skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I know I've read stories where vegan diets are also shown to cause certain diseases so it isn't as cut and dry as they make it out to be. Also what works for one person doesn't necessarily mean it will work for everyone. Steve Jobs tried the holistic approach and waited too long before trying modern medicine and he died because of that. Just my opinion of course. It's not like every other week we find new studies being published that say x is bad for you and then maybe months or a year down the road you see well x actually cures cancer!!!!
They disabled it for error reporting/debugging reasons. Because you don't need to create a new stack frame, you eliminate that information in the backtrace.
Maybe the government is sending this signal in order to encourage DEFCON to move outside the US, because that would make tracking and surveillance easier for them than within the US, and create a false sense of security for attendees?

Or maybe i'm just giving them too much credit.
Like I said, there's value in conversation. I'm here at HN after all.

I just feel that conversation belongs in places that specialize in conversation (and all the spam handling, moderation and community management that entails) and not on sites that cannot get it right.
"He proposes a global tax on wealth to help address the problem of inequality today"[0]

"Mr. Piketty is a well-known public intellectual in France. He writes a column in the left-wing daily Libération and served as a top economic adviser to the Socialist presidential candidate Ségolène Royal in the 2007 election"[1]

I exhort you to read up on Piketty and reconsider your position.

[0]:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Piketty
[1]:http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405270230348030...
Such as dumping you as soon as they find out you'd rather challenge them with physical tests than communicate?
Love this site. It's a must-read.
This was a core cluster db for about 150 web sites that had high profiles and user traffic. It was a long time ago and the client didn't want to pay for 20 more boxes to do something more durable. These things are always a balance between durability and speed. In this case the client wanted cheap speed.

Sadly it worked very well except when people used a big hammer on it. We had replication slaves but in this incident the salves were not replicating and somehow the script checking them wasn't alerting. But even so the admin didn't check before bashing the keyboard and thus we were left with manual reconstruction from backups and other sundry sources of information.
Harrison Bergeron comes to mind
Two amazing words: SELF EMPLOYED

I can go on for hours about those two words, everyone wants to be their own boss until they don't want to be... :-)
I've seen at least one paper that shows a way to fix this... hm.
One very important benefit of privacy is it allows experimentation without commitment: because we live in a society that often rushes to label, pigeon-hole, and categorize, privacy allows one to experiment with activities, world views, preferences, without broadcasting the process to the entire world.
For people afraid of the CLI, there are some nice addons to manage multiple profiles directly from the interface. A very nice one is "Profilist" (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/profilist/)
Where are you? What's the interest rate on your mortgage - any investment needs to beat that to be financially a better choice.
the world needs more systems engineers with the ability to identify problems and suggest real solutions. the computer is just one tool for doing this.

i run into so many situations where people want to identify their task, put their heads down and do it regardless of whethertheir task is actually bringing real effective value to the process.

and more situations where people refuse to change the way they do things even when its proven to them that theres a better way to do things. PHDs tend to be the absolute worst about this.
Practicality With Rust: Setting Up A Project
And round we go again...

It's almost like fashion.
Those hardly matter; in fact, if the person was an avid camper the test would be useless, because it's designed to put them under stress in ways considered socially acceptable, and see how gracefully they degrade.
Double write buffers help to validate that the pages were written to disk correctly. Otherwise, there's no way to tell if a complete page was written, since writing 16k pages to disk is not an atomic operation.

InnoDB writes to the doublewrite buffer (an internal tablespace on disk), then the record in place. If the two do not match on recovery, the record is considered not written, and rebuilt from the transaction log.

If the doublewrite buffer is disabled, then InnoDB has no way of telling if the write to the page on disk was started, completed, or partially completed. This causes corruption.
MySQL. Rebuilding the state from the transaction logs takes significantly longer than writing the memory state to disk.
If this happens organically, then that's one thing (e.g. going on a hitchhiking/whatever journey for two weeks or more, etc. - it does kind of work (get to know person as side effect, and so on)); but institutionalizing it (so to say) just sounds shitty.

Maybe because the person doing the 'test' would always (at the back of their mind, etc.) know that it was being done deliberately. And this kind of informational asymmetry is, simply put (imho), not ethical. (Nor does it sound sexy or spontaneous or groovy or really interesting.)
No offense taken, the reason he went this path is the web sites involved seemed to be non-responsive.

The core issue was actually a deadlock but he wasn't trained in detecting that and in the past just restarting the db "fixed it". Because of course all the sessions dropped and dead locks were resolved.

This was very much a high visibility production environment and yes we all make mistakes sometimes.. How else can we learn.. Trust me he never did that again! :-)

Remember, all of use were a doofus at one time and even worse many of us are every day.

