skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That HBR article is poorly written and doesn’t support your comment. An example of poor quality - it mentions taller men are more likely to be CEOs, which implies causality but it offers no data or statistical analysis to support such a claim. A simple correlation may warrant investigation into causality but isn’t causal itself. Additionally that entire article is about CEOs and not “the rich”, which are two different categories. The CEO of a well-funded startup isn’t necessarily rich, for example.

Most wealthy people I’ve met may have had occasional luck but they’ve also had bad luck. But they are smarter, work harder (more intensely and longer hours), and put themselves in positions to encounter luck/opportunity with high frequency. By and large I’ve observed it to be a result of their innate traits and active decision making.

This recent cultural obsession with claiming that merit isn’t real and that meritocracies are a myth is itself a feel-good myth with little basis in reality. Every piece I’ve read with such claims either rests on dubious statistics or pontificates endlessly to ultimately state personal opinion.
Support Sponsorable Go Packages
iOS also has a call blocking and identification interface apps can hook into. I haven't found a good spam call blocker app though.
Where would you place saying nothing in your hierarchy.

I think that saying nothing is better than being right and mean, because being right and mean is usually counter productive and reinforces the wong belief.

Humans are simply wired to use aggression as overriding evidence of the person being wrong. If your goal is to change minds, it just doesn't work.
Let's give Facebook full control over worlds communication? And allow them to cut people off from communicating with anyone? I don't think it's great idea.

We really need federated communicator.
Wow did you _have to_ get his mother involved?
I have build and managed several voice systems witch all could easily be transformed to robocall machines. The biggest money makers on all those services, incoming and outgoing calls has always been the telcos.
This.

Basically it's the only solid option (imo) that I've seen can help smokers easily quit. I was a smoker for ~10 years and have quit because vaping helped me control and phase out the habit. Marlboro bought juul to kill it, and taint vaping reputation along with, or at least to regulate the F out of it so that only they can continue and kill indie competition.
...or Matrix, or XMPP, which are decentralized and where attaching your phone number to account is optional.
What Is Kubernetes? The Epic Explainer
I want to live in the alternate universe where Borges and Umberto Eco are still alive and use this phenomenon as inspiration.
Eh, the upstream comment used bogus incendiary flamebait as an "example" so yes, people are going to reply to it. They might as well have gone with "the earth is flat". It's a show-stopper that challenges the veracity of the rest of their post. They aren't being "right but rude" when they are wrong about such a basic statement.

For example, B12 is in meat because animals are supplemented with it, like cobalt added to their feed. Humans can supplement directly.

It's like thinking you have to drink vitamin D fortified milk or iodine fortified salt to get vitamin D and iodine, and then asserting people who don't consume either must be unhealthy.
Tech companies not the only ones looking the other way.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/pyro9_SW_QY/
How and why did "news aggregators" become more popular than regular forums?

Probably because you could talk about any topic. There is a low barrier for entry (easy signup). Mods take a more hands off approach. And users kinda moderate each other with upvotes/downvotes.
I use this too, and it's worth the trade off for me too.

I just wish that apps or services that might call you (Uber, your cell carrier etc) could/would use the iOS call identification API to allow known calls through.
Gaussian process is marvelous. Demos like https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2012/06/19/slick-time... just seem magical.
I was not being sarcastic whatsoever. I know two people who have changed their name because they didn't like the name they were born with. My suggestion is 100% dead serious.
Margarita Salas Has Died
Margarita Salas, a relevant scientist woman died 2019-Nov-07 at 80 yo.

She changed criminology, forensics, archeology and oncology forever with her invention of the Multiple Displacement Amplification (MDA) technique to amplify DNA present on any sample, even if present in tiny amounts, leading to recover longer chains than PCR technique and with less errors. Both MDA and PCR techniques have pros and cons and coexisted perfectly leading to a new age of criminology studies.

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

PCR was developped by the US biochemist Kary Mullis, that also died in 2019 exactly three months before Salas, at 74 yo

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

Salas Worked in New York University with Severo Ochoa and in several Spanish scientific institutions. She published more than 300 scientific articles and supervised around 28 PhD Thesis in the fields of biochemistry and molecular biology.

She was the first Spanish woman to become a member of the National Academy of Science in United States.
This doesn't appear to be universal then, because I've been told by Telcos in the UK and France that they will not block calls even when the presented number is impossible.

It was made clear that any call that was made to one of my numbers would be delivered irrespective of any faulty components visible to me in the SIP header.
Hack supports async in a way that's production ready: https://docs.hhvm.com/hack/asynchronous-operations/some-basi...

