skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I've learned the hard way that perfect abstractions don't exist. The mathematician in me wants to find the "most elegant representation" of a given problem, but when I give in to that urge, I often end up with a god function that takes `n` boolean flags that toggle the behavior slightly for different cases.

Why does this happen? I think a partial explanation is in this Nietzsche essay [1], where he says, "every concept arises from the equation of unequal things" — in other words, the abstractions of the world were built bottom up in our heads, and the Platonic essence of things is just a fairy tale we tell young programmers so they can sleep easily at night.

1. http://nietzsche.holtof.com/Nietzsche_various/on_truth_and_l...
If you want to believe that a multi-billion dollar company cares about your feelings or people in general simply because it has come up with its own dictionary of acceptable words for concepts then go right ahead. What truly has Twitter done for humanity? Allowed racists and monsters to verbally assault anyone they choose, hiding behind anonymity? This is classic virtue signaling, concealing an absolute void of concern for people.
He's so oppressed he has like 100x more money than the average white person, while contributing nothing to society. Maybe some whites living in trailer parks should pay him reparations for all his suffering, while he collects checks from Nike.
No sorry, people setting up autonomous zones proclaiming Americanism has failed is hatred of country, not an attempt at reform.
I agree. I think we're going to see a lot more wealth concentration because of all the business shutdowns. And, soon, landlords may be going bankrupt because tenants aren't able to pay and some (how many?) states have eviction moratoriums. Even if they could evict non-paying tenants, the rental market is softening to an extent that could certainly take down some smaller or overleveraged players.
Given this introduction:

> I've re-posted this many times, because it's fundamental to what it means to me to be an American.

I was thinking I was in for something uplifting. Instead I got:

> In 1946, Congress reneged on FDR's promise. Filipino solders who fought for us and their families were not given their promised citizenship, let alone benefits. ... They waited 44 years, until after most of them were dead.

This story is horrible. We betrayed our WWII allies, betrayed people who were rightfully American citizens, in all likelihood just because they were the wrong race. Everyone in this thread is acting like this story is inspiring. I feel like everyone has gone crazy that they think this is supposed to make me feel patriotic. This is an example of America at its ugliest and most prejudiced.
Since I live in Tokyo, it’s about a 3 - 4 hour drive to various ski resorts. I want to snowboard every weekend. So I’m trying to find the best* ski resort I can head to next weekend.

Best is a mix of

- the ones I enjoy most

- but not one that I just visited last weekend

- where there has been recent snowfall / is predicted to snow

- that I have may have a season pass for

- where costs of highway tolls, petrol, hotels can be optimised

- driving time

- whether I’m going alone or with friends

- don’t have anything important at work on Monday

Eventually, I’d like to turn it into a kind of friend finder / social network thingy but for snowboarding.
The promoters of oo would not disagree with this example.
Clean Code goes into a lot of subtle detail about data structures v. objects.

https://blog.cleancoder.com/uncle-bob/2019/06/16/ObjectsAndD...
I'm not sure lifestyle company is the right description. The overwhelming majority of companies are small businesses, privately owned. Think Qt. Or Datomic. The startup scene itself is only a tiny fraction of the global tech sector, it's a sort of business pretty much exclusive to a few cities around the world. All unicorns on the planet summed up are smaller than Apple in value.
I currently use this for my personal notes and screenshot indexing. I run screenshots through OCR and then index them with MeiliSearch and I'm very happy with it.
As a white guy who has never experienced racism before, I don’t feel comfortable judging weather any of these changes make sense. I would hope that they’ve sat down with groups of people they believe they are offending with these words and figured out if these changes actually make a difference to them. If the have, then more power to them.
We cancelled the melting pot: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...
Repealing 230 would give them an even greater incentive to suppress conservative views as someone could argue they're looking the other at people being radicalised by hate speech. You could say 230 is what protects platforms like Gab who knowingly host conservative speech.
It’s a reach. Or else perhaps Twitter is concerned about offending the numerous employees who lack sanity and may feel excluded by someone else wanting their code to run.
Presumably they are examples of ableist discrimination against dumb people (those who cannot speak) and the mentally ill (insane).
> But I still always do wonder how well this is accounted for with battery tech.

https://maartensteinbuch.com/2015/01/24/tesla-model-s-batter...
The main stream media and the elites are supporting the cancel culture. In fact, they fuel it -- both WaPo and NYT published articles about why 7/4 should be canceled. That's okay, as a country needs different voice and people have different political spectrum by nature. What's disappointing, though, is that the conservatives do not have a big enough platform to publish well-argued counter points, even though "conservatives" today is really moderate, even moderate left per the standard 10 years ago.

