skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>>maintain their fiefdoms of extrajudicial decisions about what is or isn't considered protected speech

Where do they do that?

My understanding of U.S.A. First amendment is that government won't infringe on your right of free speech. It doesn't say you can come into my home, workplace, store, or website and yell what you want on my property.

There's nothing "Extrajudicial" about it and it's not "Protected speech". It's just a business owner saying "you can say whatever you want, but not necessarily in my home, on a platform I built and pay for".

I think we've gone weird somewhere if we think Facebook == Public Square on any level. It's just somebody's storefront (and insert cliches about who / what is the product :)

In some ways, I am hoping tech giants do MORE weird policies / bans / things, so hopefully general population sees it as a private proprietary closed property / platform that it is, not a friendly public gathering spot we somehow take it for. But I still don't think they are doing anything illegal/extrajudicial... it seems people feel they have strange rights or ownership on Facebook or Twitter, have some investment in property, treat it almost as a mix of paid-for condo and public space (depending on what they need to assert at the moment)... and none of that is the case. At best, you are walking in a Mall, and if you start yelling obscenities, pontificating, or even start advertising for different shops etc, the mall security guard will escort you out, as is legal and proper. It's not government infringing your constitutionally protect free speech, it's not extrajudicial, even if you don't like it and really really wanted to yell obscenities or market your business or promote your personal point of view in the mall.
The Supreme Court of the United States agrees[1] with that definition:

> Finally, the adjective “well-regulated” implies nothing more than the imposition of proper discipline and training. See Johnson 1619 (“Regulate”: “To adjust by rule or method”); Rawle 121–122; cf. Va. Declaration of Rights§13 (1776), in 7 Thorpe 3812, 3814 (referring to “a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms”).

[1]: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf
What happens if power goes out, the units stop working if WiFi isn't on a UPS?

This would definitely be a problem in cold climates where a dead furnace could lead to frozen and burst pipes.
Liberal strongholds tend to be soft on crime. When your response to someone who assaults another person "just because" is a slap on the wrist, it's no surprise they move on to more heinous crimes.

"But the guy didn't kill anyone, he deserves a second chance" -- right. And the rest of us deserve some safety from people like him.

You can't ban your way to more safety if you can't reasonably control the thing that you're banning. The US government can't reasonably control who has a gun in this country, that's just a fact and it will not change as long as the second amendment is a thing.

What you can do is adjust sentencing standards so that the people who are at highest risk of re-offending in a violent way are locked up.
Before: 100 users, 100 accurate retweets.

After: 100 users, 99 accurate retweets.

The study followed 2000 and I can only assume they all retweeted multiple times, like 10, so you get 20000 retweets. Seems plausible to me.
From a quick search, it seems this "tax" is part of an ancient (roman law) land contract called Emphyteusis[1]
that's still recognized as a valid by the italian civil codex, despite not being in common use.
I don't think it has anything to do with special nobiliar priviledges: it's just that these barons claim to own
land and the relative rights under this contract.

Apparently, the land owner has no obligations, but the lease-holder instead is bound to pay
an annual canon and "improve the land", whatever that means, perpetually.

[1]: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enfiteusi
Personally, I like the Pocket button. Why?

(1) I was already a Pocket user

(2) Using Pocket in Firefox is a way for me to support browser's development that's not adtech.
Yes, if that's what the residents want. Similar to how some businesses don't allow weapons, that could just begin at the city line.
I laughed out loud at the cows in the conventional trap.

Grew up in a rural area, feels like a very typical 'silly' cow type thing.
Personally I wasn't capable of posting such a message until quite a few years after my birth.
> 50 million human years lost is a lot less relatable number and I'm not sure how to contextualize it.

