibaba affect. I stick to the used market or known retailer’s online stores.
I'd say the only way to guarantee you're getting the correct product is to buy from the manufacture's page itself. Anker for example, everything is sold by them instead of sold by amazon.

Also been noticing a lot less companies allowing amazon as a "trusted online merchant" for returns.
The case for network-accelerated query processing
I’ve seen his work in the past and cosmetics aside, I think the real use case or value at least could be learning from his design experiences and applying to research in robotic motion. I feel like companies that were a bit before their time, like this, Segway, etc, are about to become much more relevant as we need mobility solutions for different robotic tools.
If I were in your space, I'd (seriously) consider finding a way to pick Justin Kan's brain.

Just a thought. GL
CFCs and asbestos are very useful and we've also decided to largely ban them outright because of the horrible side effects. It turns out there's hardly any safe ways to use them so they're not really worth the benefits.
(2006 study, and surprisingly not placebo-controlled)
"much bigger scale"
Ola Cuts Down 50% Cash Burn at Foodpanda, to Focus on Cloud Kitchens
The compiler will not become a build system because this is out of scope for C++. With or without modules, C++ will continue to rely on an external dependency management tool, such as a Makefile. The introduction of modules will not change anything in this respect.
I would have no problems with 2FA of the kind you described for banks. But such a system is not available here. You have to basically do a full login authentication here.

I do hate 2FA. I like it, but I hate using it. I've stopped posting on some forums/using services. I didn't actively quit them, but when the service had logged me out and it asked me for the 2FA code, I winced and went to go do something else. Over time this happened enough that at some point I just didn't visit the site anymore.
Youtube version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etWvjkomS18&feature=youtu.be
if you don't like the bullet comments
You forgot to justify where you need to have interesting features in a tty instead of graphical environments where there is no such limitation.
Susceptible, but more limited.

I think an article should be written like this:

"There isn't a security measure that exists short of locking a computer in room with a keyless door and no external connection that is completely flawless to hacking, there are just varying degrees of computer security and 2FA happens to be safer than others".
This is awesome. Going to add it to a project that I was working on a new landing page for today.

For a bit of constructive criticism, the name makes the project really difficult to discover. I remembered having seen this on HN a couple of days ago, but when I went to look it up, I remembered it as "Humans with a few extra A's or U's," and I had to Google five or six variations before I found it. One too few or one too many A's will not bring up your project. I'm not sure if this is a lack of SEO, or a function of how Google treats misspelled words.

Other than that, looks like a beautifully designed library, and looking forward to putting it to work.
100% no way Frys is better than Best Buy. All Frys is now is as-seen-on-tv junk and no name knockoffs like you get on Amazon. Frys might have some older or more obscure items, but that's not enough to make them a better store.

As for Newegg, I really want to like them but they have a habit of cancelling my orders because they think it's fraudulent. I just opt to order elsewhere and not waste time calling in to try to prove it's legit.
I'll take structs and multiple dispatch [0] over both of those any day. Raw FP is too primitive and OOP mixes too many concerns, multiple dispatch strikes a nice compromise between the two and offers additional flexibility.

While Common Lisp's CLOS is often referred to as OOP, it's definitely less coupled than single dispatch.

[0] https://gitlab.com/sifoo/snigl#functions
One important consideration I think that's missing here is how the computation over the data is processed. Immutability, a hallmark of FP, has a small performance hit on both computation and memory[0] but allows for computation to be divided more easily via referential transparency[1].

For applications that will scale horizontally, such as web apps, I think FP makes more sense, since computation over data can spread across multiple servers/processors. Where as for applications that cannot scale horizontally but must be performant, such as game engines, OOP seems to make sense since it makes mutation easier to handle by hiding it with encapsulation.

I have a hypothesis that multiple core processors and cloud computing led to the current surge in popularity of FP.

0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_programming#Efficie...

1. http://wiki.c2.com/?ReferentialTransparency
>They're going to put this conversation in a chapter about motivated reasoning someday.

It's hilarious that you're so invested in this that you resort to attacking my character.

>they switched to open casebacks, an anti-counterfeiting measure that is used across the industry

I would assume that open casebacks are used because they look cool, not to prevent counterfeiting.

>"Counterfeiting costs the watchmaking industry billions each year."

>- Nick Hayek, CEO of the Swatch Group.

