skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If it makes you feel better, you could view the current rules as consisting solely of that line?
some of these photo with the smoke stacks could have been taken today... probably a lot of the others too
How long will it remain free?
Do you have to pay for it eventually? I don't understand the business model.
She Wanted a Man with a Good Job Who Is Nice to Animals
Excellent point. I would bet anything that the chinese government gave their oligarchs ample amount of time to move a large buffer of inventory before the ban went into effect.
I shipped machine learning tutorials for an education startup client through upwork. Here's a sample: https://colab.research.google.com/github/geofflangenderfer/m...
They’re fairly useful in applications that use numeric IDs. For example, if I’m using SQL, and I have a table with an AUTOINCREMENT primary key, I’m going to have a lot of numeric IDs. If I want to reference these in a config file of some kind, I don’t want to have to read them as strings and handle the parsing on my end.

Even if you’re of the opinion that IDs shouldn’t be numeric, there are a lot of cases where you’re stuck with integers—on Linux, user IDs, group IDs, and inodes are just a few examples.
I have to add the obligatory reference to Freakonomics and the impact your name has on "how a child performs in school and even her career opportunities".

Great write up in either the first or second Freakonomics book about how adversely impacting being called Jasmin is in the the US.

[0] http://freakonomics.com/podcast/how-much-does-your-name-matt...
I'm not the OP, but I always liked its simplicity. There's just enough space to do something interesting without getting bogged down in too much complexity.
People often miss things, or mistake them for something else. My buddy thought he had a mole on his ear until it turned out it was aggressive melanoma. They reconstructed his ear and took out some lymph nodes, and 2 years later it came back in his lung. Fortunately he enrolled in a clinical trial of immune based chemo, so he only lost his thyroid and adrenal glands.

How likely is it that you'd notice melanoma on your scalp or back?
Loved the bash one. Loved the time aspect to all the stories - early decisions and then the way they played out over time. Hard to sim various architectural decisions so a super informative read for both good and bad outcomes.
I understand if I am correct, probabilistic lower bound with 0.01 probability, upper bound to the loss with 0.99 probability.
Automatically upgrade your old Laravel 4.2 project to 5.8 with LaraUp
And terrible it is indeed, but I cannot find it specified - the strings eval, exec, command, statement do not even occur in the official specs (shallow doc perusal, I know)
+1. Native Polish speaker here, and I can eventually figure it out, but it's a struggle. Still, cool, though, since I can piece it together without a dictionary.
Except they get a cut of app sales and in app purchases, so this doesn't make any sense. Why would they bother running the Play Store at all if it didn't make them money?
I came here to say basically the same thing, as my story is very similar.

One big thing to consider, which I wish I had known before college:

It’s best to go get some relevant work experience before you undertake a degree program. This is true for several reasons:

1. You find out if you even want this particular kind of job, and assuming you do, you should have a better idea what sort of specialization / direction you are interested in.

2. You need to learn what to learn before you’re in school. Industry people can give you good insight into what coursework and topics are more valuable and what is not worth your time. They can also help point you to the best learning opportunities / schools.

In my own academic experience, I did alright, but I found that when I finally emerged into the workforce many of my ideas about what I needed to know were false, and that I had missed out on material that would have really benefitted me.

In most fields the academics are barely or not at all connected to the industry, so they often can’t help you with the “vocational” aspect of your education very much.
Give me some examples.

Coming from native Spanish it actually sounds very phonetic to me.
My guess is patents.
Having just read through >300 resumes to fill several security consulting roles, my anecdata is that a well laid resume makes with good design does make a good first impression and increases the chance that I will read through it. To me, it exhibits that they have put a bit of effort into communicating their value and shows ability to understand how to communicate information.

That said, still not as much of an impression as a good cover letter written to demonstrate how their strengths match the vacancy.
New York City in 1993 [video]
Hey, don't blame the applicant. May be they A/B tested the résumé [0], for all we know. They're selling themselves, and résumé is their landing page.

[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20151104203316/https://signalvno...
I never studied business, but did spend a couple years as a product manager working with MBAs, and what I was told --- this could definitely be wrong --- about business degrees and, more importantly, business school is that most of the value was in physically attending and networking, and that you generally wanted to be in one of the top programs or not do it at all.

On the other hand, I have heard from other people that accounting classes are super valuable.
you could say it's better than l33t
The introduction is by Isaac Asimov (!), who says that John Clark was a great science fiction writer, who, when he stopped writing, allowed lesser authors like Asimov (!!!) to come to prominence. An amazing (and amazingly gracious) statement.
SQLite databases might fit the bill. Fairly lightweight. Can talk to them in basically any language. Instead of templates you copy the database file and issue some UPDATEs.
When you do things you like, how does it impact others?
Type-In Program
So far, I've been paid to ship machine learning tutorial content for an education startup. I got the client through upwork.

