skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
None of the things you mention is necessary. In fact, we're adding user-mode threads (based on delimited continuations) to the JVM without doing any of them. Remember that every subroutine must already be compiled into a state machine or you wouldn't be able to return to it. I.e., every subroutine is already compiled in just the right way to be suspended already. The reason some languages run into problems are:

1. They may not have access to the representation the subroutines store their state, as it may be platform dependent (e.g. if you're targeting LLVM you may not have access to that representation).

2. They may not track their pointers, and so find it hard to move chunks of stack around if they have internal pointers into the stack.

3. They may want to enable some specific optimizations in the special (and rare, especially when IO is involved) case of a monomorphic calls to shallow coroutines. This requires that the representation of the subroutine's state be available as a high-level node for the compiler to change.
I had a friend in the 90s who started at a tech company as an admin assistant. But her husband was an engineer and she knew a ton of engineers, so she started referring them. The company paid $5,000 for each hire. She got so many people in the door that she made more money on referral bonuses than her regular salary.

The company solved the problem by "promoting" her to HR as a recruiter.
Moose: Man Out of Space Easiest
A colleague used an app's "generate secure password" feature to change their ISP's web portal login - which then also became the WAN router's password - which they didn't realise.

It was about a week before the router dropped its connection and needed to re-authenticate - and that's when I was called in to investigate the loss of connectivity - which Windows 10 very unhelpfully reported as the network cable disconnected and was resetting or power-saving on the NIC so the "link active" LED on the switch was going out for about 2 secs every 10 sec. Cue a round of cable and switch swapping to no benefit. The LEDs for all other devices on the switch (running Linux and mostly internal servers) were behaving normally.

I finally backtraced to the router and a useful error message. We put two-and-two together and my colleague called up the auto-saved details in their password manager; it was long, and ALL non-alpha numeric characters - starting with a backtick, which the router would not accept. I tethered my phone to my laptop and tried to login to the Web account portal - which would NOT accept the passphrase. I tried it without the backtick "just in case" - nope.

We had to do a "lost password" reset on the portal..and wait for the email with link.

Lessons learned:

The ISP's password change page did not seem to validate input, but the login page did.

Avoid backticks in passwords.
Still need others for things like S/MIME, which are not supported by Let's Encrypt.
Right now we're focused on the first release of OpenTelemetry, which will include distributed traces and metrics. Many users and contributors have asked for logging support, and this was already a big discussion topic in the pre-merger OpenCensus and OpenTracing communities - I'd expect us to start focusing on this after the release later this year. There have also been some early conversations around support for an error first-class signal type (there was a recent GitHub issue, though now I can't find it), however to my knowledge we haven't yet started any error-related specs or design discussions.

You can certainly add error-related annotations to traces, however these will typically be sampled.
https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/02/09/considerations-on-cost...

This is a pretty good article, along with his response to comments:

https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/02/17/highlights-from-the-co...
Iterating over characters in a string is something that's done very often in introductory CS classes, but very little in the real world. Python has support for string finding and regexes; why in the world would I be individually iterating over characters? Generally, when you see that, it's a code smell.

So yeah, I totally agree with you, it'd be better if trying to iterate over a string were a flat-out error, and if you really want it, you should mean it. Though Python being dynamic still means that you'll only spot this error at runtime.

As for linters, how do they know if your intent was to reassign the value of an existing variable, or to define a new one? The language has no way to indicate which of these is intended.
Is Elon Musk Wrong about Lidar? A Quantitative Study
It's not just a bad UI, it's also extremely buggy.

The problem is that the market is next to impossible to get into. They're like Photoshop - they've got an army of people trained in using their super complex UI. It's the de facto standard in the market; they've built a massive moat which will be extremely hard to get past.
Top reasons anyone with more than three brain cells to rub together will never believe an "Epstein killed himself entirely of his own volition and with no outside help or encouragement" story:

1.) We'll never be given a satisfactory explanation for why Epstein was not under redundant 24/7 surveillance (because there can't be one).

2.) The trail will go cold in the ongoing SDNY conspiracy investigation, and even if more details come out from the victims or court documents, none of the high profile people who were implicated in his sex trafficking ring like Prince Andrew, Bill Clinton, or Alan Dershowitz, will see any consequences or be held accountable in any way for their crimes.

3.) Point 2.) notwithstanding, the release of an unending series of bizarre and inexplicable details about Epstein and his life will probably continue, in which power-worshipping news outlets like The Atlantic will show no interest whatsoever.
Those differences don't matter much when it comes to building software that fulfills specific requirements.

I am a big fan of compile-time checking, but there's a lot of good software built without it and sadly there's also a lot of successful slow software. These are disadvantages, not an impassable barrier.
The inconvenience of charging away from home is much bigger than you make it out to be.

