skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My advice: see if you can rewire your internal rewards. That feeling is the acknowledgement that you learned something.

The fact our ancient rewards system considers it embarrassing is of little importance.
And they are opening a new store very close to the existing stores, just out of the district. So people will only have 1 store to go to, but it will be pretty close. I too think this may draw some attention from people who live there who may demand a change. I'd bet that most people would care more about a convenient Apple store over some corrupt lawyers and judges making a money grab.
You can choose to not use Facebook and Google services, and you can use ad/tracker blocking browser plugins, and null their domains in your /etc/hosts file. That would deny about 98% of their activity as far as you are concerned.

You can't really control what your friends are telling them about you though.

Personally, I've just about opted out of the entire internet except for work, email, and a few web sites that I read regularly. The flotsam is just too thick to be worth the bother.
Actually federal law enforcement has had a long preference for 10mm auto, and its shortened successor the .40 S&W. In particular the FBI HRT and SWAT still use it despite a history of over penetration.
How to Immediately Start Closing More Freelancing Deals
It does not seem to make sense. Google has access to each and any Gmail account, and it does not matter whether you login in from your home machine, or do this at work (on Google's premises).
I like doing this, and find it fits reasonably well with a functional programming style: it is to `switch` what ternaries are to `if/then/else` (i.e. a nice way to select values; not necessarily nice for executing statements).
"A Philosophy of Software Design" by Ousterhout is my favourite of the last few years.

It's a shortish book but there is stuff in it I'm still unpacking on the third read through and a lot of stuff I sorta instinctively knew but it's nice to see someone else thinks the same.
This is a question I asked myself a couple of years ago and it has led me down a path of intense self-reflection and searching. Unfortunately, it's not something that you can "think" your way to an answer, not entirely anyway.

To save you the pain of my journey (although perhaps the pain is a necessary prerequisite?) I can tell you that what has worked for me is engaging in Mindfulness and having sessions with an expert in Transactional Analysis. Transactional Analysis teaches you to realize you are not just one person all of the time but instead have multiple "Ego States" that you will move through depending on various circumstances. TA has deep scientific grounding and I have found it the only way to explain myself to myself clearly. Understanding TA (with the help of a therapist) can give you some explainations as to why you think, feel and do the things you do.

There is a LOT more to all this but I encourage you to read a couple of books and perhaps reach out to a therapist that specializes in TA for a couple of introductory sessions and see if it works for you.

- Mindfulness: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Mindfulness-practical-guide-finding...

- TA Today: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Today-New-Introduction-Transactiona...
I disagree :) It's easier for me to look at an object and its contents and see where it is referenced. I think switch statements are ugly. I think if/else blocks are ugly. I prefer boolean statements when possible, although definitely not nested ternaries.

I'm sure I'll get flamed, but I really liked this:

const getPosition = position =>
({
first: 'first',
second: 'second',
third: 'third'
}[position] || 'infinite');
People are over complicating what a *Blockchain" really is.

All a Blockchain is, is a public, append only database. That's it.

And no, it does not require "proof of work". People have released lots of Blockchains that do not have proof of work. They might even use a central authority to sign their blockchain transactions.

Public append only databases have existed for a long time, and are quite useful.

Someone else gave the example of git. Yes git is a Blockchain. Really.

There are a lot of reasons to use a public append only database, as opposed to a private database, hidden behind a central authority.
This is why it took Microsoft 20 years to write 'runas.' Privilege elevation is easy, privilege-shedding is hard, and probably magnitudes more difficult when the OS didn't grow up with it like Unix has.
Just add "has voted" as a bonus achievement in the social score system, maybe along with "has voted for the right candidate".
Hi,

The following book is a book of practices that will guide you towards reclaiming your true self over time:

https://www.newmessage.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/books/STK...
That’s not true, thanks to recent precedent:

https://www.krcl.com/articles/patently-unpredictable-patent-...

> [T]he Federal Circuit in In re Cray rejected the Eastern District of Texas’ expansive four-factor test and set forth three requirements for determining whether a defendant has a “regular and established place of business” in the district: (1) there must be a physical place in the district; (2) it must be regular and established; and (3) it must be the place of the defendant.
"However, this system is vulnerable to a very simple threat: a dishonest seller can make a copy of a real bottle with a token, fill it with wine of lower quality, and either steal you..."

The argument around “someone that doesn’t care about tokens” is weak because that applies to any authenticity solution.

The idea behind the authenticity guarantees would be that every step along the way, you add a record that the object has passed through your step. Otherwise I agree this won’t work.

