skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There are also grackles, some of them mostly black, that are mistaken for crows.

Easier to tell the difference if you can gauge the size. This picture with a 1 foot ruler is helpful:

https://www.dshs.state.tx.us/uploadedImages/Content/Preventi...
As a semi-related aside, Cornelius Van Til developed a lot of similar ideas about the logical necessity of the supernatural in the area of theological apologetics.
Elm (elm-lang.org) does some of that.
I'm really curious where social anxiety comes from. I get it though not crippling most of the time. But for example public speaking I can logically see that I publicly speak any time I'm at dinner with friends or voice my thoughts in a meeting so it's strange to me that officially speaking would have so different a feeling but it does.
https://outline.com/VRzuMJ
Because many people enjoy casual social touching. Personally, I find it pleasing when someone gives my arm a squeeze or gives me a hug when I am leaving. But I would find it awkward to be asked "Do I have consent to sqeeze your arm". For me, and for many people, touch is a comforting gesture of affection and I'd be sad if people felt that they couldn't interact with me in that way.

I'm English and we don't do much casual touching. But when I shared a house with French people, they were visibly offended when I pulled back from a casual kiss on the cheek to say hello and goodbye. Getting used to it cost me nothing and eventually it became natural to me. I have a South African friend of Indian descent, he's much more tactile than is usual in friendships between straight males in the UK. Again, I was uncomfortable at first, but I adjusted because I value the friendship.

I am at a loss as to why people feel that their discomfort is the overriding factor in any situation. Sometimes, it's the uncomfortable one who needs to make an adjustment.
IMO this would mostly be useful if you had an architecture that evolved over time where you started with flat files for configuration and later moved to a centralized configuration system, many of which have concepts of references. Duplicating configuration or tapping into some of the advanced functions in here isn’t super helpful when you’re purely dealing with flat files, but this becomes helpful if you’re combining it with some synced external state because you can use this to “smooth over” differences in data shape.
The editors of the NYT decide what appears in the paper. That's the reason for such high consistency of the paper's topics.
I had access at first. On reload it redirected to a paywall.

https://outline.com/VRzuMJ
Correct. I opt out of membership savings and credit card rewards by using cash and not using membership cards or giving out phone numbers.

(not the grandparent, but that user is not alone)
I never found stric following of semantic versioning to be a good fit for product versions. It makes sense only for libraries and packages.
My own personal list:

- Verilog replacement with composite types, explicit state/functional separation and pipelining assistance

- "English like" language designed with reading aloud in mind

- typesafe macro assembler with memory safety assistance
Marketing maybe? If you are good about being backward compatible, you never release n+1, which might be mistaken for being stale vs your competitors.
Why not just move to 3.0?
Semver only says that a breaking change MUST be an increase to the major version. It doesn't proscribe an increase of the major version without a breaking change.
Multi-label classification of human attributes in Keras
You’re being downvoted, but you raise an important dynamic. When we bargain down and lower our expectations, who benefits? If we pack ourselves into tighter living quarters and don’t pocket the savings, or pay higher insurance premiums for no more or better care, where do you suppose the benefit goes?

The disadvantaged need to step up their bargaining game. When have you ever heard of a businessperson say, “I can’t ask for this benefit, I haven’t done anything to deserve it?” Their whole ethos is to always ask for more to maximize profits and they’ve been quite successful over the years, clearly.

Imagine if the lower income earners rose up to meet the challenge posed by the profiteers.
It should really be called Pedantic Versioning. Pedver for short.
Blockchain technology, and in other words, a distributed, decentralized record store shared across multiple participants, is the perfect technology to disrupt the heavy centralization of naming.

This is one of the few places the use of a blockchain will shine.
> Among other things, it includes a cost-based optimizer that can complete the TPC-H benchmark, CDC, and two major enterprise security features. But was this enough of a value jump to merit the leap to 3.0? Or was this a 2.2? Strictly following the semantic versioning rules would specify 2.2, as there are no backwards incompatible API changes. But with that logic guiding the major version bump, we could potentially remain on 2.x forever.

