skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Sure, nothing too deep. With the understanding that this is just peers and acquaintances, not some referred psychology paper or anything.

Among my friends, there exists generally two very broad schools of thought with respect to raising children.

In one school of thought, which I relate to self determinism and is how I raised my kids, is that as a parent you have no idea what the "best way" is for your kids, they aren't you. As a result, parenting is a process consisting of three things; Teaching your children the underlying reasons and rationale of the world. Sharing with your kids the choices you made, why you made them, and what you learned. And finally, helping them explore different things while giving them a framework for capturing any new learning or understanding that their exploration yielded.

The other school of thought, which I think of "You'll do better than me because I'll tell you how to be a better me." is about using your understanding of the world and your experiences in it to create a path for your child that will be more successful (or as successful) as your path. Parenting in that case focuses mostly on setting the direction for your children, giving them goals to help them evaluate how far they have moved along the path, and correcting them when they stray from the chosen path.

Both styles fail at the extremes. For self determinism that would be completely disengaged "observer" parents, and for guided path, that would be over functioning "helicopter" parents.

Parenting is a big job, but you have to remember that you will be lucky if you to spend a total of five years worth of time being with them[1]. Planned path parenting fails kids who are completely different than their parents (in my experience) and that situation can be expressed by people who graduate from college with a degree in X and then completely change their life after they have run off the end of the list of goals their parents gave them.

Anyway, my 0.02 for what it is worth.

[1] Assuming at age 18 they go off to college, from about 3 yrs to 5 yrs you get to spend all day with them, then half days, then maybe a quarter day + weekends, and then mostly weekends until they are gone. Chronologically it is nearly 2 decades by in terms of face to face time, especially time where you can talk and really share ideas and thoughts, it is incredibly short.
That person in MSWord isn't thinking about the ribbon bar

I think about it every time I'm forced to use it. I think about how much I hate it, how constantly clicking between tabs slows me down, and how much more productive I was without it.

For mainly this reason, I still use Word 2003 and have no plans to switch until the fad passes and someone in UI at Microsoft finally stops designing for the lowest common denominator and remembers the point of toolbars wasn't to replace menus, but rather to put commonly used functions one click away.
American date format leads to arrest in Spain
The only reason that I can come up with for teaching Python 2 in 2020 is that the instructor only became familiar with Python because they were expected to teach it.

This is like complaining that calculus is too fractured because someone taught your students to use Newton's notation instead of Leibniz's.
Putting another $10m to follow it would be chasing good money after bad, and fall into the sunk cost fallacy.
I can see how this breeds resentment in some contexts, though.

A developer might spend a huge amount of time and effort modeling a workflow or a process into something crisp enough for a machine to process. That might take months of what feels like pulling teeth from people to extract requirements - people who are supposed to be domain experts. By the time he's done, he probably understands everything better than the people whose job it is to use the tool - the tool that now enables them to ignore and forget about parts of their job and complete it with 10% of their attention.

"Stupid users - they barely understand their own job and I spent months learning the finest details about it to build them a tool so they can keep doing it without understanding it at all."

Not saying it's right, but I can see how it happens.
Then it'd probably be called a space port or something instead of a launchpad?
When you go to add the SDK, Analytics gets added by default. The setup flow makes it seem to be required. But also the previous screens (when creating a Firebase account) appear to imply that Cloud Messaging won't work correctly without analytics.

https://imgur.com/a/Fl919Wm
The trick is not requiring propellant. You can’t carry 90 years worth of water or gas. The Dawn spacecraft launched to Ceres in 2007 used up 425kg of Xenon for only eleven days of thrust for its ion engine.
I'd ask, what is sustaining java? Where are the replacement techies picking up the torch, where are youngsters seeing java?

