skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Not press-meat but a true 6 ounce breast filet. The other fast food stores use junky meats.

Maybe not even junk "meats" at all.

"Those results were averaged: the oven roasted chicken scored 53.6 per cent chicken DNA, and the chicken strips were found to have just 42.8 per cent chicken DNA. The majority of the remaining DNA? Soy."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/marketplace-chicken-fast-fo...
There are probably dozens of people who have been similarly inspired by you, but aren't reading HN this morning.
> even expecting that is more free labor

Mentioning that you don't intend to maintain a project is not "labour".
No, the key point is that these systems are still polynomial.

You cannot ask a question that would require a non-polynomial computation to provide an answer and expect it to be answered correctly.

Most importantly, recursive enumerable already means semidecidable. (Because it consists of primitive recursive functions, which are bounded.) Which means by Godel's theorems it is stronger than Peano arithmetics. (See Tennenbaum's theorem, Presburger arithmetics is fine.)
> with over a dozen identical comments saying "Same problem"

That's an UI problem.

If a bug affects 100% of the users no matter what or just a few of them, in some weird condition and setup, is completely different.

There should be a way to be prioritize or sort bugs by popularity.
Unfortunately my Ph.D. supervisor died before I was able to tell him how profoundly his views and criticisms impacted my intellectual life. He was one of those hypercritical people for whom "it's okay" meant more or less the highest praise, both for himself and others. This made him a number of enemies, I believe, and for me, as a Ph.D. student, that attitude could be kind of demotivating at times. However, in retrospective I realized that many of his snippy remarks were spot on. For example, he once said on a rainy day in front of the blackboard: "So it seems to me that linguistics is very much like economics, not really a science, or at least fairly imprecise." Something along these lines. Then, I got really angry. Now I think he was right.

Anyway, I told his family after he died and I think they appreciated it.

Bottomline of this little anecdote is that if you want to tell someone how grateful you are, don't wait until you can meet in person and just write a nice email, like the OP suggests.
Orthosonic Lift – Aerodynamic Lift from Sound Waves
> Contract systems in general have the problem that it is difficult to express higher-order properties about how functions should interact with each other or repeated invocations of themselves

Contract systems can express anything that can be expressed about a program. Some allow you to specify separate lemmas (e.g. see http://www.eecs.ucf.edu/~leavens/JML/jmlrefman/jmlrefman_toc...) . The difference between dependent types and contract systems is that contract systems can be verified by deductive proofs, or by a host of unsound techniques, while dependent types require deductive proof (or, in some experiments, other sound techniques like model-checking). If dependent types would accept unsound proofs, the soundness of the entire type system would be compromised to the point of undefined behavior.

The problem is that deductive proofs have so far shown significantly worse scalability than other formal methods, which is why most of formal methods research is looking elsewhere.

If dependent types could be made more flexible, they will be as good as contract systems.
Tokinomo Raises a €700k Seed Round from EGV and a Group of Angel Investors
@cespare Which section?
Why Google thinks we need to regulate AI
ITerm allows you to map the left and right option keys separately. Maybe that helps?
Erm not sure what your talking about those us salaries don't have the employer side taxes either.
Yeah do it though keep this tip in mind should the conversation behoove a promise/task/bid: underpromise... overdeliver

Basically, never promise more than what you are not able to satisfy, it makes you look irresponsible and like a b-s-er.

And over-deliver. Add more value to others/the_task/bid/promise than what you promised. You’ll have a better foundation with the person and they will regard you as responsible but also helpful/resourceful and that will likely ensure you have good on the table.
Yachts, villas, partying: many super-rich seem to be so unimaginative what to do with their money.

I'd have a lab and employ engineers and workers to create all the crazy stuff I always dreamt of.

Edit: I talked about the yacht in particular before editing the comment, hence the comment below.
It's result of frequent shadowban without reason.
> > I was so confident that it was not only possible, but correct to be an emotionless decision maker. That somehow you could navigate the rational path through every problem.

> You can.

This is narrowly true in theory, noting particularly that it applies only after the problem is defined, because defining a problem is an application of values which ultimately are rooted not in rationality but in emotional preference.

In practice, people don't and probably practically cannot fully define problems in advance of approaching them, but feel out the parameters of the problem in the course of addressing it, so attempting an unemotional approach invaluable means accepting an incomplete understanding of the problem.
re: Ant - If you’re using React and don’t need more than barebones mobile support, I’ve found Blueprint to be great.
Wait, Boeing does testing? Should've done that with MCAS then.
> I'm wondering if IPFS might be better thought of as a common data-publishing protocol that might be used to push content to any number of CDN's?