The whole point of semver is that it allows people to know if they can upgrade version without hitting incompatibilities. So yes, this would be a 2.2 and those on 2.1 would know that they could upgrade to it without worrying about fixing their own integrations.

The calender version 19.1 tells me nothing other than when it was released, which is of no interest whatsoever when evaluating what it does. Sounds like a triumph of marketing over useful information.
Birds standing on one leg: mechanisms and meaning
>Also keeps my resting heart rate around 55.

That would be considered mild bradycardia.
Sure: nice in theory. What about Pinochet’s arrest and non extradition to Spain in 1998 (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment_and_arrest_of_Aug...) then?
I agree.

More states are implementing laws so prospective employers cannot ask or base a salary offer on prior wages. This should positively effect gender and racial inequality at least during hiring. This would render all that protection moot.
> Since we release on a 6 month cadence, we’re starting to name releases by season and year, which means our next release is now CockroachDB Spring ‘19.

Ugh. You'd think the creators of a multiregion database would realise half the planet has Autumn the same time as the other half has Spring.

> It also eliminates the mental gymnastics needed to figure out how old a release is

I guess not.
They also mention in the article how they don't support skipping releases, so it sounds like you have to upgrade to each point release anyway?

Really if you're not constantly updating dependencies as part of your pipelines, you're going to quickly get into dependency rot issues.
Sounds timely now that Games of Thrones starts again
In practice I guess that most people would not choose to make their information public; but you could encourage it by offering a refund/rebate/lower-rate to those who did?
An effect system is like a type system, but keeps track of the 'effects' (think 'side effects', but we're doing them on purpose) that may occur when evaluating an expression. For example `print` might have a `log` effect. Unlike types, which get 'consumed' (e.g. by calling a function with an argument), effects tend to accumulate.

I've mostly seen effect systems in the form of 'algebraic effect handling', which allow effects to be "handled" in a similar way to try/catch for (resumable) exceptions. For example, if we have an expression with the `log` effect, our tests might wrap it in a handler which just accumulates a string, so we can test what was logged; our production system might use a handler that plugs into an external logging system (which would require an effect like 'IO' or 'socket' or something).

Stack languages like Forth and Kitten have "stack effects", which are the effects that evaluating an expression has on the stack, e.g. popping some values.

Effects are sort of the inverse of capabilities: an expression with effect E tells us "evaluating this expression might result in E happening", whilst an expression with capability C says "to evaluate this expression, you must allow me to C".
The main reason I don't like timestamp based version schemes is that it makes builds inherently difficult to reproduce.

I wrote some code for a specialized piece of equipment earlier this year. One of the requirements on this equipment is that all package installs contain a unique version string (ie. you can't install the same version twice). So I based build versions on git hash and timestamp. This turned out to be a problem because it made it impossible to reproduce builds without hacking the build system clock. So I switched back to semver for releases.
Most new cars are now either high-compression naturally aspirated, or turbocharged. Both of which benefit from increased octane.
If you have an old, or economy car, with lower compression, you will in fact see a bit more horsepower and lower emissions from lower octane, as it can burn more completely in an inefficient motor.
Newer cars with knock sensors will adjust the timing to be able to run better with better gas, many even have sensors now (flexfuel, etc).
The result is usually better power and mileage for turbocharged engines, and slightly better mileage (maybe not enough to offset price) in a natually aspirated one, and slightly better emissions.
Be aware USA and Europe measure octane differently.

Tldr - Buy what your gas cap says.
I am surprised to hear that. I have no personal experience with it, but anecdotally, the son of a friend who recently graduated in CS from Newcastle said he and all his classmates had multiple offers upon graduating. Although, he did say the work was not what he had hoped for. He was hoping for a position in game development or distributed systems and ended up at a company doing POS terminals software.
> Looks like the authors completely ignored Lisp related work spanning almost half a century. They will have their minds blown if they ever check out SBCL, for example.

So help me, I think it's the name.

Or, rather, the fact the name hasn't changed in a half-century. LISP is Lisp is Lisp, right? SBCL's optimized Common Lisp must be the same as mid-1960s MACLISP must be the same as LISP 1.5 directly from the Stone Tablets, or academia, whichever's closer.

