skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A couple of things you're missing:
1) Motivation. How many of these have you or anybody you know built and regularly use?
2) All the details. They require many skills, tools, experimentation, time, and spending of money.

As an example, I'm in the middle of a stalled project now where I want to make nice looking fishmouth pipe joints. I decided to cut them with a hole saw. But I don't have an electric drill that's slow enough so I've struggled doing it by hand and with a windscreen wiper motor, all the time wondering if it would be worth buying a drill press, but not the cheap ones from the home handyman shop because their minimum RPM is too high. I saw a cheap used one with no motor online so maybe I could somehow get an old washing machine motor and build some adapters to fit it together and buy an electronic controller - and that would be a whole new project in itself! What a lot of fiddly, costly details to "just weld some pipes together".
Depending on your assumptions.

For day to day use EV doesn't need trips for gas station to refuel - so you actually save time.

For long trips - yes.
I hope this becomes an immense success. Gives me hope for the future.
Alternatively just have Windows and Linux run side by side on a generic hypervisor. Then allow them to each render other virtual machines as an "application."

You can already do 90% of this. Only thing missing is allowing virtual machines to call up to the hypervisor to get a hook/render into sister machines.
Pretty cool.

> Sadly, in Python, we do not have a ggplot2.

I've got to ask, though: why is that the case?
> One thing we know about humans is that, as a species, we were never and are not currently capable of making such collective decisions

I'm pretty sceptical re claims of knowledge about complex systems, and human ecology is about as complex as systems get. So I think your statement is way overconfident.

Having said that, if I had to make a bet on whether or not we'll make the necessary decisions given how late in the game we've left it, I'd put a decent whack of cash on the prospects of failure. Also that the proximate cause of the collapse of our civilisation won't be global environmental collapse, but war consequent on local collapses. Look at Europe following 2015, convulsions caused by trickles of refugees that were minuscule compared to what's coming. I'd bet on nukes (another can we've kicked down the road for decades) offering the coup de grace.
I run Windows for Office, CAD software etc. and then have Virtualbox with Linux that I run fullscreen for coding work. Works nicely, haven't noticed any major performance hit.
Interesting. You might want to try gitpod.io to have multi-user support.
Yikes I think he is arguing against overwhelming programmers with complexity and the ability to hammer themselves with pointers, leaks and other banes of existence for average C programmers.
I never got the idea of paying more money to get the experience over with faster. Seems backwards
That's very US centric though. It's already much higher where I live (Vancouver, just minutes from the US border): $1.70 CAD/L ~= $4.80 USD/gal. I don't think $6 is far off at all in many locations.
The separation itself is not the only thing that makes the economics favorable. It's important that changing the separation makes the process electricity only overall, and this is a big deal. We can run intermittently, allowing low renewable power costs, and since there is no pressure or heat in the system, we can use inexpensive components. When the capex is low, it allows for a lot of other things to not be ideal starting out. Current densities aren't going to be as high as water splitting electrolyzers or aluminum production, for example, but that's ok in this context.
This is why I think many people find they enjoy reading the hobbit more than the lotr trilogy. It's much more concise.
If I understand correctly, what you're really advocating isn't ternary vs if/else, but expressive conditionals vs imperative conditionals. A statement that is something vs a statement that does something. Using expressions instead of imperative code that mutates state is a staple of functional programming, and is basically always preferred where possible. In some languages you can do this:

var1 = if cond {
x
} else if cond2 {
y
} else {
z
}

Which in my opinion is strictly better than using a ternary, if the language supports it.
Another Uber strike thread, another commenter thinking it's profound to reiterate the logic behind why strikebreakers privately benefit from defecting.

That's kinda the point of giving them such a bad name (scabs).

Edit: Scab->strikebreaker
Mainly Seaborn and Plotly. Holoviews and Altair are certainly noteworthy:

http://holoviews.org/
I’ll prove my counter point by calling you names.