I think this is bullshit, I doubt you can find any data that would support this claim. I can't. I'd bet he just took some estimate of replica industry total revenue and decided that's how much it costs the legit watchmaking industry.
This is the most troll comment I've ever seen on hn
In the 1970's we saw the rise of "safety first" as a philosophy for life. By the 1990 most people believed it. Safety first as a prime directive leads to doing nothing in the end. Almost none of previous tech advancements from controlling fire a million years ago to nuclear weapons could have happened following "safety first". I can't think of any new inventions (except recreational ones like wing suits, and a some medical devices and drugs) since the 1970's that can kill people when used. A huge number of things we use heavily would never be invented today. Steam engines, cars, trains, electricity, natural gas in homes, etc. Millions died as these inventions were improved and still kill millions today. The inventor of new things were only allowed to put "use at your own risk" on software, so that is where all the new stuff has happened in the last 50 years. That era is now ending as cyberwarfare, ransomware, "fake new" become serious problems and super AGI is popularized as a possibility.

Sure, S curves exist for all technologies, but now the only tech allowed to even start are ones that are thought to be powerless (ie., next to useless). We wanted flying cars but got 140 characters.
As the author notes, Dijkstra's paper is a bit of a challenge, but it's well worth reading: https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD07xx/E.... It's a great example of deriving an algorithm from a predicated acceptance state.
You assume that the transport industry pays the same price. Also need to factor in the extreme inconvenience of buying a massive amount of used cars, which everyone will attempt to exploit.

Through leasing, rental etc. is how a lot of cars are delivered to the market. It is beneficial for a manufacturer to have the opportunity to sell a new car and know that there will be lots of pretty-new in great condition cars on the second hand market after a while. Which will help drive brand perception.
As far as I understand it, there is no smoking gun. Ignoring some blatant IP theft some years ago, I actually think modern Huawei has been pretty free of wrongdoing in recent years.

And, yet, I still agree with the US position. I think a lot of people misunderstand the relationship between Chinese businesses and the the Chinese government. There is essentially zero legal recourse to resist government requests in China. None. Even assuming Huawei has no history of wrongdoing, any data running through their telecon equipment is only secure so far as the CCP chooses to allow it. And the CCP is historically brutally aggressive with whatever they think they can get away with as far as foreign policy goes.

It really sort of sucks for Huawei if they truly haven't been irresponsible actors, but that doesn't change the realities of the situation.
> They are an extremely honest company

B&H have been sued several times, most recently by the Labor Department, for discrimination in treatment of employees. Even I have heard about that, in the UK. They have paid out at least $8 million to settle the cases.

Instead I'd recommend keh.com
And then they were sold to a Chinese company, Liaison Interactive. I used to swear by them also, but had to stop after needing to return DOA electronics, which they wouldn't.
Spellcheck on my phone (USA model Samsung) wants to replace "bothie" with "brothel".
Huawei warns it may pull out of some countries
I think you misread my post. I wrote "while TOTP code-based 2FA is certainly subject to phishing..."

My point being that at least with phishing attacks the end user can prevent them by paying attention. With SMS 2FA, even if the end user does everything right they are still open to getting hacked. For example, a bunch of people had their Bitcoin stolen when bad guys convinced the phone company to change number ownership.
The CADR Microprocessor
“How to tell if you're running JDK or JRE” on Google first result
What's the bet that if found guilty that none of them see the inside of a jail cell, when so, so many people convicted for charges related to their product receive insanely long sentences?
> 3. Consider your platform. Licensing existing software to author and publish interactive video saves the time and money compared with building a bespoke platform from scratch, but you will have to work within its capabilities. Do your homework by analysing the costs and benefits before committing to your tech solution.

What platforms would an organisation like the BBC consider for their interactive story content?
amazing how you put the blame on workers for unemployment instead of on corporations being greedy vampires sucking the life out of everything in the pursuit of ever more shareholder value.
The article mentions "His patents are expiring in a few months"
Also left out is the 21-point drop initiated by JFK.

And the effective marginal rates imposed via AMT for many years.

Neither fact fits The Atlantic's narrative.
No, the language of the standard carefully omits talking about files. This is because there are still ancient mainframe operating systems around that do not have typical hierarchical filesystems, but it is still technically possible to provide a C++ implementation for these. Prescribing a module name to file name mapping woukd not work in these environments either. This is also why #pragma once was rejected and the replacement #once [unique ID] was invented instead: just defining what is and isn't the same file for #pragma once turned out too difficult to define.
> The central tenet of FP is that data is only loosely coupled to functions. You can write different operations on the same data structure, and the central model for abstraction is the function, not the data structure.