Compare Algol: It was Algol up until PL/I, then it did a quick detour of being called Ada, and now it's C and C++ and Java and C# and Javascript and Python and Go and Rust. All-New All-Different, see? They must be greatly innovative, changing names so much.
Thanks for the pointer. I can access it here in the US.
In Norway the names of those who checked your taxes is logged and displayed to you, so bosses checking their employees' taxes wouldn't be the wisest move - it would look really weird.

You can of course get semi-anonymity by paying someone else to perform the search for you, but it's not really done much. Companies are generally nicer in Norway anyway, likely due to our lack of minimum wage, CLAs and tripartite cooperation model.
The problem of semver is that everyone interprets the compatibility differently. There are some language-supported criteria, but that does not cover all important use cases. In addition, any reasonable compatibility criteria might be impossible for large enough softwares---every revision can be potentially major in the semver terminology and it won't deliver much value to the user anyway. The calender versioning is useful for such cases.
> you need to box the variables (carry type information in addition to the value).

Dealing with boxing/unboxing and trying to minimize boxing operations in computations is regularly done in Lisp compilers.

> It is possible to introduce new variables in the global scope from a local scope

just like in Lisp. Generally Javascript and Lisp have a lot in common. Scoping rules are different though and Lisp is not object-oriented at the core - but provides closures or adds object-oriented extensions like CLOS which are semi-optional.

* (defun f ()
(setf a 5))
; in: DEFUN F
; (SETF A 5)
; ==>
; (SETQ A 5)
;
; caught WARNING:
; undefined variable: COMMON-LISP-USER::A
;
; compilation unit finished
; Undefined variable:
; A
; caught 1 WARNING condition
F

* (defun g ()
(print a))
; in: DEFUN G
; (PRINT A)
;
; caught WARNING:
; undefined variable: COMMON-LISP-USER::A
;
; compilation unit finished
; Undefined variable:
; A
; caught 1 WARNING condition

As you can see the compiler warns about undefined variables, but deals with it.

* (if (> (random 1.0) 0.5) (f))
5
* (g)

5
5

If we remove the binding of A, then we get a runtime error.

* (makunbound 'a)
A
* (g)

debugger invoked on a UNBOUND-VARIABLE in thread
#<THREAD "main thread" RUNNING {10005205B3}>:
The variable A is unbound.

Type HELP for debugger help, or (SB-EXT:EXIT) to exit from SBCL.

restarts (invokable by number or by possibly-abbreviated name):
0: [CONTINUE ] Retry using A.
1: [USE-VALUE ] Use specified value.
2: [STORE-VALUE] Set specified value and use it.
3: [ABORT ] Exit debugger, returning to top level.

(G)
source: (PRINT A)
0]

As one can see, both F and G are actually compiled machine code functions. Both functions we directly AOT compiled to machine code when I entered them at the prompt.

* (disassemble #'f)
; disassembly for F
; Size: 38 bytes. Origin: #x226D3C9C
; 9C: 498B4540 MOV RAX, [R13+64] ; no-arg-parsing entry point
; thread.binding-stack-pointer
; A0: 488945F8 MOV [RBP-8], RAX
; A4: 488B15A5FFFFFF MOV RDX, [RIP-91] ; 'A
; AB: BF0A000000 MOV EDI, 10
; B0: B904000000 MOV ECX, 4
; B5: FF7508 PUSH QWORD PTR [RBP+8]
; B8: B898914F22 MOV EAX, #x224F9198 ; #<FDEFN SET>
; BD: FFE0 JMP RAX
; BF: 0F0B0F BREAK 15 ; Invalid argument count trap
NIL
* (disassemble #'g)
; disassembly for G
; Size: 57 bytes. Origin: #x226D3D3C
; 3C: 498B4540 MOV RAX, [R13+64] ; no-arg-parsing entry point
; thread.binding-stack-pointer
; 40: 488945F8 MOV [RBP-8], RAX
; 44: 488B05A5FFFFFF MOV RAX, [RIP-91] ; 'A
; 4B: 8B50F5 MOV EDX, [RAX-11]
; 4E: 4A8B142A MOV RDX, [RDX+R13]
; 52: 83FA61 CMP EDX, 97
; 55: 480F4450F9 CMOVEQ RDX, [RAX-7]
; 5A: 83FA51 CMP EDX, 81
; 5D: 7412 JEQ L0
; 5F: B902000000 MOV ECX, 2
; 64: FF7508 PUSH QWORD PTR [RBP+8]
; 67: B838555422 MOV EAX, #x22545538 ; #<FDEFN PRINT>
; 6C: FFE0 JMP RAX
; 6E: 0F0B0F BREAK 15 ; Invalid argument count trap
; 71: L0: 0F0B17 BREAK 23 ; UNBOUND-SYMBOL-ERROR
; 74: 00 BYTE #X00 ; RAX
NIL
Yeah I get it's problematic.