Think of all the people that know less about site administration/programming than you. These people would rather spend their time working on their business and pay you to work in it.

It also helps that cost of living in South America/SEA is much lower than the US. I was paying $150/month rent in Medellin, Colombia, for example.
550k is a low combustion temperature. “Modern military jet engines, like the Snecma M88, can see turbine temperatures of 2,900 °F (1,590°C).” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbine_blade

That’s like ~1850k assuming 2900F was rounded.
I use JSON streams a lot with command line tools. Keep in mind that it’s limited in that each object must consume a single line. This allows you to recover from syntax errors in a single entry; each line is a fresh start.

Have you considered SQLite? I know it’s not a friendly text format, but it alleviates a lot of the issues with the “append to a text file” approach, such as concurrency. It’s great for this sort of thing.
- Array indices start at 0. :) [Half-joking.]

- An excellent debugger and condition system!

- Code won’t be broken in 20 years (which I value when developing things like compilers). There’s one standard, and several de facto standard extensions.

- Almost 30 years of history, documentation, discussions, etc. Every corner of the language has been discussed to death.

- Several stable, mature, and independent choices of open source implementation.

- Implementations are written in Lisp all the way down. You can immediately jump to the definition of anything at any depth, and often edit or redefine to taste. (Example, I improved SBCL’s integer square root in my live image, and submitted a patch.) The only off-limits bits are a part of the runtime, like the garbage collector.

- Several independent choices of commercial implementation and commercial support.

- Generally easy to optimize and micro-optimize code. Easy to edit/disassemble/debug.

- Easy to write assembly code with SBCL.

- Fast start-up time, easy to compile into native executables. No JIT lags.

- Excellent IDE support through Emacs and SLIME. Incremental development is real with Lisp, and absolutely not so with Julia.

- Easy to dynamically generate and compile code at runtime.

- Excellent metasyntactic programming facilities. (Macros, symbol macros, reader macros, ...)

Negatives compared to Julia:

- Poor support for numerical libraries and poor support for plotting, much to the chagrin of a scientific programmer like myself.

- No hip website or hip foundation backing it.

- Quiet community, with very broad interests. Not everybody is rallying around one theme in Lisp. You got database programmers, game programmers, scientific programmers, etc. This could be a positive, if the community were larger.
> That's a bug which only occurs on five year old distributions and which was fixed years before any exploit was ever found

I don't think we're reading the same post unless you got confused by the part where he discusses the exploit not the bug.

> Honestly if that's being brought up as a bad example Linux is looking pretty good compared to other operating systems.

Compared to what? FreeBSD? Certainly not any modern desktop OS.

MSFT is investing heavily in exploit mitigations while Linux distros are probably still struggling with ASLR. https://www.blackhat.com/docs/us-16/materials/us-16-Weston-W...
Guidebook, a 70+ person company, also appears to have just had their account banned as of yesterday morning.

It's an app that tells you what's happening at conventions. Hard to see the bad faith there, but I bet the conventions they've signed contracts with this week will be very unhappy.

The co-founder has taken to tweeting at his network to try to find a contact. Crazy to think a rogue algorithm might put 70 people out of work if he can't find someone quickly enough.
You know what kind of resume stands out? A traditional one with nice formatting, nothing extraneous (if you have a college degree I don't care where you went to high school), and no typos.

Maybe 25% of resumes that I see hit all of these criteria. If you can't pay attention to detail on a one-page resume that you update every year or two and send out to every job that you apply to, then how can I possibly expect that you are going to pay attention to detail in the code that you write?
A comparison application boilerplate in vanilla JavaScript
They were used a lot in cars. I'm not sure if that is still the case.
Obviously, they get a cut of App Store revenue. Android is worth many billions of dollars to Google, and having quality apps on the store is an essential part of the ecosystem.

To be sure, this is Google failing in a way that they should care about, and likely do care about, but failing none-the-less.

The reason is because their culture will not allow them to succeed in these types of human interactions. And there is no doubt that that culture is poisonous and will ultimately bite them hard, on Android, on Search, and I think most of all on YouTube.

IMO, this will eventually cost them billions of dollars, whether it is in lost revenue due to apps that are no longer on the store, end users switching to alternative products, or hostile legislation and fines.
> they get a cut of app sales and in app purchases

Yes, but that doesn't make developers their customers. It makes developers their business partners, and business partners in a hugely asymmetric relationship, since there are zillons of developers and would-be developers and only one of Google.

