skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> "The phrase "think of, or care for, others" didn't show up in my comment"

It's a direct quote of a dead comment you wrote in a reply. Turn on "showdead" to see it [0].

The dead "think of" comment in the "shitty friend" thread appeared 405 days ago. Your comment about the bootstrapping conference was 406 days ago. (There's also a dead reply in the bootstrapping thread dated 405 days ago, which fits the timing of being hellbanned for the "think of" post.)

[0 - edited my comment to add this footnote] in response to sage_joch's response to you in that thread. Link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6473532
No doubt, at a certain point it does come down to aesthetic preference.

Using a border-bottom to achieve the look you’re describing is totally a valid preference. One potential advantage to the border-bottom technique is
the way it can be used to make a link stand out. In fact, I use this link styling on my personal website for that reason [1].

(Note: when using a border-bottom, I’d recommend using a slightly larger line-height so that the line still seems associated with the text above it and not the text below it. This is one of the pitfalls described in the original Medium post [2].)

Unfortunately, aside from iOS 8, normal text-decoration underline links have the descender crossing problem.

I absolutely took this into consideration when designing SmartUnderline. SmartUnderline literally only applies itself to links with text-decoration underline, nothing else. It even tries to ensure other conditions which make the transformation favorable (display inline, solid background color, etc.).

Ultimately I think the before-and-after on the SmartUnderline website tells the best story [3]. No doubt one may appreciate other, very different link styles. (For example, just using a different text color to denote _link_ is a perfectly valid and commonly used technique.) But if you’re using text-decoration underline already, this just makes those links look better.

I think blogs, news articles and wikis are some of the primary examples of where these links look best. Anywhere where text is heavy and the links are _not_ the primary focus.

[1]: http://adamschwartz.co

[2]: https://medium.com/designing-medium/crafting-link-underlines...

[3]: https://eager.io/showcase/SmartUnderline/
"Hence, computing science is —and will always be— concerned with the interplay between mechanized and human symbol manipulation, usually referred to as "computing" and "programming" respectively. An immediate benefit of this insight is that it reveals "automatic programming" as a contradiction in terms."

- Dijkstra http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD10xx/EWD1036...
Most of the black cab I have taken have a also a GPS, so that's not like it is an exclusive type choice, and I wonder why people assume so. Even connected GPS are fairly bad at finding the shortest way if it means running in the other direction for a while and that happens quite often in London and Black Cab driver are quite good at making those kind of info just looking at their gps traffic info.

The knowledge is a very useful tool, and in any city, a driver with good local knowledge is what you are looking for, regardless the middleman you use. Technology is only making the trade off of using amateur bearable, and in reality the real value of Uber and others is from the rest of the service provided.

A bit like in your example - if you had to go to the bookstore to load a new book on your reader and it could only hold one book at a time, the technological superiority of even the latest generation of kindle would not make them go pass novelty items. Real value of ebook comes from the rest of the services you get from it and that's the reason why even with the shit reading experience, the first gen kindle was a success.

The anachronism here is the segregation between black cab and minicab in London and the services the legal restrictions on the services they can offer. Although, IMO, that is not nearly as bad in London as people on HN experience in other places in the world. Black cab are meant to hailed on the street, now, without booking, review or other overhead by drunk people and tourists. Some licensing restriction to make sure you get a basic level of service in those circumstances is probably acceptable. If you have time to plan a bit in advance, there is Uber and plenty of competitors that have always been freed from the restrictions.
Mozilla and the Future of the Open Internet
I saw a good TED talk[1] a while ago about this topic, and the speaker made the interesting point that people use the word happiness to mean different things. You can ask someone how happy they are feeling at a given moment, or you can ask them how happy they are with their life in general. And we evaluate those two feelings in very different ways.

He mentions at one point that studies about how people feel in the moment were very correlated with money, but only up to the point that they didn't need to worry about it anymore. After that, it had little bearing on their experiential happiness. But when asked how happy they were with their lives, the more money, the better, with no limit. Which seems to me more like pride in an achievement.

I wonder if the happiness that wasn't "your own" was because part of you was happy when you thought about where you were in life, but you were also aware it wasn't really improving your day-to-day experience. Kind of a cognitive dissonance between the two ways you were evaluating your happiness.

I don't know, you think that's even close?

