skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't think it makes sense to say "React is a library because you can forego using enough of its features to fall below some arbitrary line".

Please note that I’m not arguing that React itself is or isn’t a framework. I’m simply saying that it can be used in multiple and qualitatively different ways, in contrast with your own position in the comment I originally replied to.

In particular, nothing stops you from using React only for what it’s really good at: providing a declarative way to specify the required rendering behaviour, with reasonable modularity due to the component system and reasonable efficiency for many practical applications due to the VDOM. This was the combination of ideas that React popularised within the front-end web development community, the innovation that moved the goalposts in that part of the software industry. You can also use other libraries for what they’re good at, whether that is state management or accessing remote APIs or doing a fuzzy string look-up to power a search box. And you can use your own code to implement your application-specific functionality, as well as delegating to and co-ordinating between these other dependencies whenever it makes sense.

None of this is a novel or React-specific idea. We’ve been building software effectively with modular architectures and separation of concerns for many decades. Isolating presentation code from other aspects is perhaps the most common example, and patterns formalising different arrangements of those responsibilities have been around since at least the 1970s.

I appreciate that this is not necessarily the most trendy or popular way to use React today. There is no shortage of libraries and blog posts and forum comments that actively encourage building your whole application as one big tree of React components, even if those components have little if anything to do with presentation and rendering. But in a discussion about whether modern practices are really a good idea, I think it’s reasonable to point out that there is also no shortage of blog posts and forum comments and Stack Overflow questions asking how to solve problems with that kind of application that wouldn’t have existed in the first place with a better architecture.

It’s very late here so this will be my last comment for tonight, but just to finish, your last paragraph provides some great examples of how different the two approaches we’ve been discussing can be. I absolutely do have unit tests for custom comparison functions in the project I’m working on right now, because there is significant decision-making logic inside them, and if that logic is correct then I can be reasonably confident that the sort using that comparison function will be correct as well. On the other hand, I typically don’t test my React components at all (with that type of unit test) because by design they contain very little logic to be verified.
Anecdata, but I know a first-time solo female founder who has raised north of $4MM so yes it is possible.

I don't think it's actually super common, but feels like it's hard to not end up with millions when you raise (at least for ex-FAANG folks).

As far as I'm concerned - more money, more problems (and less equity).
> Imagine a world where adding the equivalent of a 4 core VM with 8 gigs of ram is going to take 6 months from the time a team say they need it, until it's actually available

If this is the case then the CTO knows that something is very wrong.

I don't think your scenario of companies not knowing whether their teams are incompetent makes sense. You can apply this logic applies to all functions.
Yes, I'm well-aware.

Beyond the Utah datacenter's storage abilities as a privacy eliminator and blackmail facility, there were a worse series of mass privacy-invasions in the US enabled by corporate interests including FAIRVIEW and the "Room 641A"s.

https://theintercept.com/2018/06/25/att-internet-nsa-spy-hub...

In these instance, it's not public what volunteering, complicity, inducements, cajoling, and/or leverage were used to attain such arrangements.
I suspect it’s out of frustration of knocking down the same baseless arguments over and over again.
I just drove through Phoenix and Tucson. Arizona is a big hot pile of rocks, and humans really have no business living there.
Generally I don't feel great about encrustification, at any level of the software development process, which is painful enough as is. Feels close in spirit to the whole MOTD annoyance [1] - although interesting to hear it has heritage with FreeBSD.

[1] https://lwn.net/Articles/726902/
Zero evidence? The proximity of the Wuhan lab to the initial outbreak is certainly circumstantial evidence at a minimum. China’s delay in reporting the outbreak and the nature of the disease is also suspicious and supports the idea of a lab-leak coverup.

This evidence is far more convincing than a hypothetical idea that the disease spontaneously evolved from some animal some other place.
If left to continue to evolve in the wild, I would think that eventually this cancer would eventually be easily classified as its own species... if it can’t be so classified already.
Funny you should mention that; Minneapolis happens to be the largest city in North America that is located directly on the 45th parallel.
In practice any JS programmer will find that the use of the undefined value is very familiar. In Beads it is abbreviated to U as it is used constantly, because the default value of something in the graph data structures is U.

For symmetry reasons, the error and undefined values work across all types, which cleans up one of the messes in JS, where you have undefined, NaN, null, and goodness knows what else. That we have a uniform error value for nodes is a very minor point; it is almost impossible to generate an error value in the protected arithmetic world of Beads. Square root of -1 is one of the only ways I can think of.

