skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Probably not too hard. It would come down to how easy it is to detect quoting conventions so you don't accidentally parse () chars in strings. JSON is medium-easy. I don't know where the canonical definition of s-expressions you're using comes from (is it just Common Lisp?) so I don't know how this works.

We'd like to have some more examples of formats people care about - I'm interested in generalizing this work. So if you want to followup with more detail please do.
Interesting. Mine is solely focused on Productivity though, so it seems a lot more specific whereas yours seems to be about tech in general. I also run Web Tools Weekly[1], and this new one is more of spin-off of the other one, which also included productivity tools, but not articles.

1. https://webtoolsweekly.com/
But..but Gnome now has one. Pepe is now happy?.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Aenean pretium blandit sapien et varius. Donec aliquam sem auctor tincidunt venenatis. Sed libero nisi, vulputate in mattis ac, pharetra consectetur risus. Suspendisse malesuada orci orci, vitae egestas nunc faucibus in. Donec consectetur pellentesque velit, a sollicitudin mi placerat sed. Donec blandit metus et risus vulputate, eu gravida dolor maximus. Aliquam sit amet orci lorem. Donec tempus viverra tincidunt. Sed ac nisl non dolor aliquam pulvinar. Nunc ultrices nibh vitae suscipit ultrices. Duis ac cursus sapien. Morbi sed tellus purus. Nullam sollicitudin lorem id tortor tempor, quis molestie velit sodales.

Nam egestas nisi dui, vel scelerisque nisi accumsan sed. Maecenas vestibulum purus at enim dictum, eget consequat ligula sodales. Mauris vitae nisi eu orci interdum porta. Morbi iaculis interdum dui. Proin elit lectus, top of my class in the Navy SEALS convallis eget iaculis sed, pharetra id ante. Mauris finibus mollis ex, in malesuada massa viverra ut. Maecenas quis pretium enim, sed pellentesque orci. Proin viverra quam id lectus euismod, vel iaculis erat tempus. Vivamus sit amet urna hendrerit, fringilla risus vitae, accumsan dolor. Nam mollis metus eget risus convallis mattis. Pellentesque egestas et felis ut malesuada. Proin pellentesque sollicitudin elit et mollis. Proin vel leo eget leo porttitor molestie vel eu est. Curabitur quis sodales ligula.

In aliquam bibendum eros et tincidunt. Praesent tellus quam, gravida at tincidunt sed, venenatis vitae ex. Duis tincidunt purus nec convallis maximus. Proin lacus dolor, ullamcorper ut purus vitae, volutpat malesuada tortor. Donec eget posuere mauris. Integer in enim sed est volutpat sollicitudin. Ut ut mattis eros. Suspendisse et dictum ipsum. Aliquam fermentum vitae arcu convallis pellentesque. Fusce lacus dui, porttitor in posuere vitae, commodo ut nisl.

Aenean consectetur, ligula vel mollis porttitor, justo velit dignissim nisl, sit amet lacinia dolor nulla vitae orci. Aliquam sagittis malesuada enim, vitae aliquet tellus consequat non. Maecenas ut felis eu IP is being traced right now bibendum luctus. Cras in magna nibh. Phasellus sit amet semper purus. Mauris quis auctor lectus. Nam consectetur quam sed efficitur tempor.

Nulla eget dignissim nibh. Etiam in magna in urna fermentum posuere. Aliquam erat volutpat. Pellentesque in erat pharetra tellus viverra convallis vel quis mauris. Integer pharetra lectus eget diam lobortis posuere. Curabitur ut blandit orci, vel dictum elit. Sed a interdum tellus, vel molestie lacus. Quisque venenatis leo ut ligula sagittis sagittis. Cras in ante lobortis, porta massa nec, luctus massa. Donec nunc augue, bibendum id congue vel, elementum eu nunc. Donec eget luctus orci. Cras mollis pulvinar mi id sodales. Aenean at orci a ex imperdiet gravida posuere quis neque.
The tools you give them should come preconfigured to stop them hurting themselves, because you already know they will if you don't. It's not hard to go from that knowledge to questioning what it means if the defaults are harmful.
"Privacy" isn't the real issue for me. The reason I don't want all that tracking to happen with my comments plugin is speed.