We don't have a problem of being far-left. We have a problem of imbalanced influence.
I am wondering when “finger” “poke” and “mount” are under the microscope.
> The biggest problem was that the company became the arbiter of what was offensive and what was not.

Companies already have to do this and they have done this for a long time. There are undoubtedly offensive words, phrases, and actions which a company actively discourages or will not tolerate.

The problem is that society progresses in disjointed ways, and common vernacular often lags far behind that as well. Instead of waiting for the overwhelming majority of people to understand that some words which once were perceived as neutral actually carry a darker, less-desirable connotation, Twitter (and others) are working to get ahead of that.

Sure, the lines may be blurry now, but that's no reason to claim that companies weren't arbiters of offensive words or actions in the past.
The $600 week is preventing mass defaults by tenants.
In summary:
Young man who has spent his entire life studying pro-system dogma and pro-system logic runs a blog and a newsletter where he writes optimistic, windy expositions on why what the government is doing is right, and gets paid by a multitude of liberal journos and government officials who need talking points and arguments that enrich their position. He's literally a yes man for money printer go brr
We are not alone
You are assuming that the hearer would be offended or hurt. This doesn't need to be true in order for initiatives like this to make sense or have a purpose.

Words have a history and carry their original intentions with them alongside their current meaning. When you're using a term someone might find offensive, that person might also know that you mean no ill. In cases like those, they can ignore the possible subtle connotations your words could've implied.

In other situations, the hearer is unaware of your possible ignorance or motivations, in which cases they might be unsure if you're directly or indirectly trying to imply something offensive or dismissive on purpose.

Removing that doubt is simply streamlining the efficiency of communication, making sure that both parties understand each other and what they're saying and meaning.
I wonder if they ban MAC addresses that spend too much time on the same kiosk for exactly this reason, to prevent people (who don't know how to work around it) from using it as their primary internet connection.

The purpose behind these is obviously advertising and I'm assuming that the most valuable data they are after is physical movement data and that it is valuable enough to subsidize the costs of running the system. However, if you don't provide them this data (by only using the service from a single fixed location) then they have nothing to gain from serving you.
There should be a compulsory license fee, and the total fees for any given device should be capped as well.

It would actually be nice if there were a couple different schedules for such fees, and if one of those was based on the final sale cost. That would make "IP" a non-issue for no-charge free (as in beer, but also liberty) software.
Protester blamed ‘Black Man’ for Molotov cocktail; white painter arrested
This article is all over the place. The author tried to fit the current COVID-19 pandemic to the Black Death, even though they have very little in common.

Obviously, a pandemic is a major event, many changes happen after major events, and out of many changes, by chance alone, you are bound to find similarities with other events. Making some (not all) rich people richer is also bound to happen. When wealth is shuffled around, there are winners and losers, and among the winners, some are rich to begin with, and therefore, some rich get richer.

In order to make parallels like the article did, you can't escape statistical analysis, like proper scientific papers. Here, it just looks like cherry picking a few bits to draw a picture that is not even consistent.
Keeping a working Wireguard configuration with 4 peers, for both VPN-through-house, and remote LAN access.
That's not blunt, this is blunt:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ScarySigns/comments/c3ujlc/over_dra...

I mean, the warning about cave diving doesn't show you how you'll die, does it?
It’s definitely offensive, it’s also definitely not racist in this context.
"Sanity check" hits home with me, so I guess I'll try to explain why it's problematic. I happen to use that phrase and variants on it throughout my code & comments as part of defensive programming.

I'm talking about having to put in gratuitous checks to make sure that the given data is plausible given the expectations of the business logic. My background is mainly in "legacy" applications where bad data can be a real concern. The intent is to make sure that the conditions are right to continue processing the data, with the alternative being either correcting the data or raising an error strong enough to get the bad data noticed.

The problem with "sanity" in this context has to do with social stigmas about mental illness. As someone that is mentally ill, I get it. Yup, my brain processes things incorrectly according to the world. Yup, this makes life difficult for me. But I am not "insane" despite my brain's broken data and twisted business logic.

While I am not personally offended or put off by the use of "sanity" in this way around software engineering, I agree with the general principle that judging "sanity" in code can be problematic. There are ways to express the same idea without implying judgement about mentally ill people.
I am neither white nor black, but I live in the US. Every time I hear someone say "Grandfathered", I think about the origin of the word.

I'm just one data point, but you said "no one actually associates the modern use" and that's untrue.
Populating your own menus on c64 and using them with F keys allowed 900+ apm navigation.
I tried resetting the password but Facebook does a security challenge and won’t let me through.
I think you are thinking about medical treatment in a totally wrong way.

The medical establishment is conservative for good reason. You don't just pick a drug and start touting it as a cure all. And you certainly don't publicly propose it with little to no evidence.

