skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Editing s-expressions is a nightmare without some kind of automatic help.

I used to write C and C++ code in (non-vim) vi, with only autoindent, and it was fine. I could also type the spaces, if I had to.

For s-expressions, like in a Lisp, you want autoindent a bit more, and some kind of of paren-matching/highlighting is also important.

Fortunately, editors have been doing autoindent and paren-matching for decades. And once your editor is formatting your code correctly, it's pretty visual, not textual.

And few people write any code in something like non-vim vi or notepad.exe anymore, so I see no reason to think less of a language for wanting an editor/IDE developed in the last couple decades.

There's no need for paredit, AFAIK, but paredit is another thing for which s-expressions are especially well-suited, relative to most other syntaxes. (You can also do paredit-like structural-based navigation and editing of JS, for example, but you have to have a clear model of the syntax structure, not only in the tool, but also in the programmer's head.)
Keep in mind that those samples are tiny and C++ devs probably skew to more senior roles based on the age of the language alone.
By the Gov't "subsidizing" much of their economy and business. Same as Russia was able to to before in an old style economy with manufacturing by big companies which had several areas of that business. Now the new economy begins as idea based software which is more 'accessible' to a person living in all types of culture/demographic/country, especially if that country provides frameworks for innovation.
In one sense it's a shame when thoughtful, evidence-
based discussion is discouraged for being off-topic. But
I suspect that's ultimately what makes those discussions
possible;

No.

Thoughtful, evidence-based discussion should never be discouraged or deemed off-topic - no matter how sensitive the topic. ( People reading this, even 10-15 years on, might find the mores of this age whimsical, at best. )

The only reason one might find thoughtful, evidence-based discussion off-putting is to be on the good side of David Geffen in the hopeful attempt that he or she might be might be invited to luxuriate on his super-yacht, one day.

There's never a better reason than that to be economical with the truth.
No. Rear-view cameras are safety. They're simply a switch. IF in R turn on CAMERA. If move to D, turn off Camera. If MT, IF in R, Camera, if not no Camera.

Gas mileage is simply an op-ex of a car, and does not make more "sense" over a rear view camera, because increased c pillars decrease overall glass and visibility.

I rather pay a few bucks more in gas then have a featureset unused in my car or have to go through disabling it every time I operate it.
The moderators help determine the community. Insufficient moderation changes the community: the most obnoxious voices drive away reasonable ones. New users who prefer that mode of discourse stay; users who want "reasonable discussion" are discouraged and go elsewhere.

It's easy when a community is small. The more prominent the community gets, the more it tempts people who enjoy stirring things up.

In the end I'm not sure if any moderation scheme can prevent that, to be honest. There will always be people who consider it a challenge to see what they can get away with, either by trying to stay just under the moderators' radar or by returning every time they're banned. Provocation makes people defensive, and then their own replies turn harsh, contributing to a negative perception of the community.

I do hope that this community avoids it as long as possible. I've discovered it only recently and am enjoying it. But past experience suggests that it, too, will one day degrade.
What is the plan to pay for carbon sequestration? My assumption was always that it would be via carbon taxation or some kind of offset/credits scheme— if you run a business with a conventional emissions footprint, you need to pay for that footprint, and the cost of paying (for someone elsewhere to capture and sequester your emissions) will simultaneously provide the incentive to improve efficiency and reduce your emissions at the source (which is always preferable to having to scrub them afterwards, of course).

But... carbon taxes seem to be a huge non starter. The current (centrist) Liberal government in Canada introduced an extremely modest and utterly inadequate one that is revenue neutral (the money for the year came back on our tax returns this spring), and the opposition Conservative party is having a field day attacking it as a "cash grab" that's just ideologues taking money out of the pockets of "everyday Canadians". Check out the parade of last carbon-tax-free fill ups posted on social media the night before it kicked in:

https://www.macleans.ca/news/conservative-mpps-fill-up-their...

And the keyboard warriors on social media are even worse— they read the word "tax" and their brains just click over into rage mode, despite that carbon taxation is a long time conservative policy, and that similar market-based solutions were openly favoured by previous generations of right wing politicians in Canada:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-if-youre-a-c...

How do we make progress on this? If a relatively progressive country like Canada can't even collect a tiny payment for incentive purposes (because all the revenue is being returned), how in the heck are we supposed to get to a place where polluters are charged the actual cost of scrubbing their emissions?

If we can't get polluters to pay directly, where are the trillions going to come from to pay for this? We can't even seem to find the money to build high speed rail, or get proper running water to our indigenous communities.
You can have a good discussion with it being an expert discussion. Hacker News largely has neither. It really appeals to people who like, or at least can stand, the noise. As the articles says it is its own thing, but it isn't unique as phenomenon. There are many parallels to other forms of consumption, like that of sports or reality television where people create their own reality.
I'm not a huge fan of CMake's syntax, but the thing that sold me (i.e. the "killer feature") was how easy it was to setup out-of-source builds[1].

