skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I thought i'd try some other Java parsers, but the Maven build doesn't work with current Maven, and it's not clear what you'd feed to test_parser.sh anyway, as there's no driver script for the Java case.

One of the things i'm passionate about is always setting up a project in such a way that someone new to it can download, build, and use it with an absolute minimum of fuss. That means making the most of the build tools, and scripting everything you can't do through the build tool. I don't always meet this standard myself, because i am a weak and wretched human being, but it's great when it's done.

Gradle is good here, because the wrapper means you always get a specific Gradle version, although it can't control the JDK version, which is increasingly painful in the post-8 age. Cargo is pretty good, because the user just needs to install rustup, then they get a precisely controlled Rust and Cargo version via the rust-toolchain file. I'd love it if there was a rustup-wrapper which i could check in, which would obviate the need for a global rustup installation. Ruby, Python, and Node do alright, but you have to ask the user to install the version manager of your choice. C is absolutely miserable.

Since this project has all of the above and more, making it as self-sufficient as i would like would be quite an effort!
I think you’re missing a link.
The problem is that if you want to understand the issue fully you'll have to at least read and understand a couple of physics books.

Ain't nobody got time for that, so these kind of arguments are all that's left. Unless you want some recommendations?

But basically, increasing CO2 will increase the energy input into the system, that is teenager level science. Where the energy goes and what the consequences are are increasingly more complicated and less understood the more processes are involved.
Raw storage per GB is also more expensive now compared to getting a giant hard drive. 100GB triple-layer BD-XL's are often ~$10/disk (~$0.10/GB). 10TB NAS-friendly HDD's can be had for ~$265 (~$0.0265). It sure was an interesting time where average desktop drives were only the size of a few DVDs which could be burned for less than a dollar. I hope improvements of commodity optical media happen but I think I'll be disappointed as consumers move to The Cloud. Chances are long term optical media archival will continue to move towards these esoteric implementations for massive corporations instead of something you can plug in to a normal computer (whatever a "normal computer" is in 20 years).

That said, there are other positives of going with write-once optical media. Magnetic or NAND media loses its charge over time, requiring refreshes to ensure data isn't lost. Its also more susceptible to outside EMI. Archive quality optical media is usually rated to safely store its contents for hundreds of years. I know I have cheap burned CDs from the 90s which still read with 100% accuracy, while most hard drives I have from that era have many errors and lots of corruption. Keep the media free from scratches, stored in the right temperature and humidity, and it'll probably outlive you without having to touch it.
Distributed startups often use a 3rd party to do the actual employment/compliance of people across N countries. Those providers are called Professional Employer Organization (PEO) and serve as Employers of Record (EOR) - handling employee/contractor agreements, payroll, compliance, tax, etc. The startup itself does not even register a legal entity in the country, and everything is managed by the likes of Papaya Global, Globalization Partners, etc.
Chronicle Is Dead and Google Killed It
Why make something more complicated to add capability users aren't asking for.
Sure. I don’t think that should result in a SWAT team, but should people feel entitled to do it?
A even more vital part is less consumption and all the consequences that come with it.

More clean energies and products won’t save us. The usage of earths resources is now roughly double of what the planet could sustain long term and it is still growing and I am afraid more cheap energy won’t help to solve this very systemic issue.

Todays teenagers are consuming more than teenagers ever before, mostly due to availability and online shops. Three decades ago you had to go to the next city and find something, nowadays you just order the thing and it is in your doorstep next day.

Adding cheap and clean energy into this mix is like taking painkillers when you have a open fracture so you can keep going. Might soothe your short term pains, but is ultimately a counter productive thing if applied just on its own.
Can you elaborate on which issue(s) you encountered? We are considering Elasticsearch at the moment for document storage and search, versus postgres.
I accidentally clicked get PDF on the recommended paper from the page, this one:

"Will EROI be the Primary Determinant of Our Economic Future? The View of the Natural Scientist versus the Economist"

https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S2542435117300831?...

Which actually answers why the point you bring up is not relevant:

"In a recent meeting of scientists and economists in London, economists raised eight points as to why it was not necessary to consider EROI in determining future energy availability or policy."

Now the above paper tries to refute those points, but using invalid logic, e.g. arguing that because EROI and costs are linked in oil and gas, then the same observation must hold across categories to renewables.
> military implications of launching nuclear facilities. These become prime targets in times of conflict that can cause a ton of damage if successfully attacked.

As opposed to a nuclear explosion delivered by an ICBM?
Yes, they've been touting these for 15 years now and still don't have any plans for a prototype. The nuclear industry always seems to have some game-changing innovation just around the corner. I'm all for aggressively funding the research, but these new designs are all hypothetical, not existing solutions.
I'm sick of this whole situation. We need to ban "opt out". Everything businesses do should be "opt in" with "informed consent", and noncompliance should be be punished with summary closure and dissolution after the first offense.