Disqus is awful because it spins for 8 seconds before you can see any comments. All that time tracking my users and violating their privacy adds up to a terrible user experience for them.

If they could track my users and violate their privacy during the 100ms it aught to take to load comments from a database, that would be fine.

Everybody tracks and violates these days, so it's all just noise at this point. At least they don't pop up their own thing my users need to click on to accept it all.

The important thing is that comments work. And Disqus can't make that happen.
Sadly (in this case) blacktip reef sharks are "Timid and skittish, the blacktip reef shark is difficult to approach and seldom poses a danger to humans unless roused by food."[1]. Happily that means you can swim near them safely, they hang out in Ao Leuk (I think?) on Koh Tao as well.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blacktip_reef_shark
> Thinking about it reminds me of a quantum mechanics prof who once explained the way a physicist would model a person skiing through the forest. The person would be either a sphere or a box, depending on what's most convenient. The trees in the forest would be cylinders or boxes. The person skiing would then be something like a sphere bouncing around through all these cylinders.

This way of thinking is a bit flawed.

Convenience is an important aspect, but it's not the entire reason. A physicist who wants to study how skiers might cause avalanches by modeling/simulation doesn't care about the details of the people they model because that's just not important. For what they want to study, it doesn't matter if they model the human as a sphere or as a real-life model with limbs and so on. It won't affect the grand picture.

On the other hands, a physicist who wants to study how an avalanche would crush a person? Then yes, modeling the limbs and the person's physical properties become much more important.

In modeling, you choose the model that best fits and represents what you aim to study. You start off with a complex system of equations and then you slowly go through and remove the parts that would be irrelevant. You don't need to account for turbulence if you know that you will never reach the high Reynolds numbers that require it. You don't need to model cellular biology if you're just trying to modeling how a piece of tissue stretches.
It allows more substantive and interesting comments to wander upwards and be more easily accessible/visible. I feel it works fine on HN, not sure why you'd want to remove that feature. Not all comments are equal and we shouldn't have to treat them that way.
The best of all possible worlds, in other words.
Post is from February 2018, issue still exists as for today.
Feel free to use what you feel is good for you. But this makes a lot of sense (to me!) for simpler scripts. Imagine cron jobs or other "internal" scripts, maybe things that you launch on a cluster via ansible or other tools for periodic or one shot tasks... things like that.

Virtualenv is "stateful" - you need a) to have it installed on the target system b) to deliver both your script AND the requirements.txt file c) to launch virtualenv d) execute your script via virtualenv.

Far more complex than just "run this script and you're done", right? If an "embedded virtualenv" functionality existed, something like

import virtualenv
virtualenv.install_requirements("asd==1.2.3")
# from there, the software goes on with the requirements actually available

Then my snippet would make no sense.

Of course (but I don't know whether this was the real suggestion) I could evaluate using virtualenv (if available) instead of manually setting the sys.path. But I found that to be a bit more complex (virtualenv could actually be installed with a different Python interpreter since it allows the -p parameter, while pip is generally bound to each specific interpreter).
CSV is on our list; this is a simpler task than JSON due to the absence of arbitrary nesting.
Agreed, even comments from 5 years ago are often just as relevant now, and are often more substantive than more recent ones in the same article (in my experience).
>> The pedestal contemporary people put national identity on is just that, contemporary.

> As opposed to the pedestal people put supra national institutions such as the EU? Rome? Napoleon's Empire? all failed eventually.

>> National identities didn't arise naturally.

> Neither did the European Union. All societies are man made constructs, what your point?

I never claimed large regional authorities were natural, good nor special in any way. But the OP implied that national identities deserved special status or were some how superior. I'm simply pointing out that they aren't special and were once viewed with just as much suspicion as people now view larger political structures.

