But, are these approved by the American Ladder Institute? https://www.americanladderinstitute.org
Readit Newsxixi77 commented on The San Franciso Fire Department makes its own wooden ladders by hand gizmodo.com/inside-san-fr... · Posted by u/lisper
You may not like the ads, but they pay for the product.
Please don't think the audience here on HN is naïve enough to believe rhetoric like "Search is the product." It isn't, and it never has been. The product is the ads; they pay for the mechanisms that display the ads, whether that's search, YouTube, GMail, or whatever. Those things are undoubtedly useful services, but the product Google makes is ads. Everything else is marketing.
How is that different from say broadcast TV or any other media though? Or are you saying that ads are their product as well?
xixi77 commented on $10,000 Stack Overflow Toxicity Challenge medium.com/dunder-data/10... · Posted by u/KC8ZKF
Actually looking at other things the woman making the "toxic wasteland" comment wrote, I certainly don't agree with her on everything, but I'd say she actually makes a lot of good points. Particularly about how delivery style matters.
And yet, her comment itself is clearly an exaggeration (let's be real, no one is going to take up the $10K challenge), and is just as toxic as anything she mentions. It just shows that it is always far easier to see problems and possible fixes in other people's behavior, than in your own.
xixi77 commented on $10,000 Stack Overflow Toxicity Challenge medium.com/dunder-data/10... · Posted by u/KC8ZKF
Yes, I recommend reading the comments on this article, they're interesting. When a commenter argued that the fee is unfair toward minorites, OP replied:
> What is it about minorities that makes you believe they have less propensity to make the donation? That’s blatantly racist. If you know you are going to win $10k, then it shouldn’t matter to you. I’ll be happy to lower this to $100 in 6 months if nobody makes a submission.
That attitude is arguably more toxic than the typical Stack Overflow comment.
What is particularly toxic about this comment though?
I would actually agree that there won't be many poor/minority people participating, but that has more to do with the challenge itself, not the fee. Poor people buy a lot of lottery tickets, particularly when the chance of winning is high. The issue here is that the chances of winning are not high, so the only reason someone would try and go after the prize would be to prove a point, and spending a lot of time and effort to prove a point like this one is a luxury many people don't have.
xixi77 commented on Mounting criticism of NIH's relationship with the alcohol industry arstechnica.com/science/2... · Posted by u/lisper
The most damning evidence IMO is the promise, straight from the mouth of NIAAA director George Koob, to suppress future research that might be critical of the alcohol industry. Utterly disgraceful.
Koob's defense of that email -- that he was merely referring to research that is "not of the highest scientific quality" -- is pretty pathetic, given that Jernigan's and Siegel's work apparently met the NIAAA's past and present quality standards.
TBH, I find it difficult to see value in that particular line of research: it stands to reason that there would be a link between advertising and consumption in all age groups, so spending money to confirm that seems wasteful. Also, I haven't checked, but I'd be surprised if there hadn't already been some studies done on this.
Of course the reason some people are upset is because they would like to see restrictions on advertising, and were hoping another study would give them another argument in favor of such. But a positive result does not imply that such restrictions are necessary.
Excel is, to me, an example of an alternative means of arranging logic that is very well suited to a specific subset of problems. You'll notice that people aren't typically building general-purpose applications with Excel. It's clearly not a replacement for a general-purpose language. But it is also clearly a more "natural" fit for it's niche of problems.
Actually, I think that this line of thinking holds a lot of promise: building specific tools well-tailored to solving specific types of problems. I think we could easily find models and alternate modes of thinking that outperform text for given domains.
I guess my argument is that as humans language is our most fluent medium for communicating abstractions. In the general case I don't think it will be outperformed.
Sure, it might not be general purpose, but the "niche" is really quite large: there aren't too many websites written in Excel, but there aren't many written in C++ either :) I am really not a fan of Excel overuse, but it happens, so I think there must be something about it that makes its programming model attractive to people.
For one, constructs like loops that we have mostly internalized as natural, can look a bit intimidating to non-programmers (they are not found in regular language either though!). Even among fairly experienced coders, for example in statistical programming, people who come from general-purpose coding background sometimes find loops easier to read and write compared to "vectorized" code, and vice versa.
Thinking about it, the way say much Java code is written is not what I would call a linear language either, although that I suspect might be more a result of path dependence and optimizing for "large teams of replaceable programmers".
> Edit text without having to constantly move hands off of the keyboard home row to move the mouse or hit keys like PgUp/PgDn.
There's probably more you can do without using the mouse than you realize.
