skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Pulse of the Nation: U.S. Mood Throughout the Day Inferred from Twitter
"No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies
the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice,
and family. In forming a marital union, two people become
something greater than once they were. As some of
the petitioners in these cases demonstrate, marriage
embodies a love that may endure even past death. It
would misunderstand these men and women to say they
disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do
respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its
fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned
to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s
oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the
eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right."
Very cool! Thanks for sharing your scripts.
Hi, folks.

Hi, everyone.

Hi, friends.

Hi, y'all.

There's something for everyone.
Gosh I'm the opposite. I do consulting work and whether my clients want it or not the work I provide them utilizes several code analysis tools: findbugs, cobertura, checkstyle, and PMD. I simply don't write code without those tools present if it's even remotely reasonable to do so.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage#Timeline

2001 — Netherlands

2001 — Belgium

2005 — Spain, Canada

2006 — South Africa

2009 — Norway, Sweden

2010 — Portugal, Iceland, Argentina

2012 — Denmark

2013 — France, Brazil, Uruguay, New Zealand

2014 — England and Wales

2015 — Luxembourg, Ireland, United States of America

2017 — Finland (the law is voted and signed but not yet in effect)

> I mean, Massachusetts legalized gay marriage in, what, 2003?

It's a good point but not without issues to wit the possibility of discontinuation or invalidation (California, Australian Capital Territory) and the fact that subdivision-level generally lacks many (or even most) of the protections and advantages normally granted (not to mention commonly a complete loss of recognition and attendant rights on moving outside the sub-territory)
Ah yes, the good ol' printf-debug-polluting-codebase method.
What's fun after that, is when programmers all start competing to have their printf's be more visible in the sea of prints ... I find this method primitive at best.
How do you manage it?
I personally welcome those kind of ports and hate blind insistent on "idiomatic" code.

Idiomatic Java, Perl and other languages were shit for a long time, they only improved when some brave soulds fed up with it and explorer non-idiomatic solutions (like the Play framework). And some things I see in "idiomatic" Go make my hair crawl...
There are quite a lot of people who argued that changing the definition of marriage was an infringement of their religious rights. I've never been clear on how that was supposed to happen but maybe you can dig it out of the oral arguments.
The case you linked has been reversed by a higher court, though. And a German federal politician who was involved in that suggested a change in the law, but the government was against it.
Ask HN: What interesting personal service can be built upon email?
Any service which is not like a traditional newsletter or mass-mailing in any way. But obviously you need some input from user to give unique output. The input should also be preferably email, to be cool, you know. Or maybe, not any explicit input but integrating with some service they already use.
The world isn't completely a harsh place, not even close, and doesn't have to be. Although, you could be posting on HN from a war torn, famine ravaged country, I dunno. Anyway, maybe you could try making the world a slightly less harsh place, if that's how you really see it. And if it is, I'm sorry you've been brought to that conclusion.

"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi
> One day, a white supremacist dude kills several innocent people. The next day, people are appalled that such racist ideology leads to mass murder. On day 3, people that have long been upset that a racist flag that the killer revered, that's representative of an ideology that was actively disenfranchising people on the basis of their race, is present on public buildings.

There, fixed that for you.
Gah - I'm with you... y'all fits the bill in so many ways - I love the way it sounds when my Southern friends say it. I just can't get away with using it and not feeling a little contrived.

We definitely need a plural, informal you form - like the Spanish vosotros. :)
This is what I'm talking about:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIgV2Q8Leh0

I'm sure they used at least as much for the body, which is a lot once it sublimates into gas.
Yeah. Technically gay marriage bans were struck down. Whatever.
Also that feeling when you blow your nose after having traveled around on the tube for the day. Black snot. Nice.
But apple is the one who used the situation for PR purposes. Valve would have published the game one way or another, and that linked page is just how newly released games are displayed on the valve store. No special PR here -- someone from the developer probably paid to advertise it there.
I don't see why this could not have been done in a invisible fashion for the user.
Your input needed: Kickstarter hardware to connect home and phone
Hi everyone,

I'm from MIT working with a team to produce a piece of gateway hardware in the same spirit as RaspberryPi and the Spark Electron that would let you monitor/control almost anything with some programming and additional meters.

The product has a linux embedded ARM9 CPU module and an arduino-compatible chip on the piggyback extension breadboard. It can be plugged into any 110/230 VAC power supply, so it would be located in a house or yard.

Unlike many current products, our hardware can communicate with GSM/GPRS, giving it the power to send alerts and receive commands from your phone rather than just via wifi.

[b]Are there situations you find that you would need such a product, and wifi communication just wouldn't cut it?[/b]

We are trying to test the out the demand for the product, which can only be used by people who can code (or are willing to learn), as it will not include software.