Serious note: forums decay. Entropy in social media, and forum denizens exists. Such a result is unsurprising,
Half-recompiled binaries? They don't compile from source?

> It is a POSIX layer for Windows that happens to reproduce Linux APIs. So now you aren't using it like Linux, or Windows, since it is neither and it is both.

I don't know what you mean by "using it like linux or windows". The reason I'm
using cygwin is that I can use windows-desktop (rudimentary) like I use linux-desktop. With a lot of GNU-Tools and a proper terminal emulator.
Seems like a broken game.
CCS: large amounts of high quality concentrated CO2 from gas fired electricity can be stored underground https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_capture_and_storage

And when power prices are low and the gas fired plant is turned off, you have a transmission system right there ready to deliver power.
Maybe, but that misaligns the values. I'd rather see them lined up. And often more complex logic may be added to the sub-blocks such that the simple pattern goes away. Code should be able to "degenerate well", meaning it shouldn't require lots of rework when the initial pattern fades or changes in the future. It's one of the reasons I often use If/else instead of switch/case statements.
> So society is supposed to subsidize Uber‘s continued existence? That‘s perverted and unacceptable.

Of course! Why should the government provide health insurance? Doing so allows employers to shirk their responsibility to provide health insurance to their workers. I think we'd both agree that government-run health insurance obviating the need for businesses to provide their employees health insurance is neither perverted nor unacceptable. Why not then apply the same thinking to the concept of wages in general?

At the end of the day, we agree as a society that there's a minimum standard of living that everyone ought to enjoy, and welfare is our way of ensuring that. That there are some professions (like rideshare drivers) in which the pay is too low to maintain a minimum standard of living sounds like a welfare problem. And remember, society would be subsidizing Uber/Lyft via wage floors anyway, they will continue to exist (albeit only available to richer consumers), but the rich and the poor pay equally to maintain a minimum standard of living for drivers, making it function like a regressive tax.

Also keep in mind that Uber's margins are razor-thin as things currently stand, since there is effective competition in Lyft et al.
Google don't give any details, as far as I have been able to deduce, and that's absolutely part of the problem.

As far as I know, nobody even knows what the phrase "associated account" means, it could be anything, maybe someone free-riding on your WiFi?

It's one of the things Google does that I find absolutely appalling. It patently absurd that you for unknowable reasons might become unable to continue supporting yourself without any recourse or remedy at the leisure of these behemoth companies, only because they consider you associated with someone who has broken the rules.

Since so little is known, it might even affect your possibilities for employment. Who would want to risk their product getting thrown out of the app store because your team got 'tainted' by a hire which had a prior app store termination to his/her name?
I live in a big city, so I can't experiment - but is it possible to put up some sort of raised horizontal platform for those types of plants? Once it gets big enough, raise it up, put it on the platform, and let it grow horizontally, but off the ground?

Or do cucumbers periodically put down roots like strawberry clutches do?
Science Fiction doesn’t have to be dystopian
Solar panels or wind turbines do emit CO2 (e.g. construction, maintenance). Is the amount of CO2 emitted per kWh negligible compared to what would be captured from the air ? What's the ratio ?
Hi Rob. I'm CTO of a company that generates electricity from waste heat at industrial facilities. Pipeline compressor stations often generate 35MWth+ in waste heat, which we can use at about 20% efficiency to generate electricity.

Many pipeline compressor stations are not anywhere close to distribution lines so just merrily pump this heat up their stack. Especially with new pipelines where companies are battling (legitimate) environmental concerns, there is no reason they would not install your tech, powered by a heat recovery system, on every single proposed compressor station on the line.

We have actually modeled it with negative operating costs (using technology from one of your competitors) and think we could get the pipeline companies or the government (we're in Canada) to pay for it even in the face of bad economics. If your system is a step change in effectiveness from those systems, it could be a game-changer in this market.