And while we're at it, let nuke the data brokers. Preferably literally.
"Thankfully", the 737 series isn't a modern airliner, and isn't fly-by-wire. All control inputs are directly linked to the relevant outputs, though sometimes with power assistance.
Which Synology NAS are you using? Any SSDs on it?

I tried a similar Dockersetup with a Atom C2000 based NAS and spinning disks and it was really easy to setup and maintain but painfully slow.
Technology is mostly neutral morally*

It's good in the hands of ethical people. It's bad in the hands of unethical people.

Nothing about quantum computing changes this fundamental premise.

I would say that the scale of good or bad that can from using quantum computing is much higher than other upcoming technologies. But beyond that, nothing is particularly different than any other new technology in this regard.

*When I say technology here I am referring to over-arching technologies not specific applications. E.G. Nuclear technology in general, not nuclear power or nuclear weapons specifically.
> Is there an example in history of civilization turning its collective back on some scientific pursuit in fear of its potentially negative consequences? It seems close to impossible.

First we should ask: is this a "scientific" pursuit in the first place? Or, rather, are we describing the creation of some mechanisms (based themselves on scientific discovery) that can be used for all kinds of purposes, among them, yes, future scientific practice? Computing leverages scientific discovery, and aids in its practice, but is itself not science.

Second, and at the risk of sounding trite, we can also ask "is there an example in the history of civilization of someone flying before the Wright brothers?" or "is there an example in the history of civilization of a world governing body before the 20th century?" The very promise of democracy, in general terms, is that we should, in fact, be able to make large decisions together on a society-wide scale. And because that is, ostensibly, the highest level through which we coordinate, we can should also be able to direct how our democratic institutions help us achieve those aims. If your position is that money, corporate influence, or government corruption prevent such coordination, you are certainly correct. But these are not "natural law." We have the ability -- however likely -- to deal with those problems. Otherwise, what's the point?

> You may be able to convince a few researchers today, but as soon as China has the slightest breakthrough towards X or Y technology, most of those who signed the pledge will be tripping over themselves to get cracking on the problem.

We are not limited to pledges. But even in that case, it is then up to those scientists who turn a dime to deal with their own potential moral failings.
My suspicion is that it's going to do very well even if, unlike the first two movies, it's a critical flop -- which I should note I'm not predicting. The last two movies did very well and the saga is going to have an awful lot of people who want to see how it officially ends regardless of whether they think TLJ (or TFA, for that matter) completely "worked." And J.J. Abrams certainly isn't likely to take the kind of story chances that Rian Johnson would, but he's also likely to make a leaner, less messy film, and might successfully thread the needle here. (I really hope the film doesn't try and pull off shocking twists to reverse the last film's shocking twists; it's always been in the back of my mind, though, that one of the story points some fans seemed to be so outraged about -- Rey being "a nobody" -- is a point that we technically only have Kylo Ren's word on.)

Having said all that, I don't think you're wrong -- I just think it's going to be the film after this year's that's going to be the real test!
max_nesting: The maximum depth of nesting allowed in the parsed data structures.
Disable depth checking with :max_nesting => false. It defaults to 100.
And there you find why people make up ridiculous claims and become "skeptics" when they are not that way about any other facts of their life: because if they acknowledge the truth, then they commit themselves to doing something about it.

And when you have decades of fabricated political identity that says that we can't switch from fossil fuels and we can't change any aspect of our life that threatens the profits of a few very wealthy corporations, acknowledging these facts also means going against one's own identity.

The very same propagandists that let tobacco companies persist with false claims about smoking and cancer came back for fossil fuel companies' defense with a highly honed bag of tricks.

That's why we see massive anti-science responses in these comments, just like every media mention of climate change brings out hoards of denialist a to barrage the media outlet and scientists that show up: people perceive it as a personal attack on them and act accordingly.
Micro Front end Architecture: Replacing a monolith from the inside out
Let them take a hit, that's the best time to buy more.
You mean like how I can’t buy a Surface at an Apple Store and vice versa?
> Why, in the "Battery Heat" section is there a link on the small d in Discord that leads to http://watchanimeattheoffice.com/, which apparently redirects to discordapp.com. So weird!

Pssst ...

https://twitter.com/discordapp/status/1088195791355703296
> Now hitting someone when their head is low invariably is a suspension. The responsibility is on the tackling player. An attacker with his head too low is not a valid target.

