skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> These things are a little advanced for the likes of me. Any chance you'd be so kind as to give me an example of something I can't easily do because of not having this?

Well, you can do whatever you want in a dynamically typed language. I was discussing the shortcomings if you choose to use PHP's type system.

If I'm using my static types and see `function foo(): Bar` I take comfort that I will receive a `Bar`. If I see `function foo(): array` I have absolutely no idea what that array is. Is it a list of `Bar`? Is it a dictionary of some kind? Is it a heterogeneous list of bools, ints, and Maseratis?

Also, real containers are useful. A true array is a contiguous slab of memory. PHP's array is not. The performance characteristics will be very different. If you had a `Set<T>` type, you could guarantee that there are no duplicates in the set. That is sometimes very useful. No such thing in PHP. PHP arrays can't even be used as a real `Map<String, T>` because if you do `$arr["1"] = new T()`, it wont actually have "1" as a key! It'll transform the "1" into 1 and store it in the 1th slot, like an array!!! Totally flipping useless.

> But those languages require compilation and deploy cycles that are way longer than just getting files on disk, so the total cycle time of development may end up being longer in many cases.

Are you suggesting that you write PHP code and then plop in on a production server without running tests? Because running your tests is comparable to the compile cycle of Java et al. Except in those cases I don't have to write entire classes of tests, whereas you should be writing type-checking-style tests on your PHP code. You just have to be the compiler to make sure your inputs are validated correctly.

> PHP probably shouldn't be used for performance-critical things, sure, but then neither should any other dynamic language.

Then what was the point in comparing PHP's speed to Python? They're both slow and shouldn't be used for performance-critical things. That's fine, but then find me a selling point.
A blog post from PIA about this:

https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/max-schrems-files...
seems silly to send people to prison for this
Ha! Well deserved but how did this pop up to #1? All of nsl is a great show of what you kan do with k, an apl.
Probably, I accidentally upvoted it too.
Read the emails. "We hope that Apple will also make these options equally available to all iOS developers"
https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/21807251/e...

This was never a "negotiation". It's pretty clear from the beginning that both Epic and Apple were writing their emails for public consumption, not to each other. Epic knew Apple wouldn't give in, and Epic wanted to sue Apple from the beginning.
Somehow the original in B&W seems more lifelike.
Steps to Successfully Selling a Startup
You could take an interpretation that big players getting a different rate than small players isn't special treatment but normal procedure, so a big player not being given the big player rate is the special treatment. The problem with any language dealing with equality is that there are different ways to define equal and very specific definitions can result in different results. This is also true for the concept of random and there is even a mathematical paradox related to this (which is great for stripping off all the baggage that real world examples bring with them).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand_paradox_(probability)
> It is a fundamental law.

> Systems theory

I'm confused. Is it a law or a theory? And no, it can't be both. Laws are proved. Theories are unproven.
Maybe. I did it and while it's certainly educational, most of it feels like a waste of time. The bulk of the entire process is running 'make' on random things and waiting. It's fine as a teenager (when I did it lol) but as an adult with a job? There are better/more productive ways to spend your time if you want to learn more about Linux probably.
Our next such approach is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gliese_710 in 1.281 million years.

However the rate at which such encounters happen varies greatly. We are in an orbit bobs up and down from the galactic ecliptic with a period of roughly 60 million years. There are more encounters near the ecliptic, with very few encounters when we are above or below. We cross the ecliptic about every 30 million years, and last did so about 3 million years ago. So we are still in the dangerous period.

It is not entirely a coincidence that the dinosaurs were wiped out 66 million years ago, during another relatively dangerous period.
I work in Security. This process produces no substantial results. They should invest into automation not some ill thought manual review process. This is part of the reasons why the Firefox extensions store is in decline. It is enough to look into the numbers to get the full picture.
It’s a _lot_ for what’s basically just payment processing (that’s all it is for in app sales).

