skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I wonder how many dealers do updates without your notice/consent when you bring the car in for repair/warranty/recall work.

They probably plug in their dongle for diagnostics and hit « yes » if it prompts them for an update.
For 14-18yo I'd like to add semi-logarithmic graph and solver, but perhaps it's too much.
I think that's imprecise. The opposition here is not between two kinds of reasoning, but between reasoning and persuasion.

Furthermore, quantitative thinking is itself logic.
Keep the Flow Going: Four Tips for Distraction-Free Programming
The step of flipping a switch to connect to a VPN isn’t that bad. Googles IAP is in a lot of ways more annoying since you end up having that step multiple times.

It’s not really the protocol that people are worried about — it’s attack surface. VPNs have basically zero — everything is opaque and an attacker learns nothing except that you’re on a VPN by observing your traffic. An attacker doesn’t even know that the application you’re connecting to exists and can’t even reach it to break in it without first breaking into your VPN.

You can call this obscurity but I think it’s better to say that you’re not leaking side-channel information about your network.

Having a VPN isn’t an excuse to have poor network security internally but a single portal that’s internet facing is much more defensible than n different home-grown apps.
Only a few 2020 US pres. candidates are using DMARC–basic email security feature
If the driver deliberately impaired their ability to drive, yes.
Actually the author also has a 3 part article about war elephants
https://acoup.blog/2019/07/26/collections-war-elephants-part...

He is of the opinion that elephants were okay (not great) on battlefield, but awful in terms of logistics, supply usage and breeding. A horse reaches adulthood in 4 years. An elephant needs 15, and pregnancy lasts over 3 years. There are no known examples of breeding elephants. Supply-wise, you could have 1000 cavalrymen or 54 elephants. He says the main reason India widely used elephants - aside from proximity - was to show off status.

Also, don't make fun of J.R.R. Tolkien - he fought in trenches of WW1, on top of strong familiarity with medieval warfare because of all his reading.
OP is very specific behavior by one bank. What about Softbank marking up its own assets has anything to do with the idea that an investment philosophy spread out among thousands of times more people but with less money is even remotely covered in the article?
"Let’s be clear on this point: ancient and medieval warfare was mostly about sieges." I also learned years ago that when medieval battles actually happened, the goal was to rout the enemy, not actually fight them and kill each other.

I find these points illuminating because it reminds me that people back in the day were not primitive idiots. There was a very sensible logic to how they waged war. Ultimately, everyone back then wanted to live comfortable long lives like we do.
What does this mean in this context? I can't imagine many people who drive drunk have any reasons about why they decided to drive drunk.
Whatever spreadsheet software is fine for me. Excel is still more popular, but unless you use very advanced stuff LibreOffice is equivalent.
Star Trek: TNG made a teenage me wonder why starships encountering each other always appeared to have matched their orientations.

Was there some kind of prearranged signal? A diplomatic code adhered to even by enemies? Just a general preference on all sides concerned preventing headaches and vague unheimlich feelings of discomfort? So many questions…

If I was harassing the federation I would keep my ship at an awkward angle relative to theirs at all times just to keep them on edge.

I was totally fine with the other plot holes though.
Intel says Qualcomm tactics forced it out of modem chip market
A manager showing a mockup as a real, working system in order to lock in a multimillion contract. That's more fraud than bullshit though.
Don't forget that they do not have auto-aiming for their phasers and despite their advanced photonic torpedos, these are usually not homing either. (It might be that the Defiant's phasers, which were shooting these bolts instead of the continuous beams, were auto-aimed)

(Don't get me wrong, I absolutely loved Star Trek. TNG and DS9 in particular).
My go-to Linux network troubleshooting commands
Some of us (read... one of us, and not me, yet) uses TLA+ when theorizing changes to parts of M3DB, which is a distributed time series database.