The rules are way more strict now, but this isn’t accurate. It has to be intentionally targeting the head, or feet leaving the ground. There is no responsibility on the player unless contact with the head was deemed to be avoidable. That doesn’t apply to the hit overall, as there is never an obligation to avoid contact - just that if you do make contact, and you have the option of where to hit them, you aren’t allowed to choose the head.

The rule states:

In determining whether contact with an opponent’s head was avoidable, the circumstances of the hit including the following shall be considered:

(i) Whether the player attempted to hit squarely through the opponent’s body and the head was not “picked” as a result of poor timing, poor angle of approach, or unnecessary extension of the body upward or outward.

(ii) Whether the opponent put himself in a vulnerable position by assuming a posture that made head contact on an otherwise full body check unavoidable.

> I don't care whether NHL players get a few more concussions. They make millions and have great healthcare.

That’s the biggest issue in professional contact sports, particularly football and hockey, so any argument that dismisses it is not going to be very compelling.

There is no such thing as good health care for concussions. It’s permanent brain damage.
Yeah, so what they write in section 3.1 is basically what I stated elsewhere on this comments page. It's probably not that Win32 Fibers is a bad implementation of Green Threads, but more that Green Threads is an awkward model to work with in many cases.

> Current recommendation is to avoid using fibers and UMS. This advice from 2005 remains unchanged: “...
[I]nstead of spending your time rewriting your app to use fibers (and it IS a rewrite), instead it's better to rearchitect your app to use a "minimal context" model - instead of maintaining the state of your server on the stack,
maintain it in a small data structure, and have that structure drive a small one-thread-per-cpu state machine.”
I think it should be all be declassified for the public good, but I can understand why they would want to keep it classified: by revealing where they've mapped, they reveal where they've been. Quality variations in different parts of the map could also reveal where they spend more time, or at what depths. But I'm skeptical that it really matters.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_gasification is slightly better than incineration, although more costly to implement.
I like optical media for the same reasons you indicate. Write once and have reasonable expectation it will last for a good long time. I do wish Optical media wasn't so stagnated as well. Write speeds could be improved by adding more laser heads to work in parallel on the disks, no reason for us to be stuck with a single head like vinyl had to for obvious reasons. That could increase disk R/W quite a bit and make it comparable to USB 2/3 but write once.

I'd love to get a holographic disk or heck an isolinear chip-shaped slab to write to because I like Star Trek.
I think there's a significant difference between content packaged as "channels" and content packaged as individual shows. It's the difference between knowing that your Netflix subscription comes with* 10,000 different shows, and you will probably only ever care about 1000 or so, and knowing that your cable subscription comes with 250 channels, and you will probably only ever care about 20, and definitely never care about 100 of them.

It's also the difference between the, what, $20/month? that Netflix subscription costs and the $80/month or whatever that the TV portion of a cable subscription costs nowadays.

* No actual numbers were harmed in the making of this post. All numbers presented are purely imaginary.
I wish the article would talk about the consequences of this. For example, does this make left-handed people more "left-handed"?
I hadn't heard of "synchronous concurrency", but looking at the Céu paper (only briefly so far), I think the model looks very close to how `async`/`await` works in Rust - possibly even isomorphic. This is really exciting, because Rust's model is unique among mainstream languages (it does not use green threads or fibers, and in fact does not require heap allocation), and I wasn't previously aware of any similar models even among experimental languages.

I'll open a thread on users.rust-lang.com to discuss the similarities/differences with Céu, but for now, here's the main similarity I see:

A Céu "trail" sounds a lot like an `async fn` in Rust. Within these functions, `.await` represents an explicit sync-point, i.e., the function cedes the runtime thread to the concurrency-runtime so that another `async fn` may be scheduled.

(The concurrency-runtime is a combination of two objects, an `Executor` and a `Reactor`, that must meet certain requirements but are not provided by the language or standard library.)
> The usage of earths resources is now roughly double of what the planet could sustain long term

Based on what data exactly? Mankind has only ever scratched the Earth's surface for resources, and still only on land. If you imagine the Earth is a perfect sphere, we have far from used much resources at all.
Here's a talk one of their guys did at the last US PyCon that described how they collected the data using airplanes then analyzed it. They sell the service to oil companies to identify leaks from capped wells.

https://pyvideo.org/pycon-us-2019/fighting-climate-change-wi...
Yeah my phrasing wasn't that clear there but I essentially meant hosted as in cached on CDN servers, just to reduce load on the nginx instances. Though my best guess at the moment for what was causing things to be slow was just sending the JS bundle to so many simultaneous users. Putting that on a CDN may be enough.
Your source is behind a paywall, but the small part available says

>In comparison, nuclear energy was considered the safest energy source

At the same time, their second source addresses that non-rooftop solar likely has a far lower mortality rate, and either way has 100x less of a mortality rate than coal.
> If you ask me this is exactly the type of approach that has been missing from the climate discussion.

