skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That’s true for most crimes. If you sneak into Bob’s bedroom and notice that he is already dead, but shoot his dead body anyway, you’ve technically only committed corpse desecration. (Setting aside the question of why you were sneaking into his bedroom with a loaded gun in the first place.) Intentionality is a central aspect of most crimes—that’s what distinguishes premeditated murder from manslaughter or felony murder.
> The entire point of prison is to remove them from society.

That is the immediate effect, for sure. But that isn't the issue.

Unless someone is convicted for life without parole, or a death penalty, then they likely will be released into the general population at some point.

Do you want them to have skills that might allow them to support themselves, or do you think a near term investment in education might be cheaper for society and more humane than releasing them with a situation where they have fewer opportunities to make a living?
People should remain childless. Remaining childless is the only guaranteed way to prevent suffering. Also have a look at: https://www.amazon.com/Better-Never-Have-Been-Existence/dp/0... and https://www.amazon.com/Conspiracy-against-Human-Race-Contriv...
Magpies do this, too. It is not unique to crows.
Ages 1-4 were absolutely brutal for me. I'd do it again, but I'd go in giving up any pretense that I was going to maintain anything like a life. I was an at-home parent for those years, and really struggled having no escape from it. I maintained a pretense that I was keeping up on my field and doing various other things, and I did put in a good deal time on that, but it was not well-spent. I should've given up that idea through preschool age. That's what I'd do differently, and I think as a society we'd be better off if we accepted and understood that parenting is an all-in big deal; it's not just another form of housework or chores that we all have to do and that are flexible.

That said, I agree with others that it gets way better. Ages 5-9 with my kids have been great. The stuff they do is actually fun and interesting to me, and since I was such a damn good parent, the kids are dynamic and somewhat responsible for themselves. We have a lot of fun now and I have choices for myself once again.

Warning: I hear the teenage years can be just as daunting at the toddler/preschool years, but for different reasons.
No uop cache is a very strange choice. They way they phrased it "we can meet our current performance goals without it in this generation" just sounds like they didn't manage to get it working in time.
If you look around configuration REDEngine configuration files in PC version of Witcher 3, there is file with what for me looks like tuning parameters of Boehm-like conservative tracing GC, it is probably the only file in there that even includes comments about what the parameters mean and partially how they were determined. My overall impression from the various configuration files is that the whole world streaming/demand-paging mechanism is somehow interwoven with or even partially driven by the GC (so the GC is not meant for some small-ish scripting heap)
Can someone explain what this is and the significance of Carlsen's achievement to someone completely and utterly clueless about football?
Working with their xml data feeds still gives me PTSD.
Like all copyrights, you can add relevant local laws to that list, such a the US 1st amendment -> FAIR USE. That can be commercial use too. And limited educational uses. Even the mighty BBC cannot demand total monopoly on use.
I read the OP differently. Type-level programming (not to be confused with type-oriented programming) is using the typechecker to perform computation on types, which proves guarantees at compiler time. In this case, types are less about documentation, they are literally proofs of properties of the program by construction. In fact, type-level programming is usually unreadable[0] unless the reader has deep knowledge of the specific language implementation of type families, functional dependencies, poly-kinds, etc (whatever permits typelevel programming in that language).

I'm getting that the OP is arguing against these ad-hoc constructs (type families etc) and would much rather write these proofs in the same language as ordinary code (e.g. writing the law "List x where length(x) == 5" in the type rather than "forall a. List (S (S (S (S (S Z))))) a") which, well who can disagree?

In a sense, you and OP both agree on the same thing. Types are good. No types (or unreadable ad-hoc constructs for types) are not good.

[0]: https://aphyr.com/posts/342-typing-the-technical-interview uses type-level programming in Haskell to solve N-queens
Lol, might as well use monopoly money then.
Remember on 68k they also had to orchestrate the transition from 24-bit to 32-bit addressing.
In Germany, according to one study, approximately 4% of returns are destroyed. 12 to 16% items are returned in the first place. On the one hand, the resulting overall quota is very low, on the other hand that's still a very large number in absolute terms (19 million items).

Source: https://www.zeit.de/2019/25/retouren-amazon-onlinehandel-mue...
let me guess, you dont have kids. this post reeks of jewishness.
> I've never met a full time homemaker who thinks she's getting a raw deal.

When our second kid was born, my wife and I mutually agreed it made sense for her to be a stay-at-home mom. The flexibility to run errands and take kids to appointments is incredible. Logistically, I don't know how we would have survived with both of us working.

But it has been a very difficult emotional transition for her. Much of her identity was based on her profession (she was a teacher) and a chunk of her self worth came from knowing she was financially independent. It's working out OK, but it's one of the biggest life transitions she's gone through.
Please don't take HN threads on generic ideological tangents. Those blow up into generic ideological flamewars, which are always the same and always less interesting than the specific discussion that they destroy by burning as kindling.

