skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This PR is not merged. The first release candidate for 19.07 has already shipped. Can someone confirm that this will actually ship with 19.07?
> I'm not aware of Go programs that are particularly efficient.

Go occupies the same niche as Python, Ruby and JavaScript (server-side business logic). Compared to programs in those languages, Go programs are insanely efficient.
Harvard Chan School, Apple, and NIH Launch Women’s Health Study
Then you effectively submitted a blank page, congratulations.

As a non-religious example:

Q: Here are two functions describing supply and demand, where do they intersect?

A: A short essay on capitalism.

Yeah, you are not getting partial credit for that.
> I had to walk away in shame.

No, you'd have walked away in shame if you had walked away in handcuffs. Don't do stupid stuff. Imnsho you got lucky that disk filled up before you could notch up a(nother?) crime.
As I interpret it, it says if you get a scientific question wrong, but "believe" it's actually right, they will be given a correct answer.

They doesn't seem good to me. Are we reverting to a time where science was scoffed? Where people believed the Earth is the center of the universe? Because it seems like this is how it happens.
Wow, that really nice!!
But is it SPEM™[1] compliant? /s

[1] https://www.omg.org/spec/SPEM/2.0
Vegan Cheese Waits for Its Big Moment
Blink: Eye Care Through TrueDepth
These complexities are why Lightning Network adoption is failing.

Nano fixes this, superbly, securely, instantly, simply.
Blink is an iOS app that cares for your eyes.
It's a daily eyesight trainer with a number of effective exercises that helps your eyes to relief tense and strengthen eyesight.
Blink uses eye tracking to guide your exercise technique.
An adapter is $4 and is reusable when you trash the device or the cable breaks. How many devices do you have?
What's the correct answer?
Everything is a bardo[0]. I learned that from The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying. I tested out the theory and it's the truest thing I ever heard. A bardo basically means 'in between'. We are forever in between something, never having truly finished it, including life itself. It's just one long infinite attempt to get to the next phase, and then once we are in the new phase, we are striving for another phase. For some this is Samsara, or the hedonic treadmill, for others it's a great relief knowing everything is essentially unfinished.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bardo
Oxidized Tectonic – LaTeX Engine in Pure Rust
On a separate note: I don't think that what I described above should be referred to as a point on "elegance". Because "elegance" suggests that it's about aesthetics. And regarding aesthetic considerations it is usually the case that people can reasonably disagree about them, and that there is no objective argument that can be made either way. But the arguments I made above about how a bad codebase quality can wreak serious havoc with a company's/team's ability to execute on their mission is something that goes far beyond a failure in elegance. It's a liability. And when I say "liability" then I don't mean in any abstract sense, but in the sense as any financial accountant would understand the term.
Also the 'less than $500' is misleading at best. I would understand not factoring in time if it was built in a weekend, but it was two guys for 8 months.
Facebook Clone with a Market
onlyones.net

The site is for Discussions and posting about everything from cybersecurity tech, important life issues, and alot more.

There will also be a Tor link soon, we aim for people who wants total free speech also on the internet, users Who got interest in deep web, tor, tech, hacking, cybersecurity etc..

Anyone who stands out, this will be the place for you

We stand for Total Security & Freedom, there will be no logging of IP adresses or any information that will reveal anyone’s identity.

Total freedom also on the internet
Except the shitty part ofc ️
$4 for an adapter.
To me it seems quite cheap. I paid 150€ for my current huawei with all sorts of the usual spyware installed (from google huawei, facebook) that I can't really get rid of. Paying a smilar price for a phone that I can fully control seems a great deal
Technology and Policymakers
Jetbrains IDEs have those too
Yes, 60 days and the '20 are upon us :)
However a router is energy sensitive as it runs 24/7. I wouldn't want to run a desktop for this.
I've been consuming my YouTube videos via RSS and youtube-dl these days. I have a little python script that collects the video urls from the feed, downloads them, and then NewsBlur notifies me of the new videos.

