skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's interesting to me that you bring up abortion, since to me, as an outsider (I'm not from the US), the mainstream US debates about abortion and about guns have a lot of parallels. The "against" side tends to paint their proposals as "reasonable, common-sense regulations" but their more extreme arguments tend to be full of misinformation, misunderstandings and emotional pleas to the sanctity of life. On the other hand, the "pro" side either believes that all those "reasonable regulations" are just a transparent attempt by the other side to get their foot in the door, to move the overton window a little bit, so they can enact harsher regulations later, or that those regulations are not reasonable at all and will never be implement correctly.

For example, whenever the pro-choice side hears someone from the other side propose regulations about requiring permits for clinics that perform abortions (something that in principle they might agree to), they fear that the person proposing the regulations isn't really pro-choice but only says that because outright banning abortion would not be politically feasible, thus they fear (rightfully so, since it has happened) those regulations will be so onerous or badly implemented that it will result in a de-facto ban on abortion, maybe those permits will be very hard to get or maybe the organization handing them out will be understaffed and underfunded (or both). Similarly, whenever someone who is pro-guns hears someone talking about mental health checks before owning guns (also something they might agree with in principle), for example, what they fear is that this system will be abused to deprive as many individuals as possible of their rights without due process.

Thus, in this situation, neither debate will move forward because pro side does not believe that the anti side is proposing any legislation in good faith, and the reason they believe so is that in many cases that has blatantly been the case, leading to farther spreading of the divide.

Additionally, as you say, someone might be both pro-choice and pro-guns but the political situation is such that they have to choose one or the other, and thus they choose the one they hold dearer to them, usually one that affects them more personally. Unfortunately for the pro-choice crowd, gun control laws seem to personally affect more people in the US than abortion laws.
CyberStudeo – Free Blogging Site with No Monetization Restrictions
We have launched CyberStudeo where you can share your ideas, build a blogging business, or sell your own products with a free blog. Quicker and easier than other platforms.

All the blogging tools you need (such as mailing lists and eCommerce) are built in so that you won't need third party services. You automatically earn rewards and there are no restrictions on ways to monetize your blog.
I think the point is that they have to execute to get the release from the insanity.

Pulling people back from the brink might stop them trying this time, but perhaps it’s that moment of clarity after all the noise and chaos inside their head has finally been resolved by making a decision and following through, that leads them to recognise the more sensible decisions they should have taken.
Also, the main issue with static analysis tools tends to be not false negatives, but false positives. That is, they churn out tons and tons of alerts that aren't actually bugs. Some such systems alert so much that they aren't worth using.
The inverse (not being able to do this during work hours) means that if you find an issue you won't be able to roll out a fix in an expedited manner.

Being able to fix things while they are running is a big advantage, and tends to make the entire stack lean more towards something resilient to partial failure
I wonder how “hackable” Electron editors fit in to this: might they be emacs for the masses?
What sort of punishment are we talking about? They can't take back money they've already paid out. Do they throw away the rest of the products?
>In share houses you are typically going to pay cash to someone who pays the rent as a lump sum, so if you are in a share house rented for $400/wk with rent split three ways you will breach this Act sometime around the second or third year of tenancy.

The 10k limit is per transaction. I don't think that another months rent payment will be considered the same transaction.
The automated equipment is still so expensive hardly any of it is owned or used by family farms. The thing was that 10+ years ago the automated equipment was owned by very large ventures (large cooperatives and bigger) that shared or sold service only, traveling the region with the equipment to sell that service. Pretty sure that case has hardly changed. Travel the country and you see that most farms don't have the latest equipment rolling or sitting on their land.
> Molten Salt Oxidation

but then how do you get rid of the salt afterwards when it is fully saturated?
https://www.treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-07/at_g...

"What transactions are covered by the cash payment limit?
The limit applies to all cash transactions equal to or in excess of $10,000, except for
those that meet the conditions specified in the draft Currency (Restrictions on the
Use of Cash—Excepted Transactions) Instrument 2019. "

I don't think this is going to affect somebody paying for split rent in cash...
> Transactions equal to, or in excess of this amount would need to be made using the electronic payment system or by cheque.

Does Australia have a law that guarantees access to a bank account? Or would this proposed limitation imply that people who can't get a bank account for various reasons aren't allowed to transact anymore?
20k in US

https://www.google.co.za/amp/s/electrek.co/2019/07/09/us-ele...

400k in China

https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/articles/2019/07/the-nu...

I'd bet that's where the shift comes from.
People who don't know how to program emacs don't get how easy it is to write some code in it to make your life easier.

Some say Atom and VSCode also have plugins. That's true, but can you write code to extend some VSCode functionality in a minute?