With your comment, you provoked a flamewar that degenerated straight to bon mots like "Government is to govern.", "I’ve seen this on HN several times, and it always cracks me up. The condescension isn't dripping. It’s running in torrents." and "American Christians say that Jesus Christ is the only true way and that Islam is a false path". It swelled to over a hundred comments, completely dominating the page. Worse, it was sitting at the top when I saw it, crowding out all the discussion that curious readers and commenters are here for. That's not cool; that's the way a community like this destroys itself.

Tire fires like this are why the site guidelines explicitly ask: "Eschew flamebait. Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
All this! What a perfect day you described. The wisdom to just go all in with the very young kids is so important.
https://mybinder.org/
Interactivity and Animation with Variable Fonts
Not only this view of attracting young blood comes as a discrimination in disguise but also rather it has become an industry norm to hire young talent because of the resistance shown by the experienced/senior level in terms of re-skilling and get accommodated to the new technologies. Also, for any business/startup the time taken to ship things to production is a key factor to stay ahead of competition. In this way, businesses naturally opt-out for a skilled worker rather than training a newbie. Though there should be a fair balance between both of them to attain a sustainable growth in the long run.
The worst part about price discrimination is that if there are a limited number of players in the market, it feels like, and maybe effectively is, price fixing.

Now, it may not play out as direct collusion, but if only one company engages in it, they won’t be competitive for their wealthier customers, so it doesn’t make much sense. But if both participants in a duopoly do it, you have no options. It wouldn’t be possible to enact price discrimination for something with lots of competition
I recently saw a study that showed your happiness goes down relative to adults with no kids for most of the 18 years they live with you but then goes up after they leave
These are common misconceptions.

> Example 1. The article talks about compaction and generational collection as being Good Things(TM), but it doesn't talk about the costs associated with them. Looking at the linked Go article, these approaches suffer from high write barrier overhead.

You need a write barrier no matter what for any sort of incremental or concurrent GC, to maintain the tricolor invariant. Otherwise there is no way for the runtime system to detect a store from a black object to a white object. Typical GCs will fold the write barrier needed for generational GC into the write barrier needed for incremental/concurrent GC, so there is no need for extra overhead if properly implemented.

> For Go, this isn't worthwhile because escape analysis allocates many young objects on the stack (which btw is effectively bump-pointer allocation)

Java HotSpot has done the same thing for a long time! It's just that in HotSpot escape analysis doesn't really help allocation performance, because the generational GC already offers bump allocation in the nursery. Escape analysis in the JVM does open up more optimizations, though, because it serves as the scalar-replacement-of-aggregates transformation.

> so trying to further reduce GC overhead by increasing the overhead of every pointer write is just not worth it.

This is only because of their specific implementation. There is no need for increased overhead.

> If better GCs come out or tweaks to the algorithms are made, these configurations have to be updated. In contrast, Go programs gets these benefits for free.

There is no reason why Java can't do the same by updating defaults. In fact, they often do.
"it's just rational business" yes and that's why we need gouvernement to step in and change the cost-benefit equation so that it becomes "just rational business" re-value these items.
Potentially, you get to be more portable. Big screens are better (to some limit), but you can't carry 24-27" displays with you. With this, all you need to carry are the goggles, keyboard and mouse.
Mistakes and what I learnt building a video buffer system for deep learning data
Opt-in polling is notoriously unreliable but even that poll backs up my claim. You need to add the multiple parts that use “soccer” (which includes Canada) that combined total to about 54%.
Sounds good to me. The rich is as afraid of getting a fine as the poor one. Otherwise rich people just wouldn't care.

It is true that a score based system with no money involved would be equally useful but I guess people fear more about their money.
Blockchain entrepreneur talks of travails with secure email product
Listen on Episode 78 on Agile Thoughts: https://agilenoir.biz/series/agile-thoughts/?utm_source=hackernews
One thing that started to bother me recently is the meaningless of life in general. Think about humans from a wide perspective - it all boils down to survival of the species and what difference does it make if we reproduce in a cave or a modern house? Sure there are more of us now, but does it really matter? We are driven by a simple algorithm - find a partner, reproduce, keep the babies alive and die. Repeat. No real reason, just an instinct shared by every living organism, everything else is just a facade. It's not like the existence of the universe depends on our survival, we could we wiped tomorrow and nothing would really change.

Oh, and having kids must bring joy, that's how evolution programmed us, otherwise at some point people would just consciously stop having babies and we would dissapear :-)
Pokemon Company given green light to subpoena Discord to unmask leakers
Firefox (Mac) is not even able to print this article into a PDF. It gives you only one page and the page ends with a half sentence with the letters cropped in the middle. One third of the text is missing.

