skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I’m generally a good conversation participant, but this week has made me second guess myself.

My father-in-law is currently hospitalized after his heart stopped this weekend. He’s currently in an induced coma. Brain damage is a foregone conclusion at this point and they’re unsure if he will ever regain consciousness.

My wife and I happened to be on vacation in Costa Rica when this happened. We hopped on the next available flight and were at the hospital 21 hours later.

Because we were unavailable, my younger brother-in-law was given Power of Attorney. This “power” went to his head within minutes. He’s now decided that he is the sole arbiter of information. Nobody but him is allowed to talk to the doctors or ask questions.

I spent over 2 hours with him trying to talk it through. I never insulted or condescended him. My goal of the conversation was to allow his sister (both are the patients children) to participate in conversations with the medical staff.

At the end of the 2 hours, he attempted to assault me so I left. I felt like a failure. I’ve never not been able to talk someone down from an irrational position before.

I think I subconsciously used some of these NVC tactics, but failed miserably.

Is there an online course one can take on having these difficult conversations? I need to up my skills.
With structures such as EU, the distance between the voter and decision-making center gets longer, and voter's influence smaller. Exiting these structures, just as limiting the power of any central or federal government in favour of moving this power to lower-level elected authorities (such as states in US or Russia) decreases this distance.
Can you use the standard library without GC?
I were in similar situation. I had two shareholders in company that will bring value in the future - that was the hope. They have some skills that I were missing (I thought). At the end I was alone with my product and was stagnating. I decided to ask them to leave the company as I will re-write the product from scratch and make the product core as open source. They agreed to leave the company. Now, I'm 100% solo. Sometimes it is very hard - you even cant talk to anyone. But I know that I'm going to make everything myself or hire a freelancers for help, but I am not relaying on anyone and I think this helps me stay motivated. Having shareholders (or cofounders) that are not shipping regularly with you is very demotivating in my opinion.
Anywhere from 0 to 8! I'd say in average around 3.
This sounds suspiciously like CADT, as described by JWZ:
https://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html
I'm working remote since 4 years, and I have had periods spanning weeks where I have moved less than 2000 steps during 90% of the days. When I started working remote, I went from walking 8k steps per day to ~1k consistently for a 6 months or so.
My schedule when I started was 1) Go up from bed 2) Go to computer 3) Sit for ~8h straight, only pause for toilet and making lunch 4) After 8h make dinner, eat, feel like a vegetable in both mind and body.

I've since then re-arranged my day to at least walk 5k-8k steps per day. I've found that the step count doesn't matter much, I need at least 30min high intensity workout every day to not go numb in my mind and body. Luckily, I have two daughters, so I'm forced to do more excersices than I did when I worked from outside of my home.
Cats in True Collar
It's an anti-pattern to call abrasiveness an "engineering" habit. It's an orthogonal axis. "saying things are 'unreadable' or 'bad'" is not efficiten -- that's not actional feedback. Skip the "this code is bad", and the unsupported univeral claims of "unreadable" (obviously the author and the compiler could both read it, and get directly to the point of your concern with the code -- this code has a logic bug, or is inneficient, or you can't follow the changing state or don't know what this variable refers to, or what have tou.
It's a feature, not a bug. As much as people want strong individuals as representatives, time has shown over and over again that a well oiled machine (party) will be much stronger. Those parties then create rules that reinforce the need for coalitions and weaken individuals.

Representative democracy is meant to be a way to mitigate the problem of true democracy, which is the idea that it's easier to build a consensus among a small group than a large one and also that "the unwashed masses don't know what's actually good for them".

Bottom line is that it's impossible for 1 person to serve as a uncompromising proxy for a large group of people on multiple issues. Even if there weren't parties, there would be a point where my 95% agreement representative gets into the 5% of issues where we disagree. And no matter what, that's going to feel bad man.
the Brexit referendum is the perfect example of choices that should not be made directly by the population

I disagree. I think this is exactly the kind of question that lends itself well for a public referendum. The problem with Brexit in particular was its execution, not its premise.

For one, the people were given only a binary choice. As is clear by now (and many people knew that before), there are more than two options on the table: it is about in or out of the EU, the EEA, the ECJ, the EUCU, and about the laws underpinning the GFA. Secondly, the entire referendum was strung together haphazardly because the government didn't think it could lose, so none of the campaigners (let alone the public) knew what they were arguing for. And because of that ill-defined question, we still see major division among parliament about what people actually voted for. Lastly, the entire campaign was hijacked by xenophobic tendencies that only distracted from the main question.
This is just one skirmish in an on-going war between democracy and capitalism. Right now capitalism is winning, in no small measure because very few people seem to realize that this war is even happening. Most people, especially in the U.S., think that democracy and capitalism are inherently compatible with each other, as if the principles of "one person one vote" and "one dollar one vote" are not mutually antagonistic or can somehow be reconciled. Corporations, of course, are only too happy to allow this misconception to flourish.
Yes, but smartly. People have been brute forcing solutions to this problem using computers for decades now. The tricky part is reducing the search space.
The article has the example:

>Thought: ‘I feel that you aren’t taking this seriously.’

