skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm not sure what you mean by that, but I do know that people with cystic fibrosis have a bad habit of dying of infections from microorganisms that are usually not deemed infectious for most humans. When you google the names of the microorganisms in question, some of them are used by scientists for bioremediation of petrochemical spills.

In other words, they eat petrochemicals. They also think people with CF are tasty as hell while not much caring for "normal" humans, which looks rather suspect to me.

So I suspect that the defect in the CFTR allows plastics and petrochemicals generally, plus metals, to accumulate at higher than normal rates in the CF population. I have run this hypothesis past a guy with a PhD in Biology who suggested that it was not simply straight up crazy talk. He said the function of the CFTR should have some implication for how the body processes metals, IIRC.

(He's a member of HN and is more than welcome to chime in for accuracy's sake if he happens to see this remark, realizes DoreenMichele used to post as Mz and I am talking about him -- hello, nice person with PhD in Biology, and thank you for the awesome feedback.)

Our oceans are getting increasingly polluted with plastic and we increasingly see, for example, dead whales on beaches who are full of plastic and these two things are deemed not unrelated, from what I gather. So it seems that there comes a point past which "normal" humans with a normal CFTR who do not have CF may be unable to avoid similar bioaccumulation of plastics/petrochemicals and other toxic chemicals as I am hypothesizing drive some deadly infections in the CF population.

So, perhaps we can extrapolate from the experiences of the CF community that as our world gets increasingly toxic, it will negatively impact human health generally, including, but not limited to, making us more prone to infection from microogranisms that were never a problem before.

Arguably, this is probably already happening and may be contributing to the rise of Super Bugs. It may not be merely overuse of antibiotics causing this problem. It may also be widespread environmental changes, including but not limited to the increasing prevalence of microplastics across the entire world.
I've never been asked how I want the product I buy packaged, or what material its shell should be made of. I'm also never asked whether I'd prefer the product without a design flaw that makes it trash in a year or two (if not immediately). Doesn't help that the shops' shelves are full of equally bad trash products. Race to the bottom, baby.
XHTML 2.0 was very different from HTML semantically. Some of its tags (ARTICLE, SECTION, MENU, etc) wound up smashed into HTML5 later and became semantically meaningless again, but XHTML 2.0 tried to be more semantically sound than HTML and is a large part of how W3C lost the war to HTML5, because semantics are hard and most of the browsers didn't care about semantics.
Shut down social media platforms, ex-Facebook adviser urges
edit I'm using security as an example of a regulated aspect of software/IT systems. I am aware there are others.

100% agree - My point was more that regulators tend to use policy and process artifacts as proof of security compliance. The idea that more highly regulated/audited IT sectors are inherently better at security is probably false. The audits just aren't stringent/detailed enough and there's aren't enough incentives for executives/boards to do more than the minimum. Which is why the values/opinions/ethics of those decision makers becomes key.

The most secure 'company' I worked for was a large research university because it was a priority from the director and we were constantly getting probed by overseas IP addresses. On the other hand, the worst company I worked at in terms of security was in the payment processing world. We were PCI DSS compliant and audited almost continuously by various interested parties (banks, card brands, third parties, etc.). I don't think any of our people were bad/inept but at the end of the day our policy artifacts made us sound/appear way more compliant than we were. The problem was upper management didn't care (allow us time or $$) about closing the gaps in implementation unless we failed audits or pen testing. We didn't fail but no one in IT thought we were doing enough. We didn't have enough auditing and regularly had inexplicable 'bugs' reported that honestly could have been evidence of network intrusion but we had no proof either way.
Can you show us an example of, eg, an HTTP request?
Right click "Add to Firefox" button and use "save as..". This will get you an xpi file which you can unzip and inspect.

Many addons will use some packing method, bundle all kinds of stuff into their content scripts (jQuery, etc.). It can be hard to review.

