skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Not sure what to make of this. All of the points the author makes are obvious; of course a project originated at Google would have a majority-Google membership. Of course anyone is free to fork Go. Of course the code can be considered FOSS. Of course execs at Google couldn't care less about spec details. None of those things disprove the point that Go is not a community-driven project.

I think I've mentioned this a while back, but one only needs to look to the Guava library team to see what Google's general position is on community contribution: contributors need not apply. The maintainers there blogged at-length about the inferiority of non-Googlers and the tedium of dealing with the unwashed masses -- typical NIH syndrome -- this is the same philosophy that the Go team is influenced by, perhaps with only a less hostile tone.

The difference between an OpenJDK and an OpenGo project, in practice, would be that the two would be completely unrelated. Go core would go on ignoring community progress and, at best, Google would sue for the project to change the name and force a hard fork.
Ran into this recently. Docker container was running into issues until I changed "python:3.7-alpine" to "python:3.7.3-alpine3.9". It was because a package I was relying on from "apk add" changed between Alpine versions.

I could probably safely make it "python:3.7-alpine3.9" (instead of pinning to Python 3.7.3), since the issue was the Alpine version, but at this point I'm starting to really buy into the whole reproducible build thing.
13m04s: "Some guys were getting bank angles up around 60 degrees of bank at mach 3 and it just, uh, that's not good. Come very very close to losing the airplane." [He then proceeds to talk about a lamp.]
30 Years After Tiananmen, a Chinese Military Insider Warns: Never Forget
Was This Google Executive Deeply Misinformed or Lying in The New York Times?
I had the same experience. I worked in 2 different companies, in 4 different teams. And I can see the value of planning. In the first company we broke down our 2 weeks work into 3-5 hour long tasks. By doing that we had to know exactly what is the work needed and we discovered the work that we didn't think about at the very beginning. Plannings would take 1-2 days. It was exhausting but in my opinion worth it.
In my current company we create 5-8 tasks for whole sprint and when someone takes it then they work on it for 2-3 days and discover more work to be done. At the end we usually don't make it on time. Even if we do, we spend about 40% of our time on bugs/improvements that we didn't think about.
My personal view is lack of experienced scrum masters and developers who have never seen scrum working at least once xD Lack of management support who would push the process.
My favourite: ("what?! you want to spend 2 days on planning?! I can implement it in that time!").
Chernobyl has become an 'accidental wildlife sanctuary' thriving with life
> I find it especially offensive on paid services like Hulu.

What??? You can pay for ad-free hulu! Why are you complaining?
It's not impossible at all. Math tells me that growth capitalism can't be maintained forever. The only question is when, and under what conditions, it will end.
Seems like there's some sort of alternative option - whatever arrangement the state of California has with the department of Homeland security. I don't fully understand it, just get glimpses from brief conversations with tsa agents as they pat me down, but it seems California self-funds tsa, meaning for example all stations are usually manned, and there was no slowdown during the government shut down.

Probably many states can't afford that though.
Never forget that it was Obama that gave them union rights. We’ll never get rid of it.
The amount of light will still be appreciable and will affect many kinds of observatories around the world, even at magnitudes less brightness.

You also can't slew a telescope in space like you can on ground, it would be extremely cost prohibitive in terms of fuel.

"moving telescopes to space" is the equivalent of "let them eat cake" comment in this funding environment. It sounds like a wonderful proposition until you realize how many observatories we have on the ground and their utilization and how expensive it would be to replicate half that utilization. It's already not easy getting time on a telescope, if everybody had to be crammed on 15 space observatories costing $1B/each, there would be no observational time for grad students or post docs let alone funding for research. You also kill follow up observations on temporal events.

Of course, maybe the government could reach an agreement with SpaceX to send up the observatories for free and send some money the way of the astronomers for seriously messing up the sky, but there's no reason to expect SpaceX to be a good citizen of the night sky.
for the downvoters ... https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/02/good-bad-and-ugly-an...
garbage website, I flag anything from the guardian and suggest that everyone who wants HR to remain valuable do the same. This goes for and any non-specialized, non-hacker, commercial media, and politics-first sites.
The TSA is indeed embarrassing, but since we don't have audit data from the private security in previous eras we don't actually know if things are getting better or worse. There is also the notable fact that airplane-based terrorism in the US is now extraordinarily low, significantly lower than before 9/11. The causality here is hard to disentangle.