You just go to the scratch buffer, write some code, evalute it and it instantly becomes part of the editor. I don't know if there are other editors which can replicate this experience.
This is a really interesting read, and as someone who’s almost exclusively programmed in high level languages, this approach seems alien to me.

A couple of questions:

1. Is it possible to write complex, modern applications (things like browsers, photo editors, etc. — things that would take millions of lines of Java or JS) using this style of programming?

2. What is “sourceless programming”? Where is a good place to learn more about it?
The big issue with elisp is how alien it is to read code in it with so many parens and the tendency by elisp programmers to inline huge gobs of code in function calls.
How about in 1000 Swiss franc[1] notes? Perhaps this is also a reason why the Swiss franc rises so much in times of uncertainty?

[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-snb-banknote/cash-crazy-s...
It's not easy to unpack the train of thought there, and it would take a book (at least) to do it justice. Let me see if I can sum it up...

Your brain is a powerful feedback-based information processor. It's whole deal is to get your DNA into the future. Now it's learned about the existence of DNA. (Maybe from reading Dawkins.) And it's also learned about easy gene splicing with CRISPR. So as a bio-computer dedicated to self-replication, it has entered into a very strange loop.

I'm saying that this loop doesn't require any external hardware. You have a brain, you have cells, they are already connected, so you have your lab and Neural Network General (non-)AI already.

If you can convince your brain to try it (and this is where hypnosis comes into play) there is no reason to suspect that it wouldn't be able to figure out how to self-hack your own DNA. Just explain what to do and let 'er rip.
PSA: Most suicides occur while the person is alone. Company can be a strong deterrent to attempting suicide.

Thanks in part to an incurable medical condition, I'm sometimes suddenly suicidal and basically deranged. At such times, my adult sons don't leave me alone.

They mostly try to avoid discussing it with me. They don't try to make me feel better or act like unpaid therapists because it not only doesn't work, it's actively counterproductive.

Their policy is to take care of me physically (food, drink, warmth), keep me company and "do not engage Teh Crazeh."

In other words, trying to argue with me at such times about how irrational I am amounts to adding fuel to the fire. It just makes me more upset.

I've lived with this a long time, so I'm often able to just tell them "I'm not right and can't be trusted to be alone right now."

As my health improves, such incidents have become fewer, farther between and shorter in duration. It happened a lot while homeless. It's been much less common since getting back into housing.
OK, another worry out of the way.
There is no such law, at one point the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA) was state run but was privatized in 1996.
A doctor performs a well defined task: he collects data about a patient as inputs to his mental model, and produces diagnosis as the output (and selects a treatment based on established guidelines for the diagnosis, and relevant patient characteristics). I don't see anything in this process that requires AGI. In fact I think a doctor is one of the easier professions to automate, and it will probably be automated relatively soon.

Nurses which provide emotional support to patients might be harder to replace with AI, but that too will change as AI starts to become more and more "human-like" (i.e. more complex), but not necessarily AGI level.
We still use it under systemd to run our services. I don't trust systemd to work reliably.
Tesla: Cash Is a Fact. Profit Is an Opinion
> Whatever is changing is being changed by another

It started off good :)

Makes me wonder about the technical details of what hardware God runs on and how that was created?

I got interested in Sethianism, since Seth is my given name, and it has a fun creation mythos. You get a little backstory leading up to the garden of eden.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sethianism
Emacs is 43 years old. When it was written, the kernel had to be written in C. Elisp is slow.

It’s probably possible today to write an Emacs in a high-performance Lisp.

Elisp has no support for concurrency, for example.

“Some 359,000 lines of C code comprise its kernel, and 1,637,000 lines of Emacs Lisp take the rest of it.1”
> C++ has a daunting reputation because its fundamental elements nest so tightly together

Do they? I tend to find that C++’s features are often quite disjoint, which means that you can pick-and-choose which bits you want to use but the language isn’t quite designed like a coherent whole as some other languages are.
Also: https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2019/07/28/gilroy-garlic-f...
I know several people who use voice assistants because of visual impairments. Touching, swiping and tapping is several times more harder with a visual impairment.
David Attenborough says air travel should be more expensive to fight climate change
https://7news.com.au/news/environment/david-attenborough-say...
Isn't that a nice way of saying "lacking generics makes people reimplement the same code?". If they are not using some sort of dependency then the code is being duplicated.
This is a question I've found myself asking quite a bit lately. Paper products are often marketed as a 'green' alternative to petroleum products. IIRC much of the plastic we use is made from a byproduct of the oil refinement process so it's something we have anyways. Even though paper products biodegrade quicker, it seems like unless the paper product is made from 100% post consumer waste a properly disposed plastic product is better for the environment.

I do think part of the problem is that so many of our landfills are poorly managed. In high school I used to spend my summers working for the public works department in the rural community I grew up in. A few days out of the month we had to go out to the fields near the landfill and pick up plastic bags and other bits of trash that had blown out of the landfill before being covered.