I cant count the number of times I had to take screenshots to save crucial information from web pages.
I don't have kids, but am involved in the lives of young relatives and am generally interested in questions about how to raise a child in ways that lead to them being competent, well adjusted humans. To me, parent talk seems to fall into two broad categories: discussions about raising children in general, and anecdotes about some supposedly funny thing that a particular child did last week. The former I find interesting, and I can engage in these conversations for hours. The latter bores me to death (and when the child being described is present I actively try to derail the conversation, as I hated listening to embarrassing stories about myself as a child and imagine most children feel the same way even if they lack the courage to voice that opinion to their parents). This is the difference between discussing the mechanics of a blockchain and discussing some anecdote about Coinye West rebranding as Coinye. I'm not too knowledgeable about or even particularly interested in cars, but I can listen to a mechanic talk about different types of engines and be genuinely engaged. I can't be genuinely engaged by somebody talking about the new paint job they put on their muscle car last week. I can recognise that others seem more engaged by anecdotal narratives than discussions of underlying systems, but I still think this distinction is different than simply being interested in one broad topic like "children" or "blockchains" over another.
You have to use at least some domain knowledge, else you would be making a general-purpose artificial intelligence. The rules actually say: "without relying heavily on human domain knowledge" (emphasis mine).

The rule is actually quite vague, which is not very surprising, as it seems quite hard to define what domain knowledge is allowed and what isn't without having lots of loopholes.
But does that guarantee that the prices won't increase proportionally to your income? Companies are incentivized to make you buy stuff, not to make you motivated to make money.
Like pg notes in his essay, there's a good chance that there are members of Group B who are parents but you don't notice because they're not talking about their kids all the time.
I don't know about other browsers but Safari doesn't support it.

Not only that but HTML/CSS/JavaScript has been a moving target over the last couple of decades, sometimes people need something with longevity.
Sure, let's all do that, and then the human race will go extinct, and then (after we're all gone), then there will be no more suffering. Also no more laughter, joy, love...

Why is "not suffering" the ideal? Why not "more joy"?

You have a very empty view of life if the only thing you see is suffering to be avoided.

The future belongs to those who believe there will be one.
Taking what you read in the docs and then using it to solve the issue you are solving is not always easy. I was just running into that with Elasticsearh this week. Sometimes it takes asking a question and getting some clarification for the pieces to snap together.
I wonder how Messi would do on Fantasy Chess League.
>I'd say it's super dickish

I think that pretty much articulates how people view jacked up prices, especially (but not exclusively) in situations where people are in a tough situation through no fault of there own.

Thus, the garage owner who is known for fleecing out-of-towners who have a breakdown is far more likely to get a local reputation as sort of an asshole rather than a shrewd small businessman.

It does apply in other contexts though. for example, tickets to highly sought after concerts and sporting events are probably not as expensive as they could be. (And one result is profits flow to ticket agencies.) Look how hard it was to get tickets to Hamilton for ages. (Probably still is.) The thinking is that, if you're seen as price gouging because you can, that can work for a while but isn't a great look for a long-term relationship, to say, a band.

Can you get away with it when transactions are very occasional? Sure. But things have a way of coming back to bite you.
Why?

If I'm a poor speeding Fin, then a non-scaled speeding ticket could cost me a good number of days food. If I'm a rich speeding Fin then a non-scaled ticket is just the cost to travel quickly.

When you're wealthy enough fines don't matter there's no point in the police enforcing them aside from as an additional income stream.
Honestly, it's probably for the best. Over the last decade it has become the expectation that - at the tap of a button - a taxi will appear and take you across the city (or three blocks over) for a few bucks. People need to realize that this isn't reality. The entire industry has been subsidized by VCs and desperate drivers working below minimum wage since day 1.

If, after paying drivers fairly, complying with local laws, reaching profitability etc., we find that prices are where most people can still afford to take Ubers everyday - great! If not, well, that's how things have been for ~150 years. Keep urging your city to invest in public transit and bike lanes.
Yes, because it's really fair for both a billionaire and someone living on 40k a year to pay the same price (let's say 2k) for a speeding ticket. Both of those people will be impacted accordingly I'm sure.
It's Tempe, not Temple and the neighborhood doesn't exist yet. Just announced recently.
What about tools for power searchers ? Google have abandoned us.

Are you planning to create strong tools in that area ?

