skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I still look up the order to create a basic Linux symlink.

Acronyms or pneumonic devices can help solidify the things you do frequently to commit them to memory.

Frequent repetition, de stressing, quality sleep, exercise and SLOWING DOWN to actually digest the patterns and actions you’re doing can help.

Beyond that note things down and the rest isn’t important enough to need to remember, google is fine.
I was one of the very first groups to be let go early morning on the east coast. I still have access to the blind app oracle channel, and it looks like layoffs are going to continue until September.

No notice, no thank you for your work, just goodbye. DCO is filled with people who do nothing, and have data backing up how inefficient they are, but not a single layoff over there. Too many people were hired just because they knew someone.

From what my ex-coworkers have told me is Oracle slack is freaking out.
I switched to a ThinkPad after many years of using MacBooks, and it has just a lovely keyboard to use. The tactile response is very similar to Cherry MX Brown switches (quiet, but still has that "click" feel).
As one of the early engineers of the company, I have a 2015 Macbook Pro. New engineers with their new touch bar Macbook Pro are jealous. Other than some minor battery degradation it hasn't failed me. I'm holding on to this as long as possible.
Sorry if I misrepresented you. Allowing unbounded resources makes all problems trivial, whether hardware or software, using the same lookup trick.

Thus there's nothing gained from hardware, so claiming there is a constraint on software that is not in hardware isn't really correct. Both have the same constraints for fixed size machines, and both allow fast solution for unbounded size machines.

There's plenty of such "other machines" that solve NP hard problems in P time, such as closed timelike curves, chaos machines, infinitely precise engineering, etc., but such machines are generally not physically realizable, and most are not even cost effective for small n, so people use complexity to mean how the problem scales on physically realizable, cost effective devices.

If every conversation about complexity had to go through this same digression to clarify that there are indeed other areas of thought about computation that have different conclusions, then no one could cover the original topic.

Currently the Church–Turing–Deutsch principle seems to be the best formulation of such issues, and Deutsch added the physically realizable part to remove from consideration things that are math but not physics, since such machine concepts are not useful to do actual computation.

All good stuff :)
the difference is that youtube/facebook are not publications themselves, but platforms that allow you to publish. So you already aren't deciding what to host, as a user-content driven site, you by default allow anything, then naturally hopefully for moral reasons but necessarily legal ones, you ban illegal content. Beyond that, it still is a privately hosted thing so I'd still agree that your self run user-content based site may ban whatever it likes. However when you reach a general use size, where people rely on your platform for free speech, things certainly feel different. I'm not sure what the right move is, but I don't think its as simple as "my private site is my private site, thats the end of it"
I graduated from Physics at Manchester Uni, UK, in 2001. Damn good few years. I never did anything that would qualify as a physics career and went straight into coding, working at Sonicwall most of my career. I still keep on top of the bleeding edge in physics, physics is still close to my heart :D
Every company I've worked at has shared board slides (usually slimmed down for time and to remove any personnel info, but with all the key financial info there). Transparency is a huge deal for me and tells me a lot about the value of the founders. Also, "if you need this information you'd probably be on the board" is just wrong - if you're compensating someone in equity, they need to understand the financials of the business to value your offer.

"What keeps you up at night" is also a very common question... obviously within the context of an interview, the candidate isn't asking about problems with your marriage or your health or whatever other personal issue you might be thinking of. Typical answers I've heard are figuring out how to scale, hiring fast while maintaining a high quality bar and moving up market. Knowing what the CEO is concerned about is a totally reasonable and relevant piece of knowledge for picking a company.
A friend of mine started playing around with Hercules and got a job with an IBM partner company. He just took a new job now at 2.5x the money I'm making, and I make good money :)

The companies who do mainframe gigs know the market is small and they would probably accept new talent that has no real world experience. All that's required is some experience (emulator counts), and a job history that says you're not an idiot and can get the job (any job) done. My friend was just a regular linux sysadmin before he got into mainframe gigs.
Why not:

valid_from: 2019-01-01T00:00:00+x

valid_until: 2019-01-02T00:00:00+x

Even 23:59:59.9999999 would still be < valid_until without any special tricks.
I'm not sure where your numbers are from. I looked it up: https://www.deptofnumbers.com/rent/california/san-francisco/

San Francisco vacancy rates are below both the united states as a whole (1 in 16) and california (3.5%)
Ask HN: Products Built by Tiny Teams?
Recently I have come to be impressed by Keybase.io and repl.it because the product is neat. Then, I was really impressed by the headcount at both companies! Both under 10 people I believe.

