skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Web Services
Web service is a web development based IT company located rohini(sector 6),Delhi. We are providing all types of web designing & developing service like Responsive web designing, Seo friendly, Static website design, Custom website designing, Landing page design, PSD to html conversion …etc.
Our team is a blend of talented and experienced professionals. This provides you a unique edge of low cost yet and high quality result oriented output. We had worked with many national & international projects specially for USA, UK , Canada and other country.
We also providing training & intership of our company.
 Web designing course
 Webdevelopment course
 Graphic designing course
 Architect course
 Video editing course
 Software development course
Give us call on: +91-7683072463, +91-8700846332 on mail us on: https://www.web-services.co.in/
> dead Uber pedestrian

Elaine Herzberg was in dark clothing crossing a dark street well away from any crosswalk or street lighting. Would a human driver have performed better? From the footage I saw she was nearly invisible, I would have hit her too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufNNuafuU7M

This was not a hard fail for the AI.
Yes, it is true, specially for the regular consumers that don't have any idea of what we are talking about here.

WebGL game engines could already been the new Flash for casual games market, but it is just better, from business sense and support, just to ship native mobile games instead.
That is purely a self inflicted problem. There is a reason why this happens and both women and men are equally to blame.
If you look at the stats, luxury cars are involved in less crashes per miles driven.
I meant to say "an inspection that might have caught the problem", not "an inspection that might have caused the problem".
Human textiles to repair blood vessels
This has turned into a time sink with no upside for me. I've looked at some of the articles you posted which are pretty low quality. They seem more concerned about winning some USA-only political points than discussing the topic in an objective manner.

If you're making the effort of linking to studies that support a specific statement, please link to the actual studies and not opinion articles about them.

In any case, I would not expect kids with same sex parents to do worse in school or have noticeable psychological issues, which is what these studies were looking for - these are pretty heavy issues after all.

But I would expect that they are slightly worse for subtler reasons: maybe they're a bit more prone to infections in the first years because they weren't breast-fed, maybe they're distressed in school because they're being subtly bullied (mentioned in one article, btw) and so on. Remember that the original claim was "they're no worse", not that they're not much worse. I agree that they're probably not much worse, but a male-female couple has thousands and thousands of years of social support and nature on its side. Of course it's going to be in some ways better.
This is not demonstrating the system as it is sold in current cars. It is using hardware, which was not present in the crashed car (the hardware is standard now with all current cars sold) and it is using software, which has never released to the public. This is solely a demonstration of what the cars can do in the "lab".
2 infected in Russia seems to confirm what you say. ;-)
The only place I've ever been at that had any sort of lines of code measurement also tracked lines removed, This was on a points system and in fact removal of code was considered worth more points as long as it didn't break build (there was also some other stuff about if it was rolled back or the lines you had written were changed in a short time that points were removed)
There was also some points for removing TODOs etc.

It worked pretty good because there was only a team of 4-5 people on any product at any time so someone just removing TODOs and not fixing the issues pointed out by the TODOs would have been caught.
Not the GP but... Reduce a cross cutting concern from a system into an aspect and you get this easily.

I once worked on a product and identified an ability to eliminate 100K lines of poorly written, inconsistent tracing code into a robust ~250 line file using AspectJ. Management threw a sh-t fit and thought the risk was untenable.
My airplane can land itself. I always assumed that was normal.
Agreed. Worse, I have yet to see someone that gave better estimates than someone that could give a rough "good faith" loc estimate.

That is, honestly list out roughly what all code the naive way will touch or generate. Without making assumptions about cheating the metric. If you can bring yourself to that, you can probably give better estimates than you'd expect.

Instead, we seem to constantly look for ways to cheat the metric. With no real reason to do so. Other than push the cheating/gaming into a harder sector?
> I don't know where you got these papers but you clearly got an awful sampling and I don't think you're giving computer vision a fair evaluation.

I disagree, I saw such an awful number of bugs in ML codes going with papers that I now take for granted that there is a bug somewhere and hope that it does not impact the concept being evaluated.

(here having everyone use python, a language that will try its best to run what you throw at him, feels like a very bad idea)
Google App Maker RIP – Shutodwn on 19th Jan 2021
Yep, definitely an issue with IMAP mailboxes. It's not a storm-in-a-teacup-because-it's-Apple situation, it's an Apple-really-done-fucked-up situation.

https://tidbits.com/2019/10/11/beware-mail-data-loss-in-cata...
I think it's better, see the other reply at https://news.ycombinator.com/reply?id=22306638&goto=threads%...
> Anyone who has driven with autopilot, how quickly might it react to a perceived obstacle? Would it take a hard turn into a median faster than a person could reasonably react if it thought there was something in the road or that the road took a hard left?