The ability to have the entire build/build artifacts in a directory completely standalone from the source directories was a huge win.

Because for me, that meant I could have 3 separate build directories - one for my optimized ARM builds, one for my debug (-g -O0) ARM builds, and one for my x86 unit test/coverage builds.

If I modified one file, I didn't need to re-spin 3 clean builds - I just could hop into the one or more build directory I was interested in and incrementally update the builds. Plus, out-of-source builds make building clean as easy as `rm -rf build/` instead of hoping that `make clean` has all the right pattern matching and subdirectory listings to truly scrub the build artifacts.

[1] https://cgold.readthedocs.io/en/latest/tutorials/out-of-sour...
It's still amazing to me to see that people don't realize the Bay Area//New York//Seattle are micro bubbles that don't represent the world or even the united states.

Yes, people in those cities are mainly rich Yuppies that don't mind throwing away money. Everywhere else I always try to remember that most people (70% I think) wouldn't be able to cover a 400$ unexpected expense.
That page was last updated October 2018, but the dataset itself (`bigquery-public-data.hacker_news.full`) is up to date and continually updating.
Getting a sustainable OSS based third option for mobile devices where we can run OSS code without restrictions is the pressing problem of the day. I applaud Purism for taking this on, hope it catches on enough that it manages to become a self sustaining project.
Picazo Rhap – Pray for Me – Listen and Download Mp3 – Afronaija.com
Why does the same conversation not come up when discussing typed racket? Is the introduction of a static type system really less culture-shaking than surface syntax?
I've begun to view my software engineering skills as an amplifier instead of skill that can directly impact the lives of other people. By marrying your software engineering skills with another skill you possess you'll be able to create change quicker, and impact more people than someone without software engineering skills.
Make is also very easy to grok though, at its core is just a series of "i want this file, it depends on these files, use these shell commands to produce it".
No. Personally, I would have a hard time turning down SF, Seattle, or NYC for Toronto; this is mostly because of salary.

I've never been to SF, but compared to the other two cities I named above, Toronto was much nicer imho. For a city of 2m+ people, it just felt incredibly clean and safe
Sure, a highly skilled player can beat a less skilled player regardless of deck, but at similar skill levels, the player with the better cards is going to win. If cards couldn't give you an advantage, they'd all be the same price.
NASA Workmanship Requirements for Cables and Harnesses
I used to do that. But right now I am in a high pressure job that sucks up a lot of energy but I don't learn anything new. When I come home these days the last thing I want to do is to spend more time on the computer. I need to do something active or just sleep to maintain my health.
Could we start framing hot years in the same way we do floods? I mean, everyone knows what a "10 year flood" or a "100 year flood" is supposed to look like. No one has a proper statistical relation for what the likelihood of a broken temperature means, and I find that rather odd.

Even if climate change has made it so that the 100 year year broken temperature records are now 10 year temperature broken temperature records, could we at least say that statistically? Is it too much to ask?
That's not a precedent to set lightly.

Government money creation should be used for actually productive purposes. While avoiding costs represents some kind of return, it's not clear that's the best plan.
How Did NASA Steer the Saturn V?
All options need to be on the table. It's crucial that when someone spends their time and energy on a project that's good but not your preferred strategy... just let them. Put your energy into advancing your own goals (instead of destroying theirs), and we can all meet in the middle. That's what it will take.

My 2000 sq ft home is currently using about 8kwh per day of electricity in summer, which I think is pretty good. I'd love to get solar panels to get that down to below zero.

I treat electricity reduction like a game, always trying to go further. Lately I've been using a solar cooker to cook food and it's awesome. It keeps the cooking heat and smell out of the house while using no electricity. I only recently just started but I've made curry, pizza, veggie burgers, potatoes, baked bread, and reheated leftovers. My next target is getting the summer usage down to 7kwh per day average. I think improving water heating is going to be the ticket there by reducing the heater temperature a little, wrapping it in a thermal blanket, and getting a more efficient shower head. Having a solar water heater would be huge but that's a possibility for down the road.

What are other people doing?
Must be strange to work on a huge technical project knowing your work will likely never be used and is there primarily to put pressure on someone else to lower their prices.

I guess you get paid, and can think of it like a hobby project for your own technical chops. But still.
Even better, why not have a single symmetric group key that everyone uses to communicate? Assume the delivery service is perfect, so you never get dropped messages, and everyone ratchets the group key forward, thus providing perfect forward secrecy.

A question: if someone leaves the group, how do you determine the new group key?

