skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
BTC will always be banana money.
Yes that’s a thing. The problem for cryptocurrency is there’s no free lunch, and to gain significant security of a public ledger you have to spend some resources to do so. Bitcoin spends electricity, Chia.Network is working to spend unused disk space instead which is an interesting approach. Others like Algorand, Dfinity, Ethereum 2.0 etc are working to hopefully prove that rule can be overcome with less resource-hungry sources of cryptographic randomness. Hopefully they’ll succeed, but overcoming that rule would be a significant technical accomplishment, and not a given.
Spilling the Amazon Beans in NYC
Why would I leave my W2 job for your contract to hire position? All I can see here is a company that doesn’t want to fire people who aren’t working out, possibly to save on benefits and unemployment insurance premiums. And why do you have so many people not working out that you have to do this? None of this inspires any confidence.
Futures of JavaScript?
Thats not an entirely bad way to do it.
The 'right' answer is to stop allocating swap in a separate partition, and share swap space with the filesystem.

Whether you do this with an LVM, or by pinning files and swapping to their underlying extents is less important. But assuming at system setup time that you can bound the amount of swap that will be required in the future to support some specific workload is silly, and in order to avoid being wrong, you have to penalise most systems most of the time.
By this reasoning, an economy which banned all imports would thrive more than one where trade wasn't micromanaged. Do you believe isolationism is a wealth-maximizing strategy?

>makes you less vulnerable to foreign economic pressure

Should someone in the city block next to mine be allowed to sell in mine? How about the next town, state, country, continent? Where ever you draw the line is who you've --implicitly-- declared economic war with.
The sad part is he was probable middle aged by the time he realized this, those projects he worked on are probably dead.
What scares me is that people are using this as an argument for why companies like Facebook and Google should tightly control everything people see and hear. To me, this is an argument for education and media reform.
From the paper:

After spending several years using various methods to deliver small molecules in the mouse brain in vivo, we have not achieved definitive success of chemical conversion inside mouse brains despite the observation of a few neurons after chemical treatment. This is rather disappointing, but we are still continuously trying direct in vivo chemical conversion in the mouse brain. The biggest challenge for in vivo chemical conversion is how to maintain a constant concentration of small molecules inside the brain without causing a severe invasive damage to the brain. We have tried using biomaterial to encapsulate small molecules, but, perhaps because our small molecules are too small or we have not found the right biomaterial for such small molecules, the small molecules we applied might not stay for a long time inside the brain. We also tried an osmotic minipump (Alzet) but the tip of the insertion caused significant tissue damage inside the brain, and the injury induced many DCX+ cells that were mainly reactive astrocytes 2 weeks after drug treatment (Figures S7I–S7K).

Shame, but this is an entirely understandable problem, and these are still early days!

On the other hand, during our vigorous testing of in vivo chemical reprogramming, we accidentally found that core drugs significantly increased adult neurogenesis in the mouse hippocampus (Figure 7). We initially injected core drugs through intracranial injection into the hippocampus and sacrificed the mice 7 days later (Figure 7A). We observed remarkable increase of DCX-labeled newborn neurons together with Ki67-labeled proliferative cells in the dentate granule layer (Figures 7B–7E).

So, not conversion of glia into neurons, but production of new neurons from progenitor cells. That's still really useful! The hippocampus is what gets whacked in a load of different brain disorders (wikipedia tells me Alzheimer's and other dementias, PTSD, schizophrenia, and depression, for starters), so being able to drive neurogenesis there sounds really useful.
There seems to be an assumption in these discussions that everyone has to prepare for these things in equal amount. But that's not the case.

(The counter to that is that if people can relatively-easily (single-digit days) cram for your interview, you're still not going to be effectively screening for at-hand pre-existing familiarity/knowledge.)
I mean, you missed a large part of their tactics: significant government sponsored corporate-espionage.

Easy to "thrive" when the hard work is all done by 3rd parties who receive no benefit.
I'm shocked and disheartened by how infrequently environmental concerns are brought up when comparing crypto and our current banking system.

We all want a faster, more efficient, cheaper cryptocurrency, and those features are linked to its ecological efficiency.
A low, but positive, inflation rate is of critical importance.

> Any supply of money will do.

That is just nonsense. If you have a fixed money supply, given that economic growth is happening, would result in a naturally deflationary currency. That is a terrible place to be for the system as a whole as no one has any incentives to spend or invest in anything as money itself will simply gain value over time just sitting as cash. Thus, that money isn't being used / circulated. Having a ideal velocity of money has significant multiplier effects and deflationary currencies are fundamentally flawed.

The problem then is: if you want a low rate of inflation but there is a natural variation in the growth rate due to the cyclic nature of the economy, then how to create a system that could do that without a monetary authority.
I think here's your answer: It isn't just about the tech.