There is no try/except in Beads, there are no exceptions as all functions are total, and all arithmetic closed (like Excel).
Stalin's grip wasn't absolute either. We still know about Trotsky, despite his efforts. That doesn't mean the censorship didn't have very real consequences.
hey, quick question. can't iPhones for visually impaired users fix their brightness to ultra low(beyond standard lowest)? since everything is being read out, it'd probably save a lot of battery and make sure the phone lasts longer.
Well that's a given, the screen isn't
That's what we just chose. We figure that climate change will probably make the winters at least slightly less severe. :) We hope. Perhaps that's just a dream.
The US "intelligence community" is the CIA, NSA, etc.[1] Intelligence analysis is the business of trying to extract useful info from of noisy and deceptive data. Here's an introduction to the field.[2] See especially section 4.

4-11. Analyst have found the following rules helpful in dealing with deception:

- Avoid over-reliance on a single source of information.

- Seek and heed the opinions of those closest to the reporting.

- Be suspicious of human sources or sub-sources who have not been met with personally or for whom it is unclear how or from whom they obtained the information.

- Be suspicious of information that appears to be too easy to collect and is too perfect of a picture.

- Always look for material evidence (documents, reports, imagery) rather than relying exclusively upon what someone says.

- Look for a pattern where a source’s information has seemed correct and accurate initially, but then proven to be false.

- Generate and evaluate a full set of hypotheses at the outset of a task.

- Know the limitations as well as the capabilities of collection assets, sources, and potential deceivers.

This kind of analysis used to be needed only by intelligence specialists. Now this should probably be taught in schools.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Intelligence_Com...

[2] https://info.publicintelligence.net/USArmy-IntelAnalysis.pdf
In summary:

USAID is the United States Agency for International Development -- a U.S. federal international aid agency.

The Russian hacking group Nobelium compromised the agency's Constant Contact account -- appears to be a MailChimp/SendGrid type marketing email service.

They have proceeded (and continue?) to send out phishing emails to contacts of the agency, including humanitarian organizations, purportedly targeting Kremlin opposition among others. The emails contain a malicious payload with backdoor capabilities.
tosh submits 10-20 articles a day (yet averages about 1 comment every 2-3 days). There's bound to be some dupes.
I wonder if such a cancer is less cancer, and more a parasite, from a certain perspective?
I don't claim to know all the details. Can you explain how a whistleblower being detained is “garbage evidence” or which of the events was garbage? I’d like to understand where you’re coming from.
Lawrence, KS or Fayetteville, AR
Realization of a multi-node quantum network of remote solid-state qubits
Ask HN: Good books on game theory fundamentals?
I've been brought up in a strictly classical/frequentist/objectivist school of inference and testing. The last few months, I've begun expanding my perspectives into subjective probability, decision analysis, Bayesian methods, causality analysis, and some information theory.

These things have helped me understand probability and statistics a lot better. Some examples of books that have been useful include,

- Understanding Uncertainty (Lindley 2009),

- Theory of Probability (de Finetti 1975),

- Foundations of Statistics (Savage 1953),

- Computer Age Statistical Inference (Efron),

- Causality (Pearl 2011),

- Trustworthy Online Controlled Experiments (Kohavi et al.)

However, most of this is about one "person" dealing with "the world", which in turn is neutral. I want to learn more about the situation where two "people" are in an antagonistic/competitive relationship.

I mention these to give an idea of what sort of book I'd prefer: I want to go into technical detail, but I don't need everything to be proved from axioms. I will eventually use the tools I learn in practise, but I do want an intuitive sense of what they mean and how they are constructed, and I'm prepared to work a little bit for it.

If I can't get a better suggestion here, von Neumann's classic on the subject is where I'll go.
iirc Mambo was forked into Joomla which is still used but nowhere near as much as WordPress
Think of MS stuff from top to bottom as on maintenance, plus a little extra. Less investment than in the old days as foundational tech is becoming commoditized.

The focus and revenue is from cloud now, since MS has comparatively little hardware or advertising profits.

Develop desktop apps in something focused on it, such as QT. Flutter may mature.
Right. As the article argues, it doesn't seem like it would make any difference where the virus came from, which makes the reaction seem strange.

What surely deserves attention is how an idea like "could have come from a lab" is able to shift from 'mild' to 'fringe/controversial' to 'plausible/reasonable to discuss'.
Refactored and rewrote a >100k LOC expert system in the medical field. This was a single Java source file with one long if else tree. Everything was hard coded constants. It was like "if (setting.equals(foobar)) { if (a == 1 && b == 10 && ...) { sendAlert(); } }"

There was no testing and no documentation of the feature sets involved. Rewrote the code in under 10k LOC, huge cost and performance improvements were had, and the feature set was documented. Other engineers could look at the code and maintain it. Got the critical sections of the expert system to 100% branch coverage. Had to fight against other engineers who were saying "100% coverage is bad! I read that on medium!" I just did it anyway due to my own ethical concerns of writing bad software in this area and it only took me ~4hr more to get from 80% to 100% critical path code coverage.

