skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There are real problems with COBOL and, yet, it's used in the most critical parts of our societal infrastructure. People just learned to live with the problems and are by now completely oblivious to them.
Absolutely. Still funny.
That, the obesity, and the declining testosterone would all be related.

The testosterone decline:
https://uk.reuters.com/article/health-testosterone-levels-dc...

We've already found BPA (a plasticizer) and Atrazine (an herbacide) to have feminizing effects. Other plasticizers show signs of being worse. This stuff is everywhere.
I said this before and I will say it again: SQL is for data processing what IP is for networks: it's the neck of the hourglass.

There are many things happening below SQL layer (storage engines, implementations, hardware etc) as well as above it (applications, reporting engines, various services and whatnot). There are many things happening below IP layer (hardware, protocols) as well as above it (TCP, applications).

Even though there are better ways to build a neck of an hourglass, my bet is that (1) they are not much better and (2) it would be extremely difficult to get them replaced in all the existing hourglasses without breaking things terribly.

Conclusion: SQL is going to stay forever, like it or not.
In order to truly have a shot at replacing gifs, it has to be as frictionless to use as gifs are. That means being able to refer to it with a single, simply tag.

<video src="example.av1">

and, in addition, for as many people as possible to support opening of av1s as they do with gifs.
If it were merely that, there might be something to it, but the article presents claims that it's mostly organised crime, or money from countries sanctioned by the US.
Haha so relatable. Do you work for Facebook?
Well, arguments in favor of go are made up.

For instance, you have to add literally one line of code to terminate Java application at the end of main function. Why would such a minute feature of language make Java programs harder to reason about? Why would anyone even present this argument as a serious one?
Gosh, somebody should be proofreading that README. It seems a little unprofessional of Intel when I cannot understand what's meant in certain sentences...
I wonder what do you do during the downtime? Nothing?
Vertical, Horizontal and Inline Form Example in Bootstrap
I'm not sure I understand what you're asking exactly, but I guess you could say it doesn't. It's important to remember the "bill of rights" is really the "bill of government restrictions", not "bill of fundamental human rights". I guess that, unlike the right against self-incrimination, spousal privilege wasn't deemed fundamentally necessary for preventing the government from forcing testimony, so that's probably why it wasn't put there in the fifth amendment. I can only speculate as to the reasoning, but I imagine it might be as follows:

With self-incrimination, if the government decides to force testimony from you (which inevitably implies a guilty confession), you'll get punished one way or another regardless of what you say (which apparently historically meant choosing between torture and death). This means two things: (1) innocent people will get punished either way (which is obviously the opposite of what you want), and (2) guilty people won't have any incentive to tell the truth either (which is also not what you want either)—they'll instead have incentive to say whatever will minimize their punishment, which is determined by the government, not by the truth. So it's pretty much entirely a lose-lose situation, and not something that'll make a justice system (whom you're charging with the task of finding the truth) achieve its goal. Spousal testimony, on the other hand, is entirely different in that respect: as far as the relationship between you and the government is concerned (which is, recall, what the goal of the bill of rights was—again, it wasn't written as a manifesto on human rights), you actually have a huge incentive to tell the truth here, because you don't get punished by the government for providing guilty testimony against your spouse. Same exactly thing happens when you're provided immunity: you don't get punished, and therefore society gets to extract the truth out of you, with decent confidence that it'll get what it's looking for. Therefore, as far as the constitution being concerned, spousal privilege probably didn't need to be written in there, because the right against self-incrimination already sufficiently achieved its restriction and goal.
Even most people interested in computers don't want just some barebones chip on a piece of PCB anymore. They want programmable pocket-carriable device with peripherals, too. That without relying on opaque blobs, without obsolescence plans of the manufacturer, without having to share memory with opaque and dangerous modem. There is NO such thing for $35 and $50, or for any price.

With FPGAs too you can't do anything more involved, like interface DDR memory, without reliquishing control to proprietary blobs on proprietary toolchain, subject to manufacturer obsolescence plans. This isn't something I can call "general purpose computing" with clear conscience.
How can you tel an app has actually been signed in the past? It could just as well been signed today with a fake date. This defeats the purpose of expiry.

You could just as well have certificates that never expire and just start signing with a new one if you feel like it.

Note the Mozilla ‘solution’ has the same problem: their root now authorized a new certificate with the old public key. If the original expectation was that the private key would be safe for a certain number of years (which is why you have expiry dates in the first place) the unsafe private key is now valid again. This defeats the purpose of expiry.
Yes, Java does have its weaknesses. It's an old language and people were still figuring out a lot of the stuff. But the ecosystem is huge and if you know the quirks, it's still a heck of a productive language.

