skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I disagree that it's a puzzle.

A reasonable person could look at it, and go, okay, so a parenthesized string is made up of some sequence of

( <more balanced parens> )

possibly repeated, to get things like "()()()". i.e., do that check in a loop.

That is, for whatever position you're at, check that the first character is "(". Check that at position+1 there is a balanced parentheses string. Check that at position+1+len(the balanced paren string) there is a ")".

Consume as many of those as you can in your loop; return the consumed data as the "balanced string". Now, this function has to return the string (since our use of it above needs the length to know where the inner string ends). It stops after it can't consume anything further. The whole string is balanced if we consumed everything. That's it.

The stack is implicit here. Yeah, you have to know recursion, but that's the thing about interview questions: at some point you have to know something.

I asked elsewhere, and it hasn't been answered in this thread: if this is a bad question, what would make it a good one? I would love to see what the author's idea of a good question is.

For the real-world applicability of this: I deal primarily w/ HTTP APIs. Sometimes, that requires me to make use of certain HTTP headers, and a great deal of web "frameworks" out there do not parse HTTP headers; they just give you back the raw key-value map as strings or somesuch. Several of HTTP's headers are context-free. (They require at least a stack to parse.)
I can't remember the context of the quote well enough - but I wonder if he was writing about the same moment.

It was something about a guy complaining that Bukowski had misrepresented a moment between them in an earlier work to which Bukowski simply acknowledges as essentially correct, but that - he is the hero of his shit.

If you remember the doc it'd be great to know what it is. I would love to see the live action complement to that moment.
Its all a matter of line drawing, and where you draw that line is also an opinion. I do agree with you that Anti-Vaxxers are actively causing harm to the world, because i understand what science and facts are.

What about Flat Earthers? Again, science and fact obviously prove they are wrong but are they causing any harm by sharing their non-fact based opinion? What about religion? Christianity? Islam? Scientology? What about abortion?

I do agree with you but i also agree with the parent comment, the underlying issue is, do you trust Google to know where to draw the line?
Now hold on...

Are they really being demonetized being conservative? Or are they being demonetized for being racist, bigoted, transphobic, etc?
I'm not saying that's illogical or irrelevant given how the market works, but... how is this sane when considered from the benefit of society. A failing company managed to recoup some funds investors were expecting to lose by ripping off a healthy sustainable company. Why should we care about reimbursing investors like this when the whole value they add to the free market is an ability to accurately predict (and assist) in a company's growth. If that company tanks they failed at their job and shouldn't get a subsidy to continue doing their job by handicapping a healthy company.
Even if you or your children are vaccinated you still benefit from herd immunity. Not all vaccines are effective in everyone.
Having recently watched The Patent Scam, I wish more companies would follow suit here and exit EDOT, maybe then people would wake up and demand that these corrupt judges are removed from the bench!

edit: correction made per child comment.
Narrator: He hadn’t. And back at the model home, Michael was dealing with a physics problem of his own.
I think you've nailed it. Unfortunately, I think those Microsoft employees are going to see a different reaction from their management.
> If they disallowed the videos, it'd be different.

How so? It is a private service.

These are the video types not allowed on Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/yt/about/policies/#community-guideli...
Why have antivaxxers host 20 second pix in their videos of kids who died of measles, mumps, chicken pox, polio, scarlet fever, whooping cough, diptheria (one inserted at random by youtube - like ads)
They do it for tobacco
Volunteers Get Malaria on Purpose So We’ll Know How to Fight It
Endorsed by Doris Buffett, the Sister of Warren Buffett
> Anonymize the data

In our world of Big Data, where it's easy to combine many disparate databases, effectively anonymizing data is also a very hard problem to solve.
When was the planet at equilibrium? This is not a rhetorical question and I don't advocate for the destruction (or indifference to destruction) of the environment. But what is the natural state of the planet?
Its not a problem of time. Plenty have been born into wealth that never had to commit themselves to anything to survive. Anything they did was self motivated of their own accord - they could have lived and died a consumer of an endless stream of money.

Its a problem of convincing the society that its not anyones place to dictate how someone else decides to spend that time. There will be massive resistance to any economic model other than the established scarcity based capitalist regime enshrined in most of the west for the last 150-200 years. Trying to ensure the fruits of the societies labor that led to that automation are properly apportioned to said society will be a long uphill battle against people of substantial greed that see automation not as a liberating force for humanity but as a source of permanent, infinite wealth allocation and centralization.
I'd like to think you are right, I am much more comfortable with greed than ideology from the press.
I aboslutely see your point, but is the opposite equally unsettling? Today's headline could just have well have been "YouTube makes millions in advertising promoting anti-vax views," and we'd all dutifully gather for a group hate on Youtube.