On way of contextualizing it that doesn't equate lives with economic output is to divide by life expectancy: if life expectancy is 70 years then 50 million years lost ~= 0.7 million human lives that never happened, or 0.7 million healthy newborns that died preventable deaths.
Ukraine is also planning to ban flights to and from Belarus: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/24/world/europe/belarus-flig...
I would rather have a rule that politicians may not post on social media. They have plenty of other channels for reaching people.
I think you grossly mischaracterize the comment you were responding to.

And yes, invoking communism is very much an identity politics signifier in this discussion. One side of this debate is endlessly calling everything they don't like "communism" and "(cultural) Marxism". Which is pretty bonkers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_th...
Agreed. I've been really happy with Ikea's Tradfri line. It's all on Zigbee, works without internet and doesn't need an "Ikea account". However lights and blinds only for now, plus they have perpetual shortages.
And with git being the most superior blockchain of them all.
"Apple doesn’t need to market iPhones."

I disagree. May be they don't need to do ads for discovery anymore. But don't forget the legendary Steve Jobs Demonstration for Iphone initially and tons of iPhone ads that are on TV. Sure, now most people now know what Iphone is but you always need to market for sustainability. Talk to me when Apple stops doing any ads about iPhones.
Good points, appreciate the reply.
The boolean issue is probably the one that's caused me the most pain. That contradiction with DRY has actually had me go back and forth between repeating myself and using a flag, wasting a ton of time on something incredibly pointless to be thinking that hard about. I feel like the best thing for my career would have been to not read that book right when I started my first professional programing job.
as long as it's very.clear that the age distribution of surplus mortality in times of covid is heavily drawing from other than Alzheimer's dead-soon-anyhow; as long as it's very clear that covid-19 kills otherwise healthy diabetics, overweights, heart patients, cant-afford-healthcare people, was-misguided-about-indoor-events people, multiple sclerosis patients, the list goes on, and on and on, ....

as long as that is crystal clear, that "two old dead soon anyhow Alzheimer's patients" completely misrepresent the 500.000+ dead US citizens...

... such an anecdote is perfectly fine ...
It is one. The majority of migrants, qualified or not, have a hard time getting work permits. Finding work, low paid but paid, isn't the main challenge. Doesn't do any good if you aren't allowed to take that work so.

Also, our social systems are doing well. Thanks for worrying.
That example isn't quite how Black works, because Black only separates parentheses from their contents if the contents would be longer than a single line. So any function with one line of arguments will look exactly like your first example.

I think also that the comments you put there are mistaken because functions have more logical sections than you're recognizing here. Function definitions always follow the form `<label>(<arguments>): <body>`. You say "visually inside" in two of your comments, but in actuality they are two different things entirely because one is talking about the body section and one is talking about the arguments section, and your first example just skips over the arguments section as if it either doesn't exist or isn't its own very important part of the function definition.

A more thorough example set without yet expanding the arguments would be:

def f(x # inside of arguments section): # outside of arguments section
Pass # inside of body section

vs

def f(
X # inside of arguments section
): # outside of arguments section
pass # inside of body section

or if one prefers to make the "outside" parts nonexplicit,

def f(x # inside of arguments section):
Pass # inside of body section

vs

def f(
X # inside of arguments section
):
pass # inside of body section

The indent+dedent says "this is the section". But again, Black only does anything if your argument section runs longer than a single line.

It's really not about def f(x), because Black does exactly the thing you want for f(x). It's about

def f(abesessefe, dedddf_asdf, readfsefsef_afsefse, foreard_aree_aers=True,
arese_mars_mares=None, maresd_des_reeebo='17'):
pass

vs

def f(
| abesessefe,
| dedddf_asdf,
| readfsefsef_afsefse,
| foreard_aree_aers=True,
| arese_mars_mares=None,
| maresd_des_reeebo='17'
):
pass

