skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Is it skillful or foolish to call to mind a quote from a story said by a fictional character, instead of something which helps you in doing your work?

Reply with something from Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality:

"Professor Quirrell's expression became more serious. "Mr. Potter, one of the requisites for becoming a powerful wizard is an excellent memory. The key to a puzzle is often something you read twenty years ago in an old scroll, or a peculiar ring you saw on the finger of a man you met only once. I mention this to explain how I managed to remember this item, and the placard attached to it, after meeting you a good deal later. You see, Mr. Potter, over the course of my life, I have viewed a number of private collections held by individuals who are, perhaps, not quite deserving of all that they have -"

https://www.hpmor.com/chapter/26
Please do a better job of disambiguating your points from personal insults. It's not surprising that your comment landed as an insult.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...
He should sell it as an NFT
http://archive.is/CbTE4
>A sister comment mentioned 400$ million per hour worth of trades being blocked by this

but it's not $400M lost? If you ordered a $100 package from amazon and it got stuck in transit it's not a $100 loss.
Same. I'll never put GCM on my backend options list when building products after Reader. I can't operate with that level of EOL risk exposure. Will be migrating off Gmail now too with so much risk of account cancellation in the Android Dev community but that's going to be a longer project.

Such thought processes has already saved me from wasting my time on AMP.
> What’s more, its material saved over 2,400 metric tons of carbon emissions.

This is not true, part of that is a carbon sink

"That stores an impressive 1,753 metric tons of carbon dioxide and avoids production of 679"

It houses 400 people. The average person uses ~17 tonnes per year. The inhabitants using 6800 tonnes per year.

People who live in units uses far less carbon than people who don't. So we don't want to save on carbon emissions making units, it's not a lot comparatively. We want to maximise on people living in units.

We need to keep the prices down, make it liveable and make planning permissions easier. This is great for rich students, but we need all options, including tall concrete buildings.
> This is not correct. Arrow functions have the `this` value of the outer context.

You are correct, I wasn't clear. I was describing the end effect of free floating arrow functions VS an arrow function declared within a class.

When free floating, trying to access 'this' can (will) result in unexpected behavior, when inside a class arrow functions operate exactly as people expect a class member function to operate in other languages. (In contrast to having to otherwise bind JS functions to 'this')

In both cases the arrow function is acting the same way, but most intro to JS lessons don't explain it.

Indeed the way it was originally explained to me is that "arrow functions in classes auto bind to this" which is hilariously inaccurate, but the end effect is as if that was happening.
And the key words are "smaller salvage operations".
Amdahl's Law says that the marginal benefit of additional cores is always positive (or zero).

What you're describing is negative marginal benefit.
This happens at some restaurants - we'll save a table while you get the food. Half the place is people not eating be cause it's so busy.
You can also look at the actual vote counts. The Nazis won about 30% of their last election before taking power. They were a minority part against the liberals.

"I don't want the nazis to come into power, but I also don't want brownshirts to assault me and my family, and I'm pretty sure I'll be OK if I keep my head down" is an understandable sentiment, if a bit cowardly.
Yeah an example of typeclasses being less flexible to me is if what you really want is OOP polymorphism for something like being able to choose what code to run based on configuration. Given that you can add objects to your class path at runtime, you can clearly get some extreme flexibility out of a system without clear parallels in typeclass based polymorphism. Obviously this isn't something you'd want to do all the time, but it's an example of something I think about periodically when comparing the two approaches.

With typeclasses, polymorphic behavior is driven strictly by the type, and one must follow that thought to it's conclusion to see the difference. Sometimes it's more useful, sometimes not.
It's a tool, and should be celebrated as such. It gives you breathing rom to actually solve the problem. It's an early warning system. :)
I have always struggled with this issue as it feels like you're abandoning your team and leaving them hanging. Especially when you like and respect your teammates. At my last job I was the sole developer in the company and responsible for a major project for our biggest client. My job previous to that I worked as a consultant and was the PM/main developer on two different projects. The guilt I felt in leaving was real and was something I struggled with to even accept the new offers.

That being said you have to do what is in your best interest. In both cases, the move I made was just what I needed at the time and improved my outlook and passion moving forward. To make up for some of the guilt, I worked like hell the last two weeks, cleaning up as many outstanding issues as I could and documenting everything I could. I also made myself available for questions after I left, though you want to be careful about committing too much time there.

And guess what...in both situations the company moved on and eventually got past the initial hurdles of replacing me. It's likely the same will happen in your case and you'll realize you spent way too much time worrying about something that should you decide to leave, is no longer your responsibility.
Probably a bad example about the bus, no I’d probably stay silent (and do). But if I saw something highly dangerous I would be more willing to step in.