In any case, I purposefully said "tightened" not "improved". All I need for my comment is that the rules have become more stringent since 9/11 (e.g., shoes off, no liquids, etc.), which is obviously true.
If only we had some field of science that studies toxins, We could call it Toxicology.... All joking aside Alcohol is classified as a group 1 carcinogen and the Europe has yet to ban it
Bread in the US, and to be fair a lot of of supermarket bread in a lot of countries (UK, Australia, I'm sure tons of others) has a variety of ingredients added to help keep the bread "fresh". It used to be common to buy fresh baked bread on a daily basis and only use it during that day, or perhaps a day or two afterwards. There are still some places in the Western world where this is common, for instance in Munich, Germany you can't walk more than a couple of blocks without finding a bakery with fresh bread for relatively cheap prices. In the US and UK fresh bread is now a luxury item and can be quite expensive compared to the bread laced with preservatives to keep the bread "fresh" for a couple of weeks.
Food packaging is full of toxic chemicals – here's how it could affect health
Saving Capitalism: A Review
What terms did your google search use? A quick google for "listerine ingredients" brought up a label [0] that shows caramel (sugar) as an inactive ingredient. Only one I could find though. Most others however do seem to use artificial sweeteners

[0] https://www.drugs.com/otc/113880/listerine-01.jpg
> You need to search smarter, not deeper, as this result shows.

This result pits a GPU with 10,000 GOPS worth of compute and 500GBps of memory bandwidth against a CPU with only 100 GOPS of compute and 50GBps memory bandwidth.

All I'm saying is: how do we test a "fair" comparison? Well... lets (somehow) rewrite the CPU algorithm to run on the GPU. Its an unsolved problem, maybe its completely unsolvable. But its at least a research-question worth pondering.

---------

The TL;DR is: I think its possible to port Stockfish's evaluation functions over to a GPU. However, there are numerous unsolved research problems that need to be solved if this were to happen. The hash-table needs to be reworked, the search tree needs to be reworked, "Lazy SMP" won't work on a GPU, etc. etc. Most of the "tree search" methods need to be completely rewritten from scratch to be GPU-based.

But the fundamental evaluation functions of Stockfish are brutally simple and look like they could work on a GPU shader to me.
Yeesh, I know it's popular to dump on the fact that their recruiting process (perhaps unduly) is tilted towards CS grads, but this is the first time I've seen someone go full conspiracy theory and assume it's part of some nefarious tendency to treat employees poorly in general.
> Perhaps they don't form the social contacts because they don't want to make others who get to know them be the ones to suffer sadness when they die first

Are you suggesting that people with low social interactions either consciously or subconsciously are aware they have a lower lifespan? That seems like a greater leap in faith than people experiencing negative side effects from lack of social interaction.
I do not know that is true either.

What happened is some really big groups formed. The vast majority of smaller communities continued right on.

Many grew by posting in the big places.

Now that big places may be found toxic, or out of favor, the smaller ones will get new attention.

The big places got hype and attention. That is all an addition, and a somewhat unwelcome one just like many smaller communities said it would be.
Most big content websites aren't of much actual value.
So we have an assembly line and the people contributing the IP for running the 'front half' of the line can't get the production rates up enough to saturate the 'back half' of the assembly line, which means the production rate is lower than expected?
The fact I needed to log into google to view this seems ironic either way.
How did you arrange getting into a gig like this? Do you cite it on your resume as a Google contractor gig? Did it help your career much?
What kind of example does it set for FreeCodeCamp to rely on a site like Medium as opposed to making its own site and sharing that code on GitHub? Budding engineers don't need to rely on sites like Medium when they can put together their own sites and learn about SEO.
I do too, which is why I preferred prefix await.
I'm suffering serious Frequency illusion with Chris Voss - I feel like his stuff is popping up everywhere around me (ended up watching two videos yesterday).

I find myself actively fighting the impulse to read the book. I can't decide if I'm a savvy, advertising-aware consumer; or maybe I'm just another sucker.
Sorry but 600 pilot fatalities in the Chernobyl disaster is just plain nonsense, no matter what you might believe about soviets.

> I think there's a lot of uncertainty in talking about Chernobyl, since most of the information published by the Soviet authorities was intentionally incorrect or misleading, designed to downplay the significance of the accident.

You seem to be assuming malice when there's mostly incompetence, and giving too much credibility to huge organizations; they aren't perfectly coordinated black boxes in control of everything they are trying to do. Chernobyl disaster has been cross documented top to bottom in that regard. Most of the missing info was due to corruption, see the song "Я вынес из зоны" by Sergey Uryvin as an example. There was an attempt to downplay the incident early on, but one simply cannot hide the disaster of that scale. Neither there was much desire to do this internally, after the scale became apparent. Besides, most of the information wasn't coming from authorities.

The only reason one can be uncertain about such ridiculous claims is unfamiliarity with the details of the disaster, and/or lack of understanding of culture at the time and also the language.
Meanwhile I just went through security at PDX and it was seriously the nicest thing ever. It's amazing how vastly different TSA is depending on what airport you're at.
Google should at least relicense Go under Apache 2 to clarify the uncertainty.
In fact it actually has.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1796_United_States_presidentia...
Your Amazon comment is obvious but I hadn't thought of it.