The built in webserver, Proxygen, is also usable in production and supports TLS, http/2, etc.
Choose Your Future
Airplane, Flying Across Africa in a Homebrew Airplane
GV's block of phone numbers is probably considered low-value targets. Scammers get more value by talking to customers from big telcos. It's the whole "you don't have to outrun the bear, just your friend" kind of thing.
This is what I meant by a "C layer". No matter how you slice it, you have to "dumb down" communication to the C level and generate C headers. Then you either work with opaque types, or have to generate extra translation and/or wrapper types for classes, closures, etc. Both languages treat C as "unsafe", so it also makes memory safety trickier than if they could use their native safe APIs.
I wonder how the young adults who've grown up with this cope. If you're a standard issue 25 year old, Instagram and FB has probably been with you your whole life (the part where you meet people other than family), with likes and hearts replacing your feeling of self-worth...
> If you choose one of the more generic ones, now it takes more mental steps to collapse the indirection when reading it. (1. I have a Maybe Int. 2. This function expects an `s`. 3. `s` is constrained by `Semigroup s`. 4. Can I pass a Maybe Int to something expecting a Semigroup?

Semigroup doesn't involve higher kinds at all. What you seem to be discussing is either type classes or just a pile of junk from abstract algebra. Fwiw, Elm has semigroup too -- it's called appendable (which is a much much better name...).

> Learning curve is a very high cost by itself; HKP is the reason Haskell is notoriously difficult to learn.

I don't think any one feature of Haskell is why it's hard to learn. I think the reasons are much more mundane, the main ones being:

1. The language is just enormous. It's a lot to need to have in your head to understand some bit of code you come across. Folks end up picking a (small) subset of it just to stay sane, but this doesn't help you when trying to come across a new library; you basically need to have most of the language in your mind somewhere to understand $RANDOM_NEW_LIBRARY reliably. And because it's an issue of sheer size, there's no short-cutting it. It has a lot of features with heavy overlap in use cases, so you spend a lot of time thinking about silly things like "Should I use FunctionalDependencies or TypeFamilies?" "I'm writing a library that needs to generate a bunch of boilerplate code, should I use GHC.Generics, TemplateHaskell, or something else?".

2. The community is really lousy about pedagogy. They tend to lead with the abstraction, which is just not how people learn. I really wish this[1] had been written like a year earlier; it would have saved me a lot of trouble wading through useless instructional material trying to learn this stuff. It doesn't seem like the bulk of the community took that to heart though, and while there are some good learning resources out there, there's a sea of worse-than-useless ones.

3. There's a culture of complexity/over-engineering. I don't think this is unavoidable, but it's particularly a hazard of being research language where to a large extent the whole point is to play with crazy ideas. The maintainers still see the language as primarily a platform for experimentation, so KISS can be a hard thing to push for.

> and it seems like it must be pretty steep if you stack up languages with HKP and their quality of error messages and docs against other typed languages that don't.

I'm not really sure I buy this; I think the list of languages that have these things and have seriously made good error messages a priority is pretty short (empty?). I can point to some simpler ML dialects that still have some really lousy error messages.

[1]: https://byorgey.wordpress.com/2009/01/12/abstraction-intuiti...
Perfect Select All Checkbox in 3 Lines of Aurelia Code
You should expand this to blog post size and publish the hell out of it. Few people know this as the gp alludes to.
I used k3sup last week to setup a 5 node RPi3 cluster. Thanks for the nice tool! Worked like a charm! I wanted to write a tutorial on what’s needed for a proper setup, since I am using buster and arm64v8, but not time.
Form of the Dragon begs to differ... /s
And this process is a kangaroo court, to all appearances, until they show the evidence by which they made their judgment.
Sometimes they show up spoofed to a local area code. Sometimes they show up as from the 800 area code, which is not specific to any geographical region in the United States and is also used by legitimate call centers. My bank's customer service number is an 800 number, for example.

I don't know if easily spoofable phone numbers are unique to the US. But even if they are not, international scam-calling operations are going to predominantly target English speakers since English offers lower language-understanding barriers and a lot of high income potential victims.
Ask HN: Any mainstream messenger that is reliable and treats us as adults?
This would deserve a long rant, because this has been bothering me for quite some time, but now I just want to ask for recommendations, as Facebook Messenger just stopped delivering messages in one of my conversations.

Is there any among the popular instant messenger platforms that is:

1. reliable, that is I can trust it to deliver messages (I can’t believe I have to start with this one),

2. has a _permanent_ log of all messages, photos, and files sent, i. e. it does not allow others to delete either their or my messages, and does not allow to send messages that automatically disappear after some time, and allows me to transfer these logs to my desktop in a non-proprietary format,

3. and does not share things with others I don’t expect it to share, like my location, if I made a screenshot, etc. (online status and read receipts I have basically given up on).

Thanks an advance.
Would like a source for this.
As a person with one name and a programming background, I've always put my actual name in the last name field, assuming that that would usually be the most significant sorting field.
If you give marketers access to your account, and your account can see like counts, they'll still be able to measure the effectiveness.