What are some products that you find are amazing considering the size of the team building building them?
Some lisps do this. like sbcl's sb-ext:save-lisp-and-die function is a "quit" that also persists the memory state. When you load this image later, you get it as it was when you "quit" last time.
I agree with your argument and I highly suggest Brenden O'neils argument on offensiveness:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtWrljX9HRA

At one time, advocating for gay rights or saying god doesn't exist was considered offensive. Only two decades ago, major television networks wouldn't allow jokes critical of Christianity to remain advertiser friendly. A recent episode of The Simpsons had Jesus beating Homer with a sign that said "Love" (standards and practices from 20 years ago wouldn't allow 'Jesus' to even be said in a comedy, which is why "Great Zombie Jesus" was cut out in later edits of the Futurama episode Atlanta).

It is offensive speech that has lead to civil rights, gay rights and independence from autocracy. What is and isn't offensive tends to change over time.
If we're limiting our discussion to US law and mores, then at least in the context of banning African-American content, there's specific federal law they'd be tripping over.

That same law has not been (and probably should not be) extended to protect white supremacy or white separatism, which are political ideologies.
There is no monoid type requirement for fold. See the type signature in Haskell (where Monoid happens to be used for fold despite not being necessary) vs Scala (which does not require a monoid) for example. Applying fold to an empty argument has nothing to do with monoidal identities, for example you could just specify what the “seed” result should be (like with Python’s reduce function).
I have a bachelors in physics, which I finished without doing any real research or programming (not recommended). After a brief attempt to find work related to politics/science in DC, I ended up working full time as a tutor (mostly math and physics). I ended up learning front end engineering, which was an uphill battle without programming experience, and after a few jobs, I now work as a software engineer at one of the large tech companies.

My background in physics and math really helped in CS classes I've taken since graduating, and the general technical background and comfort with math has been very helpful in general. I do wish I had done more research and programming in college, as I ignored them in favor of experience that would line up better with work in DC.
>To the extent that you actually do that, you will naturally lower the market rent to the level that you wanted, making rent control pointless (except that it removes the signal that would warn you when you need to build more housing).

You kind of answered your first clause with your second. Demand can rise very rapidly, but supply can only grow slowly. If you want to keep housing prices stabile for people so they're not being thrown out of their homes or displaced, public housing doesn't address that because you don't get the signal that it's a problem until after the displacement has happened.
Julia often writes pieces that are just partial captures of a few steps in figuring something interesting out, and which don't come to a conclusion per se. So I don't really understand your critique.

I'm not seeing this as any different than her typical articles, except that in this case I know next to nothing about the topic and so from the start I was lost.

Her first sentence and her second paragraph address your complaints, anyway. We didn't "find out" that this was just her talking about something cool at the end. Not only did she intro the piece with saying as much, but that's the premise of her entire blog!
Attitudes towards free speech have changed a lot in recent times. I believe this is related to the rise of social media. The advent of social media had made it too easy to spread hate online. This has caused an upheaval in attitudes towards free speech. For example, consider that UC Berkeley which gave birth to the Free Speech Movement is now making news for banning controversial/harmful speech, such as that by Ann Coulter. The people (as opposed to governments) have decided that some censorship is in order. This is a natural evolution of societal norms. This particular evolution was causated by social media, and it is befitting to see that a social media company is now in the news for censoring harmful speech. This type of censorship, as opposed to absolute free speech, will be the new normal.
The point was more about general APIs like threading or file access, anything covered by POSIX.

It is already expected to have to rewrite your GFX backend anyway using the specialized API for the platform, but people don't expect the same for general use APIs too.
There should be a way to just `make install` it to whatever location you want, IMO.
At what point do such things change into a public discourse problem?

Do we wait until it can be shown that companies such as Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc. influenced elections because they refused to serve information from a candidate they didn't like? If we aren't already there, it's not long before it is.

What do you think would happen if these "private companies" with such deep hooks into our communication infrastructure suddenly decided to remove all data associated to the Republican Party? For that matter, the Democratic Party?

It seems to me that Facebook and Twitter are trying to have it both ways. They can choose to police the content provided by their users but can't be held responsible for said content? Are they a publisher or a platform?

I don't think comparing old thinking based around old methods of communication compares to what we have today, it requires new thinking. These aren't like newspapers sold by kids on the corner in a city that can have dozens of newspapers countering each other. Imagine if there were only three newspapers in the entire country, soon the world, controlled by a small group of people who wish to use their publishing for their own agendas.