But if you're going to start cutting out the dynamic features, and those you don't think aren't desirable, then why are you challenging yourself to write a compiler language for a dynamic language in the first place? You could cut out all these troublesome features if you just picked a static language.
Read “The Body Keeps the Score”, it is. Your entire nervous system has a memory, not just your brain.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22429941-200-the-life...
this is also wrong, though. You will not have done exactly the same course load! Universities have specializations and areas of research focus that influence and dominate their course material and presentation. You will, however, have been exposed to all the material that ABET thinks is necessary to accredit that program as being an electrical engineering one.

assuming you went to an accredited school, of course.
> this pill will turn you into Bradley Cooper in Limitless

That’s quite a sales pitch! Propranolol worked for me for occasional use for stage fright scenarios. It was an amazing feeling the first couple of times to be able to go into those situations without the anxiety. But far from the Limitless example, for me a couple of hours after taking it I would slow down mentally and a few hours after taking it I would be exhausted and absolutely done for the day.
I believe you are correct. Koch curve is a continuous curve so its topological dimension would be 1 (not its fractal dimension).
"Learning does not infinitely increase our awareness and autonomy. Sometimes it only contours out our blind spots and inarticulacies."

We just get better at defending our own misconceptions.
Resting rate around 55 for someone who exercises? I don't think I would this bradycardia.
Living with someone with crippling PTSD and anxiety disorders, I'm thrilled to hear about this study.

As someone who's dealt with an oppressive government (which is where the PTSD and anxiety came from), I wonder if this therapy can be weaponized by the powerful to oppress the powerless. The rise of the warrior cop is bad enough, but what about a crack squad that has been chemically desensitized to killing in cold blood, taking orders from corrupt officials? Great for the warrior cop's medical prognosis, not so great if you're his target.

I believe many people in prison got there through some form of fear. Fear they'd get found out, fear they'd lose something, fear for their life, fear from their childhood they lost the ability to deal with, fear they self-medicated leading to a crime. If this technology makes it out of the proverbial Petri dish, I'm hoping we as a society could substitute a session for 10+ years of incarceration. We'd end up safer, less poor, and more just.
Are you familiar with the construction of a torus by taking a square and "gluing the edges together"? It's effectively the game Astroids, where going off one edge of the screen wraps around to the opposite edge.

If, instead, you twist the edges 180 degrees before gluing, we then get the Klein Bottle. I.e. when you warp from, say, the left edge to the right edge, you also get flipped vertically.

I'm guessing you're already familiar with that, but by a similar construction, we can start with a (hyper-)cube and glue faces together to get higher dimensional analogues.

To my knoweldge the easiest visualization of a non-orientable 3D manifold is just by thinking of a cube that warps around to the opposite face. However, in addition, it also reflects you into your mirror image. This is essentially a Klein bottle in one higher dimension.

It's then not too hard to start grappling with the 4D case and beyond!
“This was version 2.something when I started, I’ve been working on this for n years and it’s still version 2.something” sure sounds like a demotivating feeling to me, too.
This does not surprise me one bit. I was prescribed beta blockers for "heart problems" that turned out to be panic attacks and I noticed the same effects. On beta blockers you're able to talk about unpleasant memories as casually as one would note the weather. It's a surreal experience, but a useful one.