Some addons are quite horryfying (you see stuff like `<span ...>${someText}</span>`) (missing escaping, etc.). I'm quite sure there are some content scripts out there, that have XSS issues, that can be triggered from the page itself. This is great on pages like github, where there's quanta of user controlled content.

So if you want a suggestion for a clever attack:

1] make an extension for facebook or twitter or github that reorganizes the wall somewhat and make a `mistake` like assigning some user controlled content via innerHTML. This will probably pass review.

2] Suggest your addon to your target.

3] Post your payload as a message/tweet/whatever to your target. Now you have extension assisted XSS.

Pretty easy to add XSS to any page, with plausible deinability.
I think we need both.
Here’s my American perspective:

Centre look and sounds like “cent-ruh” rather than the rolled out sounding of err sound to make “center”. Then again, how you say it is a bit different, too.
Whether Assange (Or Anyone Else) Is a “Journalist” Is an Unimportant Question
I think there is something nuanced here about my point that you aren't addressing. I have served Facebook ads through both a secondary vendor and through their interface. I can tell you with 100% certainty that my ads through the second party vendor overdeliver impressions based on the response rate of the ad. Unless my ad is complete garbage, I always get more impressions than I have paid for.

That's right, I get free impressions if my ad (not boosted post) does better.

How else I know this is that their video completion rate when calculated by impression is absolutely abysmal compared to other platforms. This is why they don't address VCR in their own interface. They want the ability to serve your ad however they see fit until there are results.

Also, I can ask Facebook to charge me only for plays, and you even alluded to the fact that you can pay for engagement as well. This backs up my point that Facebook will serve your ad as many times as it wants until it finds the right user-ad fit.

That being the case, I go back to what I already said. Yes, impressions are very important here, but they are not exactly what you are paying for. You are paying for user reach and engagement.

"Your ads will be deployed evenly over time, and you'll never be charged over your budget"

But your ads are usually served more than you ordered. Unlike other platforms, where I only get exactly as many impressions as I pay for.

In a way it is similar to Adwords Quality Score for CPC.
Creating Beautiful Virtualized Lists with Material-UI and React Virtuoso
Indeed, "volatile sig_atomic_t" is the recommended official C way to change a flag from a signal handler.
Isn't this obviously anti-competitive?
At my work, we use an internal config store developed by another team for app config management, versioning and audit history.

It’s a bit flaky so we’ve been looking to replace it but don’t want to spend the company’s money building it. We’ve been looking but have not really found anything OSS.

We’re looking for:

- store text/binary documents

- full audit history of document versions

- get/put like api to retrieve/replace documents

- GUI to explore history/documents

- easily deplorable on Windows (ideally without an app server)

Anyone got any (more) suggestions?
Sorry for the pedantry, but you're confused. Mr. Fusion had little to do with time travel: it was a commercial device which Doc got in the future, and which simply generated power from whatever you wanted to pour into it. Doc's flux capacitor is what allowed time-travel, and it needed a lot of power. So before, he had to either use uranium or lightning, but after installing Mr. Fusion he didn't need either of those hard-to-get things.

So, if Mr. Fusion was a Google product, as soon as McFly transported the DeLorean to the future (outside Google's window of support) and the onboard computer synced the time over-the-air and the Mr. Fusion updated its clock, McFly would be stuck in the future, though presumably in that time he should be able to find some competitor to Mr. Fusion which he could replace it with (with Doc's help; McFly never seemed to be very good with technical things).
Right, this is what happens with eventually-consistent systems. In the case of a retail system most failures are easily resolved by either resulting in delayed delivery, drop-shipping, or refunding the customer's order. It's not the end of the world.

