skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think nonlinear electronic media (like a single news site) is an acceptable alternative.

What I find particularly beneficial is that, even if one refreshes it too often, the content doesn’t change unless there is something actually new. Contrast that to TV news, where they regurgitate the same thing repeatedly, or to a social media website, where you’ll see new articles again and again about the same topic, but from different advertisers.
So the result of division would be an Option? Option types are great, but cannot reasonably be used for all types of error conditions.
If you cheat, that’s trivial.

Start with the target stable state, and add something that, on its own, dies out, far enough from the target stable state to not interfere with it.

You could cheat a tiny bit less by removing a small stable part from the ‘edge’ of the target pattern, firing gliders at it that, just before hitting the smaller target, collide to complete the stable pattern.

I think you can generate many stable patterns by taking this to the extreme: start with an empty target area, and fire gliders at it that collide and add stable parts one by one.

You may need lots of gliders, but since the board is infinite, it’s easy to prevent the separate glider groups from interfering with each other.
Why not use the 4 digit pin and then loop, appending the first two digits to the end to get a 6 digit pin? It’s somewhat easily guessed, but is a hell of a lot better than 333333...
>(for others: as we continue to subdevide the precision we require more bits of information, which has known physical limits)

Ugh. Is information theory mathematics or physics? Nature is analog and doesn't work in terms of bits, it's more similar to Euclidean geometry than Cartesian.
I mean, it is conceptually kind of a nerve-wracking thing to fly. It's a plane that is constantly two seconds from nailing the ground/sea and crashing. And as you're ripping along at 300 mph you have to constantly scan for any ships that might be in your way, because you can't just fly over them.

One of the noted problems with it was pilot fatigue, for exactly this reason.
The nethack codebase is so old school. Functions are KNR syntax
Not a fair comparison. In common parlance, there are no other uses for "w/" than "with". Certainly "4" usually means 4.

(Edit: Turns out that if 80 is the limit, "for" would've fit. Hah.

$ len "Show HN: Encourage children to use the net more for learning with Pihole 5beta"
Length of 'Show HN: Encourage children to use the net more for learning with Pihole 5beta' is 78

...
I also would've left out "more" because... am I really wanting to encourage my kids to be on the net more than they are already?!
...

Perhaps something like "Show HN: Shape your kids online time with PiHole 5Beta"... but anyway cool project. It does shape things like Khan Academy as punishment / work, though. Like... If you only give your kids broccoli, they'll like broccoli. If you give them candy, then say "you can only have more candy after you eat 5 bites of broccoli", they'll f'ing hate broccoli and covet candy as their new god. But the real world is messy like that, eh? :-D )
True enough. Although there's some custom pieces that could be useful, like the big flat pieces used in the SHIELD Helicarrier for the runways: https://imgur.com/gallery/n5TEAhH

And Lego's designers could lend their expertise to creating some wiring routing and harnesses, or design some mounts/surrounds for breadboards. Or mounts for standard SoC boards like the ESP32 or Mega2560.
It absolutely was real. Countless software engineers, including myself, worked our tails off updating code to avoid the worst of the issues. It worked. I think it's one of software's great success stories (of course after an initial lack of planning).
That is a great analysis. I completely agree with everything you said. We are currently targeting consumer and SMB use cases and not enterprise/large scale applications at the moment. Thank you!
don't like politics on HN

For me this is it. Now I generally don't downvote unless I see the same person going on and on. But, regardless of how I feel about a particular issue, I just don't think it belongs on HN. I come here to get away from all of that. There are plenty of other places to go if I'm interested in discussing politics. I come hear to talk about tech and science.

I'm not perfect and I'm sure if you trawl through my comment history you can find contradictory examples, but, I hope anyway, they are few and far between and limited to one or two at most in the same story.

My rule of being a good HN user is don't complain about downvotes, don't talk too much, if at all, about politics and read and reread my comment before I hit reply. Am I really making a contribution? If not, hit the back button!
I work with KDB daily. This comment is misleading and uninformed. I'll agree the language is cryptic but that's what makes it fast. In regards to single threaded, that's just false. There are many options from slave threads to parallel processing you can use to speed up processing if your data sets are large (billions +) or you need to query historical data that is in the size of petabytes. Also once you learn the syntax and error handling it's not bad, just like every other language.
I've used a few similar libraries [0][1][2] and wrote one for a personal project. If we categorize them as embedded DSLs for runtime type checking with some support for static interop, they all share three major flaws:

1. Sub-optimal developer experience: significantly noisier syntax compared to pure typescript, convoluted typescript errors, and slower type checking.

2. Unfixable edge cases in static type checking: Features like conditional types work less reliably on the types produced by the library.