Before this it was easy to shut down and avoid confronting bad memories. Now I can just brush away everything. Another great property to propranolol is it reduces the jitteriness from caffeine. Granted, if your anxiety is bad enough to need beta blockers that's definitely not a good thing, but at least the medication works well for what it does.

This kind of medication is far superior to benzos for anxiety disorders. It was pure luck to have been prescribed this instead of getting put on some horrible downer, developing a tolerance in a few months, and then having to detox with rebound symptoms that are worse than the illness being treated. There seems to be a lot of promising developments in psychiatry recently.
Might as well rip up the Constitution.
Look up “confounders”, random noise can be extremely useful if you encrypt it as well. This significantly increases the work required to decrypt (since you’ve got to decrypt random noise as well as signal), makes it much harder to tell if you’ve actually decrypted something successfully (depending on how well you can test the plaintext, obviously) and frustrate correlation attacks because every message has a different payload even if the logical payload was the same.
I read that as "the problem with semver is it's not perfect". Well yeah. But no semver is worse: upgrading is hard enough when devs communicate on what breaks, but when they don't, it's just a nightmare.

Semver get 80% of the job done. The 20% will still suck but Pareto and I agree that it's a pretty good deal given the effort.
> A language where the program is constructed by editing a running process in-place with a debugger/IDE, then the process is "saved" as an executable.

Another fun language which does this is Factor https://factorcode.org
Talking to the LiveView
This is mildly paranoid. Everyone has public record that gives this kind of information away, as well, like records of housing sales data. Besides which we should also drastically reduce economic inequality which would reduce the motive for these kinds of activities, anyway.
Regular price for such a journey would be around £300.

As an example: Southampton to London is a relatively short journey and IIRC the standard non-first class fare is over £70.
I'm pretty sure the property of sidedness comes up when you embed the manifold in euclidian space. The property seems to be related to orientability.
> Good point

Can a point be a manifold?
Show HN: Emotions for HN
Woa, bummer! That stuff was amazing. It opened up the entire Java ecosystem to .net apps, in an impressively seamless way.
Obama was a career politician, he had nothing to do with reforming the bureaucracy.

The very article points to that: the massive wasteful spending on records was initiated largely by him. He was able to get some focus and funds, but politicians don't seem to be able to get the right people to lead coherent projects.

Healthcare.gov is another, related, example - it was a $2B fiasco contract by CGI, based in Montreal. Google Engineers had to come in and 'fix it' - I heard they just re-wrote most of it.

In 'regular world IT' there is still a massive disconnect between the executive layer and the Eng. and Product Leadership that has the competency and means to 'do it right'.
There's nothing bizarre about it, they (NYT) have proven time and again their bias against Trump. To me, it's an obvious conclusion.
TFA claims that it does, because it galvanises people to do something about it.

Reduced income inequality is, according to TFA, a second order effect of publishing tax records.
"But with that logic guiding the major version bump, we could potentially remain on 2.x forever."

That's WAI if you don't break compatibility.

I think the only reason behind moving is to have a better sense of progress or freshness. It seems like semantic versioning should support having some date on the minor numbers.
Yeah, I'm aware of Quantitative Type Theory, it's very cool! Another neat iteration is described in "Resourceful Dependent Types"[0]. I'm interested in what the Granule people are doing though - they can track usage information at the type level too. It's still non-dependent for now, but I hear that they are interested in extending it to dependent types too. They use an SMT solver to track usage information which is really neat - apparently it allows to track more interesting usage patterns than Blodwen can.

Sadly this doesn't do everything I want though - AFAIK, you can still have multiple out-standing references in linear typing [1]. I'd really like some story for uniqueness too in order to have support for in-place updates while avoiding a GC.

[0]: http://www2.tcs.ifi.lmu.de/~abel/talkTYPES18.pdf

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniqueness_type#Relationship_t...
Probably looking a bit too much at salesforce
Woa, wtf.

Is that indicative of the general quality level of cosmos?