skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This overlap also struck me as something worth considering.

Just to add some more data points to your disjunction section:

When talking about composite types using interfaces or type variables, the difference becomes more apparent:

func Concat(type T stringer)(ts ...T) stringer

vs

func Concat(ts ...fmt.Stringer) string

On the type-parameterized case once you pick the concrete type, all the elements of the slice must be of the same type.

On the other hand this means that you can use existing slices.
One of the most common questions I found when teaching Go to newcomers is "why can't I convert a slice of X where X implements Y into a slice of Y"?

i.e.:

type sint int

func (s sint) String() string { return fmt.Sprint(int(s)) }

func demo(vs []fmt.Stringer) {
for _, v := range vs {
fmt.Println(v.String())
}
}

func main() {
a := []sint{1, 2, 3}
s := make([]fmt.Stringer, len(a))
for i := range a {
s[i] = a[i]
}
demo(s)
}

with contracts you can just pass a concrete instance of the composite type:

func demo(type T fmt.Stringer)(vs []T) {
for _, v := range vs {
fmt.Println(v.String())
}
}

func main() {
a := []sint{1, 2, 3}
demo(a)
}

So, even putting aside runtime optimizations, there are perfectly valid use cases where you either want e.g. "a slice of any value as long as each value implements a given method" or "a slice of a concrete type which implements a given method".

The former allows you to lift your value into the abstraction (e.g. you can pass your implementation of an io.Writer anywhere some code expects one). This is generally unidirectional; e.g. the external code doesn't give you back an instance of your own type (because in order to do it, you'd have to employ a runtime type assertion to get it back).

The latter allows you to consume some abstraction on top of your data. This code can produce new values of your types (without hacks like factory interfaces) and the compiler knows about that.
> 1. How about low voter turnout, so elections aren’t representative of what the people want. An app would increase voter turnout by a lot, especially the younger vote.

Improved accessibility from the status quo has minimal marginal effect on turnout. https://www.eac.gov/documents/2017/02/23/will-vote-by-mail-e...

> 2. How about letting less mobile people to vote. Or people who are not able to take off work that day.

Paper mail-in ballots are a well-established way to accomplish this, though they do have their own risks---specifically vote-buying and coercion. My county in California also allows curbside voting by appointment, which is pretty great for elderly voters.

>3. How about being able to count elections in time to call them, instead of things where Bush gets elected because some guys ran out of time, and then it turns put Gore would have won?

This is already a solved problem with precinct-counted optical scanned ballots.

I highly recommend you volunteer to be a poll worker the next time there's an election in your state. You'll learn a lot about the real problems on the ground. For example, in my precinct during the 2018 midterms, we encountered an issue with the voter rolls: the city had recently renamed a street but a lot of people's registrations still reflected the previous name, which slowed things down significantly.
Just to take things to another extreme — our society seems to believe the death penalty works as a deterrent — so why shouldn’t we seek the death penalty for executives when their neglect kills people ...?
Transparency/verifiability seems like almost the only half-way decent reason to use a blockchain for voting. And then they do it using a closed source undocumented proprietary blockchain.
You could probably achieve that by buying a duplex and lightly de-duplexing it to get a house with two complete living spaces which you can move between without having to go outside.
> "The computer seems to be a mythic emblem for a bright, high-tech future that is going to make our lives so much easier." This time, there's a big groundswell of distrust and anger against "Big Tech."

There was a huge level fear about digital tech (and others, like nukes) from the 60s ("Do not fold, spindle or mutilate" was widely cited as a sign of soulless Big Tech) through the 80s (with its fear of 1984 and future shock). If anything today is much more accepting of increased digitization of life. Certainly today people fear AI and computing to a much smaller degree than in the 1980s.

There is some distrust of the big tech companies now, but still far from the level of the 60s.

I don't remember the 60s that well but certainly when I was in University in the early 80s a lot of nontechnical stuff we read at MIT was on the perspectives of technology from the 60s-80s.
No, individual units would be subject to the restriction of being sold to direct owners and must be occupied or subject to tax. See recent laws in Vancouver for one example.

Once all units are sold, the building is co-owned between them. There is nothing left for the developer to sell. Perhaps a rental property management service, paid for by the owners.
> The voters can see that their own transaction went through.

How do you prevent vote selling and coercion?
A blockchain (at least one used like this) is not the right tool here.

Really, all you need is some sort of publicly-defined machine-readable representation of your vote that gets a digital signature locally on your device. You have an open-source app that can sign the vote payload. Then you send the signed payload to the server where it gets added to a plaintext repository.

At this point it would be good to use a signed chain (like git for example) and at this point you "commit" your vote with a timestamp and send the result back to the client. (Commit hash and timestamp.)