I have some answers. It's not a lost cause. Death is not likely, & I do appreciate a lot of java (cdi rocks, microprofile is doing great, performance is good, it has excellent big data tools & many serious pieces of infra are built with it). But how java can retain liveliness, over time, & how the experience & knowledge base continues, is a real challenge. Being on Android helps a lot but also it's a radically different immensely unlike the server side world, with its own elaborate platform specific architectures & libraries. There's not a lot of places java has a hold on UI/ux centered systems, outside Android, so it risks becoming too invisible.
Fight Club is rightly a classic.
"Support" is the excuse, but it turns out to be a bad excuse in practice. It's easy for government organizations to become small fish in a PaaS provider's big ocean of customers. Even major providers in this space, like Accela, tend to be horrible at providing actual support.
And then the distro they are using stops shipping Python 3 by default because "No one should be using that anymore.".

While I could bundle python with the program, that's getting to be more hassle then it really seems like it's worth. In addition, I'm not particularly comfortable with configuring python, so there's a non negligible chance I'd screw that up and be in the same position.

It's not that it's impossible for Python to work in this situation, it's that me doing it is a bad idea. I'm sorry if my original comment implied otherwise.
Yeah the sweet spots is landing as:

* CPUs: medium data, and queries that are small / slow / irregular

* GPUs: general analytics over data that is small (in-memory) or large / streaming data (replace Spark):

Data perspective:

-- small data (100MB - 512GB): all in GPU memory, so question if boring queries ("select username from django_table" better in psql) or compute ones ("select price where ..." better in GPU SQL)

-- medium data: data sits in CPU RAM / SSD with compute nodes, and in a preorganized / static fashion, e.g., time series
DB. too much data for GPU RAM, yet enough for for local SSD, so PCI bus is the bottleneck (8-32 GB/s)

-- large data (ex: 10TB spread through S3 buckets) + streaming (ex: 10GB/s netflow): you'll be waiting on network bandwidth anyways, so network link of 10GB/s -> PCI of 10GB/s -> GPU wins out over CPU equiv anyways. Good chance, instead of the pricey multi-GPU V100/A100s, you'll want a fleet of wimpy T4 GPUs.

As network/disk<>GPU high-bandwidth hw rolls out and libs automate their use, the current medium data sweet spot of CPU analytics systems goes away.

Compute perspective:

-- The category of 'irregular' (non-vectorizable) compute has been steadily shrinking for the last ~30 years as it's an important + fun topic for CS people. Even CPU systems now try to generally optimize for bulk-fetches (cacheline, ...) & SIMD-compute (e.g., SIMD over columns), and that inherently can only go so far until it's effectively a GPU alg on worse hw.

I see other areas in practice like crazy-RAM CPU boxes and FPGA/ASIC systems that I'm intentionally skipping as these end up pretty tailored, while my breakdown above is increasingly common for 'commodity HPC'.
When I plan my travel and am looking for ho(s)tels I very often check neighborhood for "shadiness" using Street View.
I also have extensive (20 years) experience with the solution I proposed.
The difference is that Fluke doesn't sound offensive in a URL unless maybe your name is Luke.
It's true that a lot of software jobs are in fact BS jobs. But is this a conversation that the industry is ready to have? Probably not.
I have found that not everyone in the public sector would agree with (2). By giving away the software you lose the ability to sell it and recover some of the money you spent on it. Similarly, funding the development of proprietary software involves less capital expenditure because the developer can charge less than they spend and still profit by selling to others. I don’t believe that either of these arguments are sound, but it’s hard to respond to them when the experts on how software development should be done are the contractors who benefit from these arrangements.
You're being close minded. Neither of us have any idea what would have happened if computing was left open, if the doors didn't keep getting closed, & the presumption that I'm greedy & everyone want & must have stupid, as not just a foregone conclusion, but that this was the only possible path towards that conclusion, that no space could have been created, is tragic to see in people.
You are right, I misread. My bad on this one. Now I understand why the other user was curious about the way I answered.
It's been my experience that a system's complexity (basic or complex) is less an intrinsic trait and more a matter of subjective perception, familiarity, and experience. Your experience is clearly different.
Python 3.8 can run 3.3 code too (same 8 year difference).
Speed Is Your Moat
I would certainly like to know the plan as well. If we're just guessing, there's a lot of benign reasons, like nVidia expects lean into ARM and they would rather buy the ARM than pay the license. I'm surprised there's not a lot of info on the reasoning yet.
When all you have is a hammer.... Think about it: coursework is all about writing new code. I can't recall any resources for learning "software archeology."

