skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I work for a company where we have contractors at the customer service centers. This is pretty standard for customer service workers. They handle reservations over the phone and customer support. The centers where they work are very locked down. They deal with customer names and credit cards as part of their jobs. They go through background checks. (It can be hard to get enough people who both apply and can pass the checks ) They cannot bring in phones, memory sticks, pens, or paper. they have to pass through a scanner to enter and leave the floor. They work on stations with locked down ports and restricted internet access.

I went there for a meeting but was not allowed on the floor because it was not pre-approved by security.

If the Apple centers where Siri errors are reviewed is like that, it would be hard to sneak recordings out.
5G is a step back. It's a short range link, which may be nice in a densely populated area, but is useless outside that. And it already seems like providers are rolling back 4G support in rural areas.
Don't know about him, but I would, Trotsky is one of those people who are responsible for creation of concentration camps in soviet russia on scaling it(among other horrible things). The only reason you don't think about him the same way you think about Stalin or Hitler is because he lost internal competition to Stalin an flew the country.
Double irony: this article appears in Fortune magazine.
The Visible Lisp Computer Runs on Adafruit ItsyBitsy M0 Board
anyone aware of low-power ASICs available to DIY to perform inference using pre-trained models?
I don't see how any of this is surprising.

If you want to improve your voice recognition, then you need to have a ground truth. To continuously improve, you must validate, isolate and update the corner cases.

This means listening to the failed speech to text events, ones with low confidence, and a sampling of high confidence events.

This is literally what google voice was for, it was a way of google getting lots and lots of samples of people talking using a phone's microphone.

Almost certainly google/apple/amazon will be sampling photos, emails anything that goes through a ML pipeline, humans will see.

Now, ofcourse apple have positioned them selves as a privacy first company, so this is a big no no. They should have re-asked for permission (I'm pretty sure they talked about this in the Terms and conditions, there was some noise about it when siri first came out. )
I agree (mostly) but not sure how that applies to my comment. Yes my major frustrations with it is that it isn't able to form a helpful response, not that it gets the actual words wrong. And in the case above, it goes beyond that. Designers of the product (Google maps) have it present onscreen options you need to click, in response to a spoken request (e.g. "find gas stations on my route") that is likely to be by a person who is driving and should not have to look at a screen. I would argue that that is not just non-helpful, but irresponsible and unsafe.

But I guess you are right, in that if they have the transcripts, they don't need to actually listen to recordings. Then again they might need to listen to recordings if they are trying to gauge user frustration.
Note that some of these also have nVidia GPGPUs, so you can test your open source software on both.
I've learned that it's very hard to convince people online, particularly over social media (ie twitter), because either 1) these people are unwilling to openly admit that they are wrong because their 'expertise' in the topic will be questioned and they will lose social status value 2) these people think it's weakness to openly admit that they are wrong so they will insist they are correct in order to try to keep up their 'image' 3) these people are simply convinced that they are correct and therefore won't change their ability to be convinced otherwise
Do you think running more fiber to the last mile will give more people the opportunity to have gigabit fiber ran to their home?
>>Or, you could consider that earth climate has proven to be resistant enough to natural catastrophies for life to evolve for millions of years.

The Earth has never had a massive industrial human civilization on it until the last ~200 years.
Well, the FSF/GNU disagree: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#DeveloperViolate

What kind of obligation do you think GPL/MIT/BSD/Apache could possibly place on the author?
> This quote advocates for wise people to never try to convince other people

No, sometimes the master's job is to teach someone something. It's just not all the time or even every time someone is wrong on the internet.
Unless you have access to an observer account that lets you see all the hole cards:

https://upswingpoker.com/ultimate-bet-absolute-poker-scandal...
This reminds me of gulp, where you used JS Gulpfile instead of Makefile.
Agree, but people tend to stop at Fowler and live it as gospel. There is a profound richness in the different ways to think and talk about computers, engineering, and information science, far more wonderous than any one person can catalog. Read SICP, Knuth, Code Complete, Codd. Hell, just YouTube around. If your vocabulary is prescribed by literally one guy in a fedora, you gotta get out there. Might I suggest Joe Armstrong [1] :)

[1] https://youtu.be/lKXe3HUG2l4
What I expect to see as an interviewer:

for (let i = 1; i <= 100; i++) {
let output = "";
// test modulos in ascending order
if (i % 3 === 0) output += "Fizz";
if (i % 5 === 0) output += "Buzz";
if (output === "") output += i;
console.log(output);
}

Look Ma, I can maintain it!

for (let i = 1; i <= 100; i++) {
let output = "";
// test modulos in ascending order
if (i % 3 === 0) output += "Fizz";
if (i % 5 === 0) output += "Buzz";
if (i % 7 === 0) output += "Foo";
if (i % 11 === 0) output += "Bar";
if (output === "") output += i;
console.log(output);
}

Since I didn't introduce any new functions like isMultiple as a unnecessary shorthand for the built-in modulo operator, and I didn't introduce unnecessary arrays to iterate over the index of, I don't need to write a test suite. I can simply compare the output to the expected results.

