skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
fundamental issue between "change everything once in a big step" and "many small changes".

First is pre internet, because updates cost money, and because pre internet security issues weren't common.

Second is now, change one thing every day, always run the latest code, automated testing to make the latest code always work. Also means don't need a security branch and a feature branch.

People hate change, and linux people have the ability to say no and do their own thing.
A PPA is not a replacement, especially for something like a browser that almost everyone needs to have installed.
How much do Facebook Ads cost?
Oof, I came across this just few hours ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24384797

I should have been more careful.
Leasing vs. Renting
That would be a great growth hack. I wonder if instagram has any APIs for this. I don't know anything about processing speech but maybe if you posted on my app it would create a story on instagram or make a twitter post. Snapchat would be better for this because it's more private, not everybody wants everyone they know to come to an event they post.
Google published their guidelines for designing APIs [0]

[0] https://cloud.google.com/apis/design
Sometimes it takes writing software and modifying it to even discover what your idea is.

It’s like painting.
Sadly that doesn't work for state income taxes in Oregon. They make no distinction between short term and long term gains. And you hit a 9% tax rate at income of $8,900.
Did you watch the whole movie? President Camacho was a good leader.
Suppose pretty much everyone can fly around in flying cars. Isn't there now an immense amount of noise and wind everywhere, akin to having a landing helicopter next to you all day?
maybe "memes" are a useful term?

seems some memes get stuck in peoples heads and blocks all reasonable discussions?
Covid-19 has harmed fewer people worldwide than the Chinese government has murdered of its own citizen.
I don't think it was "highly centralized" compared to say Imperial China as an example. It was a bunch of nomadic tribes banding together. And there's no reason to believe all autocracy could be abolished and forever prevented from forming under (or outside of) an anarchist regime.
I believe this is the beginning of an investment scam. This type of alpha conversion battery has an inherently low current, but it does have a very long lifetime. Some pacemaker and watch applications will emerge. The idea it will ever run an electric car is a joke
A digression, but I don't think this is actually the case.

I readily acknowledge that literally is often used when a sentence is figurative; that's not the same thing. For literally to be used to mean figuratively the utterer would be worried that, but for the presence of "literally", the sentence might be understood to be literal.

I contend that the role "literally" usually plays is that of an intensifier. I believe it plays that role through ordinary application of hyperbole: the utterance "X is literally Y" is usually meant as "X is very Y; X is so Y it is almost as if it were literally Y; but of course you understand that it was not, in fact, literally Y - we're all reasonable people here."

In much the same way, when someone says "You left me waiting for days" and it's been a handful of minutes, we don't say "'days' sometimes means 'minutes'" - we say that people exaggerate.

I recognize that I'm disagreeing with at least one dictionary; I believe they got it wrong.

And I won't claim that there is literally no single person who in fact uses "literally" to mean "figuratively" - but I have never encountered such an example and I believe it to be rare enough that we can consider it an error, even in a descriptivist treatment.
> Why would you assume that we would act righteously in the absence of law? It is painfully obvious that we would act much worse under anarchy.

You seem to be conflating anarchy with chaos (to be fair most people do, the word "anarchy" itself was probably used as an insult before it was even picked up by anti-authoritarian communists).

The weight of laws in our societies is so big that and it's meaning so large that it's probably more understandable if we say that anarchism doesn't want to supress laws [#]. One particularly good example of law system that couldn't be more anarchist is international law, the main point being that it's normative and not coercive. That's not saying it's not respected, indeed you may suffer consequent actions from some countries if you don't: from diplomatic troubles (moral judgments) to degraded economic relationship (exclusions) and ultimately war (use of force). The basic assumption is that every subject of international law recognizes that the other subject are sovereign entities.

International law is for me the proof that such organizational principles do work in practice, and it's a source of inspiration for thinking about anarchistic organization. Quoting wikipedia, all the right keywords are in there:

> [international law] is the set of rules, norms, and standards generally accepted in relations between [subjects]. [..] It establishes normative guidelines [..].

> The sources [..] include [..] custom [..], treaties, and general principles of law recognized by most [..] legal systems.

> [It] operates largely through consent, since there is no universally accepted authority [..].

The conclusion i'm hitting is that at the planetary level, we do live in some kind of anarchist system. For me it's the biggest lesson of anarchism: the main goal is to conquer the level of states, extending down from the international level and up from the inter-individual cooperative level. I could continue with the fact that this level of states is also the realm of private corporations, which then bridges with usual marxist cooperative production systems rethoric.