If there is some one-way function f that determines the new group key, then the removed person can derive the new key K' = f(K), where K is the current key. That means that if they get ahold of the transcript of the group after they leave, they can decrypt everything.

So K' must be derived by some non-deterministic process. There's a group of people who need to arrive at the same value, and they need to use randomness. Whose randomness do they use? A simple answer is "the remover." That is, have the remover include a randomly generated K' in their Remove message to the rest of the group. This doesn't work though, because the removed person can still decrypt the Remove message and get K' just like everyone else.

A viable solution is to randomly generate K' and then encrypt it for everyone _except_ the removed party. But once you're here, you run into the problem of pairwise keys, and your runtime sucks.

This last step is basically where the article starts. Thank you for asking this question!
Arguably, by putting the comments on a separate page they already are collapsed by default. Going to the comments page signifies that one wants to view the comments. Why do you think a further level of collapsing would be beneficial? Would you expand things once they are upvoted, or always require an additional click to view the deeper levels?
How did people do before Uber? When I was there about 6-7 years ago (before Uber), none of my well-off friends would use cabs to go around London. We would take the tube + walking. Maybe a cab at night after going out but that would be it.
I was thinking about something like this recently.

I am a father of two kids. I can be walking on the sidewalk with my kids, and see another parent, maybe a mom, smile and say hello, it's totally fine.

Same situation, but maybe my kids are not with me, maybe they're in school. Suddenly I'm a strange man saying hello at a mom and her kids. A real danger situation! Hold onto your bag, hold the kids extra tight, reach for the pepper spray. But I am the same person in both situations.

But mindful of this, I keep a respectful distance in the latter case.
Rust

* is a lot simpler

* has a package manager

* has type classes (like interfaces with default
implementations)

* doesn't have multiple inheritance or inheritance

* much nicer unified error/exception pattern

* amazing compiler error messages

* makes memory corruption and many forms of concurrency
errors impossible(outside of ffi and unsafe)

* has tuples+sum types w/destructing
In 2016, AMD was near bankruptcy, after many years of mediocre tech and bad decisions. At that time it looked like they were never going to compete with Intel again in any meaningful way, didn't have the resources to pull ahead, had a negative balance sheet, and the best hope was that they could survive on some cheaper x86 niches, on the grace of people wanting some x86 competition to exist.
I've been waiting to hear more about this since the abstract was published.

What was the timelines involved here? PayPal, Trello, and others were contacted over the course of this investigation. It would be nice to know what their response times were to such a serious vulnerability.
Show HN: Alternatives to Freelancing for Engineers
Then you would have excess money supply, and if demand for the currency stays the same, it will devalue the currency, which causes inflation. That might be OK, as long as its below your economic growth rate.

With the US, the treasury uses the fact that the US dollar is one of the reserve currencies (the euro is catching up), and the US government demands payment for their security services to Japan/Korea/etc in USD, etc,etc helping maintain the demand for the USD.
I’ve seen a lot more monstrosities created with Make, but if it’s controlled then yes, it’s not too complex.
Doubtful you'll connect with a helpful recruiter @ Google.

Suggest reaching out their Global Head of Partnerships, Genna McKeel >

https://www.linkedin.com/in/gmckeel/
I've been writing a lot of Elixir recently, and I'm very impressed with the Emacs' language server support:

https://github.com/emacs-lsp/lsp-mode

Looks like Erlang is one of the supported languages, so I'd give that a whirl.
I'm a JS dev and I love it, but JavaScript is to programming languages what the electric guitar is to musical instruments.

It's the thing that attracts a lot of new beginners who may or may not be interested in the more serious theory that makes programming what it is.
>Many software jobs are just bullshit. They pay super well, but the sense is nowhere there

I'm glad someone has the same sense of meaning in software development. However I'm dissapointed at the same time. In the end it's all about selling some crap to people. I'm talking about advertisment, shops, datamining of preferences, handling of orders, etc - nothing that really helped anybody. Countrary, the main goal of this process is to make you more unsatisfied and miserable, and give you a false expectation that a newly purchased crap will help you to overcome your misery.

>I found that technology people (like Silicon Valley or investors) have technology fixation, e.g. they believe (like in god) that technology will solve all problems

It's not about believing, it's about making investors believe so the investors will bring money into another unprofitable bauble.
At the time it seemed that GPUs were becoming developer friendly and productivity might approach CPU languages, but then it all plateaued and GPU languages & OS integration stayed clunky. And fragmented.

Also, most computers come with integrated graphics today. It's the no brainer choice for most uses.
Western nations have had a 200 year head start. Even if our current status is middle of the pack, we have a lot of climate guilt to atone for.