Let me know if you'd like to explore this a bit. My email is in my profile.
Much lower particle emissions is what we expect. Also no benzene, sulfur, or aromatics. Despite diesel's drawbacks, I'd rather offer zero carbon diesel as long as people are still using it.
The FAA is supposed to catch problems before the crashes, not after them. It's pure luck that a 737 Max didn't crash in the US, that doesn't in any way absolve the FAA of it's charter and responsibility to check Boeing's activity and it's failure to assess the risk of the 737 Max. Our FAA did put US citizens at risk when it approved the 737 Max, so the FAA is on the hook absolutely.

Your point about Ethiopia's and Indonesia's agencies (and airlines) is reasonable, they ought to do their own due diligence on the aircraft that they use & allow on their turf. Smaller countries and agencies with fewer resources than us have tended to trust our FAA and the aircraft manufacturers to assess these risks. In that sense, the FAA's failure to regulate the Max and it's policy of outsourcing regulations to the manufacturers themselves is (rightly so) truly embarrassing for the FAA, is resulting in loss of trust of the US FAA globally, and maybe on the bright side is going to cause all other countries to start doing more of their own due diligence.
I think their goal is to have transport layer be a pluggable subsystem, divorced from their request-response protocol.

They even essentially say that HTTP is not necessary to their protocol, so I think it's pretty apparent that HTTP is a utilitarian choice, but they're not trying to build email-over-http.
That doesn't at all align with my experiences (Dartmouth and Stanford). While I understand where the sentiment comes from, in reality, there are individuals from fantastically wealthy families who are wonderful and kind people looking for friendship in exactly the way that everyone else does.

Time and time again, I was only aware of my friends' affluent backgrounds years after knowing them well.
"The original lender is only required to retain around 10% of the consolidated loans."

That part may be the only redeemable part of this process.

Because, hey...let's package these into collateral debt obligations, and then hey...let's engineer these CDOs with tranches of various credit quality as rated by rating organizations not understanding what they are rating and afraid of asking for more information because their profit is based on volume of these ratings and not quality, and hey...let's create a second CDO based on the lowest rated tranche of the first CDO, and boom, that low credit score is magically now a AAA, and why not create tranches of this second CDO too. Then, let's create a market out of this with a way to short the CDOs, and let's call this new instrument something ridiculous as Credit Default Swap. No one is ever going to need those, because everybody in the financial industry believes the underlying assumptions that 1) the real-estate prices will forever go up, 2) and there is no chance that more than 4% of sub-prime mortgages are going to default. Seeing that this makes a lot of sense, let's make a trillion dollars worth of these and we don't have to put them on the balance sheet because they are AAA rated, safe as the US Treasury bonds, and so why not get leveraged 40 to 1 on these. Oh wait, that's already been tried.
Makes sense. CFS, like schizophrenia, is essentially a symptom of some unknown collection of ailments.
Scala has had monadic do-notation (called 'for-comprehensions') for a long time and OCaml has recently gained both monadic and applicative 'do notation' (called various things, but mostly 'let+ syntax'). Edit: Oh and F# has also had computation expressions for a long time.
He said "Learn once, write everywhere" not "Write once, run everywhere"
I'm thinking of something like http://www.absolicon.com/, concentrating collectors for industrial process heat. Maybe the intermittency is a factor though, you'd need a thermal storage to go along with it.
This is very true, but my point still stands: For a smaller team, the overhead of maintaining your own infrastructure is very significant compared to the resources you have. If you have, say, 10 engineers, having 3 of them doing DevOps fulltime means 30% of your engineering spending is going towards your infrastructure, even before we factor in capital costs and all of the other overhead—not to mention room for error—that comes with it (security, etc). And if you're small enough to only be able to afford 10 engineers, you're most likely not going to spend 3 engineers' salaries on the equivalent AWS services. So now you only need maybe a single DevOps person at most, and you get another engineer or maybe two for "free" that can work on your core product. I'm not saying it doesn't come with its own disadvantages, but there are a lot of benefits to going "all in" on cloud services.

