skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I’ll give you a better example: motorcycle helmets. There is little information about relative safety of one vs the other (they are all basically “tall enough”). They do all have slightly different features but there are so many little ones that it’s nearly impossible to compare a good $400 helmet with another good $400 helmet. But some helmets are worn by MotoGP champions and some are not and yes to some people that will be a deciding factor.
Actually, not exactly. The antibody tests, everywhere from NYC to California to Germany to Italy, is showing that unreported infections may be 80x as high as reported infections.

In fact, entire homeless shelters have been tested with about a third being infected, and zero showing symptoms.

What this means is that COVID19 is significantly less dangerous than we originally thought.

1 in 5 NYCers have antibodies; and this was sampled a week ago. Given how fast COVID spreads, it could be 1 in 4 now. This means that if we flatten the curve enough, we could possibly see ~3x the deaths (to reach a 80% infected rate) and reach herd immunity.

Now, no one likes thinking about this, but is another 32K deaths worth fully re-opening NYC and getting rid of social distancing? I think it is arguable to say yes, just as it is arguable to say no.

We absolutely cannot be in lockdown till a vaccine is found, we cannot stay at home for 18 months or we will witness decades of economic devastation for 7.5 billion people on the planet (given how connected the world is); not to mention all the mental health harm; as well as physical health harm (deferral of non-essential but still highly important surgeries like hip replacements; less preventative check ups from people going to doctors; etc).

There are trade-offs to be made: we have cars despite the fact that they kill. We allow cigarettes despite the fact that they kill. We allow alcohol despite the fact that they kill.

For anyone who this message resonates to, please join us on /r/LockdownSkepticism. We're about using logic and data discuss what the best course of action is for society as a whole.
As with most things in category theory, the way to really understand the Yoneda lemma is to sit down and prove it yourself. Break the statement down into the underlying definitions, draw lots of diagrams, and convince yourself that it’s true.

The other thing you can do is think about what it means for particular types of categories. For a posetal category, it says that an element of a poset is uniquely determined by the set of all elements that come before it in the ordering. For a group, it says that every element is uniquely determined by its action on the group. (This is basically Cayley’s theorem.) See this MSE post for more intuition: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/37165/can-someone-e...
This is how async/await is implemented. I think 'await' is almost just a synonym for yield. I didn't invent that part. I just made a faster, better encapsulated, promise free version.
Cool, but how does define the "whole galaxy"? I assume there's not a hard defined edge. How do you decide what should be made brighter for the effect in the photo?
There's a big difference between opinions that are merely taboo and opinions that get censored on social media. Not everything taboo gets censored and banned on social media.

Facebook/Twitter/popular social media as we know it barely existed in 2004, but I'm going to make a guess that discussing homosexuality wasn't banned on any of them (or whichever precursors of similar style and policies existed) around that timeframe. I feel like by picking that time frame, you're alluding to the speech standards that newspapers or TV imposed on themselves, and I'm very glad that social media doesn't impose that kind of standard on all of its users, but I don't think anything present suggests that social media is in danger of slipping to that standard. It looks like those dynamics are a world apart, and drawing these parallels is very misleading.

A bit of an aside, considering a taboo opinion which often prompts discussions about censorship online (an opinion that I think is bad and is taboo for good reasons, including that it's hard to detach from harmful calls to action, but I imagine it could be): talking about the possibility of differences in human capability in sex or race is taboo, but it's generally not outright censored in social media as long as it's not tied with calls to action like "#race war now". I feel like there's an overlap between those of the opinion social media is censoring too much and people outraged at James Damore being fired from Google, but I feel like people conflate him being fired from a tech company with the content moderation policies of social media. He was never banned from YouTube/Facebook/Twitter/Google services, but I get the impression that the volume of defense of him is linked to people thinking that did or will happen. It seems right to me that a large serve-everyone social media company would have different standards of its employees and the content hosted. (Silly example: I wouldn't expect a large social media site to ban a user for routinely posting that "$site is the worst", but I wouldn't find it surprising if an employee at that site was fired for that.) One could argue that Google went too far in firing him (and I'm glad those arguments are permitted in many places even though I disagree with them), but I often see it all bundled with the argument that this is a sign that social media itself is too censored and should be censored less, despite that it already permits him and that the enforcement line is still a world apart from him.
My work focuses primarily on consumer application development, however cybersecurity and CTF challenges like this have always been an interest.

What specific technical skills are required to successfully complete challenges like this?
Surprising Reasons Revolut Bank Is So Insanely Popular
It should be simple but a lot of companies don't seem to understand that principle and prefer free overtime.
Whoa! You’re going to finish all seven (six?) of those books over the next month? Just on nights and weekends? How are you so productive? How do you not burn out, given that (I assume) you do software during the day? Honest question, from someone who is often down on themselves for being a slow coder, slow reader, and easily burned out.
Only insofar as it's part of a putdown package. Really it's the combination of pejorative language (especially when personal), outright insults ("blindly believes vague propaganda"), putdowns ("super common perspective from [etc.]"), aggressive argumentativeness (your last sentence). The whole deal.

