skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's a combination of tax incentives, permits, active relations between planning bodies and the industry, and some subsidies.

The Netherlands is one of the most densely populated countries in the world so any kind of construction work generally involves permits and negotiations with governments about how and what. Permits come with strings attached and this is how governments can nudge the private sector the way it wants to go. EVs and clean energy are popular topics for planning bodies. It makes everybody look good.

When something new gets planned, questions need to be answered about this (and a lot of other topics) and having solutions in your plan generally helps getting those plans approved and probably also unlocks some nice subsidies. So, a real estate developer planning some new housing, roadwork, industrial estate, or whatever is going to have a big incentive to have some charging infrastructure built into the plans from day one.

For the same reasons the Netherlands is one of the safest places to ride a bike because any roadworks in the last 50 years had some explicit planning for improving bike safety. There's not a single road that gets built without that being a topic of attention and scrutiny.
Oh I wouldn't say it's non-existent [1].

There is also plenty of street charging stations in Oslo, I have many friends there without a garage that has electric cars. It's just a matter of putting up the infrastructure. It's a policy issue not a practical one.

[1] https://www.electrive.com/2019/08/18/on-street-chargers-to-p...
Honestly, this blog post is cute but it does not actually give you understanding and insight into these concepts. Imho the only way to internalise these are through practice. Write code, get annoyed by repetition/boilerplate/etc... and discover that abstraction Foo solves that problem.
I spent a couple of hours last night helping my son with homework that involved getting him to understand the sieve of Erastothenes and I can totally see this - the number of detours we had to take to find a way of explaining it (I made it harder by insisting he understand how to prove that you only need to test up to the square root of the upper limit you choose) that made sense for him was maddening. I can't imagine trying to teach it to a whole class of kids even a year or two older than he is now.. And at the start, I thought it'd be simple - it's just a handful of simple logical steps...
If you have a large single source you can go to work on carbon reduction and carbon capture schemes that make more sense at scale.
Nice name for it.
This looks really promising! I recently wanted to make an interactive GUI to control the inputs to a GAN in order to generate images and visualize how different inputs affect certain properties of the output images.

I ended up converting my Python models to TensorFlow.js and creating an ad-hoc Vue.js app [0], but Streamlit could have been very beneficial here, especially if you can just put nginx in front of it and serve it to the masses.

[0] https://thispicturedoesnotexist.com
> Exactly. I don't know why Haskell fanboys insist on abstracting us so far from the machine.

I believe it is because abstractions are the way we have always made progress.
Is the C code that's so close to the machine not just an abstraction of the underlying assembly, which is an abstraction of the micro operations of your particular processor, which in turn is an abstraction of the gate operations? The abstractions allow us to offload a significant part of mental task. Imagine trying to write an HTML web page in C. Sure it's doable with a lot of effort, but is it as simple as writing it using abstractions such as the DOM?

> We live in a mutable physical universe that corresponds to a procedural program. One thing happens after another according to the laws of physics (which are the procedural program for our universe).

You just proved why abstractions are useful. "One thing happens after another" is simply our abstraction of what actually happens, as demonstrated by e.g. the quantum eraser experiment [1][2].

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

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ORLN_KwAgs
There's one in the example (streaming from multiple cloudtrail files and grepping on the resulting stream)
I always wondered whether imperative languages feel more intuitive to most programmers because they are:

a) Inherently simpler and require no prior advanced knowledge of math.

b) They are the default in every curriculum and once your brain is wired that way everything else seems counter-intuitive.

I remember in the first grade of my elementary school we were taught basic algebra and how sets work (union, intersection etc). I understood both concepts but I couldn't relate sets to the outside world. Like why do I even need this. Maybe new programmers feel this way about functional languages and Haskell.
Mirroring some of the comments here, just because you don't understand the internals does not mean you can't pick it up and be productive with it. This is what you do with any other language, but it just seems more natural to you (even though they are really just as complicated).

Hence I feel like one of the big issues is that people learn to program in a non declarative/imperative way. When you first pick up python / c / c++ etc, there are plenty of details you don't necessarily understand (who here has absorbed all of the c++ spec?).

At most Haskell is just different and I don't think it requires more mental effort than anything else.
>There's no difference in practice either for a sufficiently small dataset.

So what happens in practice with unfortunately large datasets?

>Yes, Haskell can't help you escape the limitations of our world — or indeed our hardware — but it doesn't pretend to either

Then what is Haskell's value-proposition when it comes to solving real-world problems?
But is your low budget experiment programmable with a known sequence of well defined quantum gates? Can you statistically verify that your distribution is very close to D?
Conversely when both left and right are pushed towards extremes (compare this story to Trump), it becomes hard not to stigmatise both.
> I would be careful about making any generalizations if the user can do significant computations at compile time.

