skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>And you change the code accordingly, IF it does. Typically though, its best to change the structure of the code, not to increase its local complexity. If the context gets complicated, think about what makes sense to be split out. Local complexity should be kept minimal.

My method requires no changing ever. With better "functional phrasing" I make the title of a function independent from context. Similar to a module.

You however are saying that the name and context are tied together thus to handle it you change the name and context and structure all together. This is objectively worse.

>And you change the code accordingly, IF they are. But you name the lambda, not the generic function. There is a huge value in using a standardized vocabulary. Even in English, we get value out of "baby" versus "small human between the age of 0 and 2 years")

And there it is, more changes. Every change and edit to working code is a potential for a new bug. A change to structure of the code should be made independently to naming. Modularity is important.

>More generally, I've seen this kind of thinking before. A programmer discovers some "universal truth" which applied well in some context and they get so obsessed with it that they start applying it everywhere.

First off stop commenting on my character. Second off of course caveats apply. I never said disregard caveats. It's also perfectly fine to take on a bit of technical debt and use a one letter name to save time when needed and according to context. My argument is for knowing what is technical debt and what's not. Don't make random assumptions here, get your head straight and focus on the topic at hand.

We can get rid of the "caveat" distraction by just examining an example without caveats:

find_xy_coordinate_of_dogs_cats_and_baboons_in_picture

My claim is that the above is an informative and perfectly good "function phrase" Your claim is that this is worse. Caveats do not apply in this example.
one concept can be around how images are rendered from primitive shapes, showing that using this demo step by step.
If you really want to understand why Arm was so successful as a company I'd suggesting spending time listening to their their first CEO - Robin Saxby - in this engaging interview by Charbax from 2017.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FO5PsAY5aaI

And they are unlikely winners not because they came from the UK (seriously?) but because of the weakness of their commercial position when they started. It's a really interesting story.
I don’t understand your comment. It seems like you think it carries a rhetorical punch to (I guess) suggest that in the cloud version we’d still be slow and make mistakes? The writing is so unclear it’s hard to tell. But if that is what you’re saying, I think you deeply missed the point.

Yes of course my team won’t solve bugs instantly just because of cloud tools and of course we will make mistakes implementing bad infra designs, especially early on as we are still gaining experience with efficient and cheap cloud patterns. Nobody said otherwise and my comment before has no connection to anything like that.

Rather, if we have control over our own infra, we can adaptively fix those issues for ourselves without getting delays and philosophical or gatekeeper arguments from central data center admins. We would have autonomy to change our own deployment system, provision more compute resources, generalize something to work with GPUs, test out different delivery and runtime frameworks, create our own ingress failure robustness patterns, all without blockages and mandated central infra bottle necks.

To create such a configurable and adaptable API-driven portal into bare metal or a data center yourself is way too slow and costly, only the largest companies can do it, and then they turned it around and made it into cloud vendor options.

When medium sized companies try to do it, the most common outcome is a ton of exceedingly arrogant SRE types will create piss poor tooling that barely works for maybe the top 2-3 use cases and then will whine and complain that they can’t support generalizing it for the long tail of other use cases, and because they have political power as the gorilla in the room sitting on top of the only interface to the data center, nobody can argue with them, and you get a burnout mill with constant turnover on all the other teams who have to do SRE’s job for them while listening to the arrogance about what a rip off cloud tools are.
The write-up seems to focus on monopolization and mentions privacy only in passing. I don't care if there is a single company or duo running the advertising market, and to what extent they are controlling prices. I also don't want to "open up the market" so that more companies can participate in it. Privacy should be regarded as a fundamental human right, and the surveillance economy is based on the mass violation of that right. The lawsuits, and this write-up, completely miss that point.
If one's culture can be taken away by porn, one hadn't much culture to begin with.

If one's morals can be corrupted by porn, one hadn't much morals to begin with.

Where porn exposes one's weaknesses, one should introspect to evolve, not tilt against windmills.
Hmm, I think the idea is a bit reductionist but given that his definitions stem from those characters I don't think you've chosen great examples.

Ryan, Jan, and later Kelly are definitely "sociopaths" by the article's definition (if not by, well, psychological standards).

Jo (Kathy Bates) straight up says her primary reason for getting married was to attain wealth and power.

David Wallace is seemingly very nice, but the articles explain how he repeatedly sets up "heads i win (and you get a kudos), tails you lose" scenarios. Robert California does this as well, and often in a much more obvious manner.

Michael Scott is his epitome of "clueless", who will never advance past middle management (and we see this play out several times). You can call it the Peter Principle too, if you want. You can throw Andy and Dwight in there too. None of them has the stomach to truly put themselves above everyone else (not even Dwight).
Is that an opinion based on facts or mere impression? And if it's based on facts, would you be willing to share the source?