NewsBlur has become the way I find new academic papers (arXiv/journal RSS feeds), consume the news, webcomics, and YouTube videos.
Slight variation:

import itertools

def below(n):
return slice(n+1, None)

def above(n):
return slice(None, n)

print([
q for q in itertools.product((True, False), repeat=6)
if q == tuple(
f(i) for i, f in enumerate([
lambda n: all(q[below(n)]), # 1. All of the below.
lambda n: not any(q[below(n)]), # 2. None of the below.
lambda n: all(q[above(n)]), # 3. All of the above.
lambda n: any(q[above(n)]), # 4. One of the above.
lambda n: not any(q[above(n)]), # 5. None of the above.
lambda n: not any(q[above(n)]), # 6. None of the above.
])
)
])
2020 is the successor of "the new millennium", and is now succeeded by 2035 and 2050. For some reason we affix all kinds of goals across society to a handful of years. It's really strange and makes those years sound like the far future even when they are already in the past.
Point of feedback: this assumption does not hold.
The basic ideas, sure, but not the specifics. The ideas as I see them are:

- keep functions simple and single purpose, which makes them easy to understand quicky
- avoid long lines of code since they don't fit uniformly on one screen
- make functions as testable as is reasonable

Whenever you introduce hard rules, you get weird workarounds for cases that don't fit nicely. Dogma is always bad, concepts are immortal.

So yeah, if this helps teach a concept, use it, but don't force everything to adhere to a strict code style.
Tari labs blockchain tech curriculum
Copyright infringement is not stealing. It's as much stealing as it's sharing.
Snakemake, CWL, WDL, Nextflow are used in bioinformatics workflows.

Just plain old bash seems to work just fine, though.
It is simple and gives you a lot of portability to HPC clusters and general purpose cloud. Not hardwiring to a configuration file and not using an, in practice, un-portable workflow language saves you a lot of pain.

A truly portable cloud/hpc module for python would be a good solution.
I was going to comment the same thing. On the NixOS About Page[0], the first main section is "Declarative system configuration model"

[0] https://nixos.org/nixos/about.html
porn and VPN (to allow unfiltered internet) is charged extra though!
No... not even close.

If interested why, there’s lots of reference material:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1416594795/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_.F...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
The assertion, which I believed was implied, is that the habit of creating many sub functions will make it more difficult to trace a bug.

Imagine having a function with 5 sub functions, and since this is your style, those functions have 5 internal functions.

If I want to trace an error, first I have to find it in the main function, then the sub function, and maybe even within its sub functions. Then I have to deal with several different scopes as well.

I don’t mind this if a function is a useful abstraction, that is it does something well and is used repeatedly. My gripe is with functions that are written just for the sake of writing functions.
The question implies there is one correct answer.

Do you agree it can be rephrased as "Which answers in this list are the correct answers to this question?", so as to make it more difficult, while keeping the same answer?
It depends of how much control I have over the topic. If:

- I know the topic well.
- I understand the domain well.
- I can picture the technology, expectations and API well.
- I have the mastery of my time and deadline.

Then yes, I do.

E.G: I'm currently making a proposal for a new API in an open source python lib called iohttp.

I have time. I have leeway. I have a good overview of the entire problem. So I can afford thinking about the API first:

https://github.com/aio-libs/aiohttp/issues/4346

Then I will write unit tests. Then I will write the code.

But that's a rare case.

Many times coding involves fiddling, trying things out, writing drafts and snippets until something seems to start to solve what you want.

Other times, you want a quick and dirty script or you have a big system, but you are ok with it to fail from time to time. The cost of testing is then not worth it. You'll be surprised of how well a company can be, and how satisfied customers says they are despite the website showing a 500 once in a while.

And you course, you have limited resources and deadlines. Unit tests are an upfront payment, and you may not be able to afford it. Like it's often the case, this means the total cost of the project will likely be higher, but the initial cost will be in your range of price. And you may very well need that.