Tim Pool is right, at this rate, sooner or later, the Feds will come knocking and will shut that party down.
Let’s withdraw the Nobel from Einstein while we’re at it.
Industrial design would be great, or electronics design for a music instruments company. I need to make something physical.
I'm seeing comments mainly focusing on "free speech" and that no company or monopoly should control it. I think we are stemming away from the actual GOOD that comes from banning such content. Why are we allowing people who influence others to do harmful things to minorities? Why should we give people with harmful ideas a platform to begin with? If they feel like they need to be heard, sure let them develop their own platform and spread it among themselves. Rather than influence young people who don't know any better. That's just my opinion on the matter.
Hmm, that's odd. I very recently had to cycle through using four different phones (one was dying, two ended up being defective, finally got a decent one), and each time I successfully transferred all my messages to the next. I thought that just transferred your messages though, not your keys (I could be wrong there).

But it is a bit silly that you need to manually move the file from the old phone/backup location to the new one without some in-app option to do so.
We've asked you many times to please post substantively, and since this is still an issue we've banned the account. We're happy to unban accounts if you email hn@ycombinator.com and commit to following the guidelines.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I got my PhD in mid-to-late 2014 in Heavy Ion Physics (colliders with gold/lead/copper/uranium in addition to protons). We wrote a lot of code in c++ for on-detector selection, data-harvesting, and ultimate analysis and graphics rendering. Due to the dearth of jobs in the area and my spouse having a great, well-paying job locally, I decided to join the startup world. I found a little company that wanted a generalist (i.e. data, software, ui, wrench turning) and became employee #10. Three weeks later we begin the acquisition process with one of the FAANGs. Fast forward a month and a half and I'm now a SWE there with no formal CS training. Additionally, I'm automatically a L4 due to my PhD. This leads to pain. I'm doing the best I can to get work done, but I have a physics mindset where right is 100x more important than fast. That's the exact opposite of working at one of these companies. First half: meets expectations with an informal note that I was on the edge but they understood my position. Second half: meets most. One of the biggest punches to the gut in my life. I start fearing being fired every day (I work in an at-will state but I had yet to understand the costs associated with hiring and firing an employee). I overwork myself to get to two halves in a row of meets all with ALMOST exceeds (with a note of, "if only it weren't for that one week in the half where you shut down due to stress"). I go through a couple of reshuffles until I somehow end up on top of the stack due to some combination of attrition and management issues and get that L5 promotion. I've been riding that for a bit now and I'm coming out on the other side of this journey with a much better understanding of the software development cycle, modern technologies and frameworks, MVPs, product-focused thinking, rapid iteration, the value of good tooling and IDEs, how fast can sometimes be more valuable than perfect (with the right caveats), and a strong level of ML experience on both the product and training sides.
This is great. Thanks for building it!
I spent part of the mid-1990s hacking a proprietary data streaming protocol written in lexx and yacc. It was what we had back then.
It's a lot more pretty than the alternative. There are multiple places around the world that experimented with redistribution, and some are still doing it. You aren't about to move to one of those places, are you? Ignore the rich for a moment, put aside that jealousy, and ask yourself what it is like to be a typical or lower-income person in a place like Venezuela or Zimbabwe after things got redistributed.

There is something deeply wrong with advocating for redistribution in your own country when you could simply migrate to a country that has implemented the policy you desire.
The analogy holds no water, it is infinitely easier to broadcast your speech on another platform (or make your own platform) than to deal with state level censorship. Publishing them on a company's dime and expecting platform neutrality is preposterous.
The US President has identified himself as a "nationalist"[1], and appears to be racially white. So how would this policy apply to Trump supporters and their speech?

This is a general problem with trying to ban speech. It's often very hard to figure out what someone intends to mean versus how others interpret it versus what it "really means". Especially when symbols, slogans, etc., come into play, not to mention different audiences. That ensures that this policy will be applied inconsistently and have unintended consequences, and create a flurry of argument over what was banned, by whom, and why.

It's just a mess and does not help the discourse.

[1] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/10/24/trum...
Lots of slippery-slope fanatics posting today.

When they start banishing speech that is not about exterminating nonwhites, then we can have that conversation. (For example: Elizabeth Warren speaking out against Facebook.) But until then let's just agree that supporting groups who actively incite violence and march for exterminating nonwhites is a BAD THING. OK?

JFC I can't believe how many people are so eager to cite Voltaire and a flimsy knowledge of the 1st Amendment (hint: it only applies to government suppression) to stand up for white supremacy.
Many are rightfully making the argument that they are a common carrier because of their monopoly in the space. Right now there really isn't a viable competitor to them. The same is true with Twitter etc. because they are all substantially different products.

IMHO I would supports Facebook's right to do this if:
1. They gave up the safe harbor protections and were subject to the same liabilities as news organizations.
2. Or they were broken up.