Then later, you could just look for the commit sha and timestamp. Of course this means anyone with access to your signature can see who you voted for. Which is a general shortcoming of signature-chain systems.

Another way of doing it might be to have two different blockchains. One has signatures + votes and the other has only the signatures. The one with only the signatures is publicly posted, and the one with signatures + votes is privately audited. The trouble is deciding whether you value anonymity or integrity more.

Of course, in this case it's not clear what the people involved value, since the blockchain is private and just a database that anyone can recreate from scratch at any time.
walking: Sounds great, not an option for the 99%

Opening the window: To make it hotter and more humid in my house?

Eat less meat: I dont mind using turkey instead of beef anymore but good luck convincing most others.
U mean like thumb2?
The Life Risks of Re Using the Same Passwords
You Want a Copywriter That Can Sell, Not One That Is Just Good at Grammar
Interesting. Google Analytics next?
If people truly understood the ramification of a completely cashless society, I think they would have no problem with some of the trade-offs.
Leap Motion’s North Star is the DK1 of AR: hands-on preview and how to buy it
A decent editor (a person, not a "text editor") would quickly solve this problem.
The system you describe is currently the gold standard for election administration.

In "electionese":

Ballots issued, marked, and cast at a poll site.

Ballots tabulated at poll site the moment the polls close.

All materials and gear distributed from and to a central count.

All handling done in public in the presence of reps of all significant stake holders, election observers.

Receipts, logs, seals for everything.

Source: Was a poll inspector for years.
In your perfectly dispassionate banking office this is true, but in reality, people will judge, even subconsciously (though the subconscious bit is giving too much credit).

To give a true, recent, example, I might not like having the loan officer know about my donations to the Green Party - they could be right wing, after all!

Also, some places are just small and people gossip.
I'm not exactly sure what type of evidence you are looking for with respect to the assertion that auditing a paper ballot system is easier than auditing a electronic voting system. Auditing a paper ballot system is trivial: any person who can see and can count can do it. On the other hand, if you are relying on a software system you need to audit the hardware, the software, etc, etc which requires a lot of skill and is tricky.
I googled "Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder", this is the first video that came up : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urKKzGybKb0
They demand that because they are Marxists, but Marxism assumes that the entire system will soon collapse and must be replaced with Marxism, which was probably a sensible prediction when Marx made his observations, but hasn't been the case for 2 centuries.

So Marxists try to make it come true, by doing destructive things like the rebellion.
I think ultimately it is up to regulators to determine how to deal with these companies / platforms. They are legal entities and can be targeted, unlike open source software projects and protocols.

I can add a lot of opinions as to if these companies are a net positive or negative, but overall the regulators have a disproportionate amount of firepower compared to these companies. Airbnb first time offense for Miami Beach is $20,000 and doubles after that. All of these companies know that, and it is why they so aggressively fight the regulatory side.

Uber certainly got a lot of tailwinds due to regulatory capture backlash from local cab companies. Airbnb, to some extent because of dislike or outright unavailability of hotels. Some markets were much healthier and well regulated than others pre-Uber/ Airbnb. Some hotel/transport markets were a disaster.

In summary, if the regulatory frameworks are crafted in the right way, for whatever the given market is, everyone is better off save for previously well entrenched business. I’m not sure there is actually enough talent, globally, to accomplish that on a individual local market level.
Peter Thiel on Globalism and Nationalism
It does say that there is an incident here:
https://status.slack.com/
Monday July 29, 2019: https://status.slack.com/2019-07/b31a6510b8caabcc
Nope, Toyota's still number one:

https://www.yourmechanic.com/article/the-most-and-least-expe...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-13/toyotas-a...

Toyota has the most flexible production and the most reliable cars. Toyota isn't the biggest selling brand by accident.
Clinical trials are all about collecting trustworthy data that demonstrate safety and efficacy. Large trials can collected over a million data points.

I personally see a lot of value in creating cryptographic hashes of these data points and documents, and registering them in an immutable database. This would prove that the data/document is not altered at a later time, and increases its trustworthiness.

However, I see quite a few commenters here who do not see that value. For you I have the following question:

"How would you prove that a data point or document has not been altered"?

(No, this cannot be done by the FDA or Clinicaltrials.gov)

Please bear in mind that researchers could indeed use fake data in these cryptographic hashes. But at the moment it is collected, they would have no idea what they should alter because they are double-blinded. The results and implications only become clear when analysing the data after de-blinding. So proving the validity prior to analysis is where the value lays.
Multiple vulnerabilities published affecting Qualcomm Snapdragon chipsets
> spend more time with my soon to pass away grandparents, grow my own food... do some volunteering to keep me busy when I want to feel like a useful citizen

One might argue that this is all work.
Hasn't the left leaning media been trying to signal for a recession since DJT took office?