>> It's only our contemporary bias that tells us that the subordination of the political will of the hamlet to the nation is good and that the subordination of the national will to a continental or regional will is bad.

> Well, the EU is more power concentrated in the hands of fewer people. By nature it will always be less democratic than governance at a smaller scale. And these structures tend to seek even more power as time goes, not less.

This is obviously incorrect. You can have large institutions which are fairly Democratic, (the U.S. House of Representatives) and small institutions which are utterly totalitarian like Rafael Trujillo's Dominican Republic.

> What is better? more tyranny,bureaucracy or more democracy?

I prefer democracy to tyranny. But I contest the implication that centralized authority is inherently less democratic. And I'm not so sure we can assume bureuocracy is bad out of hand.

> Ignoring local cultures and socio-economics specificities by trying to impose arbitrary rules to an entire continent? In that case there will always be winners and losers.

That's pretty vague. There are always winners and losers. Competing nation states create winners and losers. Totalitarian regimes create winners and losers. As does free market capitalism.

You've read a lot into my comment. I do not really have an opinion about the quality of the EU as an institution. That's way beyond my knowledge. But I do contest the misunderstanding that the nation state has been ubiquitous throughout history and that it's some obviously superior socio-political construct.
> charismatic unproductive people

Not to drag politics into this, but, seriously, I think Trump has this category covered quite nicely. The costs are staggering.
I haven’t finished reading this, but what strikes me about the advice in the notes is that much of it is either contradictory or there exist counterexamples to the claims. For example, the reader is encouraged to start building, but is told you also need a good idea and that you can pivot but most good companies don’t start with a pivot. Counterexample: Slack was a pivot. We’re also instructed that you should build something that’s hard to replicate, but also that the thing you build first should be simple. What am I supposed to take away from this? If it’s simple, isn’t it almost surely replicable? Also, Netflix is a good counterexample: they just started with a DVD mail service, and were easily replicable by an incumbent, like Blockbuster. And the advice about not creating a market goes against what sometimes occurs through branding. The original Banana Republic sold “safari clothing”. There was no market for this before Banana Republic. Nor was there a market for energy drinks before Red Bull. I’m told that you should have a cofounder, yet is appears that there’s many examples of successful companies without one (eg Amazon, IKEA). I’m not sure if this appears in the document yet, but another piece of conventional wisedom I’ve heard is that you need to work on your startup full time or else (insert bad thing about you not being committed). But what about Nike, whose founder worked for 5 years as an accountant while he developed the business?

My point is that a lot of the advice I’ve heard about startups in general is framed (intentionally or unintentionally) as a series of directives that will optimize your chances of success. Moreover, no other additional context is provided to help you frame the advice, such that you can tell whether or not it’s applicable or appropriate advice to follow. The lack of context coupled with the existence of so many blatant counterexamples and contradictions prevents the advice from being useful.

(Note: I edited the last paragraph for clarity)
I think I overcomplicated my previous post. Lemme cut back the cruft and simplify. I think CPUs (Specifically AVX512) should implement the following instructions:

1. Barriers and Workgroups -- Scale SIMD UP, not downwards. The variable-length vector (discussed in this article) is backwards to the current programming model. GPU Programmers combine lanes with the concept of a OpenCL workgroup or CUDA Thread Block, and it works pretty well in my experience.

2. Implement AMD GCN-style branching with S_CBRANCH_FORK and S_CBRANCH_JOIN. This will accelerate branching when SIMD-lanes diverge in execution paths.

3. Implement "backwards vpshufb". GPUs can gather or scatter values between lanes, while CPUs can only gather data between lanes (with vpshufb). Intel AVX512 is missing an obvious and very important instruction for high-speed communication between SIMD lanes.
Yes: a GC means the programmer can avoid thinking about object lifetimes and just pretend every object lives forever. The garbage collector is deeply unsafe (as in, bugs may cause memory corruption): if a GC fails to account for even a single pointer somewhere, it might deallocate an object too early, potentially leading to problems like use-after-free.