Even moreso because we are outsized in our cultural influence. As we model the lifestyle changes ourselves, and those changes are reflected in the movies, etc that we export. That impacts what lifestyle the rising middle class aspires to in places like China and Africa.
Amazon delivery robots are officially on the streets of California
Epstein misappropriated ‘vast sums’ from wealth
> “Almost every post deals with the same topics: these are people who spend their lives trying to identify all the ways they can extract money from others without quite going to jail[...]”

A money quote for me, but it's not inclusive of the angry bystander programmers raging about externalities and corruption, and the employees trying to figure out a way that they can ethically stay employed when their boss (and probably their company's business model) is this. HN is all three.

Less so with time, though, it was once a more equal mix.
Sure. You live in an echo chamber on HN where everyone is worried about climate change. The WSJ is another echo chamber that is almost the polar opposite where people either don't believe in climate change, or that it's greatly exaggerated.

I've engaged with commenters in the WSJ hundreds, if not thousands, of times. Basically, you'll talk yourself into one big circle. People have all sorts of standard answers like "the climate is always changing", references to debunked movies, a handful of "scientific names", the Global Warming Hiatus, etc.

You can address all of them but they'll simply start over again with the same comments in the next article.

Several years ago I was even going to create an FAQ of questions.

https://2cco2.wordpress.com/2015/08/04/hello-world/

The only positive is that recently the WSJ stopped letting people comment on most articles.
It's all about who is writing it and why they are writing it, not the language. Well ok JavaScript has some legacy warts, but ECMAScript 2019 enables a variety of very well written code in a variety of styles, and TypeScript is icing.

As for me, I've only recently entered the JavaScript game, but the php I've seen has been much, much worse. I find the quality of JavaScript I typically encounter is on-par with typical Python code, and a fair bit better than the Frankenstein monsters of dev-ops code that often has a different convention for each line of bash (with attendant third-party applications) mixed in with inscrutable environment states as you shift in and out of various orchestration layers that have zero sense of application hierarchy or even running processes.

I've seen scientific codebases too, but the thing you're getting there is an authorship that is often small-team (1 or 2) and very slow to shift, with highly enculturated domain context. Of course JavaScript code is going to be a mess in organizations where you have devs coming from vastly different contexts and staying a max of 2 years with a team where all you care about is getting the pretty graphic on the screen.
There's a lot of the author's opinion embedded in that paragraph, and I'm disinclined to agree with it, but ... no wait -- was that paragraph generated by a Markov bot trained to make substanceless attacks on opinions that the author doesn't like?
In what sense do you mean you "need animal every single meal"? "Need" as in "want really bad, can't live without it", or "need" as in "my body won't function properly without it"?

Also, can you give some examples of the contra-arguments you mentioned?

Thanks
Well, the list says "JavaScript" so i took it as plain JavaScript. If you care about avoiding churn you can stick with stuff that have proven to remain backwards compatible and plain JavaScript fits the bill.
FYI: the information in this article is inaccurate. See the August 7th Forbes article for the correct information:

* https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexkonrad/2019/08/07/webflow-w...

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20636476
Google is a large organization, and many large organization is both evil and not-evil. (Also, such things as "evil" and "not-evil" is not always so clear, anyways.)

But, often you can use services and software other than Google, anyways; or at least, I can.
Without big feedback loops you actually have to go out of your way to get above a certain level of warming. RCP8.5, for 8.5C of warming, involves a frankly silly quantity of emissions, I assume this is because CO2 absorbs at certain wavelengths and there are diminishing returns as concentrations get really high.

Of course, we don’t know what the feedback loops are, they could kick in and take over. The IPCC is quite conservative about including feedback loops, and mainly deals with direct effects. But the same logic applies either way, within any reasonable range any reduction in CO2 emissions is worth pursuing.

I also personally think the economics for certain low carbon technologies will dominate over a middle/long time period, just that as it stands they won’t take over quick enough to dramatically bring down emissions.
AMD is not just competitive, it is better than Intel. Thus Google should adopt it and role it out, and faster than any other cloud provider. This will win them customers. I want 256 threads per machine at competitive prices.
Also some large companies will fire you if you test positive for it even if you work in a state where it’s legal.
Obsolutely! At this point its just a matter of how big is government contract regarding scooping into Skype content. I could bet the billions MS soend have been easily recouped in first 2 years.
The whole point of Racket is that syntax changes are not breaking, and furthermore the proposal was very clear that #lang racket would continue to be fully supported. The proposal should be regarded as an exciting extra feature, not a deprecation of anything.

Honestly, the community overreaction to this really disappoints me.
As for why people there might be so reluctant to embrace it, I think Upton Sinclair's words: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
What was horribly broken in these Opterons?
uBlock Origin at work (Chrome / Edge). Wipr at home (OSX, iOS). This gives me an ad free environment without the hassle (such as disabling JS).