skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> In a company with a million employees, it’s guaranteed

So then the CEO had to know this behavior was occurring. Did the CEO and management attempt to do anything about it or did they just maintain plausible deniability, knowing that not having a guilty mind was sufficient to prevent management from being liable?

If the NYT, an external organization, was able to uncover this behavior, why couldn't Walmart have had its own internal investigators tasked with maintaining ethical behavior?

We're not asking for the CEO's heads because they broke the strict letter of the law. We're saying that not breaking he law is the bare minimum the CEO should be responsible for.

Your defense of Walmart's CEO rings hollow for me because it's exactly the argument I'd expect from a lawyer.

Not every company behaves this way, even others with millions of employees. Feel free to call me naive and tell me the others just haven't been caught yet.
I've been following the papers a bit, but I'm also not an expert in the field, so I likewise have a hard time assessing the plausibility of outgassing given the lack of an observed coma. I can't find a reference, but I seem to recall reading that there are still possible (though implausible) scenarios (depending on grain size & albedo & lots of other variables) where outgassing could be significant enough to produce the observed "thrust" but not enough to be visible in our scopes. Of course it could also be a combination of outgassing and solar radiation.

I will say though that physics people I've spoken to about it are much more skeptical of the solar radiation hypothesis, simply because radiation pressure is so weak. I'd be surprised if it were a thin slate of rock as the dimensions are so outlandish compared to anything we've ever observed, plus I would think be there might be "structural integrity" problems with an asteroidal body that thin and sheetlike. The "solar sail" calculations done by the folks linked to above may also assume/require that the sail "turns" itself somehow to constantly face the sun, since the observed acceleration vector was entirely pointed radially away from the sun.

I have heard one radiation pressure idea that I liked, though, which is the "dust bunny hypothesis". If 'Oumuamua were, instead of a solid body, more like a very loose, fluffy agglomeration of dust, it might just have enough surface area for us to see it (and to be hit by enough sunlight to get a push), while also having a low enough mass to produce the observed acceleration. IIRC this may have other problems, though, eg. requiring the dust to be super-high albedo for it to be visible. Seems like there aren't any "nice" answers left, so sifting through the "least improbables" is pretty difficult :)
>The government owns all or most of the land, and provides everyone with free housing from taxes.

I for one don't enjoy soviet apartment blocks.
Obligatory link to Feynman's description of how a train stays on the tracks around a corner, having its wheels on fixed axles:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1ww1IXRfTA#t=35m19s
This reminds me of a really cool video I just watched "The Day the Gauge Changed"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4v81Gwu6BTE

Learned a lot of cool facts about the railroad days.
> Eg in Typescript you will often still run into bugs caused by malformed JSON that doesn't fit the type declaration, badly or insufficiently typed third party libraries

there's a fantastic typescript library, io-ts (https://github.com/gcanti/io-ts), that provides the ability to declare runtime types variables that you can infer compile time types from that solves exactly this problem. it's deifnitely work taking a close look at if you want to ensure type safety at runtime for data coming from third parties.
Security fixes carry the usual risk of regressions (even more than the average bug, when the fix limits something that used to "work"). Therefore they need just as much bake time as other kinds of changes.

Also, shipping security fixes in stand-alone updates makes it much easier for attackers to identify security-critical changes (especially if they have access to source code, which they do for Firefox) and reverse-engineer the flaw. Firefox developers often land critical fixes with somewhat obscured commit messages to increase the work required by attackers to identify the critical security fixes in the torrent of commits that go into each regular release.

Obviously this only makes sense while the bug is believed to be unknown to attackers. If Mozilla believes the bug is being exploited, they can and do issue an emergency update.
> Instead it tells you exactly what errors can happen at every point in your code. Once you have your initial prototype/algorithm figured out, you can use that information to handle all the edge cases.

While I can't say much about Dark (the available blog posts [1] are shallow), I do think that the automation may be one key aspect of future programming languages. For example, when I'm thinking about gradual typing I don't only want to mix the hodge-podge unitype and actual types but also convert the former to the latter, and a large portion of the process can be automated in various ways (for example, one can track the typical runtime types that unityped variables have; the programmer can solidify compile-time types using that fact).

[1] https://medium.com/darklang
I am so surprised that the author doesn't even mention Emmet https://emmet.io/
Then Earth-Moon L2. And we are, in fact, building a space station there. We have the rockets and capsules to get folks and equipment there. Or will within two to 5 years.
valve @ $2M per employee was always considered about the best you can do, long term, at scale.
Theory: foldables will not lead to phones that unfold to tablets, but half-phones that unfold to phones, because people want one-handed convenience.
Companies targeting great markets fail all the time due to other factors. It not like all that needs to happen is someone point their finger at a good market and magically money starts piling up.
The boring genius of how Atrium kills legal busy work
Surely 128 or 256 bits? Or is 64 enough for ever?
Graft-versus-host disease. I just want to mention most transplants aren't like below.

