skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> For instance, he says, if you notice that a Chinese restaurant in your neighborhood is always half-empty, and a nearby Indian restaurant is always crowded, then information about what percentages of people prefer Chinese or Indian food will tell you which restaurant, if either, is of above-average or below-average quality.

The situation described here wouldn't tell you anything about the quality of the restaurants. It might tell you what kind of food that neighborhood prefers. It might tell you which restaurant is more affordable. It might tell you which restaurant has a better public image. Or maybe it just tells you which restaurant is renting out its parking lot to a nearby car repair shop. To wit, quality cannot be determined by observing human behavior. Quality is determined exclusively by predefined parameters. Loudness, brightness, velocity, purity, etc., are measures of quality. In other words, quality is antipodal to popularity. Every human relation to an object, such as cost, availability, relevance, etc., has priority over quality at all times. It is even more accurate to say that quality is never a direct factor in choice. A person does not choose a knife, for example, because it is sharper than other knives; a person chooses the knife because it is sharp enough to meet their needs and, more importantly, because it is accessible to them. The only exception is the case where a person seeks out the highest quality option for the sake of quality itself, i.e. "I want to find the sharpest knife in the world." In this exceptional scenario, however, one learns nothing by studying the quality-seeking crowd that could not have been learned by simply measuring and comparing objects, i.e. it is much easier to find the sharpest knife by measuring knives for sharpness than by trying to determine which humans buy knives strictly because they are sharper than the alternatives (in such a case you would still have to measure the knives to confirm any conclusions you came to). All of this being said, I can't believe people at MIT studying human behavior would make such an absurd analogy. It indicates a complete misunderstanding of not only human beings but of logic as well.
In french there's also the curious case of "pesanteur" (gravity), which is feminine; so "la pesanteur" (the gravity). But the absence of gravity is "apesanteur" (weightlessness), which is also a feminine word; so "l'apesenteur". So we have two slightly different words that actually sound exactly the same with their articles. It's only a few years ago that people decided to change the prefix and use "impesanteur" instead (which is however a bit less accurate - see the difference between "im-possible" (not possible) and "a-gnostic" (without belief)).
Most definitely. Just for fun I logged in, installed nmap, and proceeded to scan my home connection to see if they blocked anything (scanned from 1-65535). If anything this is convenient for getting a public IP quick and they don't restrict any ports.

But wait...

You can also use SSH as a dynamic SOCKS proxy quick for an ad-hoc VPN. I bounced SSH over to port 443, because why not. Fired up SSH on my local machine with a local dynamic proxy (ssh -D 4444 -p443 ubuntu@212.47.231.xxx), set my proxy on Firefox to localhost:4444 and voila. Free VPN through them for 30 minutes. Not uber fast (server is in France) but usable.
Strange question; why didn't many games in this era exploit this? I'd guess that the knowledge just wasn't as easily shared? Seems these systems were capable of pretty amazing things, but those things were frequently overlooked.
Hence the quote "there is MS DOS compatible, PC DOS compatible, and FlightSimulator Compatibe, in increasing orders of difficulty."

Later 'Jet' provided some test indication as well. I was always amazed because CP/M machines were all different sort of by design, it was the sheer quantity of the original 5150 PC that made it worth specializing for that target. I later owned an Epson QX-10 with an "MS-DOS" card. And simply MS-DOS compatible ran hardly any software at all!
Show HN: Embed visual documentation in a GitHub issue or README
This discussion reminds me of a joke:

A linguistics professor was lecturing to his class one day. "In English," he said, "a double negative forms a positive. In some languages though, such as Russian, a double negative is still a negative.

However," he pointed out, "there is no language wherein a double positive can form a negative."

A voice from the back of the room piped up, "Yeah, right."
I am the angel investor and I have helped many companies raised many times. The simple fact is that the UK has lots of money looking for a investment home ( £1 billion plus invested last year ). Three years ago tech investment in the UK was almost zero. This money was offered but the deal was not simple as can eb seen on my post:

https://medium.com/@doug_scott/response-to-raising-money-in-...
That's a strawman. It could also be like saying laws against gay marriage restrict freedom. You aren't making a point about reality, you're just comparing two things that have one thing in common.

You lose your rights to your code if any of your code includes GPL code. Many people who write code necessarily avoid the GPL because of this.
Original paper (since the link in the story is broken):

http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~ilobel/bayesian-learning-social-...
> It is very easy to get injured doing squats or power cleans with any kind of sizable weight. For example the injury rates in CrossFit are estimated to be between 20-75% [1,2] of participants which means you're more likely to get hurt than to get fit. Personally I don't think this is due to the exercises being more dangerous but rather that the excellent group motivation of CrossFit working a little too well and people overreaching in their lifts.