Even banking works like this because settlements are done asynchronously. Some years ago there were several instances of an attack where someone got a hold of a rich middle easterner's debit card number and PIN, found a way to set the withdrawal limit up, then had crews of people hitting every ATM in Manhattan in one day. They were able to steal millions of dollars because the balance check was in real-time but the settlements weren't (so the balance was not drawn down).
The Complete Reference of Array in JavaScript
why would it be a good thing if companies spent more on fines than on costs to comply with regulations?
Are there any good links about ‘landing stations’?
Outschool Raises $8.5M Series A Funding to Enhance Kids’ Education
> - The temperature is much hotter/colder than normal

I like this 1999 story about a flaky test at Be:

> Two test engineers were in a crunch. The floppy drive they were currently testing would work all day while they ran a variety of stress tests, but the exact same tests would run for only eight hours at night. After a few days of double-checking the hardware, the testing procedure, and the recording devices, they decided to stay the night and watch what happened. For eight hours they stared at the floppy drive and drank espresso. The long dark night slowly turned into day and the sun shone in the window. The angled sunlight triggered the write-protection mechanism, which caused a write failure. A new casing was designed and the problem was solved. Who knew?

https://www.haiku-os.org/legacy-docs/benewsletter/Issue4-22....
I'm not as opinionated on Haskell, but APL is both a programming language AND executable math notation. It's just the notation is different than what most are already used to.
Postfixed and preceded by a dot is my understanding:

pub async fn do_stuff() {
// ...
}

// elsewhere, inside a fn
// as svnpenn points out
let result = do_stuff().await;
The article covers quite a few topics in set theory so that suggests that it does provide for advanced topics.

If you mean advanced proofs, again the article may be the right place to start.
What happens in the repeated game? Seems more applicable to the current problem.
Or design patterns, software, modern database architectures, cloud services, how to write production code...

I'm not trying to slight the Dept. of Stats. I love statistics. I've found studying PhD stats textbooks more valuable for my data science career than learning the latest deep net framework. I'm just noting there is a need for other tools.
That's all fine. I think you will agree, though, that engaging with Marx's writing, however critically, is not the same as offering an explicit correction to Marx's theories or putting them to the test. It's more of a case of "thinking with Marx". The tropes of Marx's thinking are kept alive somehow rather than dismissed — there is faith that Marx and the others had put their finger on something important and that their writing continues to be worth discussing.

An attempt to entirely refute Marx or Freud would not be taken seriously in academia — there's always some kind of affirmative stance in relation to the old theorists. Unless you are some kind of genius or enfant terrible.
This makes sense, but it's very unfortunate. In Utah there are quite a few small communities that have no services at all so you have to drive maybe 20 to 30 minutes for the closest anything. Needless to say this sucks. In the rare event that a small town has only one station it is virtually guaranteed to have extremely high prices (with one exception that I know of). It's one of the reasons why even tho I prefer a more rural place to live, I opt to live closer to the big city instead. We are getting to a point where the opportunities and conveniences of the big city are making small town life much more difficult (in contrast) and expensive. You have to forgo many conveniences. Perhaps things will change in the future, but that is definitely not the current trend.
There isn't one, we just accept the fragility of our options.
Another factor: commercial use and potential hazard zoning. Cities may disallow gas stations in large areas.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64)
AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko)
Chrome/64.0.3282.140 Safari/537.36 Edge/17.17134

Hmm... looks like it's entirely practical to look at the Chrome/version for feature detection. And that they are specifically adding Edge/* detection to disable Edge instead of detecting as chrome compatible.

Edit, sorry, wrong/old edge above.. new Edge below.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64)
AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko)
Chrome/76.0.3800.0 Safari/537.36 Edg/76.0.173.0

And the new "Edg" instead of "Edge" means they likely had to ADD detection to disable it.
You and I read the article very differently. Based on your comment, it sounds like you interpreted the article as implicit advocation for the idea that mathematics should be represented in a programmatic (i.e. computable) way.

