skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Accidental inventions that changed the world
> Agree, but people tend to stop at Fowler and live it as gospel.

I know people do that, and it sucks. But I never got that from Fowler himself.

There are other authors (not naming names) who are pretty dogmatic often. But Fowler seems to genuinely try to capture patterns and techniques in an open-minded way.

It's the abuse of his material that is the problem.
Did you explain that you were following a functional model in your particular app?

Traditional OO (Tatical)DDD does involve creating aggregates with mutating state
Read discussions before you join them so posters don’t have to make the same reply twice:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20788910
If I feel strongly enough to "argue" something online (which is a pretty high threshold already), the approach I take is to use questions. Try asking the parent about some assumption in their logic, and what happens when that assumption is false? Often, it helps to be truly inquisitive in a situation because there is always something to learn, even if that is just understanding another viewpoint. Just try to not sound condescending when asking questions.
Computer Vision would the the most likely example. It’s quite hard to come up with “hard rules” for distinguishing cats and dogs.
Doing something substantially faster almost always leads to a revolution in it: internet, manufacturing, cars, planes, computers.

At every step, you could always say "it is just faster". Only in retrospect can you ever see how world changing "faster" was.
With Darwinism he obviously doesn't mean the field of study, but rather the subject of the field of study, which was already happening way before Darwin's discovery of it, shaping among other things human social psychology...
I haven't seen this in the tech hubs of NYC or SF, well I've seen enough exceptions to this to conclude that degrees are not necessary to command competitive salaries in a software engineering track.

Get a third party recruiter and game them employers.
Interesting. I guess what is missing from the sandbox described in the article is the HTML/CSS component.
ML is hyped enough already and kids already don't know enough fundamentals. They're never going to sit in front of a Linear Algebra class again so the appropriate use of their time is to teach them as much linear algebra as possible and not to turn it into a class on today's hype train
yes, immutable data is a core value of Clojure.

OP said no wrong, but think about it: Bitcoin also just stole the good parts from other software projects.

Really practical inventions usually gather the best ideas from a field.
Idea for getting "almost correct" proofs: Take a big Coq project like CompCert or whatever. Search the version control history for commits with small changes to definitions. These very likely come with corresponding changes to proofs as well. Now apply only the code changes but not the proof changes: You get a state with "almost correct" proofs and as a bonus known "ground truth" proofs as well.
The slow timer actually works in your favor if you do it right. You don't count interrupts, you count CPU cycles between interrupts (search term: "reciprocal counter.")

This bug was just laziness on Borland's part; there were no excuses for it. There were any number of ways to do it correctly. Fortunately they fixed it pretty quickly, too. While I remember running into it, it wasn't a huge issue.
Fun fact: adware is one of the listed types of content that is considered unacceptable by npm's Terms of Service.

https://www.npmjs.com/policies/open-source-terms#acceptable-...
> created here is the same/similar enough to one from the sun for this to take place

Exactly. They are testing if photons on Earth are the same as those produced in the Sun - a very simple test of the translation invariance of the laws of quantum physics.

> If you couldn't entangle them, what would that mean?

If such experiments failed despite repeated efforts, then maybe the laws of quantum physics are not invariant under translation as far as 150M kilometers.

Note that we communicate with Voyager crafts for instance using classical EM waves, so presumably the laws of classical EM work the same as far as the edge of the solar system.
To me, this is not really a conversational arena. An effort to post a comment floats somewhere between editing a wiki page and adding margin comments while reviewing a manuscript. The tree of comments provides hook points for tangential observations or counterpoints. I am more often thinking of the silent readers than the parent comment author when I post a reply.

If I notice a reply to my comments, I don't feel compelled to respond by conversational norms. I am more likely to reply if I see evidence that my original comment has failed to communicate my thoughts, and less likely to reply if I think I was understood but merely have disagreement.

As a reader, I also get more out of the interesting alternate viewpoints that I see from people using the site in a similar manner. I don't tend to want to read comment chains that look like a transcribed conversation between only a few people.
>I don't see how any of this is surprising.

Had thay said it before hand, I am pretty sure 99.9% of Apple's user would trust Apple and just click yes.

The problem is they didn't ask, nor did they tell. What privacy entails, in Steve Jobs's own words

Privacy means people know what they’re signing up for, in plain English, and repeatedly. I’m an optimist; I believe people are smart, and some people want to share more data than other people do. Ask them. Ask them every time.

Make them tell you to stop asking them if they get tired of your asking them. Let them know precisely what you’re going to do with their data.
One mistake you see with nearly all electronic communication is assuming very negative interpretations of what people are saying. This is the cause of a great deal of office drama with email.

