skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I feel like this pattern is a great example of how mathematicians, scientists, and technologists should focus their attentions on things that are economical and 'good enough' rather than fetishizishing ever-increasing levels of precision.

While, say, calculating fundamental constants to the nth degree of precision is fun and intellectually satisfying in many respect, the marginal utility of each additional digit of precision asymptotically approaches zero so it's really a self-indulgent luxury. But this fetishizing of precision also has drawbacks; it misdirects resources and effort into improvements whose benefits fall far short of the costs.

You wouldn't use a laser pointer to explore a room. Of course you could; but mapping a topological space using LIDAR is only possible because we have computers to do the vast amount of number crunching required, and it's only very recently that we've gone from very sparse representations to ones of sufficiently high resolution to give us representations that are immediately recognizable as familiar spaces.

I will take fast proximity over slow exactitude any day of the week; I want models that get me close enough with very few parameters rather than more perfect ones that require a thick book's worth of specifications to articulate.
No jokes allowed here! Only very serious business!
Citation on the average wage? Federal minimum is $7.25/hr, and at least in my midwestern town, McDonald's is paying $11.25/hr, starting, so that seems shockingly low as an average. Or is that the average of the tipped staff, before tips?
India loses contact with spacecraft on mission to the moon
> The poor state of Android updates is no one’s fault but Google’s.

I don't know if I would go that far. That problem comes from the way Android is organized. It's open, and it invites third party involvement. That in turn makes it nearly impossible for Google to control the OS lifecycle. You can argue that they should have kept it closed, like Apple. But if that were the case, they'd be in even worse anti-trust waters than they already are with the device.

More likely, they'd simply have failed. They had the software know how, but in no way had the expertise to build out a new type of device. It seems unlikely anyone else could have bankrolled a realistic challenge to Apple's dominance. So we would probably be in a situation where there was iPhone, and a bunch of shit phones from random manufacturers.

In light of all that, I think Google made the best decision possible. Maybe that's what you mean -- that Google made a good decision and that, despite that good decision, there are tradeoffs. But to me it sounds like you think Google failed in some way by making the choices that have led us to the current state of affairs w.r.t. updates. I don't think that's a fair read on the subject. At least, when I see someone doing the best they can, and there are flawed aspects to the performance, I don't say, "It's nobody's fault but yours that there's a flaw in this work." I would phrase it differently.
The ones that fall on people have been outcompeted by friendlier ones after the prey learned. Just evolution as usual.
Having developed an amateur interest in cell biology over the last few years, the single most interesting thing I've learned is that Interglobulin-M cells cells just happen to have same basic morphology as the kind of animals that they come from.
Commonsense ReasoningUsing WordNet and Sumo: A Detailed Analysis
Alas that I have but one upvote to give.
What is the solid conclusion?
> A work sample test, structured interview, or IQ test (alone or in combination) would be a much better filtering process.

I'm not sure what any of these mean in concrete terms. Is an IQ test like those "why are manhole covers round" Microsoft questions of yore? Yuck. Is a work sample a homework test? That takes more time for both parties. It's not a good substitute for a 1 hour first round screen. And what's a "structured" interview??
It's story flavour. Most people telling stories stick random details in like that.
I'm not a lawyer and I don't know much about US immigration law. However, I've moved around the world a fair amount and had to get lots of visas. One of the things that's super important with a visa is to make sure that you qualify for that visa. For the US, I believe that it's actually illegal to apply for a visa knowing that you don't intend to follow its rules. For example, you might be able to get visa A easily, but you really want visa B. You apply for visa A with the intent of finding a way to get visa B. Most of the time that's not allowed and if you do it knowingly you may get in big trouble.

From that perspective, a spousal visa usually exists for the sole purpose that you can live with your spouse. It's not a visa whose intent is to give you access to the country for other reasons. So if you go into the process with the knowledge that you do not want to live with your spouse, you are almost certainly going to be going against the terms of the visa -- you almost certainly must intend to live with your spouse indefinitely. You can't go into the situation with the idea that you are going to live with your spouse until you can get a different visa/residency status. Doing so could probably land you in a lot of hot water if it came out (How could it come out? Usual route: Have an argument late at night with your spouse. Really pissy neighbours get miffed and want to get rid out you. They call the immigration people. You may find it hard to believe, but I know more than one person deported from a country that way!)

Anyway, if your intent is to patch up your relationship with your spouse then my (not legal!) advise is to just concentrate on that. Inter-personal relationships are hard and if you aren't going all-in then it's unlikely to work out well. Similarly, I would not rely on a spouse that wasn't invested in rebuilding the relationship but is only doing you a favour so that you can get a visa. That puts a big burden on your spouse because they may want to get on with their life and your visa status will be holding them back. It's an incredibly dicey situation and very, very unlikely to turn out well.
NOAA Politicized the Weather Report
Jokes are allowed here but they must be purchased with karma
>There is more than one version of the A380.