The only thing my car has ever abruptly/unexpectedly done was brake, usually in response to an overpass it mistook as a stopped car. It's happened maybe 10-20 times in 10,000 miles. Not enough to cause a rear end collision or even an angry honk. I've always had time to take over.

It's never taken a hard turn. The only times it catastrophically failed were when I knowingly put it in confusing situations: winding roads, poorly marked lanes, city driving, etc. In those cases I always have a death grip on the wheel, and the software seems to literally loosen its hold when it's feeling uncertain.
Lua and Python
"computation is almost free" actually triggered me. that's the java argument from 20 years ago, now we have go and rust. it implies electron is actually a sane approach to ui development.

the author is very vague about why exactly numbers don't fit in the type system, and in which languages. first class types for numbers exist in some languages. is he advocating for default overflow checks, which bloat code size?
"Obvious corruption"? Based on this thread, it looks like "this would be hard for us, so we object to the requirement". There are a number of ways you could slam that... but corruption?
In the last 10,000 miles I had no accidents. In fact, I had none in the last 50,000 miles. It is a big question if any of what you mention here would be as much as a touch, if you did not have autopilot in the first place.
You're confusing the technology to create UI with the UI itself.
No way, you're telling me 153 is the same as 315? :O
Not OP but also replaced a class. Very early in my career, I think I was 20, we were upgrading our Thrift version in a PHP/Java stack.

For some reason all calls were dog slow. Like minutes for simple pages.

Profiling revealed the class in question - and we were spending all our time in deserializing strings.

Copied the latest version of that class from the FB repo and luckily the interfaces were the same.

Worked for the next two years until we finally deprecated the PHP stuff.
> From what I've read it's highly unlikely the dead will be tested.

Not only that, but are the Chinese authorities going to accurately report that numbers?
You are being downvoted because your reply is basically an unnecessarily long "nuh-uh!" - a dismissal without any counterargument. Wrapping that in a string of fancy words does not change the fact that you are not providing any argument at all.
Thanks for the compliment. It's pretty much the orthodox standard argument, so no stroke of genius from me.

Orthodox economics is severely underrated.

Oh, and bitcoin got a decent short-selling facility with the futures trading a while back.

(No clue why you are getting downvoted.)
Considering the victim has complained that the system does not work well at this very spot, the question stands, why did the victim use the system unobserved at this very spot?

And independently who was in control of the car, I showed why this section was in a miserable state of maintenance and dangerous by its setup, as humans regularly crash into this very section. So this section is dangerous and should not exist in such a dangerous form, especially, as the installed safeties were not active at the time of accident.
I mean startup code that runs before main(), code that runs registered atexit() functions at application exit, floating point emulation for ISO C float semantics regardless of hardware support, thread local storage, threading (as of C11).

And keeping all of the above when targeting bare metal deployments as well.

All of that falls into the language runtime from compiler design point of view.
Besides what on_and_off said (and you can add many more to that list, for example diamonds, oil, construction using migrant workers in bad conditions, etc) there are also people who only care about money, regardless of the harm that it causes (deforestation of the amazon? Tobacco products? Financial products that lead people to ruin? Drug industries? Human trafficking?)

Some people will pay for all kinds of things that are extremely harmful. Your comment seems rather disingenuous. Why are you trying to twist my words to reflect badly on me? Guilt about the products you buy? (See what I did there? Same thing you were doing :D)
> Why does it look so ugly :(

With a bit of work, it can look however you want. Here's mine: https://i.imgur.com/13jfRup.png
Same here, always get those puzzled looks from non-technological friends when I am so picky about new tech.
Perlwm – a window manager written entirely in Perl
Maybe it's a potential vulnerability they have yet to exploit themselves... /sarcasm and also maybe not.
I never had any problem with gmail, but outlook et al I can no longer send mail to, since I switched VPS providers.

My IP range is on a blacklist and it won't come off.
I sometimes wonder, from a science fiction point of view, how cities would be designed if we somehow had foresight of the consequences (social, environmental, etc.) of building infrastructure centered around the usage of cars for daily transportation. We don't really hold much resentment for how things started since people just didn't know about the problems that over-reliance on cars would cause decades down the line. Would people still consider the convenience/economic opportunity the automobile afforded to outweigh the problems?

(Also, there is a body of fiction set in a future Earth where, since people several decades ago did have knowledge of the problem of climate change, they end up being collectively resented by their descendants for their inaction/ignorance in addressing it.)
All of this won't solve the mobile/desktop dichotomy.

I rename things dozens of times a day. Saying "rename function A to B" dozens of times a day is unviable on desktop and is nearly unusable on the phone. And this is a fundamentally different UI.
Might not be people's first choice, but Facebook is instant. Like, the money is a non pending deposit seconds after the sender clicks send. Slick, and not a silly extra checking account like venmo.
Same in Denmark. If you don't support contactless payments that basically means you're not in business.

