skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes, that seems plausible.
Wow, this seems extremely overpriced! Should give Microsoft and PowerBI a big boost value wise.
It's what happened to me when I stopped using caffeine and started taking sleep seriously. I stopped being a night owl.
I have been a customer for 3 years and have been ecstatic with their service. I think there have been maybe 2 outages in 3 years, and within minutes Mark e-mailed everyone detailing what happened, why, what he was doing to fix it, and when he expected to have maintenance finished. Observed speeds are typically higher than SLAs and as long as Mark is in business I don't plan to use anyone else.

When he came to install equipment I got the opportunity to go up on my roof and "help" (I know v little about networking) but it made for a really fun afternoon.
Diun – Docker image update notifier
I love to see this, but it's a hard sell. Philly is one of the lucky cities with reasonable competition already, one of which is Verizon's Fios - decently built out through the city. A lot of new construction homes have both Comcast* and Fios pre-wired into the home, so installation is trivial and competition is, delightfully, fierce.

25M wireless connections at $50 are a hard sell against 1G fiber at $80.

I don't mean to be a debbie-downer about this, because I think promoting connectivity is a huge boon to society.

* Fun fact, the new Comcast building looks like a middle finger facing west - literally flipping off the rest of the country. Seems appropriate.
Thanks for sharing! While the victims were being scorned by the internet for not having proper backups, nobody was sharing how to achieve that.
I said contract because you used patent incorrectly. You think the patent is what stops farmers from replanting but it's the contract and the licensing. The patent stops other companies from using the genes to create their own seed. (I'm incorrect here. Just took a look at Monsanto's patent page and they say they do use it to assert breeding rights. I guess the laws around DNA aren't defined enough for licensing and contracts alone.)

And yes it is moral. They are not under durress. There are plenty of competitive viable alternatives. The contract is very clear in the farmers inability to replant as so many are quick to point out. And all parties consented. Farmer gets a product, business gets money. Business makes sure they have a future by making sure the farmer doesn't regrow their product and sell to other farmers.

Tell me why it isn't moral. Are you advocating that patents and product licenses are immoral.
And let’s make them charge us for sending emails with attachments.
Having recently gotten my first Thinkpad since IBM stopped making them, I was very disappointed that the trackpoint is nowhere near as good as I remember them being. Don't know if it me or the laptops that have changed though
How is doing no research besides what you can find on a tweet, and heavily biasing an article towards one way considered 'reputable reporting'?

I just can't believe that all right-leaning articles are false and all left-leaning articles are reputable.
This goes against all available information on ECC on the internet. Source?
You should have released the email complete with personal attack and all info needed to reproduce the bug after 90 days. Their incompetence isn't your problem but it is their users problem.
> It could report the error “hey we are out of memory and couldn’t do xyz” or better “hey we are out of memory and couldn’t do xyz, this is probably because of abc, maybe you can adjust the tuning.”

What if you cannot do that report because the reporting itself needs memory that can fail?

> but yes you should put a check on every toolbar allocation for two reason: one you can gracefully report why your app isn’t doing it’s job

This is a reason to put checks in every toolbar allocation, but on the other hand there is also a reason to not do that: you are trying to catch a case that will only happen at a 0.00001% of the time yet to do that you are making the codebase more complex which will affect working with it 100% of the time.

Unless you are working in something like a medical or nuclear device, it is not worth to bother with such things. Even then when it comes to high risk programs relying on the programmer doing things right outside the core functionality is probably (i haven't worked on such projects myself so i'm guessing here) not a good idea and instead you should compartmentalize (e.g. the core functionality is running as a separate process from the UI and if the UI crashes, a watchdog restarts the UI process). But that is my guess here, i mainly have common end user/consumer applications in mind.
You do have that control. Find an alternative service provider. Don’t like gmail? Choose fastmail.
YouTube Should Stay Weird
The big question is how did 13% of the British public become so naive?
And with org-mode you can start to weave them together using the source blocks! I’ve been doing a fair bit of numerical code lately, and being able to have a Maxima repl, org, and my C source all in the same place has been amazing.
If you're going to persist in this kind of "I'm elite, you're no big deal" posturing (and borderline ad hominem) then we're done. This isn't about who's the biggest blog loudmouth. I don't care that you failed to find something to suit your narrow biased in interests in five minutes of stalking through my old blog two years after it was discontinued. Both Bonwick and Cantrill were able to find it when it mattered. They stopped by and we had a couple of interesting conversations. Those kinds of interactions are what matter.