Additionally, the JVM ensures every read and write to memory has (minimal) synchronisation so that there is no risk of a data race, meaning no undefined behaviour, no matter how wrong the code is. And, even the reads and writes using proper synchronisation (compare-and-swap, etc.) have only one choice: sequential-consistency.

In Rust, a global built-in-to-the-language GC isn't appropriate, and managing object lifetimes properly, with shared memory, is hard. It is thus something that a library has to use `unsafe` for, to assert to the compiler that the programmer has got things right because it is unable to check. Similarly, using synchronised reads/writes everywhere isn't right for Rust, so it is up to the concurrent data structure author to use the right synchronisation (which can be weaker for performance: acquire/release, instead of only SeqCst) just for the rest of the code to be safe: this is also something a compiler can't check.
Most people will not see the logical conclusion of this whole ordeal and will think you are merely being pessimistic.

Pandora's box cannot be shut. TOR and other projects will not be able to delete the information already gathered, backed up and parsed.

People are happy to tell everyone else what they ate, where they went, with whom and what they are thinking about at all times in exchange for nothing.

Society has made it clear that this erosion of privacy is a non issue.

-------------------

ERROR - Value 'privacy' not found.

Sorry, the value you have chosen to uphold is no longer supported in the latest version of civilisation.

Please select another from the whitelist below.
Shouldn't the dark side of the moon have a small atmosphere then?
In my experience, it is slow only on very media heavy sites like Facebook, Youtube etc. That's not going to improve unless there are many more exit nodes and relays. But for most browsing its not painfully slow, although the slight delay is noticeable when compared to a non-Tor browser. However I guess the best way to fight public perception that Tor is a den of illegal activities, as well as foil timing attacks is for more of us to use it for regular browsing.
Take a look at green card priority dates sometime, and consider how many people it takes to push them there.

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal/visa-law0/v...

American citizenship is an extremely valuable commodity in the developing world.
I don't know what he or she meant, but I wrote a comment elsewhere on the thread about a Buddhist perspective that touches on this. Ctrl+f Buddhism.

The tldr is that all our experiences are constructions of our mind. It's our mind that assigns meaning to stuff. Being alive or dead isn't a pre-existing concept, it's something we constructed.

An exercise is to imagine some beings very different from ourselves looking at Earth and not recognizing life. Perhaps because they exist in a different timescale, or they structure data differently. They wouldn't be able to see we dying.
> The main cause of injuries was fights with other incarcerated people

Putting large quantities of aggressive people into confined areas does generally result in violence, yes.

Also, these two YouTube channels are by former prisoners, if you're looking for information from that perspective:

* https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCGPB2ZA4096SESz_VZVzHoA

* https://www.youtube.com/user/FreshOutSeries
What debate?
I don’t think bank account numbers are re-used. So in that case the transaction would just fail. And no one changes phone number in Norway. With a few exceptions of course.
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/rHBdcHGLJ7KvLJQPk/the-logica...
So the majority of the examples proving the claim rely on fiction books and Netflix shows. Well I'm convinced now for sure
Remember those "twitch plays X" streams? How about "Twitch fires cruise-missiles" next? Just hook up the twitch chat to your missile API and get that sweet internet fame.

/s (I really REALLY hope)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19191241

It was discussed
An Interview with Professor Anthony C. Sutton (1980)
The Machine Stops (1909) Is an Omen for Our Technological Age
Use Swagger to Generate API Interface
This mindset can spread to higher levels if it's allowed to. At one point during the dot-com bubble the company I worked for was acquired by one where ad sales and biz dev were granted credit for all income and everything else in the company was considered a loss. This was a _financial media_ company and without fresh content the entire thing would have keeled over immediately, but via appearing to hold the purse things had slid to the point that ads and business development had power over almost all decisions. They bought us because they were trying to move into premium subscription products like we did, but we didn't know how bad it was until we found out that every dollar we brought in was attributed to the business development group and on paper our entire subsidiary was a money hole.