But imagine living your life in a small isolation room for weeks at a time. With infection over infection, bleeding out from every hole, and with good-intentioned people sticking needles into you all day long. Then you die alone in the ICU.

We used to joke that it'd be softer to die from the primary cause than from the treatment.
It's a device of my own design. There is a bit more info about it at my website www.DDproFusion.com
The fine covers 10 years of activity.

Your 3.5% uses 3 months of income as the denominator.

I haven't looked up Walmart's past income, but there are 40 quarters in 10 years, so it's possible they've been fined <0.1% of their income (3.5% / 40).
At least you can still use your computer while you wait for the replacement.
Project Oxygen is worth checking out. It was mentioned in "Work Rules" by Laszlo Bock https://rework.withgoogle.com/blog/the-evolution-of-project-...
Yep. Its been done to death by security theatre "researchers", there's even an xkcd on it: https://xkcd.com/1958/
Similar article from 2017:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/30/world/asia/japan-lonely-d...
Modern Intel processors actually support up to 512-bit packed vector operations.
Flagged. This article and his past writings are so poor without any nuances. They sound like rants.
I've submitted a few of those to apple (from within the maps app) and they've been added within 24 hours. That may vary depending on the geographical region.

But, yes, it's frustrating. I use Apple maps for the clean interface and option to get a sane and pleasant route overview. ("Hey Siri show overview" also works.)
With regard to horses and donkeys a "mule" is the offspring of a male donkey and female horse [1], while a "hinny" is the offspring of a female donkey and a male horse [2].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mule

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinny
Search doesn't work in slack! Have to use chrome incremental search!

Price/sales = 42, bubble stock ...
It's possible CCXT could be used to easily wrap other exchanges into gryphon. I'm not familiar with the library so hard to guess if it would be a net win or not.
I helped out with UI related security bugs (e.g. address bar spoofing) which we had a bunch of at the time.
Not on the chain of hardware I run at home (the machines with ECC are ones I spec and configure very conservatively), on other larger collections of machines, sure...

I've seen googles study, and out of the few thousand or so machines I've had statistics collections from, the few machines with soft errors were fixable and stopped reporting soft errors after having something swapped.

The google study itself goes on and on about the variability of errors with such wonderful sections as "These numbers vary greatly by platform. Around 20% of DIMMs in Platform A and B are affected by correctable errors per year, compared to less than 4% of DIMMs in Platform C and D."

The paper really leaves a lot of holes, I don't remember (nor do I see after skimming it) any note of how aggressively they are running the ram. Did they say try to reduce the ram timings/bump voltage on the platforms they were having issues with? Did they compare how mature the technology was when the commissioned it? Did they try to diagnose the machines reporting high error rates by seeing if they could convert a machine with a high error rate to something lower? They do spend a lot of time talking about temp though. The only valid conclusion I think can be drawn from the paper is "ECC is important use it because you will have RAM failures, better to know about it than not".

To me the paper speaks to googles diagnostic/repair system more than anything. I took a proactive approach and replaced DIMMs/Motherboards/Powersupplies/etc that reported correctable errors. When we were self supporting we would swap the questionable parts into other machines to see if the failures would follow them in an attempt to see if we could prove a failing part was marginal. Then return/exchange it if it failed in more than one machine.

I've seen a lot of different failures over time, and when I was partially in charge of designing/picking platforms I even managed to find actual design bugs a couple times that caused low rate error rates (not in the RAM subsystem thankfully). I tended to use the "any kind of failure when run normally is instant disqualification" metric when I was initially picking new platforms before buying them to put in production. I would never have qualified a platform that had a 20% DIMM failure rate. (well at least not purposefully, we got some stinkers but we tried to correct our mistakes).

Given what i've heard of google, i'm not sure I would really extend these reliability metrics unless your buying the latest bleeding edge parts and running them well into their design margins. These days its pretty common to design systems that have error correction and push the physical topology to the point where there is an expectation of a pretty solid error rate (think SSD flash chips). So for a company like google pushing the RAM timings/etc right out to the margin where they are experiencing a low but statistically unlikely error rate would seem to be the right thing to do. Its different if your a bank/etc running financial data. In that case you buy for reliability first.
I was actually shocked to see how easy it is to repair dell XPS laptops considering they are just as thin as macbooks (I think even thinner)

The battery is secured with a few screws and a metal bracket. Also the ram was socketed.
FogBugz
> Feel free to sub in "complexity", "cohesiveness", et cetera, for "cognitive load"

"...the situation is as it ever was: the stuff liked by me is rationally oriented by reasonable goals; the stuff liked by people who disagree with me is nothing but a post-hoc rationalization of their arbitrary preferences."
Most of the spam discussed are specifically for businesses that come to you. Repair services, locksmiths, etc. Or do delivery (florists, e.g.).

