skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In the last few months, I have leaned more towards audio based learning but I have realized that personally audio is great for shorter content (less than 1 hr). After 1 hour, I get distracted because I feel like I could listen and do something else. Then when I pause and think what I got out of the last few mins of hearing, I realize I wasn't paying real attention. I also tried listening for 1 hour, taking a break and listening for another hour. I am unable to recollect what I listened last time while I have no problem recollecting material I read. For example, I am "reading" two books simultaneously now - one from kindle and another via audible. If you asked me what I learnt from the audible book,I would struggle to summarize. I am part of a book club and one of the women I see there has great notes on every book she has read. She was telling us how audiobooks aren't any good because to truly understand content, you need to pause, assimilate what you just read and process it (she writes it down). Audiobooks do not give that break. I usually ask Alexa to pause and resume but it plain sucks to do that.
Maybe I know too many physics grad students who self-consciously model themselves on him, but wouldn't recommend the Feynmann books to young people. It's too easy to end up as a pile of somebody else's quirks without his unique brilliance and humanity. Wait to read Feynmann until you have a fully formed ego.
Most graphing calculators match that description.
I wouldn't go as far as damage, because it is reversible. If you stay away from saturated stimuli you relearn to taste subtler nuances.

Capsaicin, and similar substances (TRPV1 agonists) which are found in hot peppers and ginger do kill nociceptive neurons, but that's AFAIK the only case where some food directly damages your nervous system.

I think food addiction is mostly reversible (it may be easier to relapse than to become addicted in the first place).
Good hardware is essential to make frequent video calling work well. We have a semi-distributed team, spread between two offices and a bunch of remote workers.

The biggest difference to making it work was for everyone to be issued a decent headset so that you're not battling people using Apple headphones which pick up everyone else in the room, and setting up meeting rooms with decent video conferencing hardware so that its possible to bring in groups from different places.

If I had my way we'd have taken the much simpler approach of declaring that for any meeting with one remote participant, everyone connects by video, but that's a battle I lost long ago with management!
Don't you need cellular service some time when you are away? A small car issue become a much bigger issue without a simple phone call to CAA. I can understand avoiding data service (even more so if you have enough wifi around you), but cellular, I think that's an actual big loss.
To be honest from my experience usually it’s a factor of five to get to full completion.
This job sounds more horrific than a crime scene cleaner. 4500 foot soldiers to clean up a billion users. Murder rape assault fraud. Burn it all with brimstone.
> I’m not sure I really understand why big companies feel it’s there job to censor the world

Because that's what the users and the customers both want. Facebook is popular and profitable BECAUSE it provides a mostly-safe (compared to eg 4chan) place to communicate, not despite that.
This is a part of a quite large system that does a lot of things. I do not want to wrap everything inside julia, that would force me to rewrite everything in julia. I just need to invert a few 4x4 linear systems from inside a shell script. I agree that this is not a very representative use case, and maybe it is irrelevant for most people. Yet, if I try to evangelize julia in my lab this problem blocks it, and it is better to stick to octave.
RDAP is an extensible and uniform channel directly to registrars. CA/B forum has already discussed using it as a DV proof.
I think you might not be interpreting that in the way that it was meant.

Perhaps consider: what things would someone who calls some things “mental illnesses” and not call them “physical illnesses”, contrasted with the things they would call “physical illnesses” and would not call “mental illnesses”. What name would you give to these two categories?

I am reminded of a conversation I had with my dad, perhaps 5 years ago, where he referred to something as a plant, and I was confused because he meant that in a way that excluded trees, while I hadn’t interpreted it that way. Now, of course, in the technical sense, trees are plants, being members of the kingdom Plantae. But at the same time, if one is in an area with 5 trees, and a plant which is not a tree, and someone tells you “look at the plant”, the pragmatic way to interpret what they mean, is that they want you to look at the plant (i.e. the plant which is not a tree).

Scott Alexander said (as a paraphrase/snowclone of Christ’s “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.”) “The categories were made for man, not man for the categories.”.

Edit: small formatting fix
I remember bringing a BASIC code listing I had written to show-and-tell in 3rd grade. I printed that sucker out on a big stack of fan-fold paper on the ol' Apple Imagewriter so that when I was standing in front of the class, I could drop it and let it unspool onto the floor in dramatic fashion and say "This is a program I wrote."

Blank stares all around, including from the teacher. So it goes.
I'll have to take your word that humans aren't as tasty as pigs or cows.

But coming from somewhere where horses and whales are regularly eaten I can assure you that if you're used to the taste and live in a culture that knows how to prepare those meats that you'd definitely prefer them any many instances.

