skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's not true.

It is difficult for humans to estimate how they spend their time, but my guess is that I've spent at least 35 hours recently exploring Windows 10: Changing various settings, installing software, asking Windows-specific questions of Google Search.

And I'm writing this on Windows. (Except for the Windows-specific questions, I'm not counting web use in the estimated 35 hours because of course the web mostly works the same way across the desktop OSes.)

I think computer users vary drastically in how much they value predictability in the software-based systems (or "environments") they use, and that I value predictability much more than the average user does.

I realize that it is unreasonable to hope never to be surprised at the response the system makes to an action of mine. But my response to being surprised is to try to understand how I could correctly predict similar responses in the future. For example, I might try to understand the reasoning of the designer of the part of the system in question. Or I might search for ways that I might have misinterpreted the situation. And I don't like it when I never reach an understanding of the surprising response.

Its source code's having half a million folders is a sign that Windows will never stop surprising me, which, all other things being equal, makes me less hopeful that spending time getting to know Windows will pay off for me.

Life of course will never stop surprising me. But to have any hope of getting anywhere in life or achieving any goal whatsoever, my brain must be sufficiently reliable and predictable. I see my computer as an extension of my brain that helps my brain be more reliable in the ways that will help me to succeed.

If you see your computer or the web site you are interacting with as a potential friend with agency of its own, then I can see where you might be offended by my original comment. I see computers and web sites as tools.
Levers, if you will.
Most likely but I think the FSF has sufficient legal and technical chops to figure out if, in this instance, they have a good case and should contact the developer.

As I recall, Stallman used to do something similar early on pre-GNU and stopped when he realized it wasn’t technically necessary, wasn’t even particularly helpful to himself in particular, and might even have legal implications to reimplement software with that method.
This is par for the course in BYOD regimes. On a past job, I was once given the option -- not required -- to install an app called "Good" on my phone to grant access to corporate email and messaging through my phone. I found out that "Good"'s real purpose is Mobile Device Management -- tracking and controlling phones that connect to the corporate network, including forcing software installs and updates, remote monitoring of device and app activity, and installing certificates that let corporate IT MITM your device.

I told the IT department that if they want me to receive email via cellphone, they will need to provision a corporate phone for me to use because I am not installing anything of theirs on my personal device.

I never heard about it again.
Very broadly: model checkers (which most TLA+ users use) verify systems by induction, by enumerating possible states a system can take on, and showing that the none of the states violate the system requirements.

In comparison, proof assistants take a deductive approach, requiring you to show - step by step - how the requirements are satisfied by the definition of the system. Dependently typed languages move some of that burden to the type system.
> Don't like your thing? Make a new one. The old one isn't hurting you. And if it is, make a new one.

That is literally what a version is.
This comment sits at -4. Can someone who thinks it should be downvoted explain why? I ask because I want to learn (not to argue).
That old saying "a month in the lab can save you a few hours in the library"
Point taken. I'm curious if using the second/feature part of SemVer for the advertised product version would be a workable compromise?

Or must marketing always get "top billing" in that precious left-most spot?
I personally “grew up” while AWS was born and grew and have been slowly exposed to most of the services as they were released / enhanced.

I agree that It can be confusing as f for a newcomer. This is definitely an opportunity for training courses/labs/moocs to figure out how to make the learning curve less steep.
"Formal verification of software programs involves proving that a program satisfies a formal specification of its behavior."

It sounds a lot like writing your specs as tests that are then satisfied by the implementation code.
That’s the problem. Of course AWS will have more boilerplate examples with CF. CodeStar is a whole library of CF based deployments. When you export a definition from a lambda you get CF.

If you ever work for a company that uses AWS, they probably have a business support plan where you can get instant and excellent customer support on CF.
Yeah, and it's super-useful in some cases. Say, passing data directly to gzip (or reading it from it).
For the same reason that software documentation is almost always in English.
I avoid talking about because I don't want people getting ideas, but it's easy to detect voting rings with HTTP referers and voting history alone
There's also a map of Japan's rail system, which is a thing of obsessive beauty:

https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/53640/where-can-i...