Basically, an individual developer is negligible to them because there are always more where that one came from. So they have no incentive to handle particular edge cases with particular developers; they just remove that developer and another one takes their place. Most developers don't throw edge cases at them, so this strategy works fine for them.
Stanford Libraries Will Host Fantastic Futures 2019: AI and Libraries Conference
Car Theft Group Test – Britain's Most Secure Cars 2019
> XML is also pretty difficult to read

I’d say this is schema-dependent. If you’re talking about plist files, sure; those are ugly and unintuitive. But on the whole I find XML far easier to read than JSON. With closing tags, what you lose in terseness is made up for with scannability: it’s easier to understand the document hierarchy at a glance, and find your place again after editing. Whereas with JSON I often have to match curly braces in my head, or add comments like `// /foo` which isn’t even possible outside of JS proper or a lax-parser environment.
They know that whatever algorithm is used here will fire off some false positives. They also believe that paying people to review in order to correct the false positives is not worth it.
It is probably easier to describe the opposite.

If someone is not bright, then when you start discussing a topic that is outside their everyday experience (i.e. not their job, not their hobby), they only have three options: (1) ignorance and indifference "huh?" "I don't know, this seems stupid/boring", (2) repeating a statement they heard from TV or radio, but unable to e.g. explain what that really means, what would be the consequences thereof, and (3) just saying something completely random.

A bright person would be able to admit their lack of knowledge in the topic, but then do some independent thinking, or ask additional questions, or... something.
His livelihood was not taken away; he is still free to program for a trade or to sell his apps directly to users.
Essential and Relevant: A Unit Test Balancing Act
Some other ideas along these lines:

technical recruiter, project manager, and jobs selling or teaching technology

Finding people in these fields who actually understand the technology they're dealing with is pretty rare and usually very appreciated by the people you wind up working with, so you'd have a big advantage.
My experience as a manager is the exact opposite. This piece reminds me of the head-slapping simplicity of How to Win Friends and Influence People. It seems so obvious when it’s spelled out this clearly, but it’s so utterly not obvious and widely ignored in practice in all types of leadership and management situations. You absolutely won’t hear this stuff at business seminars, because it’s very dressed down and plain and common sense. It’s not high concept thought leadership drivel.
tldr; humans change their theorems/lemmas to make them fit their initial model, i.e. add caveats.
It's verbose, illegible, redundant, and shares mos of the problems YAML has.

Not to talk about the attribute/content duality and all the ill-defined parsers it leads to.
The "two language problem" in the high performance numerical computation domain, in which you have a high level language that is easy to use as a glue (such as Python) and a low level language for anything that requires performance (such as C++). In Julia a program that looks like python can run at the speed of C (and as a bonus has the metaprogramming abilities of a Lisp minus s-expressions), and with only one high level language for everything you can much more easily create, understand, extend and debug anything.
k8s and helm is where I learned to dislike yaml. I now want a compiled and type safe language that generates whatever config a system needs.

I'm pretty much thinking I want Go as a pre-config where I can set variables, loops, and conditionals and that my editor can help with auto-complete. Maybe I can "import github.com/$org/helmconfig" and in the end write one or more files for config.
I was more thinking We as in people alive right now. In 100 years things could be different, but based on current trends it’s not going to be useful in our lifetimes.

So many things are wrong with using solar road surfaces that it’s hard to make them look viable even if the panels cost nothing. Because that means electricity is worth very little, and you still need to integrate them into the road surface which costs money.
Is this exclusive to childhood?

It feels to me, though this could well be a socio-economic bubble thing, that people are just scrambling everywhere. Hyperfocused on something; anything.

Maybe it's their career; maybe it's their cause; whatever. But the innocence of just living, existing; hanging out in this beautiful world we call home; seems to be fading for many.

Happiness must be now, not future, otherwise future it will always be.
I want to agree with you, because I am generally pro-technology and pro-plastic. On many levels, plastics are one of the most amazing inventions of the last century.

On the other hand, we're seeing more and more particulate pollution from plastics which won't be solved by adequate disposal. Some plastic products break down and end up in the environment while they are still in use(see plastic clothing fibers for example).
It's also telling that even with every other possible answer being given by someone, there's still no one who wants XML.
At my old place we developed a small tool that wraps CloudFormation with a templating language (jinja2). This was actually great as it CloudFormation is extremely verbose and often unnecessarily complex. Templating it out and adding custom functions to jinja2 made the cfn templates much easier to understand.