I have to confess that I still go to my local Barnes and Noble to browse the tech section to see what's new and to browse titles I haven't heard of. I can't do the same at the public library because there are a lot of old books about obsolete tech right next to the (few) brand new books.

The good thing about Barnes and Noble is that their selection is human curated because of their physical constraints. On Amazon, I can spend an entire week browsing the "Customers also Purchased" section.

I've resorted to taking photos of the interesting shelves so I don't have to go there as often.
Doesn't that just give you Thallium?
The main reason is mobile responsiveness. With <table>, you need to conform to all the table related elements like <tr>, <td>, etc, which is fine on desktop.

However when you want the table to collapse vertically instead of staying horizontal on mobile, trying to overwrite the browser defaults of these elements with CSS is a pain and not recommended. Using grid just makes it easier to change the display in CSS.

You could argue that using CSS display:table works too, but display:grid just brings a lot of other niceties for controlling how you want the page to look.
Movies from 80/90 made the view of NY trash barge kind of iconic, when did cities like NY stop just dumping their trach into the ocean? Google came up with 1992 NYTimes article declaring the end.
It's one of the many symptoms of overpopulation.

It's also likely to only get worse especially with climate change and the massive population movements it'll cause. The Syrian civil war and resulting refugee crisis is arguably an early glimpse of this [1].

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/science/earth/study-links...
I formed the opinion a while ago that we should go a step further: ban advertising entirely (not exactly a new idea, Bill Hicks came first [1]). Billboards, TV ads, newspaper ads, paid-for articles, promoted Instagram content, all internet ads, everything.

One of the main tenants of capitalism is that it naturally produces a meritocracy. Products which are of a higher quality or cheaper than their competitors should, in theory, sell better. Advertising in any form subverts that. More expensive and lower quality products can completely outsell competitors by out-advertising them, which fundamentally undermines capitalism. I do not believe that any limits can be imposed which will make a meaningful impact: banning individual forms of advertising which we think have gone too far will be a never-ending game of whack-a-mole. Kill the industry entirely.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHEOGrkhDp0
What I find odd about this is that there does exist at least one perfectly fine micropayment system. It's running in my laundromat (the company is Heartland Micropayments), where I can use my credit/debit or laundry payment card. When I wash and dry three loads of laundry, I don't get 6 charges on my card. I get one.

It seems like it wouldn't be a huge amount of work to bring this to the internet, particularly since it's using the internet for its communication in the first place.
It is not a coincidence that you are seeing lots of old content about Chernobyl resurfacing now.

Still, the show is amazing.
tl;dr: California banned asking for salary information in job interviews.

This happened 10/2017 and took effect 01/2018 though—I'm not really sure why it was posted today.
You hardly need to login. Stop spreading FUD!
i agree with your sentiment about the finance industry, but an economist would argue that it did create value through greater monetary velocity (which is basically buying more stuff).

but to take your points further... when the limits of tangible goods constrained by population, like housing and food, are reached, a voracious economy must move to less bounded products like (access to) money itself to continue growing. similarly, advertising created monetary velocity out of access to attention, an intangible industry relatively untapped until the 20th century unlocked it.

the long-term approach to aligning the value created by these industries with our collective expectations is of course to change the metrics by which they're evaluated, but that will take decades (just as doctrines like trickle-down economics that got us here took decades to take root). lots of people here have noted that it's not bad to find out about products you're interested in, but what we don't like is having our attention wasted on things we don't care about in an effort to manipulate us into buying things we don't really need (by exploiting information asymmetries about the value of those products).

in the meantime, we have to continue having this discussion and putting our money where our mouths are.
Presumably it's because some people aren't simple-minded enough that they need to desperately cram every possible statement about any topic into the same tired framework of victims and oppressors.

Try and imagine having the ability to be concerned with the plight of disposable labor in the modern economy and yet still (gasp) capable of noticing and commenting on other facets of the situation, like how the press chooses to frame their coverage: that's what's happening here.
The North Face Abuses Wikipedia to Increase Google Ranking
Ah, but isn't the whole point of an `async` function that it syntactically erases the notion of blocking on an operation? If you ignore the fact that it blocks the async function (and yields control back to the executor), then `foo.await` isn't really "doing" anything at all, it's just handing you back the future's output.