[#] The more precise statement would be that anarchistic principles refuse "the singleton" judiciary institution (one that assumes monopoly of justice, has jurisdiction over everything). Judges and courts may still exist, for example contracts could specify under which jurisdiction they may be disputed/upheld.

ps: don't criticize saying that international law is dominated by usa/western countries, that's another debate.
Sorry about that, I missed that thread.
Hi,
Interesting approach saw the video, this seems interesting for inclusion or learning concepts of how to build an app for anyone without any knowledge of programming.
There's a likely future for someone boarding self-driving equipment: higher-quality (of car, traffic conditions, wait, etc) depending on price. And public transit with dedicated/prioritized lanes (by law).
The chromium apt package isn't there, which is one often pointed to example.
Why? Isn’t it important that tech developers have a place to discuss politics?
I’m rather curious about these claims. What specific formatting issues is he referring to, and what version was he using?

Also, they claim LibreOffice is not available on MacOS.

This article is quite light on detail.
The restrictions are very loose where I live, Houston, TX. I don't encourage using the app unless you are already going out regularly with your friends.
You may be on to something with respect to culture, but that is where the hard work will be: user experience design and marketing that codifies the culture into a brand that can distinguish your product among the sea of commodity social networking software.
Fascinating! I'll update my nomenclature, that's some quality digging.
I gave LibreOffice a go, but quickly became frustrated with incompatibility issues and some of the other quirks in Calc.

So I've switched to using Google Docs, which is powerful enough for my modest needs and has so far been pretty frustration free. It also has the advantage of being easily accessible from my other non-Linux devices. The free browser-only versions of Microsoft Office also look good... but I just haven't had a reason to seriously evaluate them.

What are the benefits to going with something like OnlyOffice over Google's and Microsoft's offerings?
People have had the same ideas you've had, and it's gotten as far as commercial products, but the general experience has been that "sufficiently smart compiler" tends to be very lackluster in practice. Any such effort needs to be extremely cognizant of what hardware is fundamentally good and bad at, and what compilers are fundamentally good and bad at.

Let's start with branch prediction. Modern hardware branch predictors are pretty phenomenal. They can predict a basic loop with 100% accuracy (i.e., they can not only predict that the backedge is normally taken, but can predict that the loop is about to stop). In the past decade, we've seen improvements in indirect branch predictor. The classic "branch taken/branch not taken" hint is fundamentally coarser and less precise than the hardware branch predictor: it cannot take any advantage of dynamic information. Replacing the hardware branch predictor with a compiler's static branch predictor is only going to make the situation worse.

Now you might be thinking of somehow encoding the branch predictor state in hardware. This runs into the issue of encoding microarchitecture in your hardware ISA. If you ever need to change microarchitecture, you face the dilemma of having to make a new, incompatible ISA, or emulating old microarchitectural details that no longer work well. MIPS got burned with this by delay slots. In general, the rule of thumb hardware designers use is "never expose your microarchitecture in your ISA."

A related topic is the issue of memory size. Memory is relatively expensive compared to ALUs: we can stamp out more ALUs than we know how to fill. We have hit the limit of physics in sizing of our register files and L1 caches (electrons move at finite speed!), and the technologies we use to make them work quickly are also prohibitively power-hungry. This leads to the memory hierarchy of progressively larger, but cheaper and more efficient memories. The rule of thumb for performance engineers is that you count cycles only if you fit in L1 cache; otherwise, you're counting cache misses, since those cache misses will dwarf any cycle count savings you're likely to scrounge up.
I still sometimes forget that currying is named after a person, thinking there’s some analogy to composing arguments as if they’re ingredients
By those criteria this group does seem to be among the very few.

I'm sure there are thousands of others whose defining unfair advantage also stems from creating a unique money-making machine of some kind, in particular making a tangible product, even if that does still add up to very few billionaires today.

Seems to me the more efficient the money-making machine, the easier it would be to do well without having to grow to billionaire scale anyway.
Not if the sub-optimal routes happen only intermittently and the extent to which they’re sub-optimal (or whether they’re sub-optimal at all) is difficult to determine. If you take the same route every day you’ll notice when it changes, but who are you to say a one-time detour wasn’t the right decision given what you don’t know about traffic conditions?
He lives in a giant mansion surrounded by armed guards in the middle of the city. Any criticism of him is illegal and can land you in prison.
I wouldn’t be surprised if I turn out to be wrong, but I was taught the causal chain was:

1. The Romans spoke Latin
2. Catholic church based in Rome, did everything in Latin
3. Between tithes and indulgences, church got rich and powerful
4. The rich and powerful keep learning Latin to keep up to date with news from the other rich and powerful
EDIT: HN isn’t a place to make jokes
You know, if you want to fast sort 20k lines, then Excel is the wrong tool. Access is better, and with their DOM linking model you can simply define once, use multiple times as you delete/edit/insert lines into that Excel/Word. Click of a button in Access and zbang! those lines are sorted instantly.