This is what most "blockchain" enthusiasts get wrong. They think it is just about technology, and thus, they can come up with "a better bitcoin."

They're missing that the predetermined monetary policy is the key innovation of Bitcoin, and that by creating a new "blockchain" which prints new money, they are shooting themselves in the foot, because they can't ever be "a superior bitcoin" when they have inflation as part of the parcel.

A free market does not really care about whether some people have the opinion that deflation is bad. At the end of the day, nobody can change Bitcoin's monetary policy, and it will be left to the free market to decide whether or not they are going to put their money in this, or whether they're going to bet on inflation.
Surely it’s insane economics for the company though. My management skills must be almost useless (and I’m considered an ok manager) compared to my dev skills. I can’t understand what’s in it for the company to make EVERYONE into crap managers AND pay them more AND make them unhappy AND ensure that only inexperienced juniors have time to actually do work. Just don’t get it. But every company wants to do it.
I agree on readability, CSS is much more compact, and therefore easier to read. I think MS designed XAML to be mostly handled by tools not humans. Didn’t work because the tool (expression blend) is not quite good enough so humans have to deal with the source too. Experience helps for simple cases like this one but not for more complex cases like control templates or animations.

I’ve wrote the above example because it shows a possible solution to the stated problem, i.e. how to introduce namespaces for styles without also introducing a full-blown programming language with scopes and variables. The exact syntax can be replaced making it more compact and easier to read.

Compared to this mostly-immutable scoped dictionaries, way more things can potentially go wrong with code, regardless on the programming language.
The same goes for glass, although the energy difference isn't as big as with aluminium. The main problem with glass is that coloured glass can't easily be made into clear glass, so it gets used for making green/brown glass. Glass is also very suitable for reuse, so it doesn't necessarily have to be recycled unless the glass item has broken.
I had a friend in elementary school that was a lot like this. As we stayed friends all throughout our school days, he would constantly argue with me about the stupidest things. Even when I was right and could demonstrate he was wrong, he'd still try to win.
Ironically, we're still good friends because I learned to look past this BS and not care.
I have met quite a large number of software developers in my day, and if I didn't recall meeting them face-to-face, I would describe the behavior of around 15-20% of them as "obvious satire".
I agree CSS has problems. What I don't see is how styles-in-JS addresses them.

Very typically, for a given app and page the styles of individual elements and components are not independent. They also depend the app theme, app section, layout area, component group, etc. The element fits the component. The component fits into the section, the section fits into the page. The specific relationships in a particular case are different of course. Styles are visual and the idea that a component on a page has nothing visually to do with the rest of the page is wrong.

The typical scoping rules of programming languages doesn't fit that well here.

To the extent some styling solution encourages you to treat styles that are dependent as independent, that's not a good or useful thing.
That is exactly the idea, with the added benefit of doing it with solar power so its transportable into places without any source of heat.

Imagine those bricks scaled up by a factor of 10. Quite the R factor as well. It would take better solar ovens to melt them into bricks but that is a matter of resources not technology hurdles.
One BIG programming hack that I learnt from ‘Can’t pay? We’ll take it away’
On the flip side, after using CSS in large projects for years with many, many third party libraries, I've never once felt this urge... Rarely had any problems. At least none that the effort of styling everything in JS would merit!
I guess a good question to ask is, do we keep falling for it because we are stupid?
>"what does malloc return?"

This is particularly pernicious, because it's a trick question, too. On linux, malloc always returns, it will never return NULL. Even if you ask for 4 petabytes of memory on a 128mb system, malloc will hand you back a valid pointer for the memory.

https://scvalex.net/posts/6/
China, Venezuela, North Korea are at constant risk of political boycott so need to be protectionist. But that doesn't mean it's an inherent feature.
I'm familiar with that article, and it got me excited for a while, but it's about compiler implementation, and it doesn't really have much to do with the current discussion, other than rationalizing the opposition for the feature.

About your other points: nope, generics wouldn't remove simplicity in the language itself. They would mostly legitimize with type-safety certain idioms that are already present in current Golang code. And the terrible error messages of C++ templates are not really a good example. There are much better languages now when it comes to generics.

I suggest that maybe you try looking into other legitimate uses of generics? The Fibonacci-Tree<K,V> example you gave earlier is unrealistic, and the other example being thrown around here, STL, is too complex... There are lots of legitimate reasons for someone wanting generics in a language, and nobody is advocating for them out of bad faith, or wishing to kill a nice language with feature bloat :(
“It could be worse”
How such do s such tech track is defined. I was researching such role path for our company but did not find a description e.g. what are preconditions, role name and stages, responsibilities...