3. Some typescript features can't be supported in the library (again, conditional types).

I think a better way to approach the runtime+static type checking is to do it as a babel plugin, which would fix the DX and edge-case problems and also gracefully degrade in the case of typescript features that can't work in runtime.

Since babel can now parse typescript, it is trivial to write a babel plugin that takes regular typescript files and converts their type annotations into runtime values [4]. Those values can then be fed into a simpler type checking library, giving us runtime type checking on top of the native static type checking experience.

[0] https://github.com/gcanti/io-ts

[1] https://github.com/pelotom/runtypes

[2] mobx-state-tree also has a schema validation library that works to some extent statically: https://github.com/mobxjs/mobx-state-tree/

[3] https://github.com/gcanti/io-ts#branded-types--refinements

[4] https://gist.github.com/AriaMinaei/2f1229178abad4363f5180db2...
Good Airbnb screws hosts and lies about their million dollar policy. We had about 5 condos we managed and Airbnb never compensated us if the damage was over 50$ They always found a way to deny it. Also always refunded guests when guests lied about anything really.
A few of my friends learned trades like optometrist and cosmetician and never found a job.
> This suggests there isn't even some kind of 'local-ish' theory of hidden variables, like in the case of throwing dice, and we would really need to account for the state of the whole universe for all of its history to accurately predict what happens when we type at our keyboards.

Yes, because all particles in the universe share a common entangled past because they all originated from the same source, ie. the Big Bang.
Unrelated to article content. I can't believe someone thought it was a good idea to set body text to 60% opacity...
> It's nonsensical to think a person created in the universe is separate from the universe. There are no great philosophers that believe in free will.

And yet compatibilism is a common philosophical belief ever since ancient times, supported throughout history by philosophers such as Schopenhauer, Thomas Aquinas, and Daniel Denett.

The essential idea is that what we understand by free will can exist even in a purely deterministic naturalistic universe - mostly, free will should be understood as the ability of any agent to act based on its motivations. So, for example, an artificial neural net is in some important sense free to act as it 'wills' to solve a problem, even though it is following its programming.
Understanding the OS of the AS/400 is a far cry from understanding all the custom software running on it.
Venture capital open for business on record amounts of dry powder
Time Has No Meaning at the North Pole
I seriously love this whole discussion. It's "well, actually"ism at its best—and actually useful.
would it matter if they were a doctor? In your other comments you said that you ignored the advice of multiple doctors and took advice from a Facebook group instead.
Well, that is kind of stale news. The sending of a few dots worked for a few weeks. I even participated. But a pack of angry hams sending dots was worse than the woodpecker. But anyway, after moving off the ham bands for a while, the woodpecker came back with a chirped signal. That was essentially unjammable.

Over-the-horizon HF radar needs to closely follow the MUF, staying just under it. So the woodpecker would drift up and down through the ham bands as the day want on.
Money rules everywhere.

Courts in the German state of Baden-Württemberg also recently forcibly privatized the State Forestry Service's logging operations because they were considered a monopoly (the "Forstkartell") and the sawmill industry sued in hope of lower timber prices.

This forced the regional Forestry Service departments to split into two organizations - the logging operations and the government authority, now regulating its former self. Government and state forestry services are now supposed compete with each other on prices.

Of course, this ended up increasing timber prices due to the resulting mountains of paperwork, the organizational chaos that would be expected from splitting up a hundreds of years old government organization, and the extra personnel/training required.

Lawyers got paid and tax payer money was burnt, and the main purpose of the Forestry Service - environmental protection and research - suffers from the overhead.

Oh, and the state-ran broadcasting organizations need to delete productions - paid for by everyone's broadcast tax money - from their online media libraries after a few weeks because private media organizations sued because it supposedly competes with their for-profit streaming services.
No, unless you replace your eyes with chips that perform the post-processing of the image.
The misconceptions of hackers and being hacked
Yeah, Bolsonaro has literally never said anything remotely close to that against the medical establishment.

He did underestimate the virus a few days ago, but he's clearly changed his mind as the government is releasing emergency measures. I see no problem with that.
Oh, understanding the underlying system, that's comparatively easy. Understanding the bespoke business logic and how it's represented in the system...now that's harder, an order of magnitude at least.

Story time: years ago (2010-ish?), we were doing some light web CMS work for a client. Nothing too complex, except we had to regenerate one section off a data feed that we received in a very peculiar custom format.

Great, everything worked, we finished on time and on budget. And then: "oh, and could you also check this other site? We need some minor tweaks on what your predecessors made". That other site was also consuming that data feed, so we took a peek. It ran in PHP3, walled off from everything, processed its own intermediate languageS, and the output was a massive 200+ page PDF (which was then manually shipped to offset print in large quantities). For Reasons, this had to run daily and had to work on first try. There was no documentation, no comments, and no development environment: apparently this was made directly on prod and carefully left untouched.