I'd be careful about perceptions like "there is a monoculture on HN and Reddit". Trying to pin down anything concrete about that is really slippery. Such perceptions are notoriously in the eye of the beholder, meaning we tend to create them without realizing it's we who are creating them, and it leads us to do battle with our own demons. Large statistical clouds like HN (let alone Reddit) furnish tons of material to craft demons with, far more than we need. That makes the pictures extremely convincing—with enough degrees of freedom you can fit any curve to any picture.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22980339

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22098687

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
The point they are trying to make is that if you have very little money to spend, advertising product A to you so you buy it instead of product B is moving demand around. It’s only generating demand if you have money to spend on both A and B.
Why wont you talk about the predicted numbers? Which professional pre-peak US prediction did you find suprisingly accurate? Clearly it's not this one.
Quantum Natural Language Processing
If there are enough double votes that throwing them all out changes the election. Then yes, do-over. The possibility of that happening is basically non-existent though because it would require a coordinated attack by thousands of people to change a national election (even assuming they strategically attack swing states).

There's a virtually zero chance that a group effort involving thousands of people isn't uncovered before the attack happens.
live version is here: https://victorribeiro.com/montyhall

I was having trouble ssh in my server, it's fixed now.
The price is generally the last price at which a transaction happened, modulo people intending to cheat the system.

There are people who put limit orders on the exchanges. Say that the price of TSLA is $500. I think it's overpriced, and its likely to go down, but then grow in the future. I can say, "I'm willing to buy 100 shares of TSLA at $420." Someone else holds TSLA and thinks its likely to go up, but not hold it's value, so they say, "I'm willing to sell 100 shares of TSLA at $690." The sum of all of these limit orders forms the market depth chart.

The more common way to interact with the market is to say, "I want to buy a share of TSLA at the current market price." In the above example, the only option is to buy TSLA for $690, even though the last transaction was $500! This is a example with very little market depth. In the normal case, you'd buy your share for $500.02 or something like that. (Same, but reversed, for selling at market price.)

For more information, but with a crypto focus, see https://hackernoon.com/depth-chart-and-its-significance-in-t...

For your example, you would put in a market order, and buy the stock at the lowest price that someone was willing to sell it at. If the last price was $4, but the lowest limit order that currently existed was for $100, and you bought it for $100, then yes, the price would go up to $100. (In real life, those sharp upticks don't happen much. It's more likely that a sharp downtick happens, where suddenly everyone wants to sell oil futures at the same time, but almost no one is willing to buy them, so the price ends up negative.)

Note that whenever people defend high-frequency trading for "providing liquidity to the market," this action of setting buy and sell limit orders that are close to each other is what they are talking about. There are algorithms that will see TSLA at $500, and offer to sell TSLA at $500.02 and buy TSLA at 499.98. If both orders go through, they make $0.04. If you operate fast enough to get out ahead of any big market moves, you can make a lot of money. But if you ever accidentally buy a bunch of TSLA for $499.98 right before the price plummets to $420, then you just lost a lot of money. This is why HFT and other trades with similar risk profiles are sometimes referred to as "picking up nickels in front of a steamroller."
I skimmed through head first, it seems pretty good but similar to a lot of other books. The watch and code course is different and I just think it’s so on point for the absolute beginner, or at least how I like to learn.

With 20/20 hindsight, what I wish I had done is read through or watch one or two courses without any pressure, just get familiar with the topic, and don’t worry if I don’t understand things.

things start clicking into place after you’re exposed to this stuff a few times. My mistake was that I wanted to understand everything and didn’t want to skip ahead if I didn’t.
Agreed.

Another factor, though, is that the interest generated from programming can be related to the thing a person is working on. A crescent wrench would be a boring object if all you did was wack it against the ground. But if it becomes a critical feature in constructing something, one probably acquires an interest. I can say that there are many things within this general field of playing-with-computers that I have previously found uninteresting, and now am quite fascinated about, but only because I've found uses. I've also been painfully unenthusiastic about some assigned work.

I'd also find it unlikely that humans in general are not interested in "making things," and insofar as programming/software is a vehicle for this, do possess an intrinsic potential to explore the field and acquire an interest. But the field rewards the independent-minded, as it's mostly through your own work, on your own projects, that generate a lasting interest (I believe).
Why Go for-range behaves differently (A peek into go compiler optimization)
Changes that affect the story deeply are difficult to do, and often only appreciable with multiple play-throughs. Alpha Protocol wasn't good enough on the gameplay side for that to feel worth doing, and this often also comes at the cost of story quality.

