skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I have so many war stories there's not enough space on HN to contain them. I'll just state my overall experience. I write elegant well designed code, but generally speaking you won't find that anywhere especially if you're working in teams. Unless the code is all written by one person who had a chance to design and implement it well solely by themselves with adequate time, it's going to be a mishmash of they just didn't have time and the pressure was on.

I'm of the mindset that if it works, it's good code regardless if it isn't. This I think is the healthiest mindset to have in any team. I will refactor things slowly to clean up issues and of course my own code is well thought out and integrated into the codebase regardless how reckless anyone else is being. Any other way of interacting with a team would be antisocial and not beneficial ultimately. The way I see it is they wouldn't be paying me if there wasn't more work to do. The most important thing is that it works and the customer is happy. Your disappointment with elegance or coverage comes second to that.

The thing that actually annoys me is when, having exceeded my own delivery deadlines and everyone else's if I provide value added like a new feature that puts us far ahead of our competition I get pushback. Management doesn't want to have to maintain it. Even though my code is really solid compared to the rest of the garbage going in there. They just see me as a plumber fixing a leaky pipe and don't want anything further. I get that there's ROI and whatnot but it still bothers me when I show them some next level shit and I'm told to mothball it. Especially when I'm the reason we're usually way ahead of schedule. </rant>
Any answer of mine that is marked incorrect will be withdrawn and the question subtracted from the overall marking grade. Due to my religious beliefs.
>I actually hate FaceID and like fingerprint unlock better so I don't really care about that. But by so far behind, you mean not caring if the eyes are open, sure they are far behind.

I guess it doesn't really matter if you prefer touch unlock, it's gone from the Pixel 4 with no signs of ever coming back. But with a really, REALLY bad implementation. Oh, someone can murder me and unlock my $1,000+ phone? Solid decision by that product manager...

>You brought up other issues with Android/Pixel but conveniently forgot to respond how iOS is crippling options itself. Don't even want to start with all browsers being wrappers of Safari.

I'm more than happy to give up a little choice in exchange for not having every aspect of my life uploaded to google's servers with a promise they won't do anything I don't like with it.
Bless.

https://media3.giphy.com/media/49zC0Bm1kbu36/source.gif
The Fastest Way to Become a Thought Leader
This may be an unpopular opnion but I actually really like billboards. I'd prefer having them around even if they advertised for nonexistent companies.
Former FDA adviser: LASIK eye surgery should be taken off market
Neither would I. However, as a counterppint:

I'm guessing that some people wouldn't want to see a doctor who believed that ultimately my life had no value.

Both belief types can affect the outcome of patient care.
The Pine team members aren't native speakers of English, so a few errors are understandable. I'm sure that if you e-mail them they'll fix em.
>it can be difficult to make a logically unassailable case that it always is more accurate

Not really. If there is some evidence that something is more accurate, than the scientific method says it is the better explanation. It can only be less accurate in matters without evidence.
The question is phrased to mislead as this is a constraint satisfaction problem over the boolean space 2^6. There may be 0, 1, or many correct answers.
>First, I badly want out of the Android ecosystem, so I going to carry a real pocket computer that runs real Linux.

Contender: https://pocket.popcorncomputer.com/
That is probably the BOX

BODY:

Dimensions: 160.5mm x 76.6mm x 9.2mm
Weight: 185 gram
Is this readable with more linebreaks?
I think real I/O and error handling will be about the same in any language. People fall in love with Haskell for other reasons:

It's very nice for some algorithms. For example, see Appendix A of this paper: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b47b/41a9b2dcf6b3ffe3ce7a04... An implementation of red-black trees in only 60 lines, including deletion, which alone can take hundreds of lines in a curly brace language.

It's also very nice for some APIs. For example, software transactional memory fits the Haskell type system very well, because it can ensure that data can't be modified outside a transaction and can be rolled back when needed. A team at Microsoft, including some well-known folks, tried to port it from Haskell to C# and failed due to the type system: https://www.infoq.com/news/2010/05/STM-Dropped/