Part of the deal is the 'humiliation' of being stuck following someone else's stylistic/design/naming-scheme choices. Another aspect is the curse of knowledge, leading to useless documentation. Plus, it's easy to underestimate the amount of effort required to reinvent the wheel: all the necessary complexity looks like incidental complexity at first glance. "Why should I be forced to learn all this gobblety-guck when I should just be able to re-implement from scratch in an afternoon? [... three weeks later] Oh, now I see why."
All businesses need to adapt to their customer's changing needs as time goes on; some know that in advance and some don't. I think you've built something incredible here: you've taken the lowest-friction way your customers want to share photos (texting them), and made that your primary interface.

You took a real-world impedance mismatch, and you serve as the interface between people so that all of them can interact in the way they most want to interact. There are a lot of potential businesses there, and I'm sure you'd be well positioned to grow into future such adaptation layers; I can imagine a brand built around a family of such inter-generational adaptations, in both directions.
Do you have any recommendations for articles that explain how to include AppKit with SwiftUI? I'm new to iOS dev and have been building with Swift/SwiftUI almost exclusively, but not sure what's the right way here just yet.
Unrelated to the thread topic:

We live in an attention economy. If you read a story, or watch a video, it doesn't matter if you agree or disagree with the content; you're still traffic.

Just viewing content on most of the internet boosts it's signal, and creates value for someone; much less engaging further by commenting, up/down voting, or sharing it. It's a pretty ugly system.
I think "had enough" is easily the most plausible reason, and it's time we acknowledged that we don't have a monopoly on intelligence, feelings or personality. We need to recognition the message and do something about what we are doing to their environment.
You must commit to not use SwiftUI if you support an older OS. If your deployment target is last year or newer, then do you have the ability to pick and choose.
Common, customizable keyboard shortcuts & behaviors across the entire OS are huge for people with arthritis that can’t use a mouse, Automator workflows that hook in and take care of repetitive tasks are common and eventually Siri Shortcuts will be available on macOS like iOS.

Last year Voice Control: https://www.apple.com/macos/catalina/docs/Voice_Control_Tech... came out and is absolutely stunning and free with accessibility labels.

A custom UI would force them into “grid mode” on page 6 off the bat while it’s almost too easy if you just stay native, UI tests interact with the app through accessibility labels for example, and obviously we’re all testing, right?

Simply riding closely on the back of the behemoth that’s weirdly good about accessibility gets one very far, very fast.
This is why many people are frustrated by web applications that do not mimic features they expect from native Cocoa apps.
I’m a VC, so this take is biased. Liberally apply grains of salt.

If you are looking to start a VC-scale startup, I’d suggest talking to VCs who can help introduce you to domain experts. There are a few reasons this is beneficial:

- You get to battle test your idea to hone the story. This will help you recruit non-technical people.

- You build relationships with VC for the moment you need funding.

- You learn which VC are actually helpful. The meme is that all VC have to pitch how much value they add, but the reality is most can’t/won’t/don’t outside of MBA 101 platitudes.

- A great VC is always building out networks for BD and founder identification. You should leverage that to help in your space.

- Even if the idea doesnt pan out, if you prove yourself to be talented and hard working, they are incentivized to help you find a role relevant to your interests.

