skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That is a flawed intuition and seems to misunderstand how bitcoin and namecoin fundamentally work. I don't have any reason to care when a trusted or untrusted notary endorsed someone's identity. Particularly if they aren't doing any sort of identity validation at all.

Miners don't verify anything relating to identity beyond the correctness of the digital signatures vs signature hashes. So miners hashing on something doesn't represent any sort of endorsement that I should recognize at all. I don't see why I should trust one signature that appeared deeper in the blockchain vs a newer signature? Older addresses are less trustworthy in bitcoin not more, that's why we use change addresses.

Sorry, this just makes no sense to me on a very basic level and I don't think you're answering any of the fundamental questions. Even in bitcoin, proof of identity goes into the encryption, not the proof-of-work. These are fundamentally different beasts.
JUSTICE DENIED UK EDITION
I'm aware of that; I'm talking about how the K1 was originally supposed to be x86-compatible through microcode and then had to be implemented as an ARM chip when the licensing deal fell through. Obviously the Soviet chip doesn't have to worry about paying Intel licensing costs.
Not that I hadn't already done plenty of CRUD in SQL in jobs prior, but for 4 years I worked on streaming stock quote servers. All in all the system had 500+ servers deployed in a tiered setup. No data was persisted to disk (save for some config), and no SQL was ever involved. Ticker symbols (CUSIPs) did need to be looked up and those went through our network, but the actual lookups went out to a service, and results were cached.

That's just one example. I'm sure there are many.
A choice has to be made in speech, as well. And, as there is no one clear correct answer in speech, and the choice in writing is based on the choice in speech, there is no one clear correct answer in writing. Choose one, and use it consistently within a given work, and you should be fine.

Of course, if its a work on SQL, you can normally avoid "a(n) SQL query" and just say a "a query" (with SQL implicit from context) or, in the less-common situation where you need to distinguish it from a query in a different query language, "a query in SQL".
I agree with you and I've never cared much for being called a 'rebel'. It means you are doing what you are doing/being who you are as a reaction against something/someone, instead of just doing what you want to do/be who you want to be, which, in this day and age, in the U.S., is pretty much available to anyone.
I can't imagine that there won't be strong efforts made by any entrants into the individual autocar market not to hinder the penetration of new public transit systems, and to hobble existing systems.
I believe it's written "[Aa]n? (sql|SQL) query" but it depends on which standard library your native language is using.
If somebody’s been pronounced dead and then you start CPR, you don’t want the
embarrassing situation where they start to wake up again. For older people that
are really far gone it’s not a concern, but sometimes life can start
to come back a bit so general anesthetic takes care of that.

That someone is coming back to life is considered "embarrassing", and ought to be stopped with a general anesthetic? That doesn't sound like someone I'd want in the emergency room by my bed...
I always pronounced it 'S-Q-L' until I got a job where everyone says "sequel". Now I just say "sequel" to fit in, and because it's fewer syllables. Even if a text said "an SQL query", I would read it "a sequel query" without even thinking about it.
There are some key differences, like Rust traits using generics, and Go interfaces using an empty interface for generic code.
Way too attached to a bit of paint on paper. It was painted after all, to be sold.
This only works for callables, though; if you want a virtual dispatch wrapper for some other set of methods, you have to write it yourself (right?). On the other hand, if you do have a relevant base class and you know the exact type, you can avoid virtual calls in C++ just by declaring the relevant methods final, although the vtable pointer will still bloat the struct a bit.

However, I'd say Rust traits are more elegant in unifying what are two separate worlds in C++:

(1) calling virtual methods on a base class pointer, which can be (usually is) dispatched at runtime, but thus can't support methods with generic parameters or having a 'virtual type' (instead of a method), and

(2) accessing members of template parameter classes, including (possibly generic) methods, constants, typedefs, etc. - much more flexible, but doesn't work at runtime. Also dynamically typed, for better or worse; Rust thinks worse.