Indeed, and with some language extensions type checking may never terminate! But library code only has to be compiled once and if you write code that takes a long time to type check that's on you. Bog standard type safe Haskell 2010 code type checks in the blink of an eye.

If your argument is "advanced type system features are too seductive for people to avoid" then I'd be more inclined to agree with you. But that's not what you said.

> > (and you mean "static typing")

> Let's not split hairs.

Well, Python has strong typing and doesn't take long to compile. Perhaps you meant "some advanced features of Haskell's type system". If so I'd agree with you. But don't discourage people from Haskell by making false statements about it and then accuse me of splitting hairs.
It depends on your needs. This is neither constrained to Haskell specifically nor functional programming more generally.

If you were building a website for your local Italian restaurant, what would your needs be? Do you need an ElasticSearch cluster to handle customer menu item queries? Do you need a database at all?

In Haskell's case it's best to avoid lists entirely, as they're _usually_ not the optimal data structure. But best for whom? Does the beginner care that a set operation would be more effective than a list operation for their given use-case?
That's a fair answer thank you (and why I asked about the intended audience and purpose of the document); however as they put the blue sky goals in the abstract, I would have expected something more specific as well.

Wrt your first observation, yes it's particularly the amount that it costs that I think makes this clarity in communication especially important.
> Ditto if you go from everyone having a Bachelor’s in Math to everyone having a Master’s.

Is this really going to matter when teaching basic calculus?
Except I'm not talking about tablet/slabphone form, but talking generally.

iPhone was operating in a market where touchscreens were already the norm, it just had a better touchscreen.

It was a general lowering of costs, coupled with better networks and the ability to use more modern web pages that truly revolutionized the market. Capacitive touchscreens were nice, but not end-all.

In fact, my first experience with iPhone 3G was that it was clunkier than the smartphones we used. (and definitely felt cheap).

At least some phones, for a time, used to integrate both touch screen and buttons, which had significant benefits when it came to UX (as buttons can be navigated by tactile feedback only)
Why it still works, no need to refactor the code for the sake of refactoring if this is free work.

Change to ES modules would be welcome though.
There was this piece of common knowledge floating around a number of years ago about how you need to know at least 1 level of abstraction beneath you well, and have a working knowledge of the second one below it, to use your tools effectively. I don't recall where the advice floated around or came from but it was something along those lines, and it's pretty true.
Absolutley agree. Before working for a small consultantancy I worked for two startups and a big company. At the startups I had next to no guidance but I guess I learned self reliance. At the big company the pace of work was too slow (although good for me at the time as my first Job). Now at this agency I'm earning more than I ever have before, I get to work with a variety of technologies with different clients and different teams. All the engineers in the shop are very pragmatic. No over engineering because there isn't time for that. Plus at the one I'm at there is a nice atmosphere and social life. As a new engineer you don't get put on some bullshit intern project in the corner with no real world connection. You get put on a real project with real impact, you have to take responsibility for your work and you are trusted with stuff you're only just about ready for. Nothing compares to building a different key component of a production system 5 times+ a year. If it fails that's your responsibility so you learn pretty quickly how to build robust software fast and what counts towards that and what is just fluff.
You need a way to reach your goal by car this must not necessarily look like a traditional road.

It is essentially a inversion of priorities: instead of having roads with pedestrians and cyclists allowed, you make it a pedestrian area with cyclists and cars allowed.
Ok, I appreciate the refinements, and I think we agree.
Thanks for your input, Euthyphro!
Security is always in service of something, not the other way around. The highest point for security is coming together with something side by side, but not before it.
The upside is that the ‘second-class’ markets will be served by local services. And when western markets are completely saturated, western site owners will be scratching their heads wondering how they get any part of the ‘second-class’ markets.
> One comment was "... the school buses start to build-up at 04:30-05:00 ...". Luckily, kids are very resilient.

Resilient yes, but you'll be harming them for life making them get up so early. Their brains just don't work like that and it's inhumane to force somebody into the school system so early. No wonder people hate it.
Silicon Valley to Wall Street: What, Make Money? Us?
> So what happens in practice with unfortunately large datasets?

You take a different approach. Haskell provides plenty of options.

> Then what is Haskell's value-proposition when it comes to solving real-world problems?