>Emotion: ‘I feel frustrated.’

I definitely agree that the "emotional" way of looking at this statement is better. The "thought" here is accusatory and puts the other person on the defensive. Moreover, like the article says, saying the person is not taking things seriously is just an evaluation of their actions; you don't know that its true, you don't know how the other person feels and its not good to tell them how they feel. That evaluation is based on how YOU feel, so its more honest to just share that than your own theory on how someone else feels.

In other words, it helps get past your own assumptions about people and deal with what you actually know.
"Such [content-sharing] services should not include services that have a main purpose other than that of enabling users to upload and share a large amount of copyright-protected content with the purpose of obtaining profit from that activity."

Well, if that's true, then the big question becomes what counts as for-profit. Do you need to be incorporated? What about a blog that has some ads to pay for server costs? Will Europeans be able to upload to Youtube as long as they turn monetisation off?

If being non-profit is the big way out, then that goes a long way to mitigate the damage from this. Although it still sucks for small content creators who do want to monetize their own creations but lack the resources to create their own platform.
There is no consequence for filing unsubstantiated claims.

There is consequence for failing to honour substantiated ones.
White Falcon Publishing Introduces Blockchain Timestamping for Books
There are things that can be learned but cannot be taught.

You have to do it yourself.
>and thus content creators lose a lot of views and money //

I think this sort of reasoning is largely fallacious. Just because people view your stuff doesn't mean that if you're successful in locking it down that they'll then pay to view it.

I feel the media companies know this and that's one reason they demand ever increasing copyright terms - to avoid older content eating in to current profits.
Leadership Tips from Executive Coach Hamilton Chan
That's pretty interesting, thanks!
A lot of things are broken in the Android Q beta, to be fair.
Lol don't use Twitter
It would put them in a Netflix position essentially and force them into being a publisher in the bad old days - demanding extensive paperwork and signing over rights to avoid liability.

So the EU will get corporate-tube at best - assuming they don't just get the China treatment. They thought they were too big to pull out too.
Reputation networks, mostly.
Binance says its enhancing KYC processes to appease regulators. But is it?
The big difference is that it's capability based, whereas those two aren't.

Perf isn't the best comparison right now, as I've heard that kernel perf is a non goal at them moment. I think they want to build out enough of the OS to know where the best bang for their buck is when optimizing.
Has this guy never heard of a bar or measure? Reading through the first section where he describes the song as sections of 16 beats makes me cringe, and this is coming from someone admittedly horrible with music theory.

Edit: I was turned off by his constant usage of the word “beats”, not phrase.
I did Play v2 with Scala... I can agree, it was not pleasant. (I had just gotten off a year-long Ruby on Rails/ JRuby on JVM stint though - so "pleasant" is a relative term)
Can Soil Microbes Slow Climate Change?
With the caveat that I don't know a lot about Linux GUI infrastructure but I would bucket GTK and the X11 client library into "toolkit", and the compositor would live in the X server and probably to some extent in the display and HID drivers. If you wanted to dig in I would look at doing an analysis of everything between physical finger movement and that movement being reflected on the physical screen, and how to reduce the latency and jitter. Anything about the Firefox APZ implementation [1] and that John Carmack has written about VR latency [2] would give a feel for the problem.

1. https://hacks.mozilla.org/2016/02/smoother-scrolling-in-fire...

2. Original article is broken but this is good: https://danluu.com/latency-mitigation/
You don't need Firefox. It's a stand-alone app.
The Startup Empathy Dilemma: As power and impact grow, empathy diminishes
those sites aren't going to leave, they will just leave Europe.
> it's a good hint that Markov chains are "good enough" for most interesting music applications, ML/AI doesn't typically yield better results

Are Markov chains not considered ML/AI? I would consider them to be a standard part of the field
Anybody have an idea of how much it would cost to have done this search on AWS?
Just have a look at what was passed today:

> Article 17/9: Where rightholders request to have access to their specific works or other subject matter disabled or those works or other subject matter removed, they shall duly justify the reasons for their requests. Complaints submitted under the mechanism provided for in the first subparagraph shall be processed without undue delay, and decisions to disable access to or remove uploaded content shall be subject to human review. Member States shall also ensure that out-of-court redress mechanisms are available for the settlement of disputes. Such mechanisms shall enable disputes to be settled impartially and shall not deprive the user of the legal protection afforded by national law, without prejudice to the rights of users to have recourse to efficient judicial remedies. In particular, Member States shall ensure that users have access to a court or another relevant judicial authority to assert the use of an exception or limitation to copyright and related rights.