Unfortunately the pics of it are tiny, but as a sampler, here's what greater Tokyo looks like:

http://ontheworldmap.com/japan/city/tokyo/tokyo-rail-map.htm...
> but I would have expected something better from you than that last statement. A lot better.

That last statement happened[0], you were there. I didn't make it up for shock value. A member of this community in good standing but with a long history of belligerent and crypto-racist behavior (as well as high quality comments) managed to falter while toeing the line of civility.

And you banned him, and rightly so, but his beliefs are not an anomaly. There's a reason he felt comfortable voicing such an opinion here.

I'm not making any accusations towards the moderators, you don't see everything, you said so in that thread. But there is apparently a lot you don't see, if people's concerns about the toxicity in recent threads lead to a thread like this and your only reaction to it is to swipe at me for being rude.

And I was. And I was flagged. Fair game.

But I'm not wrong, and I'm far from the only one who's noticed that there are problems here which civility alone will not solve. People can be perfectly civil while poisoning a well.

[0]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13056816
Apply some more of that sane and rational thinking to this question: what real evidence do any of us have that Assange attempted to 'break into someones house'? Is conjecture enough to be able to establish a moral position in this particular case?

And then, think of it like this: you see a dark house at the end of the street, a dark den of scum and villainy, and you know that crimes have been committed from this house because you've seen the corpses scattered in its yard. Are you not justified in investigating - or at least, reporting to relevant authorities, that something is going wrong?

Because America today is that house, and the only relevant authorities who can do anything about it, are the American people themselves. (The local law enforcement already know about the house - they sell their crack and bury their corpses there too.. such is the state of the American military-industrial-pharmaceutical complex today, the real, tangible crimes of which are and always have been in Wikileaks sights...)
From experience, it's fking hard. But common sense does apply.

I'm 100% in on content marketing for my business and after roughly 2 years of dabbling, experimenting and honing my skills I think I sort of get it.

For anyone starting out, all the common advice is true:

1. Create valuable, original content. This can be VERY specific to a VERY specific niche. People LOVE reading about how the sausage is made.

2. Go where your audience is. Took me a while to figure out.
For me that is specific sub reddits and HN. Twitter to a lesser degree.

3. Keep a schedule. Once a week, once a month. Whatever works for you.

[edit]

4. Get a tool / platform that removes obstacles. Probably why Medium got so popular. It makes writing and adding pictures really easy. No subliminal / subconscious blocks on writing that next post. I use Ghost now. Same experience, just private. The cost is trivial if this is your only marketing outlay.
Ask HN: Why is there an internal email in source of an NYT article?
After reading the recent article on emotion-based targeting for NYT ads, I went looking through the source of a few articles and found this in the source code of [1]. Anyone seen this kind of thing before or know why this would happen?

<!--
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Kingsbury, Katie <katie.kingsbury@nytimes.com>
Date: Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 2:30 PM
Subject: Rollout
To: Bennet, James <james.bennet@nytimes.com>

James,

Here’s a line up for the launch tomorrow, all of these will be online before Sunday:

• A.G.’s publisher’s note about The Times
• Manjoo on household items that track us
• Wu on the history of privacy
• Jeong on A.I. and insurance
• Metzel on genetically engineered babies
• Warzel on tech CEOs in their own words
• Fr. Martin on privacy and faith
• Emily Chang on privacy as a feminist issue
• Douthat on our post-privacy order
• Swisher on privacy regulation
• Irby on what’s funny about all this.

Plus, of course, your piece if you can actually get it done in time.

Next week, we’ll drop the piece about how we turned a public camera in Manhattan into a facial recognition equipped surveillance machine and who we caught with it.