In Rust, (1) is a trait object, and (2) can be done with a generic parameter specified to implement a certain trait with methods, associated types, and constants. Rust's compiler doesn't try to be magic (unlike, say, Haskell), and so traits with generic methods and such can't be made into trait objects, but they're still traits - they feel like the same basic kind of thing.
Wow. I never realized it but the author's choice of a/an dictates how I read it in my head. Without even thinking about it, if I see "an SQL query" I read it as "an es-queue-ell query". If it's written as "a SQL query", then I read "a sequel query"

But that doesn't answer your question. I suppose it's the same as when saying it. Pick one and stick with it, whatever your choice.
I'd be interested to see statistics from more rural areas where there isn't any robust (or, in some cases, any) public transit. In urban areas, where living without a car is a possibility, I don't doubt that the low income population doesn't drive. In more rural areas I suspect it's the opposite.
Hitchhiking died because the car culture died.

From the 1950s and into the 1960s, cars were the thing. They were an adventure. You were some moronic kid with nothing exciting to do and, all of a sudden, you had freedom - you could kiss the parents good-bye and hightail it out to have some fun. V8 engines, lots of power waiting to be unleashed, booze in the back seat, a girlfriend or boyfriend to play with, no seatbelts, lots of cigaretts, drive-ins to go to, streets to cruise, etc., etc.

That world is gone now. Of course, any of its elements can be re-created. All the pieces are still there. But the spirit of the thing is gone. Cool people don't waste their time on Saturday nights driving around to impress people with how hot their muscle car is (though they probably do equally silly things as a substitute).

Hitchhiking in its fad sense - i.e., when "everybody" was doing it - was part and parcel of that culture. As noted in this piece, it was probably even more likely that something bad might happen to you back then than it is now for driving around with strangers. So why did vastly greater numbers of people hitchhike back than they do now. For the simple reason that it was regarded as "cool" to do so. Just like it was "cool" to smoke. And just as times have changed for the latter, so they have for the former.

Of course there is some unavoidable risk when you hitchhike or when you pick up hitchhikers. Out of millions of people in America, there are some who inevitably will be predators and who will take advantage of others. The overwhelming majority obviously don't. The risk lies in not knowing whether you will bump into the bizarre exception to the normal rule of human kindness in such situations.

But that risk, together with the alarmist publicity and paternalistic laws that can accompany it, have little to do with why far fewer people are hitchhiking now than they did back in the day. People are strongly affected by their peers and by what they are doing. Then they tend to do the same. In that older era, there was a huge social push to get out on the road in all sorts of ways and hitchhiking took wing as a direct result of that push. Now that is gone. There is no strong peer influence pushing people in that direction. There is nothing cool or adventuresome in the car culture, at least not for many.

And so hitchhiking, at least in America, is left for those who do it out of necessity and for the remaining few who truly enjoy interacting with strangers. For most people, it is a brush-off item that they would never consider. After all, "nobody is doing it."
A web based tool to visualize hybris items.xml in UML
This is a question for English.StackExchange.

http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/5265/an-sql-serve...

http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/1016/do-you-use-a...

That said... As a native English speaker, I can infer your pronunciation from which of the options of "a" and "an" you decide to use.

FWIW, "an" is appropriate for any word starting with a vowel sound (whether or not it actually starts with a vowel) and inappropriate for any word that doesn't. "An historic" drives me nuts, but I'm one of those jerks. (My mother was an English teacher - I never stood an chance!)
Apple Watch: Leave that diagnostic port alone
Train riding is considerably more likely to kill you than hitchhiking. Things like cargo shifting in transit are a whole different deal. When you hitchhike, that means that a suitcase hits you. On a train, it can be multiple tons.

Falling off can mean getting run over.

