skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Brouwer was absolutely not a finitist! Indeed, he completely rejected the idea that you could use formal logic to bound what mathematics could talk about.

A better (but still not entirely accurate) description would be that Brouwer had an epistemic conception of mathematical truth: mathematicians become able to assert mathematical truths as they engage in the process of constructing mathematical objects. This is indeed a constructive process, but it isn't finitistic -- for Brouwer mathematical reasoning is open-ended rather than a closed set of rules.

So much like Goedel (who disagreed with Brouwer in many other respects), Brouwer was totally committed to the idea that mathematical statements actually mean things. And because they carry meaning, the mathematical process and the properties of the mathematical objects created by a mathematician take precedence over the rules of logic.

This is why Brouwer rejected classical logic -- not because of any finitistic reason, but because (for example) classical logic permits disassembling the continuum into its set of points. Since (for Brouwer) the point of a continuum is that it is continuous, it followed that any logical principles (such as classical logic plus set theory) that permitted you to break up the continuum were fallacious. This is why he spent a lot of time on his so called "strong counterexamples", such as his proof that intuitionistically all total functions on the reals are continuous.

Notice that the direction of reasoning here is exactly the opposite of what a finitist would accept: Brouwer used the properties of the continuum to justify various finitary logical rules, rather than the other way around. The continuum was real, and logic just a façon-de-parler.

I find this kind of thing really interesting because it illustrates that the pretheoretical idea of truth can be formalized in many different ways, and that the various formalizations are not all compatible with each other. We are used to informal ideas like space having many different mathematical realizations -- metric spaces, topological spaces, vector spaces, etc -- but it is a little disconcerting (and a lot fascinating) to realize that logic and truth exhibit the same plural nature.
> The no-castling restriction means that players cannot rely on memorized patterns; they are forced to think creatively from the beginning.

It's not obvious that this is true at all. Once top-level players have played no-castling-chess as much as they've played ordinary chess, I don't see why they wouldn't have just as many patterns memorised.
“Peace on earth, but only when Hitler is smashed”: Christmas wartime propaganda
> Sorry but that's brutally naive,

Hence why I mentioned and dropped the Biohacker motivation to all of this, which in case you are unaware one of has many goals: it's biggest aim(s) is making tech like gene-editing more accessible to the general public and open-sourcing as much of this as possible.

The article above is actually focused on 80s technology (CAR-T) to modify T-cells in case you didn't read it. This is all old-hat in the Medical field, the problem is that it was extremely cost prohibitive, the only real noteable advent here is that the Chinese cell therapy company just expedited the process and total turn around which subsequently dropped the cost.

Gene-editing is already taking place, in China and elsewhere: whether you like it or not, that much is clear.

Furthermore, Dr. Zayber, who is in Code of the Wild by the way, is an Ex-NASA researcher (who was studying a microbe to help terra-form Mars) got in trouble for doing just that with his ODIN project this year, they dropped the inquiry once they realized he wasn't violating any Law:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-15/biohacker...

It is because of people like him/us why its not 'naive' at all to make this tech mainstream, and force them to publish their work in peer reviewed journals so those of us who studied Biology can in turn re-create their work, in fact Josiah goes on to say how he can synthesize a now-inaccessible drug that was killed off in Phase 2 of clinical trials on just what was published as an example of why and how this will benefit us. It was deemed not Market viable, but the treatment is still effective.

I have no doubt that attempts will be made for this tech to be used for those purposes, assuming it hasn't already in clandestine operations; but guess what, the surveillance based social-media reward system many of you helped build and maintain is far more effective at creating subservience and quelling dissidence amongst the general population, how that has all unfolded makes the need to manufacture gene-edited serfs entirely moot.

The PRC/CCP weaponized that platform and created Sesame Credit, now you are making the equivalent argument that things like Myspace/FB/Twitter etc... should have never been explored because tyrants will do what they always do with any tech and you think that's a valid point?

You opine for Humanity as though that 'loss' hasn't already happened, I'd say this (and the potential Nueralink may have in the future) are the few attempts to re-gain something from that loss.

Big Pharma already created a tiered caste system in the US and elsewhere, this is at least one way to try and regain some agency in what has been a horrid one-sided onslaught.
The real solution for dealing with spaces vs tabs is that there's no real solution that will work all the time. Or maybe we could go back in time and murder both hitler and the person who decided that tabs should be a separate character (which I wouldn't be surprised if they were the same person).

If you don't autoconvert you risk ending up with a file mixing tabs and spaces which can range from a mild annoyance to generating very perplexing errors that are a pain to debug if the file's format is sensitive to indentation (such as python scripts or... Makefiles). I suppose you could argue that the conversion should require user interaction but frankly that sounds like a hassle since 99% of the time autoconverting is absolutely fine.