Haskell has a bunch of non-mainstream features that work together unusually well. It enables programmers to think a certain kind of thoughts that wouldn't naturally arise in many other languages. It's like painting with oil when the rest of the world uses watercolor: in theory they can draw the same things, but in practice they'll guide your hand toward different things, so having both makes the world richer.
If it is a biology class then it is inherently an evolution class. Evolution is the central theory of biology and all of its sub-fields.
I played Football Manager 2012 for 37 seasons. How am I supposed to move on now?
I don't really disagree with you, it's just that I think it's more of the usual divide and conquer, and pander to your perceived constituency more than anything else.
I agree on your proposed best case scenario. It's mind-boggling to be honest.
It is one of those culture shock moments when you travel abroad and see everyone has the latest phones with unlimited data for like $20-$30 a month, tops. It's pretty clear we have lots of anti-competitive organizations in place that ensure profit margins remain intact and upstarts are prevented from access.
Essentially: Due to my religion I will be president.
If person A has a criminal record, it's quite possible he couldn't afford a good defense lawyer to be acquitted, and was better off taking the plea bargain than risking a worse conviction.
Something like this perhaps? http://www.wssl.com/Car_Lot_Canopy.html
LOL
Wonder what the long-term (10-20years) impacts of this will be?
Will college's be less willing to accept students from Ohio?
Perhaps resulting in more harsh economic conditions that result in bills like this and others passing in the first place. As well as a negative economic loop.
something worth looking at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Process_Execution_Lan...
I would argue that it doesn't matter. The possibility that you can do it for parts of it already renders the results useless and without value.
Apple to remove vaping apps from store
Inbox me his CV in ali dot. elouafiq at. teal dot. ma our company do have internships industry scale project, mainly related to phosphorous-tech and agri-tech
Best Full Forms Words
I bet Scientology and other cults will be just fine as well.
This clickbait headline was refuted on Reddit. The law (dispayed in the artcle!) says that students cannot be punished and cannot be rewarded for making religious statements. It says they must be tolerated, and the non-religious portion of the answer is to be judged academically.
Pointless work meetings 'really a form of therapy'
When I was in college in the 90s, they actually taught waterfall as a baseline to compare other methodologies. Agile hadn't appeared yet, but it was obvious then that waterfall's main issue was the inability to change and adapt to a changing business climate. In other words, once you worked out a 3 year dev plan, it was set in stone, even if the business or industry had changed (and needed the software to change).

The alternative was to make shorter iterations. Our professor called this "Cinnamon Bun". Instead of one big waterfall, covering the entire project, you'd break the project up into chunks, but apply the waterfall steps to each chunk. Planning, Analysis, Design, Implementation, Maintenance were the steps. Each chunk would vary, but we typically broke it up into month or two chunks. Of course you'd need planning and analysis up front to figure out the best way to divide the chunks.

When Agile/Scrum came out, its proponents compared it to the shortcomings of Waterfall, which was disingenuous because pure waterfall had been largely abandoned by at least the mid 90s, and probably sooner.

As an aside, One important step in waterfall was Maintenance. This seems missing in current methodologies as a formal step. If you write successful software, the maintenance phase is 80-90% of the softwares lifecycle. Understanding this equates to the understanding that writing maintainable code is one of the most important things a development team can do.
Keeping the general population uneducated is very beneficial for divide and conquer. It's far easier to divide stupid people who don't have any sense of critical thought.
I was wondering how they were going to do this with AI and drones...
Well, I think it's no wonder that Ohio isn't a hotbed of engineering startups.

And before you get all hot and bothered and tell me the one obscure company you know of in Ohio that is (kind of) technical ... I care just about as much as Ohio cares about science.
Norm Data Access for .NET Core 3
State of Image Metadata in News Sites – 2019 Update
This is not about defending new ideas, but about them trying to get Christianity into schools in an official capacity.
The Worst Kickstarter Projects According to 'Your Kickstarter Sucks'
Froala Editor is Looking for a JavaScript Advocate – Community and Research
When it's a product launch, I believe it's perfectly fine to criticize it.

Basic mistakes like that make it look like unreliable amateur work.

If you can't find anyone to help you proofread, pay someone. And I'm from a third world country, I know paying people might be expensive. But in the case of some basic copy like that, a $5 proofreader from Fiverr would be enough.
Yes, if people followed the law independent of the law, the law would not be needed. This holds in general.

The law is to protect students against anti-religious teachers who punish students for making religious statements.
Yep. Hooktube's been through this already.

https://hooktube.com/changelog
Next step: allow teachers to ask for scientifically wrong questions.
(like How long does it take to create a world?)
I prefer the Python rule of 79 characters tops per line, but I lean more towards 120 characters. I think helper methods (private methods) are useful, but having a bunch of methods called one after the other like you point out seems pointless. My other rule of thumb is: DRY, if I'm repeating code, it should be a helper method. Otherwise if it's a one off method, it shouldn't be broken out unless it helps me follow the flow better.
Unemployment rate is one of the government's many statistical lies. Outside of the major metros, levels of unemployment and underemployment are obviously much much higher. Even in places where jobs are plentiful, 3.6% is a thick fat lie. Look at all the hobos in SF!

"does not have the right" is a value judgement rather than point of fact. If we step away from values, and return to empiricals, we already have AI that will smoke the best of radiologists. Will the radiologists be sidelined like the truckers? I'll bet money that they lobby for regulatory "protections", and get them.