One of the primary reasons I recommended Starting Strength is because it's not crossfit. Crossfit != squats and power cleans, and those injuries are not for squats and power cleans. Starting strength has built in regulation so you don't need to worry about going too fast or too slow. It also tells you when and when not to use power cleans. Just read the book.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say that race conditions can be the same kind of error as logic errors.

I would define a race condition as "an error due to nondeterministic concurrency". If you ban nondeterminism, for example, race conditions are impossible. In practice, nobody wants to ban nondeterminism, so races creep in. There might be smarter ways to eliminate races (ways of only allowing benign nondeterminism), though. So I'm not sure that practical languages without race conditions are an unachievable goal, just a difficult one. Give it another 20 years and we'll see where we're at. :)
Topshelf's documentation does need some more TLC -- if there's something specific you thought was lacking I can take a look at updating it.

I'm glad to hear you're getting value out of it! Last place I was at, we had about 30 distinct services running. It was a huge bonus to have Topshelf.
> This is something Walmart will not be able to pull off easily because their workers are out front, higher profile

Even then, they're cutting staff by increasing the number of self-checkout lanes. You still have to have somebody supervising, but you can just have one person watching 6-8 lanes.

At my local Walmart, the self-checkout is far more convenient than the regular lanes. They have more self-checkout lanes open than regular lanes, and people tend to scan their stuff and get out much faster than the cashiers would (seriously, the regular lanes move so slow...). I never use the regular lanes anymore, because they're always so busy compared to the self-checkouts.

I think the main thing holding Walmart back from further mechanization is that their aisles still have to be human-traversable. Amazon can use really efficient layouts when converting their warehouses to 100% machine-stocked because then there will be no reason for a human to ever walk down the aisles. At Walmart, customers still have to make their way through the aisles, and they have to be laid out to a) allow humans to walk through and take stuff off the shelves and b) arrange items in order to maximize purchases (e.g. put the milk in the back, impulse items at the checkouts, etc.).
First, please don't compare Go and Rust. They are completely different languages with completely different target use cases. Go has very different design goals than Rust, so very little that Rust does would actually be possible in Go, and vice versa.

> Go code often passes references over channels, which results in shared memory between two threads with no locking

Having a complex type system would cut into compile times (an explicit primary design goal, to the point where the Go compiler must be written to read each file exactly once[0], no more).

As for the code you're referring to, Go is not designed to be a language which prevents you from shooting yourself in the foot with provable code. It's designed to be a language which makes it reasonably easy to be sure you haven't, as long as you follow the general idioms and best practices. What you're describing here is definitely not one - I can think of a few instances in which pointers might be reasonably passed over a channel, but they're few and far between.

Also, I would think it's pretty obvious that once you've sent something over a channel you shouldn't try and write to it anymore[1]. Do you have an example of the code you're referring to?

[0] well, technically "at most once", since some files can be skipped entirely.

[1] I'd need to think about this, but I don't think it'd be difficult to detect this statically[2] at compile-time and enforce that stack-allocated rvalues into channels are never used again in the same scope. It's definitely possible to extend `go vet` to handle this, and it may even be possible to write this in as a compiler error in a future version of Go.

[2] Incidentally, one of the reasons that it's so easy to do reliable static analysis on Go code (compared to other languages) is that the grammar is incredibly simple - it's almost entirely context-free, which is very rare among non-Lisps. Having a more complex type system usually requires at least some additional syntax to along with this, which means you'd have to start sacrificing this design goal as well in order to create a more elaborate type system.
JavaScript :)

(Just because a lot of people use it, doesn't make it popular!)
I bike twelve miles a day in Austin (from UT area to Ben White, and back in the afternoon, going along Congress most of the way). 30-40 minutes. Currently I'm borrowing my friend's motorcycle, and when I ride that instead, it's more like 15-20 minutes, taking I-35.

Judging by traffic on the other side of the highway, I'm guess it's because I'm commuting the opposite direction of most people. If you have parking, and traffic isn't terrible where/when you're going, the bicycle is usually slower.

But, on the other hand, riding a bicycle is so much more _fun_ than driving a car. Riding a motorcycle can also be fun, but still always doesn't beat a bicycle for me.
"It's an observation that crowds who know something about the question being asked will often do better than experts who are also 'guessing.'"

Can you give some examples of this? I don't think that works at all. If you ask me and 100 strangers about programming, I'll do better than 100 strangers every time. Unless one of them is a better programmer than me and has the authority to convince the others that they should listen to him/her OR! they work together to solve the problem. In which case um yeah.

So either way it boils down to 2 groups of experts, not the crowd.

The 'particular set of circumstances' are not well defined in the article from what I can tell - which renders the whole thing worthless doesn't it?

