skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My opinion is that the actor model, today, is best expressed through queue based microservices, especially on something like AWS lambda. If you're already follow microservice best practices, using async communication, there's a good chance that you're already benefiting from an actor oriented system.
> ...but no one would have adopted it if it weren't.

It's a C-like language with GC, that compiles to native code supported by an efficient runtime, and can work effectively with parallel/concurrent code. In many ways it's Java done right, or a more intuitive (and from certain POVs, preferable) alternative to Haskell and Ocaml. That would seem to be enough to drive adoption.
You can do a reasonable drip coffee off 300 watts, so that future is already here!
Google employed the primary maintainer of Python and paid him to work on it. You asked "did they have a giant corp behind them", the subtext there being that you could complete the sentence "as Go does". I'm merely pointing out that your example of Python is strikingly similar to Guido Van Rossum working at Google while he was BDFL of Python
If you mean that there is no pure capitalist society, sure. But I don’t think many people with experience from a socialist country prefer that even to Brazil at least not among millennials.
Perhaps that's where the impasse is, because I see the platform APIs to have a reasonable experience now. I much prefer the browser implementations most of the time. Except drag and drop and Ajax. Those are terrible.

I also preferred PrototypeJS over jQuery, it's approach of extending objects made way more sense than a god object that wrapped itself around my existing objects. I have simply never liked jQuery's approach or API.
OP itself says 'posted six years ago', so should probably have a (2013) - or thereabouts - in the submission title.
I can feel you there, Generics can become unwieldy especially when you're nesting several different generic types.

Can you tell me if you have found any kind of security issue relating to interfaces and reflect(ion) ?
Podunk State School, eh?
This sounded very interesting, so I looked it up. It seems that Sweden during that time seems to have had a 30-70% inheritance tax, depending on the year. That accounts for a loss of 70% of wealth pretty neatly.

https://iea.org.uk/blog/how-high-tax-sweden-abolished-its-di...

Please correct me if I missed something in my haste
I kind of read the original argument that Go is dominated by a "Google point of view", and there really isn't a significant alternative view that's as coherent. And that may be a risk.

It's not obvious to figure out how Go "plays with others". And it's unclear if that's much of a risk or not. As an outsider, you read of the funky module system duality and you wonder... "What if I don't want to 'work like Google'? Will this work in the future?" It's actually not that clear.

It's weird, because I don't get this sense, for example, with Kotlin projects in Android. You can write Kotlin in Android Studio. Or, in IntelliJ for backend code with Spring. And the tooling seems to be oriented in the same way. For most devs I've met, you can just swap Kotlin for Java, and everything else just works the same, and they don't get lost. You never have this sense of "well... _Google_ does it _this_ way..." when it comes to the tooling.
Use "capability" instead of "intelligence" then. Defined as "ability to solve any problem dwighttk has ever dreamt up."

There's pretty much no reason to believe capability peaks roughly above the brightest human.

Our brains aren't yet even integrated with hardware-optimized algorithm solvers on which to offload minimax or tree search problems, or solve simple game-theoretic situations, or any number of things a computer system is much better and faster at than a human.

It's just another one of those things that you can believe if you want to not spend time worrying about the ethics problem.
element.querySelector('span') would work from parent but not sibling as $(element).next('span') does.

You could certainly use that if you selected the parent, then did querySelector from parent (which for all I know is how $(el).next('span') works). So not equivalent, it's an extra step.

And that's kind of the point I think. Instead of writing this stuff (with much longer syntax) over and over again, jQuery might be better for casual web dev. Still. In 2019.

But whatever works for you. If you don't like it cool.
Was likely one of their earlier users, been on the platform for more years than I can remember. It's simple to use and covers all the basics for digital marketers who don't have time to wait for internal design resources to free up. Business cards, CPC ads, banners, etc. I just finished designing a 15-page downloadable PDF in it. Oh, and I only just upgraded to a pay account; been using it free for many many years.
I think there are a couple other values as well. Maybe this is similar to "networking," but there is a certain standardization that makes it easier to hire an MBA and plug them into a business that has already adopted the MBA business culture and methods. It also brings everybody up to a decent level in a variety of areas. Some folks may need to brush up on their quantitative skills, others on literacy, negotiation, etc.

Empirical example from talking to a number of MBA's: They all have the same beliefs about things like the purpose of the corporation, how to motivate people, and so forth.
It's rumored that companies like Intel and Nvidia will retaliate against review sites and publications for bad press coverage by slowing or cutting off access to preview release products for reviews.
Aren’t most of those soybeans used as feed for livestock?
Robots talking out loud to each other: Adventures with the Assistant API
These complaints from the semiconductor sector are not suprising. The stand to lose volume of sales in a technology that is resistant to IP theft.
From the operations side, I feel like SQS is a very sharp pair of scissors. In the hands of a good tailor, they'll make amazing things. On the other hand, most people use them to cut things they probably shouldn't, or just flat out Sprint around with them on a wet pool deck with their shoes untied.