Needless to say, the code was massively interdependent, so that the minor tweaks were actually somewhat harder. We did manage to set up a development VM though, and document it a bit - but last I checked, the Monstrous Book Of Monsters Generator still seems to be chugging along in its containment.
It's explicitly one of their non-goals[1]:

> Add or rely on run-time type information in programs, or emit different code based on the results of the type system. Instead, encourage programming patterns that do not require run-time metadata.

This approach (build runtime behavior that produces static types) is the intended one.

[1] https://github.com/Microsoft/TypeScript/wiki/TypeScript-Desi...
Yeah, Conways compression- any dataset can be encoded into a deterministic game, where upon to restore it is a easy adjustable tradeoff of computation, stored presets and relational operations.

So, the bonus point is to find subsets of relationally related games, that can become the parent.
> On the contrary, it very clearly tells us that your society is apathetic about the EU and does not care about decisions made in the European parliament.

Exactly, that is the only thing that is clear. And the reason is that we have much greater political problems to deal with so the EU is not that relevant to us, especially not issues like right to repair (which is not an issue to anyone I know and google gives me mostly no online discussions in our language). It still does not give anyone the right to shovel us "what the society wants". Our society didn't want the Lisboa agreement, but our politicians signed it anyways - so what exactly does our society want and what exactly should the EU be saying about it?

Even if 100% of people voted, still the 2.85% of voice don't seem like much space to express what our society wants, you know? And why there should only be space for one central opinion? That doesn't seem that diverse.
Yeah, I have seen similar thins in a lot of modern and (modern-ish) countries where due to historical reasoning or organic growth some commercial business gets hold of a piece of public functionality that really should not be encapsulated that way.

But as long as it's only a few unheard voices complaining about it and no broad law stating 'public money, public data, public access" it's pretty hard to turn it back in to a real public service.
Forget startups, ExOs (Exponential Organizations) are the new way to innovate
It allows local hidden variable theories. Non-local hidden variable theories have existed for decades (de Broglie-Bohm/Bohmian mechanics).
See, I take the opposite view: consider that the 'model' is the abstract structure of the data which your application knows about.

In your case, contact info is a piece of related data that your application knows about, can traverse to, parse, and consume, and it can be either present or absent. To me, `null` fits that case perfectly (personally I'd use Maybe, but, same idea). Finally, in cases where you're modeling a collection of values where the keys are unknown, see `dict()`.
Have u checked the app? Accusing without facts is called you know how, mr.lovedictionaries
> So in Pascal the best you can do is write a switch function for each function pointer type (signature) and use an enumerated type or equivalent to dispatch calls.

Yeah, you would have to spell it out and you couldn't do compile-time optimizations, but you could get all the dynamic flexibility you need?

Really, what I was saying above is just that if your problem is easier to describe as a bunch of interacting "objects" (like a game or a factory sim) then use OOP, but if it's easier to describe as a set of functions and data structures then don't use OOP. :-)
Thank you! We are now exploring consumer and SMB but may also look into B2B use cases more closely at some point. If you know of any good b2b use case, please do let us know.
antibiotics are not available over the counter in Italy
Yes, you can compare. There are differences - there are always differences - but there are also similarities. Any reasonably smart person can pick out some signal from the noise, if they just try. Meanwhile, those who do not learn the lessons of history, etc. And contrarians (using the polite term) are gonna do their thing too, no matter how injurious, because its fun for them.
What a dangerous line of thinking you have.
https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid...
A carefully crafted Covid-19 playlist
wikipedia says the transmitter used a pseudorandom sequence, so unless you could copy the PRNG output then you couldn't predict the sequence and generate appropriate returns.

Amateurs would just jam the whole frequency so the radar couldn't hear any returns at all.
I wasn't saying that consumers "expect" the source code when they so-called "buy" the software. I'm explaining an example of what copyright law already _is_ so mentioning "software objects" is already getting into discussion of licenses even if you don't use explicitly use the word "license". There are 2 meanings:

- "buy software" the legal ownership sense : as in buying the copyright which is usually something companies (not consumers) do when they buy the intellectual property rights. E.g. Adobe Inc buys Macromedia Dreamweaver. This is the true ownership.

- "buy software" the casual sense : which just means the consumer getting a CD or a digital download to install a copy of the software. This the license not the ownership.

They are 2 different things that use the same word "buy" and just because a commentary omits the word "license" doesn't mean the above distinctions go away.