I didn't pick up any ideology in my reading. My interpretation of the article is that the author wanted to provide tips on how to implement mathematics, for two reasons:

1. People have to implement nontrivial mathematics from time to time, and

2. Most mathematics doesn't concern itself with obstacles to implementation, because it doesn't have to.
Not caring what other people mock us for is a very happy medium.
>Measuring blood glucose with contact lenses? How? Lag time is around one hour for eye liquid. Your are dead and the sensor does not know it yet. Your need to be below 10 min lag time.

Why? What if you don't care about having your blood glucose data that quickly, and just want to see the overall trend, even if it is delayed an hour? This won't help people who really need to be able to see what their glucose level is right this second, but for others it's a lot more convenient than having to prick yourself every morning.
And Rube Goldberg machines are engineering marvels, but we shouldn't laud the engineer who builds one to transport a part from here to there when a "simple" conveyor belt does the job just fine.

How much of that complexity was necessary? How much of it was chosen to boost someone's CV?
We started giving a book or two with 2 - 3 chocolates on top. Even if the kid reads it in a week, they can then bring it to the used book store to trade it in for a different book.
Non-deterministic testing is related to fuzzing, which is a well-known way to find security bugs. The problem is that it's often too expensive to do all the time.
Bill Nye: techno-optimism is just another way of living in denial (2015)
Here is a small TCP client example: https://github.com/rustasync/runtime/blob/master/examples/tc...

Note "async fn main" on line 15, and the ".await"s on 21 and 24.

Now, if you read my other comment about executors, this is using a crate called "runtime", which handles submitting it for you, see the `#[]` bit on line 14. Regardless, the syntax would look like this even without this crate; it just removes some boilerplate around the executor and submitting your future to it.
To use things that you understand? It's perfectly possible to read through the documentation/code for the things that you want to use.
> We're told not to build our own since that's a waste of time and our version won't be as good.

We're told not to build our own since we don't understand what we're using
The heart of it is that we don't know how much humans affect the temperature increase.

If we don't know that then how can we know whether we can do anything about it?
The ORM part is a thin wrapping that is there to explain Haskell enough to have type-checking. The goal is really to have Haskell type-check the requests you make.
Study what you use of course. Contribute if needed.
Ask HN: What board games are you playing?
What board games are you playing? What's your #1 and why? For me, board games are a great way to be away from screens for a few hours, and they fill up my socializing gas tank too.
It's basically just like a method call on a future:

use hyper::Client;
let client = Client::new();

let resp = client.get(url).await;
From experience, so many things that graph dbs are not worth the effort in something like 99% of cases. Stick with postgres or similar if you can!
By your same argument, if a state is running the emergency services, what guarantee is there e.g. a heart attack in Los Angeles doesn't end up in Redding?

It would be possible to have emergency services organized nationally. I wonder if cities that overlap two or more states share emergency services. Seems like that would be ideal so that you'd always end up in the closest hospital.
Also, XHTML 2 tried to push people to tags with defined semantics like ARTICLE, SECTION, MENU, etc. Most of the tags exist now in HTML5, but their semantics were neutered in the transition.
Modern web browsing provides for this with same-origin policy. Same-origin policy can be negated by the server if it sets an overly lax CORS directive.

So this is something that's secure by default, but can be broken if the "random service you run on your computer" decides to break it. I don't think that's an issue with the browser's security model.
There is no happy medium. Due to its complexity, the whole ecosystem of modern software engineering is inherently dysfunctional. Being able to understand existing solutions and to create your own solutions that aren't broken toys is both essential.
This is the fifth or so site that Google has broken for Chromium Edge in the past month. It's clearly no coincidence - it's the same constant stream of "oops" that plagues Mozilla, never ending "teehee we don't support beta browsers (while working fine with chrome canary)" or "teehee accidental UA detection mistake (when Microsoft specifically made the new Edge user agent different from the old)" incidents.

Microsoft should make the new Edge pretend to be Chrome, full time. Just never mention Edge or Edg or Microsoft in the UA at all.