What diet people prefer has a lot of inertia. If you presented say a Briton in the 1850s with spicy Indian food they wouldn't like it in anything like the numbers their descendants do today. Food's an acquired taste, and takes a while to take hold. So you can't just say try gazelle and declare "meh".

Which goes to the point I'm making. I don't think that in the year 3000 when lab-grown meat is perfect (can grow muscle fiber, bone, fat etc.) and indistinguishable from the "real" thing nobody will order up pork or beef.

Rather, there's going to be the same growth in different sorts of products at the expense of the absolute market share of any one incumbent as we see in beer, soft drinks cookies etc. for the past decades.

Now that by-and-large doesn't happen with meats because raising live animals presents you with all sorts of scalability and production limitations.
So, you'd rather posit some mystical juju that makes matter gain consciousness, that somehow magically only happens to humans, and happens to matter when humans eat it, but yet is totally undetectable?
Ill go a step further, and say I wish the view was decoupled from the data in a way that my browser controls the view template. The fonts, the column size, the page colors. So whether i browse to cnn, nytimes, espn, etc, the pages look identical.

My browser can have maybe 20 page templates built in, and sites can specify which templates work best for their content (article, video, forum, search results, recipe, howto)
>Is this the sweet spot?

Yes it is!

What is actually hilarious about this tech is that as the hardware gets better, the information it feeds you will ultimately be the most valuable piece. Crazy to think about when verifying validity a firehouse amount of data.
The incompatibility is the key feature that differentiates modern text chat from those inferior mail applications.
"It won't put it under your nose unless you actively search for it."

That's not how social networks work.
Being a "minimum viable product", it may actually be quite big and take a long time to reach. To me, the goal of properly defining an MVP is that you do everything needed but nothing more.

And getting stakeholders, or users, in the loop and validating at each iteration is still worthwhile to make sure you actually build the right thing.
That depends on the software you're using! Our VR smart whiteboard offers a way to present and draw/save your notes. We are developing a transcript saving functionality, that saves everything you talk about into notes and emails it to you. We also will use that speech to text to allow you to use commands (hopefully replacing most of the usage of the keyboard).

That being said, we are a very young start up! We will continue to add to and advance our product in pursuit of creating optimal value for all of our users.

(Would love to hear more about what you like & dislike about your current work/meeting flow in the Go if you want to email kyle@portalspaces.com)
It's not about us, UV light destroys almost all types of plastic materials, and affects color of wood and fabrics - so without glass UV filtering our furniture, floors and pretty much everything else inside our houses and cars that is exposed to sunlight would last a lot shorter.
right. the house example is plain wrong.

What I think the author should have used is a car. First, we design and test the suspension, then the wheels, then the brakes, etc until we have a working car from the ground up. Then we sell a lot of them.

The OS / game engine /car example is frightening because you have no intermediate value until the whole thing comes together. hiccups propegate.

However, an iterative approach would create a minumum feature version first.

A car with no suspension, 25 HP, and one seat. An OS with virtually no drivers, targetting single arch, bad scheduler, single filesystem, and single user.

These are, in aerospace analogies, testbeds in which you validate your long term vision while producing real things that can be sold, hyped, or used to look for improvements and bad assumptioms before the final product is produced.

I completely agree with your statement that markets become saturated with Min Viable Products ... but that is what forces iteration. I agree with the author (and this isn't new knowledge) that iteratively buidling a better thing by expanding a pre existing thing helps you capture and scale.

My opinion is this probably gets hard once that thing gets big, and starts to feel clunky, and thats where the big companaies do a "re-engineering" with a waterfall-like model. They can afford to take time to design soup-to-nuts because they are still selling the iterative MVP mutant that got them to dominance. Different strokes for different folks.
I would definitely prefer an approach where schema is explicit and defined in a minimum number of places. RDBMS/SQL schema do let you define schemas, however an important aspect of how SQL handles schemas which links back to their inflexibility is how they're defined at the level of a table, meaning a (possibly ordered) set of attributes.

A more flexible approach as taken by Datomic is to define schemas at the level of attributes, meaning an entity (table) does not have a schema, only attributes do. This requires attribute names to be within namespaces which can certainly be seen as equivalent to table names, but they don't have to, namespaces could also refer to an entire domain/subdomain/org/whatever.

Defining schema at the level of attributes provides a greater level of flexibility because client only declare/specify/depend-on a partial schema that only lists the attributes it needs. It also helps avoiding the "place oriented programming" approach of result sets, whereby attributes must be in a certain order, and if one does not have a value, you have to introduce NULL values.
does it work for you? The site only shows a beating gray circle.
I figured that if I didn’t mention child porn I would be downvoted. But it looks like that’s happening anyway.

If I had things my way, no piece of information would be illegal. Child porn, nuclear weapon plans, whatever, I don’t care, it should all be legal.