> Java inner classes suddenly appeared in 1997; it took more than a year to update the specification, and it became almost twice as big as a result. That’s a high price to pay for a non-essential feature.

I can't talk about the doubling of the specification but you can learn everything you need to about inner classes on 5 pages or so. It's over 20 years old now.

> generic arrays aren’t supported

So you can't use something with arrays that go doesn't even support ;-)

> type wildcards with upper and lower bounds are quite complicated.

Well, it's two words (extends and super) and some syntax. How could it be much easier?

> Enum [...] It’s certainly nice to have, but offers little that couldn’t be done with ordinary classes

Yes, and generics offer little that couldn't be done by implementing specialised classes. Enums are there to help you. You see an enum? You know what happens, you know what it offers, you know it's not a "normal" class but is there for a special reason.

Yes, Java does have its inconsistencies. Why is String Immutable when in a OO-language the opposite would be taken for granted? Why can't you use int as a datatype for an ArrayList but Integer? What's up with Stack and Deque and Vector? You have to know Java to work with it effectively. We are professionals after all. It can be expected that we know the language. Java gets the job done.

That's not to say that Go couldn't get ahead of Java and may be the better language (especially in the future). But the ecosystem is far from it for now and Go has to prove it won't suffer from the same problems Java is now.
The internet was founded on a military backbone, then grew to an information is everywhere backbone, now the fences of the garden have been contracting to a walled garden again.

There is a scene in firefly where the dr. character gets a box. It was implied as a openish internet. Pretty sure that's where were headed.

Information is free until the folks in the back of the courtroom make sure it's not.
一套闲置的前端算法字帖，有需要的吗？
That rings a bell. I can be laser-focused when something important is actually on the line - like, doing a high-visibility task at work, or studying for an important interview. Other than that, my mind seems to simply not care about the made-up human goals such "attaining mastery of a subject" etc. - it only focuses when survival is at stake. My subcionciousness may be smarter than I am.
I agree low carb diets are the healthiest. But for those like myself that cant totally commit, I just want to add:

Creatine supplementation has hugely improved my body's ability to attenuate sugar spikes. I feel amazing being able to handle high amounts of sugar by my muscles helping intake the sugar. If you have blood sugar issues or have diabetes, 2.5 mg of creatine daily is safe and has a great efficacy.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20881878/

The exercise portion is important because your muscles can reach peak sugar/ATP storage. Once that occurs that muscle wont really help attenuate your blood sugar any longer.. You need to drain the muscle reservoirs often to keep them as good sugar sinks.
Office 365 sure is impressing from a technical standpoint. It's also frustratingly slow compared to desktop Office, in my experience.
Immutability and recursion patterns do shrink the search space to a minuscule spot. It may fit ones brain. But some people have a state driven thinking process, which I despised for decades but recently got to understand. I see why people like to code in C-land. The issue is that, since it's not a straightjacket like ~pure FP, if you don't have a brain that sees state, state variable, lifetimes, etc etc, you're free to write piles of crap. Especially when young because you may believe that complex => more code, and complex is good.

ps: note that I'm not criticizing FP or static/math oriented programming. I'm just trying to pu both sides into a shared perspective
Keep your shoes on during landings too!
My argument was solely that of the capitalists fallacy, i.e. that monetary value and desirability are not always identical. Each case needs its own consideration.

However, there are streets in London of very highly priced completed uninhabited houses, which serve as speculation objects and money parking vehicles. There are many examples in Germany were newly constructed housing lead to a increase in rents of already existing housing. Where is the value for the very real people who must leave the city because they can't afford the rising rents, even though they have their work there and their children go to school there?

Housing is one of the examples where a rise in monetary value for the same product has immediate negative sides, and a house in one place and an otherwise identical house in another place are not the same product. I see a sometimes more or less pronounced conflict between the right of having housing and the right of owning property.

I'm not arguing against building more houses, if that is the doubt. I just don't think that housing should just be unregulated so the market can have its go at it as if that were the god-given solution to every problem.
To underscore the point:

The Python code snippet del a[i] deletes the element at index i from a list a. This code certainly is quite readable, but not so transparent: it’s easy to miss that the time complexity is O(n), where n is the number of elements in the list.

Go doesn’t have a similar utility function. This is definitely less convenient, but also more transparent. Your code needs to explicitly state if it copies a section of the list. See 2 ways to delete an element from a slice for a Go code example.

I think this assertion is wrong. del in python does exactly what it says it does. There are precisely three reasons to not use del:

o Because you have written your program, got all the low hanging performance fruits, and now need to optimise how you delete from (large) lists, and dequeue doesn't work for you
o you are arrogant and want to show everyone how clever you are because you understand how list operation are handled under the hood. So you have written your own.
o a.remove()/a.pop() you think is more readable.