A few examples:

- Monitor/control the lights/heating in your cabin in the woods that doesn't have wifi from anywhere
- Communicate temporary codes to your security system (for Air bnb users, cleaners) on a secure network. Receive alerts when they arrive/leave
- Monitor moisture of the soil in your garden (where you don't have wifi) and automatically start sprinklers when the plants need water

We would love your input, thanks! Any and all ideas welcome (no matter how crazy) :D
It's not an abstract community, much less one with some FOSS mission statement or anything, it's a YC combinator site.
For anyone interested, Ultimate General: Gettysburg is a game made by the well-known modder of the Total War series of games, DarthVader.

His DarthMod series have been consistently rated as among the best, if not the best overhaul mods available for the series and rightly so.

They are really fantastic.
I think it all depends on the context. A comedy show is a comedy show. People are always looking for ways to feel offended.
"There's no right to not be offended"

There's no right you hold for people to not be offended at your speech, either.
>the rest of the developed world.

Some countries where gay marriage is illegal: Germany, Italy, Australia, Japan, Austria, Switzerland, Greece.
> What do you consider to be the downsides to liberally using libraries that reduce the amount of code by wrapping the standard lib or that build on top of other libraries? Personally, and I may be wrong as someone still new to Go, it seems to me that the single monolithic repository model that Google uses permeates the whole community and has made adding an external dependency a Big Deal and something you have to carefully consider instead of something you instinctively do.

Because there's no equivalent of npm in Golang, culturally speaking.
Scalia is like reading The Spectator. Well-argued, cogent, urbane, but wrong.
Excellent, thank you for the reply.
I don't understand your reply, nor do I see a reason for the downvotes.

A downvote is a bashful admission of the correctness of a statement.
An additional factor is that opposition to gay marriage is heavily skewed toward the elderly. I doubt the OP has a large social circle among the medicare crowd, but that is where the pool of opposition remains the strongest. We are just going to have to wait for them to die off.
They can't let it happen. They are propping up the house of cards with more cards.

If the bubble pops, then Thatcher's children and children's children will be proper screwed.
As a straight Christian who isn't against gay marriage, I agree, but I know the energy that the "church" puts into opposing it is why it as required this much energy. There are so many issues deserving of the church's time and energy (divorce rates, addiction, child trafficking, etc) yet too many are stuck on this one.
While this is excellent news for my gay and lesbian friends, I see no progress on polygamy.

Which, unlike same-sex marriage, is an institution with deep roots both in America (the Mormons were forced to give up this sacrament as a condition of statehood) and in the majority of world cultures, where it ranges from condoned to celebrated.

Without getting unduly personal, let's say that I have a stake in that question being resolved. I know several triples living quietly among us; they face the same kind of problems (child custody, hospital visitation, inheritance rights) as same-sex couples faced prior to this decision.

What the polygamists of the nation lack is a powerful lobby. <shrug> One may hope that nonetheless, reason and freedom will prevail here as well.

EDIT: nation, not world. Worldwide the situation is different. America is suffering from its Christian legacy here. Most Christian countries are adamant about denying this right to their citizens.
Marriage between two consenting adults is not a slippery slope to bestiality.

I'm not sure why this keeps coming up in some circles. Is it maybe due to some difficulty accepting that gays are people too?
Not to mention past and outstanding pull requests.
I am under the impression that a large part of engineering effort at established companies go into porting existing components to a deemed to be more appropriate language for that task.

Is it plain impossible to pick the best fit language without implementing a solution in the first place and fleshing out the requirements and challenges that specific to the problem space? Or do the problems evolve fast enough that no matter how well you design the system, it will need to be deprecated once in a few years?
> it definitely helps to have gay culture and gay icons just out there in the world, melded seamlessly with the rest of society.

On one hand I agree, but it's never been sufficient. There have been gay icons for a long time (probably forever); Oscar Wilde springs to mind, and Alan Turing (though I don't know if he was well-known to the public). And even with their status, they were still persecuted and ruined.
Make sure to use strong SSL certs, otherwise how do I know its your website? There better be a little green lock in the upper left corner of my browser ;)
Not 100% sure this is unbiased but from what I see, £50k is good for a 30-years-old and £60k very good I would say. (Permanent employees of course.)
I'd love to see stats broken down by age. Anecdotally, it seems older people tend to see it as less gender neutral, and younger people tend to see it as more gender neutral.
"SQL"? MSSQL? MySQL? Postgres? Oracle? DB2?

There is a the free MySQL Excel plugin (https://dev.mysql.com/downloads/windows/excel/ )and I think the free MS PowerPivot plugin supports SQL databases too.
And yet the news reports I've heard on the shooting in Charleston kept mentioning "9 African Americans". No one calls the "white" folks (that would probably be me) "European Americans" or "Caucasian Americans" in the reports.