Really looking for help here how to implement such path.
Just like I thought.

Most people rightly expect something like "a GUI for a decentralized S3" but instead - for the foreseeable future - they should be ready to spend many hours on the forums before they can squeeze out a tiny bit of value out of this thing.

In reality best case scenario might be Filecoin becomes a bubble (like Sia did) and early adopters get rewarded for their suffering by getting the heck out near the peak.

After years of trying similar projects, I lost interest in them. Too much hassle for a normal busy user who has a life.
Soviet scientist Georgii Flerov figured out nuclear weapons program was about to start indirectly from the fact that nothing was being published on nuclear fission and physicists in the field didn't publish at all. That was during MAUD era before Manhattan project was started.

Flerov informed Stalin April 1942, serval months before Cambridge Five leaked the MAUD papers to Staling.
I remember just a few days ago when media outlets were slamming the "alt-right trolls" for spreading the racist conspiracy theory that the attack on Jussie Smollett was fake. Fast forward to today, it's generally accepted as fake (although Smollett still hasn't admitted it) by those same news outlets, yet there's 0 acknowledgement of the fact that the people they slammed turned out to be completely right, and of course no apology. Just more rhetoric about how this might make people less likely to believe them in the future. Believability is something that's earned, and at this point it's been lost by mainstream news outlets. Shutting down some internet troll bogeyman isn't going to change that, a little self-awareness might.
Every set of coordinates uses a different seed, so I would say yes.
The article finishes with the author explaining that (at least part of) the article is imagination.
> There's no country to actually compare it to because the US is pretty much an outlier in terms of scale and intensity of their military bases on foreign ground.

In terms of scale, of course - but the US is not the only country with foreign military installations. Just off the top of my head, France, the UK and Russia all have long-term out-of-country bases.

Do literally none of these countries have anything that is remotely equivalent to a PX (seems unlikely)? If so, do they pay with their own currency or the local one, and are those transactions subject to local taxes? At the end of the day I expect it boils down to whatever SOFA is in place, but it's a legitimate question IMO.
I'm glad it works out for you. But I would not want to work at a company where a significant number of my coworkers only last a couple months, and I think I'm far from alone in that perspective.
This story is so misleading that it's sad. I grew-up in the socialist India. It was called "the Raj." India was a social democracy from its birth in 1947 to 1991. It was on a verge of collapse as someone mentioned below, and IMF gave it a loan of $300M on a condition that it adopts capitalistic policies. Since then India has grown at a much better rate...

Also, let me tell you about what state of Indian in 1994 when immigrated here as a kid:

- We had three models of the cars - Fiat and Ambassador. These two had not changed its model for 30+ years. The new Maruti Suzuki was the third model introduced thru join-venture. Maruti was the first model with power steering. None of the available cars were automatic...most cars in India today are still not automatic as lot of those innovation never made it to India during the socialist Raj. In USA back then, there were at least 100s of models with far advanced technologies.

We had 2 Tv Channels - DoorDarshan (government owned TV) and ZeeTV - which was introduced post 1991 when Government finally opened up allowed private TV channels.

We had one government-owned airlines: Air India - that's it. It is still owned by Indian Government - they were recently trying to sell it but no one purchased it as its so badly run. It also doesn't innovate because it doesn't need profit to survive - government will keep funding it. Indian airports were dumps compared to today where they are finally international standards. Indian train system still doesn't allow private railroads, and yes, there's a reason why bullet trains never made it there.

In order to get a traditional "wired" phone line, we had to wait for years. You filled out a form to get a phone line and years later they would call you and say... hey, you finally have it. Cell phone leap-frogged wired phone lines in India due to capitalism - basic communication wouldn't be there if it was still socialist Raj.

You almost could not start a business in India as an entrepreneur to the scale that companies like PayTM, OYO, Ola Cab, Flipkart thrived. There were just too many laws that essentially disallowed any kind of competition to existing industries.

---------------
Protectionism == no innovation.
---------------

As Winston Churchill said:

"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."

Neither systems are perfect. It's really akin to picking your own poison.

For me, personally, after growing up in socialist India, I love America, the freedom, opportunities, an opportunities it provides.

And, here's the zinger... Thumbs-up would have thrived on its own had they just competed. It has the same taste advantage that Coca-Cola has in US market. Indians had been drinking Thumbs-up for years. It tastes different, and we liked it. We were used to it - after the novelty factor of Coca Cola, people just went back to Thumbs-up. It still thrives...
I've had concerns in this area as well, as far as I know the team performed some stress tests and the network can do 100+ transactions per second, maybe more. There is also a small computation that the hardware needs to perform before sending the transaction, which is only a small guard against spam but pretty useful.
The approach that I've seen work is to have high standards for code, but communicate the expectations upfront and make sure that code reviews are grounded in those standards (for new people, this means over-communicating, but it becomes more intuitive once you've worked together for a bit). And whatever you do, be constructive, not rude.