I think it all depends. Most of the time I would agree that you shouldn't template yaml, but sometimes, it's the lesser of two evils.
That guideline doesn't exist everywhere. You may just be seeing CVs from non-UK applicants.
I’d venture that the reason that mathematics doesn’t risk imploding is because ultimately it can be treated as a fairly empirical body of knowledge, and maps accurately to the world as we observe it (or rather, the implications of pure mathematics, when applied by the sciences, give results that are not ad odds with reality as we observe it to be).
> this will eventually cost them billions of dollars

It might, but that problem, if you think it's a problem, is not fixable by Google providing better service to developers, because better service to developers would prevent their current business model for apps from scaling, and without scaling it won't make them money.

> their culture will not allow them to succeed in these types of human interactions

Their culture might be the immediate cause, but I think the root cause is the economics of the business model they have chosen. The only way to fix that would be to choose a different business model, and the obvious alternate business model would be to sell their services like search, maps, gmail, play store, etc. directly to their users, making their users into customers. But I don't think that option is open to them at this point, and it might not be open to anyone without a huge disruption of the entire industry.
This should be the post then, a solution rather than griping.
These were absolutely not constructed. The Italian case was a process of making official a register that had evolved naturally over 700 years; as it had been in continuous use in modern states, updating was not necessary.

In the Hebrew case, the language had been in continuous literary use for thousands of years; the only changes required to make it into a spoken everyday language were to add vocabulary. If that's a constructed language, then French is "constructed" every time the Academie decides on a word to replace an English loanword!
Well it was based off a particular dialect of Malay, but it’s certainly not exactly the same as that dialect, nor the language spoken in Malaysia today. The Interslavic language in the OP is also based on existing languages. It was also implemented the same way you’d imagine a created language would be. A central authority came up with the language, told the people to learn it, and then a couple hundred million of them actually did.

I think it has a remarkable quality, in that the government told everybody to learn a new common language, and that that actually succeeded. That’s the part where created languages usually come to a grinding halt. Whether the language is “created enough” seems open to interpretation to me.
It is! That can be used for so many applications like microfluidics (my research field). I am not one of the authors, but you can see their paper here (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41563-019-0440-2). They have more details there. They modified the surface chemically, “The superamphiphobic surface is made from fluorinated porous silicon dioxide.” You can see some details here (https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/gravity-defying-droplets...), but may need to sign up. If you can’t get that info, let me know.
We got approximately the same numbers (your clock speed is likely to be much higher). User/system time is quasi-bogus, since it’s a high core count system (although still a bit concerning). I accounted for possible cache effect by running each a number of times and reporting the last. I’m not really trying to make an absolute time comparison here, just pointing out that if 100ms is unacceptable, numpy would just miss that bar too. Once you’re past the bar of “this needs to be kept running”, I don’t think a constant factor of 100ms vs 1s makes much difference in QoL, and now we’re just comparing apples and oranges. A constant factor gain on the rest of the time can make a huge difference on the rate of results per second. But I actually hope both will improve!
You should check out dhall-lang
> I am sure within 10 years every professional mathematician will use formal proofs.

I'll take that bet. 1:1 odds, up to $50? Shall we say, every mathematician employed at an ivy league university math department (postdoc level or above) has published at least one paper which employs proof checking for at least some claim? (provided that they have published at all.) So I win if I can find at least one professor or postdoc employed at an ivy league university math department on August 18, 2029, who has published at least one mathematics paper, and who has not published any mathematics paper which contains any formal proof.

That's a much weaker claim than yours, so it ought to be pretty generous to you.
An idea related to this helped me get a grasp on writing proofs when I was first struggling to teach myself mathematics.

The idea was roughly:

A particular formalized proof (or lemma) is one of many ways of expressing/representing a more general concept that grounds some mathematical idea. It seems to mirror the way you could have the general concept of "having gone to the store and purchased bananas" in your head but express it many different ways through natural language.

If humans were doing mathematics by thinking purely in terms of the theorem space of some particular formal system, then 'collapses' should be expected after minor errors: if you take one wrong turn, your error should be compounded in any further progress.

But that does not appear to be how we do mathematics. Instead we're operating in a more general space of concepts, and we do not do math by proceeding linearly in our thoughts from the beginning of a proof to the final conclusion--we assemble the conception piecemeal until we get some feel for the sufficient overall integrity/coherence of a general conception, and then secure it by building up a kind of formal carapace around it. But if part of the proof/carapace is wrong, it's like a malformed section of armor that needs to be replaced: the whole structure isn't going to collapse because of it (not that that couldn't happen).

Thinking about things that way gave me a better view (I think) on how to use and think about formalizations when doing mathematics.
What a perfect story. Very nicely done.
Abstract Syntax Tree Explorer with Transform Function for Ruby
No, it’s not.
The entire second half of the comment you're responding to addresses this. You don't have to agree, but you can't reasonably rebut the whole comment by pretending he didn't address it.
Indeed, the random article link on Wikipedia is a delight.