If someone adds a record, but does fill the bottle with cheaper wine, the first person that catches them will blacklist that actor.
Ask HN: What questions aren't we asking?
Bacteria, plants, and animals can do only so much. They can solve basic problems. But they can't solve problems of building spaceships like us because they have limits to their "minds" - because I'm guessing they don't ask those types of questions in the first place?

I wonder what our limits are. What are the boundaries of problems we humans just don't have the grace of asking about, and therefore even solve?

In Wikipedia, under the topic of 'new mysterianism', there's a quote cited in Steven Pinker's book, "How the mind works", where he writes, "The brain is a product of evolution, and just as animal brains have their limitations, we have ours. Our brains can't hold a hundred numbers in memory, can't visualize seven-dimensional space and perhaps can't intuitively grasp why neural information processing observed from the outside should give rise to subjective experience on the inside. This is where I place my bet, though I admit that the theory could be demolished when an unborn genius—a Darwin or Einstein of consciousness—comes up with a flabbergasting new idea that suddenly makes it all clear to us."

What questions aren't we asking?
This seems like a solvable problem. Ignore elements that have display: none, visibility: hidden, or opacity: 0. Do fuzzy text matching if you must. If you know that they'll never put just "Sponsored" on the real ads, ignore anytime you find that string.
I'd argue that moral ambiguity is necessary if you want to write people believably because all people are morally ambiguous. Either way, I don't think believable characters are necessary.

I recently read a pair of Saramago novels - Blindness and Seeing - that don't contain believable characters. They're all caricatures. The novels still work, and they're still acclaimed.

I have two perspectives on judging the quality of literature:

1. What's important about a novel is its style. Every story has been told so quality is a question of how it is told. Attributes like "realistic characters" or "realistic plot" are meaningless: what matters is the nuts and bolts of how your novel is constructed - from diction to sentence structure to the overarching structure of the whole thing. Keep in mind - I'm not arguing for a universal style guide, I'm arguing that a person's opinions about literature should be based on their opinions about style.

2. Quality is subjective - there's no such thing as a good novel, just a novel that you like. From this perspective, a novel can be said to be good if lots of people liked it over some period of time, but there's no "theory of quality," just the weight of opinions and time.

From this perspective, whether Stoner lives up to the hype is a question of whether the hype endures. We'll see. I wouldn't bet either way but I'm glad of the hype. Without it, I wouldn't have read the novel, and I enjoyed it.
Even other developed nations often have some form of cost-sharing, I think having some small charge helps offset administrative costs and prevents people from going to the doctor for every cold.

What we have right now with deductibles and co-insurance is ludicrous though, that shit needs to go.
This is an amazingly comprehensive project. What about your architecture lets your support so many frameworks?
Oh yes, very occasionally it's been an ad, or at least mass media output - even when I recall who posted it it's hard to find.

They probably already record every item displayed on screen (and how long for, and whether my cursor hovered it, etc.) so a list of items I saw (on any device) in the chronological order I saw them should just be a simple db lookup away.
1117 pages for millions of lines of code doesn't seem too bad, relatively speaking
Rich friends in high school bragging about buying Cisco stock.
Shouldn't the escape velocity be way less when firing from moon to earth ?
It’s amazing many people in the states don’t get how having everyone contribute via taxes would lower prices for everyone. Not to mention it’s kind of ridiculous anyways to have a middle-man company taking a slice of payments that could be used to treat someone else.
Obligatory mention that he spent 10 years writing a 1000+ page book of nonsense called A New Kind of Science that was basically about how great he is and how everyone else is an idiot: http://bactra.org/reviews/wolfram/
It's not just about productivity, people...
> Developers can’t easily go back to where they were right

> before an interruption. They need to get into the mindset

> for development and then slowly trace back to where they

> left off. And every fellow developer knows that.

I used to think like that too, but after 10 years programming in many environments, now I'm inclined to disagree. If I cannot refocus immediately after interruption - I know I'm doing something wrong. Maybe the thing is too complex and must be cut down to smaller pieces, maybe I didn't keep enough notes or thinking through - anyhow nowadays I cannot work without a clear understanding of what simple piece of what complex piece I'm doing and where I've written down the other pieces I should do next.
I would agree with others who say it depends on the school and the student.
The most important thing to note about bootcamps is that their "Learn to code in N weeks" is an exaggerated sales pitch. No bootcamp alone can get you job ready in that time, in sort of the same way that doing a CS degree but doing basically no coding modules will not make you very hireable (as an engineer).
The bootcamp students who do well are those who understand that the course simply fast-tracks you through the first stages of learning, and gives you strong and useful tools to learn further. These are only strong and useful if you acknowledge this and decide to use them and keep improving (maybe by filling in the CS theory which as another poster noted, is missing from bootcamp curriculum).
Things never got so bad for me that I «lost faith in the industry», but I definitely had the same reaction to F# as you did.