Furthermore it makes total sense to use an editor config to force a certain standard and avoid problems in the future, especially if you work with many third party libraries with different coding styles. At work I deal with python files indented with 4 spaces, the Linux kernel indented indented with 8-space tabs and a bunch of other projects and language who may or may not be using other variants. You'll have to pry my editorconfigs from my cold, dead hands.
We used to hire employees in California, and even with letting an external payroll company do everything we were still getting civil rights posters like every week.

Who were they for? Where were they supposed to go in our coworking space? When we let the payroll company go the administrative burden was such a sidequest to our actual mission that it was untenable. To clarify we ended employee status alongside getting rid of the payroll company. 1099 is just simpler and for the federal government's rules the discretion of the people we worked with fit the requirements for contractor status.

So now removing choices for even having employees or not really makes it unattractive for businesses under a certain size.

I think they should consider that.
It doesn't, but at least 'when' statements will be exhaustive when working with sealed classes - which is a breath of fresh air if you enjoy working with sum types and pattern matching.
> ...then you are the reason homelessness is still a problem...

That comes across as hyperbole. People commenting on the internet are not the cause of persistent homelessness.

I lived on the streets for a while when I was a teen. My experience was almost no one wanted to stay there forever. The only people that do are crazy or totally given up on life.

Therefore you have two homeless problems:

1. Crazy people or drug addicts that have no hope.

2. People who are in financial hardships.

Almost all these stories are about #1, not #2. #2 is solved with many social programs. #1 exists because the state can't house crazy people in asylums any more.

Therefore, the homeless problem will never be solved for #1 again because our society can't handle asylums.

People commenting on the internet are not the issue.
It's an externality that future Earth won't have Helium.
I'd love to see this for politicians. Lie and you're automatically removed from office and fined/jailed.

Also, I never understood why a vote is a one way street, why can't I recall my vote if the politicians that gained my vote with their programs and promises then end up breaking those promises and not implementing their programs.
It would be nice to see the economic cost of each of the options as well.
Still some workarounds to the slash-stripping:

#include "\
/etc/passwd"

program221/code.cpp:1:11: warning: backslash-newline at end of file
1 | #include "\
|
In file included from program221/code.cpp:2:
/etc/passwd:1:5: error: found ':' in nested-name-specifier, expected '::'
1 | root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash
| ^
| ::
/etc/passwd:1:1: error: 'root' does not name a type
1 | root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash
| ^~~~

Is it possible to restrict the compiler's access to only files in "/usr/include" instead? Seems like it'd be hard to cover every case with just pattern matching.
That's so cool! Yet another example of Lisp enabling what other languages get in the way of.
If the two hostnames resolve to the same IP address, they are equivalent. This could happen if initech.com was a default domain. This is a very standard situation in internal networks which i am surprised you are not familiar with.
Faster Enum. Comparison with Enum from the Python Standard Library
Cognitive Function: A Key Human Factor in Software Development and DevOps
That's a good point. If a farmer mods it into being illegal, it's on him isn't it?
> a nuclear plant takes 30 years to build

Only if your country isn't serious about it. South Korea builds modern nuclear plants in about five years: https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/article/2027347/south-korea-s...
> People will want more. People have _some_ ambition. Not everyone is made out to finding things to do at home all day (we need only look at retirees for data). What are they going to volunteer for? It’ll all be automated.

I don't know if this is true. Sure, if you grow up in a society where work is an important part of your self-worth for much of your life, it makes sense that upon retirement it's hard to see things differently.

But suppose you're raised in a society where this is not the case? Where for some, there isn't the often almost traumatic transition from play to school and school to work?

I'm inclined to believe that in such a society there will be different kinds of people, some who enjoy the tedious work, some who focus on art, and some who mostly fart around and remind the rest of us to take a break, so to speak.

As a child, I was always busy starting activity groups. I enjoyed learning for its own sake (preserved in part by not having to go to high school until I was around 17). I read voraciously. I explored. I learned a degree of diligence and discipline by other means that, in hindsight, felt a lot more natural than "do your homework". If I didn't 'have' to work I would probably still be doing the kinds of stuff that we now call work.

I've kind of become less certain that this is true for everyone, because other children seemed to mostly enjoy socializing and relaxing in various ways. But I can imagine there's a use for that too, and if we do manage to automate everything it's not like we can't afford these types of people too. I still suspect that with these other children perhaps they just hadn't yet found what innately motivates them.
> Finally, humans, while not optimally satisfying all the above tasks, do quite a decent job at these tasks, which is surprising if humans themselves were some sort of algorithm.

Whilst I agree with everything in your comment before this point, I don't agree with this.