From what I have seen in the media, they have correctly reported that the drug was being recommended by non-doctors and with little evidence. They may have gone too on the other side but given a lack of evidence the default assumption should always be that a drug is harmful until proven otherwise.
Anyone who is non-white, I assume.
I assumed “that” referred to “I don’t have a business relationship with the company”.
The U.S. Navy Flight Demonstration Squadron
Perhaps not “no one” but it’s a very, very small group. If you’re willing to cater to a small enough pool of potential offended people, well, you can find someone offended by just about anything. Maybe we need to ban language?
Battery is still good though, I don't use it much but after days it still has enough power. In terms of battery iOS is very good.
This is a weird bit of historical revisionism. The US slave trade was abolished in 1807, which was not the earliest such a law could have been passed. 1776 was. England ended the slave trade the same year (and slavery had clearly been on the way out since 1772, when the first ruling about slavery being illegal in the British isles was made). This ruling may have contributed to the interest in declaring independence from Britain among wealthy US slaveholders, like for example George Washington.

England then abolished slavery in the entire British Colonies in 1833, the US took another 30 years to free southern slaves via the Emancipation Proclamation, and another 2 years beyond that to enact the 13th amendment.

> For all of American history, most people did not own slaves.

This is irrelevant. The powerful and influential did. The people who had control over the government for the most part did. Think I'm lying? More than 3/4 of the signers of the declaration of independence were slaveholders[0].

[0]: https://twitter.com/arlenparsa/status/1168192825848213510
I studied economic history. I am not an expert on medieval economic history but the take in the article is definitely bad (unf, this is becoming more and more common).

I am not going to speculate as to why but as an example:

The article talks about government funding...this makes no sense, literally none...it is generally accepted that nation states didn't exist until about 3 or 4 centuries after the period in question, and govt finance as it exists today came half a century after that.

The article talks about companies...again, companies didn't exist for another 4 centuries.

These are basic elements of economic history in the period. If you study history, day one of a research course would be...don't read the present into history. This is one of the worst examples I have ever seen (and part of the research course I did was literally looking at the worst examples...this is worse...no historical article should include comments supporting a current political proposal, as this article does...it is just totally inappropriate).

And yes, the Wikipedia article linked is correct (in the sense that this is the generally accepted account). The dynamics of this are well understood: famines, plagues, wars, etc. triggered huge prosperity (and the poorest generally benefit most as always) because the main limit on growth was the number of people growing beyond what productivity/resources could support (this happened again in the 17th century and is why America was populated...so these periods are significant). When lots of people died, there was room for growth.

No, the BBC is not a reliable source of information and hasn't been for a number of years. The article is (unfortunately) quite typical: people have a preconceived notion about what is true, and then gather information that confirms that conclusion. At best, this is an example of an editor who has hijacked the original article...at best (the university attended by one of the authors is, however, not surprising to me). It is important not to confuse information that you want to believe is true with actual reality. I don't think it is particularly controversial to point out that 95% of the population (journalists closer to 99%) have gone off the deep end when it comes to this.

(It is maybe worth adding, the narrative in the article is one of those subjects where some news organisations will just pump endless stories about how the rich are exploiting X or Y. These articles do very well on social media but the fact that they draw the same conclusion about every single event should lead you to ask whether they don't have an "angle". Eliciting jealousy and rage is money in the pocket for journalists, jealousy is a very predictable and bankable emotion.)
That seems like a really cool project, but I couldn't figure out how exactly the where filter was implemented. Can you point me to the code that implements it?
The whole point of the clipboard is to transfer data between somewhat arbitrary apps.
> repelled a malevolent empire again

That's just straight up wrong. The US started the war when they invaded Canada. The British Empire did not want to fight the war. To them, the United States was just a sideshow of the much larger and much more important Napoleonic Wars.

If anything, it was the British and Canada that repelled a malevolent United States, who had had eyes on annexing Canada since independence.

> In the following decades the US became an economic juggernaut, while the British Empire began to fade into the history books.

Uh, what. The 19th century was the golden age of the British Empire, whilst the US remained a small player on the world stage. You must be confusing the War of 1812 to the first or second world wars.

I know its the Fourth of July for you yanks, but this comment is just straight up propaganda.

And quoting Wikipedia to prove that it was a victory for the US is ironic given that Wikipedia states that the war resulted in stalemate and status quo ante bellum. The only real losers were the Native Americans.
That is excellent. Tools like this get us close to the kind of granular democracy that our ancestors could only dream of.
Are Slavic nations going to be renamed?
I'd say this is generally not true, at least in math. There's definitely poor notation and misnomers that come from tradition, but it's hardly deliberate as "obfuscation" implies.
I'm surprised I'm the first to bring this up, but the "over-abstract" example feels more like "over-specified". The actual operation being defined works on the same level of abstraction, since it defines precisely the same operation. The first has just specified extra tweakable aspects of its execution via the argument list. I'm not saying it's not bad, I just don't think it's because it is "too abstract" compared to the simpler solution.