I think you're underestimating how hard this is and/or how motivated and smart the scammers are.
Thank you, it seemed that way to me, but I thought maybe there was something I wasn't understanding.
Seriously. It boggles my mind why this is still a question. We don’t even have to get into the morality of it, but it’s simply not profitable to care this much, so why would Apple?
All of this is true, but I'll point out that for crypto, your competition is "I heard it was hot on Reddit/Telegram", and if it's not that it's often "I buy $X worth of Bitcoin on the first of every month". I suspect that a random algorithm (like, literally buys & sells random amounts of cryptos at random times) would do better than the average crypto trader, simply because the "I heard it was hot" strategy inherently leads towards buy-high-sell-low behavior.
I guess the original author 'moved on to other projects' because they couldn't make a stable income.

We've all tried it, I personally couldn't make money after thousands of nodejs lines against Binance's API and many 'clever' ideas.

Anyone out there making a living from crypto-algo-trading?
Show HN: CX_DB8 A word-level extractive summarizer powered by text embeddings
Pokemon Go was an absolute nightmare at least for a few months.
You have to realize there are people that sit down and calculate the discount against the real warranty replacement cost because of the relative friction to getting this fixed. This is at face value damn near criminal and it should be made criminal. It's behavior that's simply anti-consumer, pro-monopoly. To be fair, my favorite culprit of this kind of bogus warranty RMA process is Google. Try getting a warranty-repair for a manufacturing defect (wholly Google's fault) in a Pixel and you'll be out of a phone for weeks -- pretty unreasonable if you're one of the normal people that doesn't keep an extra cell phone around. If the new capitalism is giant technology monopolies, consumer protections specifically targeting this sort of well-designed, seemingly clever anti-consumer action are required and required now. And seriously the solution is simple: pay for a replacement that is delivered to you immediately and have that replacement cost returned when your defective laptop is received.
Snopes rates it as partly true, and the author is a pedantic killjoy.

It is broadly true that for 2000 years European vehicles matched their roads and adapting existing vehicles to new technology led to using axles that were the same size. Do other gauges exist? Of course. Are the true elements of this worth repeating? Sure.

As an unrelated aside here’s Richard Feynman explaining why train axles don’t need differentials.

https://youtu.be/WAwDvbIfkos
Any particular industry/function/scenario you'd like used as an example? I can think of plenty of examples, but not sure which would click the best for you.
There may not be a story to link to.

I once did a write up about Aflac's rebranding because I worked there for over five years and couldn't find a write up of it anywhere. I think that blog is no longer available to the public, so we may be back to "It doesn't exist anywhere online that I can tell."
Doesn't need to be public investment, there are incentives for some but not others, and yes the situation is complicated.
Also I think part of the problem is that TypeScript encourages developers to write interfaces that have complex parameters (e.g. accept instances of specific classes) whereas JavaScript encourages simpler parameters like strings, numbers or plain JSON.

In OOP, passing complex instances to functions across different files is dangerous because the different files may all end up affecting the same instance's internal state and you don't know which file is responsible for what change (and it can lead to conflicting states/bugs). The absence of types in JavaScript tends to discourage this design precisely because it makes it difficult to express those kinds of complex/rigid class relationships.

JS encourages developers to keep each kind of "live" instance in a single file and only return raw data from that file. For me, restricting all instance mutations to one file is the secret to writing good OOP code which has clear separation of concerns.
Reposting because even though I got 0 upvotes on the last post, github insights shows that a TON of people saw this via HN - and I got an additional 10 github stars after I posted this. Ugh Lurkers

Hi all, I wrote this in my spare time, originally aimed at the American Competitive Policy Debate community (though it's applicable to anyone) - some notes.

1. No one seems to have made anything like this (queryable, word level extractive summarization) , and I was pissed because when I was doing competitive debate I really wanted this tool (I spent days doing this stupud underlining and highlighting of evidence that I'd like back).

2. This is also equivalent to a "Semantic Search" engine. I've seriously thought of trying to write a word2vec powered ctrl-F replacement for a web-browser. I'm convinced that CX_DB8 is proof that this could be neat.

