skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I feel like people often come at this topic from an individualistic perspective that ignores what's really going on. People see a new product has appeared and immediately accept it as a new fact of their environment and then debate whether they should be free to use it or not. This discussion is entirely absent of why this thing has appeared and why not some other thing.

The reason it has appeared is because it is profitable. It is profitable because it is addictive. So some company or companies begins applying a population level medical experiment, introducing an addictive substance with only extremely ephemeral benefits and potentially serious health consequences. Intensifying this problem, the companies proceed to target children, in order to attempt to create lifelong money drips based on a physiological addition. The question is why is this a legitimate activity?

While you personally may have some intelligence and ability to not waste your health and money on this product, simply placing it in accessible areas, advertising it and making it appealing, means that less informed or more risk taking members of the population will basically trip into a bear trap and feel like they're making an affirmative decision about their life because it feels good for a few moments at a time.

This is insanity. Why do we allow known bad actors to manipulate and poison the public?

EDIT: I should clarify that I don't have a problem with individuals growing and making this stuff themselves, just with the license we give to apply these medical experiments at a population level by entities that care nothing about the people they serve.
This is my feeling too to be honest. I think hooks are very misguided. Unfortunately it's no longer FP anymore when your "referential transparency" has been completely blown away.
I always wondered if there are not problems in the spot a new cable is laid to cross an older cable.
Arrr... Sorry about that. That was my idea, so my bad. We will get rid of the pop up banner.
Further to (2) by affording preventative care to everyone, people in the early stages of serious diseases can obtain preventative care and coverage thereby eliminating expensive treatments later on. In the US if you walk into a hospital near death they're required to look after you -- not so much if you walk in seeking preventative care. Imagine if they spent the $5 early on to treat you instead of the tens of thousands when you're near death? It's yet another reason why universal healthcare is a good, cheaper thing to have.
> While you can useEffect(fn, []), it’s not an exact equivalent. Unlike componentDidMount, it will capture props and state. So even inside the callbacks, you’ll see the initial props and state.

In my experience this is a fairly common source of confusion. People have a tendency to write things like:

useEffect(() => {
const unsub = subscribeToThing(thing => handleThing(props.id, thing))
return () => unsub()
}, [])

This looks pretty good except it's broken if props.id changes. handleThing() will always be called with the first props.id.

I'm the defacto React tutor at my company and issues like this make me pause before recommending new React devs to use hooks. useState is awesome and feels more natural to people than setState(). useEffect seems similarly simple but the subtleties can catch you.
I distinctly remember "learning" this in K12, before getting deeper into the technology industry. One of our textbooks had a diagram with lines showing signals flowing from continent to satellite to continent. It wasn't until I got deeper into the industry that I learned satellite latency is awful, bandwidth is limited, and everyone uses cables or microwave point-to-point links when they can. (Actually, the role of those point-to-point links is drastically undersold for how ubiquitous they are in our cities. Worked with some Ubiquiti gear professionally once, and now notice them everywhere).
Yes, my use of jankest is possibly 100% contrived.

Also, I recently added a comment with a photo album if you are interested!
The problem with this line of thinking is that everything we do in our lives, especially rational thought and communication based on it, pre-supposes some sense of free will.

In particular, it is well known that if you don't believe in any degree of free will, the stranger quantum effects (or basically any kind of statistical thinking) can be ignored - if the experiment to be run is itself pre-determined, then hidden variables that correlate the behavior of the experiment with the 'decisions' of the experimenter can't be ruled out anymore.

Perhaps more fundamentally, if you believe that there is absolutely no free will, then of course this conversation is essentially pointless, eve though we were forced into it by the big bang.
I think maybe your definition of "actual problem" is not the same as their definition. Let me try to defend their definition with an analogy.

If I write in C, I don't have to worry about register allocation (which variable goes in which register, when should I spill to the stack, etc.). I can just write things like (a+b+c)/3 and it "just works". Perhaps the compiler will do a bad job with allocating the registers, and a good assembly programmer would have done far better, even to the extent that the program goes from "way too slow" to "plenty fast". (Unlikely these days, but in the past knowing when to use the "register" keyword was worth knowing.) But even then register allocation is incidental complexity, in that they are an artifact of the solution, not of the problem itself.

But even though C programmers don't have to worry which registers are callee-save vs caller-save every time they call of function, they do have to worry about who is supposed to free every allocated data structure. Java programmers don't; they can just write

("1+2="+3).getBytes()

and it "just works". The garbage collector may be so inefficient that you wish it weren't there, but even then, deciding exactly when to deallocate every temporary string is incidental complexity, in that they are an artifact of the solution, not of the problem itself.