Looks like price collusion by the major players as well, which is also illegal.
Honestly, the only alert I have is a Tweetdeck search for hashtag `#redux`.

Other than that, I just spend too much time on social media :)
A friend of mine at Google is considering moving to another team or leaving because he's concerned about how addictive YouTube has become. Apparently it's a real discussion internally: is YouTube doing more harm than good?

To me, it seems that we're in a precarious position. I wonder what happens when we reach the limits of dopamine saturation, if there is such a thing. Otherwise, it seems Huxley was right -- "man’s almost infinite appetite for distractions" is a dangerous thing.
I guess you could say freedom of religion is a human right but it's not a human right to be culturally integrated. And so you could absolutely be required to give up that freedom in order to integrate, in the same way your workplace may require you to be at your office and do certain things, which is clearly not a violation of your freedom.
This is really sad. On the one hand, sure Apple should be able to make a cut on their app store, on the other hand, they shouldn't be allowed to force apps to do this sort of thing. This will only drive domain prices higher on iOS in order to compensate (in the case of Automattic). If I were in a position where Apple is forcing me to pay a 30% tax, I would literally add "30% Apple Tax" to the check out screen on top of the regular fees to make consumers aware. Course I'm sure Apple wouldn't like this at all either.
Stores in my city are requesting people download their app for free groceries
Oh awesome! There's a really great fast.ai time series study group BTW, who have between them built a lot of great projects and (IMO) are more familiar with deep learning for time series than any other group I've come across:
https://forums.fast.ai/t/time-series-sequential-data-study-g...
This is a very thought provoking language, thank you.

off topic, is it just me? Or a thing informed by silly memes to see this letter and immediately think oh man, Rest in Peace?!
The people can lie to Telegram, Telegram can lie, somebody can attack the communications, somebody can attack the telephones, somebody can impersonate the numbers, all the Telegram voters can be from those 60% that didn't vote...

There are many ways that could happen. But it's pretty good evidence to add to the context, and the pile of evidence was already quite big.
Remember when this was the biggest symbol of corruption in the US? I miss those times...
doesn't work if they've enabled disappearing messages
If you pause at 00:36 you can see the same view on google maps today https://goo.gl/maps/4oskPzyT5MRCma1PA

Awesome video!
Still don’t trust them. Loads of shady things, from them rolling their own encryption to the fact, that is not possible to encrypt group chats.

IMHO red flags. However I still have not encountered a messaging app which does group chats with somewhat complete feature set in groups.

Signal won’t let you moderate groups for example. (No admin role where you can ban somebody or delete messages)
Stiffer sentence than Felicity Huffman, who got 14 days (she served 11), 30k fine, 250 hours of community service.
SAML, single sign on, 2FA confirmation, etc.

For example, I don't know what login method a user would be using (our own password? or redirect them to their corporate's auth portal) until they enter their email.
Everyone else is talking about MDN as a public good in line with the foundation's mission, but it's also economically beneficial to Firefox. The existence of solid web development documentation with feature support matrices encourages FF-compatible development, which helps FF user retention when sites continue to work in FF.
Hahaha no way :)
https://security.stackexchange.com/a/85180
Same story when people predicted Hillary’s chances 99.9% based of Twitter polls. Your sample selection gives misleading predictions too easily.
Press F for respects.
I had a bit part writing upgrades to the PC emulator, getting Duke Nukem to run.

On the boot time - 2s was only realistic until you owned a hard drive! Then there was a boot sequence that was more like 15s after the drive span up, bringing new OS updates into play etc. And then you probably had some more customisations and apps, so my memory was more like a 30s boot. My cold Windows boot is faster than that now, but suffers from UI sludge for about 60s after I've logged in, so that counts as boot time too :( No post-boot sludge on RISC OS.