From individual employees up to the C-level divisions they judged everything solely on what was easiest to put into a spreadsheet and it destroyed them in less than a year. Sad to say my hope they were unique was wildly optimistic.
Speech too is power contextually. So is monied interest. So is racial caregorization. So is voting. So is media control. So is historical distribution of resources. So is protest. So is enforcement of property law. Everything is politics, everything is power.

Personally, I think what you see in the world around you is a reaction by people who realized that they don't have power by money (and thus hardly any power by speech) and don't have power by demoray in a broken system stacked against them, and have resorted to whatever other forms of power are possible. And yet still the positions they fight for are ignored because the way they petition for them isn't the right way, ie, they way in which they can be disenfranchised and ignored.
Wood can be very very low carbon compared to concrete as a building material because the wood itself is a carbon sink.
Reality itself is well-defined in that it acts consistently with itself. We as humans don't have a well-defined embedding of this universe into itself. We would need to know the complete underlying rules of physics for that.
Talkshow on Globalism, Globalization and Cultural Marxism
India vs. Pakistan – Cyber War: India Is Winning
It’s not exactly the lazy parser you describe, but Sparser[1] builds filters to exclude json lines/files that can’t contain what you’re looking for, and only parses those that might.

The Morning Paper’s writeup[2] from last year provides a good summary

[1]: http://www.vldb.org/pvldb/vol11/p1576-palkar.pdf
[2]: https://blog.acolyer.org/2018/08/20/filter-before-you-parse-...
There are counter examples to everything, that doesn’t make it bad advice.

Some people smoke cigarettes their whole life and live until old age without ever getting cancer. Should we conclude smoking does not cause cancer just because there are counter examples?

As you said, the advice is meant to maximize the chance of success. It is still not sufficient or without exceptions.

In the end, advice is only valuable if you put it through your own filter and use your own judgement to make the best decision.
> How are you going to play music you've added in the last three years, but not heard for a month, from the "Latin" genre, with two or more stars, using only the file system?

BeOS actually solved this 20 years ago with its file system BFS. Haiku is an open source reimplementation of BeOS that recently progressed from (high quality) alpha releases to its first beta.
according to this article:

> The denser dayside region of hydrogen is still rather sparse, with just 70 atoms per cubic centimeter at 60 000 kilometers above Earth’s surface, and about 0.2 atoms at the Moon’s distance.

At the distance of the moon: 200000 per cubic meter so I think it's a bit higher than you think... of course you don't explicitly mention a height for the spacecraft surfaces...
> People who actually believe in those principles actually try to convince people, and when they can't convince, they listen.

While I agree with the rest, this is just naive. You cant convince those who are don't debate in good faith. You can defeat them or you can convince third parties, but trying to convince these is lost cause.

You cant change them, you can only change environment so that they cant cause much harm.
Here's my response: People acting like absolute fucking idiots can and do frequently fuck things up for everyone else. Which means sometimes we need to put guardrails in place in order prevent them from doing things like say, selling organs to sketchy people or selling blood for quackery.

There was another comment on a prior thread [1] that I'll link here but the gist of it is that if an adverse reaction happens because someone decided to sell their blood to some guy that decided being a vampire would add years to their life, it could seriously affect the amount of blood donors and the people that actually medically depend on said donations.

I'm tired of seeing people on HN excuse snake oil salesman under the guise of 'well they should be allowed to sell or do whatever they want' because this kind of stuff can and does cause actual harm outside of your own limited scope.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19203483
Every competitive swimmer or water polo player pees in the pool. Nobody really cares about it.
Flawed compared to what? Perfect meaning what? Humans are also infamous for never being content due to constantly shifting goalposts. The reason the religious can claim imperfection is they have an "existence proof" of perfection, but I am sceptical if such a proof exists.

Perhaps we can always improve and be better then we were. Which is a bit more of an optimistic statement.
It won't. This negligible smattering of gases would have less of an impact on the moon's orbit than the tidal forces pushing it further away.