Other posters here are mentioning ~40 miles of charging in an 18 hour period. That's pretty dang restrictive.
Two New Ebola Treatments Prove Highly Effective in Congo Epidemic
Since it does not take an hour to charge for a normal drive, maybe you are the one with bad timing.

If a person is driving 30 miles or less a day they only need less than 10 minutes charging to get by.
I second this as well! ITILA is not just outstanding but offers a timeless perspective to statistical and uncertainty modeling, not to mention information theory which is often understudied in this field (including by myself).

As the parent poster says, this field moves fast but this book will give a solid grounding.

Even though the treatment on neural networks is short, the beginning chapters are worthwhile. The chapter one random variables and probability is one of the best introductions to probabilistic modeling which I’ve seen.
Should you tailor your message differently to each person? Yes.

Does that mean dividing them into "personality types"? No.

By and large, there is no strong evidence to support personality types.

Of the various kinds, OCEAN is the most reputable, and of that, the only metric that really seems to be thoroughly studied is the O (for Openness to new experiences).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits#Li...
What about for Windows development? I just ordered one through my company in order to bypass 'untrusted app' dialogs that my non tech savvy users can't figure out.
Haha, I'm an idiot, good idea :)
What are you on about?

CVS is GPL.
OpenCVS is BSDL.

Git is GPL.
Got is BSDL.

I got nothing against GPL, but I am pro diversification (competition = good, monoculture = bad). Furthermore, these projects add more than just different license. Mainly, better security.

PS: Got, trendy name. Got got?
Right now I’m experimenting with a pretty complicated model (60+ layers of multiple types), and I plan to train it on several hundred GB of data, using 8-16 node cluster (4 GPUs per node). Does Owl have a well tested and well documented autograd library with distributed GPU support (e.g. Horovod)? With a good choice of optimizers, regularizers, normalizers, etc, so I can focus on my model and not on debugging the plumbing or implementing basic ops from scratch. And last, but not least, it must be as fast as TF/Pytorch.

If the answer is “no”, then it does not matter whether I’m an OCaml expert, because I’m still going be more productive with Python.

p.s. Julia is nice though, hopefully it will keep growing.
Not exactly pertinent to "garage orphans," but i was struck by the picture featured in the article and the design choice of how electric chargers look.

They seem to be an exact replica of a traditional gas nozzle. Striking to me how initial conditions matter for human perception and adoption. While EV is an entirely new technology and thus could be built from a cleanslate, the easiest way to drive adoption was to shape it as close to the existing solution as possible - which was specifically designed to transmit a liquid. Clearly it works - but an important design lesson for me!
That’s a totally legit position - the hope is that incumbents in these sectors will adapt and work to clean-up their operations. I don’t think any investor, no matter how large, is aiming to kill these types of companies - but institute positive change. Having said all this, positive returns should come first.
I think I'd rather say "sidestep" UAC - if you drop an exe in your "documents" folder, there's no UAC prompt. Scoop doesn't write to protected areas by default.

I suppose it's entirely possible to change this via draconian policies (to have the equivalent of mounting home noexec) - and conversely, for global installs - you need to abide by UAC in the form of "sudo":

https://github.com/lukesampson/scoop/wiki/Global-Installs
Until functional people stop speak so elitist ("me" vs average programmer), people will be driven away from these concepts
I was in Norway last month, and SAS Airways has a bunch of travel slogans posted around airports, and my favorite was (paraphased) "Your reason for travel is our reason for making travel sustainable". They had several similar ones pointing out the irony in peoples' reasons for wanting to visit 'less touched' areas, and the need to preserve them.
Our neighborhood Teshole is solving the problem by parking across the sidewalk. They do have a garage, but that's for storing their other car.
A car with two people can get over 75 mpg per passenger..
That's assuming it's an error in their code.

For all you know, they have a list of too-clever license plates (null, no plate, etc), and they purposefully divvy up the no plate tickets among them.
>Types only eliminate certain tests. You will always have system tests, acceptance tests and unit tests.

Yes, so let's eliminate them with types, instead of doing them. "Acceptance tests" are not concerned with programming.

>Types will not catch logical errors in your code.

Actually, depending on the type system, it will.

That's how program logic is tested as "proof" and programs, implementations of algorithms are determined to be logically correct in more exotic languages (but even in C + some restrictions + the right statically checking tooling, NASA/JPL style project do that).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_verification
As much of a fan of Python's syntax as I am, there are real problems with whitespace-sensitive syntax.

It's not that it's hard to parse or necessarily to write.

The trouble is that generic tooling around text is really bad, especially various websites and chat boards still haven't figured it out.

Code is a way to share ideas, which was one of GvR's key insights. People share a ton of code in discussions and such and WSS makes it a bear; even here I have to tediously type in four spaces to share a snippet of Python.