Think of the bits that work properly as "the web of BitTorrent magnet: links" and you'll have a reasonably accurate picture.
> Sure, but the more dynamic ones that drift away from what a (good) static type system offers are exactly the ones that aren't amenable to automated proofs and so tend to be checked at run time.

Not really. What contract systems allow you to do is to separate specification from verification. Type systems require that all of your specifications be verified with deductive proofs. This means that some deep properties either require a lot of work (using a type system such as Idris's) or are excluded from the type system at all. Contracts allow you to check a property in unsound ways, too.

As far as correctness is concerned, contracts do everything a type system can, but more flexibly. Type systems, however, have advantages related to tooling and efficient code generation by an AOT compiler.

> This too is an area with a whole spectrum of possibilities, and some of those involve a degree of formal proof of algorithm properties but not a mechanically verified translation of those algorithms into implementation code.

Even when formal proofs are used, the specification is done in a contract system, not a dependent type system.
> Being right does not give a right to be condescending

Not to disagree, but, quoting the article, I'd like to "underscore the asymmetry" between people that are right and condescending VS people that are wrong, think they are right (or don't care if they are, most of the times) and are condescending just because they can or because that's the way they think you advance your career.

They read somewhere that CEOs have a bad temper and imply that bad temper is necessary to become CEO.
Why the distributed company is a viable option?
It's certainly useful for the code to be expressive. But sometimes it's more important for the code to be easy to analyze and easy to verify than for it to be expressive and/or concise. I know that the mantra goes that "concise code is easier to analyze" but that's not always the case. It's true that "concise" code is usually easier to "match against" an algorithm -- i.e. it's easier to read the code and figure out if it does what it has to do. But you also have to reason about whether what the runtime does behind the scenes is correct or not, and your reasoning has to exhaust every scenario. If the runtime offers no such (or very few) guarantees, "expressive" code is very hard to deal with.

These guidelines aren't meant to be applied for "general-purpose" code, which may be used by a human operator in a million possible ways. It's usually very special-purpose code that does only a handful of things (and if it doesn't, that's meant to be treated more like a design problem than anything else). Consequently, it's not that hard to figure out how much memory you need from the very beginning, and not allocate any of it on the fly.

Allocating memory on the heap complicates analysis a lot. It introduces potential timing issues. You have to make sure that no matter how your program runs, it'll always be able to allocate the memory it needs -- or to design it so that it runs correctly (i.e. predictably and in the right manner) even when an attempt to allocate memory fails. You have to bring in pretty complicated third-party code, or spend a lot of time and money writing your own (writing a memory allocator is trivial, but writing a good, safe one isn't exactly a walk in the park).

As for function pointers... that's more or less the same story. You don't need them that often for this sort of code, and when you do, the trade-off is usually worth it.

(In very rare situations it's not, but IMHO coding standards do the right thing here. Judgement calls about these things are very much subject to ego and organization politics. It's always better to err on the side of having to do extra work under some circumstances).

These guidelines don't produce the most good-looking code but they do make it harder to shoot yourself in the foot.

Obviously, there is an argument to be made about alternative solutions, such as code that you cannot physically point at your foot, but that's a discussion for another time (and also way more complicated than that...)
they do when you can have a profile attached to the key and the car can have some configurations to that profile, mainly the seat and mirror positions if those are electrically adjustable.

On the other side, I had an audi that on top of 2 keys, it had a plastic key with a code that can be used to create a new key as the one that you must store in house and keep safe.
I'm seeing others here point out that IPNS basically doesn't work - so it doesn't really either, in practice.
I disagree. I think if you make officers individually responsible, you will paralyze them. In this case instead of the wrong person arrested for the murder, nobody would be arrested and the case would go unsolved.
My suggestion would be to treat it like an air crash investigation. An independent body produces a public report on each incident, with the power to make changes to procedures or training, or even recommend changes to the law, with no blame or punishment, and the full co-operation of all parties. Maybe it's less satisfying, but for air travel safety this approach is incredibly effective, and it seems like it could be for policing.
That feeling when you are pressing SoftIce popup hotkey and guessing will application survive or not. then your computer just freeze :D just old good times
> Women leaving tech are doing so probably because they can afford to.

On the contrary: world-wide, poor countries tend to have a larger proportion women in tech (and medicine, and ...). Not because they want to, but because they cannot afford anything but the most high-paying jobs!
Hazelnuts are also botanical nuts.
Fake Food: Big Food’s Desperate Attempt to Further the Industrialisation of Food
As I already mentioned in other comment, there was Syser debugger, but seems to be lost now.

https://qpdownload.com/syser-debugger/ (I am not sure how much is this link legitimate, so please be careful)

https://github.com/marakew/syser
at least for us you could change the title :)

we might have heard of front-end devs before....
This is an interesting point. As a humble pythonist I would like to hear more about why that is... thanks!
> This is narrowly true in theory

There is no switch that make it true just by flipping it.

