skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I have some noob questions that I don't know how to ask:

What, if any, is the relationship between type systems and pattern matching?

Does structural typing reduce the need for instanceof style tests?

So if a language uses structure typing, is pattern matching not useful, applicable?

--

Thanks for humoring me. I'm mostly a Java programmer, self taught, no CS background. I've been reading wiki articles about type systems, trying to figure out what it all means, how to get started. Inference, structural vs nominal, linear types... But, honestly, my eyes glaze over pretty quickly.

Am planning on powering thru Appel's 2002 book, especially implementing the type system, but we'll see how far I get.
>> I need folks who know how to think... for themselves and learn and go out and find knowledge they need to solve problems and then solve the problems.

So, is going to college and earning a degree the only way to do that? In fact most of the college education is not designed with the idea of inculcating learning as a skill, in fact college may be a bit late for that skill and as a consequence/side-effect earn a degree.

Should we reject someone who still can give you the signals (thinking, persistence) one could be looking for, but hasn't attended or dropped out of college?

There could be more optimal ways to learn to think, and solve problems and being reasonable enough in not giving up. Going to college, incurring debt, doing things where the dead end is a degree is not optimal.
Arguments like this also ignore the success of Chromebooks. The "average" person doesn't actually care about the things you listed. Some professionals might. But the average person isn't a photoshop user, and libreoffice works well enough. A default Ubuntu install doesn't require much if anything in the way of settings mungery, and I recall many a nightmare of getting drivers working on Windows back in the day.
OP is a 2017 article that mentions an upcoming 2018 report that has since been published here https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/csd/assessments/ozone/2018/executi...
I'm wondering what the difference between this and json-cpp https://github.com/open-source-parsers/jsoncpp is. They look like they provide the same functionality, albeit this looks more "modern C++ style"?
Here's the executive summary on rockets:

Rocket launches presently have a small effect on total stratospheric ozone (much less than 0.1%). Space industry developments indicate that rocket emissions may increase more significantly than reported in the previous Assessment. Their impacts will depend on rocket design (particularly the altitude of emissions), launch vehicle sizes, launch rates, spaceport locations, and fuel types. Important gaps remain in understanding rocket emissions and their combined chemical, radiative, and dynamical impacts on the global stratosphere and in projections of launch rates. These gaps limit the confidence level of predictions of present and future impacts of rocket emissions on stratospheric ozone and suggest periodic assessments are warranted. The lifetime of the most important rocket emissions is limited, and the stratospheric accumulation of rocket-emitted black carbon and alumina particles varies in correspondence with global launch rates and altitude of emissions.
> What is your theory though? Who is pushing this concept and for what gain?

"Who benefits" is always a valid question. However in the climate and energy debates it is usually just left hanging there - implying that some cabal of shady characters somehow benefit. The question serves very little purpose if it isn't followed by a somewhat coherent story that points to "who benefits" and "how".

So in order to redeem yourself, would you mind terribly answering who benefits. And perhaps why this is either good or bad? Names, numbers and observable facts.

As for who doesn't benefit, that's much easier: incumbent energy companies and the immense government interests in maintaining the status quo. (Even the tinfoil hat "free energy" quacks manage to harp on about who is thwarting their efforts to supply the world with free energy).

Heck: _I_ would benefit from maintaining the status quo. I live in Norway - a country whose pension fund is built on oil revenue and is currently the largest national sovereign wealth fund in the world. My quality of life as I retire is directly linked to how large this fund is. It would be in my interest that we keep pumping out hydrocarbons for as long as possible so we can load up on stocks and not depend on being innovative or doing actual work to remain wealthy.

(That being said, this pension fund is essentially a giant index fund. So there's that :-))
This is great. I hope they succeed, but the climate crisis isn't solely about emissions.

Yes it's the largest most immediate threat. But we will continue to have the dust bowl, ozone crisis, emissions crisis, microplastic crisis, etc. Unless we fundamentally address our relationship to this planet.

There's an incredible documentary that was way before it's time called "Who's Counting?" by Marilyn Waring. I think it addresses some of the fundamental causes of each crisis that comes up every so often. We're not accounting for the economic value or the "jobs of nature". We might not even be able to, because we really don't fully understand it.
Tesla vehicles are the safest ever made - I'd say allow Tesla to innovate away from whatever stagnancy the status quo auto manufacturers have allowed. User education is part of good design - and perhaps driver tests will need to start including proper use of such systems. They're road legal likely because it's innovative and it hasn't been discussed nor laws written yet - it takes time for the regulatory processes to work.
You’re calling it a pastime? I think there’s a little more than that going on.
I suspect it's because a lot of people don't see climate change as an actual problem to be solved as effectively as possible, but rather as an opportunity to effect the kinds of change they would favor anyway. It's "never let a crisis go to waste" thinking.