For single user Access is still fastest database to use locally. Nothing beats it! Well, until you need 50 millions records, at which point you definitely switch to PostgreSQL as none of Microsoft tools beats that beast when it comes to large data (MSSQL included!).
I dug into the phrase “Put your wood behind 1 arrow” and found a type of culture I want nothing to do with. This quote is just dripping with toxic masculinity. The argument literally boils down to “Iterative development (agile development) isn’t manly.” My personal masculinity doesn’t need to be reinforced by my choice of software development practices.

> Face it, iterative development is for people who don't know what they want, who don't believe in themselves enough to trust their own specifications. They don't know their requirements, they don't know where their projects are going to end. No wonder they're afraid of the waterfall method--that takes a little confidence. Here's an analogy. You go out deer hunting. You take your bow and arrow, but do you need a map and a compass? Hardly, not if you are a real man! You take direction from the sun, go east for 3 days, and then shoot your bear. Sure, you meant to shoot a deer, but nobody can call you a coward for shooting a bear, right? And notice I said bow and ARROW, no "s." That's right. Real men bring only one arrow. They know how to aim (and they remember to take plenty of time when aiming), and they put all the wood behind that one arrow. Only sissies bring extra arrows for--what?--in case they "miss?" Real men don't know the meaning of the word. This is the way our fathers did it, and our fathers before them, and if it was good enough for them, it should be good enough for us.

http://www.waterfall2006.com/kroll.html
This is the history that was explained to us on the visit to Predjama via their official audio tour. Nonetheless it's a fascinating place and a pleasure to visit [1]. Even better there is a breathtaking cave system not 10 miles away that's very accessible to the public and part of the same tourist organization. [2] One neat thing the guides were proud of is Jackie Chan's visit to the castle while filming Armour of God [3]. They also said he broke his leg while doing a stunt on one of the stone staircases, but I couldn't find any written evidence of this; instead he sustained a much more serious injury elsewhere.

[1] https://www.postojnska-jama.eu/en/predjama-castle/

[2] https://www.postojnska-jama.eu/en/

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armour_of_God_(film)
I’m not surprised if you are using OpenOffice. Try using a LibreOffice.
Agreed. My point here is that there was no reason that we couldn't have had something better than passwords in the time between first using passwords on the web and now.
> For anyone reading this and considering seeking help: There is a strong anti-psychiatry movement online following in the footsteps of the anti-vax movement.

I don't think it is fair to compare criticism of psychiatry to criticism of vaccination. The science behind vaccines is actually far more advanced than that behind psychiatry. With vaccines, we have identifiable infectious agents which we know exist and are distinct, and we are trying to develop safe and effective ways of teaching the body's immune system to fight those identifiable infectious agents. In psychiatry, the targets of treatment haven't even been clearly identified – documents like the DSM-5 contain long lists of "disorders", but few believe the DSM-5 is an accurate reflection of what's really going on in the brain [1]. People talk about entities like "ADHD","ASD","OCD" as if they are distinct entities in nature, when we have evidence that the distinction between them is mostly invented by humans [2]

The effect of psychotropic drugs on the brain, and other body systems, is very complex and not completely known. The side effects of vaccination are significantly less, and vaccines tend to act much more narrowly on just the immune system. As a generalisation, vaccines are more safe and more effective than psychotropic drugs. I don't argue that nobody should take psychotropic drugs–some people are really helped by them–but it is unfair to compare people who are concerned about their harmful side effects (e.g. antipsychotic-induced brain atrophy [3], [4]) to anti-vaxxers

[1] http://cepuk.org/unrecognised-facts/diagnostic-system-lacks-...

[2] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41398-019-0631-2

[3] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30191724/

[4] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3476840/
Not even all evangelicals of course.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruth_Carter_Stapleton befriended Larry Flynt.
I can't speak for the author, of course, but recently while working with LibreOffice Calc I ran into an issue where it was completely mangling cell coloring in spreadsheet that a coworker sent me.

I was using the latest version of LibreOffice in Ubuntu 20.04, and my coworker was running the latest version of Microsoft Office for Mac.
Spiral Pacing
I've been working on a lisp that's strongly typed and basically only has functions that are the llvm C API, including JIT. With that you can build macros, type systems, etc. Basically much of the code you write as a user can be what's typically implemented (in predetermined ways) in the compiler in other languages.
Creating Trippy Graphics with Neural Networks (TensorFlow Filter Visualization)
The core assumptions of the algorithm:

- if a file introduced introduced a bug recently, it will tend to introduce bugs again
- new files added with the bug introducing file will tend to introduce bugs
- other files changed with the bug introducing file will tend to introduce bugs
- files often changed together with the bug introducing file will tend to introduce bugs soon

fixCache maintains a fixed-size cache of these bug-prone files based on bug fix-commits. This helps in prioritizing verification and testing resources (right now it only updates a pull request with a comment and a label). If a file no longer introduces a bug, it will eventually be replaced from the cache.
>> Lee Kuan Yew lives in a giant, gated, guarded compound in the middle of the most valuable real estate in the city

Didn't he die the better part of a
decade ago?
Machine Learning Engineering has been published same author of The 100 ML Book
> OP is wrong that there is no evidence for effectiveness of any medications but there is still some debate over the effectiveness of some classes of drugs(SSRIs for instance, last time I looked).

