skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> But I don't get your point about a missing tag.

At least in my experience, interfaces that use tags (Gmail, Google Docs prior to the Drive upgrade) end up being a massive global heap that make it impossible to find anything. Tags help but only marginally, and only when I'm very selective about applying them. When a tag becomes too big it, it's just the soup problem all over again. In my experience with Gmail/Docs I usually find things via search, or not at all (and unfortunately more often than not the latter).

You could argue the same problem occurs in hierarchical folders. But I think one major takeaway I've had is that defaults matter: hierarchical folders normalize a usage where you categorize everything. Therefore, I can find utility bills for an apartment I moved out of some years ago, with about four clicks through my folder tree. As another example, a while back I was asked for my daughter's birth certificate when checking in for a flight. No problem, five clicks and I've got it on my phone. In my experience this is hopeless in a tagging system unless search is very good or the tags are hierarchical and very granular, and at least so far I've never been able to develop the discipline to do this.
You're grasping onto ideological straws. Both governments and corporations have to manage their finances, together with non-financial aspects of reality, in order to survive. Smart corporations don't only look at the bottom line on their account sheets.
definitely worked pretty well so far
DMD 2.085 Realeased
Maybe, but you have to specifically opt-in to the nightly toolchain in order to compile something that uses it. It's not something that's included by default, or appropriate for use in production scenarios (unless you're willing to deal with the resulting breakage, of course).
The benefit of modernizing the grid is reduction of carbon emissions. The ideal geographic locations for wind and solar are not necessarily close to the consumers. If you lack the transmission capacity the plants have to throttle down and waste potential energy production which has to be compensated by plants closer to the consumers.
How would that compare to an anthropologist studying those tribes and then sharing that information through writing?
Or they hire them because they went to Harvard as well.
In the hope of forestalling an argument: there are cohorts of "excellence" where differentiation is often in the eye of the beholder (20 smartest people, 20 best guitarists, 20 best research universities). But I would hope it would be uncontentious to put VN in that group.
For those of you who read the comments before the article, this is actually about calculating hash collisions and is pretty interesting.
It's valid, but not interesting. The "old legacy" system was once modern, too. And before that it was <script>. Better to talk about the technical benefits of the solution instead of how new (i.e. modern) it is.
I mean a document with no tags is just like sticking something in /

Plus, with tags you can have multiple categories.

Also, Polar suggest tags for you based on your history. So it gets smarter over time.

We will probably add some sort of hierarchy viewer but I'm torn over whether it should be compiled based on the tags or built manually.
Without context, one could indeed get this impression. However, Kurt Gödel and John von Neumann had met each other and exchanged letters long before that already, and Gödel was fully aware that von Neumann was interested in this area. For example, quoting from:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_...

“Gödel announced his first incompleteness theorem at a roundtable discussion session on the third day of the conference. The announcement drew little attention apart from that of von Neumann, who pulled Gödel aside for conversation. Later that year, working independently with knowledge of the first incompleteness theorem, von Neumann obtained a proof of the second incompleteness theorem, which he announced to Gödel in a letter dated November 20, 1930 (Dawson 1996, p. 70).”

To that letter, Gödel politely replied that he had already submitted the result for publication.
This. I put a disc on repeat
I think if you didn't see inmates as human beings you wouldn't allow music players at all.
John von Neumann seems like the man you would certainly want to meet. Apparently, he was good at talking to children and treating them with respect, same thing with people who weren't up to his abilities (which, let's be fair, is basically everyone) so he would probably not be condescending towards you. He had a great sense of humor and loved telling jokes, and he probably had a story or two about when he drove into someone else. He came from a wealthy, cultural family in Hungary, was fluent in Greek and Latin and was always well dressed so he could probably offer very deep discussions outside science too. And, he was one of the first contributors to computer science and thus could probably offer a great discussion to us techies. His war stories are actual war stories.

If I could meet some historical person for an interview, von Neumann is at the top of the list.
In that case you wouldn't want to modernize the grid just for the sake of it, you would want to reduce carbon emissions. The places where you would build out new infrastructure would be different if the plan was to connect solar panels in Nevada versus if you just went around to the oldest wooden poles and replaced them with newer ones.
Wait a second. Are we talking about software projects or infrastructure?
I'm curious.

I believe national-wide weather forecasting by computers was been done since the 1960s. As today's personal workstations are much more powerful than a supercomputer built in the 1990s, and the old models and numerical methods (not the state-of-art ones) are well-known (and have multiple open-source implementations), the calculation should be possible today on an ordinary workstation for educational purposes.