Not having the function call for every value will help this "scale" if necessary, though for this problem scaling was neither stated as a requirement, nor implied by any reasonable reading of the requirements.

Putting on my hiring manager hat, if a candidate changes a for loop to a map() because "there are just a few programming languages that doesn’t support loops," I would ask the candidate to name some of those languages, and how one could solve a problem like FizzBuzz without loops. I would expect to talk about recursion and declarative languages (Prolog, or even SQL), not about `map()`.
It's got nothing to do with wanting free things - the argument is that massive wealth disparities are bad for democracy and thus redistribution is necessary.
"Your objections are invalid; one does not need to be better at a task than an individual in order to criticize them"

He did not say that. He said, that he wants concrete criticism, what ideas are wrong and if possible, why ...
There's no way he'd be in a classical liberal party. He has, at times, said he supports universal government-provided healthcare, and he favors heavy protectionism, both of which put him at odds with liberal economics. His erratic, right-wing populist message would also not fit with a liberal party.
To be fair, I don't think they believed in anything they were selling to the masses. They just used it to get enough power to establish themselves as stable as absolute monarchs(the end of the great terror was the moment when elites realized that they actually already that)
Which is exactly why no one should have as much power. The only question how to make it impossible?
Yes?

A refrigerator will still keep things cold. A stove will still heat things up. An AC will still AC. Other than home automation systems that go belly up when their servers go offline, most things do the same thing they did 50 years ago.

5g isn't revolutionary.
Completely agree with all the points here.

To expand on the first, I recently came across a tweet that provides examples of ways to rephrase something to achieve a more neutral tone:
https://twitter.com/shl/status/1164924044061237254
I can understand some reluctance. My current position has suffered a lot of churn as devs ran away from clojure. My boss was very glad I showed up when I did.

It does require a different way of thinking. I was lucky in that I had very little experience, academic or professional, when I picked it up. I had a lot less to unlearn.

But that doesn't mean it's limited to ultra-brainy lisp weenies. We have undergrads writing clojure, never having written clojure before, in their first programming job. They do just fine.
Clojure has nothing at all to do with Haskell.

I can't think of two more opposed camps in programming.
1 word: ultrasonics.
Ignoring the fact that memory allocations as of 1999 were somewhat more generous than that, the problem of backwards-compatibility is more induced resource wastage by current low costs than insufficiency of earlier computers.

We've been at a plateau of roughly 1-2GB RAM for most of the past decade, masked by the fact that devices have been shrinking (phones replacing desktops) rather than resource allocations growing. Which is a fairly frequently-encountered trend in technology.

We create some design, it proves useful, and for a time, focus is on increasing size, power and performance. Then a shift occurs and the focus is on smaller, more distributed systems.

James Watt's steam engines typically produced 5-10 horsepower output, and he built 500 of these by 1800. Following expiration of his patents, and the adoption of high-pressure steam engines, a period of increasingly large and more powerful systems began ... until the realisation that mobile power was a thing, and electric generation, leading to steamships and locomotives.

With electrical power distribution, whole factories were transformed from shaft-and-belt distribution from a 10-20 hp prime mover to electrical power distribution to individual motors, some of which rivaled or exceeded earlier entire steam engines, but many of which operated with fractional horsepower, delivering motive force precisely where needed.

Locomotives grew more powerful and faster, until internal combustion engines allowed 10 horsepower cars to reach speeds of as much as 30 miles an hour on city streets or country roads, without rails or being bound to fixed routes.

Console radios became portable became handheld became a smudge of silicone you probably don't realise still exists within your phone (virtually all are FM receivers).

Warehouse-sized computers shrank to refrigerators, cabinets, towers, pizzaboxes, luggables, portables, laptops, notebooks, tablets, and phones. There's little reason for even a desktop computer to be much more than the size of a paperback beach read these days, other than port size.

The IoT (the "S" stands for "Safety") is the equivalent of putting compute power where it's needed (or not, as the case may be), but it's so cheap to do, and cheaper than equivalent non-compute-based means, that it's become increasingly difficult to buy silicone-free basic appliances and components.

Many of these small systems don't have huge resource allocations, but they're sufficient to the task. They're not end-user interactive devices ... except where they are, with the Twitter-enabled refrigerator (that's a Web browser running on the display).

Web designers have been buidling on the assumption of ample resources, or have used "requires recently-acquired hardware" as a market-segmentation technique (the poor won't buy your dosh but can't afford the kit required to run your website, so feature-block them out and pre-slim your conversion funnel -- I don't condone this at all, but it apparently works).