The vanity URL is locked in as nytimes.com/privacy-project and the social team has spun up the @PrivacyProject account.

Katie
-->

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/14/technology/china-surveillance-artificial-intelligence-racial-profiling.html
Further see: AIAA paper 2004-872 "Air Launching Earth-to-Orbit Vehicles: Delta V gains from Launch Conditions and Vehicle Aerodynamics"
Are you telling me that checking Hackernews every couple hours is going to pay off?

>take a 10 second break

I guess that's the next browser plugin, instead of blocking Reddit/HN/Facebook/Twitter, limit them to 10 second bursts.
If they're also afforded the same responsibility, sure. Because if people had the same rights as banks, I'd be free to gallavant down to Vegas, blow all my money on slots, and expect the government to vacate my debts and pay for my steakhouse dinner
Thanks for have making this!
Not long ago, I was dreaming about getting an embeddable version with Rust with DSL.

And since a couple of days I'm getting more posts about org-mode.
I think are nice foundations to continue on.
> some examples?

Exception handling. EH is often sold as a "zero cost abstraction". The reality is far different. To see what I'm talking about, create a simple D (or C++) struct with a constructor and destructor. Write a simple piece of code that constructs an instance, calls some function where the implementation is hidden from the compiler, and then expect the destructor to run.

Compile it with and without EH turned on. Take a look at the code generated. You might be quite discouraged.

The existence of exceptions also significantly degrades flow analysis by the compiler optimizer, to the point where large swaths of optimizations are simply abandoned if exception unwinding may occur.
Bring enough money to a bank with the trade and they’ll make you a market. Probably nothing with that kind of maturity on any exchange.
Do you honestly think that Americas military secrets prevent its manipulation and exploitation by foreign powers?

If anything, the fact of Americas military-industrial-pharmacuetical complex covering up crimes against humanity (torture program) and real war crimes (every twenty minutes) makes American leaders even more susceptible to corruption and influence by non-democratically elected actors, state or otherwise.

You'd rather the country be run by shady Blackwater types protected by ultimate state secrecy than have to deal with state diplomacy as its always been?

Wikileaks exposed pretty clear cases of war crimes and crimes against humanity where the laws and policies and "ethics" of the situation are very well documented, and are very well understood among the sovereign states which ratified them. These are clear crimes we are talking about.

The American military-industrial-pharmaceutical complex is inconvenienced by these crimes being exposed - not the American people, in whose names these acts are committed, and who bear ultimate responsibility for the actions of their state.

Knowing what is being done in your name by your government representatives is a good thing - you cannot be a responsible citizen otherwise.
Well, there are some statistical learning models that are explainable. Decision trees can be induced and can "explain themselves", just like in expert systems. Additive models are self-explanatory.

Not sure I'm sold on LIME and other similar approaches, though. Seems like a lot of deep learning people are all too happy to substitute "intepretability" for actual explanations.
Live 2019 game of thrones Season 8 Live streams/Reddit
https://qiita.com/batpar24/items/90ac470fa38a572d5746