You can see the specs here, the current TLA+ models the consistency model of data being persisted to disk (flush, snapshot), there was at some point TLA+ for describing the quorum writes/reads along with the background tick event loop but that must be elsewhere now.

https://github.com/m3db/m3/tree/master/specs
All cloud companies are going to figure out that the cloud won't work if everyone is afraid of being protested off their cloud provider.

It's already someone else's computer. If that someone is hostile to me or my business, or has a track record of becoming hostile, then there no way to build a business like that.

If everyone is an owner no one would be let go. Everyone is an owner is Kool aid hr fed you.
SSD wear was known for a while, but that it would cascade into display then charging malfunction.. that's class action worthy.
That paper is looking at raw materials, not carbon.
It's more that the ideas seem pretty far fetched. And if you're about to quit your job over these ideas, my bet is that your family would prefer you to do the research instead of eating thanksgiving dinner.
The Edison style are often like that. They use four led elements configured as a full wave bridge rectifier but because the diodes are themelves the load ther is no place to put the lowpass and so you get 120.
Existing rules in effect are different to those that are publicly adhered to. As the saying goes, "in theory there is no difference between theory and practice, in practice there is."
We (https://bespoke.app) use Lightbus in some supporting infrastructure, and despite starting with a less stable version, we've been quite happy with it.

Firstly, the maintainers are extremely responsive, and have gotten most issues fixed in less than a day. IMHO, the devs are being particularly conservative in calling this 0.9 instead of 1.0 -- which is arguably a good thing!
Here's a quick/informal experience report. Happy to go into details.

Pros:

- It's very "Django"-y. The declarative interface reads and writes like Django ORM code, so there's very little context switch. It should feel familiar to Django programmers.

- It's built on "boring" tech. The default transport layer is Redis. Most of us don't need a distributed queuing system like NSQ or Kafka. Config is YAML.

- The API is designed to favor ease-of-use over virtually everything else, and yet there's actually very little magic under the hood. There's a bit, but we've found it pretty easy to reason about. Default options are sensible, and easily tunable.

- The documentation is good. It's a bit spartan for some of the more complex things (e.g. writing your own client in $YOUR_FAVORITE_LANGUAGE).

Cons:

- Our biggest concern has been with logging. Message-bus architectures have all the difficulties of cooperative multitasking, with the added problem that events can also go missing. Good logs are invaluable in debugging this kind of problem. My understanding is that this is on the roadmap.

All in all, I think it's a safe bet for pure Python projects. If you're a polyglot shop, you may want to consider something else in the short term, but Lightbus is very capable of solving the problems that message-bus architectures were designed to solve [0].

[0] e.g.: "how can these isolated web apps share data in a sensible way".
Larry Niven once wrote, in either an intro or separate essay, about the problems associated with building universes where you introduce extremely powerful technologies. As time goes on, it gets harder and harder to write around why $TECH can't be used to solve almost arbitrary problem.
The EU can use hydrogen to stop climate change and create jobs
A 'Mole' Isn't Digging Mars: NASA Engineers Are Trying to Find Out Why
Indeed, it's surprising that someone is building today a framework in Python that is not async, when it's pretty easy to do so (compared to eg. the twisted days, but even to pre3.6 days).
If the formalization discovers more (or more significant) soundness holes, would that be a possible reason for a Rust 2.0 release?
Zero details on what it actually does with blockchain that couldn't be done more easily, quickly and cheaply with an old-fashioned RDBMS. I'll assume it's just a puff-piece for some "innovation manager" until I see otherwise.
Judging from your other comments here, we may simply be using the same term in different ways - yours being the historically correct one, mine the colloquial one.
Neighbours open WiFi
Some fun/gripping ideas for single-class activities:

-Google-fu: everyone needs to know how to find what they need, maybe you can challenge them to go on a google scavenger hunt and find a ton of random answers in a limited time-frame?

-Wikipedia golf: how quickly can you go from page A to page B? Least clicks wins. you can pick a topic they know about, maybe minecraft or star wars or something popular, and then pick an interesting article you might want them to check out, like the Dot Com bubble or Y2K or the google AI bots vs. video games?