It matters very little to me how people screw up, it matters how they recover, learn and avoid doing it again in the future.

My favorite saying "Originality in mistakes" if you're going to screw up make it big, creative and interesting. And please, don't repeat it.
I always open the link in an incognito window and login with the email it was shared with. Have to re-login, but works without fail. And I don't have to logout of other accounts.
http://blog.aeolipyle.co/ explains what its about. Not sure what the rules are WRT multiple submits as ShowHN...
You read your personal email at work, or you collaborate with other people, or you are freelance. I have 3 google accounts, mostly use 2 and its annoying.

Also if you use chrome and use the same login it is hard to separate them.
The words "tax" and "inequality" each appear once, in completely different paragraphs, in the NYT article cited by the Wikipedia entry on Piketty for the sentence you're quoting, and "global" zero times.

Your second quote is an ad hominem, specifically "guilt by association" — and comes from the WSJ, not exactly known for its own unbiased stance on capitalism.
I think the difference between male and female "testing" is often just in the rationalizing process e.g. if you were approached by girls since the age of 12 you would have established by now unconsciously some "filters".
Bass Guitar Preamp Design [pdf]
That rhetorical device only works if there is a clear parallel. Simply replacing the words does not make for a convincing counter-point, in itself. For example, "If a certain profession needs a document, it's much more efficient for specialist scribes to consult with domain experts, write that document, and sell it into the industry", but most in this industry can't/don't need to read: how will 'the industry' benefit from documents if they can't read? That goes back to kim's point about dissemination of knowledge.
>Reading things like this makes me kind of sad, because I feel like it really shouldn't be this way. Hopefully, with the advent of more sophisticated automation, many of our more tedious jobs won't need humans to do them.

Well, yes, but with society norms as they are now (ie. where money dominates all) those humans wont be needed anymore either. The will be homeless, living in slums, getting by on whatever they manage to find, etc.

(And no, new, less tedious, etc jobs are not automatically and as if by magic made available, and when they are, they don't take as many people as the manual jobs before. In fact, even the services industry -- the traditional way to create non-essential jobs to employ people when the core industry jobs didn't need them anymore -- has been getting automated).

For automation to have a positive impact we will also have to rethink how people get employed and paid.
You're right I shouldn't have used that tone. On the other hand, my points still stand. Taking quotes out of context to create false contradictions does not make for a very kosher discussion either. However, unlike with floating point multiplication two negatives don't make a positive, so I hereby apologize for my tone.
You are right, thanks!
> Malicious people exist

Is it malicious to expose the truth? Who is to blame if others react badly to the truth? The "malicious" person or the ones that react negatively?

> things we consider private

Why do we consider anything to be private? Where do you draw the line? Do others need my permission to collect any information that relates to me? Why do we assume we have some exclusive right over any information?

> We are inherently imperfect

We all have positive and negative qualities. This is what makes us different from one another. How am I going to judge people if I can't know anything about them? Why do we limit this "privacy" to negative qualities, but tolerate that people with extraordinary qualities share them with the world? If the quest for equality is the reason behind allowing people a right to conceal imperfections, why don't we also stop people from bragging about their qualities?

> we define a protected space in which we can can happily be imperfect without spending energy on worrying about it.

This lead to a society that is used to see only the "good" side of people, but not their negative side. Not only does it skew perception of reality, but it increase standards and make it even harder to be yourself (including all your imperfections) when you're outside the "protected space". It seems to be like this would only lead to isolation, increased social pressure, more superficial conformism. At some point, letting a secret slip could literally ruin your life. This bubble will lead to nothing but more intolerance.

Would you find it silly if a group of people actively tried to build systems and tools to help homosexual people to stay in the closet? Because that's exactly how I see the fight for privacy.
Would be cool if it could detect which users had access to the document and switch to the most recently used of those to open the link. Not sure if that can be done securely though.
The evolution of chess: Game lengths and outcomes
But I think having extra buttons is a cool idea, I will consider that. Thanks :)
> I guess it could be a bit nauseating for people who have become one with the mouse wheel.

Those were my feelings exactly. It feels much more natural to be able to scroll the part of the page you're interested in to whatever part of the monitor is most comfortable for viewing. Also, this prevents you from quickly scrolling down to a lower section of the page.
If you look at it from the perspective of continuations then tail calls are very natural. A function call is always a goto, the only difference is that calls in tail position do not need to add extra data to the continuation.
>A tail call is basically goto with arguments.

Every function call is "goto with arguments". Sometimes there's even an argument that tells the code block where to jump back to when it's done.

>Like a goto, it's useful but potentially confusing.