The point of what Black does is that in the second case the dedented section terminator `)` is always going to be at the same column as the def if the arguments run past one line, so it will always be easy to find and your arguments will also be a lot easier to read.
AArch32 is not implemented on Apple CPUs since quite a long time now.
I make my code "read like a book" with a line comment for each algorithmic step inside a function, and adding line-ending comments to clarify. So functions are just containers of steps designed to reduce repetition, increase visibility, and minimize data passing and globals.
100% would love to see broader protocol support.
The article is missing a lot of information. Bar end are significantly inferior to extended width bars and last I check iOS/android didn't preclude you from reading existing text on the web (yet) so this information should be freely available.
I hear this term often. What does gain of function mean? I am not able to understand that term.
> But mixed into the chapter there are more questionable assertions. Martin says that Boolean flag arguments are bad practice, which I agree with, because an unadorned true or false in source code is opaque and unclear versus an explicit IS_SUITE or IS_NOT_SUITE... but Martin's reasoning is rather that a Boolean argument means that a function does more than one thing, which it shouldn't.

I see how this can be polemic because most code is littered w/ flags, but I tend to agree that boolean flags can be an anti-pattern (even though it's apparently idiomatic in some languages).

Usually the flag is there to introduce a branching condition (effectively breaking "a function should do one thing") but don't carry any semantic on it's own. I find the same can be achieved w/ polymorphism and/or pattern-matching, the benefit being now your behaviour is part of the data model (the first argument) which is easier to reason about, document, and extend to new cases (don't need to keep passing flags down the call chain).

As anything, I don't think we can say "I recommend / don't recommend X book", all knowledge and experience is useful. Just use your judgment and don't treat programming books as a holy book.
The US Constitution only prohibits the government from inflicting cruel and unusual punishment. It says nothing about preventing a privately owned and operated company from doing so.
They are definately trying to have their cake and eat it: either you are a media company and legally responsible for content, or you are a platform and then you leave people alone unless they are doong somethong illegal
Your wording is misleading. That applies to people who have been court committed (even the majority of hospitalizations are voluntary or tagged 'voluntary' as a courtesy), or deemed 'mentally defective' by a court. That is a much higher bar than what you wrote. There are plenty of people with mental health diagnoses who have never been court committed.
For me this maps so clearly to the Dreyfus model of skill acquisition. Novices need strict rules to guide their behavior. Experts are able to use intuition they have developed. When something new comes along, everyone seems like a novice for a little while.

The Dreyfus model identifies 5 skill levels:

Novice

Wants to achieve a goal, and not particularly interested in learning.
Requires context free rules to follow.
When something unexpected happens will get stuck.

Advanced Beginner

Beginning to break away from fixed rules.
Can accomplish tasks on own, but still has difficulty troubleshooting.
Wants information fast.

Competent

Developed a conceptual model of task environment.
Able to troubleshoot.
Beginning to solve novel problems.
Seeks out and solve problems.
Shows initiative and resourcefulness.
May still have trouble determining which details to focus on when solving a problem.

Proficient

Needs the big picture.
Able to reflect on approach in order to perform better next time.
Learns from experience of others.
Applies maxims and patterns.

Expert

Primary source of knowledge and information in a field.
Constantly look for better ways of doing things.
Write books and articles and does the lecture circuit.
Work from intuition.
Knows the difference between irrelevant and important details.
That is a really great idea. I love that wiki page. Some of them are harder to follow in a team that prefers "expressiveness". Quotes because I think it's easier to follow Go's prescription especially for always returning concrete types instead of interfaces.

> return a concrete type and let the consumer mock the producer implementation
Is AArch32 support optional in ARMv8.4-A ?
> Realize there's no such thing as "clean code"

You can disagree over what exactly is clean code. But you will learn to distinguish what dirty code is when you try to maintain it.

As a person that has had to maintain dirty code over the years, hearing someone saying dirty code doesn't exist is really frustrating. Noone wants to clean up your code, but doing it is better than allowing the code to become unmaintainable, that's why people bring up that book. If you do not care about what clean code is, stop making life difficult for people that do.
Modern react is mature, stable, thoroughly explored by community yet at the same time lean enough to start small (ie scalable and battle tested).