Is this accurate? I would see it more as FP separates the two abstractions that OOP (for better or for worse) would have us keep together.
Bill Gates has shamelessly uses his philanthropy to further his own interests, similar to how he abused Microsoft's monopoly power in the 90s.
Indeed. You've now taken one solution off the table. The other one is for the build system to become a compiler, which is equally unacceptable. That leaves you with manually encoding all dependency information in the build files. Which most people aren't doing (the exception being Bazel-like build systems which enforce that).

That seems to leave us with just one conclusion: the article is right, and most of the ecosystem will never migrate to modules, leaving us with the worst of both worlds.
Could be client HTTP/3 --> proxy HTTP/1 --> backend

gcloud load balancer docs:
https://cloud.google.com/load-balancing/docs/https/#QUIC
Now I know why Apple watch features are called 'complications', thank you.
Compelling argument, but I wonder how much of that can ever be proven. Sure, this is enough simply to make some people believe that the 0.001% are 'bad people', but this is the difference between investigative journalism and opinion pieces. One directly links pieces of evidence to make a claim, the other is simply an explanation of their thoughts. I like where the piece is going, but its an idea rooted in one possible explanation of reality, not an idea rooted in a discovery of something within reality.
Do you mean forward proxies? The HTTP/3 draft currently specifies how the CONNECT method is used. At present, it only allows you to create an onward TCP connection. So you have a QUIC connection between client and proxy, and a TCP connection between proxy and server. Like so

QUIC TCP

client <----> proxy <----> server

Unfortuantely, this means that a HTTP/3 client has to tunnel HTTP/1.1 or HTTP/2 to the target server. I realised this was a shortcoming last year and prepared an I-D called HiNT that explores the problem space and some candidate solutions:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-pardue-httpbis-http-n...

This was presented, along with some nicer tunnel diagrams, at the IETF 102 meeting. Slides in pdf: https://github.com/httpwg/wg-materials/blob/gh-pages/ietf102...
How more limited? In both cases you type some numbers into a form field. The phishing attack is exactly the same.
Imho this kind of thinking is wrong. I believe in every large enough program such as a web server or game engine there will be parts that are suitable for fp and suitable for oop. A web server (of a large enough company) and a game engine are complex enough programs that they do not include one type of data flow, so why would we need to use only one type of programming to formalize that data flow?
The scenario where OO shines is game programming. Each object encapsulates a game entity and it basically runs like a simulator, allowing for complex interactions between objects. But software in general is not like a game and OO doesn't help as much.
> When I watch it, my analytics aren’t tracked

Unless you watch it on a smart TV. It's a shame you can't get the features of a modern TV without content tracking.
Create JavaScript Project – Set up a project by running one command
> I wonder how much of that can ever be proven

One can imagine a scenario where the Mueller report creates so much outrage that it causes reforms to real estate laws in certain markets, which creates a natural experiment that allows the affect on price to be quantified.
Hi, thanks. Not sure why you would think I meant the Pinker interview. Yes, I read that a few weeks ago I think. I don't think I've seen an article on Quillette that wasn't worth reading.

I like reading savage criticisms of people/positions I like! That wasn't the problem. Ok thanks, will give it (salon) a go.
How to hire someone to install sw remotely
Need cudnn installed for rtx2070 on win 10. Any site where I can hire somebody for this ?
Disabled apps take up space. It's not the same thing.
Interesting to have an arbitrary $8 price point. You only live once, get the best!
Applications large enough will likely contain both paradigms, yes, but the processing constraints of the application will likely dictate the appropriate methodology to use dominantly.

For example, I always found it ironic that the JavaScript library Immutable.js uses OOP heavily, but I'm guessing this was for performance reasons.
Lol. Perhaps you can help me ? The q before yours thanks
Indian Netflix and Amazon prime are making originals that are border line porn with no story or acting or what so ever. They know one simple thing. Sex sells.
I can't really agree with that. Their 1080p content doesn't look anywhere near as good as a BluRay, and their 4k is indistinguishable from 1080p. I'm often frustrated with the compression artifacts and colour banding, especially on low contrast frames like dark scenes or fade ins from black.
What isn’t clear is how exactly is this laundering the money?

How do they buy billions of RE for cash? If it’s not cash, then these must be traceable electronic transactions?

Why do they need to rent it? Seems like it’d take forever to launder the amount. Can’t they just buy and sell from each other?