Some of the most stressful software I worked on. I added in shit loads of logging to make sure that if anything did go wrong we'd find out what happened.

At some point someone wasn't notified about something the expert system was supposed to catch. I felt like I was going to faint because this meant someone was seriously hurt. Unfortunate twist: my code worked correctly. The system on the other end who was supposed to send the alert (maintained by the "100% coverage is bad" guy) died. Very unfortunate. The other engineer didn't feel bad about it at all.

I think about this a lot when I'm speaking to engineers. I use it as a litmus test for who I really enjoy working with. If they read a medium article and can't apply critical thinking to identify if it relates to their circumstances or not. Also, attempting to find out if they refuse to hear out a coworker.
Summary from the other thread:

USAID is the United States Agency for International Development -- a U.S. federal international aid agency.

The Russian hacking group Nobelium compromised the agency's Constant Contact account -- appears to be a MailChimp/SendGrid type marketing email service.

They have proceeded (and continue?) to send out phishing emails to contacts of the agency, including humanitarian organizations, purportedly targeting Kremlin opposition among others. The emails contain a malicious payload with backdoor capabilities.
I think consumers that finally manage to buy a card at a decent price will disagree
> Would you mind expanding upon this? I'm really curious.

Not GP, but I share that sentiment. Let me add my two cents. Here are some of the things that confuse me while doing interactive rebases in git:

1. What happens when I delete a commit? Won't the subsequent commits still hold on to its changes, since git uses snapshots? (Nope, that's not how it works)

2. Why does a rebase conflict happen when we try to squash or reorder a few commits? Yes, we can see the original commits, but we have wrack our brains to understand what trips the algorithm.

Git internally uses snapshots to store commits, but uses diffs for rebasing, merging etc. Knowledge of that fact reduces the confusion a bit, but doesn't relieve the cognitive overload. With StGit, they are clearly just patches that you can inspect any time. The reason for any conflicts or results are immediately apparent when you see the patch - much the same way you know why a program misbehaves when you see the source code.

> Have you tried Pijul too?

I have tried Pijul, but didn't stick with it. It didn't feel mature enough yet. However, I sure am going to keep trying until it feels right. What excites me about Pijul is that the author stresses the advantage of patches over snapshots when it comes to merging and rebasing (both are the same in pijul). If the combination of git and stgit is any indication, pijul is likely to be way more powerful. I am excited about its future!
> we don't have an explanation of why those distributions of DM are balls around galaxies and not balls in the intergalactic medium

We do. Structure formation is part of the standard cosmology.
https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Space_Science/Planck... https://kipac.stanford.edu/research/cosmic-structure etc etc.

Matter fell into place wherever it could, forming overdense areas. More matter tended to fall into overdense areas from underdense areas, and this allowed the underdense areas to expand more easily while the overdense areas were constrained to expand more slowly or even to collapse. Dark matter, not being able to collide and radiate away the collision-energy collapses much more slowly than heavy matter.

Dark matter connects fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background with large scale structures -- the cosmic web -- extremely well, as long as it moves nonrelativistically (that's why it's "cold" compared to electron neutrinos which move ultrarelativistically) and collapses very slowly.

> ultradense ball of lambda-CDM

Mu?

Lambda (capital greek letter) is the term that encodes the expansion of space and the consequent separation of clusters of galaxies from one another. It's irrelevant within clusters of galaxies, let alone individual galaxies. The solar system is not expanding at all, and neither is Manhattan.

Lambda is also a constant. It doesn't form balls, there are no overdensities or underdensities, it has the same tiny value at every point in spacetime.

CDM is cold dark matter, and your phys.org link discusses evidence for a possible explanation about why there isn't a high density "ball" of dark matter in the galactic centre compared to around our solar system: maybe dark matter can interact electromagnetically under conditions found in galactic cores. The electromagnetic interaction in this study would produce a gamma ray and the vanishing of a dark matter particle. This could be some complicated way dark matter can self-annihilate in the presence of very hot standard model gas like that around black holes or produced by supernovae, for instance. Whatever the specifics, this conversion of dark matter to gammas would keep the central dark matter relatively sparse.

(Other mechanisms for avoiding high dark matter densities in galaxy cores are available. These do have a good collective name: galactic outflow, of which dark matter heating and dark matter decay are subcategories that are at the root of your phys.org link. Generally dark matter turns into hot matter, or drags hot matter along with it for a ride. Outflow must enrich the metallicity of stars far from galactic cores, and quench core star formation, and these generate observables for individual proposed mechanisms, and astronomers are already happily gathering up data that probe those observables. Good proposals for outflow mechanisms also work on the scale of structures like the Coma Cluster).
> If you’re looking for a way to share logic between front-end and back-end code

So... exactly like isomorphic/universal JavaScript?