But there's no inherent need in transmitting a few kb worth of actual text and a few ten-thousand-word pictures to do so. 20-year-old kit should handle that fine, really.
The Stream is a Christian propaganda site featuring comedy gems such as "Alyssa Milano Props Up the Abortion Lie" and "More Evidence of the Bible's Historicity"
ClojureScript doesn't try to abstract away the DOM. It really depends on the front-end library used.
Reagent (and re-frame) is pretty much react with goodies and you can easily integrate other react libraries (using shadow-cljs)
Well, yeah, but civilized countries.

While you could argue that Columbia and PRC fall into those brackets, those are nevertheless countries with a high occurrence of corruption.
It's possible Russia is doing it to give China a leg up.
It would be neat to aerate it without breaking the closed system. Maybe a magnetic connection through the glass. Motor on the outside and prop on the inside... Does add complexity though.
> It does not need write access outside of its sandbox.

You have SElinux for that, if you like bureaucracy and filing triplicate forms to able to run scripts with side effects.
> Even kings and queens that subscribed to the notion of divine right, recognised that they had an obligation to the people they ruled over.

"Divine right of kings" is the fig leaf. The "obligation" comes not from the divine, but from the threat of pitchforks and torches.
Last time I looked into it, I could count all the open software developers making more than $1k per person per month on donation platforms like Patreon, Liberapay, and Open Collective on less than two hands. Most of those weren't actually just taking donations, but using the perks system as a store for add-on products and services like ads, access to security alerts, and work prioritization.

I don't know you and I don't have anything to say about you. My point is on the funding mechanism. The evidence I've seen shows that donation-based funding a la Patreon produces a few highly funded, highly visible outliers, many of which would be far better off doing large-dollar deals with their larger supporters off the platform. So far, I don't think the evidence supports recommending the donation-platform approach as a general solution to enabling more valuable contribution from developers, even those with substantial online reputations. Supporter counts and supporter amounts don't bear donations alone out as a meaningful support for individuals.
I don't use standard, but FWIW I like this approach. npm install can output thousands of ads for all I care if it means software I depend on is better maintained. At that point I'd probably never see most of the ads, but, eh, I do know what LogRocket is now, so this ad at least did its job.

Edit: There are some good arguments here. I'm on the fence. In most cases I don't look at npm output, in which case the ads would be useless, and when I do need to actually look at npm output they'd be in the way. I can also get behind considering the terminal an "ad-free zone".
Sometimes the point isn't to convince the person you are discussing with, it's for the benefit other observers. So if I see someone comment something that is factually wrong I'll often correct it and just leave it at that, no to convince the person but for the benefit of those who don't have time to fact check everything.
The Galaxy Note 10
Isn't that also true for women landside in the nations those ships are flagged under?
Drew Houston: "Hey guys I made this thing called Dropbox"

HN: "But we have rsync?!?!"
Technology which serves an amplification role almost always serves rather than breaks monopolies.

It may, on rare occasions, disrupt an existing monopoly. But only on the way to installing a new one.
Is this Buddhism?
> but wearable connected medical devices are and will be a big thing

And most are served perfectly by Bluetooth Low Energy, using a smartphone as local compute, storage and network uplink. The few cases where that's not ideal are so few that they may as well use a regular 4G uplink without much downside (it's not like they need the bandwidth or will create a high device density)
Online, nobody is a "master", because everyone is effectively anonymous. Your reputation for being right does not help you, and each point must stand on its own. Without the reputation, though, good arguments are often lost in the noise.
That's fine.

Prove me wrong. That's the point to a discussion. You share points of view. But if I follow your path of discourse, I could just say you're a sheep that'll believe whatever silicon valley tells you.
Sure, and a service that is able to scale much better, has a fatter pipe, allows configuration through a web UI...

But in this context, how does this matter? "Origin" is a client/browser side concept, and however you serve your website internally, it appears as one web site. Basically, I replied to a comment bringing CDNs into discussion where they are totally irrelevant.

Origin checks can't protect you against servers forwarding your data to a privacy-invading site (eg Google), and a server can do that simply by being a reverse proxy to another site.
A look at Didi Chuxing, China's ride-hailing leader
> Nothing ever before or for a thousand years after

There's quite a history in premodern-to-modern times of something being attributed as "first appearing" in the classical period, and then everyone being surprised to discover a much, much earlier example.

Heck, an instance of this which was falsifiable all along was the idea that Archimedes invented the Archimedes screw. Why else would it be named after him? Well, he visited Egypt and wrote about the water screws he saw in use there. They'd been there, as far as he knew, forever.

We know a good amount of what was going on in the classical period because there was only a moderate amount of disruption between then and now. But the fact of something's existence is entirely unrelated to whether we've noticed it. The odds are overwhelming that there was a lot of material comparable to this ring before and after 1500 BC. We just don't know about it.
> Software development does have a certain Darwinian character - whatever survives and thrives can't be wrong.