It is far more important to be readable than to be fast in 90% of cases. If we all really cared about speed, then React/electron/et al would never be a thing.
Microsoft (+ Intel) murdered the netbook in one of the most insane self sabotaging plays I have ever seen.

Combine that with the launch of the ipad and the future of ARM based laptops was delayed over a decade. Netbook makers were poised to release Arm netbooks only to get scared when the ipad was announced.
I'm not protesting anything. Sure I would like to use something else but I don't see any other search engine with better, more relevant results yet. Nor do I see a better video platform or a better webmail (I am being subjective here ofc). You can't tell people to give up good things just because [insert evil things here] and offer no better alternative. You can escape the wrath of google of course, there's always Bing, Duckgo and others; Python, Ruby, Elixir, PHP, Java; Proton, yahoo mail, Zoho; Vimeo, DailyMotion;

Gmail, Search and Go (yes it's my fav language so far) runs or helps my business greatly and with a direct impact on my income so yes...I'll gladly share my fetishes with the big brother. I don;t want to but I have no better alternatives. Do you?

I think your frustration comes from the fact that you want to avoid using their products but can't find better alternatives. Also, no need to call people names and...use your own username; don't go green in fear of internet points.
http://35.237.60.51
Tablets they were definitely ahead of the game on, though the hardware wasn't ready to be affordable the OS has never done well in that environment so it didn't work out.

I'm not so sure about netbooks though: I remember that being something the played "catchup or kill" on. Any links to refresh my history?
The end of that headline is "but it's not really worth the effort and will likely not succeed".

Sure, SQL is not the most elegant language. But it works. It does what we need it to. Millions of developers knows it, countless tools speak it.

So I expect EdgeQL to go over like a lead balloon. Unless you can convince one of the big existing SQL servers to adopt it, almost no one will ever get the chance to use it, and it'll be a niche language for a niche database.
I hear you on local sourcing but they mentioned it last and didn’t quantify the impact. The stalled project mentioned in the Chronicle article was approved in under two years, not five. So I don’t think these are strong points vs what the source clearly emphasizes as the primary driver of labor cost: “number of workers relative to the number of units being built is still below the historical average.”

Which would be exacerbated if workers cannot afford to live in the region. I once saw a map set that visualized where you could transit to in various metros in under an hour from an affordable neighborhood. Even in NYC you could get to most of Manhattan, from the outskirts of Brooklyn or Queens. SF really stood out. You could only reach a few blocks around the BART stops. The whole city is cut off from a labor supply. It’s affecting staffing at restaurants and retail too — Nopa advertises for cooks in its menu because who wants to ride a motorcycle to San Leandro at 3am.
EdgeQL looks really interesting - I'm glad I read through the article.

I think the issue - for me - with articles like this is the tendency to take the stance of "${EXISTING_TECH} sucks, let's drop it for this new thing"

I would have found this way more compelling if this line was the very first in the article:

> The relational model is still the most generally applicable and effective method of representing data.
It's definitely a better C, but that's about it. Let's not kid ourselves. It's in many ways a language stuck in the past, for senile people, OCD's, or drones who are forbidden to produce non-uniformity and who want everything verbose and explicit.
I'm keeping an eye on https://github.com/aquametalabs/aquameta "Web development platform built entirely in PostgreSQL"
Hm. Technically, can we even say the evacuation was "completed" when a considerable amount of passengers never left the plane alive?

Have you ever unboarded a plane? If so, you clearly remember that every single hand luggage item, every single person on the isle causes congestion, even those in business class, right? I think it is impossible to state that "just the hand items that did not cause congestion were taken".

Further, was there a magic curtain between the areas of the plane that were unaffected from smoke and fire, and the affected parts? Fire and smoke spread, right? If not, at least some passengers were catched in fire and smoke after the plane had landed. Some of these passengers might have been able to escape, given an open isle. Only considering the opposite (unlikely case) is ignorant.

The ones taking luggage with them most certainly slowed down the process and caused a jam.

Once you stop in the isle, drag a luggage item down the isle and down an emergency ramp, you slow down the process. Unless somebody behind you is also causing a jam, you are directly to blame.
That did a 180 for me. I'm now a Blue Moon fan!
Id read up on the agile methodologies and not so much the processes but why they exist. Estimates within 30% is waterfall and may not be the best approach for web apps. It might be better for the client and you to use an agile approach. Or if not at least an open dialog where you can say oh X will take longer because of this technical issue, but how about we also do Y and Z, which are things you can do easily the add a lot of value etc. coding to strict estimates all the time sounds like a horrible situation.
No, it’s called adverse inference basically the prosecution can say that because you didn’t cooperate you are guilty.