There is a very big difference between almost achieving something and actually achieving it. For example, there exist algorithms which are able to determine whether a given program halts, for a large class of programs, or to give some probability that a program halts prior to some point, even if they are unable to solve the general halting problem. So you haven't really argued that humans are doing something computers can't do.

In addition, I take issue with your statement that humans "do quite a decent job at these tasks". On the face of it, I agree that yes, (when sufficiently motivated) (some) humans do indeed do a pretty good job of e.g. proving mathematical theorems and writing programs that halt when they should. Certainly better than the best computers we can build. But that "pretty good" is a _far_ cry from the optimality referenced in the theorems you've stated. And if you are using this "pretty good" to indicate that humans are better than any possible algorithm, that argument doesn't follow-through.

I think that human-level algorithms are in principle possible. They will have to incorporate a lot of probability and approximate results and the like, and likely will have something similar to "intuition" where the path from input to output is not clear, whether to human onlookers or to the algorithm itself (whatever that might mean). We already see hints of this today with our deep learning algorithms. Not to say that we are necessarily close to achieving this, or that we ever will, but on the other hand it might very well be just around the corner!
Just run the most sophisticated chess engines available 960 times and publish the results.

Even if not the "best" in an absolute sense, the moves those engines find are going to better than the move that an human comes up on the spot.

This means that memorization will still be necessary in Chess960 to be competitive at the highest levels and in fact it's probably going to be worse because memorizing those 960 starting moves sounds far more tedious than memorizing classic opening theory.

Scrabble players can memorize 10K+ word dictionaries in languages they don't know, and since (starting position, move number, chess move) triples can be encoded as words, it should be possible to memorize the main variation found by chess engines for each Chess960 position.
Off topic, you need the triple backticks on their own lines for them to render here.
System Design Interview – Step by Step Guide [video]
How to geolocate this photo without a mapping service
I have a 15 year old svn-turned-git repo called commonplace-book and keep my notes, plans, quotes and tidbits in there under a terse, relevant filename in a flat directory.

And I have a bash function called 'cheat', that will look for things in there based on the filename, or contents or however I happen to have it written.

As I learn new things I can append an existing file; I run 'cheat git' once per week and 'cheat tmux' every time I forget how to clone a session. Since this all invariable dumps to stdout, I can continue grepping when it suits.

I have another very dirty hack that will get me in trouble eventually - I'll share it because I find I can often improve my code by self shaming - ghetto secrets management:

echo '1,$'|vim --cmd "set key=${password}" ${filename} -es

This is the nugget around a lot of boilerplate, but this invokes vim and makes it decrypt a file and dump to stdout. From here I have my own little grammar and grepper for storing quasi-secure strings or even just secure texts. I'm positive it's going to get me into hot water but it's been extremely portable for me and I trust it on systems that I have the audacity to believe I am alone on.

I know there's a vimdecrypt plugin floating around that is almost definitely superior, but, mine works on stock linux, mac, and git bash.
These were vehicle related incidents. The important thing would be to get better descriptions of the vehicle to (hopefully) help with a later financial claim. Prevention is really a secondary goal.
Joplin on desktop and mobile. End-to-end encrypted, and stored in OneDrive (could use Dropbox, etc). It uses markdown.

https://joplinapp.org/
Do you have a good guide for writing portable makefiles? I’m always using GNU make so I don’t notice it with mine but I always feel a little bad.
Rambler vs. Nginx confrontation timeline (updated)
I've implemented this in Kotlin with sealed classes, and it's slowly taking over within our org. You don't get a few things (like the ? sugar) but it's still really nice.

I have no idea why the Kotlin std lib has a Result type but limits it to exceptions - such a missed opportunity.
You could do that with a modern type system. For instance, you create types:

UserInputString,
UnvalidatedEmailString,
ValidatedEmailAddress.

At least the first two of them are type wrappers for strings - opaque to the type checker, but transparent to the runtime. Rust and Haskell have wrappers like this. Typescript does not.

Keep the internal details private to the module so that application code doesn't concern itself with the details.

The module that sends emails only provides code that accepts a ValidatedEmailAddress and sends it an email, or accepts an UnvalidatedEmailString, records it in the database, send it an email, and Validates it. Next time you load it, if it's been validated, you get a ValidatedEmailAddress - as long as it's been validated.