A non-comprehensive list of ways I've seen my developers shoot themselves in the foot:

* Giant try-catch block around the message handling code to requeue messages that threw an exception. They neglected to add any accounting, so some messages would just never process. No one noticed until they saw the queue size never dropped below a certain amount during debugging.

* Queue behavior is highly dependant on configuration. Bad queue configurations result in dropped messages. Queueing systems provide few features to detect and alert on these failures (it's rally not their job), but building a system to track the integrity of the business process across queues is deemed to onerous.

* The built-in observability is generally not enough to be complete. I haven't seen a lot of great instrumentation libraries for SQS like there are for HTTP, meaning that observability is pushed on to the developer. They typically ignore that requirement because PMs rarely care until they realize we're unable to respond to incidents effectively.

* Most people vastly overestimate their scale. The number of applications I've seen built on SQS "because scale" that end up taking less than 100 QPS globally is significant. Anecdotally, I would say the majority of queue-based apps I have seen could have solved their scaling issues within HTTP.

* Many people want to treat queued messages like time-delayed HTTP requests. They are not, the semantics and design are totally different. I have seen people marshal requests to Protobuf, use it as the body of a message, and had another service read and process the request, and write another message to a queue that the first app reads back. It's basically gRPC over queues. Except that it solves none of the problems gRPC does, and creates a lot of problems. Just an example, how do you canary when you can't guarantee that the version of the app that sends the request will get the response to that request?

I think SQS is an amazing tool in the hands of people that know when to use it, and how to use it. But my experience has been that most people don't, and the ecosystem to make it available to people who aren't experts just doesn't exist yet.
> The GOPATH is also a huge win. You always know where everything is and it is really fast to figure out about dependencies or structure of the project.

I ... have some bad news.
Traditional Learning vs. Online Learning: Which One Is Better?
> I undervalued marketing dramatically and don’t know how to do it well, and I had a hard time speaking the language of investors.

These are all valid reasons, but I thought I'd mention that you may be able to get answers to some of these questions by reachig out to a local uni's MBA program.

Ask if they're looking to connect students with businesses as part of their capstone project. MBA students usually do a semester-long capstone where they work with a real business to develop marketing plans, pitches, product roadmaps, etc. It might be interesting to run a cohort of prospective MBAs through some of the scenarios you faced as a founder and see how they approach it.
Ahhh, the epsilon greedy strategy... I forgot I had read this until I was a few paragraphs in. If you have rare positive results, it gives you better statistics on your highest signal tests, while still evaluating the others (i.e. more than one alternative).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imdFhDbWDyM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy#Criminal_i...
> I'm optimistic about its continued development though.

Org is amazing, yes, but I'm not too optimistic about this - even if some of its more noticeable warts got fixed (a big one, for me, is the fact that you cannot nest quote blocks), it would still represent a tree of nodes, and trees are somewhat limiting where it comes to knowledge representation.

You can organize information in a tree, but it doesn't neatly fit that model, and just deciding where to put each snippet you captured can be a huge hassle.

> It's good to hear that you liked the Oscean/Nataniev tools; I haven't tried them and it could easily have been all style no substance. They certainly sound impressive. From what I've read, I have a feeling there might be something worthwhile there. And XXIIVV itself looks amazing, although I know that's just one implementation.

I'm not too sure, either, but I'm going to take a stab at implementing something Oscean-like. I want to see where this approach can take me.
Doubtful - 30 kB minified & gzipped is a lot of code, and the fact that jQuery doesn't help with your code organization/keeping code DRY much is a huge negative.
As always, it depends on your use cases. The data management and API footprint story is way simpler with SQS than with a relational database, and you don't have to worry about all the scaling complexity that comes with relational databases. Plus you get things like AZ resiliency for free. Staging SQS queues for demo/local/qa/dev envs is trivial if you are using CloudFormation.

Personally, I would never use a relational database as a queue, but I'm already very familiar with SQS's semantics.

Especially for temporary batch processing jobs, where I really don't want to be modifying my production tables, SQS queues rock.
It's a good thing it's an open source project and not a web service, then.
If you're sharing the repo, then you'll have to convince everyone to discard their copy of the original history and accept your modified version. And if that's done and everyone accepts the new history, the original can still be kept in each copy of the repo on another branch and the rewrite seen in the reflog. If commits are being signed, you can keep undeniable record of who contributed what in the original history, and who rewrote it.