There are many. You can consult your favourite search engine to learn more.
Yeah, I occasionally work in construction. In .au you have to have a Civil Engineer on site for anything like 2meters or more deep and so on, council approval, engineers reports, water course layouts, surveyors, soil experts, excavators required skilled labor (in the sense proof of competency & licenses) I don't know what OP is getting at.
87% of Consumers Would Opt Out of Ad Targeting Under CCPA Terms
It just means "demonstration effect", right?
>but got a family, need to do summer camps in jersey but live in brooklyn.

So take the train with your family? I don’t see the problem.
Ask HN: Is there some unwritten code of conduct for code reviews?
Code reviews are all the rage these days: I am getting code reviews at work from people whom I don't even know; Is there some accepted code of conduct for this kind of situations?
I mean is one supposed to just do what any reviewer is suggesting, or is there an acceptable way to resolve differences of opinion?
You still need ambulance access everywhere and delivery access almost everywhere. So you need a lot of vehicle infrastructure even though it’s mostly unused, and vehicles must suddenly share the space with pedestrians instead of pedestrians having sidewalks and designated crossings. Pedestrian streets exist in most cities but the problem of making each street a safe place for pedestrians while ambulances and delivery trucks can still access them isn’t a solved problem. A couple of vehicle terrorist attacks in Europe in recent years highlighted this issue.
Don’t get crushed by your car loan
Me too, think.

What about sharing it as an internal non-exit VPN in a nested chain?
On Google Reader
Not just selling them things but selling yourself first.

Before I was a full time programmer I was a salesman when I was young (I'm by nature an introvert so it wasn't anything that was natural, I had to learn to do it and I got good at it - The company I worked for I held the highest sales for the district and the 3rd highest average order value over the company (150ish locations)) and after a while I realised that 'people buy people' with the product often been secondary (turns out all those 'CTO made the choice over a round of golf with <IBM|Oracle"> sales manager' jokes have a basis of truth, they figured it out decades ago).

It's also something of an awkward truth in that as programmers we like to think we pick thinks for objective considered reasons rather than because we like the person pushing them but then I used to watch the tech industry go nuts after a Job's sales event and think..maybe not so much.
The funny thing is that software engineering tools exist to relieve programmers of mental overload. This in turn can be used to build more complicated systems, at the cost of another level of mental overload.

So this begs the question: where are the complicated systems written in Haskell that could not have been realized in other languages? Or are Haskell programmers only using the language to sleep better at night?
Also, depending on the country, you can be hold responsible if someone use your exit node to do something illegal.

As far as I remember, in France, you can get the same status as an ISP (don't remember the name though) to be able to run an exit node without being held responsible. But you will have to respect certain rules.
I love chartjs. It's so easy to get started with it and comes with a lot of great features out of the box. I just wish its animation system was a little more extensive like giving me the option to animate ticks and grid lines for eye candy on load.
[non-rhetorical question:]

Was there anything in that sort of price range that did have memory protection?

A PC with OS/2? An Acorn machine with RISC OS?
And how many people dropped out of CS because of that first Haskell course? I saw plenty of people struggling with Python initially and I know exactly how they felt later when we had to learn Haskell.

I think if I had to learn Haskell first, then I would've just given up at the start.
Hi. Checked out the demo. Super interesting!

If I want to become a developer and sell the projects on your platform: How can I start?

What is proximate pricing schema?
Thanks for the recommendations.

I need to create a polygon of specified width based on an arbitrary GPS track (which can cross itself multiple times). Can anybody recommend a JS library which is capable of doing this?
Sorry, I was trying to explain why there are so many contributors on this document.

I am not so much into the details but I can try to explain a little bit more.

First of all is important to understand the time scope of the project. The whole FCC is suppose to run until the end of the 21st century and one way or another will shape the general knowledge of us as human.

Then, it is a CERN project, so it's CERN that decided whenever this get build or not. CERN has it's own budget and decide what to do with it.

Of course, the project is so big, that is expected some level of (at least general) agreement between the member state of CERN.

Given the context, the document aim to create a general understanding of what will be FCC, what will be its cost, what the benefits and what the challenges.

Nothing is yet, set on stones, but it is a first high level sketch of the project.

In my understanding the target of the document are the people that decide what to do with the CERN budget, which are generally ex-physisct, with a deep understanding of the matter, but that now are into management.

They will need to manage the balance between costs, opportunities and expected reward of the project. They will need to decide if it is actually worth to build it or not.

Unfortunately I cannot speak about physics, I am an engineer who happens to work at CERN.

However the general model at CERN is been to build a "small" accelerator to discover new things and a new bigger one to measure this new thing. LHC is the small one that discovered Highs. More precise measurements will required something bigger.