It's like saying it is going to rain. When? Well, under a particular set of circumstances it will. lol :)

When it comes to guessing numbers - there are no experts, so who is the crowd's opinion better than? I still feel like I'm 5 and not getting it.
Not as feature-rich, but way cheaper:

http://www.instructables.com/id/Self-watering-recycled-plant...
Does anyone have recommendations for frameworks or libraries for implementing CQRS and distributed processing of large sets of data through DDD?

I've found some different options including Lokad, NServiceBus, MassTransit, MPAPI, but would love to hear what, if any, tools HN users are utilizing.
I'm looking forward to how his, "Reasons not to use Uber, Sidecar, and Lyft" will be received around here.
I take it there's no way of tying the lifetime of the MutexGuard to the lifetime of the .access return, so that you don't have to have this intermediate step?
Sure, this thread is about health, which true volume training is not necessary for.
Small point: tax avoidance is legal and sensible. Would anyone or any company seek to maximize its tax bill bar bizarre circumstances? Rather, the reverse. If there's a devastating avoidance loophole it's the job of government to redraft the regulations or let the courts decide.
What about in States where you have a right to Privacy?

(Alaska has an absolute right to privacy in their state constitution)
What's interesting is that Kerala was the first state to ban Bandhs (a decision upheld by the Supreme Court). A similar measure to enact a total ban on Hartals failed.
Liquid metal discovery paves way for shape-shifting robots
People like Stallman (and whoever would be his polar opposite) need to exist in order to establish the boundaries and give us a framework to finding a balance between egalitarianism and greed.
Oh, I absolutely agree about picking childish names! It's not particularly effective, and it does tend to lose your audience.

Made-up names can be done with a wink-and-a-nod when punching up for great effect ("We had particular issues integrating with a vendor who we won't name but are a bit fruity--we'll call them Orange for the sake of comparison"), but usually it's done by people who aren't particularly bright.

At the same time, there is kind of an open question as to how much power a name has. If we only ever use the proper trademarks for these folks, are we not always granting them a certain amount of legitimacy and respect?
"You know what happened last month without anybody noticing? This is for real. Webster’s dictionary expanded the definition of the word “literally” to include the way it’s commonly misused. So the thing is, we no longer have a word in the English language that means literally. It literally doesn’t have a synonym. So we’re going to have to find a Latin word for it and use it, but see, I don’t know any Latin. So when I say that I am literally going to set fire to this building with you in it before I hand over the keys to it, you don’t know if I’m speaking figuratively or literally.” -- The Newsroom
Amazon in all honesty likely had zero choice but to comply with the NSA. Also it might not even be the one complying, but rather the shipping carrier.

Actually a lot of what Stallman is complaining about boils down to Amazon is a company that complies with US based court orders, and sells things on publisher terms.

I really don't see much that doesn't apply to say Google:

* Distributes books with restrictive licenses (Google Play Books)

* Sells online music with restrictive terms (Google Play Music)

* Can remotely delete content (Yes, http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Android-Google-Applications-Andr... )

* Can force auto updates (Yes you can disable updates to chrome, but not the google update client https://support.google.com/installer/answer/146164#Policies )

* Google's cloud is even more restrictive than Amazon's on content, and their TOS gives you no recourse.

Apple likewise does much the same thing (except they don't have a public cloud offering).
Well, auto-antonyms are homographs with opposite meanings. Homonyms are a subset of homographs.
New Functionality Expansion: Get Even More Migration Benefits with Cart2Cart
NASA Emdrive experiments have force measurements in a hard vacuum
You're wrong. I wrote at least 4 Makefiles from scratch in the last 10 years. :)
If you build something you should definitely have something to say about what others can do with your work, especially if you give it away for free. And nobody imposes something on you - you are perfectly free not to use GNU licensed things.
Barring a point-by-point analysis, his interesting points include:

- Non-ethical corporate compliance with surveillance activities.

- Pay-for-placement allegations. (Especially interesting given recent lawsuit for ratings spam.)

- Warehouse worker treatment.

- Monopolistic pricing power, particularly against small publishers. (Also ironic, as Amazon has given self-publishers a great platform.)

Note that this is just a list of allegations: this isn't a particularly investigative piece. (Though several have been linked and/or published elsewhere.)

Less valid arguments/rhetoric include:

- Calling the Kindle a Swindle. (Cute, but I can't take your argument as a serious, objective view.)

- Broad "freedom" arguments about file formats (PDF, MP3) and rights associated with same not originating with Amazon.

- Auto-update as a "back-door".

- Hosted content vs. owned content and the pros and cons therein.

- Workers "walk all day under the orders of a computer". (Like Uber drivers drive all day under the orders of a computer?)

- General competitiveness against bookstores and differences in business models.

So I'm saying that Stallman makes N interesting points (albeit without much in the way of reasoning), another N points I find to be logically unsound, and that combination of factors lead to an overall "article" that isn't very impactful.