-Data analysis: pick your data, could be sports or YT views or retweets, or even from surveys in the class; then teach them R or Python to make some charts/visualizations of their favorite data.

-Video games: no beating around the bush here, kids love games, mobile and desktop and console. How can you harness that passion and transfer it into Info and Comm tech?
-Online posting/trolling: there should be a class period where you look at online bullying, what are the repercussions, this could hit home for many kids.

Good luck, sounds fun!
I bet it's b series stock and you're an owner of the a small nonvot8ng part (I might be a bigger owner in my investments without working there at all).

If you really believe what you wrote you're fooling yourself
Did you check out SYCL at all?
downvote: this piece was well researched and a piece of art itself, and not just another NYT throwaway op-ed. If you don't want the world to be twitter rants and facebook meme reposts, we need to support pieces like this, and the publications that fund and publish them.
Read the white paper.
Yeah, i don't think its good idea to move during burnout straight to another job, with high expectations for seemingly senior position, tons of stuff to learn, integrate with new teams/culture/etc.

Just stating a looming burnout and serious will to rather NOT work at all than continue working at that company under current situation should let them realize how grave the situation is. Don't leave them room for interpreting this as 'he just needs a pat on his back and some sweet talk and he is back on track'. Polite and honest, but firm stance.

People are so freaking afraid to be on their own without job for few months. Unless OP's finances are very tight, it sounds like this kind of break is exactly what he needs. Too much at stake, and after proper breakdown, there might not be a way back.
I would say that SPJ was quite right, though. Compare and contrast with Haskell. In Haskell, there are broadly only three cases of unsoundness:

* Infinite loops

* `undefined`

* Abuse of unsafe IO behavior, including monads built on or reducible to IO

Rust's unsoundness bugs are all over [0], and come from so many different angles that they feel indistinct from any other low-level C-like language.

I looked a little into RustBelt; how would it have helped this `Pin` issue? I browsed [1] a bit and it seems like `Pin` would have to have been proven on its own in an ad-hoc way not covered by RustBelt.

[0] https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/labels/I-unsound%20%F0%9F%...

[1] https://gitlab.mpi-sws.org/iris/lambda-rust/tree/popl18
Intro to Reverse Engineering by solving MalwareTech VM using cutter
It's not so much that they don't care about their beliefs enough to act on them; it's that they don't care about verifying those beliefs.
"Everything is difficult in this language" made me smile. :) I mostly agree. There are things things that APL / J make amazingly easy, too, but a lot of simple things are just brutal to me. I'm not a hardcore APL programmer -- I've played with J more than APL, but I'm still a novice at both. I just enjoy the mental challenge sometimes.

To insert items from B into A at point N, you could (in pseudocode, I don't have time to play with APL right now!):

(Take N of A) , B , (Drop N of A)

To remove items from the middle of an array between N and M, I can think of two ways (I might have off-by-one errors here):

- (Take N of A) , (Drop M of A)

- Bools / A

where "Bools" is an array of 1/0 values, and the 1's indicate the elements to keep. As a dyadic verb, "/" means "compress", that is, to keep only the indicated elements from the right-hand object.

I'm sure there are other ways! These are the few ways that my limited brain could come up with. :)
There are techniques taught at top business schools that deal with these issues and how to design an organization that actively encourages or suppresses certain traits; look up principal-agent problem, rotating leadership, voting out team leads teams don't like (Apple) etc. The problem is that at startups there aren't such managers, tech in general gets some of the worst managers out there and founders typically "know better" to learn from somebody else.
I think the weak premise is 4.

Agents in economics are typically modeled as maximizing wealth or utility, which is different from 4, which says agents want wealth to be non-decreasing.
Their torpedoes don't even have to be "homing." It should be possible for them to have onboard AIs smart enough to allow them to develop complex strategies, use swarming tactics, evasion, etc.
I read about something similar here a while ago if I'm not mistaken... Great idea...