How is it confusing? You don't even have to be aware of TCO to take advantage of it. Many recursive algorithms are tail-call-optimizable out of the box.

>You shouldn't use it when a more structured loop construct will work.

Ironically, there are many programmers who consider loops to be too low-level and unstructured compared to recursive algorithms.
Why does it matter what he wanted to do growing up? Since when do we value the judgement of children?

People can be passionate about work that seems menial or degrading, he might not have dreamed of being a taxi driver as a child but he's capable of appreciating his current employment as a taxi driver.
Also great for reading nytimes.com.
In addition to hardness, they have an exceptionally high thermal conductivity.
If that's the signal, it's not a very good signal. Finance jobs can be horrible, they don't care for you (they literally let you die), they only care for the top performers who then get promoted in a few years.
It seems to me that Zigurd is referring to people who keep exploits secret and sell them for financial gain to criminals and government agencies.
Early in his career, Bill Gates was making millions of dollars.

I never saw any convincing data on HN to back up the claims - it's always an anecdotal data point here and there. My guess is that a small fraction of the engineers actually make the stated figures, and confirmation bias leads HNers to believe that's the median pay.
What? Google has the right to rent a bus as much as its employees have the right to pay for taxis. Or their own cars.
I'm not so sure that in FP communities recursive call based algorithms are thought of as elegant solution; rather higher abstractions are desirable (e.g. map, filter, fold, etc)
It isn't always the cartel's goal to drive prices up. In the case of de Beers, they wanted price stability. They went out of their way to avoid increasing prices more than the desired amount at many points in the history of consumer diamonds.

There is no reason to believe that the price of diamonds at the time De Beers lost control was not at approximately what the market could bear, especially now that they have liquidated their supply-controlling stockpile. Growing demand from developing countries and speculative pressures that would not have existed before could certainly account for increasing diamond prices.
> A tail call is basically goto with arguments.

In the lowest level, yes, but you could say the same about regular function calls, return statements, and even loops and conditionals, break and continue, etc.

The main selling point of using recursion for looping, IMO, is immutability. As jacquesm said, you don't need mutable local variables to track the state of the loop.

And in the real world functional programming you rarely use recursion to replace a loop, you mostly use abstractions like map/reduce/etc along with lambdas, etc.
Sure, but i think there's a nontrivial difference between these kinds of (usually) spontaneous and (often/usually) unconscious filters, vs. a whole streamlined process (which takes a longer time; though it does yield more information, as a rule (imo.))

Then again, maybe this is just, uh, institutional ludditism ;) (i.e., everyone has their own process, some have simply industrialized it a bit (e.g. for want of a more spontaneous set of filters, as you said.) But this metaphor probably doesn't work that well.)
Exactly, this does nothing. Let's not forget the US is operating on the same level as China. The US spies on China as much China spies on us. We spy on our own citizens as much as China does. The only real difference is that the US doesn't actively censor internet but I expect that to change.
Sounds like you're describing an issue about society, not transparency.

As long as we keep in mind that "label[s], pigeon-hole[s], and categori[es]" don't have to be permanent, and that people usually change as they learn, I don't see a problem with them.

You can't really draw a line between "experimentation" and "commitment", as commitments usually become experimentations in hindsight. Unless we live all our lives in private, and only went in public when we were 100% sure that our positions about everything would never change (and that we're happy with them), I don't see this working very well.

Sure, we all make a lot of mistakes when starting something new, but this is not a reason to do these things in private. Not only does it probably slow down the learning process, but it also increase other people's expectations. If we no longer see people making mistakes, we'll start believing that mistakes are bad. If we have to hide whenever we do something new (as encourage by the privacy movement), we'll probably just stop experimenting new things.
It has nothing to do with a "gold standard", or "just because Apple does it". It also has nothing to do with Safari, or using an application solely written by Apple.

On the platform, we contribute to the ecosystem by respecting the value of the whole.

It's about humility: Understanding that you're operating as part of a larger whole, and that larger whole is more valuable to your customer if it is consistent and interoperable.

The only reason to diverge from the common platform standards is if your divergence provides more value to the user in a way that doesn't detract from platform consistency. Sometimes, people come up with novel new ways to do things that genuinely fit right in to the established platform norms.

Using a non-standard[1] user interface font to achieve cross-platform consistency isn't one of those cases.

Diverging for the sake of your UX designer's ego or your "brand identity" does not provide value to the user. In fact, it's robs the user of value to the sole benefit of your product/brand concerns.

Heck, even Apple disagrees with you!

No, they really, really don't.