Buyer A buys one unit from B, sell to C. B buys from C sells to A. Etc.
Huh, maybe it's time to start teaching again.
If you want to call advancing causes that are objectively beneficial for society "furthering his own interests," then sure.
> This type of phishing is precisely the kind of threat that two-factor authentication is supposed to protect you against.

I've never seen an article so imprecise. 2FA protects against account takeover, not from phishing. In fact, most of 2FA mechanisms are affected by phishing, and that's why there are security keys with U2F and now FIDO2, that seem unknown to the writer. I'm surprised to see such a poor quality writeup from the NYT.
There is some research going on in this area, but it is still too expensive at this stage to be viable. We need to first stop pumping CO2 into the atmosphere while we work on finding viable ways of pulling it out.

The best suggestion I have heard is slash and char of the tropical rainforests. The idea here is that instead of the current slash and burn agriculture is you instead pay the locals to produce biochar and bury the resulting char back in the soil. You can fix around 30t/C per hectare from the regrow and by turning the forest into biochar you prevent the carbon being released again into the atmosphere. There is just enough rainforest to balance the carbon being emitted, although it will soon be overwhelmed by the growth of emissions.
Yes that's true actually, it's U2F that actually fights phishing directly. I use TOTP integrated into my password manager, so it does partly fight phishing in that sense, since I can't accidentally enter it on the wrong domain.

Though it is still worth considering SMS insecure due to the many other pitfalls that aren't phishing, where TOTP fairs a bit better. Still, I wish more stuff supported U2F.
But the preprocessor is part of the C++ standard, no? I'm really not seeing why it's ok for the preprocessor to refer to files but not the language.

Also, going to this level of trouble to support systems that don't have files seems... odd. Targets that don't have files, that I can totally understand. But compiler toolchains that don't have the notion of a file? That sounds obscure beyond obscure. I'm surprised such a system would be a compilation host instead of a cross-compile target.
This article was originally published on another site, and was already posted on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18995360
Moving laptops to the back was almost certainly detected by corporate when their laptop sales plummeted for that store. The fact that they didn't do anything about it (if it kept up for more than a week) is on corporate. Entirely detectable.
Contracts reflect bargaining power, not fairness.
> On your desktop browser yes. On mobile devices not as easy.

What's even worse, on mobile, imgur heavily downscales and compresses images. Which is fine for kitten photos, but completely destroys any of its utility for screenshots, as you can't read normal-sized text on the phone.
TRON Shows Steady Growth Amidst the Market Slump
If this is actually happening on a large scale, there should be secondary evidence. Like, do a lot of REITs have financial ties to banks in low enforcement jurisdictions? If an investigative journalist were to show that there were networks of actors who share links to suspect institutions ( Cypriot banks known to be controlled by Russian oligarchs for instance ) that could form the basis for forfeiture proceedings to free up that housing stock and help fix the housing crisis.

And as a note a "clean ownership" policy that requires REIT's operating in the US of A to divulge all individual owners sounds like it might be a policy win.
Simply put, Huawei's products have better quality and companies in the US can't compete with it.

They are already #1 in telecommunication equipment and for consumer electronics like smart phones, they are killing other competitors in markets like China and Europe. Their phones were just like another cheap knock-off a few year back and what impressed me most is how they innovated through hard core R&D in the last 3 years.

I'm now typing on a Huawei Matebook 13 and carrying a Huawei Mate 10 phone. Those things have amazing quality and it's a real pity customers can't have them in the States.
Using a password manager defeats this as all the main ones will verify the url asking for the creds before sending them, defeating phishing.
What really scares me is that the use of the preprocessor is still allowed inside modules. This might have been a chance to define a clean break at least with #include and the shortcomings thereof. A syntactically and semantically saner replacement for #define amd #ifdef could have laid the groundwork for a much improved tool support. But if the preprocessor is dragged into modules as a whole (sans interaction between modules), the only gain is in language complexity.

I'm generally disliking the need to maintain separate header and implementation files. Maintaining both is time consuming and putting everything in headers is no panacea, either. Now modules seem to add another type of interface definition to the mix that would need to be maintained after a project adopts modules.
Totally agree, I would introduce immutability in OO to address Concurrency issues. In short, picking the best of both worlds.

Where the conflicts arise is when we have stateless functions. It's a bad practice from OO perspective to have stateless (or static) functions. I am yet to have a good solution to this problem.