Please, try learning something new instead of getting stuck on the first thing you found when you first entered the industry and spitting all over everything else. Go look through the conference proceedings, even from Sun's glory years, and you'll find plenty of papers from people elsewhere that have had a far more profound effect on software practice today. This fanboi behavior does nobody any good, least of all you.
Indeed, it's cyclical. About 7 years ago there was a social media platform buying spree. Salesforce bought Radian6 and Buddy Media (for ~$700M). Oracle bought Virtue for $300M. Google made its own acquisitions in the space (Wildfire).

But now, Salesforce now has a bigger war chest to play with.

Looks like BI is the new hotness.
What an absurd way to say it too. So bad, in fact, it may be intentionally dishonest.
Other countries have far lower costs. Improvement is possible.
Google is one of the most evil companies out there for a company that started out with don't be evil. The have some very smart people, some amazing tech, but unfortunately they have some very evil people working for them help bent on maintaining their advantage by any means necessary.

Without using Google's push notifications, you are going to end up with something that works about 75% of the time. When this first started happening to me, I lost tons of time thinking it was a bug only to finally realize I needed to use Google's library to get reliability for what once worked.
If Salesforce wants to run my entire underlying data infrastructure, I think we’re in trouble. I see this more of a land grab, with SaaS vendors trying to push their own BI stacks and create an even tighter era of lock-in. I don’t think it is necessarily a good thing.

Data is an asset and liability - when somebody else has all of yours in their proprietary platform and under the control of their cloud, that is a scary proposition to me.

Fair enough if you are running your infrastructure on open standard tech and common cloud platforms, but not locked away in Salesforce.

This is reminding me of the behavior of other large orgs, like Oracle.
Show HN: Pluggable vector space models
> When I picked DoTT up (a few seconds after release ;) ), no such thing. You were in it alone. Maybe there was a magazine write in for hints, and if you were lucky you knew a guy on a BBS, but other than that, you were on your own. That made the puzzles so much sweeter when you got them.

Completely agree. Unlike today, there was really no alternative to really thinking "deep" and trying to figure something out on your own. If push really came to shove, you went to the local bookstore and hopefully they had a magazine or guide available. I miss those times. :)
The corporation will put its best interests before anyone else's. Doing something like this where 99% of the world won't know or even care is likely in their best interests no matter how unethical its actions are. There tend to be very few true 'friends' because of it. People are normalized to this corporate dance and keep expecting less and less for more.
It is interesting how many of those screenshots include an open web browser.
local man writes email, changes tech giant's course of operation

seriously tho, the way i see is to boycott companies hindering repairs, and plaster the repair manifesto everywhere

EDIT: political rant below

the issue at hand is that these companies actions are dictated by their boards of investors, most of them members of the so-called 1%. and for some philanthropist exceptions those people only care about acquisition of wealth. they do not care about environmental damage, as they live in a different world than all of us, they do not have to go to work to secure their basic needs.

their very lifestyle is not threatened by global warming, social injustice or wars.

when the sea level rises they still will be residing in climate-controlled mansions, but at that time build of island further away from equator,

they will still have access to best medical treatment,

they will still have best food on their plates, even if the produce on those plates will cost 10'000$ a serving they will still have the funds.

they will still roam the seas on their super-sized yachts

they world is not in danger. ours is
Very cool. What kind of work do you do? Also, do you speak Russian or just basic Russian to barely get by?
The OOM killer can strike at any time, regardless of the mapping options you've set, even if you aren't explicitly or implicitly allocating new memory. What I'd like, and what I think twic is asking for, is a way to "opt-out" of the overcommit paradigm at a process level, so that allocations by a given process reserve memory and may fail, but in return the kernel promises not to OOM kill it.
It doesn't have to do with being special it's just that music is touching something very deep inside you. It depends both on the intensity of the music and receptivity of the listener and can be developed.
I used to support this point on view, but after the Facebook VPN scandal [0][1] I think using this approach will do more harm than good. It's a good way to make sure only poor people lose their privacy, since those that can afford it will use other platforms that charge a fee in exchange for a private experience (say no ads, or better privacy defaults).

Arguably, this is already happening with Apple, positioning themselves as privacy-aware, but charging a huge markup for it.

[0]: Facebook has been paying teens $20 a month for access to all of their personal data https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2019/1/30/18203803/facebook-re...

[1]: Discussion on Hacker News https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19031055
My company is using Einstein Analytics, however, other than the Salesforce integration has been a terrible disappointing experience. Loading data is a pain and has to be done to a custom API. Of course Einstein analytics need to have it is own language called SAQL resulting in a steep learning curve.
I've never once gotten goosebumps from music (Or movies or really anything other than the temperature).
There’s no way that computer costed only $200 to build unless you were reusing many parts from a previous computer.
If I post an article on Medium, will the platform drive traffic to it on its own? Is my job done at that point, or will I still need to generate interest by posting it around and getting a lot of visits before Medium suggests it?