But exactly what kind of data do I need to run my own weather forecast on my computer? Is it possible to calculate my personal 12-hour weather report based on public data published by NOAA, etc? Is there a tutorial for setting up a weather forecast?
But the data here says there is no statistically significant benefit to picking an “in-network” (ie. Former McKinsey, Goldman Sachs, Harvard, etc) executive. Which is the homogenous network that these people will continue to cultivate.

This data says the parochial boys club doesn’t deliver any difference from the average state-school “rose through the ranks” type of executive.
"common sense" and "real-world experience" are frequently euphemisms for "everyone knows that's how it works".
I hate to see this. I really like music.

I guess when I'm doing something repetitive and manual (like painting a house), then some music is just a welcome distraction. But when I'm working on something that requires heavy brainpower (like debugging some failing computer process), then silence does seem to be best.
You mean in those cases where the cartell leader basically owned the prison?
Yeah well, in those cases they do not even need telephone or internet, they just tell their subordinates.
This is only marginally better, as the computation logic is still "hidden" in the lambda.

This is a very weird statement. It's hidden in exactly the place where it's needed! Where is it hidden from? Where else would you need it? If you're reading the code, it's right there, you don't have to click to definition like you do with Pair::next.

What should I get from reading Pair::next? There's no natural "next" for pairs of numbers. How would I guess that this guy's idea of "next" involves incrementing the first number and then squaring it? To make this equally readable you'd have to rename "Pair" or "next" so that the names were just as informative and easy to read as the lambda itself. So you end up with an unwieldy-but-meaningful name like SquareNumbersIterationState or SquaresSequence.State, which is the classic hallmark of OO programming run amok (aka, the Kingdom of Nouns.)

It's so much nicer to have the lambda inline and see exactly what's happening. One of my favorite things about functional style is that it doesn't force you to noun and name things that are easy to describe but hard to name. Sometimes something can just stand for itself instead of needing an awkward name. I mean, Java isn't the best at this, but this isn't hard to read at all:

pair -> new Pair(pair.index + 1, Math.pow(pair.index + 1, 2)))
It's really not something you can compare. Space Shuttle was not a can for humans to reach LEO. It was a much more capable spacecraft with a significantly bigger (both in volume and weight) payload.
They both have to manage finances, but governments are spending other people's money. A corporation is people risking their own money on profitable ventures. How you can think they are in any way similar is beyond me. Governments have little accountability because they are so large, and they can't "go out of buisiness" because they don't have competition. They merely have a quadrennial theatrical show where two "directors" appear to compete for business, but where the shareholders (the taxpayers) ability to actually influence those "business" decisions are almost zero.

If there were a free market for most of the services government takes it upon themselves to provide (by their force on monopoly), the government would be out of business in nearly every area because there would be better competitors offering better services at lower costs.
I'll always want my private vehicle, in the future it will just drive itself. But I want to own mine. I like to go to Utah and go off roading
What's the best way to short self driving cars if you believe that they won't arrive in a big way for at least another 20 years?
They are absolutely hilarious: http://0x0.st/zoT2.png
No.. I looked at it and I'm still considering it but I wanted to first get a Polar MVP launched and prove that people will actively use it.

To be clear I was one of the inventors of RSS and Atom so it's not like I'm naive in this area...

I just find that implementing standards can slow down a proof of concept that may or not be successful.

Plus I need to review the spec to see if it's compatible with our model and I plan on iterating rapidly on our model and it might not match up with the standard.
A lot of these hacker- rank like coding tests often require some extensive preparation. I've used codility (I think that was the one ), and it actually mentioned that ideally it requires at least 2-3 weeks of preparation or more.
Senior Engineers Build Consensus (2019)
Mach: A Remake of Make
IBM won't buy them. They just bought RedHat.
Polar doesn't mutate the PDF - by design. The PDF stays in tact. The annotations are layered on top.
> Anyway, barretbellamyclimate.com is a lot better than I first thought.

So you do understand some physics at least. Then...

Buy his book, and try to find any error: he confirms there that IPCC is right:

https://www.amazon.com/Global-Warming-Contribution-Jack-Barr...

It's less than 200 pages, much less than IPCC report, and also concluded without the use of the supercomputers. Human released CO2 is what is warming the Earth right now, at least at the speed as calculated by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Exactly what I've told you that anybody who honestly approaches the topic should do.

Prove yourself that you don't listen to authority, especially not Watts authority who is effectively a liar and the authority only to those who want to delude themselves or the others and who you obviously read.

You saw yourself what was Barrett's starting point on the pages that you like. You delightfully quote what he wrote before he checked everything himself. Then see how he was able to come to the conclusion that IPCC is actually right. There's no error: he was just able to repeat what the whole world can repeat and repeats everywhere every day... except the people who read Watts and such, which blocks them to see for themselves that IPCC is indeed right.