It's a similar distinction for many types of intellectual property. Photographers of weddings usually don't let couples buy the wedding photos in a legal ownership sense. Instead, they sell some prints with a license for use. Same with musicians selling "songs" to the public. People bought a license and not the copyright. Paul McCartney doesn't even "own" the songs he wrote with The Beatles. Thus, Paul McCartney can't do "anything he wants" with the song "Yesterday". He can't "resell the song" to somebody else like a used book. Instead, he has to ask for Sony's permission.

Does anyone "force" couples to license photos instead of buy them? In one sense, no. The bride & groom could conceivably contract with a photographer on a "work for hire" basis and thus own the copyrights to the photos. But most couples don't do that. Newspapers and magazines do establish "work for hire" with freelance photographers so they can own the photographs but most wedding couples don't.

As other commenters mentioned, the real issue is the slippery word "buy" that defies consumers' natural intuition of what that means. If you're really leasing/renting/licensing something, you need to make that clear.
FWIW, you can somewhat accomplish this with just the `config` library and config files written as TypeScript.
You're from India! I was just talking about this with an Indian coworker.
I'd loosen the problem a bit myself. After all, the Mona Lisa isn't a solid block of black either. It should be possible to put down a stipple pattern that, by construction, isn't a Garden of Eden pattern for at least one generation. This gives some degrees of freedom in the output. This should make the problem mathematically more tractable, although computationally more difficult since now we're searching a large space rather than being able to pretty quickly just go "nope, no solution".

How far back you could push that, I don't know. One generation before is almost certainly going to look very like the final picture. The "real goal" is almost certainly to get something that doesn't look much like the original for as long as possible, only for it to flash into existence with as little warning as possible. Though you could augment the scheme I describe above by coloring in the large chunk of non-alive spaces with patterns that fully extinguish themselves, which would at least somewhat obscure those portions.
I think that the guy shared his link with his friends/colleagues
It reminded me precisely of the situation in the US with the tax prep and filing process. A service the government could provide for free (which, by many estimates, would cost them less to do than maintaining the current system) but is instead propped up by an industry that has no reason to exist and makes life worse for most individuals.
Hard to keep under wraps though
Could we have a discussion about C without making it about Rust? The author doesn't mention Rust once.
Consistent kernel hackers get hired fast. Focus on a particular subsystem, participate in the community, and contribute regularly - you'll have opportunities in no time.
Did someone ever use electromagnetic diaphragm to control lens shape?
That is correct, you get some sort of mix or grey area. I think there was an interview with some of the engineers with an airplane manufacturer that described the changes after a merger where both companies were general commercial companies with profit in mind (and shareholders etc) but one had a company culture of doing it right and the other wanted to lower that down to 'right enough' hoping to make a bit more money that they didn't actually need on top of the billions of profit. But that's what minmaxing with do...
The thing I find interesting about C is that everything and anything done in other languages can be done in C; after all, how does that language implement feature X? In some low level manner, and that is where C shines. C is not just the language, it is the entire ecosystem of all available source code written in C - compilers, browsers, you name it, it is there. Working in C is as much research and integration as one wants, with the results being any flavor of programming style you want - with all the foundation bits under your complete control. Plus the community of pure C developers is people that have been working in it for decades, with more practical programming wisdom than you'll find in shops with teams of high level developers releasing modern applications. The C teams release them too, but theirs is exponentially higher performance in exponentially smaller foot prints. Lots of software shops appear to be more into empire creation than quality software, but that's a result of decades of software industry propaganda too.
https://youtu.be/NkpcRX6o7VM?t=386
Did you watch the video?

If you can "fix" what that video describes, you'd better start preparing your Fields medal acceptance speech. That you can "get around" it sometimes doesn't remove the underlying math.
I am Chinese, when has zhong nanshan ever being removed from heading the epidemic control committee. Just a few days ago he was making statements and directives as a member of that committee. This news is so fake it just smells like another Taiwan news piece smearing the Chinese government. (I have seen a number Taiwan news article that are just straight out lies. They often spin whatever happens in China has negative on the government, and push the government is evil narrative. Mainland also has it's share of fake news and propaganda. Both side is just equally guilty in brewing hostility against each other's government) And the government's treatment plan has never stated only to use TCMs instead of regular medicine. We don't have any effective drugs against the virus yet. All the treatment treats the symptoms. Say if the patient can't breathe so we give him oxygen. TCMs has a whole theory about regulating body as a system, it's supposed to reduce stress and improve immunity. I personally used TCMs and I have gotten better after using them. But the TCMs could very well be placebo. But when there is no drugs to use, why not try TCMs? Maybe it's just comforting thing. The patient is scared and super stressed. You give him this thing that claims to help, they gets to calm down, they are not stressed anymore, they sleep better at night, they are more hopeful. This is scientifically proven to help recovery. Also TCMs is cheap and you can get massive qualities in a short time. Whereas for Western medicine we gotta pay the drug companies expansive prices.