skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A nice to have but relatively unimportant feature suggestion, the option to filter by total capacity independently of drive type.

That aside, this will be useful for figuring out hosting for side projects, thank you for sharing!
The post is a clever implementation of the clickbait technique with a sole aim of bringing more startup CEOs and executives to visit Slab’s website and discover their product in the process. The arguments presented in the article are weak and show no proof of actual trust erosion as a result of Zuckerberg’s writing style, only a set of arbitrary conclusions on how certain words and phrases may appear to some people. This hardly belongs on HN.
I'm not familiar with Vickrey auctions; can you explain how they solve the problem the author is referring to?
>Why aren't there more Hospitals?

In most states building or expanding a hospital requires getting a Certificate of Need establishing that you won't be competing with existing providers.

>Why aren't more companies producing medical goods?

If you're competing with one of the big guys and they don't like you they can find some FDA reg you might plausibly be violating and sue the FDA to get them to shut you down. They generally have more expensive lawyers than the FDA can afford so they'll often get their way if their case it even only vaguely plausible. Or at least this is why the US doesn't have epinephrine injectors competing with EpiPen, I'm not sure it's the main reason.

The same feedback-by-lawsuit mechanisms work fairly well in other regulatory contexts, though.

>Why aren't there more insurance providers.

Insurance provider profits are capped by law so I'm not sure adding more of them would actually help. Especially since they all have a pretty hefty fixed overhead in terms of negotiating rates with hospitals.
WTF is an API
You made the suggestion that as programming work became a higher paying field that men suddenly looked for jobs there, due to "evolutionary psychology", without a lick of proof that it wasn't the other way around.

Perhaps programming work is really well paid now because Nintendo of America decided to advertise to boys, and then those boys grew up to become men who were interested in programming, and because men pay other men more than they offer women. Or perhaps because, as the SV folks like to say "They aren't a good culture fit" when interviewing female candidates.

> We used wage data and productivity data from the whole of New Zealand to look at the reasons for the gender wage gap. We found that sexism (where employers prefer to hire men rather than women, are more likely to reject equally qualified women, or offer women less) is likely to be the most important driver of the gender wage gap. This is opposed to women working in low-paying industries or firms, being less productive, or being less successful at bargaining. [1]

Of course it follows. It is undeniable that many centuries of sexism are going to take a lot of work to undo, and it isn't exactly easy when most religions followed the world over, by huge swaths of humanity, also belittle their contributions to society, and actually devalue them to be below men. These beliefs and stories have a major impact on what we do.

So I'm going to stick with sexism because it is most likely the correct answer.

[1] - http://theconversation.com/women-paid-less-for-same-contribu...
Java 11 client with HTTP/2 and TLSv1.3 can lead to endless loop
Yes, it’s the writing style that’s the problem. Maybe if Mark Zuckerberg changed his writing style, everything would be okay, and we wouldn’t notice so many problems.
My impression when i read the article (whether I’m wrong or right) is that the writer is quite young. Not only in their own writing style, but also in the premise. When you’ve been around the block a few times, you don’t care about words and focus on the other persons actions.
Still need to take Emacs for a good spin before I pick my religion. Is there a vimtutor for Emacs?
It looks like Uber ai lab don’t have anything to show to management to prove their existence. That’s why they come up with this kind of (you know what I mean). The code-free toolbox is a myth.
The answer is to fine CO2 emissions to the point where carbon capture makes a killing.
TIL: People are weird and irrational, and there’s much we don’t understand. Like why do shoppers moving in a counterclockwise direction spend on average $2.00 more at the supermarket?
I am in a very similar situation, 4.5 years in at a large / prestigious organization where I was thinking there was a lot of scope for progression and I could stay long term.

First 3 years were great, good work and appraisals, I learnt a lot. After that, things deteriorated quite suddenly, a combination of some urgent but poorly conceived projects, passive management, too much time in meetings, a few layers of extra paperwork / approvals introduced.

Basically, the work environment really did go downhill, but in hindsight I didn't deal with that very well or put together a plan to move.

I would suggest you come up with a plan to bring this to a head sooner rather than later. Try to do an excellent job with your status reports and pointless meetings, so that you can transfer or get a good reference from your manager, and leave on a high note. At the same, research the market for your next job, pick up any missing skills, and prepare for a move on your own terms and schedule. Don't let the situation fester without doing anything about it.
For most companies it transcends any single individual, but for facebook mr. Zuckerberg has basically complete control of the board and the conpany. Even if he lets facebook be the way it is, he has the power to change it single-handidly.
I want to add more context to this story, the Shepherds are doing this protest because the system is rigged. There is a monopoly on the milk in favour of big companies, these companies buy the milk from the shepherds from a very low price when the market is full and shepherds have a problem selling it ("You can choose, sell the milk for me for 40 cents or sell to no one because no one is going to buy it"). Then after the market wants milk again, the companies sell the milk bought at a low price from the shepherds for a high price to the distributors.
Essentially these companies force the shepherds to sell the milk to them for 40 cents/litre, and then they sell it to the customers for 1.5€/litre, nearly 3 times the price.
I sense an upcoming reckoning against these techniques.