To reduce this to econometrics and arrive at a "let them eat cake" policy will have undesirable second-order consequences. Letting that many people suck it is the well-worn path to an FDR (or worse), and all of the nastyness that entails.
Call it "Church of Churches as a Service" and you don't have pay taxes too!
Run it online here: https://onlinegdb.com/rkZhWVniH
>Is getting docked points for bringing religion into an answer on physics, or biology, or chemistry religious discrimination or is it requiring an answer to be germane to the question?

IANAL but reading the text of the law, I honestly can't tell. It seems like it says a teacher can't go outside the bounds of normal academic standards for grading in regards to religious content, which if true doesn't actually change anything, since it's already illegal to discriminate against people for their religious beliefs, but it would be acceptable to do so in the specific context of education if religious beliefs aren't germane or factually correct IRT a test or curriculum.... so what's the point?

Although it does use the weasel word "legitimate" which makes me suspicious that the real purpose of this is a bait for pro-religious lawsuits.
Oh we are in complete agreement there. I was just speaking to another facet of the issue. :)
As the law (included and underlined in the OP) states, no such ridiculousness is in scope.
Disappointing, but unsurprising.

See also: Greenspun’s Tenth Rule, “Yo Dawg…”.
>I doubt they read the law in question.

No, but they answered it according to their beliefs.
This is not a product launch intended for the general public.

I couldn't care less about whether they proofread their copytext. Hell, it's probably good that they didn't spend money on any professional design work on their page, it contributes to the affordability of the product.
It looks like dolor is assigned without first being initialized.
One possible issue with this article is that its focus is on students - their 'job' being to learn as opposed to producing or delivering something, which is the aim once their skills are learned.

Learning is often done best in small chunks e.g. when learning to rock climb it is usually best to climb no more than 6 hours a day, every other day. But when the skills are learned the climber may spend 15 hours a day, 3 days straight to climb their dream route and they may well sleep hanging from the side of their wall too.

I'd be interested to see how much time the elite players devoted to their work when on tour as professional musicians in later life.
Data is only switched on when required, we are far away from flatrates over here.
Public school is K-12. All of the questions asked in public school have overwhelming supporting evidence.

I went through a 4 year engineering degree and didn't really get close to the limits of our evidence in anything (without it being made completely clear that we don't know).

So those concerns might be relevant in advanced physics education but they're very outside the wheelhouse for this discussion, and IMO serve as invalid whataboutism for the religious side of the argument.
Decentralized ones like provided by OpenNic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenNIC
Exactly.

13 years ago, my friend R. said this in an IM chat we were having. I found it resonant enough that it's been one of my rotating .sig quotes ever since:

"An educated public is exactly what they don't want . . . more people believe in angels than believe in long division."

(R., for his part, may well read HN -- he's a Scala bigwig now.)
I didn't expect it, but I thought Perligata is more readable than Perl.
Automation could replace up to 800M jobs by 2035
No, it enshrines in law that religion is an axiom system independent of the state's axiom system, like the parallel postulate. Unprovable things are not to be [edit: assumed] false.
You loan currency to a bank in the form of deposits, they keep some of that on premises due to the reserve requirement and loan out the rest to their other customers. In exchange for letting the bank use your money, you get insurance and a tiny interest payment.

Other than it being too young and inconsequential for people to bother, what property does bitcoin have that works against this scheme? Banks have worked this way since long before modern fiat currencies were developed, and they’ve always increased the money supply without minting new coinage. Whether it’s gold bullion, federal reserve notes, or bitcoin keys in their vaults doesn’t seem to make much difference.
I could write a test plan first, but I haven't always fully designed the interfaces until I've ploughed into the code and figured out what needs to be passed where, so there would be a lot of repeat effort in fixing up the tests afterwards.

Effectively, in writing tests first you make assumptions about the code. These don't always turn out to be true.
Looks like everything wrong with the web. I'll keep the simple grid of static thumbnails.
KYC and AML regulations.

Know your customer and Anti-money laundering.

Those two are why banks need to know about you. Cash is harder to track, while well-organized digital cash is not.

Any time someone is dealing with money, both of those need to be covered. It is why Stripe is so valuable, they handle PCI, KYC and AML with a fantastic API.
Then you end up insuring your canopies against wind damage... And your cars against the possibility of canopies falling on them. And still insuring your cars against hail in the event that the canopy blows off, or the hail comes down at an angle and isn't fully blocked by the canopy, or whatever.

Also, I'm imagining canopies getting in the way of 1) making inventory highly visible (both from the road and other parts of the lot) and 2) making it harder to pack cars really close together because you have to deal with all the canopy supports.