> The kind of people who think that's a PROBLEM instead of a FEATURE really should not be ever writing any new code, and instead should be punished by forcing them to maintain other people's code written with that same lazy misguided attitude, until they recognize how self indulgent, inconsiderate, and disrespectful that is not just to other people who have to read their code, but also to themselves.

Having gotten worked up like this myself plenty of times, I think you're treating someone doing a bad job as an injustice to you.

Unless there's a malign intent, it's simply not. And elevating it to an injustice is creating stress and strife for yourself (which you're venting here) that you don't need.
There's a guy with a Tesla around the corner from me, who does this (cable out the 2nd floor window), and he does park on the street. Not sure what he does if he can't get a space close enough. (A neighborhood of row houses with little off-street parking)

I think the car makers have to accelerate integrating solar charging into their cars. You probably wouldn't get 100% of your charge that way, but you could get enough to substantially reduce dependence on the grid.
Knowingly writing gibberish could get you in trouble for lying on an insurance related form.

Better to blame a “senior moment”.
This is why we need standard, swappable battery packs. You pull into a "filling station" and a robot pulls your used pack and pops in a new one. 5 minutes, in and out.

Sad thing is, this isn't a new idea. People just don't seem to want it.
> The US generally has a legal system that acknowledges joint and several liability, so the bank and criminal are independently 100% liable...and guess who the damaged party is more likely to get satisfaction from?

People often wonder how this is fair. If parties D1 and D2 both played a role in allowing some bad thing to happen to P, but it was 90% D1's fault and 10% D2's fault, but D2 has deep pockets and D1 has almost nothing, how is it fair to make D2 pay both their own share and D1's share of the damages to P?

It makes a lot more sense when you realize that these are situations where someone has to get screwed. If D1 is liable to P for 90% of the total damages and D2 is liable to P for 10% of the total damages, P gets screwed. P only gets 10% of what they are owed.

Joint and several liability recognizes that of the parties involved P is the one who least deserves to get screwed, and so allows P to collect the full damage award from whichever D's have the money. If, as in this example, that results in one or more D's getting screwed, those D's can sue the other D's over it.
> it paints a picture of certain places as belonging to a certain group of people by natural right rather than by a more contingent or accidental mechanism

If my ancestors built a place, and raised their families there to continue taking care of it for generations, in what sense does it not belong to me and my extended family? Nothing about that process was "accidental", though it may have some factor of "randomness" about it depending on your personal epistemology.

> I think it's only a very short distance from that kind of argument to the argument that many use to suggest that immigrants fleeing dangerous and awful places are an infestation to be eliminated.

You've skipped a thousand steps. When the caretakers of a place welcome people in, and then discover they pose a problem, it's not unreasonable for them to wish to mitigate the issue. If this means that an unlimited number of refugees or immigrants cannot be accepted because maintaining the same standard of living would be impossible, it is not unreasonable to refuse new entrants. By no means are we beholden to support every other human being, even if we empathize for their plight.

> The fact that some groups of people find themselves in possession of a place or a resource that others appreciate or even covet does not convey on them some kind of moral superiority over the rest of humanity.

It's not moral superiority; it's moral duty, to understand and uphold the works of the past that have lead to greatness. Failure to do so could mean seeing beautiful things destroyed, replaced by the same chaos and fear that people are already fleeing.

> I say this as someone who hates to travel

Well, maybe if you saw more of the world, and saw what people are trying to protect (e.g. in Europe), and got a greater sense of what it means to be a people (as opposed to the atomized, decultured masses in North America)... maybe you might understand why someone would seek to preserve something.

It makes sense that you don't care about preserving your local strip mall / walmart / home depot. It's quite another thing to care about preserving Notre Dame and such.
To me, this seems like a transient problem. As battery technology improves, we may be able to move back towards a "gas station" model for charging. BMW/Porsche already has a charging solution that can do 100 km in 8 minutes [1].

[1] https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/282364-bmw-porsche-demo-...
All we had to do was register our cars in each others names. When I was married, my car was registered to her and vice versa. The redlight/photoradar laws in my state required that the company operating the devices had to match the pic of the driver violating the law, to the pic of the registered owner via the license plate. If they couldn't match them, no ticket was issued as you can't prove who was driving. That's probably changed now that a lot of DMV's are doing facial scans with datapoints. They probably just scan the whole DMV DB now to find the driver. Wear a mask.
>banning gun ownership has a history of leading to genocide

Basically every other developed country has stricter laws than the US (which is what we're talking about, not full bans). It's ridiculous to suggest those lead to genocides.
How many non-democratic systems have you seen, which upheld this and the other principles GP referred to?
My school transitioned to Canvas from Sakai, it was like night and day in usability. I used Blackboard in highschool so even Sakai offered a major increase in usability.