That said, you undersell the consequence aspect in DXHR. Things I remember that had consequences - after your CEO tells you to get to his chopper for the hostage mission, the hostages would be killed if you delayed more than ten minutes, which had a range of impacts on characters' approval of you. Getting to the dialog at the end of the mission could result in death of captor and hostage, death of captor and live hostage, both surviving, death of hostage and live captor - all of which had some effects beyond what you describe, as I'm pretty sure there was a side quest line that depended on the hostage being alive. Malik (the pilot) can be saved after the crash in Hengsha, which changes some scenes slightly later. The endings available change a fair bit depending on who you talk to and what you convince them on in the last chapters. Going to the LIMB clinic for the upgrade could change the difficulty of one of the boss fights and some scenes significantly. I'm pretty sure most of the police station mission can be skipped if you can convince one of your old co-workers to help you. And these are just the things I remember, almost ten years later.
For better or worse people play sports voluntarily because they enjoy it. That's very different than succumbing to a contagious viral infection, eh? I don't see what the two have to do with each other.

I feel for the people who have lost their jobs, I have family who have lost their jobs and are trying right now to figure out how to pay their May rent and bills and buy food. It's scary. My mom has lived in the same place so long that her rent is about 1/3 of what her neighbors pay. If she misses some payments I doubt they'll try to evict her, at least not for a few months anyway, but they will likely try to break her lease and charge her 3x her rent. She can't afford that and would be forced to move, probably to a different state. That alone could kill her from stress even before factoring in the additional exposure to possible infection. What I'm saying is, even though I'm a healthy computer nerd, this is still very personal for me.

FWIW I think the simplest thing would be for the government to just give people money. But what do I know?
Persistent Memcached: Bringing Legacy Code to Byte-Addressable Persistent Memory [pdf]
U.S. Colleges Drained of Foreign Students, Perhaps Forever
Hi there, nice start!

* Some pause, stop, reset buttons would be nice - but maybe you're more minimalist than I am.

* You could use the Notifications.js API to alert the user instead of just a noise.

On the code side, I would try to format the positions correctly in css instead of using all those <br/>'s.

(Personal preference here), I wouldn't spread the code so thin into so many components/css files too early in the project. In my experience, this makes the structure more rigid when you should maximize flexibility, so you can iterate as quickly as possible.
Will COVID Kill the SAT?
Not sure what you're disagreeing with. I don't think the person you're responding to thinks it's /impossible to get a gig as a programmer for a while, but that it's not going to yield a fulfilling career if one is merely chasing a paycheck. I think that's about right.
The classic explanation is "divergence", and it goes something like this: On GPUs, branching is tricky because the same code is evaluating many pixels at the same time. If half of those pixels go one way, and half of those pixels go another way, the GPU has to run both pieces of code, with half the results "masked out" [1]. This is why branchless code tends to be more idiomatic in shading languages.

You might ask how max() and min() are implemented with a branchless model. Sometimes the GPU has a native instruction for it, and a "sufficiently stupid compiler" might not be able to recognize the branch and turn it into the corresponding max/min.

The modern reality is that most all GPUs all have conditional move instructions which allow them to do some amount of branchless conditional across vector lanes like "x >= 1.0 ? x : 0.0;" without incurring the penalty of true flow control.

However, some are still uncomfortable with trusting the compiler to recognize and support this, especially on mobile chipsets with poor quality compilers. Others still just prefer the coding style of the idiomatic branchless expressions, since it's what they're used to.

[1] Footnote: On super old GPUs, like those in the Direct3D 8 era, flow control was emulated completely through branchless systems. The native machine ISA was something like a series r=lerp(A,B,C)+D instructions, and flow control amounted to clever abuse of this paradigm -- lerping to 0.0 or 1.0 can get you a form of conditional move.
How do you decide when to stop commenting?
No, but that's an awesome movie too. Cheers
I'm glad this exists.

When I was getting started in GraphQL two years ago and had questions for things like pagination I either got downvoted[0] to hell or "help"[1] in the form of, "Why don't you just use Apollo/Prisma"? No offense to any frameworks but they often come with a bunch of crap I don't want/need. Even the eventual "solution" provided in [1] didn't offer pagination without a framework.

[0]: https://stackoverflow.com/q/48817281

[1]: https://github.com/howtographql/howtographql/issues/514
If you see a single share price listed, that is the price of the last sale that occurred.

Now that can either mean that someone bought a share that someone else was selling or that someone was selling a share to someone who was offering to buy.

The shares are listed as a series of buy and sell orders in what's called an order book.

If the price a share was sold at was 100$ and you think it will go a bit lower, you could place a buy order at 90$. Should enough people sell shares to reach your price and order, your order will be filled and you will own the share at 90$.