That said, people mostly use cards; potentially because the bank apps that existed before were just really awful and didn't work the majority of the time. But Google Pay and Fitbit Pay work great.
If it's so hard to learn about this tool and so easy to learn about it the wrong way, that's a pretty obvious hint that there's something wrong with the tool.

Having to learn about the internals is a giveaway that the tool suffers from poor encapsulation.

To me git is definitely one of those tools where one should satisfice and not learn it deeply, because it's not worth the effort. One can successfully stick to a simple workflow and ignore anything git astronauts come up with, like git flow if they want to keep their sanity and focus on what matters - creating quality software. And almost any team has some git fetishist which will be thrilled to help when things go south. And if they don't, it's probably for the better.
It wasn't Tesla.

NTHSB investigated the crash and got this particular information with Apple's help.
Have you looked at other applications of this approach for tasks like semantic segmentation or depth estimation?
Show HN: Color Circular Weaving (Petros Vrellis)
I don't have time to look at rumprun right now, but from the Unikraft page:

> The Unikraft build tool is in charge of compiling the application and the selected libraries together to create a binary for a specific platform and architecture (e.g., Xen on x86_64). The tool is currently inspired by Linux’s kconfig system and consists of a set of Makefiles. It allows users to select libraries, to configure them, and to warn users when library dependencies are not met. In addition, the tool can also simultaneously generate binaries for multiple platforms.

So it doesn't solve getting the makefiles (or presumably the source code depending on how it's organized), the compiler, or assembling multiple projects into one coherent build.

Using Make as the big unifier also sounds a bit scary, since it's so easy to screw up dependency lists or introduce accidental impurities, because it has no way to verify either.
How does proof that the USA did something affect or change the risk that Huawei devices can pose? That's literal whataboutism.

The alternative providers aren't even USA owned, they're European.

Discourse is going no-where because some people have a fundamental misunderstanding that this is some sort of trial that requires proof, when in actually it's simple risk analysis.

Discourse is going no-where because some people somehow think it's unfair for Huawei to be banned from networks, when China routinely bans Western companies based on domestic security/market risk alone.

Discourse is going no-where because some people expect backdoors to have giant identifiable red flags, when instead they look like the openssl CVE's from 2006 that disappear and reappear in Huawei's firmware.

Discourse is going no-where because some people seem to think this is some attempt by the US to maintain some surveillance hold on telecom networks, when they can just compromise Huawei gear anyways.

Anyone sticking to Huawei hardware is doing it because it's extremely cheap, and they're either blind to (willingly or not) the risk or have factored it in (see UK's 35% deal).
Fairly sure that you do need that for autoland, to engage TO/GA (for go-around) and take control. Most other cases, AP disengagement indeed means "now we think about what next".
The author has a good point, although he miscommunicates it: The common use-cases, such as servers, business logic, glue code, etc., don't usually require hyper-optimized performance. It only needs to be reasonable and predictable.

They need a language that is easy to work with, and share with others, and there are few that really do that.

But of course, there are. Go, Python, Julia and others I'm sure, all prioritize comfort over performance. Although, as compilers improve, they might one day actually become faster -- since the user writes more abstractly, there is a wider search space for optimizations.
> C-style programming in C++ is also a bad sign; the IOBuffer design pattern with separate storage of buffers and their sizes is inherently dangerous.

This the main take away. Even when writing C, just prefer safe libraries to default strings and arrays, when possible.

By the way, MSR is hiring for Checked C.
Exactly: it's such a niche thing, no one is mass-producing it. Because you would still have a problem.

Let's say, you started editing a document on your phone. You then put it in a dock. Now what? The separate desktop OS starts, and?...
Honestly it really hurts the author's credibility.

Virtual functions hurt performance (generally not significantly) but allow for OOP design, in theory to make the program structure more clear/organized. Exactly what the author is supposedly advocating.
yeah that was my immediate thought, stopped reading at that point.

BCPL was from the late 60s, most people were introduced to it in the 70s, C++ from the mid-80s
This is an interesting idea. Sadly, applications that use this are probably not eligible to be distributed through Google Play. One of the main reasons, as I understand, is that Google wants to discourage lots of apps from each having their own network connections open in the background.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20145206
They are for devs, Apple eco-system devs, not devs using macOS as pretty GNU/Linux.
It doesnt surprise me. One dev creates the endpoint for testing, leaves the company and the next dev does some refactoring and it makes its way to production. Many projects are done under a lot of time pressure. Also, often devs face worse consequences for a late project than for a catastrophic error.
In the movie “Airplane” the autopilot is an inflatable humanlike doll full on manning the plane. :-)
> I don’t take investing so seriously

Then how do you know you aren't over paying for stocks? Your plan is to buy high and sell higher?