This is colored by my personal investing philosophy that you should prioritize meeting “makers”. Others prioritize meeting executives, or sources of capital, or influencers, etc... None is a “true” path, there are successes in each. But the ones focused on makers always want to chat with folks like you.
Adding a new developer just before deadline is horrible. But what is not?
These are at best machine learning questions, not data science. ML is definitely a sub-category of data science, but if you see a job posting for data science, you're 100% not going to be doing machine learning. That would have been labeled as a machine learning job posting.
One problem is that all those things are more likely to reach people interested in Python unto itself vs as a tool to accomplish some other goal, like scientific research. The bigger problem, if/when you reach all those people, is convincing them to put their work on hold while they deal with the fallout of nonfunctional changes to the language/ecosystem, making them jump through academic and aesthetic hoops.
The dependency web makes it really hard to upgrade one part. You have to upgrade or rewrite all your dependencies and then do the same to your code: I tried this several times in the ‘07-‘12 timeframe and gave up each time: the cost wasn’t worth the benefits.

Ultimately, I stopped writing Python: these days I write Common Lisp for personal projects and Clojure/JavaScript for everything else.
I noticed it's powered by an "ethical operating system", however they don't really go into any detail about what an ethical operating system is.
I was verifying the Alan Kay quote: “Simple things should be simple, complex things should be possible” and came across a Quora answer by him that provides a lot of useful context. See https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-story-behind-Alan-Kay-s-ad... Here are two excerpts

"I think I came up with this slogan at Parc during discussions wrt children, end-users, user-interfaces, and programming languages. Chuck Thacker (the genius behind the Parc hardware) also liked it and adopted it as a principle for many of his projects.

So e.g. Smalltalk needed to work with children and end-users even more intuitively than (say) JOSS or Logo. But we also wanted to write the entire system in itself, so that those who were curious — especially later on — could “pop any hood” in the system and see a live program/object written in exactly the same terms as what the children were learning.

Similarly, the GUI had to be easily learnable by children, but — looking ahead — it had to handle “50,000 kinds of things we hadn’t thought of done by 50,000 programmers we hadn’t met” and be as simple as possible." Alan Kay

Neal Stephenson explores similar ideas in his "In the Beginning was the Command Line."

"Another part of this was that we were determined to have a very easy to learn UI would also incorporate end-user programming (scripting) as a natural part of it — in other words to combine what had to be simple yet possible with the programming language with what had to be simple yet possible with the UI.

The general zeitgeist against this idea — both back then and now. Basically: those artifacts that do simple things usually wall off next levels of complexity, and those that do complex things don’t do anything simply.

But, given that there have been some really good examples of how to do both, it’s hard not to see most computer people as (a) not caring, or (b) being lazy or unskilled, or (c) both." Alan Kay

Bonnie Nardi explores the value of this approach in "A Small Matter of Programming: Perspectives on End User Computing"
Perhaps you should mention what they did wrong, instead of being snarky?
nearly all leisure boats on a long passage would be using an autopilot of some kind though and the vast majority of those are electric motor driven. perhaps the sample is pre-selected to have autohelm in that case..
The 'serendipity mindset': how to make your own luck
Our daily lives are not greatly impacted by this assumption not being true. Unless we look at the horizon or at a map, it is easy to forget that we live on a globe. And without atomic clocks it is very hard to measure the curvature of spacetime.
Sounds like me :)

It's great to already have a caring parent, so double down on focused efforts.

Get the Asperkids' books,
and just be there for him.

I still have issues with following orders, but tbh doing fine.
Physicists Find a Way to See the ‘Grin’ of Quantum Gravity (2018)
Actually, last time I had an issue with iOS safari I found this really useful since I'm developing on Linux:

https://apitman.com/12/#debuggin-ios-safari
How do you go across state lines with a gun in the middle of protest and then claim “Self defense”?
jamesmcm.github.io

The author criticizes a lot Microsoft and hypes FLOSS, while being hosted on a closed source, Microsoft-owned platform.
Additionally, one of the gravitational wave observations was corroborated by immediate follow-up observations with normal telescopes [1].