I mean, sure, the freedom can be great, but... highly not recommended for safety reasons. Really, please think twice.
Interesting to read--best of luck to Aral. Nationalism seems to be spreading all over Europe, so I can understand why "where to go next" is a tough decision.
I'd recommend just asking the user to confirm the email domain they care about. I solve this on YesGraph's registration page indirectly just by making the entry field label "work email". https://www.yesgraph.com/signup/
Not representative of everywhere, but I hitched (solicited and obtained rides from complete strangers using my thumb) over 27 times last year while thru-hiking the Pacific Crest Trail from Mexico to central Oregon. Sometimes alone, sometimes in a small group. You encounter a highway after 2-6 days of walking, hitch into town to rest and resupply, then hitch back out to the trail.

I never waited more than an hour, and we usually got picked up in just a few minutes.

Most of them felt like a mutually beneficial exchange. We got a ride, and typically advice of where to stay/eat in town; the driver got to be a little part of a big adventure. Some drivers insisted on detouring to drop us off at the grocery/motel/WWII Japanese internment camp. I can't recall any situations that felt dangerous, though pick-up truck drivers were happy to let us ride in the bed, which is a significant fine for the driver if caught by law enforcement in California.
No, Turing-completeness does not mean you can "do whatever you want". It means you can compute whatever you want that is computable. If the way you want to compute things is to embed a Rust compiler, yes you can do that, but there are many things that we'd colloquially refer to as "do whatever you want" that apply to the semantics of C++ itself.

You cannot, for instance, create a new abstract base class and have a pre-existing class in someone else's header implement your abstract base class, such that a pointer to that pre-existing class can be dynamic_cast to your class.

Because that statement refers to C++ semantics, not your ability to compute things, it's not affected by the claim of Turing-completeness.
Generally in English, I think that when it's unclear whether the majority considers an abbreviation to be an acronym or a plain initialism, it's proper to treat the abbreviation as an initialism.

Importantly, people who have only ever read the abbreviation, and not heard it spoken aloud, will assume it's a plain initialism. It's better, I would think, to write something that reads properly to these people—something "more accessible."

The people who are aware of the acronym pronunciation, meanwhile, will be able to adapt their reading either way, because they're also aware that a plain-initialism reading exists, so you're not unduly burdening them in parsing the sentence.
Depending on where they came from, it may require less Δv to get to Ceres than to Earth. Or who knows, maybe it's an automated surveillance platform set up to monitor the Earth?
Whats next for you guys?
I'd call those "hot startups" myself and they tend not to be hot for long.
I heard that, you guys have it terribly slow right now, really wish someone would get Australia and the PI's connected better.
Think about the physics. There's a _whole_ lot more energy in a moving car than in a saw blade. The car is also being operated in physical circumstances that vary wildly (wet road surfaces, high wind, being struck by other cars) that don't happen in the comfortable little micro-universe of a spinning saw blade.
I've definitely recommended your service to my friends looking to learn SQL.

Also, I made my share of contribution to the SQL pedagogy by writing blog articles on "SQL for Excel Users":

http://blog.treasuredata.com/blog/2014/12/05/learn-sql-by-ca...
Traces of flowers placed on a Palaeolithic tomb found
Game engines, graphics, animations, lot of front-end web stuff... The list goes on.
Most likely driving tests will be tightened and be made more difficult to pass. The main barrier to doin this right now is that so many people need to drive.

It doesn't need to be spelled out that crashes are not evenly distributed between the driving population, and taking the 20% worst drivers off the road is going to reduce crashes by 80%.

My insurance rates are low because of a very good driving history despite owning high powered cars. I don't see any reasons why that would change.
But the article mentioned hitchhiking guides as far back as the 1920's. Not just the 50's and 60's. Perhaps we all want to think our generation owned something. But that doesn't seem to fit the history.

Anyway, nobody leaves their house any more, not to drive, not to sit on the porch, not to hike in the hills. Well, somebody will say "But I do!" and that's fine. But the massed millions don't. They go to the mall and fool with their phones.
Speaking of the Académie Française—do published works in France get "French-picked" to conform to proper Académie grammar?
"Technology independence" is going to be our generation's equivalent of "energy independence".
That first one ain't pedantic; C++ code on the whole tends to generate a lot of assembly bloat with inlined methods and template instantiations, and while executable size probably isn't that important for most use cases, it is for quite a few.
You could develop relational database applications using Dataphor's D4 language without knowing SQL, though I suspect most D4 users also know SQL.