So this also encourages to appeal in court against the current very opaque content upload policies. Certainly this is not strictly better than the current situation (where you can be arbitrarily banned), but definitely progress compared to the situation today, where platforms just act like they see fit.

> Article 17/7: The cooperation between online content-sharing service providers and rightholders shall not result in the prevention of the availability of works or other subject matter uploaded by users, which do not infringe copyright and related rights, including where such works or other subject matter are covered by an exception or limitation.

So overblocking will be costly as well, if enough suitable laws are signed into effect and people start complaining. And this really puts large scale commercial (remember non-profits are exempt) sites in a though spot: they either share revenue with content-creators/their organisations (which are mostly s*, but could be changed...) or they employ even more moderators (remember the small paragraph, where banning is to be done by humans ;)) – which all severly limits the current exploitation of the internet as a big chunk of empty space, where the strongest strongman is going to grab the biggest slice and employs an army of user-slaves.

> Article 17/10: For the purpose of the stakeholder dialogues, users' organisations shall have access to adequate information from online content-sharing service providers on the functioning of their practices with regard to paragraph 4.

I guess already today a lot of people would like to know, how Content-ID blocks their content, but Google can't and won't say (because it will show their dirty secrets...).

=> IMO: all in all, for the average person, the internet might develop back to where it was 20 years ago with select content-providers and quite a large proportion of actual people hosting fun stuff (and moderating their own boards...). If people are as IT-literate as they claim to be (although I doubt that for the large percentage of fortnite-playing #saveyourinternet-people) we might as well enter a real golden age of the internet.
What amazes me is with GDPR, so many people were cheerleaders of Europe being the regulator of the internet. Regardless of what you think of GDPR, once we get a political body comfortable with the idea of regulating the internet, this is what we get. The next wall they're working on knocking down is the national sovereignty boundaries of the reach of laws. It's already in progress and soon we will have European nations enforcing their perspectives including limits on free speech, worldwide. We have started sliding down the slippery slope my friends.
This is a bit of a diversion from topic, but the population of Soviet Union, and how it was calculated, is a very interesting issue.

Stalin expected a fast population growth, and when the 1937 census showed that he was mistaken, and population of USSR was only 162 million, Stalin had statisticians sent to the GULAG and some were even executed. After that, many tried to avoid being nominated for top jobs, out of fear for meeting the same fate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Census_(1937)

This kind of dictatorship and purges of competent people certainly lessened the capabilities of Soviet Union, lead to the unexpected result of the Winter War, and greatly increased the losses of USSR in the coming great war.
Your site is broken on firefox
Most Cited Computer Science Articles since March 19, 2015: http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/stats/articles
>Why do so many of these articles on the Winter War just narrowly focus that particular conflict, instead of covering the Continuation War as well?

You kind of answered your own question there. They're two separate wars. Of course articles on the Winter War would focus on the Winter War.

Now you may ask instead why the Continuation war doesn't get as much coverage as the Winter War. Well because it frankly isn't as interesting.
Ah, useful to know. So I guess what my post was about, was preffering to scale the rewards between positive and negative ends of the spectrum, instead of punishment.
Actually, a phrase is a common term in music theory.
Programming can be done well, or poorly. Speaking English can be done well, or poorly. Agile methodology can be done well, or poorly. Cooking can be done well, or poorly. The possibility that something can be done poorly is not a strong argumetn that the thing should never be done.
You could (relatively) easily, implement Pagerank but use votes instead of links. This would make people who have lots of (quality) upvotes have more weight.

Whether it would improve the quality of the comment sections is an interesting question. I'd be interested to see that tested somewhere ...
Stop pretending you don’t think it’s weird.
The link isn't a good example, or maybe it's the exception that proves the rule. XOR/shift is a well-known technique for hashing and I wouldn't expect an experienced engineer to need to cite it, unless they copied the specific constants.

The question author is a student and thus the expectation to cite is increased, unless they independently came up with the idea.

There are no hard-and-fast rules, but the more the example is a straightforward application of unknown (or forgotten) knowledge, the more unsurprising that knowledge is, the less I feel the need to cite. To take it back to the OP's example, once you know that subtracting two datetime objects yields a timedelta object, it becomes obvious to take the result's .total_seconds() (if that's something useful to you). Conversely, my older code is littered with citations for things that are obvious and second-nature to me now but weren't at the time.
Police Nationale is not part of the military.
And fire department and Gendarmerie Nationale being army units has more to do with historical/organizational/governance reasons, than with a military-specific purpose.
GN core mission is one of police, pretty similar to PN. Nothing related with the main army corps.
I'm sorry to hear about your situation, that sounds particularly challenging.