Big "SALE!" signs and prices ending in 9 aren't benign: they're malevolent attempts at psychological manipulation, and they degrade consumer trust the minute customers recognize them as such. While it's likely impossible to fully counter the bias, I've started clutching my purse strings more tightly since those big glowing signs became less of a declaration of value, and more of a warning that "We don't have your best interests at heart"

These techniques work, but only because people view this manipulation as acceptable and commonplace. It would do wonders for consumer confidence (and therefore sales) if stores could give a credible and transparent promise that they make every attempt to inform consumers about the value of their products. Shoppers like myself (busy, uninformed about most categories of things they buy, and unconfident that they can navigate the "DEALS" landscape and come out ahead) would not only shop there: they'd pay a premium to do so.
> "Really? We're there now? It's become Apple's "responsibility" to police every last corner of iOS?"

Yes. I think they took that responsibility on themselves, when they decided their devices would be walled gardens under their purview. If you set out to create a totalitarian utopia and want to take credit for the things that go well, you must also take responsibility for when things go wrong.
> You're not wrong, but using it as an argument has a counter...

I'm not using it as an argument. I'm using it as a descriptor for people who make arguments against semis.

> ASI is intentionally a part of the language spec...

Yes, but it's clearly there as a corrective measure for people who mistakenly omit them. So, the spirit of the language spec and all signs point to: use them.

> I probably would have put it in the spec too, but that doesn't mean I don't set `semi: false` in every React project I start.

To write a spec rule and then immediately ignore it makes no sense to me.

But anyway...why do you not want semis? If you have a tool that automatically inserts them, like prettier or eslint, then the only reason you're making that decision is because you don't like the way they look. That's pretty shallow reasoning IMO.
They're not numbered. Referencing doesn't have the problems the article complains about. Also, you can go between these extremes and have a handful of medium-sized files.
People can just, you know, not go to the grocery store every day.
I have never heard anyone argue for Net Neutrality as a means to lower price. It has always been about preventing gatekeepers to the internet.
Because of Chinese capital controls they're connected less than one might expect.
The failure risk of ECC is significantly lower than a lack of insurance of backups, though.

Drive fails and no backups? Potentially terabytes of data vanishes. House burns down and no insurance? Hundreds of thousands of dollars to repair. No ECC and a bit flips? Nothing happens, program crashes, or maybe a single file gets corrupted in an unrecoverable way.
Is real estate still a "great investment" in China when you can't own property but merely buy 75 year leases? (this is my understanding of how real estate works at least in Shanghai)
I speculate that most of the growth is due to the urbanization of the population.

China's population isn't growing... But it's urban population is exploding[1]. Any other country that was seeing a 5% YoY adult population growth would be expected to see at least 5% YoY GDP growth.

Why would China be any different?

[1] And city dwellers in China sure as hell aren't living on a dollar a day. They are living nearly-first-world lifestyles.
C/C++, and in many cases Lisp, seem to be the most entrenched communities when it comes to the "culture of seat-of-the-pants flying and bravado". For contrast, JavaScript has as much flexibility and nearly as many foot-guns as those languages, but its community has been much more receptive to safety rails and static analysis. (Hopefully this doesn't start a flame-war; that isn't my intention)
Also, MENSA is a self selected group and I have never held a high opinion of it.

I recall a comedic/editorial column in the old Omni magazine about MENSA. (I think it was the early 80's) The author knew he couldn't qualify for MENSA membership, so he got together with a friend, then he phoned the organization's office and asked if he and his friend, with their IQ scores added together, could qualify for a joint membership. The secretary put down her phone and went to ask.

At this, the writer hung up. He then spent the rest of the article describing how he was going to establish the DENSA organization, which only would exist to oppose the MENSA organization, which he maintained had no point for existing.

(Insert Dr. Evil meme here.)
What is it with these people and controlling the choices of other, quite possibly more experienced, programmers?

Why is it not enough to offer better tools and let the rest take care of itself? Or to solve problems using a tool that fits your way of thinking? Why do you need a cult/marketing effort if the language is as good as it claims to be?