Or you could develop software that doesn't use relational databases for persistence; there's still lots of that.
I think that's going a bit far. I think we're saying the same thing but using different signals; the ability to say "I don't know" is actually an important gauge of aptitude in my opinion, because anyone that is unable to say it will possibly have too much hubris to take the time to learn something they don't know. It is not the only signal I rely on, and if they truly know the topic, there are other signals I rely on either way. But it is /a/ signal which I don't believe is invalid. I don't actually care if someone agrees with my definition of expertise, I just care about their ability to learn, which starts with admitting they don't know something.

Challenges are another great way to do that, and don't necessarily need to be time-limited; MicroCorruption is a great example. We will occasionally do similar "take home" style challenges. The only time we'll time limit them is specifically when we're looking for how /quickly/ someone can get up to speed on a topic they're unfamiliar with, which is also occasionally a valid question; i.e. do they need to become an expert to build something in it or can they get dangerous enough quickly. Not everyone can. In those cases, we provide plenty of resources, make ourselves fully available, and make the time limits a matter of days, not hours.

Edit: to clarify, it is far more important to me that someone have the ability to learn new things quickly than already contain an existing bit of knowledge in their head.
Event-driven blogging with AWS Lambda
Amazon and Hover are worth a look.
Ah that's right, I think someone in a comment linked to an article on his blog and that's how I found out about the book.
To make things more confusion there is a software product called SEQUEL
I bet he'd make a great president himself.
> Just go back to that tutorial with your C hat on and substitute the word "union" for "enum" and I promise it will all make sense. All your intuition about C unions will cross over just fine, and the new Rust rules (they're tagged at runtime and the compiler enforces that you can only ever use fields of a runtype-checked subtype) are straightforward extensions.

This is not true. Rust enums allow you to match on which of the types you have. C unions do not. If you want to implement a switch statement over the possible members of a C union, you need to put it inside a struct with a type field. You don't need to do so in Rust, and you can't do so and have it compile.

(That said, if your real complaint is that the official docs on enums are confusing, I'd certainly agree with that.)
Sorry, but where's the data on "the overwhelming majority of people don't choose to live in suburbs"? Where are all the ghost suburbs that should be all around us?

I know a bit about the other side of the coin: the overwhelming majority of people who would love to be able to live in an american suburb. They are called poor people.

I too would probably want to leave, had I grown up there. But, today, older and a little bit wiser, I know it's not the shit hole that people say it is. Go start a family, go live in somewhere where there are guns going off weekly. The suburbs will have its reason to be. It's not the funnest, most open, most inspiring place to live, not by a long shot. But it's not empty for a reason.
Imagine a world where that level of insensitivity was inextricably coupled with the sort of accomplishments he produces for humanity.

I'm not saying they are, but if asshole-ness and makes-awesomethings-ness were linked, would it be preferable for him to be "a nice guy" and not "a guy who drove plausible solutions to global online payments, solar power, electric cars, and space travel"?

Or would we rather have another nice guy that didn't do those things?

It's hard to imagine that anyone who continues to work for Elon Musk's companies right now doesn't have alternatives. So they're CHOOSING that, for whatever reason. Maybe they tolerate his behavior to be a part of what he does. But nobody is really trapped there without options.

Maybe (probably) it's possible to be nice and be awesome. But it's not important to me that Elon Musk is nice. If I have to pick between his creation and his compassion, I pick creation.
Embedded? D3? COBOL?
P (partition tolerance) refers to network partitions. There's nothing a distributed system can do to prevent network partitions; they're a property of the network. The question is, in the face of partitions, what does the software do? It basically has two options:

* Respond to requests, even though it may not have the most up to date information. I.e., it sacrifices consistency. These are AP systems.