Heck, I think it was just 2 days ago that the headline was "Facebook allows ads to target people with interest in Nazis." Same idea.
Yeah the age is probably the news here. I remember older teens (HS junior) doing the same.. but 12 .. that's young. Kudos to him.

Hopefully mother nature decided he would be the chosen one to make fusion reactor net positive
A better example might be Carly Fiorina.
Can't say I even agree with that.

These questions don't just manifest in a vacuum. And if they are worthwhile asking, then IMO (and stressing IMO) it doesn't matter if they're rhetorical or directly interrogative in delivery or purpose.

Asserting otherwise feels like an excercise in projecting.
Ironically that's postmodernism for you.
What did he 'do' specifically?

There was a thread specifically for politics, loosely associated with his name, and he didn't proactively ban enough people who you don't agree with?

(If you read the article, he didn't defend any Nazis. He said that he never saw any specifically Nazi content, yet a bunch of people, yourself now included, accused him of enabling it.)

Tolerance goes for people you disagree with, too. In fact, it's only actually tolerance when it applies to those you disagree with or don't like.
> It's become so ubiquitous that the nerds have started complaining about how the tourists have ruined it.

1993. The year of Eternal September

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September
The problem I see is what if there actually were a problem? Keep in mind I solidly believe that there is not.

But there have been many drugs with serious side effects pulled from the market some of them after regulators and drug companies behaving badly.

Is YouTube pulling them because of a sense of responsibility to open fair scientific inquiry? Or are they doing it as a PR stunt to distract from other bad behavior?
Meanwhile I just made a NiCr wire glow white with an ATX PSU. The race . is . on.
There's an interesting meta-twist here… YouTube is trying to prevent the spread of dangerous "viral ideas" that enable the spread of dangerous physical viruses. The ideas are arguably a part of this health crisis as much as the viruses are. So this is a sort of "meme vaccination" to slow the spread of those ideas.

Imagine if there were YouTube channels in the 19th century promoting the idea that surgeons washing their hands causes surgical complications. What would be the appropriate response?
With the way many people are making a career out of Youtube these days, they might as well have "robbed them of their platform".

While in this particular case it might be "justified", imho it still sets a very problematic precedent. Because now YouTube has pretty much ascended itself as some kind of arbiter to decide as to what constitutes as "monetizable opinions" and "unmonetizable opinions".

The potential long-term consequences coming out of this are not that difficult to imagine and quite scary.
They haven't decided that people can't see this content though. The content that is already there is staying up, new anti-vax content can be uploaded and will (likely, i can't know for sure i suppose) be suggested if you are watching another anti-vax video. They have only demonitized the content, deciding they wont pay money for anti-vax content.
It's a very sad state of affairs.

The problem is partly caused by the medical establishment failing at their job and a healthy dose of hubris, followed by a campaign to shame people into submission. Now that shaming has failed (as shaming people into submission historically has), they're deploying soft power, in the form of censoring these people.

I have trouble as seeing this as anything but a disaster: Google has validated the claims of anti-vaxxers.

There's just no way to cut it besides that anti-vaxxers are right -- the medical establishment doesn't really have an answer, and is prepared to use force rather than debate the topic. This is evidence for the anti-vaxxer's longstanding claim that medicine was wrong, knew it, and was perpetuating a cover-up. They've just been censored by one of the largest corporations on the planet.

Setting aside if you care about speech, if you care about children and rigorous medicine, rather than enabling the egotism and cargo-culting of the medical profession, this is bad.
If I remember right a YT channel needs at least 4k subscribers now as of last year change to qualify for monetization on your channel.

So I'm surprised there's channels big enough which are dedicated to this anti vax thing to be monetized in the first place.
Federal judges aren't the sort that get voted out.
They're appointed for life.

The degree and direction of corruption within a judge bear a striking resemblance to the president who appoints them.
In turn, anti-vaxxers are killing people whose immune system is compromised by a variety of circumstances (cancer treatment, vaccine allergies, diseases etc). It also doesn't stop the fact that viruses are not some static class. They can mutate, which makes this line of thinking especially dangerous if they start mutating to get around the original vaccine.

This is before we even talk about vaccine efficiency. In the worst case scenario, evolution means we start wiping out vast amounts of the human population because of a growth in previously preventable diseases.
It doesn't help that the Army's own PR for the specific contract emphasized increasing the "lethality" of American soldiers.
So how do you get the other actors to concede and play nice?
Labor is a negative word? We labor every day, our actions are labor, we set out upon labors, and most of us are labor.