I already understood it is against your political sympathies to say that IPCC calculations is right. Well... it's time to prove that you don't listen to "authorities." You can confirm yourself and still have the political sympathies that you have. I definitely do not consider any of the two big parties or their voters even behaving consistently sane, but believe that in some topics one are right, in some topic another, and in some topics even neither. You are allowed to do that too. That can be a better chance for a real change, different than the pre-election slogan pseudo-change.

Don't support scientific illiteracy.

And most important: don't run searching for the false instant excuses by watts et al, search for the real sources yourself, check yourself what is real. Then once you are yourself sure compare what you've learned with what watts writes... and it will finally click how he distorts the truth. I don't care what his motivation is, his goals don't justify his means.
OS-Lib:a simple Scala interface to common OS filesystem and subprocess APIs
I think the biggest to a hurdle is the fact that there is no stdlib so nothing unused has to be shaken out. I think that’s a low barrier now though with more than adequate tooling. Another comment mentions a different stdlib for server vs browser but that’s also not a terribly hard problem.

I think a good first pass would come from studying analytics from npm. What are the most used packages? The most stable? I know lodash makes a lot of sense but there’s also underscore. I think the biggest hurdles are really political over technology as everyone has been so entrenched now that a one-size-fits-all stdlib would be hard. Not impossible, just hard. I do wish someone were working on it and I hate to say it but Google probably has the most skin in the game with v8 and Chrome yet I don’t really trust them not to abandon it. So who else is there? It wouldn’t be a very ‘sexy project’ either but still seems worth it to at least try.
This page mentions using Python.

I also went to mention that you can now use .NET/C# with QML as well.

https://github.com/qmlnet/qmlnet

PS: I'm the author.
I wonder if this one is still valid (for the human certification) as it was done with a very different capsule. Wasn't there a new one since?
Dragons are also reused (although at first, these newer ones will only be reused for cargo flights).

Additionally, SpaceX is serious about Starship/BFR. That's fully reusable and will be capable of going to the Moon (or even Mars) and back fully reusably: https://twitter.com/JaneidyEve/status/1102023437206388736
>It is well documented that, after Von Neumann learned of his terminal pancreatic cancer, he became horrified of death and would cry out at night, even resorting to last-minute conversations with a priest on his deathbed (though he was an atheist throughout his life).

Oh man this is utterly terrifying for me as I always hoped that the fear of death would diminish with age. It's horribly terrifying to me that he was horribly terrified of death at an advanced age.
Anyone aware of something like this in golang?
It's definitely a thing. It's easier to see with applications that use a lock file rather than libraries that always try to fetch the latest dependencies. That's because there have been incompatible changes made, but within the "allowed breakage" policy. For example, try checking out 0.2.0 or 0.3.0 of ripgrep and building it with Rust 1.33. Both fail for different reasons. The former fails because rustc-serialize 0.3.19 was using an irrefutable pattern in a method without a body, and this was prohibited: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/37378 However, if you run `cargo update` first, then the build succeeds.

The 0.3.0 checkout fails because of a change in Cargo. Specifically, I think it used to define OUT_DIR while compiling the build script, but this was not intentional. It was only supposed to be set when running the build script. ripgrep 0.3.0 got caught here in the time after when the bug was introduced but before it was fixed. See: https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/3368 In this case, cargo update doesn't solve this. You cannot build ripgrep 0.3.0 with any recent version of the compiler. You need to go back to a version of the Rust distribution which ships a Cargo version that sets OUT_DIR when compiling build scripts. (Or, more likely, patch build.rs since it's a trivial fix.)

Of course, both of these things are fine on their own. But strictly speaking, from a user experience point of view, code does break from time to time. With that said, ripgrep 0.4.0 and newer all compile on Rust 1.33, and ripgrep 0.4.0 was released over two years ago. So, strictly speaking, it does show the GP is wrong in at least some circumstances. :-)
>Bugs are correlated with lines of code and TDD forces writing more code so how can it reduce bug counts? If the test code has no bugs then just write the rest of the code in the same style

I'm not advocating for TDD (the programmer methodology in the IDE) but the author's explanation about "test code" isn't correct. Code written for explicit purposes of a test to exercise other code has been shown to increase correctness. E.g. SQLite database has 711x more test code than the core engine code.[1] (I made a previous comment why this is possible: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15593121)

Low-level infrastructure code like database engines, string manipulation libraries, crypto libraries, math libraries, network protocol routines, etc can benefit from a suite of regression tests.