I'm sure they can tell Netflix to detect their fancy 4K DRM differently. Of course that can be used to detect new Edge still, but then at least it's just that much harder to say "oops" when you have to go out of your way to detect a specific feature.
Apple refreshes the iPod touch with the iPhone 7’s processor
If you taint everything in your relationship with "if we divorce", that is not a good sign, nor is it a healthy thing for a marriage.
"Don't build your own" does not imply "just use what's there blindly". You should have an understanding of the tools you're using, but of course if you try to audit every line of code you include into your app (God help you if you're using node and npm/yarn) then you'll never get any work done.

At some point you simply have to trust other developers, but don't be afraid to build your own, especially if it's smaller functionality (looking at you left-pad ...).

Dependency management is a skill all developers should learn but it's not one that is actively taught or encouraged. Most (including myself) only really start learning once you've felt the bite of that one bad dependency, or fought through dependency upgrade hell.

In short, make sure you're asking yourself "Do I really need this as a dependency or can I build something myself?"
Awesome, thanks Rust team! I'm super excited for this to be stabilized.

> That won’t be the end of the async/await feature - there will be a lot of extensions left out of the minimum feature

Is there a summary of these somewhere for perusal?
AWS New I3en Meganode – Bigger Nodes for Bigger Data
Why do we continue to debate climate change focusing on centuries old data when the carbon cycle takes hundreds of millions of years? Any data we've collected amounts to less than a rounding error.
Looking at mid term solutions: Nuclear fission is just not cost effective if you factor in all total cost of a building a secure nuclear power plant and safely dismantling it after its lifetime. Also uranium ore is a limited non renewable resource. Nuclear fusion looks similarly bad but at least deuterium and tritium is rather abundant.

Looking at ultra long term solutions: Wind power is nothing else than reducing the speed of rotation of the earth. This is similarly true for tidal power plants. Geothermal power plants will eventually destroy earths unique magnetic field.

Solar is the only true sustainable "renewable" way to produce energy in all scenarios for literally the next million years. So lets concentrate on that and not waste time on the other stuff.
Can you explain it better? I do agree with Haskell due to laziness by default and arrow types for example, but against Scheme and Clojure the only aspect seels like it would be the more strict rebinding/shadowing rules (which doesn't limit what you can express, just that you can also express non-mathematical expressions).

Primitive types (like pretty much all languages) are immutable and structs in Julia are immutable by default (which includes pretty much every math type like complex numbers), and all math operators are non mutating (in fact mutating operators should have a ! in the name).

Function composition is just as simple in this scenario:

f(x) = x + 2

g(x) = 2x

h = g ∘ f

h(3) == 10
Calculus on Manifolds [pdf]
await goes inside the function, at least thats how its done with JavaScript - do you have evidence otherwise?

https://developer.mozilla.org/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Opera...
https://www.submarinecablemap.com/
Intentional Subscriptions – Ideas for Better Subscriptions on iOS
> Recursive relation within the same table. A single table can solve this problem.

How? Which table will recurse?
So pretty! I'm going to assimilate this purely for the aesthetic pleasure :D
Scene report from the Chernobyl Zone
If the lag is one hour, you still need to prick.

If you want to see "overall trend" and don't care about any "lag time", just measure in Urine.
How does this work? You feed it a list of texts and a list of recipients, then click "start"?
Basically: https://twitter.com/PeterCorless/status/1131709423234179072
At least 90% of sites [in the Czech Republic] required to implement GDPR are not abusing privacy
The completely new overhaul browser should be detected as Chrome, or the new Edg, they had to add code to disable it.
You are wrong because fun money is to be used however you want, whenever you want by the one person. Savings here referring to the couples savings.
I read your parent as suggesting that the line with `let` was made inside of another `async fn`. You're correct that you can only .await inside of one. You shouldn't be downvoted.
> I agree if you can use a recursive table

Could you please elaborate on that? Which table will have recursive relation in this case?