If the point is to forbid you to modify even when you're the only person working on it, any common database will allow you to update and delete when you enter with administrative privileges, so I don't see the difference.
A Few Principles of Software Development
Just like the inventor of the other language Go. They even filed am early bug asking G to change the name.

Folk were using that Go, but they would use the Google Go.
Previous discussions worth checking out here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11437114

and here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4040022
Dyakonov‘s opinions have been rebutted by many prominent quantum information scientists and physicists. To put it charitably, his arguments don’t agree with the consensus. Check out [1] as an example criticism of his writing.

[1] https://scirate.com/arxiv/1903.10760
There is a world of difference between a CLA that gives your code to a for profit entity and one that gives it to a foundation that (at least in theory) only cares about the health of the language/community.
Thing is, even if countries go full-on isolationist and block all foreign websites, it only takes one hole in the dam for traffic to flow through. It's not like they're going to change the protocols so the separate networks are no longer compatible.
When I was in high-school, I'd drive to the local university and head to the 500s section: astronomy, physics, math, and other science stuff; and though there weren't all that many books, I'd spend a lot of time just looking through them. I'd get a book on blackholes, and it'd lead to physics, etc.
Yep, I've never been in a team where the process was not a regular topic of debate. Once it stops being a topic of debate, it actually just means people are no longer adapting. I prefer a good dose of pragmatism here. Changing the rules all the time is very draining on team morale. Similarly not adapting to obvious process issues is equally demoralizing.

Since everyone is doing, or claims to be doing, agile, the whole notion is completely meaningless. Unless they are actively advertising to be doing some form of waterfall, you can safely assume there is some notion of iterations involved.

What matters more these days is whether the team is mature enough to have continuous deployment without process bureaucracy. Deployment fear is a good sign the process sucks. If you have a need for human gatekeepers, something is wrong with the test automation. Deploying often and with confidence is a good sign you are dealing with a smoothly running team.
Do you have issues with fructose? Because carving for sweets is a typical symptom and garlic and onion can be problematic if you have a fructose intolerance.
Python was picked up by companies like Red Hat at the end of the nineties (e.g. in the Anaconda installer). So in Linux circles Python had already gained quite a bit of popularity.
Also one reason a lot of teams can't do more than two options (A, B, C, D, E, F, G, etc. testing) is because you need a TON of traffic for it to be statistically significant.
> In absence of more accessible complexity measurements, line counts do matter somewhat. E.g. the briefer a program is, the more readable it is (last time I checked, brainpower and time is much more expensive than computing power and bandwidth.)

There are as many exceptions to that rule are there are examples when it’s true. Code golfing, minifified code, shell 1 liners, Perl, etc.

Line counts mean jack shit.
Green New Deal
so, it's interesting. you can see it both ways. Money distills a certain kind of power; one of the sorts of power individuals can have within a lawful system; but... there are other kinds of power that money simply doesn't convey, at least not in a system with functional rule of law.

in societies with rule of law, money provides power in a way that is... limited. No amount of money (assuming rule of law, reasonable laws, uncorrupted law enforcement, etc..) lets you have a person killed, or even roughed up without lawful reason.

In that sense, even very small time gangsters, people who make way less money than a silicon valley engineer, have more power than a law-abiding billionaire, just 'cause they can credibly threaten to have you killed.

I mean sure, the rule of law should prevent the murder in both cases, but on a practical level, it's really a lot harder to prevent crimes in the first place than to punish them after they occur; The low-level gangster's seeming willingness to do things that could potentially cause them to spend a lot of time in jail is a kind of power in and of itself, one that is unrelated (some would say negatively correlated) with wealth.

Another interesting side to this is that you could also argue that outside of functional rule of law, money is... worth a lot less, just 'cause you have to put in a lot more effort to protect that money, if the government won't do it. Without the rule of law, if you have money but don't have the sort of power that flows from the barrel of a gun, someone will simply take the money from you using that sort of power. Sure, you can hire bodyguards, but absent rule of law, what's to stop them from just stealing your money? you need some of that other kind of power to convince your bodyguards to work for a wage rather than just stealing your money.
Clearly anything related to company IP belongs to the company, even if you come up with it in the evening.

I am of course talking about innovations or just work done in unrelated areas, while employed.

The idea that an employer owns everything you create is offensive to human dignity and happily that is not how it works in Europe.

You are even encouraged to start your own company, in some countries you have a legally enshrined right to take a LOA for six months and work on your business, and then come back to your old employer.
The recent ML-focused chips are really just high efficiency, low precision matrix multipliers. It turns out that operation can be made ~10x more efficient than previous processor designs, and is the bottleneck in inference for modern neural network models. Specialized hardware can also accelerate the training somewhat.