[1] https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/UserEx...
Show HN: Abbrase – password generation by abbreviated phrases
Ask HN: Are we using the final numeral system?
In the earliest days of mankind, 13 was written as "............." The number of dots represented the number. Later the Egyptians had a different hieroglyph for 10, so 13 could be written as "#..." where "#" means 10 and "." means 1. Much shorter. 33 was written as "###...". Nice. Then the 0 was invented. And nowadays, we have "hieroglyphs" for all numbers up to 9 and we have this notion that every number is multiplied by 10^its position. Is that the end? Or will this look as ancient as counting dots in a million years from now?
I think you might be attributing stronger emotional intent than is present. They disagree about whether it's worth fundamentally changing npm's search method to avoid some ../.. paths in your argument to require. require aside, you can express yourself through your code however you like.
It's considered elegant because that way you only need functions, no other constructs required.
Your little script performs amazingly well on my Mac, coming in at about 165 ms, quite a bit faster than I expected. If your script is too fast for you, you could consider reading the dictionary into a bash array instead of using sed. My /usr/share/dict/words contains 234,936 words.

As a point of comparison, here is a Python version that clocks in around 107 ms:

#!/usr/bin/env python
from random import SystemRandom as r

with open('/usr/share/dict/words', 'rb') as f:
lines = f.readlines()

print ' '.join(r().choice(lines).rstrip() for x in xrange(4))

However, I don't know how well SystemRandom compares to arc4random in terms of crypto.
Yes, yes, yes. I think good universities (i.e, most of their faculty and administration) still believe strongly in the "rounded education" goal. As you say, historically universities sought to provide a liberal education, regarding subjects that "were considered essential for a free person (a citizen) to know in order to take an active part in civic life. . . . The aim of these studies was to produce a virtuous, knowledgeable, and articulate person." [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_arts ]

It's mostly the students now who don't believe in a well-rounded education, who just want to prepare themselves for a job. I'm fifty years old and I've observed the trend towards higher education becoming more and more like vocational education. It began before I was born, but it surely seems to be accelerating. Frequent articles on whether college can be "economically justified" are representative of this. Formerly, there was no question of whether a liberal arts (i.e., "well rounded") education would somehow "pay off". It was something desirable for its own sake, part of becoming a better person.
Looks good - I'm going to try it when it's in Beta.
You have $500k in cash available after all that?
Everything You Wanted To Know About Usenet But Where Afraid To Ask
...And then there's Python.

(Although, amusingly enough, you can actually hack TCO into Python via decorator weirdness)
That's still not a product; that's just explanatory information. For Show HN, you need to show something.
If you need to load this from a CDN, it's available through Brick (http://brick.im/).
There is still a lot of manufacturing based tech companies in PGH, something China is competing with.
I'm uncertain why pointing out the mentioned feature is easily bypassed is irrelevant?

It isn't like I was attacking him on it, just pointing out that feature is effectively ineffective except against truly mass bot type stuff.
WordPass doesn't really solve the 'easy to memorize' problem, since it injects random numerals. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7793469

Abbrases require very little effort to remember, since phrases are very easily imprinted.
Honestly, there are a myriad of ways to try to deal with this but I think for many of the things listed, I think you should probably stop caring so much. Having full on anxiety about drawing a paycheck but feeling you don't deserve it or something, just relax and think about yourself more than the morality of this. As far as bad code and needing to do a rewrite and your company not wanting to let you, at some point, if it is not your company, either look for a new position or stop caring about it so much, getting upset about it won't do you any good and if the executives in the company don't care that the code bad, maybe you shouldn't either.
No, I'm saying it's not possible to write reliable and correct code in C# using exceptions without also doing all the heavy lifting of the compiler. You can also write reliable and correct code in dynamically typed languages, which involves doing even more work on behalf of the compiler.

This is not unique to C#; if you review coding standards for C++, you'll see plenty of people who have adopted a no-exceptions approach, Google included. Simply put, exceptions are a failed experiment, because checked exceptions are the only mechanism by which the type of your methods is fully defined.

As far as API documentation, that something gets thrown is part of the return signature, and it's no more pollution than expressing the return type is.

Your willingness to employ ambiguity as a means to avoid having to do the work necessary to fully specify your system's behavior is a lazy and logically flawed position; it creates a cognitive load for all consumers of your APIs, and breaks the utility of the compiler that we rely on to write and maintain reliable software more easily.
There is a really nice example of the "goto" semantic for proper tail calls in "Programming in Lua". The example is a maze or adventure game where you need to move into different rooms (north, south, east west).

http://www.lua.org/pil/6.3.html

It's a nice example because it's simple, it doesn't confuse/intermix the concept with recursion, and it's an effective solution because it allows you to achieve the goal of moving to rooms (i.e. s state machine) elegantly. And in a language without proper tail recursion, it is easy to envision how you could accidentally blow up the call stack.