Abstraction in my mind is fundamentally about the "higher-orderness" of a thing. These two average methods are just as abstract as the other, since one is not a higher-order operation than the other. I would use the word over-abstract if one was to write a program modeling a dog-walking business (a very specific thing), by writing a system which models actions on entities (a very abstract thing), where walking is an action which may involve one or more entities, and dogs, humans, employees, and customers are all entities. If the core thing you want to do is just a single concretion of the system that you actually built, then you "over-abstracted". I feel like we should not discourage the practice of abstraction, since that's our business. I literally get paid to think about the real world in terms of abstraction and write it up into a computer. Young engineers should not be taught to fear "over-abstraction".
Ye gods, no. Never.

While the progressives are indeed successfully driving Indians, Asians and other immigrants into the arms of Republicans thanks to their embrace of identity politics and cancel culture, the answer is for the silent majority of mainstream liberals to openly repudiate progressivism, as Obama did, and drive them away from the Democratic Party. Make it clear that the liberal left truly welcomes people of all races and beliefs, not just the ones the progressives favor, and that the left seeks to heal the country, not to divide it as Trump and the progressives do.
Similarly, I feel "grandfathered" implies a similar meaning as 'exempted' (which seeing elsewhere, the meaning, but not the source propagated with the word's use).

Compare:

The use of fax for the transmission of medics records is grandfathered.
The use of fax for the transmission of medics records is exempted.

Both are true, but grandfathered, as noted above, implies that it really wouldn't be allowed in today but gets to exist because some people just can't move on and look for a better technology.

(In fact, many of the reasons I hate fax are features for it's die-hard users. It's fire and forget, open loop, low quality, and as easy as dialing a phone entry. Also, there's no security attached to the sender or receiver.)
I also can’t say his name at a team meeting to cite where I learned something he may have tweeted. You can’t really make a word unusably offensive by others, but then keep using it yourself. At least not if you still want your voice to be part of the broader discussion.
The Saturn V launched 13 times with no launch failures as well.
The dev -> silicon -> user feedback loop is orders of magnitude faster, cheaper, and more scalable than one that involves wetlabs, clinical trials, regulatory bodies and interfacing with the medical-industrial complex.
Shutting down analog tv in favor of digital freed up a huge amount of spectrum but aren't the FM and AM commercial radio bands pretty tiny in comparison? Not sure what's the motivation for trying to shut it down especially given the simplicity of the system which would be much more useful in an emergency situation.
This story isn’t about Truman and the other people who reneged on the promise in 1946–who were all dead by 1992. That’s a very self-centered way to look at this. This is a story about immigrants who loved America so much that they proudly accepted citizenship when it was belatedly conferred to them. What kind of country engenders such love and devotion even in the face of such slights?
Huawei phone with HarmonyOS installed is becoming real
This is an opinion piece from the BBC.
The fact that you clearly don’t understand the difference between an argument and a citation tells us everything we need to know.
This just means new words/phrases will be offensive and need purged in a few years.

Lest we forget, “retard” used to be the kind way to describe mentally challenged people when earlier phrases became offensive.
They appear to be excellent examples of what will probably in the future be compared to the 1950s hunt for 'commies' in the US, with respect to users of language that some might take offense to.
Sorry, haven’t read the mountain of comments yet: will it be possible to have a hybrid car that runs on Electric, with Hydrogen fuel cells as an alternative fuel source?
Hey, are you Svip from Paradox forums, of Ulm fame?
Technical innards of the Autobidder system in case you care to know more https://youtu.be/ggdYts4muu0

It’s basically a market forecasting system which allows the operator to place bids on various energy markets such as supply, contingency and ancillary services. The battery has limited resources (power output and energy storage) so it needs to plan well ahead for making the most money for each watt-hour it buys or sells.
Who was ugly and prejudiced in the story? The narrator? The Chinese-American judge?

Certainly not the veterans waiting for citizenship?

They are all America too.
The security team might use white hat and black hat hackers.
I would ask the same question. Is there evidence that somehow the majority has forgotten the original meaning but the minority hasn't? Do you have any evidence of that? I'm sure if you study this type of thing as a hobby you could probably score a lot of points in arguments. But is that the best way to go about making real changes?
Beyond the racism, even if a black person gave her a Molotov cocktail, she didn't have to light it, throw it, or direct it into a police vehicle. Even if her story was true, how on Earth would that absolve her of the crime?