That's why I said I've been trying for the past 25 years, it's a process.

On the other hand empathy doesn't work much better in practice.

People (we) are largely irrational.

> attempting an unemotional approach invaluable means accepting an incomplete understanding of the problem.

Of course!
> Women leaving tech are doing so probably because they can afford to.

I am considering leaving tech because selective biases play a larger role in hiring and advancement than they used to despite all efforts to the contrary. After talking with other people I am not alone in thinking this. I am willing to leave tech even though I cannot afford to because the hit to my finances is temporary but the barriers to my career from remaining in tech are permanent.

Let me discuss selective bias in a bit more detail. When I first started programming candidate qualification was centered around the needs to the business. For example, did a candidate understand the minimum criteria of working in a given technology plus the advanced criteria that harmed user interaction, slowed execution speed, or some other measurable concern. Those days are long gone, at least in high level languages.

Now the name of the game is programming fashion. Specifically, does the candidate write code according to a current trend a given team or interviewer wants without regard for any performance or measurable quantum.

That change is disruptive but not in a healthy way. In the old days the desirable and rewarded developers were those who performed well, such as writing the best code in the least time. The people on the right side of a bell curve. Replacing that with fashionable and non-measurable factors limits candidate selection to the center of the bell curve, which are people who do not perform as well but are better rewarded for it.

If I am willing to abandon a long time tech career even though it will hurt and have found others that share my frustration I can only imagine that perhaps this might be some small factor in why some women might want to leave in general.

I suspect this problem has increased despite all efforts to the contrary because all efforts to eliminate hiring/reward bias were typically limited to identity factors that carried provable legal consequences.
It sounds like you missed the context of the discussion. The starting point was "women cannot take on more income producing work because they are all tied up in housework."
I don't think the claim is that such a device with a finite amount of information could decide halting. As far as I understand, it could replace the infinite time required to classically decide halting with infinite information entanglement, neither can be put into real physical use.
Yes, you're right, it's not about how explicit you are, or even how explicit you have to be. You can write "stringly typed" code in a static language where none of your assumptions are apparent in the type system. Conversely, regardless of your typing discipline, you can be completely explicit about your assumptions just by writing comments.

This fits in a larger point that, in the end, the technical qualities of a language in many ways matter less than the culture surrounding the language. Even Haskell has unsafePerformIO which means that none of its guarantees about referential transparency actually hold, in theory. In practice, the culture of the language ensures that, when you pull in a library, you can be pretty sure that it's not riddled with unsafePerformIO, and you can almost always treat code as if referential transparency is guaranteed.

A language may facilitate certain habits and discourage other habits. I feel that statically typed languages do not force me to be explicit about my assumptions, but they certainly encourage it by providing immediate benefits to doing so (automated reasoning), and through the culture that surrounds these languages.
except the term yada yada was around long before seinfeld

I remember it from my childhood.

https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/yada-yada.html
> I live in SF, and I "only" make $150k a year. All of my friends in the city make at least double what I do thanks to RSUs. Some make three times as much. Three of them are women (!!!!). I've accepted that I'm probably never going to get into a company that pays that well, and that's fine.

This isn't statistical evidence, this is an anecdote about you and your friend circle.
So it sounds like pretty much marketing/sales runs the company and the product people have no say at Netgear?
For those that like the history of the Cracking scene - there was a set of binary-patching SoftICE extensions called "nticedump" and "icedump". They were pretty nuts, too - one reverse engineer got annoyed by his music playback stopping when he was in SoftICE, so he hacked an MP3 player into the SoftICE driver.

http://n8on.free.fr/hackzines/bhz/7/crackingbeginner3.txt

There was also in-SoftICE tetris.

I used SoftICE extensively from 96-00'-ish ... to the extent that as a teenager I had single-step dreams and dreams where I tried to hit CTRL-D.
Timestamping Before Leaving a Job, Advocated by Employproof.org
Please let’s not reinvent concepts or words. We are not the chosen ones nor do we live in a field that is different from any other.

Many other fields require the same mental capacities we employ: from doctors to school teachers all the way to even accountants. They are literally doing the same stuff we are doing: grabbing stuff that was already built by others, thinking about it, discussing it, having meetings, etc.