This friction isn't probably worth it for a small-time influencer, but for the bigger players, the marketers will still spare the pain.

The ultimate impact is more advertising dollars collecting for bigger influencers, and smaller ones losing market share.
Following up on this, here's some math.

As you may know, Lake Mead (the reservoir for the Hoover Dam) is currently running very low owing to various water shortage issues. If you've flown into Las Vegas recently this is very obvious. It's currently at only about 40% of its capacity, which is a shortage of about 210^13 L. The Hoover Dam's hydraulic head is 180m at peak height, but let's call it an average of 160m for our purposes below. Using the equations here: https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/hydropower-d_1359.html

For the total amount of energy available if we were to use solar to pump the reservoir up to full during each day and then generate power at night:

PE = (1 kg/L) (210^13 L) (9.81 m/s^2) * (160m) = 3.14 * 10^16 J = 8.72 * 10^12 watt-hours (this should be knocked down a little bit for efficiency losses; cursory Googling shows that turbines are roughly 90% efficient at turning PE into electricity). Contrast this figure with the annual total electrical usage of the entire US of 4 * 10^15 watt-hours. Divide by 365 and you get 1.1 * 10^13 watt-hours.

So, if you fully pumped just Lake Mead up to its full capacity and then ran it back down its current level each day, you could store most of the energy used by the entire country in a day. Just in that one reservoir. Obviously you'd need to add a lot more pumps and turbines to do so, like orders of magnitude more, but the point is that you wouldn't actually need any additional land to do so. If you're willing to fill up and then empty Lake Mead each day, you can easily do more than the power requirement of the entire country.

So anyway, that's a long way of saying, yes, pumped storage is entirely realistic. Add in all the additional extra capacity in other existing reservoirs across the US and you can easily store many days' worth of power in reserve, just using pumped water.
I'm saying that balance isn't important.

Science progresses by refinement of mathematical models, by crafting of narratives, by thought experiments, and by the simplifying and compressing actions of institutionalization and education.

It's irritating to be accused of not reading. Sabine's not exactly easy reading, but let's start at the top:

> In the foundations of physics, we have not seen progress since the mid 1970s when the standard model of particle physics was completed. Ever since then, the theories we use to describe observations have remained unchanged. Sure, some aspects of these theories have only been experimentally confirmed later. The last to-be-confirmed particle was the Higgs-boson, predicted in the 1960s, measured in 2012.

Oh, and why did it take half a century to confirm the Higgs? What is glossed over is that the confirmation of the Standard Model required particle accelerators, either ones we built or ones we improvised using Sol as a radiation source. We theorized, we imagined, and then we experimented and confirmed. Along the way, we discovered multiple different supporting reasons why things are the way that they are, and demolished various optimistic hopes that the answers to our questions would be simple.

To zoom out, Sabine has been slowly building up a campaign of doubting gravitational-wave observation technology. I feel like her position is that any big-science expenditure is a poor use of public funds, and that she is willing to work backwards from those conclusions.

Protip: When somebody argues against a specific thing that people are doing, but otherwise argues for the status quo, to "continue all that has worked" but "discard [a] new approach that hasn't", they are really arguing for exclusion of that specific thing. Okay, fine, but why and to what end? I feel sometimes like this is an argument that particle accelerators are a waste of public funds. (See also: top of thread.)

Y'know, you are the only person saying that I'm agreeing with you and Sabine, and then you gripe that I'm somehow saying nothing. I feel that I'm directly addressing your attempts at communication. You aren't going to make progress by accusing me of failing to commit to a position when I've been pretty open about my position from the start and when your position is framed in opposition to the thread-starting comment.
> That makes them faster than road travel

Not in Germany.
Clicky: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_displacement_amplific...
Okay. Can you please share the link and hopefully some example timestamps of this?
Here's an explanation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVviNyIR-fI

It's basically fitting on non-linear transformations of x.
Looking forward to all the contortions people will suggest so that we can do literally anything except not ban cars on crowded marathon days, which is the obvious and easiest solution.
This is entirely goal specific.
Your position is fine when you don't need to build consensus.
My former boss had us use Debian stable in production for this reason. He did not like apt-get related surprises.
Check out 'Auto op dak' if you like this, it is hilarious.
> That last sentence in your post is an incorrect assumption and isn't true.

I believe you have misread that last sentence as I didn't make any sort of assumption.

> Also wearing a hat is not the same as speech.

I never said that, but wearing an iconic hat created, used, and sold by a person who said what I previously quoted can obviously be interpreted as supporting such speech. This however, as I have already said, is not my personal view.

Could you clarify what "crazy associations" I made?
At least in NL the privacy authority (under GDPR) and courts (under former law) afaik have ruled a license plate is not personal information. Filming in public is legal. Insurance contracts are two party contracts where there is basically freedom to accept or not. Also no specific rules on actuarial factor, outside of 'illegal discrimination' (all pricing is discrimination). So all those flags are still green in my book. (I work in insurance.)