[1] http://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_kahneman_the_riddle_of_exper...
No, i don't think so. Do you have the data to support that?
It's breathless reporter-speak, and it's often not actually intentional or conscious. Many reporters truly believe they are uncovering Woodward and Bernstein level stuff every time they hit "publish".
Rust isn't nearly as stable as Go. It still hasn't reached the state that Go was in when it was released outside Google. That's not a judgment of Rust, just a result of it being developed in the open instead of inside a company, and it being much more ambitious than Go.
Rust 0.1 came out in the beginning of 2012, about 3 months before Go 1.0 game out (or go1). In the meantime, Rust has changed a lot and is only now close to a 1.0 release.
I like functions as first-class values and closures. If they weren't present, I might well have bailed months ago. :) And from various experiences doing OO with other languages, I can kindof buy that Go interfaces are often 80% of what you want.

Most of what I've been working on is a Rest API. Here's an example of a problem that felt like it should be something for which I'd be able to write an abstraction to deal with, but turned out to be challenging, at least as a n00b:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/golang-nuts/JhsiiGHQ...

(Incidentally, though I moved past my then really poor understanding of Go interfaces, I wasn't able to apply the respondent's answer or my new general knowledge to achieve the abstraction I was looking for, and settled for just grinding out the same code for the dozen entities/endpoints it applied to.)

Concurrency: I suspect there's a bit that's hidden in some libraries we're using, and we may yet need to write our own code for some API requests that get processed offline, but I haven't had to explicitly write code for it yet.

If you can think of a specific exercise that might serve to illustrate Go's outstanding concurrency strengths, I'd be interested to try it and compare efforts to another language or two.
In this case, I think it's wise to sacrifice compatibility with a 13-year-old operating system in order to improve transport security. Still, it would be nice to have some kind of a negotiated fallback option where a site can offer an older SHA-1 certificate to a client that requests one.
No need to get personal. I was talking about all the features in all the languages, not the ones in Go. And yes, we don't need more new features, we have plenty.

However, none of the languages I know of address psychological issues. Does type system reduce mistakes or introduce? Certainly both, don't know which one more though. But the question itself is wrong. It's not the type system who makes mistakes, humans do. And humans have brains. And brains are limited in their ability to do some thing while keeping other things in mind. And if among other things types happen to be present and mistake was made, than one could say types added to that mistake. And if types were not something programmer needed to think than type system certainly didn't add to that mistake. Things are not as simple as most programmers tend to think. Features don't matter how they think they matter. And research in language design was broken since the beginning of times and, sadly, still is.

(if you read "no silver bullet", "out of the tar pit" papers and couple of recent ones on bugs you should get the idea of how bad things are with mistake-making research)
I have a few problems with this.

First, using a browser which includes fancy experimental features might result in the page looking or behaving differently in the users' (stable) browsers. I see this as kind of risky, that's why I usually develop against stable browsers and use the nightly/aurora for personal browsing.

Second, having browser-chrome debugging on by default is not very helpful for web developers, it actually gets in the way. It might be more useful to activate these features in the nightly channel, where people are more actively debugging the browser itself.

Third, if this channel is the intended one for developers, why ship the development tools with the stable release?
So they're going to do to Hacker News what they did to Reddit.
The effects are mostly on the margin, but they are there.

Eg when I might be on the fence between two jobs, so I take the politics into discount.
Show HN: Mirrorthisvideo
Ref counting is not deterministic. First of all because while looping on an atomic reference is non blocking, it is not wait free. Malloc/free are not deterministic either, can be quite expensive and while real-time implementations exist, that's not the malloc/free you end up using. With a generational GC allocating new objects involves just incrementing a pointer, deallocating short lived objects happens in bulk, so the cost for short-lived objects is similar to stack allocation. With ref counting memory gets fragmented, apps like Firefox have been suffering for years from fragmentation and for Firefox there was a sustained and very significant effort to fix it.

This can only be solved by either doing stack allocation or by building object pools. And this is for people that know what they are doing.

Rust is the only language (I know) that tries solving this with the ownership concept in the language, but then Rust will have problems in implementing immutable data structures that can be shared amongst threads, data structures which are doing structural sharing, so people will expect reads to scale, except there will be non-obvious contention happening due to usage of reference counting.

The latency in state of the art mainstream GCs is also NOT variable. Good garbage collectors allow you to control the max latency and frequency of STW pauses. That is not the issue for real-time requirements - the issue with real-time being that STW is unacceptable. But so is reference counting.

On the memory requirements, I don't buy it. My Android phone has more memory and more CPU capacity than my computer did 7 years ago. And I'm not seeing a difference in behavior to my iPad. Surely for games it pretty bad to drop frames, but most apps are not games and games are using highly optimized engines built in C++anyway.
> The new Haskell IO manager in GHC 7.8 completely blows this out of the water.

Go will still outperform Haskell by a huge margin and the typical Go process will have a much smaller memory footprint.

I don't even like Go, but nobody choosing Go is realistically considering Haskell as an alternative.
It's strategic voting under first past the post that maintaining the two-party system, not strategic voting in general.