The interesting points are still interesting.
I Don't Want to Make My Customers Think – Interview with Ron Rule
Sweet fucking Jesus, do we need to talk about the GPL here? It's an utter derail here, and the way comments are ranked here means that the top pages of this thread are going to be the same hashing out of pros and cons and it's incredibly tedious.
I think I'm just being imprecise with my terms, since this is just a comment. I've seen people describe race conditions in practice as "most of the time, message A comes in, then B, but I didn't write it correctly, so in certain cases, B comes in, and then A." Which I would casually describe as racy, but as you point out, would be more accurately described as a pure logic error.
Alternate keyboards have fascinated me ever since I first got a smartphone capable of using them. My most memorable experimental trials were 8pen[1] and one where the user would "slalom" from key to key as columns of letters would move from the right side of the screen to the left, expanding the target area in a fisheye type zoom as you neared your desired letter.

Unfortunately the name of the second keyboard evades me, but as a single-finger input it was fairly efficient, and I believe targeted at disabled people with limited mobility.

[1] http://www.8pen.com/
There is nothing is worse than exercising whilst you are deprived of sleep and mal-nourished.

Which is my personal battle. I don't want to sleep the 9 hours I seem to need, and my eating habits are insufficient, to the tune of 1k+ cal on some days. (young male, active)

My latest revelation has been a good fitness tracker that estimates the caloric cost of my various activities, and is finally forcing me to get enough calories.

It's also throwing my poor sleep patterns in my face, so we'll get to those soon...
This is what I do:

- Try not to use an alarm clock
- Get 8 hours of sleep a night. (I find that sometimes I need to take melatonin to avoid insomnia.)
- Walk the dog every day at lunch time for about half an hour
- Try to eat vegan most of the time
- Limit myself to 1-2 beers / glasses of wine a day
- Don't smoke tobacco

If you research what we really know about living healthy, it comes down to two things: 45 minutes of walking per day is what most people need for exercise; and modern Americans eat significantly more animal products than what our ancestors ate.

Thus, it's not very hard to stay healthy, as long as you can get over not eating a T-bone for dinner every day and aren't an alcoholic.
Agda; it marries formal mathematics and programming in a very satisfying way. I can't wait to see what comes of it and other intuitionistic type theory–based systems.
RMS is supporting buying the book directly from the publisher. But what if they are running IIS on the server, or Flash on their front-end? Doesn't this mean that he is recommending the use of proprietary software?
BLToolkit and the replacement (linq2db) are great. Excellent performance and it has some excellent developers contributing.
The last big piece of Kerala-related news that I remember coming up in America media was about the Annie George case.
How a 13-year-old’s one-line blog post became a worldwide meme
So the script checks if the variable worldHasEnded isn't defined to see if the world isn't destroyed. Hmm....
Office Pet Peeves
i couldn't agree more, that's why i started collecting snippets in https://github.com/andreineculau/util.mk
> That's a strawman

We need a hotkey for that one.
I think it's counterproductive, but this page explains his rationale:

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-call-it-the-swindle.html

I sometimes make a point of saying "copy prevention" rather than "copy protection," or "digital restrictions management" rather than "digital rights management," but I don't go for stuff like "Swindle" or "Losedows."
What's your end goal?

Picking up PHP will make it very easy for you to find work as a developer, but python will make your soul hurt less.
You don't lose the rights to your code. The original copyright owner still owns the copyright on their code. That's why you have to follow the rules of the license they gave you. You can still distribute your code under whatever license you want.
This is a bit of a misunderstanding of what Rust's safety guarantees are and what 'unsafe' actually means in Rust.

Rust safety guarantees are based around a few rules involving references, ownership, lifetimes and borrowing. None of them forbid the creation of mutexes or anything else which you will find in Rust.

'unsafe' Rust code shouldn't break these rules any more than the 'safe' code does, the only difference is that the compiler lets you do something which it doesn't know is safe. It's up to you to design the code such that it is.

If code marked as 'unsafe' does something which actually violates one of the assumptions on which the Rust compiler works, then the safety of the whole program is jeopardised.

(There was actually a bit of bike-shedding surrounding possibly renaming the 'unsafe' keyword to better reflect these facts, which included suggestions like 'trustme' and 'yolo', but a satisfactory term was not found)
Setting up Mirror for Stetho
I'm skit developer #1. And it's awesome.
Some of these arguments are just kind of weird, but I did read the study by the undercover worker about working conditions at their distribution plants. They claimed that they are given an impossible workload, are routinely verbally abused, they get fired for almost any infraction, and they are paid poorly for the privilege.

I'm not sure B&N is so much better. I haven't heard anything either way. I usually look up books and review on Amazon, then buy them elsewhere.

I do like that they are trying to make all e-books cost less than $10.