3. While my idea of making a tool that can make any document "say what I want it to say" was cool, the reality is that it's kinda hard to make it look like a document says the opposite of what it naturally says. To a word vector model, "X is bad" and "X is good" are usually very similar, meaning that the summaries given for each query are very similar.

4. Is there anything I could improve? I feel like there's gotta be something better than Cosine Similarity and mean pooling for the creation of document vectors out of word vectors. I saw something implying that TF-IDF weighting doesn't help - which sucks - so I'm skeptical.

Thank you to all the people who contributed the packages that makes CX_DB8 possible
"Big Face Box" was a fun project I saw at a Makers Faire: https://makezine.com/2017/05/25/bigfacebox-a-simple-way-to-g...

I'm not sure where they got the plastic sheet lenses from... I know old rear-projection TVs used to have giant ones.

(They had a warning on the booth: "Do not take outside". I'd hate to learn that lesson the hard way.)
I was a local guide until the Maps API price increase screwed over my use case. Somehow that killed my motivation.
Yeah, pretty much. That said the ability to shape glass like that was pretty cool. In theory, you can keep making the rings smaller and smaller (and the lens thinner and lighter) until you hit the wavelength of the light you're trying to focus.
Show HN: FounderPad – a compilation of resources for makers and founders
You'd probably derive more benefit from typing this with mypy, instead of rewriting in a statically-typed language
The big question is about what caused its non-gravitational acceleration? The only thing that makes sense there is a comet - comets are icy and when that ice heats up, such as by passing around the sun, it can result in an outgassing that can create an acceleration. But it showed absolutely no indicators of being a comet, such as the tail or coma that comets display.

Another problem for the comet theory is that the object was very elongated like a submarine and spinning fairly quickly. Outgassing to the point of creating a net acceleration would have further increased this spin and likely torn it to to pieces. For those that'd like to go for the 'its aliens' theories, it accelerated at the exact time you'd accelerate to have the most substantial impact on your orbit. Of course that's also the most likely point for a natural source of acceleration as well.

So ultimately? Nobody knows what it was and while you have more or less plausible hypotheses, all have various flaws. Except aliens, but you can use aliens to explain any and every unknown phenomena. For instance pulsars are rapidly rotating stars that emit a high energy beam. As it rotates this beam, when the pulsar is aligned with earth, can result in it regularly pinging Earth. The first pulsar signal was detected in 1967 and, unsurprisingly, was labeled LGM-1: Little Green Men-1. Regardless, this is one of the many reasons that evolving our space technology should be priority number 1 for humanity. There are a countless numbers of reason that lacking the ability to intercept, or even identity, relatively large objects flying right next to us in space is a very bad thing. The Fermi Paradox being somewhat meaningless in the interim is just one of those reasons.
I got flagged for calling it a 'dust bunny'

\_(ツ)_/¯
No autoranging -> won't survive a week. I know because I have in the past burned up a few analog multimeters which did not have autoranging.
Most people fixate on the terseness that it can afford in a language. I suppose I do like that but for me it is not a huge deal.

What I think is more important is the flexibility that it brings to express design patterns that in other languages, like Java for example, can become very cumbersome. I can’t tell you how many times I have been in the bowels of some Java code and found some method that takes a concrete implementation of something that could or should be an interface when I really want to pass in something different. Then you are like “let me extend and fix this class” and then you end up just extending and fixing 1/2 the code base to get done what needs to be done. In a language like Ruby I would just pass in an object that responds to all the needed methods and it would happily work. Ideally you wouldn't get into these type of messes in statically typed languages because people would follow good design principles all the time. But people are fallible and in reality messes are everywhere in statically typed languages.

So I think the approach of adding type enforcement if desired is a nice approach considering there is a large amount of code out there that probably doesn’t benefit much from it.
Theodore Sturgeon update: 90% of all programming books are geared at beginners.
I don't have any data to back this up, just knowledge about Chinese society. My view is the main driver for the low score for China is the society norm of minding your own business and not getting involved. So it might not be a measure of honesty but rather a measure of being passive. For example, I would assume if instead of having to contact the person, the person just walked over to retrieve the wallet, they'd likely get it back.
Despite all the hate there was a kernel of a great idea here. This was a proto-alexa
Why you didn't considered Ember.js? It is modern, great community support, opinionated and easy to use.
Probably because making profit on selling your home means you have to move away. Because your neighbours home also went up just as much.
I typed my serial number in and got

> The serial number you entered may be eligible for this program. Please choose one of the service options below.

What does "may be" mean? Servicing my laptop requires me traveling to Singapore, so I kind of need to know if I am eligible or not.
Not mine, but indeed, it is an interesting method.