In approval voting you are always best off voting your preference. The only thing you have to decide is your cutoff for how many people you want to approve. From what I've read, people are pretty good at that intuitively.
Thanks for the tips :) Here is the response I got after discussing it:

"We have an internal structure called the "Grunt Fund" that I would like to go over with you guys which is equity based on time and money put into the business. "

Is that a valid thing?
I would modify your system to include a placebo downvote. There is a downvote button, and you can click it. It just doesn't do anything. Or maybe it only has locel effects - that comment is grey on the user's local system but not on anyone elses?
As an aficionado of both math and The Simpsons myself I quite liked the author's book "The Simpsons and their Mathematical Secrets". One thing to note before reading: it's targeted at an audience with a passing familiarity with The Simpsons, so an unfortunate percentage of it is a description of episodes you probably already know by heart. But it's a good read, anyway, so check it out at your local library.
This definitely will give you some interesting leads, but a spell check ahead of posting here might gain more positive support. "Our Questionairre. We analyze your answers to a series of specially crafed questions designed to understand your business objectives" .. the words Questionnaire and crafted have typos.
"Blub" as a concept isn't really useful anymore. I've seen people attacked as "blub programmers" for criticizing Go for its lack of features. At worst it's a personal attack ("you are a short-sighted programmer"), at best it's kind of supercilious ("language X is great, it's just over your head").
Where are you getting these stats from? Would love to see sources.
Privacy conscious CCTV takes you out of the picture
Mushroom Networks Unveils Truffle V, a WAN Orchestrator on VMware
I feel like the points you two are stating work best in concert. We do need to start asking more empirical questions about "what is depression in this person" and obviously can't do that without substantial amounts of data to drive our investigation, and this is where I agree with the original post that we're very lacking. To me at least, the first step in handling something subjective is trying to define it, and for that we need to better understand it.
The culture of different government agencies varies widely. US-CERT is run by Carnegie Mellon University. US-CERT, incidentally is far older than the relatively new DHS. US-CERT, Mitre, and the rest are all about transparency and don't have motivation to hold onto really effective exploits.

However, if NSA discovers a ground-breaking exploit, and it's deemed low-risk to US systems, they'll probably keep it. But they certainly wouldn't disclose it to US-CERT or Mitre. Not to mention, since US-CERT and Mitre aren't in the intelligence community, they don't have a mechanism to keep information like that undisclosed.
I was wondering whether they took any special precautions before starting this. Might have made for an interesting talk at the local police precinct.
Link to actual S-1 document: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1448056/0001193125144...
Thanks for the ideas.

I think there are several avenues that could be explored with this. I wanted to stay away from explicitly checking the code initially, as there are other tools aimed at that specific task, however there is no reason something like this couldn't be added into GitCop at a later date.

I had the idea of checking that the user exists in a list of users by specifying a JSON list of users. This means that it could be used to check if a CLA has been signed, but there are other applications too. Does this seem like a reasonable way to do it?

I like the idea of ensuring a test has been added, not sure how to tackle it, but it is certainly worth keeping in mind.
At least a commercial JVM with a nonblocking GC is available and people are using it for real time stuff in the finance industry - http://www.azulsystems.com/
So either they've slowbanned you, or they're doing something O(n^3) with your long comment history...

The first is certainly more likely for a host of reasons.
Higher weight is given to mass delusions compared to acute delusions.
I tried the above for colors in mintty, nice, thanks.

As for running mintty in conemu, it's still not quite right. If I figure it out, this will be what I recommend to people.

But for me, I like having urxvt the same at home on linux and at work in cygwin. I use urxvt's keyboard management of its tabs a lot.
Way to make a not-relevant comparison that doesn't really address my point!

Ultimately this addresses my point best:

“The highway department didn’t use to see the drivers as customers,” said Frank DePaola, administrator of the highway division for the department. “For a while there, the highway department was so focused on construction and road projects, it’s almost as if the contractors became their customers.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/us/rapid-construction-tech...

It is possible to get this kind of thing done with or without unions, but when unions have a strong presence it's harder because the union bosses know that this could mean fewer jobs, and for them, less power. People generally don't take a pay cut (or reduction in status) willingly.
Or just cruft from an old profile. A year or two back I had to start with a fresh profile and found FF ran far-far better.
I'm finding that water > coffee...
And that makes founder Lew Cirne 2 for 2 with Wily (acquired by CA) and now New Relic. Not too shabby.
Steve Wozniak: The iPhone 6 is three years too late
London already is a police state, every square inch is monitored with cameras and servers equipped with licence and face detection capabilities. While there are some upsides, the down considerably outweigh them.