Missing? Did you live under a rock? All these charts aren’t new information. It’s always been just one click away if you cared to look. Ok, maybe two clicks.
Right, this is because the homelessness industry needs to justify its existence with ever inflated numbers. Someone down on their luck and staying with parents or siblings is not homeless and does not need intervention for shelter. In general, we should encourage extended family living as its economically easy and socially good. These 'homeless' need economic help, not shelter, and its likely that, due to their proximity to family or friends, this help can be provided in large part by the private sector as long as government policy encouraged the creation of jobs. Really, when civilians say homeless they mean what researchers call unsheltered, the subset of homeless living on the street. This group has much higher needs, typically around mental health and drugs
Hence "available RAM is the only limit" for Haskell.
Not really, that's just an artifact of the example, which I constructed to emphasise that consistency errors can be serious.

But I agree that if access control were used (and pushed down to the database, rather than implemented on the client side), it would prevent that particular example from returning the disallowed data.

Even with access control the problem is still there. In the example but with database-level access control added as you suggest, the client gets an access error instead of a consistent resultset. Or missing data instead of a consistent resultset. In either case, the client needs extra code to handle the inconsistency caused by the sequence of dependent HTTP requests, or it will render an invalid screen. In some cases, maybe throw errors trying to render it because the data is in an "impossible" state that wasn't allowed by the database logic.

For example, a person without an address is shown, even though the database never contains a person without an address. Or nothing is shown, because of the access error, unless the client has "retry on access error" logic.

Try to imagine how unprofessional that would look if it was, say, a bank statement line without an amount.

These inconsistent data hazards can get complicated easily, as they arise from all sorts of weird corner cases that rarely arise and are hard to enumerate. Defensive programming is needed to handle them, and even then it can be hard to ensure every case is handled well. They are also hard to test.
Why does a health insurer have more money than what they know what to do with? How were they able to extract so much wealth if they were providing a competitive service?

Why don’t they just lower premiums so that more people can afford to see a doctor? Or provide better coverage so fewer people would go bankrupt when diagnosed with an “expensive” condition?

Why is buying real estate a better investment than saving lives?
I like my infrastructure to be nice and stable. I realize that all the recent drama MAY not be a cause for concern, but I imagine this makes Gitlab a harder sell, in a world of many choices.
Can you expand on F# not being functional enough for the other 1%?
They can. They're at 1.55% right now (they were at 2% not long ago, I guess they're trying to stave off a dip in demand). During the depths of the recession, they were basically 0% (i.e. 0.07%, etc). Below inflation.
Netflix Isn't Cool with Password Sharing Anymore
Is it any more alarming than the other results?
This:

We will not tolerate Very Serious Charge X. This post did not do X, but other people did and this post says something critical of us so we removed it.

construct is quite something.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S09254...
This t-shirt defeated 2 CV model, R-CNN and YOLOv2.

We need better deployed testing suites that can test an adversarial model against many popular classifiers, not just 2.

Even so, the paper itsef shows tht their tshirt doesn't make the wearer undetectable, only partially-undetectable. A security system won't ignore you just because it only saw you 10% of the time you were present (unless it's an Uber self-driving car).
A wearable captcha!
How are C build systems miserable? If you're building for a general Linux distro, you'll not have much control over the dependencies, but that's not a problem with C, but with how programs are distributed in the GNU/Linux distribution model.
They can; this is generally referred to as "biogas" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biogas). It's equivalent to Carbon Capture and Storage, but for all of these methane releases. It's only used on a relatively small scale in rural areas, mainly to save money on natural gas (which is also basically just methane) and its related distribution infrastructure; I haven't heard of any successful projects to harvest biogas on the large scales required to really cut down agricultural and landfill emissions. The main challenge seems to be purification, as biogas has all kinds of nasty contaminants that are bad for people and machinery.
I'm not sure I follow this line of thinking. The price is what it is, and everyone knows what it is. How can I feel sorry for folks that live there and just shrug and say "can't afford it". It's one of the most expensive cities on Earth. There is so much land in the US, so many cities with reasonable cost of living, etc etc. It feels like instead of doing the logical thing, we're building some class of caviar homeless. We can't just dictate that because people want to live there, we must provide them cheap or free housing in popular coastal cities.

Though the above does touch on what I think is really missing - a social safety net. I can see how high cost of living could lead to homelessness when you're trying to cling on after losing a job and can't find something to replace it right away. I fully believe we should help such folks, give them a safety net, just -not- in SF. There's tons of inland cities that are begging for people, let's solve two things at once. After they are back on their feet, if they want to move back - so be it.