Having said that, I'd have to assume that `fut.await` does consume the future, which normal field access doesn't do. Personally, I'm ok with the tradeoff that says "this keyword looks like field access but it consumes the receiver, but as a result we don't have these extra parens all over the place on a keyword", especially because going the other way introduces other costs (e.g. it looks like a method call and yet can't be referred to as Future::await).
That's what has always driven me nuts. No matter what the security process is, you know exactly how many people are going to show up within a couple hour window. So you should be able to make at a fairly constant amount of time. The flights are scheduled months ahead, everyone bought their tickets weeks ahead and confirmed within 24hrs. Everyone is beholden to adding more security steps like adding a personal phone number, DOB, and showing government ID, so if needed, we could add more steps to make things faster or help with capacity--many people are glad to pay for it with Clear and PreCheck.
and ... http://www.euro.who.int/en/media-centre/sections/press-relea...

"Over 41 000 children and adults in the WHO European Region have been infected with measles in the first 6 months of 2018"
Yea, I've seen all kinds. For a federal agency there's very little consistency.

California has been the best. Hawaii was pretty good but mostly because they were so chill and nice. Los Angeles was the most strict but most engaging in conversation. They picked apart my lockpicking set, then let me in after making sure there wasn't a knife tucked in there, talking about the hobby the whole time.
I stopped flying altogether when the body scanners became mandatory. Biometric collection frightens me because it could be used in the future for presently-unknowable reasons and purposes which today might seem absurd but in the future could be terrifying. It’s hard to discuss without sounding like I’m wearing a tinfoil hat, but then I would never have believed in the 80’s that in the 00’s I’d consent to have an agent put his hand down my pants in order to board a plane, certainly would never have believed we’d actually have a Department of Homeland Security, TSA, FEMA...
> they took away my access to Memegen. Memegen was the last straw, so I left.

Like many things about the way Google was run, I really didn't appreciate Memegen enough until I left.
Automaton Conceptions from History
working fine for me logged out in an incognito window, not sure what you're referring to
That works if there is a single source from where people learn about your product. If you product is popular enough someone else will simply make a nice table comparing your 7" screen with your competitions 8" and 9" screens.
It sure as hell asked me to log in...
Yes, ACA is based on projected income:

https://www.healthcare.gov/income-and-household-information/...

However, for most people, the primary number to estimate this is your adjusted gross income, which they explicitly instruct to use line 7 on the 1040. It's not entirely clear to me who the regulatory authority is now that the tax penalty has been taken away for not carrying insurance, but I'm pretty sure it's going to look bad if you say that your income is near $0 to get a subsidized plan and your actual income is above the subsidy level and the IRS will have this information.

As far as holding the money in a C-corp, sure. However, then you're going to pay the corporate income tax rate for keeping the money in C-corp, file much more complicated paperwork than you would as a sole-proprietorship (depending on the state), and then likely have to pay additional taxes or play games once that money turns into income. All of this is to save on what's going to turn out to be likely less than $5k in premiums, which are already tax deductible as a self-employed person.

I'll still contend that the comment is largely false given the idea is to save money by pretending that there's no income. The IRS isn't dumb and they'll get their taxes eventually even if it requires an audit. It seems like a huge hassle and liability to play this game to save such a small amount of money. If this isn't a small amount of money, then the OP isn't in a position to start a business, unfortunately.
It would also be interesting compare if a consumer could pay for a product without advertising vs having a product for "free" with advertising, does this finding still hold true?
The idea is that employers ask employees their salary history. I believe some studies show that this tends to perpetuate pay bias. Also, most career people will advise against sharing that information.

Interestingly, I work for a movie company, where all work is contracted. For directors, screenwriters, stars, etc. It is very traditional to base pay on your "quote" = what you got paid last time. Now they can't ask what the person got paid last time.
If you have any G cookies set at all you will be forced to log in
versus ~ 400 in the US.
I'm not sure reading the phrase "genital analyzer" makes me feel like you are giving an unbiased description of the events.

In the future I would highly recommend overnight Amtrak service. At most someone may ask for an ID. And I find it to be a much more pleasant overall experience.
I wonder if they'll give all these small sellers the co-mingle option. If they switch to a model where the original vendor pays the extra to not co-mingle, it might indeed address the counterfeit copy. (Buy at MSRP from the original vendor, and be assured that it's genuine, or buy a discount version from another vendor, and take what you get.)
It didn’t ask me to log in but I believe you because I’ve had google groups ask me to log in to read regular posts before.
I hate to be the typical HN contrarian, but I actually love advertising. I think its messaging and visual language is unparalelled in its ability to succinctly depict the modern values and behavioural norms of our societues.

If you take an 'observe not absorb' approach, advertising can be extremely insightful of where the needle has moved or is moving.
It seems the bulk of the rebuttal is a reposting of Russ' blog post from 2015 "Go, Open Source, Community" found here: https://blog.golang.org/open-source

I was hoping that this would address the package management fiasco, but it did not.