As an aside, and being from the UK, I wouldn't say it's common to make jokes about being from the north or south. It's also not a very good "joke".
This comment is problematic. You're confusing discrete-state-space models with discrete-time models. You can have any combination of continuous/discrete Markov process:

Discrete states, discrete time: text, etc.

Discrete states, continuous time: Poisson counting process

Continuous states, discrete time: gambling earnings

Continuous states, continuous time: Brownian motion

Of course, the term "Markov chain" is restricted to discrete time. But you have said "Markov model", which includes all processes with the Markov property (i.e., they forget old state). The model in the OP was not originally a chain, because the radioactive decay process is continuous-time, but he made it into one.

When you say that Markov chains are discretized differential equations, it tempts the reader to think "discretized in time" -- but that's called a difference equation. I think you mean it's discretized in state. I.e., there is a flow of mass from one state to another that is smooth in a diff. eq., and stochastic in the Markov chain. But that's just guesswork.

Also, I would not say a martingale is a discrete random walk. Your statement here introduces the same confusion. Like Markov processes, martingales can be continuous or discrete in both state-space and time (e.g., Brownian motion is a martingale).

I think of a martingale as a mathematical model for a fair game (expected future earnings is zero given available information).
Yeah, pretty much. "Developer Edition" is the new name for the Aurora channel. There is no more "Aurora."

(Well, almost. The "Developer Edition" stuff is desktop-only for now, so the alpha-branch builds for Android are still branded as "Aurora." But Aurora for Andoid and Dev. Edition for desktop are built from the exact same source code.)
A Few Questions About the Culture: An Interview with Iain Banks
That's not in the Snowden papers, and the actual source for that is highly suspect.

I forget the name of that project, but the Wikipedia page's reference are all terrible. Not a single one stands up to scrutiny.
"It is one of the main reasons that I would never consciously leave a comment up if it reaches -3, even if I stand by it 100%, it's important, and the community happens to be wrong in its groupthink and I clearly have explained why. I would delete it instead."

I am confused. Your preferred path is to avoid conflict such that you would rather delete than be disagreed with? If your opinion differs from groupthink, you would make it go away? I guess that is similar to not posting in the first place (because of groupthink you disagree with) , just retroactive.

Probably better than my not posting in the first place :)
Hackers target CEOs in 'Darkhotel' scheme
I should also say that I think whether or not upvoting and downvoting should have guidelines is largely a choice about what kind of community you want to create.

If you provide guidelines, you're prescribing the behavior you'd like to see and, it seems, doing more to manually try to carve out a culture.

If you leave the barest guidelines, you allow the culture to define what it means organically.

I don't think either of those is right or wrong. I think prescribing behavior through guidelines is more complex and harder to do well, though, but again, not better.
Do they use manure?
I started using Clojure just after 1.3 came out so I could be wrong, but my impression was that while contrib was all in one place, it was still maintained by a bunch of random people who got their code into contrib, rather than being treated as a core part of the language the way (I believe) Golang's is.
One argument for the resolution is a perception as to whether the ride is improving or not - a binary indication of this will only tell you that you've gotten to the best ride, whereas a scale will, over the course of time, show improvement or detriment (subject to the different standards of the rider). Also, one person's "satisfactory" might not be another's, so having a range to select from will provide a much richer piece of feedback capable of being weighted than a simple yes/no.
It wasn't obvious that you do not hold by the HN norm you described.

I don't think it's the norm anyway, I think it's a minority that do that.
TIL Rust will be single-handedly used to rewrite every single GC'd program in existence, and furthermore only VR systems like Oculus will be relevant after that, so why bother dealing with any of the actually-hard problems of the real world and improving the existing technology we'll have today, and for years to come?

Good to know.
Yes, that's all fine. But here's the thing: even if the billion dollars dropped magically out of the air, it still only took a billion dollars to develop a new rocket. Doesn't matter where the money came from if that's how much money it was.

I don't care if it's public or private money that made SpaceX possible, and it doesn't much matter to me if the tech to go to Mars is all designed from scratch or bought from people who already know how to do it. It's that it is possible to do big things for a lot less than $50B.

If you have to design everything from scratch because it's $10k/lb and every pound counts, well, then yes it's going to cost a huge pile of money.

But what if it's $1k/lb to get to space? Suddenly COTS stuff doesn't look as stupid.
> Community groupthink is not strongly related to truth, IMHO, and provides little marginal value, because I already know what it is and it's easy to find.

In other words, downvote and upvote according to what you think those actions mean.
You seem to have missed the the clarification in the beginning of the post: "Not talking about extreme poverty here"
Ah, thank you for pointing that out. I realize now I actually missed the point.