It's the high-level stuff like GUIs in webpages being tested with Selenium or LoadRunner that has conflicting business value because altering one pixel can have a cascading effect of breaking a bunch of fragile UI test scripts.

[1] https://www.sqlite.org/testing.html
Incredibly rare US bank bills set to sell for $8M at auction
Nope, but you could probably integrate it with something like SciSpark.

https://github.com/SciSpark/SciSpark
In addition to the choices already offered (just give it away or sell it like any conventional piece of software): I would favor your choice of seeing the results.

But don't encrypt the results -- what's the incentive to use the app then? Instead provide value to any user (it collects and saves the results locally), but for a subscription the data collector could upload the results.

Then you have a choice: does the event holder or the competitor (or both) pay to see the results? The fact that you collect them means competitors who compete in different events can see all their results, view leaderboards and the like. You could pretty well automate all that so your involvement would be minimal. I don't understand your domain but without prior knowledge I would think it would be easier to charge the contest holder.

Your model might be something like Strava.
Inventing something great but otherwise leading a miserable life might be noble, but it's not really something to strive for. Ideally we contribute in a meaningful way, as well as getting something out of life for ourselves.
>OCaml really shines when your problem is data in, data out, and the transformation is non-trivial.

So do you think it would be a good choice for creating a make-like tool, in which you want to support doing transitive / hierarchical makes, like target A depends on B, and B on C, so if C is newer than A, the tool should build B from C and then A from B, and other such variations?

Working on such an idea, currently in Python, and have an interest in and am reading about OCaml, hence asking. I think the work may involve a topological sort.
A way to filter submissions and comments to only those submitted by accounts that have either applied to YC or one of its programs.
Is still true. If china hadn't moved to a quasi capitalist society they would still be making rice and no one outside of a few chinese political dissidents would know anything about shenzhen
That’s an ongoing annoyance with using NPM in a security-conscious environment. It’s really easy to end up with thousands of submodules and the amount of time you’ll have an audit showing a vulnerable package can be many months while layers of dependencies slowly update. You can usually show that it’s not exploitable but the number of modules on the average project means you’ll be doing that all the time.
The goalposts are exactly where I said they are. They have always been there for people that actually understand the nature of the problem. The fact that some people were spectacularly and obviously wrong about the nature of chess programs is irrelevant.
Really buried the lede here. I get that it was acknowledged as a rant / opinion piece but there's not a lot of really actionable advice for the general population of programmers, IMO. The article has good points, for sure, but the ending has the best part, IMO.

> So here’s the punchline: if you want to be a good programmer then learn a technology and language agnostic formalism. Logic, statistics, and game theory are probably good bets. As things stand that kind of skill is probably the only thing that is going to survive the coming automation apocalypse because so far no one has figured out a way around rigorous and heuristic thinking.

I think there's a lot of support there.

I don't think using Kubernetes as an example of "sequestering the complexity behind a distributed control system" was a good follow up to TDD generating more lines of code. Containers are a step in the right direction and Kubernetes _is not_ the best option for using containers in production but it _is_ the most popular option and so if you want community mindshare and support then it probably is the best choice if you can manage it or use a managed service.

"Serverless" is real, it's here, and containers / k8s are just a step along the way.
What really helped me is my desire to automate most aspects of my job. If I'm doing something more than once(and twice is more than once), I prefer to automate it. I'm really stupid, and I'm really, really lazy. I am not good at repetitive tasks, but computers are. If there's one thing I feel is important for every programmer to get, it's that our single reason for existence is to make computers do work for us. We should look for opportunities to do so, not always because it is the most efficient thing to do, but because it is what we do.

So I end up writing a lot of bash scripts. A lot of small python scripts. Stupid scripts. Over time, you build up a library of tricks. You read threads like this where you pick up new tricks. It isn't something you'll learn once. Some of the tools take years to really get the feel of.
From years ago, I remember reading about a study involving punch-card batch processing, where two teams were given a stack of input data and an algorithm to implement. One team listened to music, the other not. Both teams completed the task in about the same time, but the team not listening to music saw that after the complex algorithm, the output was the same as the input.
The 13th amendment to the constitution (emphasis mine): “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States”

I think it’s important to frame any discussion of criminal justice reform in the US in the fact that our modern legal system is built on laws and loopholes, beginning with the 13th amendment, that exist solely to criminalize and reenslave huge portions of the population.

I highly recommend the documentary “13th” on Netflix for more info.
What is the evidence for that? Autoimmune conditions can really suck.
Thanks!
Right now for my sake the search selection is very small, I only chose books from gutenberg.org that have covers, Paul Clifford doesn't
http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/7735
The people that would be using it arent really the ios/ipad type... its hard to explain without sounding like Im stereotyping.
See the movie industry