https://qiita.com/batpar24/items/084533588db0f8d751b0

https://qiita.com/batpar24/items/b0d640933362feacec2c

https://qiita.com/batpar24/items/ee65b0197ff1fa3f1e5e

https://qiita.com/batpar24/items/930981a5185e921ab654

https://qiita.com/batpar24/items/82a09859b1ff52e55b35

https://qiita.com/batpar24/items/3346a03fe0f4da60a753

https://qiita.com/batpar24/items/c1252e2919b0b3ebfb97

https://qiita.com/batpar24/items/4ada3817de87443eb543

https://qiita.com/napoleon24/items/6b25d1c39d79bea684af

https://qiita.com/katriel24/items/34882d99282adb14d820

https://qiita.com/sunita24/items/4f6923734a1477236a7e

https://qiita.com/margorie24/items/d920fd18543edcfa5630
New social media code gives thumbs down to Facebook 'likes'
Our story sounds very similar to yours. We allow them to use the computer but only while we’re holding them, and they’re so young they just bang on the keyboard imitating us. So I open a text editor and let them go nuts. Similar deal with the phone. As for TV we show them animal documentaries, or train documentaries, etc, and an hour a week probably. Our goal is to teach our children to use “screens” correctly, rather than severely limiting them. But these things are inherently addictive, far more stimulating than real life, and warrant real concern and intentionality. If we are on them 5 hours a week in their view, they will want them 15 hours a week, so we must limit ourselves, too.
While I've yet to have Queen Elizabeth or some other high ranking official have some physical contact with me, pretty sure my first reaction would not to be thinking bout oppression.
Yes, the article says that was the solution on how to unlock it.
Especially, in my experience, anesthesiologists. They often aren't on my plan, even though the entire rest of the hospital is.
Old wives tale. Meal timing has no effect on 24h metabolism.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24847666
I feel like something like that would be worth writing in assembly directly anyway, wouldn't it? And with C you usually don't need to give up compiler optimization entirely, just carve out the specific sections.

By that I mean that since you're sitting on a pretty thin abstraction anyway when you're on microcontrollers, doesn't it make sense to code the parts that require piercing the abstraction using the toolset that sits below the abstraction?
Just leaving this here:
Earn crypto by doing tasks
https://coincircle.com/l/50VVxbObg3
Specifications aren't tied to any specific programming language - you're outlining how the algorithm should work, not the implementation.

(You can write Java code and invoke it during model-checking if you really need to, but I haven't come across any situation where it's actually necessary.)
General, non-critical software systems. My understanding about TLA+ was that it really shines in critical software systems where the result of the system crashing would be catastrophic. The effort involved in modelling the non-critical systems I work on never seems to outweigh the effort of "write a test, fix the bug, re-deploy"
> ...Only if you're trying to represent temporal logic in some functional language

Well, since the user was specifically asking for a comparison of TLA+ with systems like Coq, Agda and Idris, I should think that the question "how would I represent the logic TLA uses, given a language like Coq/Agda/Idris i.e. a functional (dependently-typed) language?" is quite relevant! (Perhaps even more relevant than the issue of what happens to be better known among academics in the formal-methods community.)

> A failure to find a counterexample most definitely amounts to a proof of correctness. It is not a deductive proof in the logic, but a proof nonetheless

This is of course true if the model checking is exhaustive. Given that TLA+ is most often tuned "for use in industry on large, real-world systems" however, most uses of model checking are probably not going to exhaustively check the relevant state space.

(Similar to the underlying reason why the vast majority of users in industry would probably focus on the model-checking component in TLA+, not the fact that it also happens to include a proof assistant.)

> ...Now, all formal methods -- whether Coq or TLA+ -- have severe scalability limitations. Very roughly, one could verify about 2000 lines of specification...

(This is of course a very real challenge, but type checkers are far more scalable than that, and there are reasons to expect that this may generalize to other "local", "shallow" properties like simple checking of pre- and post- conditions ("design by contract"), or the sort of resource-based and region-based checking that is now being used for systems like Rust. This is where end-to-end methods might have real potential.)
A generalized surface in arbitrary dimensions. A common English "surface" maps naturally to a 2D manifold embedded in 3D space.
Not the first article about this kind of stuff. Police departments can do whatever they want to obtain leads (as long as it is legal (Gray area)). I will be worried when they will start using technology instead of judges.
Tried duck duck go? In my experience it’s better for getting to Wikipedia for stuff like you describe
I've submitted with original title, but a preferred one might be:

UK watchdog imposes conditions on tech company treatment of U18s

Which is a paraphrasing of the second paragraph.
It seems like every other month, some facial recognition system is being attacked because of this.
Thanks... it's the simple things!
Not only is there no intrinsic curvature in 1D, but the 2D and 3D versions are also simplified special cases.