I say this as someone who avoids single use plastics, drinks tap water, recycles, etc.
If a public institution was introduced to allow you to freely digitally transact and securely store your money would you feel similarly?
Ask HN: How do you share programming knowledge in your team?
is there any working demo to play with? I am not into ML and won't read the whole paper... I expect these sort of mechanisms to make some weighting of the morphemes and sentences and replicate the top score ones whereas a human made summary is based on context and semantics given by humans (for example, the relevant part might be only relevant during the current zeitgeist or for some peoples bias)
Why some of us are like grasshoppers
I know people who were working on, what is now called, Libra at FB more than a year ago though. The paper was published a year ago. This just looks like a case of multiple people having the same idea.
Can anyone recommend an editor like Emacs that doesn’t use LISP? I find the syntax to be an abomination.
Well, worst case scenario: that's your trash, and at least you saved all the other atoms from the (toxic!?) landfill.

That's the floor. The ceiling would be some sort of automated chemical/mechanical filter and recovery system. Technically all those "waste" molecules (chlorine and stuff) are useful industrial material, just in the wrong place.

In the long run we should retire most toxic stuff, just stop using it as much as we do now. Spend out "pollution budget" on rockets and such.
> The best way to summarize the data is to say that the difference between self-assessment and performance increases with lower performance below about the 80th percentile, with slight underestimation of performance for those above the 80th percentile (or a test score of about 70%).

It may just be me, but this does not seem like the best way to ‘summarize’ the data for general consumption.

The original “dumb people always think they’re smarter than they actually are” that the author takes issue with seems more sensible.

We can’t expect everyone to be in the top 20%.
Things you should definitely do when setting up a product line
You often pay for things > $10K in cash? You also pay by barter for those things?
In Washington I think the cycle is similar for hardwoods. Wherhauser is a pretty good steward of their land, as that's really the only "asset" they have.
I guess you could say less is more!
Making systems work more efficiently is incredibly rewarding.

That there are potential profits in unlocking gains in efficiency makes it even more rewarding.
I lack even a reference for the sorts of things that can be done. How have Emacs users here customized their workflow?
I bought a laptop with a replaceable battery, RAM, and HDD this year. A Lenovo T480. Most people don't have to buy a MacBook (outside of iOS dev).
The existence proofs for production code for both Clojure and Common Lisp have been done. That is, large teams, large programs, and making money. I'd point you towards either one.

Both have "modern" toolchains, testing and CI support, etc., depending exactly on what you mean by that. I suggest whatever you pick to spend some time trying out a few different workflows though (some of which may hail from before you were born yet still feel great) rather than deciding something based on what seems "modern" from your past experience. There was a time when Clojure was "just another jar" to sneak into an enterprise Java app and introduce a bit of sanity. It wasn't "modern" then, lein didn't even exist, but it was still worth doing for a lot of people. Similarly there's a lot of CL code out there that just chucks stuff into a single script-like file instead of doing things "the correct" way (the author might even expect you to use e.g. SBCL with the --script flag, which will do something very similar to what Python does when you pass a filename to it instead of launching it on its own), just like a lot of Python code out there chucked into a single file, but it can still be useful and perhaps appropriate for a particular production task.

For CL I've recommended this booklet before: https://www.darkchestnut.com/book-common-lisp-application-de... It helps you quickly get setup into one (of many possible) modern-feeling professional flows (by Java standards at least, which you'll also find following the default lein flow on the Clojure side) with a suggested project layout, a version-pinned library-dependencies definition file, and a single-step source-to-exe process via a simple Makefile that's little more than a wrapper around a simple shell script which would expose functions like all() or clean() as commands.

To add a bit more after reading some other replies, it's notable that Common Lisp has multiple implementations to choose from (some open source, some not) and if you're following the ANSI standard (or using various trivial-x or de-facto standard libraries) they can all run your code so you can change implementations rather easily later on if you have a reason to. (There's also an implementation that works well when you need to integrate with C++, and of course a JVM implementation if you do decide you want something in that ecosystem.) Clojure has no standard, it is whatever the on-JVM implementation implements, which has in the past changed and may change again (though the creator has ranted against doing that in general, we'll see if usage of "spec" can continue without changes though) and alter your program's behavior. There's a popular on-JS implementation (if you're looking to write production front-end app code I'd highly recommend getting into ClojureScript over any other Lisp) and a less popular on-.NET implementation, they'll both for the most part run pure Clojure code, but there are a lot of non-portable bits.
The phrase "that's on you" means "it's your fault".
Whenever I open a file of code that is ~2000 lines or more, emacs slows to a crawl. It takes 5 seconds to redraw the visible text after hitting "page up" or "page down".