If your codebase is going to be maintained for a long time, letting sloppy or inconsistent code in is going to make it much harder to maintain or evolve in future, so just lowering standards to make people feel better doesn't work. It's totally reasonable to hold people to a high standard if they're submitting code that others will have to maintain.

A lot of the problem is if people start off with the expectation that their code should be merged with minimal modifications, they're going to be upset when a code reviewer seems to be moving the goalposts on them. Also if the reviewers comments are arbitrary (or seem arbitrary) because they're not obviously grounded in consistent standards.

I've seen a project go through the process of tightening up code review standards and it was initially painful (a lot of people used to the old way feel like they can't move fast enough, etc) but ultimately worked out and resulted in people shipping working features at higher velocity with far less time spent on rework and maintaining overly-complex and buggy code.

There's also way less conflict in onboarding new developers because standards have been made clear in advance and reviewers are expected to be respectful and coach newcomers through the review process.

The hard part, I've found, is working with developers who can't or won't get code to the expected standard, even with coaching and detailed feedback. As in, repeatedly making the same simple mistakes pointed out by reviewers and failing to understand and address relatively straightforward feedback.
I'm not sure if there's a solution to this, beyond minimizing the damage and trying to move the person to a role that they're more suited to. In one such instance the person was, in retrospect, a complete liability - they switched to a different team with looser code review, got a "bugfix" committed with some obvious errors that, if not luckily caught by our team, could have potentially had disastrous consequences for some customers, then left the company. Maybe the lesson is that high code review standards contain the damage from such people.

Edit: I also think this requires code reviewers to approach the reviews with the attitude of "what do we have to do to get this merged without compromising our standards?", not a desire to tear down the person or block the code change.
I'd argue that if you have a toxic team culture then no matter what you do things will escalate. Code reviews are a focal point but if they didn't exist then the focal point would move somewhere else. For example, engineer A commits some code and then engineer B rewrites it and then they get into an argument about it during a meeting. Toxicity in code reviews is at least auditable so a pro-active manager can nip it versus someone going off in a meeting they weren't part of (in which case it becomes a she said/he said situation).
Norway's $1T Man Talks Brexit, China and Big Tech
> I see very little "power" in bullying all of the other developers on my team into following my opinions.

The author actually addresses that. It's just the style of the article takes you on a journey in his mind before getting to the conclusion. It's a different style of writing. From the article:

If we were being laughed at while young, it doesn’t mean you have to return the favor later on. The vicious cycle can easily be broken. Life becomes easier if you learn to lose arguments, if you can admit that another developer is more talented than you.
The key word here is “optimal.” These aren’t difficult tasks if you can just write down the straightforward code to do them.
It does not seem to work on mobile ( chrome, S7) :/ looked cool on paper though
Have you tried OpenSeadragon? I feel like I have been casting pearls at swines here.
Hey HN -

My name is Sahil, and I'm excited to share this v1 of Spase.io with you. It's a 3D planner where time moves forward, instead of in 7-day loop-de-loops, so that when you see stuff in the future, it really looks like the future.

So if you have a project deadline, a birthday party, or a reminder to do laundry, that event will actually register spatially in your mind as in the future.

Spase.io clearly not as powerful as Google Calendar or Todoist but it does hack your brain to focus on the future.

What do you like about this v1, and what do you want to see it become?

- Sahil
I would suggest a Go programmer give ReasonML an honest try (as an example language where "generics" are done right), but the getting started / documentation situation is still not at Golang level so thats a bit annoying.

Maybe F# would be a better choice. .NET Core and its tooling are pretty well done. C# and NET Core would be another nice alternative.
> I would gladly trade all my gains for a world where governments have no control over the creation and regulation of money.

Indeed. And not just because they're absolutely terrible at it: giving control over money creation to a government is like giving a drug addict the keys to the heroin factory.
Okay, but now you're using a C library as the basis for your non-C programming language. I understand why it is that way, but that kind of sucks.
No, ground chuck != ground beef. I do wish it was common to buy actual ground chuck though.
An example and actual numbers would be a good addition to this article.
This is excellent, Capitalism will save your country but it has to be allowed to grow as a child would, but always knocked back in line by the parents. Regarding the bribes, as someone who has studied the early American capitalism roots, you won't like it, but some local good ole boys need to remove some of those corrupt politicians from office, by force if necessary.
My guess is it's a big canister which, when enough people have relieved themselves into it, is shipped to the USA and distributed to hipsters in Brooklyn:

https://untappd.com/b/pabst-brewing-company-pabst-blue-ribbo...