Strongly the agree that the OP is wrong. I’m not sure why it’s so contentious.

As for SSRIs: The famous paper questioning their effectiveness has been widely panned for coming to misleading conclusions. If you read the paper, even their conclusions show SSRIs outperforming placebo. The authors used a cherry-picked analysis technique (“effect size”) to argue that the effect size was not as large as they’d like, despite showing that the effective size of SSRIs was in the direction of showing superiority to placebo.

It’s also difficult to evaluate these topics without fully understanding the science. SSRIs aren’t evaluates in isolation, they’re evaluated in relation to placebo. The problem is that placebo shows remarkable efficacy in some patients. This doesn’t mean that SSRIs are placebo (they still separate from placebo) but it does require careful analysis of the data. For example, SSRIs are significantly more effective than placebo in patients with severe depression, but they separate less in patients with mild depression. None of this means they are ineffective, but the data is often misconstrued as such by those with an anti-medicine agenda.

I’m glad you’ve found a solution that works for you, but please refrain from projecting your own medication choices on to other vulnerable people online based on a cursory understanding of the research.

> There are also many, many people who are helped by psychiatric medications.

Strongly agree.

Everyone should defer to medical professionals rather than HN comments for treatment decisions. It’s very unfortunate to see so many people choosing to avoid treatment for years out of unfounded fears of medications they’ve read online, just as it’s sad to see people avoiding vaccinations due to something they read on Facebook.
I disagree that these examples are a waste of time. In all cases you benefit from having created the code to address your own use case, but perhaps don't see further direct benefit from sharing your work.

Submitting a PR allows others in the community to apply your patch (or incorporate into a forked version of the project) if the PR doesn't get merged or deleted. From a project maintainer's point of view, significant patches can be difficult to test & review, and merging a PR implies accepting the long term maintenance of those changes. I've left some promising PRs for much longer than I'd prefer to because of factors like time to review and the risk of merging code which may not have adequate tests. If an open PR attracts some community interest or discussion, that can give project contributors a helpful signal for prioritising.

If a PR is featured somewhere, this can be an opportunity to raise your profile and perhaps introduce those inquiring users to something you can benefit from more directly. If I get direct emails about a PR or project I contribute to, I try to politely point those users to the right channel (eg raise a GitHub issue) and ideally a contributor guide so they can be empowered to contribute directly. This may not be a straightforward reflex to develop, but I think responding with "This is a volunteer effort -- here's how you can help with docs, testing, or code" is a better viewpoint than "Ugh, more entitled users". I've been pleasantly surprised to see this approach turn some agitators into useful contributors.

If a project has very niche dependencies (like requiring API access to a satellite ground station), there can still be an audience and they may be even more motivated to collaborate on your open source project. I feel like this may have the best upside in terms of potential ratio of users to collaborators.

I think your last example is the most challenging. If you are concerned about someone else benefiting by stealing or repackaging a project you have openly shared, it would be best to keep that effort private. Compliance with open source licenses (or the spirit of open collaboration) requires ethics that are not universal across developers, companies, and countries. This problem isn't unique to open source (commercial licenses also don't prevent piracy), but is a harder blow when you are personally affected.
OP clearly stated the issues. And why do you need me to provide a solution? I find your response insincere and rude.
This number is shocking, but it is not weighted by usage. Just because a medical treatment is a treatment doesn’t mean it’s in common use.

On top of that, I find it 100% believable that doctors use understudied treatments. The reverse makes a lot more sense. Treatments get studied after people have tried them, and believe they warrant further study and more frequent usage.

Consider coronavirus treatments, at first we had very little idea what to do, beyond inferring based on past virus with a similar symptom profile and reasoning from first principles. Later on, we slowly but surely identified effective treatments (corticosteroids/prone position/...) after people tried them. Even later, we had descriptive studies of past effectiveness. I assume most treatments go through a similar progression (covid treatments go through this progression on fast forward).

Medical studies are slow and retrospective. Fundamentally that gets you this 1/10 figure.
Formally or informally, it’s generally a societal expectation that the childless will pick up the slack in the workplace.
Programming 101: Books to Start Coding
Per the stack overflow comments, that post was an April fool's post.