Given this context, my understanding is that particle physics is a little in a tough spot. Everything seems to work kind of alright, but there are few points not well understood or predicted. It is not like we have no idea of what is happening, but we are not even super super sure of everything.

Interesting to know that there is another project "competitor" of FCC, CLIC which is a linear accelerator and in my understanding should explore a different space of the problem.

Given all this, sorry that I cannot comment on the physics, but if there is enough interest in the community we can try to get in touch with somebody more informed than me on both the physics and the technology side.

If you guys have more questions please ask, and I will try to do my best...
I love to work alone
> So what are they gonna do for 25 years?

Run 2 of the LHC ended in 2018. Currently the experimentalists are busy analyzing that data, and the theoreticians are busy improving the theoretical prediction precision to the level of the experiment. If we had no new data, it would take a decade for this work to be finished.

Run 3 of the LHC is scheduled for 2021-2023. After that the High Luminosity LHC upgrade will take place, with data taking currently scheduled for 2026-2038 [1].

Overall, just with the LHC-related projects in the foreseeable future we are looking at decades worth of measurement and research. There's no reason to worry about the lack of work to do :)

[1] https://project-hl-lhc-industry.web.cern.ch/content/project-...
What happens to heavy-metal-laced (and somewhat radioactive, too) ash from coal, by comparison? I suspect it's similarly big problem, just not such a political scare, more ways to sweep it under rug/export/etc.
No. Vorführeffekt is used for anything that suddenly behaves differently when an audience is present. Be that features that suddenly don't work when observed, or bugs that suddenly don't reproduce anymore, etc.
I love this kind of programming tools, but do not understand the terminology. Using programming tools has always been called, eeer, "programming"? Is there something that I'm missing here? What's the point of saying "no programming" when you are, precisely, programming?
Honestly I think Haskellers should spend less time writing blogs and more time writing code that does something interesting/useful. When the language you claim being so superior comes with such bad tooling and usability your claim instantly looses any substance.
>I believe it is because abstractions are the way we have always made progress.

>The abstractions allow us to offload a significant part of mental task

Edge/corner cases in our abstractions is also how propagation of uncertainty[1] happens. You can't off-load error-correction [2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propagation_of_uncertainty

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_error_correction
> And more Americans than ever are zipping around in SUVs and pickup trucks, which, thanks to their height, weight and shape are between two and three times more likely to kill people they hit.

It’s not such a mystery then.
This blog post may help some but readers shouldn't expect it to magically flick a switch that allows them to use or create monads.

Instead, I really like:

1. Stephen Diehl's “Eightfold Path to Monad Satori” from “What I Wish I Knew When Learning Haskell”:

http://dev.stephendiehl.com/hask/#monads

“Much ink has been spilled waxing lyrical about the supposed mystique of monads. Instead, I suggest a path to enlightenment:

1. Don't read the monad tutorials.
2. No really, don't read the monad tutorials.
3. Learn about Haskell types.
4. Learn what a typeclass is.
5. Read the Typeclassopedia.
6. Read the monad definitions.
7. Use monads in real code.
8. Don't write monad-analogy tutorials.

In other words, the only path to understanding monads is to read the fine source, fire up GHC, and write some code. Analogies and metaphors will not lead to understanding.”

2. Chris/kqr's “The ‘What Are Monads?’ Fallacy?”, which mirrors the advice from Stephen Diehl:

https://two-wrongs.com/the-what-are-monads-fallacy

“Instead, learn to use specific monads. Learn how Maybe a works, learn how Either e a works. Learn how IO a and [a] and r -> a works. Those are all monads. Learn to use them with the >>= operator and with do notation.

Once you've learned how to work with all of those, you'll have a really good idea of how monads can be used.

Asking "What is a monad?" to learn how to use monads is as wrong as asking "What is a musical instrument?" to learn how to play musical instruments. It's a good start, but it won't teach you very much.”
Lisp (Scheme) was chosen for the same reasons at my uni, but I think is a superior choice as the syntax is so small and it’s very appropriate for teaching.
Where do you get a $1/month VPS?
Parent comment is wrong, as you just demonstrated with your statement about the bug not occurring.
I've used both frequently, and I don't think the toaster oven is easier. It's just better for things that are not slices of bread or bagels, so I'd concede it's a more general kitchen appliance. To toast bread in a toaster oven, I need to open the glass door, then position the bread on the tray, close the door, and then turn the dial. Then I have to open and close the door after toasting.

With a toaster, it's just drop the bread in and push the lever down. Then pull the toast out when done. It may not seem like a significant number of saved steps, but if you're doing it over and over again it adds up.