I think you have to remind yourself to assume the best of what you read.
That is not at all the counter argument. It is very possible (easy, even, at least for me and my work/social circle) to have very in depth conversations about vegetarianism without bringing up any of the questions you posed. As I said in my previous comment, my SO and I have in-depth conversations all the time with people regarding vegetarianism and not once has any of those questions surfaced.

I showed my SO this thread and she laughed at the notion that she apparently can't discuss her lifestyle (she takes a car to work and drinks tap water, too) without it being political.

I suspect, as another commenter said, that this is apparently a cultural aspect where I and those around me have always grown up talking to people about such topics without any of them becoming political, while apparently others have not had such 'training'.
Aren't those chores creating order?
Here is my "Why Clojure?" blog post: https://medium.com/@ertu.ctn/why-clojure-seriously-why-9f5e6...
Oh yeah, don't get me started on the Linux hellhole :). I like Haiku (in fact I keep putting off that weekend when I'll try my hand at fixing a bug or writing a new app for it, because I really liked BeOS back in the day, too). A lot of it isn't even POSIX' fault, it was just abused by things built on top of it, and now you can't use those things without making a mess.

I know a lot of it like the back of my hand, I've been writing POSIX code (or, at one point, POSIX implementations) for much, if not most of my career. That doesn't mean I don't want to see something better, or that I'm blind at the fact that Plan 9 is so fun to code for precisely because they skipped POSIX (although, that being said, I'm also not blind to the fact that it's on of the big reasons why it never really took off, either).
Abide by the principle of charity
This might not be ideal, but I just don’t bother engaging with people where there are deep fundamental differences in terms of basic values or worldview, especially when it’s obvious they’re not interested in hearing anything contrary. My goal isn’t to convince anyone, it’s to find people with whom I already have some shared basis of understanding and reach a point where we can at least understand each other’s perspective.

If I’m truly confident that somebody else is deeply and fundamentally wrong, like creationists or Holocaust deniers or whatever, I don’t take responsibility for their misconceptions and I don’t think I have anything to learn from that person so I just ignore them. Convincing such a person that they are wrong conveys zero benefit to me and is not something that the other person even wants me to do for them. I guess a more positive way of phrasing that is that, when I pick arguments, I do so just as much to give the other person a chance to convince me. If there’s no chance of that happening, it’s not worth my time.
I was reading somewhere that there are evolutionary drivers behind our cognitive biases. I wonder if this is because to cooperate in social settings you have to rely on other people's expertise.
If have good reflexes you can sort of kick the phone with your feet, so that a fall of ~1.5m into stone leaves only minor scratches on you un-cased phone.

Happened to me.
i think the subject was forest fires, and not really human based CO2 emission from industry and oil...
Local nonlinear optimizations can be found locally by constructing linear approximations of the problem statement near the initial conditions, so that is actually connected with Linear Algebra. The issue here is that most students spend only a short time of their life getting exposed to fundamental topics like linear algebra, that's not the time to waste their attention on hype of the month
Yes. The physics of radiation and it’s medical impact is the single most studied subject in the history of such things, thanks to untold trillions sunk into research and development of nuclear weapons.

Ionizing radiation cause DNA damage and cancer, the damage level can be both computed and measured.

Non-ionizing radiation only causes temperature increase - lightbulb and microwave alike. The only difference is how deep the heat penetrates, and how many watts are pumped into the subject. The WiFi router is damaging in the same way as a very small lightbulb, and much less so than sitting in the sun.
I don't see the conflict as long as he did the work. Thinking he takes it to trial and wins.

Now Iowa State University ECpE, they have full on corrupt faculty working full time for their private company, showing just up for lectures to read out of the book. Their TA's do all grading. Their RA's must sign NDAs and take forever to graduate because he won't let them publish his "proprietary" stuff. That is fraud.
MACLISP had state of the art type checking and compiler optimization, for the 1970s state of the art, and produced better math code than I could write by hand in assembler. These capabilities were used extensively for MACSYMA.

The point of the article wasn't to say that all common lisps support type declaration but to show how easy it is to add support for such decoration (and optional support to boot).

Arbitrary amounts of inference could be added in such declarations before feeding the result to the compiler; the same work could be easily extended for other compilers -- and that other pre-analysis would work there too.
> Will be obvious if child is mixed.

You have misidentified the problem.
I think that commenter was thinking that 23andme would be able to identify many people as children of the same unknown person, but unless that person also submitted their DNA to the service, they would effectively be anonymous. An unknown parent of dozens or hundreds.
They're 30% owned by Philip Morris. I'm sure they know exactly what they're doing.
NPM and RubyGems are going to be steamrollered in short order by Github repos, so there is an opportunity to start afresh.
It's just spam. Wait until you have 200 karma, flag it and go on.
The article mentions that "there are no simple answers for fixing the F-35 program, as tempting as it is to look for a single root cause for its problems."