If someone wants a million shares at 91$, you may not get your single share at 90$.

To go back to your example, if you were to place a buy order at 100$ for a 4$ priced share, how much the price moves depends on how many sell orders are in place from 4$ to 100$ and how much you are buying.

If it's only one for share, your order will probably get filled at something like 4.01$ if the spread is low (the spread being the difference between the highest buy order and the lowest sell order).

If you're buying 1000 shares and it's a low volume stock with a "thin" order book, maybe it could go up a few dollars instead but for it to go up to 100$ you have to buy every single share between 4$ and 100$.
Deaths without comorbidities are relatively rare. Santa Clara's dashboard shows 5% of all deaths. You could ballpark a 1/1000 order of magnitude chance of death from an infection.

In some sense that is pretty high compared to the baseline, but being equal to 10 years of driving isn't apocalyptic.
Can you please formally define what a spinor is? Like, mathematically, what are they?
Lamest Edit Wars
They're talking about MySQL specifically, not databases in the abstract. Sure, yeah, you can call anything "paritioning" in a general sense when it comes to data storage, including building a physical wall between your database servers, or adding dividers to your shoebox full of recipe cards.

Here's a more relevant link. https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/partitioning.html

It's like if you had a MySQL table that contained some sort of metadata that helped you find other data more quickly. Would you call that table an "index?" I mean, yeah, sure, it's an index (in the abstract sense of the word) but that would be awfully confusing in in the context of a MySQL database since it already has a pretty specific meaning there.
Almost everything competing with Andromeda in that region of the sky is in the Milky May, and there's no problem differentiating between the two galaxies. In other words, galaxies are blurry but the Milky Way and Andromeda are sufficiently far apart that you can unambiguously partition 99.99999% of stars as being in one or the other.
In PostgreSQL, the grammar does not permit unquoted identifiers to start with a digit. So this is a syntax error:

SELECT 'val' AS 2

Instead you must escape the identifier with double quotes:

SELECT 'val' AS "2"

So there is no ambiguity on that front in the ORDER BY clause. Either you have `ORDER BY 2`, which means order by the second column, or you have `ORDER BY "2"`, which means order by the column named "2".
I cannot imagine trusting food ordered off of Amazon, let alone trusting it to fill an order without verifying what it actually ordered (listing, quantity, etc.).
I don't suspect that willpower will be something people can measure with any degree of usefulness.

You can personally verify that it is like a muscle by attempting to enhance your own willpower. I'm not trying to sell you on anything, this is just what I've observed in myself.
These are 128-bit cryptographically secure numbers that rely on thoroughly battle tested primitives. There is absolutely no way a compliant implementation would generate a noticeable number of collisions unless the underlying keys themselves were the same.

(And I would certainly expect that Apple and Google are capable of generating the underlying keys in a cryptographically secure manner.)
Thanks for sharing! Yes you are right, the architecture articles are trying to help users understand how Nebula Graph stores and processes data.
Practicing the Coding Challenges
Big scare quotes there, you can't really 'prove' much in typescript. Don't get me wrong, it's a nice type system they've tacked on to JS, but it's far and away from proofs of correctness. At best, it's an optional type system with escape hatches.
Over the past couple of years of remote work, I've made a strong effort to keep my social life healthy and focused on in-person activities. That's been blown out of the water by the lockdowns. It's certainly been a great deal more taxing to have a remote job now that my normal social activities have been snuffed out.
Geez Walter, you are full of surprises... When did you manage to do THAT?

(wikipedia does not have any other info, so I assumed you went to computer industry pretty much immediately after your aerospace eng degree...)
Yeah, I've gotten to the point where I can't do any arithmetic on any values without immediately adding integer wrap tests afterwards.
True, but worse than that: it flattens everything. In another medium, we can kind of tell how much work you put into a thought. A well-written 500 word post is a different animal than a throwaway line.

This isn't a good thing. Who's an expert vs an amateur just having fun? Who's just musing idly while sipping scotch versus gone through several drafts and really put a lot of work into this? Who's passionate, if wrong, vs a troll and a provocateur?

It's fine for all those things to exist, it's not fine that we can't tell the difference and then amplify an unsuspecting chunk of them to a massive audience.
Does it? Humans sleep on a wide variety of surfaces, from bamboo
mats to memory foam, and if sleep quality is taken to be “does not wake up” then observably mattresses don’t really affect the quality of sleep in general.

Are you sure ”mattresses are important for your health” isn’t largely a product of advertising? That would be ironic.
You may be interested in the idea of legal realism [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_realism
I don't even have to read this article to know that the best way to harvest rainfall is already being done: rain flows into rivers and we already use hydroelectric dams!
My Love and Hate Relationship with Hackathons