Edit: Wow. Its worse than I thought. I solely searched NYT:

https://www.nytimes.com/search?endDate=20171231&query=recess...
One of the Hitchhikers Guide books has Arthur Dent in that situation, except he does remember how to make a sandwich.
"But how secure and accurate was the 2018 vote? It’s impossible to tell because the state and the company aren’t sharing the basic information experts say is necessary to properly evaluate whether the blockchain voting pilot was actually a resounding success."

...and that's when I stopped reading.
The people so egar to keep up these behaviors should solve that problem themselves. They aren't entitled to have other people carry the burden of supporting their wasteful lifestyle.
YouTube needs 'new set of rules and laws': executive
Fargate is nice but expensive. Run through the numbers for your app.

I’m moving away from ECS and going to EKS. The rationale is k8s has a significantly larger user base and I will benefit from that.
We have "solved" those problems, but doesn't that just make it worse? Not only are they inured to the constant barrage of emergencies, but they are used to someone else finding and implementing a fix for it without their input. Those problems are so big that there's literally no way for 1 person to solve it alone. It takes a massive, coordinated effort, such as outlawing something and making it simply unavailable.
I don't get delivery anymore unless it's first-party, which is becoming more and more rare as time goes on. I don't need to worry about tipping cash vs credit card/app, people eating my food, delivery time, etc. If the restaurant has an employee delivering food, it's a much better experience overall.

I've never had any issues with getting pizza delivered, but every single time I use a third party service the food is late, cold, and has 12 different service fees attached (as well as tip).
Tariffs are often regulated by treaties or meet with reactionary tariffs so local exemptions are usually the most practical way of dealing with imports.
> A quick review of the wikipedia pages puts those two figures in the mid 30,000s per year.

Mass shooting != gun violence. Roughly the same order of magnitude of people die from motor vehicles & firearms in the U.S., but very few people die from mass shootings.
The 737-700 is ~10 feet longer and ~20 foot wider wingspan than the -200. Surely that has a greater impact on aerodynamics than the -Max engine change. It’s not that there is no certification but rather that they are built on a common type certificate (and flown by a common type rating).

Everything that adds cost to aviation has a safety balance. Why do we allow 0 and 1 year olds to fly as lap children (without buying a seat)? Because displacing the fraction of families who would substitute a car trip if forced to buy more tickets would mean greater overall injuries and fatalities. Saving money has its own real safety benefit that needs to be balanced holistically.
Web devs, please don't do this:

p { color: #707070 !important; }
body { color: #7b7b7b; }

This is a deeply hostile attack on your users, telling your users that you don't want them to read your site's primary content.

If you think you need this, UI development is not a good career choice for you.
Slack was down
Kong CTO on how the platform is enabling microservices adoption
I was under the impression that CISC processors have utiliized instruction pipelining for a long time already.

Here's what Wikipedia has to say about it:

The terms CISC and RISC have become less meaningful with the continued evolution of both CISC and RISC designs and implementations. The first highly (or tightly) pipelined x86 implementations, the 486 designs from Intel, AMD, Cyrix, and IBM, supported every instruction that their predecessors did, but achieved maximum efficiency only on a fairly simple x86 subset that was only a little more than a typical RISC instruction set (i.e. without typical RISC load-store limitations). The Intel P5 Pentium generation was a superscalar version of these principles. However, modern x86 processors also (typically) decode and split instructions into dynamic sequences of internally buffered micro-operations, which not only helps execute a larger subset of instructions in a pipelined (overlapping) fashion, but also facilitates more advanced extraction of parallelism out of the code stream, for even higher performance.[1]

And Intel has an article on how instruction pipelining is done which covers CISC designs as well.[2]

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_instruction_set_comput...

2. https://techdecoded.intel.io/resources/understanding-the-ins...
Consider the ethical side of IT: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html.
Interest rates can be refi'd at a lower rate, but the amount you paid on the day you purchase it can never be bought down (there is inflation, which can reduce your debt load, but only if wages go up as well. We're seeing real estate and consumer goods increasing and most non-tech wages stagnating. Don't even get me started on the gig economy).
MBSE - model based software engineering - a specialisation of MDA / MDE and a core concept with UML.

For more information take a look at https://modeling-languages.com.
Ethiopia 'breaks' tree-planting record to tackle climate change
Could your provide a source for your housing crisis in most major cities? If a look at the top 10 largest metro areas[1] only one is in the news often, Los Angeles. NYC and DC do not have the same issues as the west cost. Boston, Atlanta, Dallas, Houston are not even close to having the same issues as SF or Seattle.