The save dialogue was really fiddly and needed some pro-level window management and mouse skills :) but I appreciated not having two UIs, one for loading and one different for saving.
Google CTF 2020
This should really be clarified on the landing page!
What you're describing actually exists, it's called Heterogeneous Systems Architecture. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterogeneous_System_Architect... It's nifty, but it's generally only used as a cost saving measure, not a performance one. It does, as you mention, broaden the scope of what is a useful target for GPU compute operations.

Memory bandwidth is typically the bottleneck in GPUs. Meanwhile, the access patterns are typically very predictable. So they're able to prefetch data, so latency is generally not a problem. So GPU memory is designed to have very high bandwidth, even if it means completely tanking the latency.

On the other hand, CPUs typically always need better memory latency, and most workloads do not saturate the memory bandwidth. Unlike in a GPU, many memory access patterns are unpredictable. The bottleneck of operations that are pointer heavy tends to be limited by latency. All tree operations and linked list iteration tend to be latency limited. Languages like C#, Java, Python and Javascript where all data lives behind a pointer tend to benefit significantly from improving latency. So while improvement memory bandwidth up to a point is important, there's much more attention given to latency.
Having human pilots is going to play out the same way cavalry charges did in WW1. Old out of touch generals who romanticize how things where back in the day sending airmen to death needlessly.

The inability to change and adapt to new technologies plagues the US airforce and navy. Resulting in both of them being completely miss-equipped for what any war that doesn't involve fighting impoverished herdspeople would look like today. Only a fraction of both's budget is spent on systems that are actually good at anything other than showboating and being profit centers for mil-contractors. The majority of their budgets are captured by outdated manmetal (surface ships/pilot'd aircraft) most of which would be expended very quickly if a conflict ever did break out.

God forbid we ever have another conventional war but if we do you can look forward to having a couple dozen hypersonic glide vehicles (costing pennies on the dollar) sinking entire carrier groups in minutes. Swarms of drones just flying past over-priced f-35's, letting them expend all their munitions (which probably cost more than the drones), and still making it to hit their intended targets.

But the US navy's still got some kinda ok submarines so they got that going for them, the airforce.... idk I guess they can keep talking about "stealth" (fancy paint) and how its effective at avoiding detection from the underfunded military's of 3rd world dictators.
It's a bit different aspect of the same thing. If B can perform better than A given the same data, it usually means B can perform equal to A with less data. From wikipedia:

> Essentially, a more efficient estimator, experiment, or test needs fewer observations than a less efficient one to achieve a given performance.
I find it really surprising that Apple didn't grant the request given the potential outcome, if Apple loses (however unlikely), ranges from Apple's app store fees being capped to Apple losing their store monopoly to even Apple being broken up. Shareholders are going to be coming after Tim Cook with torches and pitchforks if he could have easily avoided that simply by giving Epic special treatment.
In Germany it’s 40 euro, max 45$
That's not a lesson that Americans ever "learned," that's an axiom that some Americans assume to be universal across the culture.
As it relates to hacking, I think of it as: clients can be fickle because they don't even know what they want sometimes. So I picture next steps as coalescing, like a wave collapsing. Uncertainty comes to dominate the process, so it works more like evolution than planning (stochastic vs deterministic).

My problem solving algorithm is to look up to 7 steps ahead, along up to 7 different branches in the tree of possibilities (I'd like to examine more choices but my brain can't hold them all). In practice this is always at least 2 and 2, so this task or its alternative, and then looking at the next step along each branch. Then I prune the tree, selecting for the steps that work across as many branches as possible, without rewrites or duplication. I'm often working on a common dependency several steps out that other people aren't aware of yet. This could be thought of as a breadth-first search or parallel search.

Unfortunately on an individual level, the tech industry seems to be going the opposite direction, exploring deeply down very long and linear branches of the tree. Coders are expected to implement an idea and be ready to scrap it without hesitation, iterating over and over again until finished, rather than simulating the outcome in their minds. More of a depth-first, serial search.