Of course, just because the problem is incidental doesn't mean it need not be solved! You really do need to free those strings or else you'll run out of memory and crash. (but not too soon, or else you have a use-after-free problem.) And likewise, at the end of the day, the values better end up in the right registers. But whether you're writing a game or web app or an FPGA simulator, memory management is not the "actual problem" you care about solving. The proof is that you don't think about when you're writing the user guide to your software.
Hans Rosling has ted talks about the topic ( why wont world population exceed 11 billion, or something similar - he has a lot to say about this in multiple videos). It is backed by statistical evidence.
Well said. Reminds me of something I heard in some interview about what makes the valley special that really stuck with me. It goes something along the lines of:

"There's no other place quite like the valley for starting and scaling a company from the ground up. No other place in the world can even come close to the valley in terms of the sheer number and concentration of engineers, leaders, and investors who have experienced the scaling of a company from the ground up first hand. And those are the people you want by your side when starting your own company, because they can apply their learnings to help your company grow at an accelerated pace and avoid the pitfalls they encountered along the way."
Why am I self entitled? I'm not measuring them against my lofty standards, I'm measuring them against their standards.

If they want to put it on github, with an announcement saying they've done a thing for fun, what do you think? I'll judge it on those terms. If they say they're aiming to create an OS that I can put on my Grandma's computer (which they have, read the thread), then its only fair on them to judge it in those terms.

I've been complementary and wished them well several times in this thread, because yes there are only 15 of them, but that doesn't change the fact, that they haven't yet built what they said they were going to build. That isn't jeering, and it isn't patting them on the head and telling them that it's the taking part matters, either.
Imagine if every late-night "male enhancement" pill was instead a cancer treatment. That's what the world of snake oil salesmen was like. That's the world you're advocating for. God help us all if you get your way. It's like how the rivers dont catch fire anymore so we don't need an EPA </scarcasm> I bet you the costs of disposing of dangerous waste products went up exponentially after the EPA was established, and yet, nobody cares because it's better all around.

Out of interest, how do you feel about vaccines?
Hooks solve some problems nicely, the main killer for me is that they don't work with classes, so you end up with 2 wildly different paradigms in your codebase.

Feels like hooks should have been a clean start in a new framework rather than retrofitted into React.
I'd be wary to encourage useState. It seems too easy to accidentally use in loops/callbacks/etc where your state would then break because react tracks it via call order instead of call site.
> It has better records than the American counterpart

What is the basis for this statement? And are you trying to say something about airline maintenance policy, or manufacturing, or training, or record-keeping?
it happened to me once in high school after smoking weed and lasted for atleast a week. i’m glad it didn’t stay
Lessons from Building Two Unicorns
Hooks solve the problem that state in classes is not compositional. If you have a stateful class that manages two or more bits of state, it's a lot of work to move one bit to a different component: if not already you have to make the other component stateful, move code over there, check that all the lifecycle methods are updated etc. With hooks you can copy&paste one or two lines of code to another component and be done.

I agree that the bulk of your application state should be managed centrally. But I often need small bits of state all over the place, not related to the overall app state but for UX purposes. For those cases hooks are much more pleasant to use that writing stateful classes.
We just updated the graphs to show throughput numbers instead. Should be more clear now.
Totally different things. It's like saying if I tweak this nob and it goes bad, well, why should I switch to a completely different system three counties down? Especially when that totally different system three counties down works for every other developed nation in the entire world. And also some of the developing ones. You should be defending why the American system is better than every other country in the world in spite of their lower costs, better access and better healthcare and better outcomes across the board. Private care in the US costs two times as much per capita as socialized care in Canada, doesn't cover everyone, and yet Canada's outcomes are better and Canada places higher in WHO rankings.

Making small adjustments to a doomed system is just akin to rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg.

I'm suggesting maybe fixed-wing aircraft that aren't full of Hydrogen.
The lint rule Dan mentions (eslint-plugin-react-hooks/exhaustive-deps) will catch errors like this.

It’s also worth noting that most class components people write don’t handle all prop updates correctly – Hooks tend to be slightly harder at first but tend to have fewer pitfalls in edge cases, especially if you stick to the rules (which there are lint rules to enforce).
Crackpots are only fun when very few people take them seriously.
> Unfortunately, this is unlikely to affect male pattern hair loss.

Source?
But there's something to be said about needing a lint rule for the API to be safely used.
This hits home. I am personally a culprit in daydreaming and building castles in air.
Old but good article by Neal Stephenson

https://www.wired.com/1996/12/ffglass
They took it down. What did it say?
Who's Voting This Year
Wipe and reinstall a running Linux system via SSH (2017)
what restless pontification
I feel the same way.