I've found this book very helpful at facilitating communication and it might be of help: https://www.amazon.com/Say-What-You-Mean-Communication/dp/16...
> Europe tries to catch up to the Silicon Valley startup scene.

I don't even see them trying to do this...
I was turned off by the lies (even post launch) they told, but I will say I respect the work they've done since to deliver the product.

I'm as guilty of the same youthful exuberance in my first software products. Mine were just far less public.
Now THAT'S funny
It's probably fraud, but yeah, still no consequences for large media corp execs who are personally responsible for that fraud.
Gross – Research Compiler Using Graph IR for Code Optimizations and Generations
If it's anything like sel4 in this regard, you can share memory just fine, it's just that the first pass should use IPC through the kernel (which is very optimized).
4. Avoid adverbs, especially after “he said” and “she said.”

I heard this years ago, and since then, I've noticed how often these adverbs are used as a crutch. It's a classic example of telling instead of showing. The best writers almost never break this one.
> What I mean is they all repeat in cycles that are called incommensurable — they are not likely to come back into sync again.

I remember a few years back there was some quick guide to visual design that I saw that recommended this. To provide what appeared to be randomness over repeating samples (or at least prevent easy pattern matching in the brain which is distracting), take three images that can of different prime number lengths, then repeat each one and put them next to each other.

I believe the example used was the ruffles in a stage curtain, where there were a few layers. Each layer was a repeating image of length 3, then length 5, then length 7 (but the image itself had some variations between ruffles within it). You won't get a point where all the images all stop and start at the same point (a dead giveaway of the pattern) until length 105.
I agree wholeheartedly. But, I feel it is sometimes extremely difficult to understand if the opposing party seriously cares or is just manipulative.
If anyone takes this over, here's a patch of what I was working on last: https://sephware.com/autumn/innertabs.patch.txt
The Numberphile video, mentioned elsewhere, explains how a search of O(n^3) is reduced to a linear search via some clever tricks. From there, the linear search is quite brute force. Several numbers are searched at the same time, indicating that no solution for 42 could be found under 10^16.
Some supercomputer infrastructure seems to be necessary ("don't try this at home").
If Google can't be bothered to give a fuck, can't this be mittigated by splitting the responsibilities?

Have a company that takes care of building, uploading and distributing apps from developers to the app store, and fixing all the distribution issues (via Google/Apple contacts in cofee shops in SV, that could push for resolution of issues internally).

And developers would work with this comapny, and would not need to care about Google/Apple at all.

Why do we need to see all these "Google did this to us" articles on HN? This should be a solvable problem, via some intermediary that would have more options/human contacts/power wrt Google, than a single developers.
I have the same problem.

I think Hanlon’s Razor applies -- this isn’t intentional, it’s just unfortunate mistakes.

I think the main driving factors are:

- Many Android APIs were badly designed from the start;

- Android was not designed for easy OS updates, so many users have old OSes;

- Google like Apple’s approach of aggressively deprecating old APIs, and try to do the same. But unlike Apple, they still have to deal with old OS versions, and their fundamental OS design is not as sound. The end result is what we see, messy and buggy APIs.
There is also a Notes app. https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2018/07/10/introducing-firefox...
In that case, let them talk and talk and talk. When they do so, listen.

At the end (which will come eventually, especially if you only answer with yes and no, so there are no follow up possible) you suggest a great solution for some problem they mention, which you can do because a) you are detached and b) they talked a lot and you had ample time to figure things out...
I happen to disagree with the dogma that a strong government is a good government, so in my eyes it's a bug.
Love what you guys are doing. Pretty fun to learn about space, something I'm fascinated by but know about so little. I'm sure even space scientists feel that way, so I know I'm in good company.

Thanks!
You seem to be conflating "delivering criticim" with "hurting feelings", and I don't understand where that's coming from.
Would you be delighted to be proven wrong if for every mistake your boss or peer told you that you were an incompetent idiot who doesn't belong on the team? Would that make you want to do more work? Would that make you feel comfortable proposing an idea that you aren't 100% sure ir correct and already known to your teammates to be correct?

Nothing about respecting teammates and their emotions says you have to accept their pull request.
Or we post a huge load of original content of the EU pm's making sure we the people own the copyrights. Making their digital life a hell...
NPR's "The Indicator" podcast has had a couple of good (and short) episodes about inverted yield curves. I think this is the first of them: https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2018/01/12/577710151/the-...

I highly recommend The Indicator podcast.
Phrase is actually the appropriate term. A bar would be 4 beats (for this song, which is in 4/4). The main phrase of the melody is 4 bars long.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrase_(music)