Sakai and Canvas seem easy enough to setup that I can't imagine Blackboard can continue making money for much longer.

There's another system called LON-CAPA (written in Perl) that seems ancient compared the other competing systems. It was very easy to use and "just worked" but it felt like it was straight out of the Web 1.0 era.
Should use nullptr :P
Whether anybody is practicing witchcraft or any other form of magic is beyond the point; it should be obvious to anybody who's not totally naive that some countries have more corruption than others.
Two things this makes me think of.

1. The US has a large NIH attitude and is unwilling to adopt overseas experience or standards.

2. Somehow we have to move away from building infrastructure as stepwise huge mega projects. And start building infrastructure as an ongoing incremental and reliable program into perpetuity. E.g. instead of CAHSR designed largely as a dedicated rail system with huge up front capital costs the benefits of which can’t be felt until it is all spent, set up a state rail agency to consolidate and consistently fund incremental improvements to the rail system, with incremental ROW purchases and improvements that over time reach the really big HSR goals. Imagine for example CAHSRs capital budget of $80 billion but instead going to fund an agency for 30 years that can then hire engineers and project managers and allocate it to its projects that have the best ROI over 30 years.

That last one seems to primarily be a political challenge though. Nobody likes state run agencies and everyone loves defunding them.
That works if they're losing money due to not selling enough volume to recoup the startup costs. However if they're actually selling them for less money than they cost to make, every unit sold is just adding to the loss.

If it costs $1,000,000 to design a car and I sell that car for $30,000 and I sell 33 cars, I've lost $10k. But just selling one more car will turn a profit.

On the other hand if that car costs $32,000 to make and I'm selling it for $30,000... GM has long been in the business, for whatever reason, of selling cars below cost [1]. And for the Volt, it's more like selling a $40k car that actually costs $80k to manufacture [2], not even taking engineering and marketing costs as a factor.

Selling more Bolts and Volts would hurt GM, not help.

[1] https://www.hotcars.com/gm-admits-bolt-not-profitable/

[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/michelinemaynard/2012/09/10/stu...
And that'd be fine if everyone were on board with it and that were the general direction of the project, but I don't think that's true.

I've never seen a strict, type-annotated Python project out there in the wild, and I've seen a decent amount of them. A random non-primary-contributor isn't going to have much luck stepping into an established project and getting everyone to go along with adding annotations to the whole thing.

And if I were starting a project from scratch, rather than coercing the language to do something it wasn't really designed for, I'd just use a language that has first-class support for types directly in the compiler, like Java or Go.
You left a job that gave you a cubicle? Man, I'd kill for a job that gave me a damned cubicle instead of a cacophonous open office... but sadly there are none left except for the one you just gave up.
Disagree. The masses of Chinese tourists do well to be exposed to the rest of the world. Where in your reply do you offer solutions? People have been giving some form of your complaint since the beginning of time. We will continue to innovate and find solutions just like we always have. Overpopulation and overtourism are not intractable problems.
> It doesn't matter if it's prerendered, as long as it's fast enough, and fast HTML sites are fast enough.

If that were true, Bing et al would not spend resources maintaining AMP caches. It's clearly not true.

> If AMP was so good then this entire SSR wouldn't even be necessary

This just shows that you don't know what AMP does. It allows prerendering from the link aggregator, and it does this well enough that every competent search engine implements it. The problem this solves is that people share AMP links directly, which can't be prerendered because they aren't loaded until someone puts the link in the location bar. In this case, it is slower than plain HTML, but this isn't the case AMP is meant to solve. By using SSR, they can make it faster than most plain HTML and just slightly slower than hand-optimized HTML with above the fold optimizations.

> You also seem to argue that because Facebook Instant Article and Apple News exist, AMP must also compete. I'm saying none of them are needed and creating yet another standard to push onto publishers because others have done it is poor justification.

The publishers use it, and as we demonstrated above with Bing's A/B testing, the users want it. What more justification do you need?

> If Google wants to, it can force speed standards that change the majority of websites overnight. It can implement rules and restrictions in its adserver that change the majority of ads overnight. It can optimize Google analytics that change the majority of tracking overnight.

Who says they don't? None of those solve the problem that AMP solves, which is instant loading of pages .

> Facebook doesn't pressure IA and normal links work just fine. Apple News is new inventory and doesn't take away from Safari or the web.

It's the same with the search engines and AMP.

> And RSS is completely irrelevant and nothing more than a feed of updates where pubs can share as much or as little as they want.

So what you're saying is that RSS is exactly like AMP, where pubs can share as much or as little as they want.
That might work in Europe, where there are more options than planes. In Canada, and obviously the US, there's no option.
I think that is a very dumb notion. It completely omits the part where people are very dumb.