Cost+ is one of many problems. Some others are described at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/21/magazine/f35-joint-strike...

Cost+ does create misaligned incentives, but you also can't just expect a company to develop a project that big on a fixed-price-on-delivery contract. Nobody has $1T (or even, if you think it could be done for 1/4 the price, $1/4T) to invest in R&D before getting paid.
HTTP: //www.arcgis.com/home/group.html?id=e81b72318bb646dfb771c92c5e54af90
> the same idea will come to more than one person quite frequently

This seems to happen as often as not. And sometimes the ones in the not category are that way for a reason!
Fraud requires intentional misrepresentation. "You indicated to your counterparty that you would obey the contract, when you had no intention of doing so" is what may be criminal fraud. Simply failing to perform is not fraud.
The topic article describes exactly the kind of people who are well-adjusted and yet could not find a way out.
jnbiche, I didn't mean to say anything about you specifically!

If you're experimenting with funding models, I support your experiments, too. But without looking into specifics, I'm guessing you had the usual experience with README and website ads, sponsorship badges, or the like. I hope it was able to cement some new relationships, and perhaps make you more aware of who's relying on your work. But I wouldn't bet it made you significant money, or significantly changed how much you could or did contribute.

As for stdout versus README and so on, the lines aren't sharp, but I think there's a basic distinction to draw between an advertisement and something more like a credit or acknowledgment. As long as those who go looking for their credit can find it and point it out to others, all seems to be right. Sponsorship in a README fits there, in my view. Ads go where people will notice them, even when they don't go looking. They're frequently invasive. I don't like invasive, but that's where `funding` seems to fit.

There are middle grounds, too. Actors often negotiate for fair billing in relation to other players, for instance. And donors to cultural centers and other physical venues often get their names on plaques or stonework in the foyer. In my mind, all of that just points out how many conventions and expectations we've developed about funding in nearly every field but software.

In my comment above, I was reacting to your mention that Feross' approach seemed ill-conceived. I thought that was one-sided: It's not just about whether user-developers like it. It's also about whether it effectively gets devs paid. It's not well conceived if it doesn't work.
What this article calls "Academics" it's really just lefty intelligence orgs, so of course journalists will advocate for them. Cambridge Analytica's major crime was helping a Republican that one time
Clojure has something like an extendable type system called Spec. We can create our own types lol
#bothsides, amiright? On one hand you have the continuation of a 150 year old white supremacist terror movement whose adherents have recently and repeatedly murdered dozens of people solely because of who they are, and on the other you have those scary people with the masks who will throw a milk shake at someone, just because that person is a fascist.

It's really too bad that we can't just empower indifferent moderates like yourself to sort things out in a totally even-handed and proportionate manner.
It would almost certainly have been Kemet, as they really made their reputation on those wet-slug hermetic tantalum caps. If you take apart a piece of HP gear from the 1960s-1970s timeframe, you find that those are the ones that are still good even today.

I definitely remember seeing Kemet markings on at least one of the caps in the power supply restoration videos.
How to Get Started with Plant Medicine Therapy
Hey, this is awesome. Thanks for sharing. Happy to know I'm not the first one to think about it. While it may be a niche thing, it proves that there is actually an audience for it. Did you have a price set for it? Did you do any kind of marketing for it?
> You get a catalogue of various physical and socioeconomic traits from anonymous donors and pick the one that you want. Replacing that with any other is certainly fraud.

It's fraud, certainly, but the system you're describing (I'm not familiar with it) seems to be open to abuses that are almost as unethical. Surely genetic health is the only thing it really makes sense to take into account when choosing a donor. Some choices (race?) seem particularly icky.
If one side thinks the other side doesn't believe they should exist as people—and even more so if they correctly believe so

As someone who had grown up in a part of the country, where my parents had to drive almost 50 miles to hang out with people vaguely of the same ethic group, let me posit that the real problem is:

People who don't think certain other people should get to simply exist.

On the other hand, a company full of people who genuinely believe in fundamental human rights, self determination, live and let live, and the equality of people (even of people they don't like or agree with) does just fine. My former company did just fine with that. Democrats interacted with republicans, with people of faith, with atheists, with people of all backgrounds and skin colors.

The problem is with people who go around "seeking" people with the wrong opinion. Frankly, this reminds me of the same kind of "seeking" that some people who turned out to be racist enacted with me as a young adult, questioning me to find out how "American" I was to justify mistreating me. (Even some of them know better than to attribute to genetics what should be attributed to culture.) The similarity with which some people (who claim to be about "love" and "justice") enact the same "seek, then persecute" pattern is eerie to me.