How Orwellian would it be to try to avoid calling a pig what it is because the word describing it makes you feel bad? Software development, regardless of how much you want to shout from the rooftops how much you like it, is labor. You trade your time for money to someone else who wants code. We are damn fortunate that wealth is attracted to code enough to provide this small segment of the working class as much luxury as it can reap from its labors.
There are many people who cannot receive vaccinations because they are immunocompromised. Herd immunity protects them. Anti-vaxxers threaten them. The concern is not merely that people start becoming anti-vax
> it doesn't require a haunted git repository to fix it.

lol, thanks for that.
Jane Goodall: How Ending Poverty and Protecting the Environment Go Hand in Hand
Nature is and never has been equilibrium. Nature is chaos.
Remember that multi-polar worlds tend to have far more wars. Even the bi-polar Cold War was highly dangerous. Having a good single block is preferable.
It’s always been true, but it used to require someone with resources and like minded people to start it. Now everyone is in the game, with predictably unpredictable results. Worse, with bits and content farms it’s possible to distort the perception of reality and popular opinion at the individual level. Governments enjoy unprecedented power to erode trust at home and abroad. People are understandably giving up and turning away, while,other get lost in a deep dark hole.

How do we stop this without making matters even worse? I want to say “educate people” yet that’s a pat response. Some people won’t be educated, it takes a lot of time, and how do we even agree on what a good education is? To me it’s critical thinking, STEM, and meeting other people. To others it’s teaching their kids that people like me are the agents of the devil, that fossils are a test from god or a plot by the CIA. How can that gap be bridged without someone trampling all over the rights of the other? How can people in such separate relaities not undermine each other or seek to use the system against each other, only to see it turned back on themselves?

How many times have you read a comment on a board and your first thought was, “That has to be a troll/shill/bot”? How often have you just given up on a discussion because the signal:noise ratio was intolerable? I know my answer is “too many times to count.” I worry that it means bad actors are winning, that I’ve fallen under the spell of Oh Dearism.
As a Microsoft employee, I never grant them to represent me. And also I don't support their demand.
That wouldn't be smart, because then they'd still have a physical presence in the district. The sooner they can lock the door and terminate the lease, the sooner they get the benefit of not being located there.
> Immunization though, is a matter of public health

Not necessarily. Human-to-human transmission isn't the primary vector (if even possible) for a lot of diseases we get vaccinated for, e.g. yellow fever, Japanese encephalitis, lyme disease, tetanus, shingles, rabies, etc.
A Bayesian analysis would have to include all the decisions where FB was a good steward of user data. The events reported in the news are a very small fraction of the possible times that FB could have done wrong.

Not that I'm defending FB, but your attempt to lend credence to your statement with a smart sounding approach was undercut by selecting a superficial and biased prior.
I've been down the flat earth rabbit hole a few times, and find it equal parts hilarious and disturbing. I'm not sure it doesn't affect anyone though.. Critical thought and actively avoiding confirmation bias are real issues and when adults present arguments [e.g. to children] that effectively abandon these objectives, well.. that might be generally bad. I'd love to have a "crazy tinfoil hat" filter I could turn on or off.
> it’s the fact that our lawmakers are too cowardly to pass some laws around the issue.

There are laws on the books in the U.S.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;"

The solution to bad speech is more speech, not less.
> Scripts are a whole other question.

I disagree entirely.
What Makes a Great Conversation?
What happens if YouTube demonetizes channels with people smoking or vaping, because it's unhealthy, and encourages young people to take up the habit when their favorite YouTubers are doing or recommending it? It's not subjective, smoking is deadly, addictive, and it affects others in close proximity, so why should someone be able to recommend their favorite vaping accessories and be monetized?

I'm not saying YouTube made the right or wrong decision, but is it that much of a stretch to go from demonetizing anti-vax channels to smoking or alcohol channels, and if not, at what point do they stop?
$28 mil is in the order of a year's development on a large AAA title. That's quite some opportunity cost.
This is literally the worst argument I've read on Hacker News, and that is really saying something. They didn't in any way validate the claims of the anti-vaxxers. The medical community has repeatedly given the answers, these people are just too dumb, selfish, or gullible to believe them.
Unfortunately that's not democracy. It's anarchy for a good cause. In democracy we vote together and then the most-popular thing happens.
It can be done in a way that show massive visible progress and impact. Just have to fill plenty of tickets for doing plenty of changes. Adding new features that are already present, sometimes renaming the file that had them if necessary. Fixing bugs, possibly freshly reintroduced because the existing fix was purposefully ignored or removed.

Do you know that progress report and commit messages don't even have to match what was actually done or committed? The project is your playground.
It doesn't work that way. No vaccine is 100% effective, and not every child is medically eligible to be vaccinated. Getting these diseases out of general circulation is important.
But if you are dealing drugs, and the judge says to hand over the funds, you better believe that no amount of "blockchain" will keep those funds under your control.
Why should a private company be forced to publish opinions it disagrees with?
I think philanthropy is great. It's the tax-advantage of large-scale philanthropy that I object to.