> it’s worked out well for me

My unvested RSUs have more than doubled in value over the past year, and ESPP has done just as well lately. The market has worked out great for everyone, especially those of us in high tech.

> if I need to derisk I will make that decision at a later time.

To me this reads as 'I will sell when the market drops hard enough to make me anxious.' A ton of institutional investors (think pension funds and university endowments) did exactly that, and it made them worse off in the long run. David Swensen calls that institutional strategy out as 'buy high and sell low.' IMO, buying into a down market is the real step the average person is unwilling to do, even though it's incredibly easy implement: sell off your winners and buy more of your losers.

If you have something more complicated in mind, I just am not ready to believe someone unwilling to bother calculating the present value of forecasted future earnings is bothering with looking at their Sharpe ratio and deciding 'welp, time to buy some VIX to offset this risk.'

> Again, I just thinking screaming “anything except index funds is stupid gambling and irresponsible” is untrue.

Even if you don't accept the premise (I don't[1]), doesn't mean active investors are a priori smart. I have yet to speak with anyone upset by the index investing philosophy I consider prepared.

[1]: There are clearly people who make a living doing this who dig far beyond financial statements. Random example I know of from a lecture given at Yale by a trader (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMbhgSBIUfk&t=3875s if you can stomach the umms and ahs) reading Bond contracts ("indentures") and looking for companies that were likely to delay financial statements and owed bondholders par immediately. One such notable source of delayed financials was backdated options, and this exact accounting irregularities even affected the tech giant you mentioned, back in 2007. You may recall another facet of this story from HN favorite 'Why I did not go to jail' (https://a16z.com/2014/02/06/why-i-did-not-go-to-jail/) as this was widely practiced at the time.
This comment looks like an offtopic pun to me and feels distracting.
> working from your bedroom

If you read your contract as a remote worker, they often say that you must work from a dedicated work room in your house, so not working from your bedroom. Not sure if there's some specific legal reason for that.
Agreed. It seems to me there are, in the main, two problems which include many other problems relating to the general problem.
I wouldn't disagree. The fact that they can force the government to do their bidding is corruption in my eyes too.

The carmakers in Germany shut down various attempts to incentivize electronic cars and inquiries in their criminal behavior in the cheating scandals.

I think there is a fine line between lobbying and being downright criminal. I think most companies have actually crossed the line.

Deutsche Bahn after privatization let the train tracks in Hamburg rot for a long time. Now that they've passed the safety threshold they decided not to renew the tracks but instead move the train station somewhere else.

I've been involved in a government construction project and the way the contracts are handed out are on the surface to the highest bidder, but it's hard to call it anything but corrupt.

Lobbying is one thing, but threatening consultants and employees with repercussions and lawsuits for wanting to inform people about lies that led to these contracts is in fact criminal. I had a good lawyer, but nothing happened to the leadership on either side and nothing probably ever will.
This article missed the two most important characteristics in the good vs. bad bullet list:

* Ability to understand how a piece of technology actually works. Not just push buttons or google answers. Not just follow a recipe to fix a problem, or know a piece of knowledge. Often problems are new and unique. Real understanding of how something works, or is supposed to, is critical for synthesis of new unique solutions. If you see someone that gives up after all information sources, google, documentation, etc. have given out - this is the problem. You have to solve problems even if they have never been seen before - somebody has to figure it out the first time.

* Sound and logical problem solving aptitude, skills, and techniques. Too often, even someone who is knowledgeable in a technology, can fail hard and waste lots of time if they have poor troubleshooting skills and no aptitude for troubleshooting itself. For example, don't keep making hypothesis and changing stuff, but forget to put it back when the guess doesn't work. Getting lost, making illogical guesses that don't fit the problem, tunnel-vision.
️ Note that this repo has now been moved to https://github.com/GoogleChromeLabs/browser-nativefs.
The future is very uncertain; but dealing with the immediate past the US are much more likely to use their intelligence to drone strike somebody or invade a country.

I would personally rather be spied on by the US than by China, but I can see how a rational person would choose the reverse.
I am really excited about this project! Having a source of push notifications without routing them through the google servers will really advance the state of open source and/or google free android. It is great to see it being backed by f-droid and apparently funded by the German government (through prototype fund and Federal Ministry of Education)
> the author is very vague about why exactly numbers don't fit in the type system

No, he’s quite specific: “hardware details such as the number of bits supported by an integer add instruction show through in the language semantics.”

Now, it's also true that there are quite a lot of languages where this is not true, e.g., Scheme, Haskell (IIRC with the default numeric settings), Ruby, Python, for instance, and many more have numeric types in core language or stdlib that don't face this problem but don't make them the default for simple numeric literals.
TikTok user gains fame as videos of life in Wuhan amid lockdown go viral