It's just silly.
> Lawyers for the four states said their bans were justified by
> tradition and the distinctive characteristics of opposite-sex
> unions.

Reads like they dusted off the old arguments in favour of slavery and/or segregation and remixed the recipe for marriage.

Take a dollop of “tradition says it should be so,” and sprinkle on “distinctive characteristics” to taste.
But did anyone argue that they couldn't express their views?
The effort:reward ratio is still out of whack here, though. Linters are relatively limited in usefulness at the best of times (compared to tests, for instance).

Linters that can't rank rule violations sensibly, have bad defaults and opinionated stylistic rules quickly become more trouble than they're worth.

If somebody comes out with a better linter, though, that isn't verbose and just catches truly problematic code consistently without needing a ton of customization, I'll use that for sure.
What the poll shows is that it's only considered neutral when plural, and in the vocative case.
The North still made the first move, by occupying the confederate fort and refusing to leave. This is middle school history, no need to hide the facts.
Thanks for sharing! Interesting thing is that until now, Uber has been paying the drivers' fines for operating illegally while waiting for the court case to be resolved.
Bikeshedding while Rome burns.
Do the platinum rule: Treat and teach others the way they want to be treated and taught.
What is a Candlestick?-This is why it is preferred by experienced traders
How companies can get huge and still stay innovative
Which is exactly what it says, along with an argument that the rest of us shouldn't care either.
OT: It wasn't anti Semitic remarks that got Michael Richards in trouble. Michael Richards went on a massive tirade saying the N-word repeatedly after he felt that a black patron was being disrespectful.
Hot.

Any real time integration?
One step at a time. It'll happen...
"Guys" is fine, except when it isn't. It's a pain point for some people, and it's reasonable to be sensitive to that.

> Yeah, and medieval oppression was actually real, unlike some other "oppression" I can think of.

That crosses the line into the ridiculous, and is precisely the kind of poison we should try to avoid. Oppression means longstanding cruel treatment or control. The author doesn't perceive longstanding class, gender and race based control and oppression over the last few generations in our society. That makes the author maybe not a great source to take advice from on the topic at hand.
I think he's often right. But unlike tptacek, I just can't muster any admiration for this dissent. It seemed so petulant, and more grounded in sophistry than law.
And that!
> True, but the costs (both direct and ancillary) of making a bad hire are so high that anything we can do avoid making the wrong hire would be worthwhile.

That's a load of highly-enriched equine fertilizer. I have had this discussion here before. I asked for information. I didn't get much. Some worst-case hypotheticals that, to my knowledge, have never happened anywhere. A buttload of management failures surrounding bad hires where management was responsible for the vast majority of the costs, not the hire. A couple legitimate bad hires where the costs were significant, but not in the same ballpark as people like you parrot.

Also ignored in this conversation: what is the cost of keeping your req open? How much money are you losing, directly or indirectly, by not having someone in that role? Why do you think someone can't grow into the role?
With the Political Correctness police gaining momentum again after being laughed out of the 80ies

People say this kind of thing, and I know there are terms people have suggested that I find kind of silly.

However, we know better than to call people negros, and most of us know not to call a grown woman at work a "girl", (or a black man "boy").

The principle is pretty clear, we're just haggling over the details.

Essentially no one disagrees that there are some words that are overtly insulting, and others that are more or less subtly patronizing. We (myself) included, just have a knee-jerk reaction that "of course this one's ok". And we're probably right some of the time, but we're wrong other times.
How do machines learn meaning?
You can't get that MAC address without first talking to the hardware. Chicken and egg.
My submission would be:

I was a help desk pleb at a well known inkjet/scanner/camera company 15 years ago and this company "extended" their clipper database to record third party cartridges, but recorded them in .ini format. That's right, one file per record, in key=value pairs. I was bored and accidentally mentioned to the guy whose job it was to copy and paste the data from each of all 90,000 ini files into an Excel spreadsheet that Perl could do it, and I'd even use references to hashes to do it. He had no idea about that last bit, but I did it for him on the proviso that he didn't tell anyone, and reduced 10 weeks of work to 30 seconds. They unfortunately made me employee of the quarter but neglected to tell me so I missed my awards ceremony.
Originally the API was completely asynchronous (every "request" function returned a channel).

I got a lot of feedback that I shouldn't do that, so I moved the asynchronous requests to specific functions e.g GetAsync and made the standard API synchronous.
Oh ouch, that was my incredibly dumb mistake. Thanks for pointing that out.
SSM and polygamy are not really related issues. You run into very complicated issues when you consider how children and property ownership would work in a many-person relationship. Marriage specifies shortcuts for these kinds of things, but they only work for two-person relationships. Polygamous relationships would basically require unique contracts given all circumstances, which is a pretty high burden. It's also not clear that polygamous marriages would have the same kind of societal benefits that two-person marriages have.