There is only one version of the A380, the A380-800.

>But there was no A380 Airbus with a 550 seat capacity in service at that time.

I didn't mean "in service", I meant "in production". You're right that it wasn't in service at the time, but pieces of the plane had already been started to be produced, thus "in production".

>The whole point of that wing testing was so this newer, higher capacity A380 could get certification.

There was/is no "newer, higher capacity A380". This was the certification for the original (and only) A380.

We're just arguing semantics and talking past each other. During the test, the wings 'failed', but this failure was intentional. I see where you're coming from in your statement that it was a "failure", but my point is that the test passed, because the test did exactly what was needed to provide data for the necessary certification, which was achieved based on the test.

edit: edited to be less inflammatory
What are the odds?

Google\Wikipedia\YouTube all down momentarily in an 18 hour period.
I just have one question my brother got deported 2017 he has been in this country for 20 years came here as refugee but ran into some criminal charges violent felony landed him in prison in 2010 he has 2 kids here is there anyway he can return?
Doesn't sound like it.

"Engineers had the plane pressurized and on the ground. They loaded it up well beyond capacity and bent its wings in an extreme manner..."
You will never have no patch at all if you upgrade to a new phone regularly as I recommended. It is better to have a patch that doesn't require reboots like an Android browser patch than it is to have a patch that requires a reboot like an iOS browser patch than it is to not have a patch like an old iPhone or Android.
$100 an hour as an independent contractor developing farming robots at a place that feels very very good for me.

EDIT: I definitely got very lucky finding this position. I’m not suggesting everyone can just do this. But if people don’t refuse to work 40-50 hour work weeks, then that’s what employers will expect.
Hilariously weak logic... reading has higher information rate than listening. Written content can be parsed rapidly to focus on interesting chapters and sections of books. Main use case for listening to podcasts (incl vs. scanning podcast written transcripts) is in the case of listening while doing another activity (e.g. driving a car).
Very importantly, this hasn't been described as a "test failure."

No indication of what the test criteria were, if any. Some tests, especially those past design limits, are just for informational data.
Maybe they don’t have a publicly available issuance (challenge/response, ACME, etc) infrastructure for their Root CA.

Or maybe they just want to keep google CA, limited to Google properties. The same way you put things in googleusercontent.com and not google.com.
Many years ago I remember reading about EV conversions, and besides direct drive or keeping the existing multispeed (manual) transmission, one of the other relatively popular options was a Chevrolet Powerglide with the torque converter removed. This is a two-speed automatic from the 1950s that's known for being simple and very strong, and remains quite popular for drag racing. I suspect its popularity for EV conversions also arises from being able to handle the huge amount of torque an electric motor can exert, and the better performance of 2 speeds, so it's interesting to see Porsche also choosing a 2-speed auto for its EV.
> he led the fight to end colonial rule in Zimbabwe,

That overstates his role a bit. As in many 20th-century revolutions, the main thing distinguishing Mugabe from other leaders was not his actions vis a vis the target of the revolution (the Rhodesian government) but his ruthlessness toward his allies (e.g. Nkomo, Sithole).
Two other LSD targets of the CIA's program weren't mentioned in this excerpt. You've probably heard of them:

Ted Kaczynski

Charles Manson

It is possible that neither would have committed their crimes but for their involvement in the CIA's mind experimentation programs. See, O'Neill, Chaos: Charles Manson, the CIA and the Secret History of the Sixties (2019).
I'm not sure what you mean by standardization. You're totally at the whim of the exam-maker either way. If anything I find algorithm screens tend to draw from a semi-standard set of fundamentals as outlined in books like Cracking the Coding Interview and tested on Leetcode among many other examples.
Actually he said "It's not very typical."
> Microsoft also allowed various carrier changes to Windows Phones but they could still offer upgrades across devices. ... Microsoft has had a vibrant ecosystem of third parties selling PCs running its OS for decades.

And for all that, they still failed to make a dent in the market. Partly, OEMs and carriers were not as interested in supporting Microsoft's offering precisely because of how they could not put their own stamp on it. In many ways, Microsoft's offering was better on the fundamentals than Android's. So why didn't it succeed? Perhaps because of the very features you are praising.

The only reason Apple was even able to pull it off was because of their first mover advantage, combined with their extreme consumer appeal. Their phones were so much better than anything that was available at the time, but even with all that, they had to enter into an exclusive contract with AT&T for the first couple of years in order to get the control they wanted. Only after they had established a foothold were they able to say "no" to carrier and OEM customization. If they had been second to market, like Android, it's hard to picture them having that level of control and leverage.
It really does. I've been a professional developer/programmer for a few years - since I was 18 - and I'm only just going back to college (at the behest of my employer).