I think the split is due to programming moving from an individual endeavor towards teams. We can't see inside each other's heads, so we plot the course and divvy up steps among the members. The cost of this is that serial searches will almost always turn up suboptimal results, because the resources to do broader searches get withheld so we miss elegant solutions and even perceive them as more costly.

To answer your question, the serial approach works best for individual tasks, but misses the big-picture view that might have let us see that the task didn't need to be done in the first place. So my vote would be to see more quiet reflection and less spinning and churning. But I'm mostly outvoted, so it probably comes down to personality, with junior developers being more sought-after than senior developers like me who might be perceived as reserved/overcautious/conservative.
"Subject: Consumer Choice & Competition"

They might as well have made it "Subject: Antitrust"

That email would have been a pretty rude opening for someone looking for a sweetheart special deal. Not "nice" at all.
I don't see how that could be true given that they continue to roll out features to Firefox.
Do they still run antivirus in Azure Windows Server VM instances? I was kind of taken aback by that a few years ago.
I've never looked at DOH as an attack on DNSSEC, though I suppose you could. I think the resistance is more about the big corporate and the Internet level DNS operators like Google's 8.8.8.8, they want to be able to manipulate DNS responses when necessary. I know, evil corporate IT Ops hijacking my HNN connection. No, not that.

Think about a coordinated effort by top tier DNS providers globally to stop a giant bot network by simultaneously 'hijacking' DNS responses for the command and control server host-names. In classic DNS this is easy, just intercept the requests at the LDNS provider and return a dummy server IP, all good.

That falls apart with DOH and DNSSEC. With DNSSEC you cannot forge a response to a client that strictly expects signed responses for a particular zone. And with DOH, the various corporate IT shops cannot inspect and 'hijack' the responses. Though, the DOH operator can still change the response. But that moves the capability outside of local corporate IT and into a multinational company that might not agree with your request to 'fix' a problem via assisted DNS hijacking.

So all of these new, safer DNS delivery methods do legitimately impact the ability of "good"* operators to protect the Internet. Is the trade off worth it to protect users DNS traffic versus being able to respond to threats? I think that protecting users daily traffic is net-net better as it is a steady state problem and state sponsored actors have the resources to subvert a population via DNS. But I also feel the loss of a tool to protect users at the same time. Things like this are never zero-sum.

Disclaimer: I work for Microsoft and although I don't operate DNS services as part of my job, I have spent a lot of time on this particular topic over the years. These are my opinions, not the companies. I welcome challenges to my opinions, that's how I learn.

*"good" is always a situational thing.
> I'm pretty sure he just had access to X.com, plus it's a cool domain. Is it really a strange fascination?

I just think it's funny that he went out and bought the x.com domain for a consumer finance startup in the 90s, and then ended up running a company called SpaceX, and then ran an electric car company whose top-of-the-range model is called the "Model X", then he had a baby, and named the baby "X Æ A-12 ", or "X" for short. The dude is crazy for X!
It's quite amazing how hard Apple is pushing this now with all of the extra regulatory eyes on the subject. I guess they're fairly confident that they're untouchable.
Finally an answer to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22854641
This is why I love game programming. You think that's what you're learning and then find out the same techniques are useful all over.
Here's the actual email and response from Epic's CEO:

https://twitter.com/TimSweeneyEpic/status/129691854162779341...

> Apple's statement is misleading. You can read my email in Apple's filing, which is publicly available. I specifically said in Epic's request to the Apple execs, "We hope that Apple will also make these options equally available to all iOS developers..."
I know I really don't matter to Apple, but this walled garden and app store dictatorship is what finally made me move away from iOS to Android last year. I had used Android in the past, but it was with Samsung Galaxy's which where very bloated and awful when compared to Apple.

But when a friend told me that Samsung just ruin Android [1] and I should try an actual Google phone, I bought a Pixel and it's honestly great.

I can install apps I build myself very easily without Google's input at all, although I don't even need to build apps since their PWA's can do almost anything I'd want.