Svelte is promising but way too young.

Vue seems yet a tiny bit behind React in terms of community size and number of hi demanding real life use cases. As far as I see it.

In the end you should start with your specific requirements for the app, not from a fashion question.

There’s no and never be “one choice fits all” answer.
Actually it failing in the courts provides more fire for the campaign

"Activist Judges!" as a rallying cry.
The point that people are making is that they believe the "spirit of the law" is a conceptual split between platforms and publishers. The way people commonly think of telephones vs newspapers. Telephones are a platform for speaking, newspapers are a publisher with editorial control.

The discussion is not about whether or not social media companies have Section 230 protection but whether or not they should have it.
The paper is online: https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3411764.3445642

> To measure users’ subsequent behavior after receiving the correc- tion, we focused on three main outcome variables. Most importantly, we considered the quality of news content shared by the users. We quantifed the quality of news content at the source level using trust- worthiness scores of news domains shared by the users based on a list of 60 news domains rated by professional fact-checkers (this list contains 20 fake news, 20 hyperpartisan, and 20 mainstream news outlets where each domain has a quality score between 0 and 1) [39]. A link-containing (re)tweet’s quality score was defned as the quality of the domain that was linked to. (Quality scores could not be assigned to tweets without links to any of the 60 sites.)

Citation [39] is Pennycook,G. & Rand,D.G. “Fighting misinformation on social media using crowdsourced judgments of news source quality.” I am not sure what “crowdsourced” means here because I didn’t read all the citations.

But it sounds like they have a plausible metric. It’s always very dumb to criticize science based on a press release.
The Future of Work: 7 Predictions for 2021 and Beyond
Are you really building generic frameworks and writing extensive tests every time you do some data exploration and analysis in R Studio?
What is a "self-catalyzing reaction"? Would nuclear fission or fusion count? What about reactions involving free radicals, where the catalyst is a reaction product?

Is the "self-catalyzing reaction" sufficient on its own to classify something as life?
Every Developer Needs a Mentor
Fitnesse is Uncle Bob's baby so it makes sense to use that example, he can't get through a book without talking about it at length.
Thanks. If you find that there's a regression in accessibility with this update, I'd appreciate it if you would email me (my email address is in my HN profile), to make sure I get the message even if I forget to check this thread, so I can help sound the alarm.
"acquacotta". The recipe varies, but in my hometown it's basically a soup made with onions, potatoes, stale bread and raw olive oil, plus whatever was around to give it flavour (broccoli, wild water cress, dried cod, lard).

It's not "bad" but you definitely can feel it being the cheapest thing that you could do to fill you up.
The Case for Extreme Vaccine Effectiveness
See the 1% rule:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1%25_rule_(Internet_culture)

The vast majority of people are lurkers and only read the content.
Another thing Martin advocates for is not putting your name in comments, e.g. "Fixed a bug here; there could still be problematic interactions with subsystem foo -- ericb". He says, "Source control systems are very good at remembering who added what, when." (p. 68, 2009 edition)

Rubbish! Multiple times I've had to track down the original author of code that was auto-refactored, reformatted, changed locations, changed source control, etc. "git blame" and such are useless in these cases; it ends up being a game of Whodunit that involves hours of search, Slack pings, and what not. Just put your name in the comment, if it's documenting something substantial and is the result of your own research and struggle. And if you're in such a position, allow and encourage your colleagues to do this too.
It actually does happen every once in a while
Simulating Update or Delete with Limit in Postgres with CTEs
I wonder if this is some sort of precursor work for the generics release? Feels like gofmt -r on steroids, and could be eventually used to do large scale transformations to the standard library?
I think we need to take a look at how we deal with the same issue in face to face interactions. Calling out someone who is incorrect in a group setting often goes poorly - you seem obnoxious and they need to double down on their rhetoric to save face. Even doing so "politely" just makes you seem more like a dick. While that may sound irrational, think about how you'd react at a conference where one person in the audience shouted "that's not true! this arcane reference which no one in the audience has evaluated claims that's just a myth!" in general you'd think they were at best misguided if not trying to be deliberately provocative. What are the odds that you would go home that night and look up the reference the heckler cited?