I’m sure everyone reading my comment in their head is imagining something different. I was imagining some one being assaulted, and wouldn’t have drawn a weapon - just spoke up.

Frankly, I don’t think pulling a gun in a crowded place would almost ever be a good idea. Unless there was already an active shooter and even then, retreat if possible.
We're talking about digging a diversionary channel. Making either end of that where it connects to the current channel wider to accommodate turning is trivial in comparison.
That’s pretty cool! Thanks for sharing this. My SQL knowledge has been a hodgepodge of random stuff for years, so maybe going through your course will help fill in the gaps.
...that's exactly why I spent some time writing concrete examples of precisely where that's not the case.

How exactly is seeing all this progress mess in your log helpful? If your network connection suddenly breaks at 158K, are you going to do anything different than if it broke at 60K? Do you really need every single line here when all you're doing is just an external download?

0K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 0% 153K 67s
50K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 0% 310K 49s
100K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% 300K 44s
150K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 1% 10.5M 33s
200K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 2% 305K 33s
250K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 2% 152K 38s
300K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 3% 51.1M 33s
350K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 3% 305K 32s
400K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 4% 302K 32s
450K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 4% 306K 32s
500K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 5% 158K 35s

What I think you're not realizing is you waste so much time normally filtering through all this cruft every time you scroll through and filter logs; it's not a zero-cost addition. You're paying for it every single time, and the noise actually makes it harder to find stuff you're looking for. At best it wastes seconds of your (and your teammates') time every time; at worst it makes you (and your teammates) actually miss real problems. It actually helps productivity to filter things out, and often (like here) it doesn't even have an ongoing downside to begin with.
If you think a programming paradigm is going to save you, then you are lost.

What makes enterprises work are:

- clear responsibilities

- clear requirements

- clear interfaces

- clear ownership

- good tests

- good communication
When everyone who will ever want to see it has done so. So never.
I mean, the law part is still completely obvious. If you have a part that scales proportionally with workers (p) and a part that does not scale with workers (1 - p), then only the part that scales proportionally with workers scales with the number of workers (p / s), it is pretty much a tautology.

The only reason why it is non-obvious how to take advantage of it in practice is that problems in the real world very rarely break down so cleanly into a completely serial piece and a trivially, arbitrarily parallelizable piece and even if you are lucky enough to find such a problem at a certain scale, the very act of breaking down the problem almost always eventually results in other previously ignorable constant or scaling factors becoming important either as you chop the problem into smaller pieces or as you scale to bigger problems. The difficulty lies entirely in posing the problem to be "solved", not the application of the law itself.
Linktree raises $45mm Series B
One way of thinking of it is that a physical calculator has two parts - the circuitry that performs the calculations and the UI - in the form of physical buttons, displays, and the connections between them and the calculation circuitry - that allows people to effectively make use of it for their calculating needs.

A modern CPU has got the calculation part covered by itself, but it still needs the UI. Of course there are other kinds of UI for people to do calculations - for example Excel, or programming language REPLs - but desk calculators had pretty good UI for some use cases, so it makes sense to have an option based on them.
You broke the site guidelines badly in this thread, repeatedly crossing into personal attack. Please don't post in the flamewar style here. It's not what this site is for.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I agree with that. If you create accessors as a matter of course, then you are mostly adding dead weight. But accessors can add a useful layer of abstraction at the interface layer, as you say.
The spot where the ship is abuts to a town with a 750k pop. There are residential neighborhoods directly adjacent to the canal.
Using traditional things ( eg. Cofferdams) for non-traditional uses ( raising water instead of lowering) aren't always considered by the same experts.

The problems that I heard of till now are logistics and duration ( since it also has to be removed). None mentioned the depth/length since it is doable and had been done ( cofferdams, but with more planning ofc)

It could have been more plausible if the problem was worse though.
How would you remove such a dam? Sounds like it'd take weeks to build and weeks to remove?
Panama Canal Authority soon to announce widening capital works.

> As Relay's chief competitor in this region, we of Windsong have benefited modestly from the overflow; however, until now we thought it inappropriate to propose a coordinated response to the problem.
Ok, since everyone is sharing their solutions, and nobody named the most obvious one, I'll do it: just nuke it from orbit.
I moved to newsblur, but Reader was a product near and dear to me.
Is it really? The much more likely assumption to me is that something as basic as a calculator app wouldn’t have particularly complex internals.
It is not OO that sucks. Sucks is the article which makes numerous unproved and false statements. So many things Joe says are plain wrong. In my opinion it never hurts to actually know the subject before talking about it.
The center of gravity on that ship looks like it could only be improved by chucking containers overboard. On the other hand, chucking them over the side one by one might be harder than just pushing a whole column over but making that kind of sudden weight change might not be good.