* Not respond to requests, in which case it sacrifices availability. These are CP systems, of which ZK is one.

In particular with ZK, if you lose quorum (i.e., the cluster has fewer than (n + 1) / 2 active nodes where n is the cluster size) the cluster (or partition thereof) will become unavailable in order to avoid sacrificing consistency.
You could just go to Germany ;P

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02Ak1eIyj3M
Being a board member of the EFF isn't enough for me - I like to understand specifics and don't trust the EFF sheerly on invocation of their name.
> Especially since digital image recognition still isn't that great.

I believe digital image recognition is better than human, and a lot faster to boot (hah!).
> And as a type, "block" sounds like a code block—i.e. something like a lambda. Ruby uses "block" for this, for instance.

As does, notably, Objective-C, like Ruby due to the Smalltalk heritage.

I've never heard the term "block" used to refer to heap allocations, so I don't think it would really help.
Back in the day they tried the overlapping red thing in my city. Once everyone got used to the new way of doing things the time when both light were red became a sort of anarchy zone. Everyone assumed that everyone else would strictly observe the red so they didn't have to.

We don't do that anymore...
The Search Suggestion Popularity Index
Packages equivalent to named long-term development branches of upstreams, without packaging the result under a separate name (thus confusing dependent packages)?
Translation Exchange | Los Angeles & San Francisco | Backend & Frontend engineers, UX/UI Designer

We're a small venture-backed team working on an advanced localization platform for mobile & web applications.

Email jobs@translationexchange.com if interested.

http://welcome.translationexchange.com/jobs
That's still bundling something fragile with infrastructure that carries heavy machinery. Transporting electricity is a solved problem, we can put a solar farm in the middle of nowhere with current technology. And if we're looking for land that's already owned we could put solar cells underneath long range transmission lines 1000x easier than we could embed them in roads or in train tracks.
Is Wired's CSS utterly broken for anyone else? On Ubuntu and Chrome 44, I get navigation elements hovering over the article text.
On a very similar theme I was discussing the merits of requiring police to have personal professional insurance that pays out for a portion of any civil liabilities and is priced accordingly.

It seems somewhat perverse at first glance, but might actually be a good incentive if carefully structured and actuaries are also one group of people that might actually get somewhere with demanding actual figures from police.
As a german with not a iota of patriotism, aside from a little pride in the social institutions still maintained here, i'm honestly curious:

Where do you see nationalism increasing in germany?
Experimental is an all or nothing proposition. With a PPA system it should be possible to keep most of your system on stable, and opt into newer versions of software on a case by case basis.
> (That said, if your real complaint is that the official docs on enums are confusing, I'd certainly agree with that.)

I'd love more specifics about which docs, if you have some time.
Oh, don't get me wrong: I actually like absolutely nothing about DNSSEC.

I just don't think "It has a worse security model than HTTPS" is a true statement. I think smart people need to keep working on the authentication problem, because we clearly have not solved it yet -- including with DNSSEC.
Oracle has had pipelined table functions since version 9.0.
Why would there be an unconditional jump?

- Initialize locations 2 & 3 to zero. (solution & scratch register, leaving 0 & 1 unmodified)

- While loc 2 is not equal to loc 0, increment loc 2. (Copy, just a conditional jump)

- While loc 3 is not equal to loc 1, increment locs 2 and 3. (Still just a conditional jump)

In the end, 2 holds the solution, 3 holds a copy of 1, and there are no unconditional jumps.
In today's world you could probably be powerful using the NoSQL databases. But, imho, you will still have to understand the basics of set theory. Unions, intersects, etc.

But I agree with the spirit of what you're saying. A good programmer will know SQL. It's definitely not going away anytime soon.
I think the main difference is that Alive can run any piece of code you unit test. This means we can run code dependent on state.

We're hoping thus makes it easier to read and modify code written by others.