How is pricing determined? As a company, how much would I pay? is this something set by the developer? Can it change? is it a subscription or one-off (or is this also up to the developer?)

Leaving it up to the developer has some benefits, but having a standardized pricing scheme also has advantages (standardized is much harder to get right, but would probably be "better" for companies... more predictability, etc)
Looking at the docs, then looking at the amount of contributions on Github, the answer is simple: You shouldn't.
Jaeles – The Swiss Army Knife for Automated Web Application Testing
Goar Vartanyan: Russian spy who 'changed history' dies at 93
Soundness bugs are the only thing we make an exception in our stability policy for. In general, unsoundness is treated as a serious issue. However, "unsoundness" can mean a few different things; in the "semantics of the language" sense, they're taken very seriously. In the "there's a compiler bug" sense, they're taken seriously, but in accordance with how likely they are to affect end users, and how much work they are to fix. For example, an incorrect type signature in the standard library was fixed one day after release by changing it to the correct one and re-releasing; an issue where casting between floating points and integers causes some problems has still not been fixed, because it partially has to do with LLVM's semantics combined with our semantics, and it's not clear how to do the right thing while not seriously regressing performance. (That being said that particular issue has had a flurry of activity in the past week...)

The GitHub label for these bugs is A-Unsound, which has the description "A soundness hole (worst kind of bug), see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soundness".
Seems they just simply could sell a faster connection and just call it an "institutional feed".

Regulated financial exchanges basically do this already.
Black Friday 2019 deals for developers
Toward more efficient computing, with magnetic waves
Usually people higher up in the hierarchy are by definition valued more than grunt-level workers. So OP should assume she is at the bottom of the ladder and importance. Founders could be good friends with the team lead and completely biased towards her opinion.
An interesting perspective. I personally didn't enjoy lectures in college when it came to technical classes (engineering, math, physics) as I had trouble keeping up. Videos help solve that though as you can go at your own pace...pause and rewind. I'm sure it will be a lot faster and reach more people faster with videos. There are so few in the APL/J world. The few ones that exist are very popular though.
Sounds like you are in the receiving end of narcissistic abuse (Google it). The only known effective way to deal with narcissists is to get them out of your life. Any other path is pure misery.
I believe soundness bug fixes are the only things allowed to break backwards compatibility in Rust.
It doesn't really matter whether the people calling for radical change are hypocrites or not. That has no material affect on whether there really is a need for radical change. It does make them rather annoying and gives those resistant to change something to criticise them over but it doesn't alter the facts of the situation.
Pilots Revving Engines Too Hard Led to Airbus Woes
I am interested in knowing which philosophers and which texts you found most helpful.
Show HN: `join!` – Rust macros with combinators to join everything
Hey there! Thanks for the comment, I'm glad its been going well. I'll reply to a couple of your points below:

> The documentation is good. It's a bit spartan
> for some of the more complex things

Yes, I've documented the protocols[1] but I haven't gone into much more detail. The docs may also need some iterating on as/when people try to develop new clients.

> Our biggest concern has been with logging.
> Message-bus architectures have all the
> difficulties of cooperative multitasking,
> with the added problem that events can also
> go missing. Good logs are invaluable in
> debugging this kind of problem. My understanding
> is that this is on the roadmap

Yep. Two things are on the roadmap that are relevant to this:

1. Revamping the logging system, likely to have an option to support structlog
2. The ability to see a causal trace for each message (Message C was caused as a result of Message B, which was caused by Message A)

I think no. 2 should be straightforward, and I think no. 1 is just going to take a grim sense of determination and deleting a bunch of old logging code.