And obviously there are no absolutes—there are certain workloads that really do benefit more from dedicated hardware, even at smaller scales, and there are huge companies that are better off with cloud services (ex: Netflix).
Complain all you want. Sometimes nowadays it even works, just through the sheer power of a Twitter shitstorm. But complaining -- essentially asking someone else to fix things -- that's one of the very first things a human baby learns. And it only works if there's someone more powerful than you, on your side, who protects and looks out for your interests. Good luck with that - maybe you noticed who's in the White House (and whom he put in charge of the FCC and the FTC and so on). And certainly the AXS/AEG people aren't on your side: they're your adversaries! Complaining to them is like asking your no-good abusive husband to please stop beating you, while you continue paying his rent and getting beaten. You need to get out of there!

Besides, NOBODY is more powerful than you in this case! You're the one (you and your fellow buyers) with all the money that AEG depends on! So when it comes time to actually stop complaining and do something about this kind of crap, there are many things you can do, starting with the obvious: Absolutely Stop Supporting Them Monetarily. Even better: organize a widespead boycott. And then all the time and money you save by not going to concerts (or only going to small cheap local ones where you can actually talk & hang out with the artists), you can get yourself a guitar or a copy of Ableton Live or whatnot, and start teaching yourself!

This article points out (or complains about, to use your phrase) a problem that does exist, and needs to be pointed out/complained about. But then instead of taking the next logical step ("everybody stop supporting these assholes please"), it instead spreads hopelessness and despair by saying "They know they can get away with [this crap], so they do. And so they will, until anyone with enough power to enact systematic change cares enough... to actually do something about it." That's a clear appeal to the "someone more powerful" that I mention above, and if they don't do anything, we're all just totally helpless, right? Weak sauce.
Mozilla rr vs. Deterministic Execution
I agree with the comment about interest. Hell, my dad just turned 80 and he has far more interest in playing with Android on his phone, tweaking things on his Tesla, and so on. But he never worked in tech, although of course he used computers as part of his office job.

As someone who works in tech, I just want my personal tech to work, and I have much more limited free time. But he could have all the free time in the world; if he wasn't interested in learning new things, he'd have far less tech than I do.
For a while now, users have been forewarned about a reboot being needed because of an update for at least a day, in my experience. Most of the time it is multiple days.

It's not like it hits you without warning. You also have the ability to manually reboot whenever you like(!) and prevent surprises that way.
How to Use Sorted() and Sort() in Python
What exactly did Travis do that was bad?
matplotlib & things built upon it e.g. seaborn are the dominate forces in python visualizaiton.
Yup, exactly. You can fit the entire battery installation in 5.5 cubic meters! A fairly small closet, even (1.4x1.5x2.5 meters for example, 4.5 x 5 x 8 feet) could fit the entire battery plant, which is huge by comparison.
$1000000000000000 says on a long enough timeline he will be proven crazy
Spent the last few years developing my own end-user automation language for rendering templated artworks in Adobe Illustrator. Not written in AppleScript, mind (that language is a junker), but driving AI via the same Apple event interface that AppleScript talks to. Insanely powerful stuff.

Currently reimplementing Carbon AEDescs in pure Swift, to see if a modern high-level IPC framework that works across macOS, iOS, and Marzipan apps is feasible. (https://twitter.com/hhas02/status/1124763874413174786)

Developers generally hate AppleScript because it deliberately misleads them into believing Apple event IPC is OOP, then drives them absolutely nuts by acting in all sorts of very un-OO ways. However, once you realize that it’s not OOP at all, but RPC plus simple first-class relational queries… oh the possibilities. Interesting times.
I've never understood the use of the word "semantic" in the dismissive sense. Meaning is everything when parties are trying to communicate. This thread finally got to the heart of the miscommunication, and instead of celebrating you say "meh." I don't get it.
Try Olive[0]

[0] https://github.com/olive-editor/olive
I wonder about an altenate timeline where Rust kept its lightweight threads. Marking async calls explicitly instead of marking synchronous calls with await is a step in that direction, because that's also the syntax you have with lightweight threads. What would problem 1 look like in that alternate timeline?