I think it's a point that can be convincingly argued, but the legalization of SSM does not imply a requirement for polygamous marriage's legalization. They're entirely different issues.
In the same Wikipedia articles it mentions several times that it mostly spread among the elites.
That's really not true: "the medium is the message" applies just as much to computer technology as it does to things we would more traditionally view as media. Think about the difference between a conversation you'd have on the phone versus one had over instant messenger versus one had via text message. The content is informed by the way in which it is conveyed; the properties of a piece of technology shape how we use it.
This is a great example of mistaking a nuanced social issue with one that has a binary answer. In many social situations saying "guys" is not gender specific... but that does not mean that it is "perfectly" fine to use in all cases. Some people may find it offensive or exclusionary in some cases and it doesn't hurt to be respectful of that.

We should of course be on the lookout for those who would try to chill free expression via enforcing some sort of Orwellian newspeak by making baseless accusations of being offended/excluded/discriminated against... but those people are rare, pretty easy to spot, and outnumbered by good people who have legitimate complaints. And BTW if you want to have credibility when calling out the former, it might be a good idea to be respectful and earn gravitas in the eyes of the latter.
> A case where it was ruled that loading a program constituted making a copy. Copyright law was later changed to allow that making that copy, being essential to actually using the software, was not a copyright violation.

This is a nice illustration of one of the balancing acts involved in making laws. Do you want fewer rules, or do you want simpler definitions?

Assuming you are going to have copyright in computer programs in your system, then there are two ways you can reasonably do it.

1. You can have a fairly simple definition of what constitutes a copy. That will then include the thing in memory when you load a program from disk to run it, and so you then also need a separate rule to make that not be a copyright violation.

2. You can have a more complicated definition of a copy that doesn't include a program loaded into memory from a disk. Then you do not need any special rule to allow for that memory image since it is out of scope for copyright law.

I think #1 is the better approach. I like my definitions simple so I can keep them all in my head when reading the rules. That way when I'm trying to understand a particular situation I just need to cram into my head at once the simple definitions and the specific rules relevant to that situation.

With the complex definitions/fewer rules approach I think you end up having to hold more in your head, much of it irrelevant to whatever situation you are trying to analyze.

I also like keeping definitions simpler and sticking the complexity in the rules because we almost never get things right on the first try--or ever--and so there are almost always going to be revisions. I'd rather have those in the rules rather than the definitions, so that the definitions can provide a stable vocabulary across many versions of the law.
"What if I'm offended and decide to stop hanging out with those people, or decide to remind them each time that they are offending me?"

Let me clarify a bit please, I fully support people trying to educate people on potentially sensitive verbiage, and their ability to remove themselves from a situation where they aren't comfortable. I think you are right and my "grow a thick skin" comment was unwarranted so I have put an edit in saying so. My primary issue is this:

Censorship, full stop. Don't like something? Ok, tell the world your reasons, and try to convince it to follow your lead. Don't, however, use "offensiveness" as a tool of censorship of things you don't like. That's my main point, so sorry if I muddled it a bit. Censorship from either point of view is my issue.

Of course, you also have to take into consideration that I am saying this from a decidedly American perspective, where freedom of speech is respected to a higher degree than almost anywhere else.

I think Christopher Hitchens put it well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIU96N7ciXM
What Summer Blockbuster Is Your IT Business? Take the Quiz
There is no question that this is the case. This video a guy articulates this, be warned I suspect that his conservative opinions and religiousness may rub some HN users the wrong way. However I think his point is persuasive and well made nevertheless.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zcs1K7Gi9Pg
> OK, just cool your jets mister, everyone here is having a pretty civil conversation without you attacking people for 'pushing corrosive ideology'.

Please.

Rhetoric = Ethos + Logos + Pathos

Unless you want to believe I chose my words while extremely angry at you personally, and unless you want everyone to never use pathos and talk like robots in perfect clauses and rebuttals connected in an acyclic directed graph, I suggested you get used to this very common rhetorical necessity.
They really waited until they had no choice: they refused to hear all cases until there was a circuit split, then they had no choice but to resolve the split.
Celebrating 10 years of WordPress.com – Automattic
Uber.... well that escalated quickly.
Yeah, things start to break down when you include bottom (and fix id = _|_ since it diverges).

I'm not sure exactly how to work with polymorphism in the function as subset model you described, but I'm guessing it would be something like this:

Let id_A ⊆ A x A s.t for all a ∈ A, (a, a) ∈ id_A.

If A = ∅, then id_A = ∅, which is exactly the result we'd expect, so I don't see any issue.

> the empty type can also be interpreted as the type of non-terminating computations

This is true, in a sense, but also a little bit misleading I think, since technically every type in Haskell is the set of terminating value with that type plus _|_
A minor can't consent.