That said you cannot convict anyone on adverse inference alone.
which site
The surprisingly beautiful science behind how paint is made
UWP targets Windows 10, Windows 10 Mobile, Xbox One and HoloLens.
Do DevOps Like the Mad King
RFC 3161 timestamps are used because they let people do something Mozilla doesn't care about at all and which was largely irrelevant here.

Alice the OS Vendor wants to let Bob the Developer make certificates saying these are his Programs, she is worried Bob will screw up so his cert needs to have a short lifetime, but her OS needs to be able to accept the certs after that lifetime expires so users can still run their Programs. So, Bob makes certificates and uses Trent's public TSA that Alice authorised to prove they were made when they say they were. Alice only has to trust Trent (who is good at his job) for a long period, and Bob who can be expected to screw up gets only short-lived certificates.

But Mozilla's setup doesn't have these extra parties. There is intentionally no Bob in Mozilla's version of the story, they sign add-ons themselves, so timestamping plays no role. If a 25 year TSA would be appropriate (hint: it would not) then a 25 year intermediate cert would be just as appropriate and simpler to implement for Mozilla.
No thread on submarine cables is complete without a link to Neal Stephensons classic "Mother Earth Mother Board" article:

https://www.wired.com/1996/12/ffglass/
If it only dates back 230 years, it's not ancient Breton or anything "ancient". 230 years would put it in the 17th or 18th century.
MS and Google are committing big time to supporting developers with excellent support for all things linux in ChromeOS and Windows. This is an area where Apple used to be strong (through shipping a BSD OS with decent inherent compatibility) but has made life harder in recent years by basically neglecting that side of their product portfolio.

The lack of servicability of mac book pros and the many hardware issues with screens, keyboards, etc. paired with a less than stellar hw. performance means that it just no longer is what it used to be: a best in class hardware platform with a no nonsense OS that just works. The hardware is increasingly meh, and the OS feels stale and limiting. Actually, it's been a while since Apple launched a product that I really wanted rather than grudgingly upgraded to (like my current MBP).

IMHO Apple is increasingly fighting itself into a corner by insisting on exclusivity to their hardware platforms through walled garden style software platforms. Inevitably some developers and users are ending up on the wrong side of that wall. E.g. Metal vs. Vulkan, Chromium vs Safari, Swift/objectiveC vs. just about anything else. It's all so pointless. They do the same things, more or less, without doing something better in a clear way. They're basically just obstacles for users and developers, not key enablers.

MS just threw in the towel with Edge and is together with Google creating an ecosystem outside of Apple where a lot of interesting things are happening in the next few years. I'm no longer sure a mac is the best platform to experience that. IMHO this is the biggest challenge against Apple's dominance in two decades. MS is back and moving very aggressively.

Apple is locking themselves out of important markets through their choices in software platforms. E.g. the gaming market (aside from casual stuff for IOS) is a multi billion dollar market where Apple is an after thought. I have some games on my mac but most of the big titles don't ship for mac. The mac platform is just too different for them to bother and when things like opengl get deprecated, things don't get any easier.

This is a failure on Apple's part to accommodate developmers and anticipate where the market is going. On paper, Apple is an ideal platform for games: homogeneous hardware platform and a user base that is spending liberally in the Apple store. Why would you not want to target that as a game developer. Apple ought to be making billions from this and they just aren't. This "our way or the highway" attitude is locking them out. VR is a great example of something that is happening almost completely outside the Apple platform. Countless wealthy people spending way too much money on games, PC hardware and VR goggles and Apple gave us Metal, broken Nvidia drivers, and tumbleweeds when it comes to any kind of meaniningful VR/AR on Apple hardware.

Apple needs a new strategy. Marzipan is not it. It does not appeal to developers outside their bubble and that's where the action is these days. They need a new strategy that reverses the trend of developers working around them. More of the same is not going to make that happen.
>> We Can Do Better Than SQL (edgedb.com)

No you can't. Many companies have tried, including very large and successful companies and have failed miserably. Just try out the JSON query language used by MongoDB, including their aggregation pipelines, and you will absolutely love SQL.
I completely agree, it's easier to write in Python. This is unfortunately extremely limited, as the convenience comes at the cost of a lack of control over memory and fine details. Other C-based languages may look convoluted but every line will tell you exactly what's going on (which comes with its own set of costs as well).
More Spanish than Russians,English or Irish,know what is causing climate change
It's complicated. It depends on the sensor and the motion of the object. Because the gravity vector doesn't change spatially very quickly if you are doing loops you can use the accelerometers to calibrate the gyro biases in the sensor fusion loop (via the gravity vector). You can also use the magnitude of the vector to calibrate the accelerometers (roughly). Nothing helps pin all that stuff down like a global position measurement though.
Some sensors are just less prone to bias drift as well.