I wonder what the options even are for removing the containers? I assume they're very securely strapped on most of the time, and maybe there's not any reasonable way to get any of the containers loose outside of a port without making the whole pile unstable.
This doesn't seem to be correct. The article talks about reinforcement learning agents optimizing a communication game to trade off color description accurately vs. effort.

The words they use aren't real words, they're partitions of the color space, and the researchers found that the partitions the agents came up with to win the game were similar to human partitioning of the color space.

Now, did the design of the game and the reward function smuggle in human notions of reasonableness that made the outcome a foregone conclusion? Maybe that's a more reasonable criticism, I don't know.
A quick read of the article leads me to believe that the AIs were inventing language tokens of their own. What makes you think it was trained on human data?
We don't have to guess what this looks like. We can just look at pre-car neighborhoods in the U.S, which were a lot more dense than modern suburbs, but not necessarily extremely dense. The largest U.S. cities in 1920 included places like St. Louis, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Baltimore [0], each of which have several neighborhoods with a gentle mix of single-family homes alongside two-, three-, and four-family flats and traditional corner stores.

If you let neighborhoods develop organically, then this is what you get.

[0] https://www.biggestuscities.com/1920
You see it as "restrictions" because you must be a developer.

GPL licenses mainly benefit the user of the software, and for the user these are not restrictions but rights (e.g. the right to see the source).
TUC: Employment law gaps will lead to staff ‘hired and fired by algorithm’
I heard RMS once say "proprietary software subjugates people" and at the time I thought it was over-the-top, sort of out-of-place like "the people's front of judea" opinionating in the middle of a software meeting.

But wow, phones and computers nowadays are like a giant steamroller, squashing users common sense, interests and privacy.
I keep everything with obvious names in ~/.ssh, and I moved .ssh to iCloud and symlinked it for seamless backup.
It is an army of FP / (insert your own pet paradigm) zealots making sure that there is but one ...
While you’re of course right that implementation inheritance can’t commonly be modeled in FP, it can be used in multi-paradigm languages with explicitly functional semantics devoted to it (eg Swift’s take on structs), and its purpose can be handled in FP languages either by data structures providing consistent interfaces into their constituent parts (exceedingly common in lisps) or by static types with similar consistency (exceedingly common in MLs).

In the latter cases it’s not inheritance in the sense that one thing derived from another, but that all the things you’d model that way are derived from broadly compatible base types.

Aside: Rich Hickey’s introduction to Clojure made all of my lisp anxieties vanish when he illustrated the syntactic difference as primarily moving a function call’s open bracket before the function name rather than after. It’s silly in hindsight, but it helped me feel more familiar at once and ready to learn the rest.

Un-aside: I think this kind of exercise would be valuable in translating functional-ish OOP (state is isolated but largely operated on with stateless functions) to its FP syntactic equivalent.

For example in Clojure, in Clojure you could syntactically rewrite (map some-hash some-fn) as a map method on a class instance and it’s just moving some punctuation around.

Another one which is probably not very mind blowing here, but did tickle my brain when I recognized it for what it was: before the great concurrency upheavals over the last decade+ (eventually settling on Promises and async/await), Node had monadic Either/Option types as a core part of its interface (you just destructure them as callback arguments).

None of this is meant to disagree with anything you said of course. Just wanted to add some “if you’re approaching state the same way there’s a representation in your environment” flavor to the discussion.
The epipen design might have been "open to public inspection", but I think most descriptions of it are accompanied by the term proprietary rather than open because of the nature of it being closed for them to use exclusively.

In contrast to the patent on insulin being made open for all to inspect, use, and build upon - SSPL does not smell very "open source" if it's similarly opposed to forking or being the foundation for something someone takes in a different direction.
Thank you, I needed that laugh.
>My point is that even this wasn't proved by his experiment, because he failed to prove the two outputs have the same quality.

If the gains were purely due to an unchanging image, both conversions should have chopped the file size to basically nothing. Any file size difference due to quality would be dwarfed by reduction due to compression of like 600 images down to a handful.
Don't forget that you need to put containers back. Same or more effort needed.
Suez Canal block satellite image from this morning
You can't get lower key-to-screen latency than an 8-bit computer on a CRT.

Well, most of them. My Interact draws characters pixel by pixel.
Sounds like the retention policy is also solving the wrong problem. If for legal reasons you want to destroy any potential evidence, maybe it's a good idea to stop doing illegal actions.
>I don't think they assume they are evil.