Far more effective is to take someone aside and tell them in private that they are incorrect, especially when combined with acknowledgement of what they got right. In that context you are not attacking their social position and thus the stakes are lower. While it is hard to simulate such a position of privacy and trust in an online setting, private direct messages on most platforms are a good start. Anecdotally, people seem much more receptive to a respectful direct message and conversation seems much more cordial and focused on pursuit of knowledge. While I have no evidence that this leads to long term positive changes in posting behavior, I'd be willing to wager it has a better long term outcome.
I appreciate them doing a bit more for transparency, but I believe that it's never as easy as that. There will always be something hidden.
Lay person here. What does gain of function mean? Thank you, kindly.
I am infuriated by people who take little sips of a drink. The intense sucking around (primarily a hot tea or other hot liquid) but that pursed lip sucking sound destroys my will to live (and in a way that wants me to take everyone with me.)
Here's the one for NSF: https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2018/nsf18041/nsf18041.jsp#q1

Search for Public access policy and agency name.
Facebook: "Yes we can ban you, Mr. President. We have a foosball table in the break room."
Both can be true. Texas fears too much centralized power and Abbott likes cash. Texans put up with the latter because of the former.
> Go Texas! Pride of the South!

Inciting isn't helping. Why should someone take what you have to say seriously, when you insult people in the next sentence.
"We might have expected that being corrected would shift one’s attention to accuracy."

Really? Who would think that? Science requires an open mind, sure, but it doesn't require you to be some sort of idiot when formulating your hypotheses. To a first approximation, nobody responds to being corrected with a polite thank you and a shift to focus on accuracy, and everybody knows that.

Whatever model of humanity they're operating with is less realistic than homo econimus. Are they using homo vulcanus?
I suppose this is a UK source but it should apply to GDPR generally https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio...

> You should also not request formal identification documents unless necessary. First you should think about other reasonable and proportionate ways you can verify an individual’s identity. You may already have verification measures in place which you can use, for example a username and password.

The GDPR doesn't state explicitly how to do identification for subject access requests, only that “The controller should use all reasonable measures to verify the identity of a data subject who requests access, in particular in the context of online services and online identifiers.” In the case of ask.fm it seems like if the person's identity can be verified by the fact that they can access their account, it's not reasonable to require an official ID.
Bar ends were obsoleted by wider straight bars the article is of poor quality welcome to hacker news.
To be clear, I also work at a FAANG, doing very similar work but am consistently condescended to by these folks, literally everywhere from real life to online. The fact that I'm basically only worth 50% of them just adds insult to injury.
Looking forward to 2042!
You can be an eu citizen with a non-eu ID so it makes no sense.
Zannon Lake?
I've never understood the desire to control systems by speaking to them in code words. Speaking monopolizes a shared channel, requires diverting your conversation, and is really slow.

For practically anything that involves using code words to tell the computer what to do there are better input methods, like physical switches, or purely automated.

This is slightly off-topic, but in your opinion what are some of the reasons people prefer to use voice input with code words over the other options ?
OSHA won't require reporting of reactions to employer-mandated vaccines
> (? I don't know the difference)

My superficial googling suggests pig and hog were once, like piglet, developmental subcategories of swine (unweaned and ready-for-market). Like shoat (weaned), and gilt/sow (female that hasn't/has reproduced). But meaning has blurred and diversified since.
Capturing System Core Dumps
Yes, all of those things are better than living in cities.

Less noise, less crowding, less violence and crime, more space, more peace, and more friendliness.