One additional things few people talk about is how organizations can make that hard for you. You may be working in orgs where the tooling you need (CI, version system, specific testing lib...) may be refused to you. You may even be working in companies where you cannot get clear information about the domain, but get a vague specs, and the only way to design the software is to ship, see it break, and wait for customers to report to you because otherwise the marketing people don't let you talk to them. I'd say change job, but it's not the point.

At last, you have the problem of the less experienced devs. TDD is hard. It requires years of practice in the field to be done properly because you build a system in a completely abstract way. Dependency injection, inversion of control, mocking and all that stuff you need to make a properly testable system is not intuitive: you learn it on the way. Even harder is the fact you have to use it in your head since your are not coding it, but what wraps it, first. And even more terrible is the fact that baldly implemented, over used and over engineered, design patterns make problem worst, not better.
English is the most widely-spoken language in the world (although not the most common first language) and is the lingua franca of the Internet. While language mistakes shouldn't be seen as evidence of technical issues, it should be common practice to ask a skilled native English speaker to review a group's public statements and marketing materials.
Hmm, I don't think I have experience with such hail. In my experience, the bigger they are and the harder they hit, the more vertical their trajectory. But my area isn't particularly prone to hailstorms.
> we have a good, liberal, secular bill

Wow.
Here is that exact documentary you were thinking of [0]. It's really a fantastic documentary on the incredible feats of von Neumann and worth a watch by everyone here.

That person you quoted was Edward Teller and the interview can be found at 54:58 [1].

I read somewhere that the young boy asking von Neumann a question at 6:13 [2] is actually Bill Clinton. Can anyone verify this?

[0] https://youtu.be/Y2jiQXI6nrE

[1] https://youtu.be/Y2jiQXI6nrE?t=3299

[2] https://youtu.be/Y2jiQXI6nrE?t=371
No need to downvote, this is just a fact.
Yes, Crystal is pretty cool. Though I have found that it is hard to compile for different platforms. If you need speed and concurrency, giving jruby a shot is worth a try. It speeds up your code through both being fast and having 'real' concurrency.
Yes, most of the time for the non-exploratory code that is not deeply ingrained with external framework.

When starting a new module / class I put a skeleton first, to establish an initial interface. Then I change it as I find, while writing tests, how it can be improved.

When dealing with bugs - red / green is incredibly helpful with pinpointing the conditions and pointing exactly where the fault lies.

When introducing new functionality I do most of the development as tests. Only double checking if it integrates once before committing.

Going test first pushes your code towards statelessness and immutability, nudging towards small, static blocks. As most of my work is with data, I find it to be a considerable advantage.

It provides little advantage if you already rely heavily on a well established framework that you need to hook to (e.g. testing if your repos provide right data in Spring or if Spark MRs your data correctly).

I tend to change/refactor a lot to minimise the maintenance effort in the long run. I would spend most of the time testing by hand after each iteration if not for the suite I could trust at least to some extent.
It's not about the surprise factor, it's that there's a good chance you fail to process that you're being manipulated.
> efficient development

I think the rationale for that is twofold: that as a static typed language that prefers stack allocation, you can get some very good performance without putting much effort into it, and that it's usually clear what the idiomatic way to accomplish something is. On the latter point, I appreciate golang's simplicity when I need to review other people's code or dig into third party libraries.

For the record, I agree with most of what you're saying. I also don't find it elegant, and most developers I know are eager to work in a different language after spending any amount of time in golang. Its benefits come at the expense of expressiveness, and I never thought I'd be doing things like code gen to work around a lack of generics in 2019.
WTF? Venting might be arguably beneficial in some cases, but in many companies employees don't get to vent in a meeting.

Rather, they have to endure demands, complaints and display of status from management - which is the opposite of therapy.