Really enjoy taking advantage of it and reassuring the younger kids (only two or three years younger than me) that they're more than capable of this shit. And it helps me be more confident when I'm at work - at school they see me as the guy with all the answers (ha, I wish - but it's a good reminder that we're all our own worst critics).
https://www.payscale.com/research/US/Employer=Waffle_House%2...

https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Waffle-House/salaries

But really, if the employee was making $11.25/hour, would that somehow make it more ethical? $22k/year is still borderline impoverished for a 3 person household: https://www.thebalance.com/federal-poverty-level-definition-...
I would recommend ArangoDB. See my post here: https://medium.com/@mikestaub22/slack-lunch-club-part-3-7-ba...
This thread annoys the shit out of me! What are we talking about?! Y’all are like “man Apple sucks so I develop for Android now”

We only have two options?!? That’s fucked up! This is not at all an okay state for software development ecosystem!

There’s a virtual monopoly on consumer applications! That’s the actual, real problem!
The goal is roughly that if you manage to hit some of these numbers, it's because things have already gone catastrophically wrong.

It's not feasible to ask for certain safety in all possible conditions. The only thing that can manage that is a bomb shelter with 50 parachutes.
THANK YOU, empath75, for that hilarious link. I am flabbergasted by the downvotes; the link is relevant and worthwhile.
The second, third, and fourth sentences seem to imply otherwise?

>The test is meant to push the plane beyond its limits. Engineers had the plane pressurized and on the ground. They loaded it up well beyond capacity and bent its wings in an extreme manner, in a way almost certain to never happen in the real world.

and also further down, more "not necessarily a normal test" evidence:

>... The ultimate load test is the latest in a series of tests that Boeing has been conducting on this full-scale test airplane over the past several months."
is the discovery of deception not a new ground in itself? "jump or fell". "the suicide of your father upset you, go seek therapy", ... don't qualify as new grounds?

does the law explicitly regulate settlement, new grounds, etc or is it emergent behaviour or "standard operating behaviour" of which everyone assumes that is what the law says as opposed to what the law actually says?

Edit: perhaps a clearer phrasing in everyday language: is there a difference between how lawyers, judges, ... have the cookie crumble versus how the law says cookies should crumble?
Show HN: One click code sharing within Visual Studio
> Aren't most concerns with companies who exploit open source software without contributing their changes back?

Companies get away with this because developers don't understand licensing in the first place. Pushing a false message that "once it's out, anything goes" is detrimental to that state of things.

> If we have source code and can determine it is derivative of open source but improperly licensed, does it matter?

Of course it does, a license is a license, you cannot selectively apply only some of it. And yes, if the license is not followed, the original author can revoke consent to redistribution and usage. Have you actually read an open license? The GPL is very explicit on this matter.

> if I ever shared code incorrectly and got slapped on the wrist for it, that might just be incentive for me to never bother to share again.

That's not a problem. Opensource doesn't run on generosity, but on publicity - a currency that can be converted into actual cash. If you don't share your "left pad", sooner or later someone else will share his own version and reap the rewards. The time when we had to beg companies and individuals to share, is long gone.
365 RFCs: a 50th anniversary dive with one RFC blog post per day
Rhodesia was not merely a white ethnocracy, it was a state premised on white ethnocracy; that was its reason for existence.

I mean this sincerely: I think you might want to make your point about different ways to handle decolonialization without invoking "Apartheid: The Good Parts".
I did know some friend who were tenants five years ago but today....no one.

Why? Because here are so many co-working spaces that have popped up over the last few years. There is no moat or barrier to entry other than the capital to lease a place and set it up. These new co-working places also tend to be cheaper.

You can see the net effect on their S-1 filing where their per-desk revenue is slowing and their growth rate is slowing in markets where they have existing locations. The only way they can grow at a decent pace is to open new locations in new markets and that is very very capital intensive.
I would guess that the keto craze taking off has helped as well. White Claw is very low carb.
果然只有5天，如果是中国程序员的话一定会有7天
The thing that irks me about domain names is that registrars hold onto expired domain names and put them in their domain auctions. ICANN needs a new rule that registrars can't hang onto expired domain names for more than 30-90 days.

From https://www.godaddy.com/help/when-can-i-register-an-expired-...:

"If the domain name is not renewed, redeemed, or purchased through an auction, it is returned to its registry. The registry determines when the domain name is released again for registration."
I haven't looked anything up in a book on programming in a long time, but I'm not really a software engineer presently. While I rely on Google in general and stack overflow in particular, I don't believe everything is on the Internet. I went through a period where I started to think everything was, but in recent years I realized it isn't.