Sensibly, there would be no (public) code to convert the ValidatedEmailAddress to a database id, since (a) you never application code want to run "UPDATE email_address SET address = 'ketchup@tomato.sauce' WHERE id = 5", because it needs to be validated. Likewise, you never want application code to run "INSERT INTO user_email(email, user) VALUES (5, 6)". (Something like the latter will of course occur, in the code responsible for recording invalid emails and retrieving validated emails.)
Ditto, I think that'll sell well in a world where millennial are killing $THINGS
Smartphone gambling is on the rise among African millennials
Top Java Frameworks for 2020
Linear Algebra. Points Matching with SVD in 3D Space
Habr – best articles, authors and statistics 2019
Its coming to java: https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~briangoetz/amber/pattern-match....
Does somebody even use other make implementations anymore? I think such suggestions aren't relevant nowadays. Same goes for bash. Posix compatibility is overrated.
When most engineers automate repetitive work flow, they seek praise and then find other useful things to do. I think automating, then being lazy, is an exception rather than rule for most.

With that said, I do believe AI will replace most developers in our lifetime. Particular ones like me, that create run of the mill relational systems for SMBs. I didn't need to go to school or get a fancy CS degree to do what I do. Nothing cutting edge. AI will cut deep into development like everything else eventually.

A lot of what we do is converting business rules into code, storing that data, returning it, and performing some useful operation with it. The remainder is making the systems easy for humans to develop on (be it DevOps or clean design). That whole last part doesn't matter to AI, in fact it's really a waste of time when you remove human engineers. Even still, AI can figure out SOLID principals, cyclomatic complexity, style guidelines, and general human readability if it needed to, but why?
Both of those are awful and it’s the same problem: They’re incompatible with community maintained software.

The manufacturer has to support all the software on them which is an insane model if you’ve ever looked generally in the direction of stuff hardware manufacturers have written.
Isn’t burning lots of fossil fuels putting us in a bit of a pickle?
The problem is, who is likely to find On the Road an escapist, elegiac, seductive fantasy? Sure, it’s not the ‘sensible rationalist’ slatestarcodex guy, but it’s certainly not, say, most women (unless their greatest fantasy is very masochistic). IMO the people who will find it the most seductive are precisely the trembling bourgeoisie who, of course, harbour fantasies of grabbing everything they can, using it mercilessly, throwing off the shackles of marriage and shagging everyone they can, etc. Every boring mediocre middle class white dude has these fantasies.

If it was transgressive then, it ain’t now. It’s the opposite.
Picking the right onboarding curve for me
Bloomberg is a libtard publisher, glad to see them fined.
Totally agree.

The way to alleviate the fear is through education and turning off the dramatic, need FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) to sell things, "news".
AKA my first experience with patent law. Marching cubes is an incredibly obvious algorithm, and the owners of the patent for it sued people gleefully in my experience. I talked to numerous game and simulation developers at the time and the story was the same: a need to convert volumetric data into a 3D surface, coming up with the obvious approach, get a nasty letter that it was patented.

Very happy when the patent expired.

Condolences to his family, though. He sounds like he was actually a good guy.
Nuclear plants take 5-10 years to build. 30 is how long it's been since public opinion in the US allowed for them to be built regularly.
I sympathize, but the ability to recall your vote, i.e. unelect, at any time would make your attitude towards your initial vote less serious and elections/unelections would cycle too fast to govern. Sometimes a bad government can be better than no government. Burden of citizenship.
Open Source Java Library with Stacktrace Filtering, Silent String Parsing
With Tox I cannot share an account between multiple devices - or that is I cannot switch seamlessly between PC and phone. That is dumb and I don't want that.
One way to bootstrap a new community. Take an existing popular online forum. And create a "backchannel" on Slack / Discord. Results can be mixed. But in rare cases the new channel will supercede the old

One thing that does work is maintaining a critical mass of "influencers". Likeable people who post high quality content with predictable regularity ;)

Observable is one community I follow. I think a lot of people had the idea to create of network of Jupyter / Collab notebooks (like Tableau's Gallery). But few have gained mainstream reach outside of their niche

ps Observable is hiring in SF!

https://observablehq.com/about
It seems that most languages these days are on a path to adding as much syntax as possible. Is there no limit? The mainstream languages are already too complex for me to understand fully, let alone use effectively.

We used to joke about APL (the "beautiful diamond") and Lisp (the "ball of mud"). Lisp was big, at the time, but most of it is what we'd call the standard library today. The actual core was quite small, and everything was remarkably coherent for a system of its size. Today, many core languages are as big as all of Common Lisp.

When I see a language add new syntax for a trivial transformation, in the compiler because the language isn't extensible, using ASCII art because they've run out of symbols on the keyboard, it just looks like the worst of APL combined with the worst of Lisp.
High taxation of fossil energy together with rolling-out of new energy/carbon-removal technology seem to be a real way out of this catastrophe.

Does anyone have a list of startups and established companies actively working on any of those crucial solutions?

Only found this through a quick Github search:

https://github.com/flamato/awesome-climate-change-ressources...