We could even keep generating power with natural gas and just capture all of the carbon emissions at the powerplant. Nuclear is an improvement but you don't even need to go that far if you are serious about decarbonizing the power grid as quickly as possible.
It's not easier than on campus. The curriculum is the same, and it's taught by the same professors and on campus head TAs (usually). If anything, it can be more difficult due to lack of interactivity in lectures to clarify things - although on the whole the recorded lecture quality is very good. OMSCS is no joke! If you want to take it, keep in mind it is a top 10 program and the workload and intensity of the classes can be very high. You will learn a lot, but it will also mean personal sacrifices (free time, time with family and friends) to keep up.
Yet another reason to use Linux.
Cannot talk about Canada but I’m willing to speak about Berlin. How the tech scene evolved during the last 12 years and where I think it’s heading. Reach out via contact on my profile. Happy to jump on a call.
Let’s look at Stallman’s actual words. Stallman said the most plausible explanation is that the child who Minsky abused was ‘entirely willing’.

Or, there is this quote:

“All I know she said about Minsky is that Epstein directed her to have sex with Minsky. That does not say whether Minsky knew that she was being coerced. it does not report what each said and did during their sexual encounter. We can imagine various scenarios.”

Or this one:

“it is morally absurd to define ‘rape’ in a way that depends on minor details such as which country it was in or whether the victim was 18 years old or 17”

With all due respect to your argument, this is not a case of a 20 year old and a 17 year old. This is a case of a 73 year old esteemed researcher at an institution with undergraduate students having sex with a 17 year old in a country that defines such an age difference as statutory rape.

Stallman’s idea about how it’s absurd to define rape according to age or country is offensive in every way imaginable. Sovereign nations are allowed to set and enforce their own laws. Other sovereign nations are allowed to choose whether to extradite their citizens back to those nations to face their justice system. But the act of entering a country is an agreement that you will respect its sovereignty and its laws. If you argue against that, you’re effectively arguing against the entire basis of international law and international relations. That would be an interesting argument, but let’s talk about mineral rights instead of child sexual abuse.

As for age, countries around the world recognize that children cannot be expected to provide informed consent to engage in sexual activity. They argue that by statute, some children are not capable of consenting to sexual activity. These countries have tried to come up with policy to deal with how absolute differences in age don’t necessarily account for differences in maturity. Some countries will not enforce statutory rape laws if the age difference is slight. Other countries enforce their own laws differently to account for different situations. This is a case of a 56 year age difference involving a pedophile, an eminent researcher and a victim of child trafficking.

All of that aside, the fact is that a victim chose to come forward and make herself available to be deposed. During this deposition, the victim said that she was coerced into having sex with Minsky.

Minsky is dead. Why not believe the victim? What do we gain from pedantic arguments about the nature of international law and sexual abuse?

* Edited because my first version was poorly written and almost incomprehensible.
It is when you overengineer safety for 1 technology and ignore it for the alternatives, and then compare the costs ignoring the safety record.

Energy Source Mortality Rate (deaths/trillionkWhr)
Coal – global average 100,000 (41% global electricity)
Coal – China 170,000 (75% China’s electricity)
Coal – U.S. 10,000 (32% U.S. electricity)
Oil 36,000 (33% of energy, 8% of electricity)
Natural Gas 4,000 (22% global electricity)
Biofuel/Biomass 24,000 (21% global energy)
Solar (rooftop) 440 (< 1% global electricity)
Wind 150 (2% global electricity)
Hydro – global average 1,400 (16% global electricity)
Hydro – U.S. 5 (6% U.S. electricity)
Nuclear – global average 90 (11% global electricity w/Chern&Fukush)
Nuclear – U.S. 0.1 (19% U.S. electricity)

Source (2012): https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-d...

If people wanted solar power to be as safe as nuclear powerplants it would have to be much more expansive than it is now. But apparently deaths are ok as long as it's not from nuclear powerplants :/
Yep this is why I like JSON Cpp, there's a single-file build and I've had success using it with Repl.it: https://neverfriday.com/2013/07/26/learning-jsoncpp/

Since JSON only has basic data types, it's easy to just parse and retrieve objects, similar to using XML tree parsing libraries back in the day.
Presumably we'd need to lower it from geostationary orbit. This is a unique solution though I suppose there is some dependency on the mass of the planet where you might be too deep in the well. But you'd be in orbit so presumably some low thrust low propellant engine powered by sunlight ought to be an option?
Ask HN: Searching for Functions via Type Signatures
I just came across an old paper discussing searching for functions via type signatures.
How prevalent is this kind of search perhaps in code search systems? Does anyone else know
more about this kind of work?