I hate it when a community becomes so biased towards their own field in a way that creates a bubble and interferes with actual innovation. This has sadly been the case for the software industry.
While I am also walking down memory lane -- writing recursive SoftICE macros so that one could make SoftICE single-step 50k times and write the log to a file.
Peppers are also fruits though.

I think this is merely a flaw with the English language. Tomatoes are fruits (fruit of the tomato plant) but they are not fruit (a food category). It's two separate words with different grammatical treatment.
On on Composition
Ha, publicly paid police officers making sure an office move of a private company goes well.
I guess the simpler proof that they are the same thing would be: Do they work the same?
I really don't buy that in this case. Poland's population has been stagnant or falling since the fall of the Soviet Union, like most of the rest of the Eastern bloc, and politically motivated homophobia has ramped up abruptly in the last year (rather than, say, in the early naughties, as you'd expect if it was actually associated with worries about population). I'd more or less assume it's because the migrant crisis has largely ended, so PiS needs something new to scare people with.

EDIT: Incidentally, I suspect that much the same thing has happened more broadly in the developed world with trans people. In the late 20th and early 21st century, many Western European countries passed major reforms to trans rights, and it largely went without comment from the far right, because they were at the time fixated on same-sex marriage. It was only _after_ most countries legalised same-sex marriage and the sky failed to fall in that the "trans people are corrupting and impurifying all of our precious bodily fluids" thing started, and it only wound up to full volume as the perceived threat of the migrant crisis faded (to the point that it now seems to be basically the primary issue for some European far-right groups). Some people, presumably, always need an enemy. I wonder who it'll be next.
Elon Musk: Starship Will Fly for 20-30 Years, Aiming for Fleet of 1k
I’ve thought for years a SaaS app could be created that elevates a prospects chances of a call. I’d have to hire folks to work alg but we could take their resume and apply to job with a very high score
Sure, but this is only an initial prototype. I'm sure we could make it work faster/more efficient with a few more design iterations.
Show HN: Writer.so – You are happy every day by writing
When reading articles like these I am mostly surprised, because my experience with FOSS has been largely different. I maintain a few semi-popular libraries like shortuuid and catt, but users have always been helpful and courteous, the pull requests have always had the best interests of the library in mind and the users were open to feedback, and the worst I've gotten was users politely asking for support with their particular setup, to which I politely reply that I unfortunately don't have enough time to debug things outside the scope of the code and that's that.

Has anyone else had this experience? Maybe the trouble comes with libraries as popular as ripgrep, or maybe it comes more often to a specific type of person. I'm generally not very patient, so I'd expect to have much more trouble than other maintainers, but I'm also just not negatively affected by bugs and PRs at all. People filing them have taken their time to do it, which means my code is important enough to them to spend time improving it, and bugs happen, so I take bug reports as compliments rather than as personal failures.

Hopefully someone else has the same experience as me, and maybe we can figure out how to generalize that experience for others.
They probably had to pay for the service.
I appreciate that. That is a very good thing because it not only feels good to them but it feels very right to us as well. I will also start doing the same.
I wouldn't worry about the PH launch. We had a pretty decent number of upvotes on ours, but it yielded zero paid customers. I've heard similar stories on others PH launch (lots of upvotes, zero revenue).
"Any sufficiently complex home automation system is indistinguishable from being haunted"

This is just a plain digital radio one; I'm sure with the involvement of computers it could have been made much more intractable.

My own experience closest to this was an office meeting room that had dimmable lights ... with a standard "boolean" momentary switch. There were, of course, no instructions. We sort of figured out that holding the switch down would sometimes put it into a cycle of brightness from which releasing the switch would leave it at right level, but it wasn't reliable and we often sat in the dim light, defeated by the UX.
i have not heard the word abandonware in like forever!
Congrats on the launch and i hope you make money quickly enough before Google launches this as a built-in feature.
what about the yacht builders though?
>a typical business can probably stop doing business with you

I think any private company doesn't have the legal obligation to serve you or many of the rules that apply to public/government institutions. See Cloudflare refusing to serve right-wing extremist websites, or Youtube taking down similar videos and channels. The only justification they need is that you failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the service. The leverage some have is judging them in the court of public opinion.
Servlets and Tomcat: 23 Years and Counting
I've never done this myself, but I've been on the receiving end. And I can say that those emails are really appreciated. It's one thing to get stars on GitHub but that's rather impersonal and after a certain threshold nothing special anymore.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_harmonisation

Spitfires focus was about 300m (1000ft / 330 yards)
This is why German unions often negotiate for different geographic areas independently. This way, different costs of living are factored in.
Built a startup on the side and open-sourced 7 libraries thanks to remote work