And how isn't Hooks are worse off in terms of testability? I have got into too far with it, but it seems to favor small piece of ad-hoc code over classes, which seems neet from the surface, but doesn't feel very encouraging towards tests coverage.

Anyone that applies Hooks to production project can share your experience so far? Would love to see some real world adaptation success stories before making the move.
Have you tried trazadone or mirtapine?
I've had good results with trazadone, bu would wake up after 5-6 hours with adolescent-like erections and read that it can actually cause priapism; mirtazapine works wonderfully(also a very strong antihistamine at lower dosages) but it leaves me groggy for 24 hours.
While being low-hanging fruit, these things are also fully irrelevant. If the entire world stopped using them tomorrow, it would barely be a blip on any climate model or ocean pollution model.
Thanks matee.
I read that Singapore waste management/disposal is top notch, those plastic would most likely end up in incinerator and eventually to man-made offshore Semakau Landfill which itself is an attraction spot.

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/a-rare-glimps...

https://thesmartlocal.com/read/semakau-landfill
The rule about unconditional calls tends to sound weird (I personally found it very strange when I first saw it), but in my experience, people do not have a hard time following it – it’s very rare to want a variable number of state fields, for example.

If you do end up making a mistake, React has both lint rules provided and runtime checks to catch any errors. But from watching many people learn and use Hooks, we haven’t seen it to be a problem in practice.
No, I'm saying it's strange having the people in charge of the government touting a privatized health program for the entire nation except themselves. If private care was so much better than socialized government care, why are the senators, the house members and everyone in the armed forces so staunchly in favor of keeping their socialized care? Don't you think if socialized medicine was murder and death panels and bad outcomes and high costs, that the senators and house members would be on private plans? Why are they so in favor of staying on the government's program? Is it because socialized medicine is in fact better than private care?

Further if they don't want to get off the socialized program because it's better than the private plan, why don't they work towards extending that to the average citizen like every other developed country in the entire world? Political expediency probably.
> LSB 9-16

What is this? Google thinks it's some sort of metal stamp.
Unfortunately we use tslint so we'd have to add eslint just for this.

> It’s also worth noting that most class components people write don’t handle all prop updates correctly

I'm very guilty of this however I'm usually being intentionally lazy and assuming that a certain prop won't ever update. With useEffect it usually happens by mistake.
STEMpedia: One Place for Infinite Innovations
Orange is a big player on this market, probably thanks to the fact that (as another user mentioned) Alcatel is one of the largest manufacturer (both historical french companies).

You can follow Jean-Luc Vuillemin [0] on Twitter for very interesting pictures of ships laying cables around the world.

One of the largest undersea cables plant is Alcatel in Calais, France (Dover straits). The factory is linked to the port by huge tunnels under the city. Unfortunately the Wikipedia page is only available in french but contains nice pictures[1]

[0] https://twitter.com/jlvuillemin
[1]https://fr.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcatel_Submarine_Networks
Least significant bits
It's actually a very reasonable assumption, as most people don't really know about the limits of fiber, but they do own mobile phones which seem to work almost wherever they are thanks to wireless technology.
Ah, it would be a candidate to replace the "here are the headlines of the day to prove I didn't create this message in the past"
I was just about to bring this up. Do none of the customers use public addresses internally? My employer does. And, as far as I know, everyone who runs IPv6 does.
Private CA's are the way to go. There are free tools for this sort of solutions. Requires some careful preparing but certainly possible. One should use one master CA which is used only when the signer CA's needs to be renewed etc.
Any decent-sized US city has its share both wealth and poverty, but most are dominated by postwar development, so the two are separated by miles of freeway rather than feet of sidewalk.

Where inequality seems worse, you are probably seeing a successful progressive effort to prevent segregation, and vice versa. When your neighbors and everyone you encounter in daily life are all in roughly the same economic shape as you, that doesn't mean you're living in an egalitarian society. Quite the opposite.
Right. I don’t know what states those are..but Prop 13 applies across the board here in CA.

I support Prop 13 protections for primary homes. The rest is up to voters.
The point of the && in a Dockerfile is because every single RUN directive adds another layer to the final image. Less layers = slimmer images = faster and lighter deploys.
That assumes Europeans or Chinese would have the same issue where nationalism constantly blinds their judgement.
In my experience, the only bullshitters who are successful have knowledge in key domains anyways. Running a company is hard, and you have engineers who think it's just math.