Further, what is it that you're implying with that statement?
NYT: Europe == good; Asia == shit
I agree with your overall sentiment. Most companies should have a better legal structure that benefit employees. However

> Companies will shovel money to their lawyers to set up an ownership structure that benefits the investors and founders

This isn’t entirely true. When a new startup goes to a law firm to set this up, even top tier law firms will provide a structure based on prewritten templates that the firm uses will (nearly) all their clients.

This means that setting up a company is actually relatively cheap if you use pre-written templates from your law firm. As soon as you make any special requests, it means those templates can no longer be re-used and that’s when the startup needs to shovel money having lawyers rewrite the templates to accommodate special requests / clauses.

The blame for this is always put on founders, which isn’t uncalled for. But for real industry wide change to happen, it’s the law firms that need to make it easier for their clients to offer employee-friendly structures so that founders don’t need to pay a premium for employee-friendly structures.

Also important is that the entire structure is typically set up very early in the company’s history (usually before the company has any or minimal funding). It’s difficult to justify spending $20,000 to set up a non-standard equity structure vs. $2,000 for the standard docs when the startup may only have just $100k in the bank.

Industry change won’t happen without law firms offering cost efficient ways for companies to set up employee friendly structures.

The situation is very unfortunate and unfortunately difficult to fix.
Perhaps you're right. My opinion has only been formulated from my own experience, so it's very limited. Emotions have simply been a net negative for me, and I barely experience the good ones.
It only works because of non-linearities. So that seems like too much of a simplification, limiting it to "linear algebra" when it involves both vector calculus and non-linear algebras.
That is precisely the kind of work performed (in the open, all the data is public) by the Global Meteor Network: https://globalmeteornetwork.org/

Unfortunately most meteors never land because they completely burn up in the atmosphere. From the reading I've done today, I think the ones you're after are called "meteor-dropping fireballs".
So you did have most of these issues, but jumped through a lot of hoops and maintained a bunch of brittle fixes to address them?

Also, your link to "Windows 10 Pro N" just leads me to the download page for Windows 10 -- I don't see any option for "Pro N". Smells like dark patterns to me.
Because the Atlantic has lied many times, and there is direct communication from POTUS. You can belive him or not, that is your choice.

Everyone believes anything else Obama, or what Dems say regardless of facts presented.
Think Kubernetes and Docker: They are trendy technologies. But they are declining in popularity, they are fragile over time.

D is Lindy Effect. It's been around for 19 years, it'll probably stay around for at least another 19.

> The Lindy effect is a theory that the future life expectancy of some non-perishable things like a technology or an idea is proportional to their current age, so that every additional period of survival implies a longer remaining life expectancy.[1] Where the Lindy effect applies, mortality rate decreases with time.

So Rust may be hot now– but remember, NoSQL and Docker were hot once too, and they are now not popular.

Plus D is adding Rust's ownership and borrowing.

D compiles faster than C++20 and is easier to learn.
> Many things we consider "automatic" require complex maintenance and upkeep, and inappropriate automation can actually increase the net amount of work needed to be done.

As seen in some test suites and CI/CD pipelines...
Interestingly, it seems this has already happened with the virus being integrated into human DNA in rare cases, though apparently to no ill effect: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/12/coronavirus-may-some...
this is spot on - I attempted to create an adult entertainment site and this was the crux of it. The security aspect of the entire architecture is a whole different endeavor.
This isn't replaced at all because the charge in question was for users who didn't use the ISP provided modem.

That said, I've never understood why they used a separate charge rather than raising the rental fee for the modem. Is there a legal restriction here or a psychological trick to occlude fee hikes?
This is pretty much the identity theft nightmare. Imagine someone pwning you early on in your life and then just waiting for retirement or other wealth events to arrive before cashing out.
Way too much time spent on this game. I think it might have been the first video game I spent a considerable amount of time on. Monochromatic Apple II with a box joystick which was bent out of shape.... still great to play with though. Great game for the era.
Call forwarding was one way to bypass intrastate long distant charges. My bestie ran a co-op. Members would get dedicated POTS line, add call forwarding feature, run a dedicated relay node. He maintained both dialer (client) and router (server) software. You enter phone number, dialer would pick a toll-free node in that general direction (telco provisioned prefixes corresponded to physical exchanges). Node would answer, decide to forward you to target number or next node. repeat as needed. The co-op spanned much of western Washington, from Bellingham to Olympia.
As a Brit I agree, I muttered my way through the parochial tone. Now imagine the parallel universe where it had been the Dragon 32 whose CPU had taken over the world :)
I am glad the first comment on HN is pointing this out.

I still think it is unfortunate UK couldn't bring its tech to the next level with IMG, ARM, Icera and arguably Dialog Semiconductor.