Thing is, doing this will get you in a shit storm so that might be the simple reason no insurtech has tried it yet. Perhaps some smaller insurers are doing it and keeping their mouth shut. No problem if nobody knows where the license plates on the exclusion list are based upon.
This can be solved with keys
In a previous job, I wrote an autotrader which by now I believe will have handled hundreds of millions of pounds in untyped Python 2. Certainly tens of millions.

There were a number of approaches I used. This is a few years back now, so apologies if anything is unclear.

You can fake a type system to some extent in py2 by using methods and copious 'isinstance' checking.

For example, Money<EUR> + Money<GBP> can be made illegal by overloading addition operators. Strings which require some sort of meaning can be given classes and functions which use them can use isinstance and friends to perform runtime type checks.

Another is indeed the use of 'raw_whatever' and 'whatever' in identifiers, what I now know to be "apps hungarian" notation. 'raw_whatever' would have a similar definition to Joel's unsafe user input. It might come from an API of some sorts that you don't truly "trust".

Similarly, that sort of variable naming approach applied to function parameters. Passing a 'dog_id' to a 'cat_id' function _may_, in certain cases, be possible if both were flat strings (and not objects that could be isinstance checked), but I favoured a variable naming approach (along with calling functions by keyword argument) that would result in this at least being visible after problems came up (e.g. you'd see myfn(dog_id=cat_id) and feel an urge to hold your nose).

There were tons of these sorts of things all over the codebase, tests, etc, and the system outperformed the previous ones by a significant margin. My understanding is that it still hasn't suffered any significant losses; only some minor API issues that were outside of our control.

Super fun project. Nowadays I'd just use a typed language for it and interface with the py2 stuff via an API. Or at least make use of mypy. But that autotrader was what the company needed at the time.

Details are in my bio if anyone has further interest.
Yeah, but when the call is originating from outside the US? Why would that be allowed?
True, but you don't need a marathon to tell you that. Just go anywhere downtown at rush hour on a weekday. Every 5 minutes, some driver will enter the box before it's clear, and block the intersection both ways for everybody.

A couple months ago, a package truck crashed on the freeway a mile ahead of me, and traffic didn't move for over 3 hours. Our roads are not designed with redundancy as a primary concern.
I'd say I get an equal number of robo-calls to my cell phone number, and my Google Voice number which forwards to it. Might have something to do with the area code.
> I predict in the future there will be some tech startup that will go all in on the Swift ecosystem and be able to run circles around the competition.

Personally I'm really interested with what's going in with Swift in the math/science space. The work that's going on with Automatic Differentiation is fascinating, and the Numeric library which has just been released should make it much easier to achieve highly accurate numerical results in Swift.

I agree with you that Swift's public perception is out of step with the reality of the language. It certainly has issues, and when comparing the developer experience with something like Rust, it falls way short on things like tooling, and platform support, but it's just so easy to be productive in Swift I keep coming back to it.
Going Soft: Taking (un)design cues from nature
This reply right here is what I'm talking about. I simply don't care about veganism, I do care about the grandparent's points concerning insecurity.

Stop telling me about veganism, it's irrelevant. Stop writing irrelevant stuff, just stop it.

Edit: To clarify, before a stealth edit, hombre_fatal's first paragraph used to consist entirely of "Eh, the upstream comment used bogus incendiary flamebait as an "example" so yes, people are going to reply to it.". At least now he's added some more substance.
Did people forget the most recent case of this? "Disney bans Netflix ads from all of its TV channels except ESPN". [0]

Disney banned Netflix ads on its streaming service. How is that not the same thing? The monopoly argument crumbles when you realise how big Disney is compared to Netflix.

[0] https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/disney-to-ban-netflix-ads-fr...
Ireland didn't get rid of it, they restricted it and it remains very generous compared to just about everywhere else. One parent an Irish or British citizen, or with right to residence in either Ireland or Northern Ireland - there may well be other categories acceptable. They retain the island of Ireland extra-territorial limit too.

This, along with the grandparent clause, has the probably unintended consequence that something astonishing like a sixth or eighth of the UK is eligible for Irish citizenship.
Do you think your jewish, black or lgbt peers, for example, would answer the same? Would they also be comfortable with your "resorting to hyperboles to make a point"?
Especially when they are completely ignoring the fact that what works for Google usually works for Google because they have achieved a certain scale, not that Google achieved that scale by adopting these methods.
I wouldn't make the trade in that direction.
US military tested airships extensively. They proved to have considerable advantages in certain naval operation roles. It all ended with the airship aircraft carriers (you read that right) crashing in separate accidents. They turned out to be extremely difficult to control (not crash) in extreme weather.