But I accept that it’s a fringe position, though a completely tenable and consistent one. It’s all information and I think it’s ridiculous to try and censor something that only exists in the abstract.

Moreover, once you start censoring you will never be able to stop. Even though I’m sure people will do bad things with information, I believe that history has shown that the good will outweigh the bad.
That's funnier. As stated in the post, it's really just the Pareto principle again.
It is pretty well researched that people in sustenance farming societies do not accumulate capital but when there is surplus it is invested into social capital. Only since people stared moving into cities the economy becomes money-based and accumulation of capital becomes a habbit and later obsession.

This is way there is so much nostalgy of coming back to simple rural living. This is why philosophy (epicureism, cynism, Rousseau) are critical of urban living.

People had been made to cooperate not to compete with each other. Human beeing is not the largest, strongest or quickest of animals but are able to cooperate for the common good.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/?title=Sustenance_farming&redirec...
> Anyone who buys debt at that point is just hoping to be able to convince/trick the indebted to paying anyway.

Seems like this should be illegal, then, with penalties.
Show HN: Fast Newton's Method for Neural Nets, with Finite Difference
I'm a bit surprised that there didn't appear to be any mention of Clojure's built-in concurrency support outside of basic immutability. core.async gives a nice channel-based system, agents give an actor-ish system, and STM/atoms let you mutate the variable safely, without having to manually work with locks.

This is definitely a good high-level article, just something I was surprised by, since core.async is what drove me (and several other people I know) to start using Clojure.

EDIT: Just a note that I know core.async isn't built in, that was a mistake. It is a first-party library, however.
I use serverless Wireguard running on AWS Lambda.

No .. just kidding :)
how about https://www.aldaily.com/ https://techmeme.com/river http://www.mediagazer.com/river https://www.memeorandum.com/river
That's incorrect though. It's impossible to have data races with Go channels.

The example the author gives doesn't use them.
Well, society decides. Sometimes societies have a framework for deciding the grey area between individual rights and the right of society to regulate (in the form of government). That’s what political and legal battles are all about. There is nothing unfortunate about this though. What is good at an individual level may not be good at a societal level.
Yup. The free market as the end to all means relies on several incorrect assumptions:

1) humans are not rational agents that always pursue their best interest

2) local optimization (what the market does) doesn't always lead to a global optimum

3) oftentimes the interest of investors and consumers diverge and the former have far more power (information asymmetry).
BASIC was a huge turn off for me as a kid in the 90s. I hated it. I hated having to deal with the line numbers. I hated everything about it, except that it let you write a program. Whenever I would look at a long BASIC program I would think, “how the hell did anyone write this?” To this day I don’t understand how people liked this language. I guess it’s easier than assembly, which also has line numbers. And I absolutely loved programming and computers. I remember reading a C++ book around 1997 and even though I couldn’t get my hands on a compiler then, it was liberating to just read about.
> it's not so much about failure in actuality

Murphy himself was unhappy abut the common interpretation of his law, which is negative rather than cautionary, implying a vindictiveness to exist in inanimate objects and the laws of chance.

> but more about anticipating the failure, and designing your code/product/system for the worst case scenario

Which was his intent. IIRC the phrase was coined while working on rocket sleds for a land speed record attempt. He was essentially trying to achieve "no matter what happens we want to maximise the chance of the pilot being alive afterwards, if some of the equipment survives too that is even better" and promoting a defensive always-fail-as-safely-as-possible engineering stance.
the meetings will have a transcript that is sent to the emails of the participants (a feature we are currently focused on). You could easily forward that transcript on to your remote employees who can't make it due to timezone issues!!
Ignoring for a second what should or shouldn't be allowed...

now the moderators are just subjected to constant child porn or potential child porn, which, let's be honest, is still essentially the same issue re: their mental health.
Your best example of an attack mitigating by deploying a languishing IETF standard is Heartbleed, which was caused by the adoption of a languishing IETF standard extension to TLS.
I haven't looked much into lit-html but is it possible to type check your templates like you can do with JSX? That is one big advantage I found for JSX compared to template-based frameworks.
I didn't think of either of those services FWIW. Name seems fine (if a bit bland) to me.
Brooks' ?
Finagle's law: "Anything that can go wrong, will-at the worst possible moment."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finagle%27s_law
I agree. Among other things, I'm pointing out the opposite risk: a beginner may come up with a correct solution to the exercise, check from the book's provided solutions that her solution is correct, and move on to the next section, fooling herself into thinking that she has sufficient understanding (hey, she solved the exercise correctly!), not realizing that “not needing to look at the solutions” and “coming up with (or finding from other sources) lots more exercises” is part of the task of understanding.