> # Change all the 'X's to 'Y's on the current line in 5 seconds.
In PyCharm, I can easily select the current line with Home followed by Shift+End, hit CTRL-R, X, Tab, Y, click Replace All. Doesn't really take much more effort than whatever black magic command vim uses.
> # Syntax highlighting for [any language the IDE doesn't compile].
Then you're using the wrong IDE. PyCharm is primarily a Python IDE, but also does syntax highlighting for JavaScript, HTML, XML, YAML, CSS, and CoffeeScript. Visual Studio Code supports C/C++, C#, CSS, Go HTML, Java, JavaScript, JSON, PHP, Python, and a few others.
Both of them have support for adding custom syntax highlighting.
> # Pipe text through an external program.
I'd be doing this on the command line anyways.
> # Start quickly enough to pop open text files whenever you need it.
I'll give you that one. But that's not enough to do your general development in vim.
I'm much more of an emacs than vim user, but the "wrong IDE" part is not quite true. Most IDEs support the common languages that you've listed, but once you go a bit further into domain specific, it is not as common any more. Speaking of what I'm familiar with (statistics), even SAS is supported in a very spotty manner, or at least was last time I've checked, and this is a popular language that has been around longer than C. At best you would get some limited R support, which really pales in comparison to what you can get in Emacs (and surely vim). Sure, sometimes they have their own IDEs (RStudio is quite good, and so is Matlab's IDE), but they have their own issues. I'm sure the same is true for lots of other DSLs.
> Moreover, there are far more powerful ways to interact with code than at the text buffer level.
This is actually one of my core reasons for using Vim. I agree, but all of those "more powerful ways to interact with code" happen in my head, not in an IDE. And my head is far more flexible than the IDE. In pretty much every IDE I've used you start thinking according to the patterns of transformation that the IDE supports, which can be helpful for a beginner, but is ultimately very limiting. New languages start with no IDE support. This is mostly for practical reasons I concede, but it is usually also often the case that the new language is being written because it represents a new paradigm of thinking. It's not until the language matures and the common patterns of thought become known that they then become encoded as "helpers" in IDEs.
The other main objection to this, I think, is to point out that linear textual encoding of code is itself a bottleneck, and that a strict text editor like Vim will never let you move past that. Implicit in this assumption, however, is the belief that there is a better way to represent code than linear text. However, I would point out that throughout all of mankind's history, language (and text as it's persistent form) has been the highest form of communicated logical representation. We have had access to pictography and other forms of communication for millennia, but none has had the same ability to encode and transfer knowledge and logic like text. I think we are primarily adapted as humans to think in terms of language. My bet is that there isn't a more powerful abstraction than this given the structure of our brains. I'm happy to be proved wrong though.
Given both of the above, personally I find the most productive means of working is to work primarily at the conceptual/abstract level in my head, model the problem and solution in thought, then translate the solution into the most natural form for expressing thought: language (as text).
So most of the tools that the IDE gives me (especially regarding code transformation, etc.) are hard-coded, less powerful versions of the kind of mental processes I am already doing. I don't need those. What I do need is a way to encode my thoughts in text as quickly and efficiently as possible. I don't want to have to think about that at all. I want it to flow naturally from my mental model into prose (though not English prose, obviously). For that an IDE again gets in the way. It's slow and full of distractions. The Vim keybindings have become so ingrained that it's muscle-memory. And I've yet to find another paradigm that lets me manipulate text as effortlessly.
I think you are right, but: how about tools like Excel, which is very non-linear, and yet it seems to be easier to pick up, and less intimidating, for complete newcomers compared to traditional programming?
xixi77 commented on Ex-Facebook insider says covert data harvesting was routine theguardian.com/news/2018... · Posted by u/valanto
lol, noticed the same thing. Sadly its not just Facebook doing it. Every time a company goes under fire there's a ton of comments defending them or saying how it's a necessary step etc. etc. Sometimes its the "famous" users here doing this, consistently for the same companies. Gonna guess they have invested in them but this kind of shilling is just stupid.
TBH I see a plenty of the arguments on the other side too, whenever a company does something people disagree with, there are calls for regulation. Even further, there are lots of people here who get annoyed when they see someone just skirting the rules without literally breaking them and always argue for the most expansive interpretation.
I think some people just naturally like rules and would prefer to live in a more orderly, rule based society, and some people don't like the idea of being constrained. Both groups act quite sanctimoniously though, as if their personal preference is somehow the holy truth.
I understand the appeal ideologically, but in practice what you are suggesting would increase inequality.