I am not sure of that. A lot of what we see today is just adding an abstraction on top of other abstractions. People use five frameworks for a static webpage that could have been easily made in half a day using editor, css and html without ever writing a single line of javascript.

In a evolutionary sense it works for them, but the reason isn't that html and css wouldn't also work, the reason is that they believe they have to use it.

So I'd be careful with the darwinian comparison here, this is more a mimetic or meme-like evolution of ideas and once the layer below is abstracted away it is quite easy to just forget about it alltogether.
For RISC-V to be a more compelling option than Power, it would need to be an option first, but if I need to buy a CPU today, I can't buy a RISC-V one.

I can, however, buy a wide range of PowerPC CPUs, for a wide range of applications. From embedded applications, like routers, to laptops, desktops, workstations, high-end servers, up to super-computer class CPUs.
Considering the lack of available facts in these articles, my suspicion is that it's not the ecig vendors who have an agenda in this case.
Well, they have immutable data and persistent collections in common. Otherwise, agreed.
I like the idea of k means in a APPLIED car repair book :-)

Chapters 18 and 19 are about nonlinear least squares. I think that ideas outside the nominal linear algebra domain (like k-means, or nonlinear LS) can be helpful in a way like sex between people with different genomes; it's useful for exchanging ideas.
NASA investigates the first allegation of criminal activity in SPACE
Taoism
After a couple decades of verbal swordplay on the net, I have to agree that slaying trolls has lost its allure. I've learned that a frontal assault on a paragraph errant just isn't that compelling to write or read. In heaven and earth and net, I aspire to more.

“Like what?”, you may ask.

In any conversation (online or not) I can choose several ways to engage:

1) I can directly confront the specifics that were written: a conclusion, reasoning, or evidence. On the net it's typical to be contrary, but often in ways that aren't especially imaginative or enjoyable for others unless they too just want to argue.

2) I can bypass someone else's specifics and propose an alternative point of view, a fresh perspective or a confounding dependency that isn't common knowledge. This is likelier to introduce an element of surprise to the exchange, inviting others to dive deeper into the problem or solution space, encouraging others to employ more imagination and not be so binary in debating T/F on each point of the assertions.

3) I can ask questions: for clarification, to suggest new dependencies or implications, or propose factors or mechanisms that aren't necessarily contradictions but might be tangents or parallels or essential unknowns.

And if I do choose option #1, to openly disagree, I can voice it in a less confrontational style or focus on only the point I think is most interesting or essential (or amusing).

The writing style I choose makes a difference too. Rather than making bold pronouncements, if I can couch a point as my opinion or a doubt I have, I can deflect rather than provoke.

In the end, I have to decide what I want from this exchange, to discuss ideas or argue. Personally, I'm tired of the latter.
What kind of a license doesn't have to be observed by one of the parties to the license?

Would any HN lawyers like to chip in? From my understanding of contracts, that interpretation seems contrary to basic legal principles.

The obligation GPL would place on the developer would be to release the source code if the program is released under the GPL. Based on my reading of the blog post, that's exactly what one user was complaining about.
This method of adding static typing to a dynamically typed language is called gradual typing. It works and is sound but can come at a considerable cost if the compiler doesn't support it well.

Suppose that you have function that you know only returns fixnum, but isn't declared as such, and you use that result as the input to a function declared to only take fixnum then the compiler has to add runtime type checks. Even very cheap type checks can cause massive overhead if they are executed in tight loops.

Or suppose the fixnum x is given as input to an identity function: (id x). The compiler knows that x is a fixnum, but unless it is sufficiently smart it has no idea that (id x) is one too.
The Evolution of the Newspaper of the Future (1995)
Clojure is one of the better dynamic languages.

The rub however is that GHC can check the consistency of my software faster than I or my colleagues will ever be able to, and programmer time is expensive.

So that's why not Clojure.
We just need two more to get into Atlantis
Show HN: Generate migrations from SQL and Git shas
Good one, yes I can imagine the field branching out and developing disciplines like Software Psychiatry, System Nursing, Geriatric Care for Legacy Codebases..

Coming soon: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Software Disorders.
What is the “job” it refers to? Is that a person’s true purpose?
The root cause of the problem is the paradigm of Cost+ contracting where companies are rewarded for going over budget and over timetable.
You are describing car camping by backpackers. The more you need to integrate with non-backpackers, the more your gear collection will start to include heavy items that would be ridiculous out on a trail, but a trivial addition to the back of the SUV...

Glamping, however, can go more into the territory of a trip hosted by guides and outfitters to provide a fantasy experience. They plan the meals, haul the equipment, and do the camp setup/teardown for the clients. They might be serving a multi-course meal, planned by an executive chef, with tableware and glassware befitting a dining room. They might bring a string quartet.