- https://github.com/theSage21/sigsearch
- https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~wing/publications/ZaremskiWing93.pdf
I don't know what to say. I've seen this across dozens of computers since 1903. Were you installing 1903?
When implementing that protocol, dependency to JSON should be minimized, contained and preferably eliminated.
I think just the opposite. Once rocketry is cheaper, not throwing the craft away with each flight, it makes perfect sense for inter-continental flights. Have a space plane for each city fly to an orbiting transfer station; passengers switch planes and arrive anywhere in the World in three hours or less.
It feels weird having Google on the “improve connection between the company” side when they are the poster child of parallel implementations and internal competing products and standards (at least as seen from the outside).

It is just a warped perception ?
Be careful if you are a person who cares about preserving testosterone. Receipt thermal ink contains BPA which is highly absorbable through contact with skin.
Does it matter?

Space travel seems like it should be a priority for humanity. More so than the latest iPhone and all that other crap that produces pollution
PC gamers won't be switching to an Xbox, and so we require a desktop. It won't just be halo effect on home users, but ironically also Halo effect. The remastered collection being ported over as we speak, starting with Halo: Reach iirc.
So why is Hinckley Point C three times as expensive as wind farms?
I am 4 classes into the program and enjoying it a lot. The surprising thing for me is that a single class seems to consume about 15 hours per week. I have heard that the harder classes, such as AI, IHPC, ML, GA, take 20-25 hours/week. I don't remember my undergrad courses being so demanding but I did not attend a top tier school.

All that said, perhaps for the sharper students these classes demand much less time than they do for me.
>Attempting to make this illegal isn't going to work. Even regular people have this kind of power now.

They might have this kind of power, but they don't have enough scale and other power (p.x. state power) to matter as much as a state or company like Google doing it...

And if it's illegal they can always be busted for using it, and their private surveillance results could be automatically rejected as court evidence for anything, making them even more useless except for e.g. blackmail or something (still illegal).
Reflection isn't required; keys in JSON are strings, and there are basic data types that are supported (strings, numbers, booleans, arrays, and dictionaries which are more of the same).

What's wrong with writing "initializers" which are serializers/deserializers? If you're looking for automatic file format to C++ class object, why settle for JSON (whether it's this library or JSONCpp) why not use Thrift or Protocol Buffers?

- Thrift: https://thrift.apache.org/
- Protocol Buffers: https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/
It's not a mess. Windows 10 IoT Enterprise has a price-tag. I'm involved in a low-volume system and it's not a nightmare.
The deaths figure is not the whole story? The areas rendered uninhabitable matter as well.
Definitely can vouch anecdotally, that dropping out of college, is a weak signal, after all the solid content you have published[0].

I read your Practical Compiler Construction combined with Elements of computing systems [2] and that was a great combo!

[0] https://www.t3x.org/index.html

[1] https://www.t3x.org/reload/index.html

[2] https://www.nand2tetris.org
Porsche vs. Tesla: False Equivalence
What worked for me was uninstalling the September cumulative update and the August cumulative update[1], then flagging those two to avoid that they get reinstalled the next time Windows updates[2].

[1] https://www.windowscentral.com/how-fix-start-menu-and-search...

[2] https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/3183922/how-to-temp...
Weird location because local user accounts have little to do with domains. :P
With a good "gets thrown to jail" system if they're found to be using surveillance.

If they can use surveillance and keep it forever secret and with no public artifacts from it shown, let them do it...
I believe the plan from SpaceX is for point to point ballistic travel in a rocket carrying ~100 people, not going via something in orbit.

Flight times of an hour from anywhere on the planet to anywhere IIRC
As you should know as a software developer, development of major new capabilities is an incremental process, and for something like self driving cars it’s expected that there will be a transitional period before self driving. Summon in parking lots is a good transitional step.

Remember Tesla is not just training cars here; humans also need to learn to deal and not freak out. There will be fender benders along the way. Most of them probably caused by other drivers, but bugs are also a possibility.
Why are you perpetuating the myth that there is a difference?
Granted the IoT buzzword naming is confusing. Windows 10 IoT Enterprise is simply the good old "Embedded" edition which is fundamentally Windows 10 Enterprise with a price-tag. LTSB means that they have a specific version of Windows 10 that they will support for a long time. For embedded applications, that is perfect.
Alternatively the established players have become incredibly good at what they do - it's simply something different. Elon is motivated ideologically by a desire to colonize Mars. By contrast this [1] is the current head of Lockheed Martin, this [2] was the head of Boeing until 2015 when it became clear they were losing by most of every metric to SpaceX. Exact same story in both cases: 0 tech background + MBA.

These people are not aiming to achieve anything, just to make more money in general, and specifically to extract more taxpayer money. And they are extremely good at that. For instance ULA (an anticompetitive joint venture between Boeing/Lockheed) managed to get the government to pay them $422 million per rocket launch. [3] The only reason this ended was because of those pesky kids, SpaceX in this case - who are charging $83-$97 million for a comparable launch capability. And that's at the inflated government price - private commercial launches go for about $65 million. SpaceX have a big picture goal. Boeing/Lockheed exist only to make more money.