Or Interesting UniKernel project from Cambridge UK [1]. I mean there are lots of Innovation happening even right now in UK. Both hardware and Software.

Edit: And I forgot Raspberry Pi.

[1] https://mirage.io
People support more than one content creator though, if you got the entire media spending of 1000 people you'd do fine. Since your books can't fulfill peoples entire content need though you need more than 1000 people to do that, however 1 full time content creator per 1000 people seems reasonable.
This is probably the document you seek: https://docs.google.com/document/d/18TT-Jm7z9kYskl5ua07jQWD9...
The above proposal is compatible with this goal, since it reduces the default copyright term, and adds optional paid extensions on a sliding scale. As compromises go, it's pretty decent.

I few other wrinkles I'd suggest to reduce friction: a copyright registry is being reintroduced[0] here, and this registry must be made public just like patents and trademarks. Registrations and extensions should also be filed a year before expiration (no fair to create a derivative work based on something that is scheduled for expiration only to have the rug pulled out from under you). This gives the creator plenty of time to register a work after publication, minimizing the burden on copyright owners (currently copyright is granted with no notice or registration required).

[0] Okay, not really, a copyright registry still exists today, but given it is optional and only affects the amount of damages you can collect from violations and absence from the registry isn't an affirmative defense, it isn't really comparable to the kind of registry that is needed to make such a scheme work. Nor is it comparable to the functions of the registry as it existed before copyright was made automatic.
I don't see your point. You didn't buy the YouTube content. You're watching it for free. How about you just don't watch YouTube?
You should check out interlaced PNG and friends
This is not true even in an extremely idealized model. For example, if you pick two random points in a unit cube, they are much more likely to be a moderate distance apart (on average, about 0.66 units) than they are to be very close together.

https://people.kth.se/~johanph/habc.pdf
The creator of ffmpeg Fabrice Bellard(1) is truly a genius and has created so many amazing software that have been an amazing benefit to the world.

(1) https://bellard.org/
Should medical science only promote “get rich quick” surgical procedures and refuse to consider that “work hard first” lifestyle changes are effective for the vast majority of patients that work diligently towards health? No: lifestyle changes are a preventative and curative step that can avoid diseases and surgeries in many other fields.

Medicine is absolutely capable of demanding patients work diligently towards lifestyle changes before they receive surgical intervention. For example, if you want an organ transplant and you aren’t working diligently towards health (often with exactly the same list of lifestyle changes as above!) you may be denied your organ transplant.

The problem she fought against was that surgeons didn’t want to consider that the lifestyle changes method could possibly be effective. She was right; they were wrong.

So now it’s left to medicine to decide when and how to take that into account in their treatment recommendations and standards of care. As you describe, this is a Hard Problem, but it’s a familiar one. They already have lots of experience with treatment through lifestyle change, and now as a result of her work, they can apply those learning to this new area too.

Good work.
When I think public workers, I think jobs where no one can be fired no matter how bad they are. We even have nationwide protests on this very point...
C came from the Unix environment, gained momentum in the 1980's. The 1980's was a time when microcomputers exploded.

Unfortunately, these microcomputers only had the memory and CPU power of big iron from 25 years before that. The best applications and games for these machines were written by assembly language wizards.

The C language played right into that. C came from an environment of "mid-grade iron" from about ten years before that. It was developed for the efficient programming of machines that Unix ran on, which were roughly similar in power to the consumer-grade microcomputers of the 1980's.

There were tools like Pascal and Modula also, but C came shrouded with a naive mystique thanks to its cryptic syntax, reputation for bending to the programmer, and creds due to its Unix connection. Naive programmers believed that expressions like i++ were faster than i := i + 1, or else, in any case, they liked it better. Moreover, in some situations, an expression stuffed with side effects in C would actually generate better code than less densely coded equivalent (the only equivalent available in a Pascal family language), due to the limitations of compiler capability. Coders whose ego was built on writing big programs in assembly language and getting them debugged were less threatened by a cryptic language in which you could write programs that were hard to understand, and those used to macro assemblers would also have liked the preprocessor. The ability to abuse the language to get the compiler to do what you want also would have helped. "C gets out of the way so you can get the machine to do what you mean (unlike those other things from the Wirthian family). Before there was an ANSI standard, that would have applied double. The printf function with its format strings also blew away Pascal and Fortran.