The more of this bullshit I'm confronted with, the less inclined I am to ever let Rust slip into a project I'm involved in.
I'm soundly in that camp. For instance, we write API endpoints that look a lot like this:

def update_password_view(session_cookie):
values = request_params(['old_password', 'new_password'])
user = get_user(session_cookie)
verify_password(user, values['old_password'])
update_password(user, values['new_password'])
return 200

def request_params(param_names):
values = {}
for key in param in param_names:
try:
values[key] = request.params[key]
except KeyError:
raise BadRequestError('Missing parameter', key)
return values

def get_user(session_cookie):
users = db.get_user_with_session(session_cookie)
if len(users) != 1:
raise NotFoundError('No user with that session')

return users[0]

def verify_password(user, old_password):
if hash(user.old_password) != hash(old_password):
raise BadRequestError('Bad password')

def update_password(user, new_password):
user.password = hash(new_password)
db.update_user(user)

Notice that each function raises an HTTP-ready exception, so update_password_view has no explicit error handling of its own. You can look at that function and read the intent of how it actually works, as each line is only reachable if the one before it 100% succeeded. After `user = get_user(...)`, you know that `user` will have valid data and not some sentinel value you have to check for.

Our actual implementations are more subtle. We have our own exception hierarchy with classes like `UserNotFoundError` or `BadPasswordError` that subclass the corresponding HTTP error classes, so you can still write code like:

def upsert_user(data):
try:
user = get_user_by_email(data.email_address)
except UserNotFoundError:
user = User(data)
db.save(user)
do_something_with(user)

in the cases where that exception isn't fatal.

In practice, we've found this coding style to be much easier maintain than idioms like `if not_found(user): return None` where you spend half your lines of code explicitly checking return values for error sentinels. Life's too short to live like that.
I too like this about Typescript - allows for fast spiking too, where you don't actually yet know what you want
Often the language is chosen because it is the only option like JS for web, or it is the best option for the project. For example, you are doing physics and you need a general purpose language that is easy to write and handles gigantic numbers correctly so you pick Python.
You don't evolve for the sake of it, thats not how natural selection works. Evolution, espeically in the short order time spans it takes for things like humans to evolve from our last common ancestor with chimps, requires strong environmental pressure to see rapid change such as the development of language or our large brains.

We evolved until we outcompeted our relatives (its why we are the only homo left) and until we were the apex species of our biosphere. After that the pressures were much more diffuse over the nebulous optimization space of "what makes humans have more babies".

It should be completely unsurprising that our brains are functionally only as smart as they need to be to be able to handle complex language, social interaction, planning, and spatial / self awareness. With some slight bias upwards over the millennia - probably moreso from more caloric availability, in the same way we have gotten markedly taller in 300 years mostly from just being food rich and nutrition aware, than from genetic drift from natural selection.

To evolve substantially larger brains past what we already had would have been evolutionarily contrary to fitness. Bigger brains require more calories, moreso endanger the mothers in child birth (and our births are already extremely dangerous due to just that), required more developmental time to mature (15-25 years is insane in terms of developmental maturity in nature) and would have had minimal or no competitive advantage (complex reasoning skills aren't really valuable when all you are born into or will ever have is a tiny tribe and the tactic of exhausting gazelle all day for dinner).
API versioning has its own tradeoffs as well. Now there's a negotiation protocol to follow, which introduces a bunch of other issues. E.g. if I'm looking at a field that hasn't changed between versions, then a version mismatch doesn't matter. Clients have to opt-in to new versions, which introduces another set of problems.

I've done a fair amount of Go programming in large teams, mostly doing distributed systems stuff, and I've never run into a situation where I was like "Damn I wish I had enums here." Strings have worked just fine, and we've never had any bugs related to that. I have, however, run into situations where I was like "Wow, good thing I wasn't using an enum here." And in some of our Java code, we've had multiple production issues caused by over-eager devs using enums everywhere. They implicitly enforce a contract on the value of the data, which can be quite undesirable if they don't actually care about the contract (e.g. they're just passing values through to something else).
Who is a place's "respective peoples"?

How do you feel about Native Americans and their claims to various land in the USA and the policies around reservations?

How about native Hawaiian's various issues? Should Mark Zuckerberg be free to erect walls of whatever size he wants around his land and to seize the ancestral land of various native hawaiian's through the courts?

How do you feel about the sovereign citizen movement?

How do you feel about the state of Israel?

I think that your position trivializes the complexities of these situations.
ZeroCater Releases Catering to Culture Annual Report
Refusal to proceed with arbitration has been a problem.[1] Surprisingly, there's still litigation over whether this voids the arbitration clause. At the appellate level, several courts have ruled that it does.[2]

The 9th Circuit dealt with this in another case.[3] "On the assumption that Brown's narrative is true, this case displays a dark side of our nation's policy in favor of arbitration. When a defendant in a judicial forum refuses to respond to a complaint that is properly filed and served, the court has the power to enter and enforce a default judgment. Arbitration works differently. The American Arbitration Association could not compel Dillard's to pay its share of the filing fee, and in the absence of the fee it could not proceed. Brown had no choice but to come to court. Many people in Brown's position would simply have given up. Because she did not, we have the occasion to make clear that when an employer enters into an agreement requiring its employees to arbitrate, it must participate in the process or lose its right to arbitrate."