[1]: https://lightbus.org/reference/protocols/
What I don't understand is your banking. As a Czech person, I strongly felt like German banking is 20 years in the past. Why the heck would you have ATMs with opening hours, and not accepting all cards? Why does it cost so much (or anything?) to withdraw? Why are your businesses not accepting cards, or only accepting some cards with weird details like "CCs only German, other cards only EU"?
In theory, if there were incredibly massive holes that affected most Rust code and could not be fixed without backwards-incompatible changes, I guess so. Details matter in cases like these. It would just depend.
Tor and the Dark Web: How to connect to the digital underground and why
Not sure about the exact official stance, but can't imagine it's anything other than eventually fixing all soundness bugs, at least as long as someone is willing to do the work.

However, an important thing to note is that Rust strives to be safe only against unintentional bugs, and not against intentional malicious code (against which you are supposed to use OS/CPU-level sandboxing), so unsoundness issues that are very unlikely to be accidentally triggered aren't necessarily a very high priority.

This is a reasonable policy, since current Rust does not have a certified provably correct compiler and Rust programs in current practice don't come with formal proofs, so full provable soundness in type system doesn't really translate to any useful properties, since programs can intentionally fail to do what they are supposed to do in other ways (just do something safe but malicious or incorrect or exploit bugs in rustc or LLVM).

For instance, this issue is very unlikely to be triggered by non-malicious code, so emergency action to fix it is not being taken, and instead it will probably be fixed only once there is clear consensus on the best fix.
Compiler bugs are not what I had in mind, so this answer is very reassuring! The original thread led me to believe this was not an absolute, official policy of the Rust project, but I am happy to hear it is.
depends on what you're trying to become, if you want to be a doctor it's still required
I have wondered the same a number of times. Enough that I wrote an article on it.
Business Model Fire Insurance:The Phoenix Strategy

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/business-model-fire-insurance...

In short I was making the point that large corporations should deliberately invest in start-ups that directly attack their own current business model. Think of this as a way of stress testing your business model with the benefit that you own a stake if the attacker happens to succeed. Side benefit, those start-ups that fail will have small teams of technically talented people who now know your market, and are now needing an acquire-hire. Pick through and hire the best out of the failed efforts.
I would recommend against assuming anything. It's a start up not IBM, things are more fluid.

I've used this strategy before in real life, more than once and it resolved the issue 50% of the time.

If it doesn't resolve the issue for the OP, all he does is quit. He was going to anyway.

You can't be afraid to tackle these issues head on. There's no need to be afraid to talk to people.

Do you think the founders just ignored the VCs and didn't negotiate with them for the best deal they could get? That they don't negotiate with their customers?
It is really bad. Semiconductor technology wise they are falling behind which will make it hard to recover the investments in at least one generation. Heat distribution wise the AMD architecture is better. Yield wise the AMD approach is more effective. Product flexibility and ability to iterate AMD approach is better.

The biggest threat to Intel is economic. Each generation costs usually more. One generation funds the one after the next. Loose once and there is trouble, loose twice and it becomes existential.
Why can't we work on both problems at the same time?
> Does anyone report on eMMC wearing out in phones, game consoles, TVs, laptops, etc.?

It simply doesn't happen very much (especially not in game consoles and TVs, which don't do much writing).

> Are there really no other car manufacturers using eMMC btw?

I assume there are, but they're not writing loads of logs, or, if they are, specced their flash storage appropriately.
The Establishment of the Manhattan Project as Told by It's First Commander
Motorists risk their lives with Mobile And smartphones
That democracy requires blind faith is not a feature, its a bug.
> Deutsche Zeppelin Reederei still runs passenger flights out of Friedrichshafen. If you ever get to Germany, you won't regret taking a Zeppelin ride.

Looked this up just now and Jesus Christ, 450 EUR for a 60 minute tour flight??
Before cryptocurrencies, we believed we needed a central authority to create money, too.

We currently have to trust arbiters of fact because we have no systematic way of evaluating the work of journalists, nor of aggregating the distibuted verification efforts that millions of people perform daily. If that work were easily navigable, our collective intelligence might improve.

In a previous comment[1] I suggest a software solution. I've already written part of it.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21664084