On the latter point, I started to learn C at about the same time I enrolled in engineering. There was a mandatory Fortran course in the engineering curriculum. In one of the assignments, I wanted the Fortran program to have numeric output with dynamic column widths. It was really difficult; I can't remember whether I even got it working. I also remember the issue that Fortran's output would replace a fixed field with * characters when the value would not fit, instead of just expanding it. A few months later when I was learning C, I made it a point to try to do that with printf. Wow, I was easily able to do that. I was thinking, why would anyone use Fortran for number crunching if we have C?
> so if your salary is 80K then the employer is likely paying another 80k for things like social security and health insurance

Is that 80K gross salary? If it is, that would mean that the ratio of take_home_pay/total_cost_for_employer for US is smaller than in much of Europe (which is surprising to me).

Here is what numbers for that kind of salary would look like in Croatia:

Gross yearly salary: 80 000 USD

Total cost for employer: 93 200 USD

Take home pay: 48 088 USD

(Note - this puts you in the highest tax bracket, almost no one makes that much.)
Calls to "lock up the bastards" might give some short-lived emotional satisfaction but rarely translate into anything resembling victory (see the war on drugs). The burden of proof in criminal matters is "beyond a reasonable doubt". I'm somewhat doubtful that prosecutors, faced with an onslaught of defense counsel and sympathetic jurors, will meet that burden in white collar crimes. The answer isn't jail but rather developing the will to overcome regulatory capture and to enforce existing legislation which is more than sufficient to counter monopolies.
"Still, none of this background would be remembered by anyone who actually played the game. Instead the supposed Bungeling guards would become popularly known as "mad
monks," which their pudgy low-resolution shapes rather resembled. Doubtless plenty of imaginative young gamers made up new narratives of their own to fit the bizarre image
of greedy monks chasing an intrepid adventurer up and down a maze of scaffolding dotted with gold."

As a kid, I didn't think of arcade games in terms of words, so the elaborate backgrounds and characters that game authors made up for their arcade games didn't matter, and I was rarely even aware of them.

I related to the games on an intuitive level, and just watching someone play without any words being exchanged or thought was enough for me to get it and play myself.

RPG's were different. There the actual background and characters mattered.
Lode Runner was one of my very first game on Commodore 64, although not my favorite. I was in primary school. A schoolmate gave me a tape with a few games on it, including "lode runner". Every week we would get new original games. There was a lot of creativity on these constrained 8-bit computers.
You are not describing the Langlands program here. You seem to have confused the concept of a group representation with the concept of a group presentation. These are completely different things.

As a result of this confusion, instead of describing the Langlands program, you described something like the classification of finite groups.
Well, that is possible. I have probably worked too much with trees and forests.
I remember one quote from Hermann Houser (one of the founders of Acorn)... "I gave them two important things to develop the Arm chip. I gave them no money, and I gave them no people".

It's amazing what necessity can accomplish...
Note: D2 is now stable, and also open-source. There are no plans for a D3.

Remember when Python went from 2 to 3? It was incredibly painful. But the transition is over now. Depending on who you ask, Python is now the most popular[0], third most popular[1], or second most popular language[2].

When I started learning Python, it was not popular.

[0]: https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/
[1]: https://www.northeastern.edu/graduate/blog/most-popular-prog...
[2]: https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2019

Python is old.
Well, it's a show anyway, but in moments I described writers definitely had sth more in mind than just "Michael having a few good moments"

I can agree that if you look at the storyline as a whole, this theory doesn't make much sense, but these little hints here and there are always giving me second thoughts. Goes to show that art, even such low-key one as TV comedy, can really shine when you keep your head open to more interpretations than just the silver-plattered one.
Tesla car sales will grow, but their stock continuing to grow is not sustainable. Tesla certainly make desirable cars, but I don't see their product being hard to replicate should any other manufacturer make a serious effort. Other manufacturers will make a serious effort when it makes financial sense to.
Why would anyone want to support programs for Knights Mill on Ice Lake? The (past) theory of Intel that x86 was valuable in itself made no sense anyway. And there is not a single "AVX512" extension set but a base and quite a number of fine grained extensions, and which are supported per uarch is easy to find.
One of Intel strategy is runtime dispatch in library code, and for any general purpose AVX512 you are probably going to do that for now. So you could as well address variants if needed. If AVX512 generalizes, I suspect it will become a more stable instruction set. But Knights Mill is legacy already, and has not been replaced.
This uses hill climbing to minimize RMS error, I wonder if gradient descent with some momentum would be faster?

Thanks for sharing!
Well at least it serves as a quick and timely warning for less knowledgeable readers. Such readers can do their own research now. Someone else can point out the mistakes if/when they have time ( this takes much more effort ).
I mean yeah, sure, by all reasonable measures, TSLA is grossly overvalued. I absolutely believe it's grossly overvalued.

But... so what? A million people have had this take before this guy and for what? You gonna short the stock? I'm certainly not. So that leaves this as just some mental masturbation on Twitter.
CSS Thumbnail Effect
And taxation, to make evil geniuses less interested in the activity in the first place, creating room for less evil geniuses.