When new readers enjoy the content will they come back to me or will they come back to Medium?
You are right, but my point was that the feature doesn't depend on the Chrome extensions store.
First parties might compensate me by providing a service in exchange.

What of the third parties with whom they share my personal data? When those parties profit off my data, what compensation do I receive?
Facebook sells your attention. Look at your news feed, every second post is an ad.
Presumably the objection is that it's not the original title. It's also an odd wording, I think "is interesting to read" might be clearer.
Very expensive acquisition.

Perhaps in 5 years we'll look back at this move as a prime example of the bubble we're currently in.
It's quite clever actually, why spend resources to try and infiltrate them - which is not a guarantee, when you can pay a fraction of the cost for their capabilities so you can focus your efforts on other nation states or your own citizens.
You can protest by using a Hackintosh. I'm sure Apple's aware of how big the Hackintosh community has become and I think it's part of the reason we're seeing niceties like upgradable RAM on the new Mini and iMacs.
Your code is no longer completely FOSS when you do that. It depends on a binary blob that you can't see into.
usertesting.com pays you for your data.
And earn.com pays you for your data
Adversarial interoperability: reviving an elegant weapon to tame monopolies
> Companies pay taxes because they use resources and services provided in a given country (roads and other infrastructure, police protection, courts, etc.).

That's one view. Another is that they pay taxes simply because they have resources that society needs. If Facebook is trading in the UK (benefitting from access to the UK market, then I think it is reasonable that they pay tax in the UK).
> Personally I had never fully grokked the reordering based memory barriers (I understood what they did, but it was hard for me to understand all the implications); on the other hand the C++11 memory model and its happens-before based somehow seems much more natural and it helps me retrospectively to understand even barrier based code.

Same here. C++11 memory model is when I managed to "wake up" to the facts behind barriers, load/load and store/store dependencies, and all that good stuff.

I recognize that Java apparently specified all of this stuff first, but I wasn't a Java programmer at that time. So I learned it from C++11 (Or more specifically: Herb Sutter's talks + other C++11 programmers)

---------

EDIT: For anybody who has issues with memory barriers, think about a spinlock and where the appropriate memory barriers need to go for a spinlock to work. That's the real beauty of C++11/Java model: instead of thinking in terms of load/load or load/store or store/store barriers, you think in terms of "lock acquire" and "unlock release".

The spinlock is the canonical example of memory barriers, and "remembering" that through the use of language is helpful.
In particular it's "a" if the following word starts with a non-vowel sound, and "an" for a vowel sound.
There is also an argument that all penetrative sex is violent rape, but I don't buy that, either. As far as "societal pressures" to perform a certain way, this seems a very poor excuse for someone that likes to think of themselves as a journalist. But I suppose it's also why people think of Buzzfeed more appropriately as mass-media entertainment than some kind of journalism. As much as I wish there were a way to reliably communicate to readers that the source they're reading is a tabloid, I also am wary of gatekeeping in journalism. I'm not sure what the best way forward is, but I do worry about this new breed of yellow journalism, sites like Buzzfeed which are purposefully harmful, muckraking for profit as clickbait.
Well, you can't completely understand the calls for breakup until you understand that the politicians don't really care about the traditional monopoly issues. They're upset that Facebook, Google, and Twitter have as much control over the political discourse as they do (note the missing Amazon in that list, modulo the fact that Amazon's CEO happens to own a major newspaper). If society is like a big collective brain as it thinks about the big issues, those companies have installed filters on a significant portion of the neural links and they aggressively use them.

I personally think this is a bad thing as well, and fully support breaking them up for this reason alone. In a perfect world, we'd carefully and thoughtfully craft new laws to address this matter; in reality, we're going to probably "creatively" read some existing laws in new and unpredictable ways to get some unprincipled compromise of what several groups want.

So I'm likely to be both unhappy at the theory and the practice of how they are actually broken up. Isn't government fun. But I do agree they need to be broken up.

This analysis is then useful as a conventional reading of anti-trust laws, but I fully expect that if a conventional reading of the laws won't get it done, then either new laws are going to be made or unconventional readings will be made.