[1]https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2018/popest-m...
What do they do with the voucher? Fan themselves?
I think for the foreseeable future, it will come down to proven adaptive technology to avert disaster. We should be preparing to source a lot more electricity, in a way which doesn't dig the hole deeper.
Oh definitely, my comment was intended to highlight how blunt these tools are.
Yeah, it looks like "contracts for homogeneous, interfaces for heterogeneous / pluggable" is a useful distinction.

But what worries me is that it's an extremely subtle, implementation-understanding distinction. They are still extremely similar and their dissimilarity seems to be of the sort that will bite people. Beginners definitely, and sometimes even pros.
Understanding malaria with data-efficient Bayesian modelling
is for me :(
There isn't, sorry if I worded that confusingly: If the claimed theoretical efficiences of 80% can be achieved in a way that's economically viable, then the pre-existing German infrastructure solves the storage problem and you could go 100% renewable. If not, it would be more effective to keep some nuclear capabilities around.
If I could identify what the hell saltpeter was, gunpowder would be an option. Of course, without better metallurgy it’s not that useful by itself. Likewise for steam engines.
Either way, the unwillingness to share actual financial data about the plants is bad both for the larger case for Nuclear energy and because they are asking for a bailout to keep in operation.

How can someone possibly make an informed decision in this scenario: are they near profitability? millions/billions in the hole? Is there a horizon where they'll break even?
Can you clarify whether that was indeed your assumption, please? Can I see your calculations? I've linked to mine.

Luo's threats (which are from December) do not seem to have been borne out by photovoltaic panel prices since then: https://www.solarserver.de/service-tools/photovoltaik-preisi... although his cartel does seem to have paused the precipitous price declines that have been the rule for the previous 48 years. But it does indeed seem quite far-fetched to posit that the cartel's members have ceased to invest in expanding their productive capacity — much less that the manufacturers excluded from it, or cheating on it, will do so. Especially if we're talking about holding the line and failing to build any new factories, not for a year or two, but for 30 to 50 years!

Presumably even Luo's prediction of a 15% price rise over two years is predicated on the continued exponential growth in demand for utility-scale photovoltaic installations, not on a constant demand level.
Can confirm. Down here in Boston.
What in particular is wrong with this?
> "Using a blockchain cannot (ever) tell you if your vote was counted."

What.

By voting you commit a change to the blockchain. The system should report back your "commit hash". Said hash is public (as is the entire blockchain), guaranteed to be unique, and counts towards the overall balance.

In contrast - a paper ballot can disappear. Your vote can be manipulated. All without any trace.
> A public blockchain is a mere write only database

Precisely. It does nothing to address who can write to it. Ideally, it should be people who are eligible to vote (citizens of the country that are over 18 years old). That's a difficult problem to solve even with paper ballots (especially in a country that doesn't have national IDs), and pretty much impossible to solve with any sort of a digital solution.

> ...that everyone can see.

...or nobody can, as you'd see by reading the article that was submitted.

> Every transaction is available to 7 billion people.

7 billion people can see how to vote as well. You're not asking 7 billion people to vote, but a small subset of 7 billion people.
Not saying that I know this is the case but when you struggle for years to reach a liquidity event and with the direct offering everyone reached that event at the same time, likely there’s a bit of a collective sigh of relief there and people are taking easier leading to higher SLAs on incidents etc.
One of the things I like about this article is that it gives another example showing how formal methods catches deep errors unlikely to be caught with human review or testing:

"Overall, the error trace found by Infer has 61 steps, and the source of null, the call to X509 _ gmtime _ adj () goes five procedures deep and it eventually encounters a return of null at call-depth 4. "

I think the example Amazon gave for TLA+ was thirty-something steps. Most people's minds simply can't track 61 steps into software. Tests always have a coverage issue.
RAM prices go tumbling
The furnace burns at over 900C but the superheated steam (which is your ‘hot’ temperature for your heat engine) is only at ~400C, you might lose some power output but you won’t be losing efficiency.
Yes, I was off with the numbers, so I had deleted my comment just before you replied to it. But the point is still valid: the current ethnic composition of Crimea was greatly affected by the deportation.
Your self-hosted plans look very cheap to me. $1699 to $4999 including 'Unlimited lifetime technical support'.

Unless you can invest those revenues at some very high rate of return, the annual return on the money you put aside to support future support costs won't pay for much.

e.g. if you put $1699 in the bank and earn 2% interest, that $40 in annual interest might buy you an hour of someone's time to provide support to that client.

Of course, I might be wrong, but I reckon you could offer free support for the first year only, and charge ~20% per year for upgrades and support.

And my point might be totally irrelevant if all your clients go with the SaaS option.