For example: custom search engines, the NEAR operator, limit search to sites that don't update that often or aren't linked to very strong sites(against SEO), etc
Centaur has already built several generations of x86 processors so you need to make a stronger argument than that.
You can defraud an honest man yes, but that’s not the same as a classic con.
Is it necessary to be bug-free? AMD still sells chips...
I’ve often wondered given what we now know about psychopathy (it’s heritable, has a biological basis) if humanity, and especially it’s social order, isn’t locked in a kind of evolutionary arms race between these two forms.

Essentially, psychopaths push for forms of social ordering that allow them the greatest latitude, entrench hierarchical power, and normalize their antisocial nature, while the prosocial rest of us struggle to resist them through more communal and consensus-oriented forms.

There’s obviously a continuum between the two poles from which all conflict and failures arise, but given how much of success in modern society seems oriented around the antisocial pole, I’m often left wondering which side is winning.
It's easy to write a GC that doesn't stop the world at all. A Baker treadmill [1], for example, is a very simple type of incremental collector that can be implemented quickly. (It's a fun exercise, by the way!) If you implement it "by the book", it will have no stop-the-world pauses whatsoever (assuming the mutator doesn't allocate faster than collection can happen).

The problem is that a simple GC like this will have low throughput, so it's not worth it. These are some of the most common misconceptions about GCs: that it's hard to write a low-latency GC and that pauses are all that matter. In reality, GC engineering is all about the tradeoff between throughput and latency.

[1]: https://www.memorymanagement.org/glossary/t.html#treadmill
Single income setup is quite common in some European countries. In my country you can get paid leave up till your youngest kid is 3 or 4 years old. The amount of money you get is way bellow even minimum wage (~ 200 USD/month depending on the number of months you want to take off), but most people who can afford it stay at home.

My wife is currently finishing her third year at home and there will be at least two more.
Could you expand on why you think so?

1. I'm driving at 110 kph when the limit is 100. I pay $80, but I got paid $16000 after tax this month.

2. I'm driving at 110 kph when the limit is 100. I pay $80, but I got paid $4000 after tax this month.

Fair?
Wrong, and definitively not period.

The enterprise world moved to Java and C# because:

- It was a corporate language with corporate support and that matter a lot in many environment.

- It had at the time one of the best ecosystem of tools available.

- It was the mainstream fashion of a time and nobody get fired to buy Sun/IBM/Microsoft right ?

Most companies (and managers) could not less give a dare about your program crashing with a segfault (unsafe) or a null pointer exception (safe). It's the same result for them.
My first child was born at 1 AM, on our third night at the hospital that week. All I felt was tired.

> over the past 3 years have realized just how selfish I am when it comes to taking care of the munchkins.

Ditto. Part of the deal with parenting is to grow out of the selfishness. It's never completely gone (at least, not for me), but I've grown to a place where I am (hopefully, at least) less selfish than I was.

Children grow their parents, too.
Though the better analogy might be: Bob knows that somebody is out to kill him and so he hides at the police station while a cop places a mannequin in his bed and waits in Bob’s closet for the murderer to show up. Or, more commonly, the cop goes undercover and poses as a hit man and gets the murderer on tape contracting the hit. That’s a pretty common sting and people get first degree murder convictions out of it.
All the GCs we're talking about here are incremental and have been for decades.
JDK 14 Early-Access Builds
I think you may be dramatically underestimating the cost of NIH and code bloat.

I'm talking about things developers think they can do in ten minutes but that they are at high risk of getting wrong: generating SQL, parsing JSON, handling dates, etc. These are all things that have well-established libraries in most sane languages (maybe NodeJS is not sane in this regard), where everything that you save yourself from by using the library is worth even a 40 hour review process.
There's some sort of irony in calling out the x86_64 vendor who's been the least-touched by all of the recent vulnerabilities
I'm curious about how to have kids in the face of failure. My truth is that I'm caught in a turbulent stream of life where I can have anything I want except success. It's a strange feeling to have time or money (but never both). To have freedom or love (but never both). And so on and so forth. If my definition of success is to have both of something, and my life is already half over, the evidence doesn't point to that ever happening.

Is it possible to be successful and have children? This is part of a larger thought experiment about spirituality, metaphysics, existentialism, etc. My feeling is that no, it's probably not. But that being human is learning to cope with the failures of everyday life and eventually life itself.

Or maybe having children is a drug that changes the spirit to realign one's truths. I know that all things of any importance that have ever happened in my life were not of my own doing. So is it just that when we give even the most minuscule effort, like skipping a stone off the river, that it changes the course of the river in some unforeseen way? I'm standing on the bank holding the stone, and am so tired that my only thought is to somehow set it down. It's no more work to throw it, but I have lost the will to do so. I guess this question is to God as much as the internet.
If the parents are expired, they don't need a license. The base patents are expiring very very soon (ie. months).
When will Northern Hemisphere get to see a great comet again?