In 2D there is only scalar curvature, i.e. you don't need the whole Riemann tensor, just one number (at a given point).

In 3D you need the Ricci tensor, but still not the full curvature tensor. This is still much simpler, for instance IIRC this is why you cannot have gravitational waves in 3 (meaning 2+1) dimensional spacetime. In 4D you get the full complication.
You're looking at it backwards. We, as a society, can stop wasting people on this nonsense, and find something worthwhile for them to do.

(Yes, and we have some responsibility to make it possible for them to find a new way to earn a living, training them if needed.)
I'm not sure I see the objection? Are you saying that the US government doesn't have sufficient carrots and sticks to get app stores like the Apple Store or Google Play to remove apps from US markets that violate US law?
Get “Anime Girl Face” with New “3D Surgery Shocker Technology”
I wrote a similar piece a few years ago:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-03-07/investors...

There is no hedge against the apocalypse. But some people will create enormous shareholder value during the runup.
The standard in criminal law is "beyond a reasonable doubt", which is a higher standard than "preponderance if evidence" which only satisfies civil claims.
You're theoretical, respectively not related to the statement posted as it's subjective.
Julian Assange should be extradited to Australia, father says
> This is of course true if the model checking is exhaustive.

If it isn't exhaustive, it isn't model checking (i.e. it doesn't check that your program/spec is a model of a formula that describes some correctness property).

> most uses of model checking are probably not going to exhaustively check the relevant state space.

Ah, so what happens there is that you check a finite instance derived from your specification. I.e., instead of checking a specification for n ∈ Nat, you check a derived specification where n ∈ 0..4. But it's a proof of the correctness for the specification that is actually checked. Obviously, a model checker can't prove something it can't check (same goes for deductive proofs).
Three were linked in the same Washington Post article you referenced.
Ah, yea they teach that even in uni courses in econ: The public extarnalities offer a great return on investment in private businesses.

Of course it is wonderful in theory. In practice, my own opinion is that it's a really bad idea.
Terry Gilliam’s Don Quixote film finally hits the big screen after 25 years
Default swaps on state/city bonds (spoiler alert - you can’t)
My son could read the alphabet and recite it at 18 months. He learned this on his own because someone gave him a kid's alphabet book and he kept pointing to things in it and we'd tell him what they were. I think kids are perfectly able to do this stuff by 2, they just need to be exposed to it. For the record, we didn't encourage this behavior or try to push for it, he just really obsessed over that book for ~1 month for some reason.
> that coders who sat at 12-person lunch tables tended to outperform those who regularly sat at four-person tables...
>...driving more than a 10% difference in performances

Yeah, so this is exactly the sloppy analysis that makes these policies so counter productive: there's a pile of data, it is interpreted so poorly as to be random yet instills an absolutely unreasonable level of confidence.

It certainly does not compensate for the loss in productivity that such demoralizing practices create.
Yes, I feel trapped right now. I work for the federal government and have for the past 13 years, for a specific reason. That reason has been fulfilled and I deeply dislike my position but momentum is a strong pull. Also the situation is complicated, I feel, by my age. I'm 62 but not ready to retire. I love software and development and feel I have more years to work.
There is also an important ethical difference between dark skin tones and dark clothing.

I see the point you are making, but to the extent that an AI can do better than a human due to the physical aspect, for example, of dark skin reflecting less light at night, I think we should at least try.
CEOs Manage Time
There is no need for optional attributes in the first place, because you can always just do this:

<thing>
<optattr>42</optattr>
...
</thing>

insteadof

<thing optattr="42">
...
</thing>

Attributes exist in order to create a more compact syntax within XML/HTML tags, in ironic recognition of these notations being horribly verbose.
2001 had a much higher acclaimed script and was more appreciated by viewers
"...Medicare is currently being subsidized by private insurance."

Did you mean "supplemented"?
Why not just use something with a natively supported schema at this point like protobuf/grpc or graphql?