[1] https://www.bdlfirm.com/arbitration-the-consequences-of-a-pa...

[2] https://www.arbitrationnation.com/tag/roach-v-bm-motoring/

[3] https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1105777.html
Is Zuckerberg the chicken or the egg? Other sites existed before FB, but FB seemed to get the right formula. As for the evil use of the data captured by/about its users (and even more for its capturing data of non-users), it again seems to be the one that "got it right" first as far as monetizing it goes. This is from the social media view point. This is just from the FB/Zuck perspective. Google is also in different discussion with how it uses Chrome/G Suite apps.
Any tree will be a carbon sink, some just grow faster than others. I'm pretty sure the Arbor Day Foundation can tell you which trees to plant in your particular locality.
Another question... would you guys just wait until you have another offer in hand and give your 2 weeks notice, or would you let management know that you're planning on leaving if things don't change?

I'm leaning towards just giving my notice when I have a new offer, because I don't really trust management enough to see that I'm trying to be fair and help them out... I imagine I'd get a big "FU, don't let the door hit you on the way out" if I even hinted that I was going to leave if things don't improve.
IMO, this is the time for policy makers to start to debate policy changes. It takes over a year for tax laws to have any effect for example, and maybe 2 or 3 years before tax laws really kick in and affect the economy. (First year, people will be typically surprised at their new refunds instead of really spreading it over the year)

Trump's Tax Cuts were written into law in 2017, but only these months (tax season 2019) is when people are fully understanding the scope of the tax law, as it hits our pocketbooks.

A surefire predictor within 2-years or so is good for policymakers, but probably bad for traders.
To be fair, that's valid in Typescript because it simply uses Javascript's coercion rules.

You could imagine it having built-in rules for JS' coercions:

string + number -> string
number + string -> string

Maybe your snippet is provocative to some people, but in real code it would quickly fail once you actually use `bar` and were wrong about your assumptions.

At which point it's similar to languages with `Int + Float -> Float` and `Short + Long -> Long` in that perhaps you wish those operators weren't defined but it's at least consistent. And you'd find the error once you've passed those results to a function that expected Int or Short.
Any sufficiently typed programming language will grow a vocal subcommunity that will try writing Haskell in it.
It's not how you test. It's who you know!
This is actually a positive development in the long run. A few years ago my father, who lives and invests in China, boiled down the basic investment strategy in China to: invest in big companies because the government will always bail them out. If that's what everyone believed then you can see how some very poor decisions can be made and debts can balloon without end. Disasters like these will remind Chinese investors that there are risks. There are no free lunches and be prudent about your investments. This is part of the process of modernizing the Chinese economy.
Do you mean unchecked exceptions? Python exceptions are strictly typed, that's core to how they work. An except clause will catch subclasses of the target, so you need to have a custom type for each exception you want to raise in your code.

The mistake I see people make is to use built-in exceptions without subclassing, making it impossible to explicitly catch specific errors. Or the opposite, catching Exception, which will catch everything indiscriminately.
"Blockchain" is over-hyped. Bitcoin is the real innovation. The use-case has been clear since its inception: It is censorship resistant digital money with no externally-decided monetary policy.

There are a lot of people who want it to be something else, or who want to sell you some snake oil because they missed out on the opportunity to accumulate a lot of Bitcoin early on when it was cheap, and think that they'll be able to repeat the process with them at the forefront. It is all utter nonsense. Each project which prints its own token undermines whatever technology they think they've invented, because the fixed monetary supply was one of the key innovations of Bitcoin. Removing that innovation from your own project only makes your project inferior to Bitcoin by design, but bitcoin still remains immutable to changes in its monetary policy.

Every "blockchain" idea can actually be implemented as a pegged sidechain to Bitcoin, and avoid the need to print its own currency. This is the simple litmus test of whether or not it is snake oil.
Artificial “Dumbness” May Be a Solution for Engineering Smart Machines
100% this. I also find it extremely annoying to have to give daily status updates on highly complex, time consuming problem. It shows a complete lack of understanding of the work being done.

The sooner we move om from this Agile garbage the better.
Congratulations! Been looking for EXACTLY this for our app.
Unlimited vacation is common in Silicon Valley. It's not really unlimited vacation but it's really just a company policy of "work when you need to work, take a break when you need to take a break". Some people are more effective at taking PTO on unlimited vacations than others, however.