I'd rather have someone who would use a racial slur on me, then accord me some meritocratic respect later, than someone who assumes I should think, vote, and affiliate a certain way based on my skin color, then gets outraged if my compliance to their expectations isn't 100%. True liberals are live and let live. It's false to be "liberal" and then demand ideological compliance -- or else. Doubly so if that reaction is based on identity.
Online communication greatly suffers from lack of context. When you talk to someone face to face a lot of the message is coming from the body language and the tone of the voice, this makes it clear when the person is joking, serious, naive, confused or whatever reason to look in disagreement with you in a written online conversation. This keeps things from escalating most of the time. Not online.

The measures I took for myself:
- ignore conversations with lower importance.

- argue with people I know, I trust they are smart enough to understand the discussion and interesting enough to communicate with. Ignore strangers, there is always some stranger that is wrong on Internet, it does not matter, it is not your job to "fix" it

- read several times before answering and read my answer several times before pushing the button if the discussion is heated

- take in consideration cultural differences. I find even this place very different for me (Eastern Europe), I see myself downvoted for apparently no reason (but there is one, I guess), I see opinions that look strange or even outrageous - I figured out most of these are due to cultural differences. Diversity in not what we wish to be, not yet (diversity in opinions).
>They have an amazing sense for picking up territory cues from their owners.

Seems to me like something a powerful sense of smell would make trivial. A dog can instantly detect the points past which its human pack members never venture.
This is also available in Portugal, and it's even better.
I've definitely kept all my stuff from those days. I even once decided to throw some of it (with little organization beyond a few projects) on my public website:

http://www.logicprobe.org/~octo/history-code.shtml

What's actually more amazing is thinking back to the time distortion of being a kid. Stuff that really only took place over the course of a year or two, feels like 5+ years in terms of my perceptual memory of the era.
Can you explain what parts of the TLA+ stuff you can express in Prolog and why you think that might be better (or equally good)? It's true that modeling languages all have something in common with Prolog, but do you think that proofs about a similar Prolog version would be nicer than in TLA+?
Well it's currently shipping so I'm doing this for better or worse

Mic array...pretty sure the tech I ordered (respeaker 6 mic) is towards the top end of DIY mic arrays so hopeful that I'll get good real life results.

Also very keen to work out whether I can use tensorflow to filter out baseline background noise BEFORE feeding the audio stream into mycroft.

Planning on launching a new blog to document my experiments and failures on this ( https://kaizen.today - not yet live cause still waiting for said tech...but SEO links and all that)
If you want others to follow, learn to be alone with your thoughts
You're welcome to read the Siri EULA, which is linked from the places where you enable Siri on your devices: https://assets.pcmag.com/media/images/421115-activate-siri.j...

The key sentence is toward the end:

> By using Siri or Dictation, you agree and consent to Apple’s and its subsidiaries’ and agents’ transmission, collection, maintenance, processing, and use of this information, including your voice input and User Data, to provide and improve Siri, Dictation, and other Apple products and services.

So both the data collection and the fact that contractors may be involved are mentioned in the EULA (and have been mentioned for many years, going back to at least iOS 5: http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/ios51.pdf).

Whether people feel they've been adequately briefed on this is a separate question.
> I do think that a man ought to have the right to know if he's the biological father and I think it's understandable if he wants to leave if he isn't.

Yes, but I've always assume reasonable people want to know this because it would prove infidelity by their spouse, not because they specifically care that their child shares their genes.
> It's like if someone writes something that I disagree with, I'm compelled to launch into a logical argument with them right there and then.

You should probably realize that 99% of arguments on-line are pointless. And you could probably use your time in a better way (for yourself).

Nowadays most platforms try and indoctrinate users to the mantra that your opinions matter and that you are special.

The thing is, your opinion is one in a trillion other opinions. It doesn't matter. Nobody cares.

Realizing this helped me a lot, because I now usually skip the flame bait entirely. Sometimes I start writing a comment or a reply and then throw it off and switch to doing something else. Sometimes I write a reply and post it.

I realized, as I write, that realizing that my opinion doesn't matter and that nobody cares made me switch to taking part in conversation that I genuinely find interesting instead of "somebody is wrong on the internet"-kind of conversations.

This is my experience so far. Nobody will care, and I'm fine with it.

You're of course 100% free not to care about it :)
> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20788910

Lad, I have absolutely no clue what Bayesian classification in an RSS reader has to do with dance games.
Don't think you need that much power for inference. Plus at siri levels you can probably push it to cloud if need be
Awesome. It would be a great hack to reimplement this in VimScript.
A great example here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18776215