[1]: https://www.as.arizona.edu/discovery-optical-counterpart-gra...
Maybe outnumbered but still exists and still human.
I would say that most SwiftUI controls instantiate UIKit views under the hood.
It doesn't sound unreasonable when you put it that way.
Moving 25TB data from one S3 bucket to another took 7 engineers and 2 full days
This doesn't fix the philosophical issue, though. Is it the same person? Or did that thread of individual conscious perception disappear forever and was replaced by someone "new" who acts the same?

In the end, this is a philosophical discussion because consciousness is not something we can observe in a way to test and falsify hypotheses.
For me, "production" is the stable, tested version you ship that runs constantly. The one facing most users.

You can have hobby projects with users, and 24x7 uptimes being a goal. It makes sense to distinguish "dev" from "prod" with those and to use mechanized testing and CI/CD, just as with commercial projects.

A lot of open source projects fall into this category.
>The first one is a good point, although it doesn't quite sound to me like the folks advocating for preservation are doing so with the intention of being valuable to future generations for the interests of those generations.

They probably aren't. But that isn't incompatible with both them desiring to continue to live and them contributing to whatever society they are reborn in to. After all, people today are primarily concerned with their own lives first and foremost, yet we manage to work together to build societies just the same.

>why do we imagine that someone from the present would be more effective at using those tools than someone from the future?

Diversity of thought. That doesn't mean that revived-person-x is going to be better at any particular productive activity than someone who was born in to the future in question. But simply by being from a different era, I like to think that there is potential to be able to contribute meaningful value. Or, put another way, while it is true that the world benefits greatly from those who are the best of the best, it is also true that there is a place for a large number of competent but not exceptional people to do the bulk of the work, and that their lives have positive value, too.
The culture at Uber is weird. In my opinion, there was way too much emphasis on titles. An employee's title is literally in your face in almost every internal site. This creates a lot of situations of bias because every time you get a message on slack, one of the first things you see is their pay grade.

In combination with what you listed above, and the rigid, narrow pay bands, it's no wonder everyone is fishing for constant promotions.
In one C file you can declare a global:

int x;

and in another:

int* x;

and you'll be mixing pointers and ints and it won't be detected.
Instagram want to charge for a fee to put links in captions
Then create a separation between person and profession. That would limit the scope to the location of the offense.
They've taken so long to deliver Librem 5 that even normies have started reverting back to candybar phones in the meantime
> It's not your place

Strange how your response to abuse isn't to warn us about abuse, but to moralize about the actions through which your abuser justified their emotional violence.
I was a bit hesitant about applying since it's remote (thus less opportunity to build connections when you're outside the US), but it seems that the last remote batch was more than successful. Are there any S20 participants who'd like to share their experience? :)
Even if it did work I don't think the EmDrive would be revolutionary. A vehicle equipped with it still has to generate energy. It terms of how useful it is you've just moved the payload requirement from the fuel tank to the generator module. Going by these experiments the EmDrive doesn't have a hope of ever matching the mass efficiency of an ion drive.
Conservation of energy and momentum are separate phenomenon and in this context, "closed" relates to the latter. You can have systems like particle collisions in a collider that receive energy from (are accelerated by) the electromagnets but the collision is a closed system because when the products scatter, they conserve the momentum of the colliding particles.
Ah I didn't even realize the list I sent wasn't from his account. Thanks for the correction!
An additional perspective, Carol Chen had an interesting post and thoughts about her ups and downs of being a co-founder / founder

https://carolchen.me/blog/founding-bad/
People who are downvoting you cannot see the irony.
These are really expensive on a scale needed for powering current world with solar and there's nothing to suggest we'll stop there.

I'm not sure you understand the scale involved. We're talking billions tons sodium. Millions tons aluminum and steel.

Hence the 10x.
The odds of catching Covid-19 on an airplane
This Idea Must Die is an interesting take on that concept.