Otherwise, this is akin to kicking someone out of the town square without the ability to move to another one....and that is not free speech...
With the hordes of rats fleeing a certain sinking ship of a state on the west coast anything is possible. Texas might not be Texas in 20yr.
Given the culture of mass surveillance I don't think this is a reach.

They are talking about doing the same for social media too, I expect that will either be framed in terms of cyberbullying, fighting the far-right, or perhaps copyright. I see a consistent agenda that lines up perfectly with Theresa May's authoritarian approach to matters.

Either they are stupid or they are pursuing a consistent agenda under different guises. I think the simplest answer is likely the latter.

Also there is plenty of deliberate deception and malice in the Conservative party policies at the moment, I don't see why this would be the exception to the rule.
Sounds like the solution is to become a landlord ;-)
==What we are saying is that Facebook is no longer a platform for free and open exchange of idea and is engaging in censorship==

When was this ever not the case? Violent imagery and sexual nudity are already not allowed.
>The trouble is that today, these companies have a monopoly on distribution. People who are banned go to other sites that capture extremists views (Gab/Voat/4chan)...

If the banned go to Gab and 4chan, then there is no "monopoly" on distribution. The Constitution is what allows for the alternative options to even exist. It's GOOD that we have the alternative options. That's not a "bad" thing.

And what is wrong with people going to "open" platforms that "breed exclusive extremism"? I don't see anything Constitutionally wrong with that. (Keep in mind, you or I not liking something does not mean it should be Constitutionally restricted.)
DCO has been poaching anyone they can get from Amazon/Microsoft by offering higher salary. If you come from one of those or you know someone at oracle you're in.

I know DCO's that couldnt tell you how to find the ip of an interface that make 85k+/yr
>What’s not easy is needing to manage a subscription account, log in on multiple devices, and either manage caching music local to the device (and frequently needing to clear items out of the cache to switch with other items) or always use cellular data services to stream music.

Somehow doing this with Dropbox is easy, but not with Spotify?
Founders Talk 62: Entrepreneurship in Medicine
>Let's start with curbing speech that encourages harming others.

Based on numerous past incidents of corporate behavior (not specifically from Facebook) I do doubt a fair and unbiased application of such a standard. Politically we cannot even agree on what constitutes harm or even murder (abortion being an example of such disagreement). How then is it possible to fairly ban speech that encourages harm when we don't agree on what constitutes harm?
You could safely draw that line at the top 25%, in terms of the US being competitive.

If you look at income, wealth, employment, education, healthcare, life expectancy, infant mortality, there's a very large difference in the US between the 25% line and the median.

If you don't think you can get into that top 25% bracket in the US, pick another country if you can like Canada, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, Austria, etc.

40%-45% of the world's millionaires reside in that top 25%. Full-time employment will get you $80,000+ at the 25% bracket cut-off. Healthcare is broadly high quality and easily accessible for the top 25%. Economic opportunities are abundant and unemployment is always very low outside of deep recessions. You can also hit that $80,000 income line in dozens of cities, depending on profession (much easier in tech, energy, healthcare, banking/finance).

Household net wealth skyrockets from about $100,000 at the median to $425k-$450k at the 25% line (and to $1.2 million at the 10% line).

Just consider software developers in the US. 1.25 million of them with a median income of $103,000 for 2017 (per the BLS). So there's probably ~650,000 software developers in the US earning six figures for 2019. That's more than the rest of the world combined.

The biggest downside to being in the US if you're in the top 25%, is that many of our largest cities aren't nearly as livable or safe as those in other developed nations. This also assumes a city to income match, where you're not making $90,000 trying to live well in San Francisco or New York (in which case you're generally going to struggle).
From reading your other comment "you can pull things over a network without a web browser...", your argument appears to be: we could have a separate platform from the browser for running web applications, and lose the need for the browser to support applications. Correct me if I misunderstood.

A benefit of applications in the browser is that they share and benefit from the same security policy decisions which are made for web pages. I think the closest thing to what you're suggesting is mobile apps, which don't always compare favourably. Users are often coerced into giving up unnecessary permissions, and they have less control over the user experience (can't block ads or change styles).
For REAL bragging rights, you had to solve Krotov :)
"Open source project"
> Things published on youtube are not on behalf of youtube

Tell that to people using YouTube. YouTube will end up being inextricably tied to whatever content is uploaded using their platform as long as they are the ones who manage its display and recommendations.
You're right, but, at least for laptops, they're still so much better (as in: less frustrating) than the alternatives that it's not even close.
I feel like, unless I'm about to transmit some data that is absolutely crucial, the act of regular conversation through Signal is enough to verify the person. Unless I'm missing something?