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

One of the reasons of pointless meeting is to keep busy and appear busy - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs
Very useful - no ads and I can run it in background audio only on my iPhone just using the webapp.
Thanks for posting this, because I'm a Python n00b and I had no idea what this line was doing:

itertools.product((True, False), repeat=6)

The site made it easy for me to spend 30 seconds figuring it out. My interpretation is that that line generates what I'll call a truth table (not sure if that's what it formally is) then brute force searches for rows that satisfy all of the listed constraints.

I'd also hazard that the fact that there's only one answer is engineered into the question and not a natural product of this search.
Kind of. For a lot of my work I first elicit the bad behavior, then fix the code to no longer be broken, then write a test that automates what I did manually initially. The manual stage is the first step in writing the test.
I love that someone wrote a script to try and solve this problem.
Gates Derangement Syndrome
I'm reminded of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Richard_Montgomery : 1,400 tonnes of explosives sunk in the Thames estuary. At least it's safeish as long as nobody touches it. The couple of nuclear reactors in subs that have already sunk are I believe in deep distant water, losing one inshore would be a serious problem.
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
"The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer."
I find this interesting. Your point would align with the thread a while ago about the giant kubernetes function (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18772873).

I have a theory that SRP is the driver behind a lot of this, and that the way it's commonly understood is incorrect (in part because the idea itself is somewhat ambiguous and possibly incoherent). I'll try to go into more detail in a blog post.
Not really. Everything, except maybe the physical-chemistry reactions, is there due solely to evolution. No evolution, no molecules. To translate (very poorly and grossly) to math, it's like all operations are evolution, only the numbers aren't.
Show HN: Remote Weekly – Insightful Content and Product Updates on Remote Work
I think we are now seeing that the attitude of Google in the way they treat Chrome users is seriously worrying. There are now a litany if issues - from adversely affecting ad blockers, linking Google sync to logons to Gmail and to now rolling out “experiments” unannounced... surely by now it is time to seriously consider Firefox?

Of course, Mozilla needs to make sure they never enable extensions like the way they did for the Mr Robot one many years ago...
And switches ...

> Privacy Switches: LTE (include GPS), Wifi/BT, Mic, and Camera
Compared to any other service or product mentioned on this site.
Your interpretation makes the portion in question purely symbolic, since you interpret it's requirements to be exactly the requirements already imposed by the First Amendment.

However, in interpreting a law or portion of a law, courts tend to assume that drafters did not intend to adopt a nullity, and will tend, if interpretations are otherwise equally plausible, to interpret the law so that each provisions has substantive effect.
A less clever solution, using the wonderful z3

import z3
answers = [z3.Bool(f"answer{i}") for i in range(1,7)]
implications = [
z3.And(answers[1:]), # All of the below
z3.Not(z3.Or(answers[2:])), # None of the below
z3.And(answers[:2]), # All of the above
z3.Or(answers[:3]), # Any of the above
z3.Not(z3.Or(answers[:4])), # None of the above
z3.Not(z3.Or(answers[:5]))] # None of the above
constraints = [z3.Implies(ans, impl) for ans,impl in zip(answers, implications)]
z3.solve(constraints)
It's a Lenovo ThinkPad T450, I would assume it's an "enterprise" laptop.

I'll give it a look, thanks.
Sourcehut's Year in Alpha
That's fair ... but I assume you wouldn't have any problem with acknowledging that not everyone is going to place this same constraint on themselves yeah?
I'm always amazed by how well MLMs inoculate their sellers to criticism. Questioning the merits of the product or the distribution system usually results in conflict. A lot of people selling these things think they've discovered something special and that they're clever to have picked it up and run with it. Once they're at that point there is no stopping ego.
How will this website not be killed by Google lawyers at any moment?
Five “pillars” for securing a cloud environment of agile working teams
This would be a much better option: https://www.meshcommander.com/meshcommander

It works if the computer is fully vPro compliant. There are castrated versions of vPro for small businesses that lack the KVM feature. It’s all free and you just need to do the initial provisioning in the MEBx (post UEFI).