I don't think emacs should be made any slower than it already is.
Looking only at a subset of situations is why people play the lottery and generally make sub optimal choices. It’s easy to ignore the odds and support any argument, but it’s a bad habit to get into.

That said, feeling more secure is by far the most likely situation. While it’s far safer to leave your house in the event of a home invasion than to confront the robbers. Feeling like you can defend yourself is empowering.
You can also be working on something and a paper comes along that fills in some gaps in your concept you may or may not have been aware of.
There is something that is greater than everything else, and you chose to call it "God."

Great. What else can be said about this "God?"
It is arguable that no such editor exists.

Take away the Lisp and you are already very unlike Emacs.
Facebook's faithful copying is the large tech corp standard operating procedure. Google, Amazon, Microsoft and Apple will start product lines based on accurate rumors about what the others are doing, and then cancel them as soon as their competitors do. This form of "copy thy neighbor" just happened with something like three major R&D products/features, one of which was cancelled and another leaked in the tech press.

Sandy Pentland cares a lot about these things and it's too bad Facebook just ripped this stuff off.

But he will have the last laugh: People already don't want to work at Facebook. It didn't matter so much that all those supposedly smart people aren't really capable of meaningful innovation. There will be a lot fewer of those smart people now.
Can you recommend a good starting-point for learning emacs internals?
With an ev, you only need to wait on charging it you are taking a long trip. With an ICE you need to stop at a gas station pretty much every week.
JS is way from settled. There was grunt and gulp before, and there are Webpack, Parcel, RollUp, Pika etc.
Last month you ate one doughnut, this month you ate two, so month-to-month growth is 100%. Is your consumption of doughnuts booming? To say that it is, I'd need to see doughnuts replace a significant portion of your calorie intake first.

Toyota RAV4 alone sold more than all plug-in cars combined.
I'm currently working on an extension to modify the built-in symbolic calculator to display its stack entries in rendered LaTeX--it already has various language modes for displaying its s-expression based formulas, including LaTeX, so this honestly isn't that big of a lift.
For VS Code, it’s like developing for another web browser, your VS Code IDE launches another instance of VS Code with your plugin running, and you can “Refresh” the second instance of VS Code to reload your plugin’s changes. Installing a plugin once developed is of course possible, but as far as I know there’s no hot-reload outside of this Extension Development Host window. Basics at https://code.visualstudio.com/api/get-started/your-first-ext... and you can run automated tests also in that second IDE window.

That said, VS Code isn’t as flexible—there’s a distinction between building VS Code and building an extension, and the two aren’t equivalent. The closest analogy I can think of is developing an old-fashioned XUL Firefox extension vs a new Chrome-style extension. The former used the same building blocks the app used, the latter was intentionally sandboxed and sanitized.

That said, you can do a heck of a lot with VS Code extensions, enough that I don’t want to install any I don’t trust —they can run programs and never prompt you for permissions, etc. So with great power comes great responsibility ;-)

And it could be argued that in a perfect world, VS Code should have both a live-edit-and-reload experience for plugin development alongside a more formal, sandboxed approach with signing and permissions and everything.
Most code should be abstract, because the things that are specified are abstract. Some code needs to be closely coupled to hardware, but most code should only need to be closely coupled with other code.
To digress a bit, on the Lisp curse, and freedom more generally:

In the HyperCard thread on the front page right now (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20550189), someone linked a talk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nd9DwCdQR0&feature=youtu.be...) on the history of educational software, and one of the presenters said something like, "Some technologies we are simply not mature enough for."

I think this is not a bad description of "the Lisp Curse." I definitely wasn't mature enough for Lisp when I first learned it---high on my knowledge of what was possible, surrounded by myopic fools, as I thought.

But that was years ago. I'm mature enough now. It is possible.

In my consulting work my partner and I have marveled at how managing technology projects is a skill --- learnable, but only with some effort and practice, and carrying relatively heavy requirements of being technically competent and having a context of the business.

That's the skill that's needed, IMO, to make Lisp "work." Lisp itself---and Clojure---are really not complicated languages. My boss teaches them to undergrads and they can be productive fairly quickly. They are complicated when someone has built a crappy, leaky tower of abstractions on them. Recognizing when you're in danger of doing so, and when it's not worth it given other factors (business value, maintainability, etc) is the key.

So I wonder, idly, if metaprogramming---no, really, the meta of programming, like "Don't Call Yourself A Programmer" (https://www.kalzumeus.com/2011/10/28/dont-call-yourself-a-pr... ) and "Developer Hegemony" (https://www.amazon.com/Developer-Hegemony-Erik-Dietrich/dp/0... )---might develop some more, esp. among the Lisp communities. When the language is no longer the barrier, you start to realize that other things are.