BTW, I didn't mention this earlier, but for verifying solutions to exercises which ask to prove something, I've never found it useful to see a solution that is simply a proof. The only way to get more confidence that you've proved something correctly is to find someone adversarial (e.g. a friend with similar or greater mathematical maturity) and try to prove it to them while they keep say “why” or “I'm not convinced”. (A proof is a social process; you cannot get feedback on your proof from a static, non-interactive source like a book.) One's proof may be superficially similar to what's in the book and yet not be a proof, while it can be very different and still be fine.

What provided proofs can help with is getting you unstuck when you've been unsuccessful at proving something. So they help with frustration and motivation, as I mentioned earlier (feedback not so much).
yes it would, but then it's not semi-private and if there's a tracker, why do you need magnet links in the first place?
As a less technical user, the number of sent emails is a little not straightforward to me. Like if I'm in a group email with 50 other people and I reply all, is that 50 separate emails or just one email charged?
Dear Qallunaat (White People)
I've seen people increase their number of "spoons" day after day by just grinding it out and refusing to quit. Some folks with severe, crippling disabilities have accomplished amazing feats largely through determination and force of will.
Important part of STM is that the retry mechanism requires functions to be pure - which haskell compiler will check for you.
You may want to try Filezilla or gftp for something similar to WinSCP.
Im with you.

Id like to see a browser come out that does this. Reading mode by default, along with some p2p network of userstyles and templates. Opera sort of did this once, where the community maintained .js patches to make websites work better in the browser. It would be nice to have a set of standard browser templates, and then be able to have an on/off button for "allow most popular community patches to load automatically," those patches basically being css tweaks for sites that dont quite fit a template.
Because that's vague enough to be meaningless.
The author explicitly said it is not motivated by money for this project.

When you have money, you may like the power it gives you to make incentives so people do what you like. However, in some rare cases, someone doesn't need your money and prefers doing thing how himself likes. If you don't like that, that's your problem and not the one of the people refusing your money.
How is it disrespectful? The majority of the people in Somalia probably share his opinion, and the ones that don't are profiting from the corruption there.
Thanks for this Klathmon.

The reason meeting in VR is fundamentally better from a technical standpoint is the amount of information your sending over a network is GREATLY reduced. A video is a series of pixels with 4~ values that all have to be sent around 30 times per second at least.

On the other hand, in VR, all the textures are stored locally, so the only two network "dependencies" for communication are voice over IP and positions (usually about 4 sets of coordinates). This allows you to have 20+ people in a room with almost no lag.
Dont you normally have to wait for the heavy site to load before switching to reader?
I would be impressed if Zuck and Sheryl decided to spend a day per year doing this job.

I suspect that as a billionaire and the CXO of one of the largest companies of the world, you can get disconnected from the details.

It would be valuable for them to see a different reality of their platform.
HTM actually looks pretty intriguing to me.

One thing I like about JSX is that it looks and feels like HTML.

For me, that has two huge benefits:

1. It narrows the dissonance between the code I'm writing and the actual structure that will be rendering into the DOM. I find it much easier to write and debug when I don't have translate between some JS factory function and the actual DOM implementation.

2. It's almost pure HTML. Sure I'll have to change class to className and update some other tags. Generally, though, if something works in HTML, it's little fuss to do in JSX. With tools like JSX, I can write in a single templating language across all of my software.
I think exposing people to at least a little bit of basic or assembly is probably a good thing so people can understand why functions are useful.
The loading graphic may be more to prevent a Flash of Unstyled Content (FOUC) than to mask loading times:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_of_unstyled_content

Single page apps have quite a bit of control over rendering, however Google prefers that indexed markup be pre rendered from the server. Juggling the two competing priorities leads to byzantine technical issues.

Front end development for content sites can be complex.
Have you tested your service using https://www.emailprivacytester.com yet? I would do it myself, but you don't seem to have a free tier
There isn't even a Russian article for that article in Wikipedia. You're the one reading propaganda, not me. Communist state propaganda was the very opposite to "women at home" propaganda. Women were portrayed as working at the factory, in the field, and in general as equals of men. In fact it very much reminds me of the feminist propaganda you see in the US today. The state decimated by revolution and civil war needed all the workforce it could get. In the 30's "women not dying in a war" was common sense, not propaganda. I don't get why it's not common sense to you in 2019.

Everyone knows about Zoya Kosmodemyanskaya in Russia (well, maybe not current generation, but my generation for sure), and about the occasional sniper or pilot. That doesn't change the fact that women were a tiny minority of the forces in combat, and that is how it should be, because women are demographically far more precious than men.

Consider that children also volunteered, and served on the front lines and as partisans. It was a tiny percentage but there were probably more of them there than women, and more than enough to fill up a Wikipedia article. Surely you aren't going to argue that children should go to war just on that basis?