Perhaps my favorite example of ULA's success is the 'launch assurance capability subsidy.' ULA managed to get the government to give them about $1 billion of taxpayer money per year, to do literally nothing but exist. [4] Elon's taken flak because of astroturfed articles suggesting he feeds on government subsidies when they tend to be little more than tax rebates (in other words the government taking less). But this is literally getting the government to write you a check for $800 million, just to make sure you have your vehicles ready to accept their $420 million check later on. ULA, for their part, refers to it as an "innovative contracting mechanism." Whatever it is, getting the government to spew taxpayer money to you is what they're trying to do, and yeah - again, they are very good at it.

The examples are endless here. For instance Lockheed Martin is also behind the maligned F-35 program (works out to an average of about $29 billion a year of taxpayer money, for the next 50 years), the SLS launch vessel, perpetually 3 years out on the horizon, draws billions per year and a large chunk of NASA's entire annual allocation, so forth and so on.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marillyn_Hewson

[2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_McNerney

[3] - https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/06/air-force-budget-rev...

[4] - https://spacenews.com/u-s-air-force-looks-at-ending-ulas-lau...
The sole purpose of this location is to create an offline account... Seriously.
It's educational to try.

I had to tunnel dns through openvpn to make dnssec reliable.

On a wifi router, there's loads of leakage; mdns, ntp, things devices do to check for captive portal, weather apps, etc etc.

You can mitm https, but breaks hsts sites, unless you hack your browser
> Fukushima type accident every few years would be completely acceptable and compared to coal and hydrocarbons.

This is the most delusional thing I've ever read about nuclear feasibility. No country will ever accept more than one of those.
TL;DR: "The climate impact of rockets has not really been seriously addressed as yet"
I didn’t feel the need to specify that in my comment because the linked Reddit thread already explains it, it’s the top upvoted comment, you can see it just below the initial post. When I said “this is incredibly bad” I was referring to the dark pattern, I wasn’t trying to suggest that the option had been completely removed.
The Politics of Attention means we've always been reactive. Too much outrage. Too few eyeballs. Resulting in triage. Made worse as investigative journalism has been gutted these last few decades. Made worse as engagement driven business models (ad revenue) begat outrage culture.
Sorry again.
Is 1000:1 right? I thought the Saturn V was about 100:1.
UK seems to be doing all sorts of crazy shit right now so not all that surprised that people are finding out about this via news
Mint vs Ubutuntu vs fedora.

What's the right choice in 2019 for a power desktop user who wants video drivers to work,for a 7 year old hp machine?
Keypirnha is apparently only for "keyboard ninjas", so I'll stick with something made for the rest of us.
It's pretty amazing how well Firewatch captures the feel of that point in time. Your character's backstory was pretty well designed to give you an emotional connection to the game. Back when people first started discussing games creating interactive movies, what we ended up with were mostly electronic versions of Choose-Your-Own-Adventure books. Firewatch is a nice evolution of interactive fiction into something an order of magnitude better.
of course its unreasonable, but thats a liability clause added by a lawyer.
It is actually quite high. The problem is that we won't really know until it is too late. For instance, if the growth of phytoplankton collapses, it might well mean that really large ecosystems collapse in relatively short order.

And it isn't really as simple as "well, I don't eat fish anyway". It is unlikely that other ecosystems wouldn't be affected by this. There is a greater than zero probability that if this happened today you would be dead in a few years. If not of starvation then due to societal collapses resulting from a sudden shortage of resources.

The thing is, the things that can result from climate change are not part of our experience so we can't really relate to it. We're used to "tomorrow is going to be more or less like today" and "well, this has never happened before so it can't happen".
Linux is not a one-time investment unfortunately since the software landscape is constantly changing. For people who are invested this is generally a good thing. There are more distros that you’ll run into in the wild than editions of Windows easily which is doubly true in the embedded space.

In the enterprise where Red Hat and Canonical dominate licensing is becomes an issue again when you use their paid offerings.

So don’t get me wrong. I want people to switch to Linux but we gotta be realistic that it’s not a panacea.
There is a significantly larger land area rendered uninhabitable by coal mining operations. No one seems to care. The impact of all the nuclear disasters combined is negligible in comparison. Wind power renders larger areas unusable just by the fact of covering that area with wind turbines. No one cares. Solar and wind installations devastate wildlife populations. No one cares.

Why should we treat nuclear power differently and discard all of its advantages just because worst-case failures can render small land areas unusable, but smaller than other alternatives already do on a regular basis? I'm not even bringing up the fact that there exist modern reactor designs that are provably incapable of failing like this. The comparison is in favour of nuclear even when we're looking at currently rolled out explode'y reactors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_the_co...

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47165522