The super rich should give anyway, even without the 40% break.
Then people would do a different thing. We aren't locked in forever to all decisions.
I grew up in Latin America, so I guess I can give you some context about some of this stuff. I am not going to defend the entertainment value of the movie, because I personally found it pretty boring (I guess the voyeuristic value isn't there for me, having grown up in a similar environment).

> It sets the tone for the movie’s aesthetic and hollows it out, reducing Cuarón’s worthwhile intentions and evident passions to vain gestures.

The assumption here is that Cuarón should've made the film about Cleo, by giving her a voice and explaining to us her point of view... when maybe Cuarón might be trying to show us how he was unable to really understand this person who had a very rich life outside of his world. If Cuarón's experience was always defined by a very simple interface (that of the "sirvienta" or "mucama"), then it's understandable that his version of her is a muted - one could say desaturated - version of the real person.

> ...and then the family claiming they love the maid, it just isn't believable given how they've ignored her and mostly treated her like crap.

Most families' relationships with their maids is super weird. My family was never affluent enough to afford one, but I had plenty of friends who had a "sirvienta" (the Argentine equivalent of Cleo's role). To the kids, the sirvienta was a second mother, to the parents the sirvienta was a friend, psychiatrist and help. All of them would talk fondly of their sirvientas as if they were part of the family... to an extent. If a sirvienta falls in hard times (be it health, money or otherwise), the family doesn't usually offer to help.

In other words, as long as the sirvienta is in the house, she's part of the family. The moment she leaves, she's just an stranger they didn't really care that much for. Very strange.

> Speaking of crap, the dog shit. Why the hell was that so important to Cuarón that he features it, what, a dozen times?

I think this is Cuarón's rendering of the kind of things that imprint on you as a kid. I remember my first time walking around La Boca, in Buenos Aires, after living abroad for a few years. The amount of dog shit on the sidewalk was staggering. I was surprised, even though I grew up less than an hour away from there. I could see myself remembering the dog shit had I grown up in La Boca.
My line is merely understanding and allowing others to protest things they find hurtful and believing they are valid in doing so. I never said I shared this view and I'm concerned you took my words so far from their face value.
Staples does, but indirectly. Your stuff goes into a lock box. Does it get shredded? No idea.
The laws would be for requiring vaccinations, not for silencing anti-vaxxers.
This is great. I always wished I could see front pages from the past.

The only downside is that getting bored of the current front page is sometimes the only reason I get off HN when I'm procrastinating and this makes it easier to prolong that. :)
I thought Maven was mostly for scanning vast amount of collected non-live zoomed out satellite imagery (think of finding where North Korea hides missiles), rather than live killer drone use case.
Federal judges are appointed by the President and serve for life. There are possibly corruption problems in the Eastern district of Texas, but the root problems are the patent laws themselves, and its the elected members of congress who can fix that.
It takes many hours to shred and not worth my time. I have a shredder for the rare cases I need something shredded NOW.
That's not an option that you have.
They enforce the contract on the blockchain, but that's pretty much irrelevant, since breaking a contract usually doesn't involve anything a blockchain solution would control.

As an example, fradulent fish is a huge problem in the fisheries and food industry. At every step of the supply chain, there is temptation to substitute expensive for cheap fish. Most Chilean sea bass you buy isn't actually Chilean sea bass, for example.

A lot of people are hyping blockchain as a solution to this serious problem, not appreciating the fact that the technology cannot actually tell different types of whitefish apart. I really would like a solid counterexample where blockchain actually would help, but I've never heard one.
Postmodernism does not mean "all truths are valid". Foucault was often unclear in his writing but he was clear on this.
I think there should be concern that surveillance is also used by the military on leaders in progressive movements, also. Military force has been used against domestic social movements in the near past and possibly continues to be used in the present.
This is cool, thank you! Would “days” be a good name as it allows you to browse a set of days?

It doesn’t seem like posts you’ve hidden from the front page are reflected here. I guess they don’t really need to be since this is more archival in nature.
I got 173 lol
Exactly. I don't think that a company that is supposed to be just providing a service to publish your videos should be unilaterally deciding what they like and what they don't even if it majority opinion.

Free speech is there exactly to protect minority opinions because sometimes it happens people in minority are right.

Every major movement started as minority, by definition. Free speech protection is there to make sure we can have smart people notice a problem and then express their concern and be allowed to voice it so that if they can gather enough movement to make a change there can be a good change.

It is sad that this can sometimes lead to aberrations like anti-vac movement but it would be a horrible idea to argue this is a reason to throw free speech protection out. Instead we should demand lawmakers to grow a spine and recognize there is no basis for anti-vac movement and enough is enough. Sadly, vote counting is much more important nowadays than sound medical advice.
I never claimed to make a position. I merely said that maybe a position against the military is not entirely unreasonable.