It just makes programming so much more fun — all the tedium is gone, it feels like every character you write is actually important.
Bizarre Open Source Licenses
You can repeat it all the times you want, but it it is still a shortsighted view.

“A database and a contract”... but who owns the database? And who enforces the contract? And who owns the actual data?

Blockchain provides satisfactory answers to all those problems.

I agree 100% with the article in that blockchain is being ‘applied’ to a whole bunch of places that don’t need it. That doesn’t mean that it can’t work well in many other (legal!) scenarios.
Mind elaborate a bit more? The title sounds interesting, do you have to pick up another language in order to gain from the book?
traditional money can be readily stolen via taxation and inflation. Digital fiat can be frozen arbitrarily and is not private. So it has not worked.
The ignorance about how other countries do it extends to proponents of various public healthcare plans, as well. For example, I was surprised to find out that a lot of people have recently become convinced that "Medicare for All" (i.e. single payer) is how things are done in all developed countries other than US, and that public option is some kind of conspiracy to cheat them of having the same.
That's why I said "intermediary attestations".

I did not miss the interface between real world and blockchain. I did not claim that the records would be 100% accurate. What I'm saying is, when audited and we discover that someone provided bad data, we know who that was.

That's how fraud claims work in general. Having a nicely packaged up list of who attested to what is nice. That's my point.
I surely was when I worked at an insurance company. It actually enabled me to build my chops and end up getting a dream job at a startup.

If you do get the opportunity to slack off at work, make sure you put it to good use, especially because they might find out one day.
The EFF explains it well in the other link. It is the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 56. I quoted it twice. The Eastern District of Texas requires you to ask permission to file summary judgement, which the judge then can deny without explanation or reasoning. As such, while the rule says you "may move for summary judgement", this is not permitted in this court. It also says you get to hear the reason when the judge denies it. This you also do not get, as the judge will deny your ability to ask for it and the reason out of hand, and without explanation.

So we can understand that the first line of rule 56 is a lie in the eastern district of texas.
Uh, no it’s not. You think they happen less often in Russia? Syria? Venezuela?
What Cancer Taught Me about the US-UK Healthcare Debate
moderately sized database, pixels on a screen
Ask HN: Best Practices to Combat Data Harvesting / Browser Fingerprinting?
I did for a number of years, mainly as an SSH client, and for web-based stuff. The automatic OS updates are great.

A noted limitation is that there's no good X11 story. The new Linux subsystem looks very interesting, but it only works on some hardware, and you'll have to do heavy research before buying to figure out if your new Chromebook works.

All that said, I'm thinking of moving away from it. Using Chromebooks for everything requires trusting Google a lot, and because of their various recent behaviors, I'm willing to do that less and less these days.
We are not talking about "most" sane, reasonable companies like Google, Samsung, etc. Apple is historically known for being litigatious, in addition to being the most litigated today:

https://www.pcworld.com/article/262202/apple_vs_a_pl_tech_co...
I see it similarly. Also to put it in perspective, most softwares - especially in commercial settings - are just presented from this money generating point of view or even in a way that pursues the user to take action on something, i.e. almost deceiving. Combining it with Wolfram's bio makes the software a bit more human. ;) That said, I'm rarely interested in reading anyone's bio in book form, not sure if one exists for/from him.
Sophisticated landmines do have decent target discriminators to reduce false positives with respect to the targets they are intended for.
Point 3 though. At some point how can you be so demure? Sometimes people are just stupid and wrong and need to get checked. Some guy working for a year getting nothing done and pretending like its some other problem than what it actually is needs to be forcefully briefed on their ignorance not 'hrmm well you see we tried it this way'.
Can a Set of Equations Keep U.S. Census Data Private?
well the original idea was exactly that: subvert the government by making legal enforcement of (some) contracts redundant.
lots of research about the subject lots https://duckduckgo.com/?q=pattern+matching+compilation&atb=v...

David Nolen publicly used some paper about optimized PM
Ironically, that's precisely how a lot of old Z80 and 6502 programs managed conditional execution. We used to call it a 'jump table'.
If someone is interested in Functional Programming, here are the books which I highly suggest everyone to read:

https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-functional-programming-P...

https://www.amazon.com/Structure-Interpretation-Computer-Pro...

https://www.amazon.com/Programming-Haskell-Graham-Hutton/dp/...
I see this in my step mother. My family isn't very high in social standing, but she has a nursing degree and a long well paying career, better than anyone else in my family. Now that I have a CS degree with similar pay, she pays me respect but still tangentially riffs on things she only half understands.
Why I Believe in Cell-Free Biology
>There are computation devices more powerful than the Turing machine, which is why we have complexity classes

Equivalent meaning computability, not complexity. The two machines can simulate each other (even w/ exponential slowdown) then it's equivalent.