What exactly is the practical benefit in this, compared to say, JS functions shared by serialising them as strings or by abstracting them into a common dependency package which can be ran both on front-end and back-end?
Oh plenty bad. Think of brittle C applications where everyone is afraid to touch anything since it might break. Type systems might not help you code faster, but they do decrease the worry of changing things later. You have to basically find or create abstraction boundaries in the code, then lift out localized balls of cruft and replace them a piece at a time. Or put another way, I usually prefer to edit with emacs, but sometimes you have to just plan on editing with rm.
For a long distance move, I would probably only trust movers that are hired by an established company to relocate employees.

Does your new company do relocation for some people, but not you for some reason? Maybe they could book it at your expense? Your current company won't relocate you to get rid of you (probably), but if they do relocation, it's worth figuring out who they use and see if it might work. Of course, if you book it, the moving company may subcontract the job in ways they wouldn't if it were the employer booking.

I did a similar distance move, but from a two bedroom silicon valley house. If you have time, see if any of the pod companies support your new and old locations; we packed two (maybe three) pods, and then got the rest of the stuff in a Penske truck. My parents and brother flew to our old place and then drove with us to the new place (two vehicles + the moving truck) and stayed for a few days to help unload the truck (and I think the pods managed to come in time that we got help unloading those too).

For pods, if possible use a vendor that has rails so you can actually tie things down. Anyway, you want to really pack your stuff in tightly. Anything that can move, will move and break itself and whatever it moves into. I think we used u-haul's pods which are basically plywood boxes with one or two ring on the wall (which does just about nothing afaik). For load-out, you could get extra pods dropped off and if you end up not filling them, they don't charge for the empties (or didn't). Really, as much as you can get in those, the easier, because they're out of your hands.

Also, this should be earlier, but sell or otherwise get rid of as much as you can at the old place, rather than move things to the new place. IKEA furniture you put together isn't going to move well, so why pay to move it. Lots of things may be easier to replace than to move. And maybe some things you really just don't need. Couches and bedframes and matresses are a pain to move, and if you can avoid it, great.
> Wait I have to match the HTML almost to a tee because the chrome plugin no one else has ever heard of says you have perfect SEO (despite only getting first page results with a highly specific query no human would ever type) and you think this will lower your score? :(

That's hilarious. I'm assuming it would not have gone well to try to tell them otherwise?
Funny you say that. We have a lot of $100k+ debadged cars in Switzerland, and I never even noticed until my Kiwi friend started pointing it out.
I moved from Massachusetts to California last December. I recommend Atlas Van Lines.

Background: I originally used one of these brokers as you described without realizing what I was getting into. About a week before they were supposed to pick up my things, they told me they were still trying to find an available crew to actually do the job. I have a flight booked in two weeks so now I’m panicking and calling up any places I can find. When I called Atlas, the local rep I talked to calmed me down and explained in detail how he’d heard this a million times before, that Atlas was one of about four legitimate moving companies that aren’t just brokers (I’ve forgotten the others he mentioned), and that the source of the problem was due to deregulation of moving companies several years ago. Long story short, they came through in the clutch, picked up everything no problem, and delivered it no problem. Of course YMMV.
And then moved back: https://aws.amazon.com/solutions/case-studies/dropbox-s3/
> They are well funded.

Rebol Technologies went bankrupt, and Rebol is de-facto dead since more than a decade; Red barely manages to get by thanks to a recent crypto spike.

> I would say the languages are very different in the sense that Beads is clearly aimed at graphical interactive software.

So is Red with it's native GUI engine. [1]

> Red exists as a systems programming language, a variant customized for building crypto contracts, and then as a general purpose language.

"Domain-specific languages" is the term you are looking for.

> They are so different that it is hard to compare.

Both share the same goal of replacing modern software practices with biased, batteries-included toolchain, varying only in implementation.

> Red being a concatenative language has more in common with FORTH than Algol.

Red is not concatenative in any sense of the word, nor any other language in Rebol family that I know of.

[1]: https://github.com/red/docs/blob/master/en/view.adoc
It’s be fairly confused if a flat earther talked about GLOBAL warming.

On a serious note I’ve learned to not take anything as gospel. Facts aren’t binary, they sit on a spectrum and also in an ecosystem. Given the natural information compression that exists in thought and language it’s impossible to be too sure of anything. The one thing I’ve stopped however is being 100% sure of anything. Of course I will dismiss obvious BS from sociopaths but on the other end of the spectrum I also tread more lightly.
So far it doesn't look like Rapamycin will be very effective for human life extension.

https://peterattiamd.com/richardmiller/
Not necessarily. You can encrypt the search value clientside and search by value in its encrypted form.