Again, having the ME in the CPU is not enough. The chipset, NIC, and BIOS/UEFI support matter.
Ohio's unemployment rate is 25% above the national average, but not particularly shocking at 4.1%. It also has a GDP per capita higher than Florida and Vermont. Ohio is 16th out of 50 states for weekly church attendance.
It's a weird quirk of the brain how easy it is to wait until the food hardens onto the cooking utensils before cleaning it (sometimes needing a hammer and chisel to remove it) rather than just rinsing it off immediately with water. Yet, despite knowing this, picking the former route every damn time anyways.

If you're like this, try putting on some small bluetooth headphones. Now cleaning the dishes just becomes a way to keep yourself busy while listening to an interesting podcast.
Since there are multiple competing fibre companies, won't nationalising one company and offering "the fastest fibre free to all" bankrupt all of the other companies?
I do sometimes. It depends. I want to do more of it.

Here are cases where I've genuinely found it valuable and enjoyable to write tests ahead of time:

Some things are difficult to test. I've had things that involve a ton of setup, or a configuration with an external system. With tests you can automate that setup and run through a scenario. You can mock external systems. This gives you a way of setting up a scaffold into which your implementation will fall.

Things that involve time are also great for setting up test cases. Imagine some functionality where you do something, and need 3 weeks to pass before something else happens. Testing that by hand is effectively impossible. With test tools, you can fake the passing of time and have confirmation that your code is working well.

Think about when you are writing some functionality that requires some involved logic, and UIs. It makes sense to implement the logic first. But how do you even invoke it without a UI? Write a test case! You can debug it through test runs without needing to invest time in writing a UI.

Bugs! Something esoteric breaks. I often write a test case named test_this_and_that__jira2987 where 2987 is the ticket number where the issue came up. I write up a test case replicating the bug in with only essential conditions. Fixing it is a lot more enjoyable than trying to walk through the replication script by hand. Additionally, it results in a good regression test that makes sure my team does not reintroduce the bug again.
including suspicious non-disclosure of the actual "why"...
I love that this got flagged! Well done HN.

The anti evolution crowd really got their pants in a tizzy trying to downvote everyone and turn this into an evolution debate.

The fact this stuff doesn’t get flagged on other social media platforms is part of the problem with society right now.

Companies need to start doing the right thing rather than follow the ad dollars and claim it’s all in the name of free speech.
-Wouldn't making them inflatable solve much of that problem?

You could even offer a deluxe version with a CO2 cartridge.
> Did you, dear sysadmin, pay anything for Google Chrome? No? Are you in any contractual relation to Google that covers your use of Chrome?

The idea that because you did not pay anything for a product translates into 'you have no rights' really is getting old. Even if you don't pay you have plenty of rights and the provider of the software should not - and in many places can not - walk away claiming that because you did not pay you have no rights. It may not be the rights that you want, and it may very well be that certain behavior even if you don't like it is allowed but it just simply isn't true that you have no rights.

And that contractual bit runs both ways: companies have tried to argue time and again that free users of websites and software products were bound by EULAs, that means you can't now turn around and suddenly claim that there is no contractual relationship. Yes, there is no paper contract. But you are in a relationship and if Google or any other provider claims that they have rights by the definition of the word 'consideration' so do you.
There's some truth to this, but holy smokes, another meeting is not the cure.

There is value in "venting" at work. A few years ago I built a software tool that pings people at the end of the week asking how their week went. Some of the quietest people in the company had the most to say when they were behind a screen. In fact, some people literally called it therapeutic. It turns out that writing things down can serve as a form of "therapy" (source: https://positivepsychology.com/writing-therapy/)

If you lead a team, I'd strongly recommend you have a feedback mechanism like this in place, but a meeting is not the right medium. It's just a place for the extroverts to complain.

If you do hold a meeting for this stuff, a 1-1 is probably the best way to surface a similar level of information.
Snapchat Founder’s Sister Launches Audio Erotica Site