I also think that these platforms are basically boned in terms of voters and public opinion. Consider two sets of forces on these platforms: First, the set of forces that want to insist that they carry any given piece of speech, and second, the forces that want to insist that they censor any given piece of speech. (Observe I'm not breaking this up on conventional political lines; all sides have their lists of both types of things they want.) I submit that there simply is no solution for a single universal platform that combines all of them. Almost all even remotely controversial speech is going to be on the mandatory list from one party and the banned list from another, which means that in the public opinion war, every political side is going to have an endless list of grievances against these platforms, literally no matter what they do. There is no solution for platforms at this scale. This is ultimately what is going to kill them; even if the government doesn't break them apart, something will.

In fact, in my first paragraph, when I said they "aggressively use" the filters, I'm not saying they even necessarily have a choice, or particularly accusing them of "incorrect" usage. I think at this point, they're simply at a size where they're boned no matter what they do with those filters. I do have my own list of particular localized grievances, but if you don't have one now, you probably will soon. The latest YouTube demonetization purge is hitting a lot of weird channels, including... a channel dedicated to making completely a-political cartoon parodies of the Final Fantasy games? Everyone's going to be pissed at something. I don't think there's ultimately a solution to "the one big site that everyone uses". Applications to the stock price of the relevant entities left as an exercise for the reader.
Ever been to a city? There is a reason NYC has everything one could ever want to experience because it takes very few interested people to have a lot of people in NYC interested in a thing.
This is just people: I make games. Players want 100 hours of unique experience, DRM free, DLC free and oh free. Plus they want all their features and bugs fixed or they threaten you.

The reasons for this are complicated but just like FOSS, videogames have convinced players we can provide them with the moon on a stick when in reality it's a photo of the moon and they need to provide the stick.
> If you are fully dependent on a single vendor, the cost of migrating tends to skyrocket and the negotiating power moves towards the vendor.

This is particularly important with SaaS, as you lack the leverage to walk away. If you're fighting with a vendor, you had best resolve it by your contract date, as they will happily shut you off and wait for you grovel (and pay).
I'd also add that by forcing a 9-5 mentality we create a situation which has everybody traveling to and from work at the same time, yielding delays adding to stress, pollution...

Not saying that by solving the 9-5 mentality we will solve climate change, but it sure would be a measurable improvement on that front as well as mental health as a whole. Maybe somebody should research that.
> t will be awesome if Salesforce can adjust their model and make Tableau spit out D3

Can you clarify?
"Identity" is who you are, not something you have. It's not an attribute assigned by some other party.

Digital systems traffic in identifiers -- strings of some sort, usually, which purport to identify one and only one ... something. A person, a business, a role. The holy grail is that no one such identity (the actual behind-the-identifier entity) has multiple identifiers, though this always fails, least of all because developers and authorities require flexibility.

What identifiers actually track, mostly, is relationships, between some individual, and ... well, some interested party. Are you a homeowner, patron, customer, insured, user, employee, employer, vendor, client, ...? And here, a large part of the conundrum becomes apparent: relationships differ depending on the relation between entities, a single individual has many relationships, possibly (or probably) with even a single other party.

Much of the attempt to track identity comes down to credit (or creditability), rights, trust, entitlement, responsibility, or other ongoing relationships over time. Are you the individual who has a legitimate claim to the contents of a bank account? Or a data storage account? Are writings A, B, C, and D the work of one or multiple individuals? Is that individual (or individuals) credible? If I want to listen to a musical performance, do I owe you a payment? If you listen to a musical performance of mine, how do I assert, and correctly collect on, a payment claim? Are you claiming to be A but are actually B? Is this transaction potentially fraudulent?

Some claims are more enduring and critical than others. Entitlement to a pension or government social insurance claim. Tax liabilities (or refunds). Voting. Others are inherently limited -- for all the risks of fraud in commerce, once a transaction has conclusively completed (and the tax office gets its vig), identity is largely moot.

(Service-based relationships change this, though whether that's worth the hassles is another question.)

In-person assertions of identity, as with voting, are expensive to spoof, particularly at scale. This is why the interesting acts of voting fraud very, very, very seldom involve individuals voting multiple times -- the costs are too high given the desired benefits. Far easier to corrupt the process elsewhere: eligibility, ballot formats, voting places, counts, and the like.

The power and curse of digital information it is independent of presence. Actions can be taken independent of place, and often of time. One work-around is to require an in-person registration at some periodic interval, or anchoring to a specific location (as with mailing addresses), or to payment. That last is why financial transactions records are so hotly sought: there's literally a cost to creating these, hence they're vastly higher quality than other data. (In the data analysis world, data tied to payment is virtually always more reliable than data which isn't: in U.S. health care data, procedure data, on which payment is based, is far more reliable than diagnosis. And since payments are contingent on both, each is gamed (through physician billing coding software) to maximise revenue.)