And just making the decision to type things into Google is far from the ability to search effectively. Increasingly search engines will converge on a bad answer for a given question because it's the most popular. You just cannot assume that the correct solution is going to be prominent, because once another one has critical mass, it cannot be dethroned. The result that sounds just barely plausible enough to fool the average person making the search (not the average programmer) wins, and often it's terribly wrong.
Sorry to disagree but what you said is simply not true. If she stays long enough in the US with her spouse, and she gets a green card or citizenship then you are not obligated by any means to stay forever with that person. Tricking the system might be immoral but it is by no means illegal, pretty much the same way tax lawyers find loopholes in the law to help corporations pay less taxes.
if they're interested in knowing non-theoretical failure limits, and how it behaves under failure: yes, of course they want to hear that.
Specifically from the video description:

> This Boeing 777 wing was tested to destruction, finally breaking at one fifty four percent of the designed limit load.
果然只有5天，然而如果是中国程序员的话一定会有7天
Thanks. Author here. I mean, generally I agree - but, any generalization will always be a bit overly general and reductive. The point of this article wasn't to try and make a formal taxonomy; just express an intuition. If I were to revise this article now I think your point is what I'd change about it - I mean, all of us can embody all of these core motivations. (Although I'm not sure we can hold all of them at the same time easily, and I think they're in tension within us). I'm also sure Rich Hickey, Bret Victor and RMS are all more complicated in person than how they're perceived in public.

But extremes are useful to define a scale. In your work on ReasonReact, how much time do you spend thinking about the ergonomics of the users? It sounds like a fair bit of your time and mental cycles go into that. So it sounds like you sit somewhere between the extremes of those camps. I don't think I would have been able to say that sentence without defining overly steriotyped, extreme positions.

And there's lots of interesting thoughts that follow from that - like, what happens when those motivations come into conflict? Eg, users care about feature X, which is going to be really ugly to implement, but desired. What do you do?
Comparing Porsche and Tesla shows that the perception of performance applies to EVs too: European performance is more about the handling, while American performance is more about straightline acceleration. The reason for this difference becomes obvious if you compare what the roads are typically like between the two regions.
What fact was false in the P0 article? Apple is downplaying the severity of hacking thousands of people a day and sending them to concentration camps as a result.
One has to wonder if MK Ultra and similar were actually a net positive.

The CIA guy pitches it as defending the country, but it seems more like defending the egos and delusions of the team involved.
The fact that it deserves further research is precisely why we shouldn't frontload the prestige incentives. That's how you get clickbait. We don't want clickbait, we want further research, but if we incentivize based on clickbait, clickbait is all we're going to get. Let's not.
This is Darius Kazemi’s new year-long project to blog one RFC daily in chronological order.

Quoting Darius:

April 7th, 2019 is going to be the 50 year anniversary of the first ever Request for Comments, known as an RFC. These documents started out in 1969 as a way for ARPANET engineers to keep track of notes and discussions on their project. (ARPANET was run by the US Department of Defense and is considered the primary precursor to the modern internet.) I'll go more into what these documents are as we encounter them over the course of the year. But basically: they're just slightly formal documents attempting to formalize some knowledge about a project, like an internal page on a company wiki, that kind of thing.

In honor of this anniversary, I figured I would read one RFC each day of 2019, starting with RFC 1 and ending with RFC 365. I'll offer brief commentary on each RFC. I'm interested in computer history and how organizations communicate so I think this should prove pretty interesting even though RFCs themselves can be legendarily dry reading (the occasional engineering humor RFC notwithstanding).

I can only promise I'll cover all 365 RFCs in a year. I may post anywhere between 0 and 3 of these a day.
You expect things stressed beyond limits to break where you expect them to, and the point of the test is to show that the failure modes are the expected ones. Having a door pressure seal fail explosively during an airframe stress test sounds to me very much like an UNexpected failure mode. That's bad.
My job in a tech startup in NYC is 9-5. We are on call on rotation, which usually means two or so weeks a year. I don't look at Slack or email after 5pm nor do I have any notifications on my phone for any work-related app (just Slack for now).

It really hasn't affected my career - I just got a raise/promotion actually. My experience is that the "I love to work!" type of employees just get more work assigned to them instead of rewards.
> If the interviewer moderates the interview well, a single open-ended question with a broad scope can lead to wide-ranging conversations that shed light on more than just technical prowess.

Yes, this is my favorite kind of interview question. These days my goal as an interviewer is more to find somebody's strengths than their weaknesses. Nobody knows everything; nobody's good at everything. So what I'm trying to figure out in an interview is what this person can add to the team.

Sure, you do need to keep an eye out for red flags. But you won't find all of those in an interview anyhow, because people can hide those. It's much harder to fake a strength, and it's their strengths are ultimately what we hire people for.
That it is unlikely to speed certification