I highly recommend people who are sick of this Apple crap, to try a Google Pixel. I haven't even needed to sign up for a Google account since using it (although I have to use an alternative app store).

I've already moved three family members over and after a few days they basically don't notice a different.

Between moving to my Pixel and a Purism laptop I'm pretty much free from Apple, apart from my work laptop, which isn't my choice.

1. Disclaimer! I am very privacy, open-source, freedom orientated so if you don't mind a bunch of binary blobs that track you maybe Samsung would work for you.
This course and the accompanying libraries were very good when they were released and have only improved over the past several years. I will echo what others have said - the courses are very approachable and practical.

Fast.ai changed the course of my career and helped give birth to deep learning as a practice at my place of work. Thank you Jeremy!
I like resilience better as well - here it just happens that the technical terms of statistics match up fairly nicely with what we're trying to say.
Given that many reviews dispute the accuracy of some of the other product claims, I'm not sure that claim is anything more than BS. The manufacturer's website also doesn't really give the impression otherwise.

http://www.suyuanxin.com/
Puts skin in the game. No kidding in 1987 I actually did convince a professor to agree to an independent study course for me and a friend to build a voice synthesizer on an IBM PC proto board using the TI chipset available at the time and the only terms of the class would be that he gave us the grade my computer verbally asked him for at the end of the semester. We actually built two of them, one for each of us. It was wire-wrapped. We had no backup plan whatsoever and it was a brave/stupid thing to do, but we both got A's and the prof told us his only regret was that he didn't have us make one for him too. Even more skin was that it went into my own IBM PC, so if I blew that up not only wouldn't I have had enough credits to graduate but PCs were very expensive at the time.
These days you can blow up a Raspberry Pi and who cares.
Exactly anything you can think of can be represented as a segment of pi's infinite decimal expansion.
I have a very hard time getting even remotely upset about the college bribery scandal when it's both legal and encouraged for the truly rich to get their failsons 'legacy admissions' at selective colleges by donating multiple millions to the institutions.

The people who have been prosecuted as part of this scandal aren't being prosecuted for devaluing earned degrees at selective colleges; they're being prosecuted for finding a cheaper way to get their children into selective colleges than paying the ten million+ selective colleges charge a for legacy admission.
For anyone missing how little radiation that is, radiation is proportional to the 4th power of the temperature in Kelvin.

200 K is a bit below (water) freezing. 400 K is just over boiling. The 400 K object emits 16 times (2 ^ 4) more radiation than the same object at 200 K.
> From 8 parsec to 70 parsec

Really minor correction, but 7.1±1.4 is the lower bound. 1 parsec is a tad over 3 lightyears, so it's a somewhat significant difference when the distances are that small.

EDIT: corrected my correction
Ah yes the wheel shop, of course
What is it about our culture (is it mostly a western culture thing?) that is so obsessed with the question of identity?

Western people are much more individualistic, we're not defined by our family/clan as much so we seek other markers of belonging.
As a 1980s kid, I had similar experiences. Some bright spark in my northern England smalltown had the idea of bringing together all the families and professionals and their 8-bit machines and having them all set up on a bunch of trestle tables in some old church hall or scout hut. It was wild. I remember seeing a Macintosh for the first time and freaking out with excitement.

There were also genuine red flags though in a less well supervised setting. Some dodgy bloke with a little shop in the back of a rundown mall created a "community" of computer enthusiasts which turned out to be a front for some extremely unsavoury "grooming" type activities.
There's also efficiency like "I picked up some extra screws at Home Depot because I wasn't sure if I had any at home".

Having ways to avoid an unanticipated repetition of a process, which would result in bunging up the works for dependent parts of the system, can make the entire flow more efficient. See also 'drum buffer rope' from constraint theory.
Corsair Gaming S-1
And I thought I was good for soldering a TQFP 32 package to a DIP adapter!