Just musings...
Don't give them any info. Write something along the lines of "transfer of money", always. Use separate channel to communicate "why". Every bit of information you give them will be used against you.
Foam would suck up water unfortunately. It'd almost have to be something that was waterproof, dried quickly, and could be stored compactly.
OpenAPI Generator v4.2.1 Released
When I build a new web app, I start with a REST API. The input and output are known, so bugs are less likely. As I roll out new API methods, I add it to a postman collection, and add a couple of tests to it. Then with each deploy, I point my postman to that environment and hit run.

When building the client application, I typically just manually test as I go along. Bugs happen, but because the foundation code is all REST API, the bugs are usually and easily fixed.
The law may be intended for that, the actual consequence is disregarding facts as if where opinions and growing up believing doing so its Ok.
exactly, lots of people are missing the point.
There's other coverage, e.g.

https://www.inquisitr.com/5743685/ohio-law-student-religion-...

The gist of the problem is covered in this paragraph:

"The language in the bill abolishes 'any restrictions on students from engaging in religious expression in completion of homework, artwork or other assignments.' What that means is that a student could, for example, turn in work that claims that the Earth is 6,000-years-old, as some Christian denominations teach, rather than 4.5 billion years, like the overwhelming majority of accepted science teaches, and not be penalized for it. Similarly, a student could turn in work that claims that Homo Sapiens were created by a benevolent god, rather than having evolved from a common ancestor shared by humans and other apes."
Why does there need to be a law to protect students who provide incorrect answers?

I guess we need a law to protect students from having to read controversial books too?
If I were FIRE I would probably spend all of my time going to court for stuff like this. I'm surprised there's not at least 1 rich person dedicated to being a righteous shit disturber.
I think some essential context here is required. As I get from this article [1] it is not so much about 'anything goes' student answers needing to be accepted by a scientific teacher under the cop out of "according to my religion", as indeed careful wording of the questions on tests could easily prevent this as in “according to evolutionary theory”, it is about a creationist teacher marking student's creationist answers as good and being protected from scientific challenge by this law.

This article states: "This is an extension of a strategy that creationists have been using in recent years. They are pushing for carefully crafted laws that sound like they are just promoting freedom, but are specifically designed to provide cover for teachers who want to introduce creationist materials in their classroom. Alternatively, under the guise of “standards” they can introduce laws carefully crafted to provide justification for not admitting evolution or climate change into the classroom."

[1] https://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/ohio-student-r...
It's the dominant theory, and it's a darn good one, but isn't that a bit like saying that all geometry is euclidean geometry?
Critique My Website
onlyones.net

would be nice if you guys would check the site out by creating an account , critiquing it

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 ️
The failure of these people to fix their state, you mean. Instead choosing for the easier and more profitable option of going into tech and the road paved with good intentions.

You can build gigantic multinational corporations, disrupt all kinds of industries, change significant parts of people's lives with tech all written with code and rules and regulations but somehow making a well-functioning country is too hard, even when there's well-working smaller prototypes available to learn from.
This seems like a crucial problem with the initial question. As with so many puzzles like this, it assumes that the reader will make similar (unargued, unstated) assumptions as the writer.

But what justifies that methodological assumption? Nothing, as thaumasiotes is pointing out.
She used a color chart for calibration. I think it should work, but I'm not an expert in image processing.

An alternative can be to make some similar looking objects that are like fake coral blocks and use a boat to sumerge them in the sea and compare the corrected photos with the photos taken in air before. (The wet surfaces have a different look, and it would be important to use a diffuse light instead of direct sunlight, and perhaps other technical problems for the comparison.)
> The moment you allow imperative behaviors to leak into a declarative system it loses its ability to reason reliably about operations over time; and you’re back to flying seat-of-your-pants a-la C &co

By your (imo, extremist) line of reasoning, wouldn't the existence of `unsafePerformIO` mean Haskell itself "looses its ability to reason reliably about operations over time"? I think a more reasonable position allows for gradations of reliability, and appreciates the benefits of encouraging pure computations while allowing room for judicious use of benevolent side effects.

> they are already evolutionary dead-ends

That is patently false, imo. OCaml has a number of interesting features which most statically typed FP languages are yet to explore (e.g., polymorphic variants, (typed) named and optional arguments, first-class modules, binding operators). More to the point, ongoing development on a novel approach to multi-core, native support for algebraic effects, and modular implicits, testify to it being a live evolutionary branch. OCaml aside, innovative languages and approaches like like F, 1Ml, Frank, BER MetaOcaml, and Rust seem to give clear evidence that we still have much to learn from impure* dialects of ML.
this seems reasonable. perhaps all science questions should be asked this way. it would be a subtle reminder that what you are learning is only the best current explanation, not the absolute truth of the universe. a lot of material you learn in grade school is simplified to the point of being almost wrong anyway.