So having this hardware in your phone means that, for example, face recognition can run faster, and scene analysis during video recording takes less battery.

But the neural network inference speed is rarely the issue that requires both running models on servers and collecting user data. In your case of speech recognition, the problem is that training state of the art models requires 10s of thousands of hours of speech data. A recent Amazon paper actually used a million hours. For language models you need even more. Modern phones actually can perform speech recognition locally (put your phone in airplane mode, dictation still works) but it's using models trained using data from users that did talk to the server.
> And that may be a risk.

How is it a risk? Is Rust at risk because of Mozilla? What about Java given all its corporate sponsors?

People need to stop with this predictive FUD crap, it's tiring.
There is a notion here that the community is unified and all the core team needs to do is listen to the community and do what they say. In reality the community is too large to get a grip on and has conflicting ideas. You can run polls and read online arguments but in the end this won't result in a design.
I would think the outrageous antics with the Chinese governmnt directly attacking Github and using attacks with extremely wide reaching effects (using Baidu analytics links as a javascript injection attack) would uh... be more likely to damage access to Github.

But ignoring that, it seems to me like increasingly we're wanting distributed (dare I even say: federated) code forges even outside of China as people realize quite how overly and dangerously centralized their infrastructure and company are over Github.
The effect of temperature on people's cognitive performance
I recall a time when Google's SVP of Engineering saw some of us in
the cafeteria and congratulated us on a release; this was surprising
since we hadn't released anything recently, and it soon came up that
he thought we were working on the Dart language, not the Go language.

That's a great little story. As an IC, I always felt that VP's, Staff, etc would know everything about what was going on in their organization. This story lets me know that even at that level, they don't know everything.
While in general, I agree with that quote, I don't think that we have a problem with the Go core team in that respect. I think they do understand the problem but don't really have a solution.

I mean, the community has (so far) just a few cases were decisions of the core team were 'not so good'. Sometimes because we didn't like the process and sometimes because of the outcome. But I guess, in general, the majority of Go users likes what the core team does.

The problem is more about that many of us have a problem with Google (for a myriad of reasons) and seeing that the core team is tied so deeply into that company makes us worry about future decisions of the core team (as you said). But what could/should the core team do about it?

Suggestions?
That's probably overly dismissive. Obviously state schools are super valuable for undergrad- I went to one. I just wouldn't pay a ton of money for an MBA from one of them.
Nice read! Love that sarcastic proposal for the kextutil prompt.
This is dangerous. This will suppress the backup of files that were added to the repo with a manual override, against .gitignore rules.
Perfect, perfect advice. The key thing you have to get over is that you have to start with the small, boring, concrete stuff. Those are all the handholds you generally have with a stranger, even if it's a friend of a friend. But watch for those openings, something that they sound like they're interested in. And then dive in.

Also, try not to kick yourself too hard later when you decide you said something stupid. There's no score.

The only losing move is not to play.
Whoever owns the copyright on the code can change between licenses at will, they are not constrained by the GPL's restrictions on re-licensing (because they aren't licensing the code to themselves, they own it)
Let's further say that there exists another company that can produce the same widget with fewer emissions, but it costs $110 base price + $0 carbon tax to do so. Now the green company actually has a viable product, and consumers are incentivized to switch to it.
These are angels or spirit beings and their flying vehicles.
What is "too much" and "pseudo" about their activism? Yes, they indeed directly benefit from that. What is wrong with having a privacy-respecting monetization?
The main goal of React hooks was the shrinking of the component tree. Most people would probably create their own version of an SVG component and then they would have to nest the library component. Now they just have to throw in the hook and be done with it.
Is that relevant to the monoculture topic?
You're not wrong. Maslow's hierarchy is a thing.
The US is in many ways a third world country, but I don’t think many young people actually know or would prefer actual socialism, as experienced by hundreds of millions of Chinese and Eastern Europeans.
Go shot past similar languages because Google's backing got lots of instant attention from people who would never even hear of something like Nim or Clay.
Cheaper by what metric? Also, it depends on the variety. FWIW, my experience is that oranges are usually more expensive than apples, except for the few weeks that oranges are in season.
These are angels or spirit beings
My record for a dozen eggs was $0.37/dozen in summer of 2017 at an Aldi in a town go about it 30,000 in Iowa. It was roughly that price the whole summer.

From my understanding, that was below the price of production. 2017 was a very tough year for chicken farmers, with a huge oversupply. The chicken rendering (killing) operations were backlogged by many months. Farmers often had no choice but to raise the chickens they already bought, knowing full well they're going to be sold unprofitably.
I really like garlic, I'll even chew up a clove raw occasionally. But good god man, 15-20 is wayyy too much, you can't eat that and be allowed in any social scene outside of north jersey.