In that case the concept of async functions disappears and your first function becomes a normal function. The second function remains a Future building function. So I'm tempted to conclude that this problem might be a non-problem, caused by a confusion between async functions and Future building functions. Even though an async function desugars to a Future building function, they are conceptually distinct in the lightweight threads model. With lightweight threads, all functions are async functions. A future building function explicitly builds a delayed computation. The types should be different.

An async function is just like a normal function, except that it may call async APIs (i.e. other async functions). Calling an async function from a normal function is an error; it does not return a future. The programmer never sees that async functions are implemented with Futures under the hood. In particular, an async function is not syntactic sugar for wrapping its body in an async block. We rename the async { ... } keyword to future { ... }, which constructs a future out of the block. You may call async functions in a future block. So if you want to call an async function inside a normal function, you must do future { foo() }, making it syntactically clear that the call is delayed even when the call is made from inside a normal function. The programmer no longer needs to think about how async functions work at all. Don't tell them that future{ foo() } actually will just call foo(), and foo() returns the future, they don't need to know that. The only thing they need to remember is that async functions can only be called from within async functions or future blocks. In all other respects they behave the same as normal functions. All delaying of computation and running computation in parallel is explicit.

IMO, problem 1 only occurs to programmers that have been told that async fn = Future returning function. That's a leaky abstraction; it's syntactic sugar. If you prevent them from developing this notion, the problem simply doesn't occur. To understand the main proposal for async/await you basically have to understand what desugaring the compiler is doing. With the "Explicit future construction, implicit await" you can use async functions and futures without understanding how they work under the hood. It's a non-leaky abstraction.

IMO, problem 2 is a problem for the IDE. The IDE can easily show which function calls are async and which are not.
Bokeh is my choice.
http://bokeh.pydata.org/en/latest/docs/user_guide.html
The best catalyst for CO2 conversion is copper. There are papers that have done an exhaustive analysis of alternative metals, and copper comes out on top everytime. Adding it to other materials like carbon or other metals in a heterogeneous material can help with Faradaic efficiencies. We are less concerned with Faradaic efficiencies than overall efficiencies and costs, which leads us to different optimizations than academic labs pursue - they typically want very high specificity. We don't care as long as it burns in an engine well :)
Assisted living, in general, is phenomenally expensive. It sounds like the mother lived in Sacramento, but they're renting out her house, so I'm sure that's a welcome revenue stream.
Interesting how you completely avoided responding to the comment regarding Microsoft's abominal disregard for customer privacy these days... "oh, excuse me!! it's TELEMETRY, NOT ANALYTICS hurrrduurrrrr...."

You know, I think my computer talks to the internet more than any of my teenage daughters. All on it's own.

Now THAT is saying something. Cut that bullshit out. Now.
Sure, but you can view things as "where do I assign blame" or "what are my fixed inputs." If you look for something to blame, maybe it's that people lack reading comprehension. If it's enough people getting confused, and it matters to you that people understand things -- even if things would be solved by them reading/understanding the right things, you need to change what you can change, because you can't change your fixed inputs (in this case, your audience).
I keep my bell-bottom jeans, disco ball, lava lamp, and wide ties because I'm pretty sure they'll come back in style eventually, sometimes twice. However, keeping all that stuff drives my spouse crazy. My parents' furniture from the late 1950's is quite in style now.
That sounds like a slot machine, not a game.
Awesome link, thank you for posting, this probably disproves my theory above. :)
This is a brilliant way of doing it.
Calling them scabs is an attempt to dehumanize them. It is quite funny that the pro union individuals are so easily swayed into attacking their fellow workers which only give unions a worse image.