Clinkle is a perfect example of this.
FAA can write regulations that are favorable to the U.S. interests as long as it is seen to have integrity so the major course correction needed to save it's credibility as a long term advantage to the national aviation industry? Not credibility in terms of actually avoiding craters full of bodies better than anyone else on the planet to date(737MAX is still 737?), but only as a petty strategic trade war tool? This implies moving from fake news to fake aviation security, it seems.
Interesting, I've never noticed that before. I would guess it's a lens artifact, since it seems to move depending on where the sun is in the frame.
It's not about RH packages directly. They are fine. As it is with universe on ubuntu, you quite likely need epel on rhel for doing quite a lot of basic stuff. If you are able to get by with just the proper supported packages in each distro, this doesn't affect you. And that's where the two diverge. universe is in better shape since it is semi-official, v/s epel which is completely unofficial/community-based.
Emoji Recently Added, v12.0
Note that if the other blog post is not licensed under a license that allows you to do so (such as Creative Commons Share-Alike), you are simply not permitted to copy images or text without explicit permission from the authors. It's not enough to state that it was taken from another post.

Of course, you are allowed to cite excerpts, but then the text should be clearly marked up as a citation.
Did you look at the page thoroughly? More citations to peer-reviewed studies on nicotine than Wikipedia. That’s what he does. And his research into the dark web and bitcoin was very thoroughly researched, analyzed, he posts his datasets and methods used to reach conclusions, etc. Are you suggesting that someone studying these has lost credibility because of the nature of the dark net and such? Or are you suggesting that a person is only capable of applying investigative and analytical skills towards only one area of study?
Makes sense now, thanks!
> My concern is not that e-cigs are dangerous (they might be, but they're very probably not more dangerous than actual tobacco), but that e-cigs' perceived safety might eventually get people, a lot of them, to start actually smoking.

If cigarettes are cheaper, some people who use vapes exclusively will smoke cigarettes in order to get their nicotine fix. Addiction doesn't care about price or which delivery method is healthier.

If cigarettes are more accessible, as in if you're out and your vape's battery is dies and/or it breaks and you need your fix, some people who use vapes exclusively will smoke cigarettes in order to get their nicotine fix. Addiction doesn't care about where you are or if getting your fix is inconvenient.

You can draw similarities to the opioid epidemic: if you give 'safer' prescription opioids out like candy, and then take them away, some people who used prescription opioids exclusively will move to cheaper and more accessible heroin.
Similar story here, developer then sysadmin, but I decided I wanted to have a hobby and "physical stuff" seemed interesting.

When my child was born I spent my paternity leave getting started with Arduino, and ESP8266 devices. These days I've kinda stalled, but there's something fun about making the hardware and the software, and getting back to the limits I used to "enjoy" with limited RAM/flash-space.

Mostly my projects are put together for learning, then the parts are recycled, but there are a few projects dotted around the house that have stayed in-place for a couple of years now.

(Wireless temperature/humidity sensors, along with tram-departure information, etc.)
I interviewed one of the hawaiian elders who did a lot of work to save hawaiian graveyards from rogue archeology students, real estate developers, and the hawaii state government. To paraphrase what he said: "if we don't become experts on our own people, then they become the experts."
I don't see much in there that is relevant to vaping in general being unsafe. The main concerns seem to be related to non-nicotine contents of the liquids being used. While that is certainly an issue to keep in mind when talking about current vape usage, it should be something that is addressable without getting rid of vaping altogether. The only concern specific to nicotine seems to be the possibility of spills leading to overdoses. I suspect this is minor enough to ignore entirely, but if not then better education and even product design can be used to address this.

Otherwise the section referenced said nicotine does not seem to be a carcinogen but some people suspect it may be a tumor promoter. If we're drawing the line at "suspected to be involved in cancer somehow but doesn't cause it" then we're going to have to rework most of society and then some.

The only other thing that stood out was the particulates issue, though they didn't mention any health effects of being exposed to the particulates and I don't have that knowledge off-hand.
begins with: "I learned then that everyone must be insured at all times." (Which he didn't do)...

Ends with: "They have no business making my health care decisions for me."

Hypocrisy much?

His story goes on to reiterate that because of Obamacare rules, the optimal strategy for a healthy person is to go without coverage, as the fines (even when assessed) are far lower than premiums... and you can always sign up for retroactive coverage should you need it. That's a fiscal nightmare.
The irony is, popups to accept cookies are not GDPR compliant, unless there's an opt-out option. You cannot force tracking on someone as a condition of loading your website.

(you can, of course, serve generic ads instead, if they opt out, or serve generic ads by default and not show a popup at all)
I never said I didn't care about money. All I did was ask why we are looking at every problem in terms of money. There are some problems that have become so big (global warming, pollution, loss of top soil...) that looking at these only through the lens of profit/loss makes no sense.

Not sure why the outburst/snark, I started my comment with "I understand commerce makes the world go around" ...
Based on their chart, "incomprehensible" is a bigger number than "incalculable" and both are larger than $4.6 trillion.