> cannot be simulated efficiently classically

Efficiency isn't really the point. The OP is suggesting there's a literal wall which makes something impossible to understand. This would require a computational behavior that cannot be programmed as a turing machine.

> To falsify any Turing model, you need to answer the question: what cannot be done by any given machine?

Correct. The answer is that a turing machine can't decide a turing-complete decision problem, so hypercomputation is achieved by equipping a turing machine with an oracle for a turing-complete problem. This actually leads to a hierarchy that is each strictly more powerful than the previous ones by using oracles for problems that are "more undecidable" so to speak (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arithmetical_hierarchy )

Either way, we have no evidence that suggests theres a natural process that lives higher up on the arithmetical hierarchy. An example of a physical process that would fulfill this criteria: suppose there were a type of particle that only sometimes collide with each other, and it turns out that they only collide not just by running into each other but also when the sum of their velocities encode halting turing machines, otherwise the particles pass right through each other. A classical turing machine cannot decide the halting problem, so it's impossible to simulate a system with these particles because you never know if they will collide or not.
“Expected Threat” (Football)
Never had FB account. Never will. I saw this on day one. Not using FB is insufficient. Privacy tools are insufficient. Gov't involvement is insufficient. Make them "eat noise." I don't know if it will work, but we're running out of options quickly.

https://www.newsweek.com/facebook-tracking-you-even-if-you-d...
Isn't it just weird that we can't vote for that issue without getting every other issue the person also wants, like why must issues be lumped in to person-bundles. It's just broken.

Personally I'm stuck with voting for "the party not dismantling the NHS who stand a chance of getting in".

Maybe in my kids lifetime we'll get proper PR at the national level (UK).
There are big gaps in your understanding of what H1B is (it is dual intent). Most folks on that visa go on to become greencard holders and citizens. Several of them go on to create jobs (directly or indirectly).

And it is not like H1Bs are handed out like candy. There are caps, lottery, wage requirements, 6 months of advertising etc. (sure there is abuse like with anything else which should be addressed).

Also ironic that you come to a thread discussing how things like these rip apart families (and work against women) and try to take a higher moral position.

Your stand of, "I support immigration" doesn't sound sincere because you seem to imply that if we reclassify H1B to immigration-visa you will suddenly be supportive of it.
YouTube to limit ads for creators whose videos receive 'inappropriate comments'
As others have said, hollow points do cause more harm, but it’s a physical side effect of trying to stop the round in the target.

If the energy of the round wasn’t expended into the target, it would simply shoot through and continue into the next target behind, which is the absolute worst case.

You may end up only injuring the intended target but killing an innocent behind it.
https://www.fretflip.com | An interactive guitar fretboard tool to make shareable scale and chord charts. I'm using it as a common place for learning guitar and bass. Opened it up for others to store their own charts, some are using it for education. Still non-profit but glad to share.
Does anyone have any opinions on "Uncle Bob's" Clean Code [0] book? I read bits and pieces of it but never sat down and gave it a thorough read.

[0] https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/clean-code/978013608323...
Do you hide tweets liked by the people you follow? Shadow notifications? "In case you've missed it" sections?

After a few refreshes of my Twitter homepage in a short time span, I did a little research: I've edited the CSS to make the distinction of "liked" tweets more obvious. Over 50% of "fresh" content turned out to be likes by the people I follow that are in no way chronological.

You can fight it... for now, but I assume not for long. I've stopped relying on Twitter for that same reason I've stopped relying on Facebook.
As opposed to the usual rigorously meritocratic VC funding decision, where they scan the application for the words "Stanford" and "Harvard" instead of "Joe Montana."
The best use case for blockchain is smart contracts. Guaranteed continuous liquidity without a counter-party (bancor/uniswap), self collateralize loans (maker), stable coins without counter party risk (maker again), etc.
Yes, there are many such use cases, and it would be impossible to predict what they are (what are you going to do, live word segmentation in the browser with any reliability across all languages in the world?). At the LDC, we do character-based annotation on words, which, since it includes highlighting individual characters, means each character has its own span (this is actually something I've seen done for wildly unrelated reasons on other sites, with spans, divs, etc). I'm sure there are millions of sites doing things like hiding/showing text that's next to other text for a million different reasons.
Security is an economic choice of the producing firm for the most part, and there are plenty of certifications and degrees that employers can discriminate on but do not. They even might have the security training and still fuck up.

Reality is, most customers do not want to pay the price for extra security, other than the CYA (Cover Your Ass) kind and it shows.