Not expressing any opinion of my own, but I did think people assume Ellison is evil.
Cofferdam are temporarily dams.

Biggest issues seem to be building ( and logistics) + deconstructing. But i saw an estimate of a cofferdam for a
bridge of 640 meters ( but less deep and with a single crane) of 16 days.
What requirements, what interfaces? We make and brake things every day.
Our Promise
Sure, as long as people living in dense areas pay the true cost of living there. No more free or subsidized fares that only pay a fraction of the operating costs and zero of the capital costs of transit. Be ready to pay carbon tax on the steel and concrete used to construct tall buildings that the wooden suburban house doesn't have to pay. Maybe move some jobs out of the city to the suburbs; it's not fair that suburban commuters subsidize city people's lifestyles with the goods they buy while there for work and the taxes their employers pay on the property they work in.

You can't just make up "externalities" for something you dislike; I guarantee you, anything you like has lots of "externalities" as well that may cancel out whatever you're trying to charge someone else for things they like.

Gas taxes, tolls, and other user fees pay far more of the total expenditure on roads than transit fares pay for their infrastructure and operating costs. Be careful what you wish for, you may not like what you get.
for UWP apps the OS shell is in charge of creating and managing apps' window frames, unlike Win32 where it's the apps' responsibility

Sounds like the linux ecosystem moved to client-side-decorations, and Windows moved to a window manager model.
To this day I've yet to use any social media as much as I used sharing Google Reader articles on Google Buzz.

My little circle of friends just caught the thing right at the right time, and we loved it hard!
If whatever actions turn a non government entity into something inefficient, then the entity wont survive for long and will go out of business (or at least that's the hope of a competitive free market economy)
Well, Solr and Lucene projects are right now in the process of splitting up (after joining for versions 3-8).

And, you could have always used Lucene directly as an embedded search library. Amazon does, for example, for their customer facing search as their scalability patterns do not align with either Solr or Elasticsearch.

And if you do use Lucene directly, you can choose just the libraries that apply to your use case. I think at minimum, you can get away with maybe 3 jars (core, queryparser, analyzers-common) and that's just over 5Mb for the latest Lucene, which includes things like: http://blog.mikemccandless.com/2021/03/open-source-collabora...

Sometimes, there is a disconnect between implementation that is very flexible and messaging that just shows 'use everything' garden path.
The combination. E.g multiple dispatch without JIT would be really slow as you are picking a method to run at runtime based on the type of all the function arguments.

That requires a linear search through a list of all possible combinations of input arguments.

In a single dispatch language like most object oriented languages, you can do a simple dictionary/hash table lookup. Much faster.

With the JIT Julia is able the optimize away most of these super slow lookups at runtime. Hence you get multiple dispatch for all functions but with fantastic performance. Nobody had done that before.
Twitch Reached $1M/Month in Revenue – Storytime with Justin Kan
Show me the evidence that shows full self driving is not a scam!
I recently ported a reinforcement learning algorithm from PyTorch to Julia. I did my best to keep the implementations the same, with the same hyperparameters, network sizes, etc. I think I did a pretty good job because the performance was similar, solving the CartPole environment in the a similar number of steps, etc.

The Julia implementation ended up being about 2 to 3 times faster. I timed the core learning loops, the network evaluations and gradient calculations and applications, and PyTorch and Julia performed similar here. So it wasn't that Julia was faster at learning. Instead it was all the in-between, all the "book keeping" in Python ended up being much faster in Julia, enough so that overall it was 2 to 3 times faster.

(I was training on a CPU though. Things may be different if you're using a GPU, I don't know.)
The point of the article is not whether or not it's normal. It's that amazon lied about whether it was happening within their walls.
Sites will not let you crawl unless you are Google or maybe Microsoft. They might have, if it looked like you were likely going to become much better than Google and would be competitive. But you will never look like that because they will not let you crawl. Is this true? I don't know, but it is one story. And gets to why there's a more fundamental economic mechanism to Google's monopoly, over Amazon's or Microsoft's.
Would I Have Been Drafted for Vietnam
Very few people translated commuting into working. Whereas before you had N-2 hours working, many folks now have N+M, M>0.
This is true if you expect Elon to care to register his handle on every NFT marketplace. Which may be true for him, but not the majority of people.
You can see from pictures that most of the containers are 40 foot ones. Also, the ship doesn't appear to be at full capacity to me. See https://imgur.com/a/b8neNkR (top is as full a picture as I could find, bottom is current). My guess is ~6000 40 foot containers in its current state.
Having Fun with Branch Delay Slots (2009)