jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
i lead a guild and it helped me hone some of my skills in this area, but i tend to agree that the amount of time committed could have been better spent learning leadership via other mediums. but at least we got something out of it other than just a level XX character.
I'm 3.5 years into owning a 17" MB Pro, and my next laptop will be the 13" Air. I wanted the screen real estate when I bought it (coming from a Toshiba that could only do 1024x768). While I love the performance and all the pixels, it's just not portable. The higher resolution on the Air is good enough, and the weight is very appealing.
Yes. WPA and WPA2 secure the network segment as a whole, not conversations between each pair of devices on the network.
Why would you do that if you don't have to?
I am wondering, if Unity isn't supported due to lack of hardware acceleration, does it fallback to Gnome2? (does it mean it still bundles Gnome along with Unity?). This is essential to make a choice between Xubuntu and Ubuntu when running in a VM
You are comparing Garage Band to A High End Medical device?

Technically, they had the feature but the feature didn't help the doctors be better doctors. Features don't automatically translate to outcomes.

How can you determine utility of a feature before it is built? Well the answer is you cant! And surely not for a High End Medical device!

In fact your whole argument is based on incorrect assumptions, well if you are building something like a GarageBand or one of the Me Too To Do list/Collaboration apps, go ahead sure do whatever you want.
But when you are creating an EMR software or an MRI machine which costs Millions of dollars you better make sure that it has all types of features and customization capability.

The problem is that you are confident in your skills as a developer to predict the needs, While your hunch might be correct with software that is used in daily life, it might be totally wrong while making something that is not

Also "What people can do with your software" is a subset of "What software can do".
Thus its the software that is the limiting case.
* It's both internal and external, so in a laptop you can drive both the laptop's own screen and the external A/V plug with the same display interface (instead of having an internal LVDS interface and an external HDMI one for instance)

* It's backwards compatible with DVI-I (and HDMI for that matter): you can carry DVI-I or HDMI signals on a DP cable and only need a passive adapter (although that is limited to single-link on both DVI and HDMI, there aren't enough pins in the DP connector to handle dual-link DVI and HDMI via passive adapters)

* It's packet-based and includes arbitrary pure data transfers (ignoring Thunderbolt) so you don't need a separate data cable to have your screen act as a HUB (USB or 5-in-one for instance), HDMI is TDMS and has no data stream (it comes from TV analog cables)

* It includes a Direct Drive Monitor spec (allows for controller-less monitors which are directly driven off of the displayport signals, although this puts limits on the panel's resolution and color depth)

* DP 1.2 includes independent video streams (to daisy-chain multiple monitors without the need for multiple connectors or a hub), though AFAIK no monitor handles daisy-chaining so far.

* DP includes a mini-connector (mini-displayport) with roughly half the footprint of the full-size one, a boon for ultra-portables (it was developed for Apple, and Apple gifted it to VESA) available under the same royalty-free license-free terms as DP itself (mini-DP was folded into the DisplayPort 1.2 spec)

HDMI is a good A/V standard for TVs, but DP is far superior for computers (and it's driven by computer manufacturers). There is probably a future for both (that's VESA's own party line), but I'd much rather find all my computer video output available as DP first and foremost (with HDMI as an option if they want to).
Yep. With swappable keyboards, I really hope that they consider an alternative option with trackpoint, trackpoint mouse buttons and full-size arrow keys, perhaps even adjacent PgUp/PgDown keys à la ThinkPad.
It's good that you found a way to plan meals that works for you and I am not saying that you should stop.
What I am saying is that most people value the variety of food and actually want their food to taste good so I think your plan is not suitable for the vast majority of people.
I mean I am also one of those people who "eat to live" instead of "live to eat" but your plan is just way too extreme. Even I can feel the difference in my mood when I manage to cook every day and get a decent variety of food.
I started to meal prep every sunday and just prepare food that I then heat for dinner and that worked pretty good for me.
You're saying "they'd have competitors" as if it is some kind of a downside. It's good thing if Google had competitors, it is also a good thing if the competitors had Google. Honest competition keeps participants honest and agile. Of course, honest competition is hard to achieve in a place where the most important proficiency required to achieve success in a business is proficiency in navigating a byzantine network of regulations, permits and requirements, and that, instead of delivering stellar service, becomes a core competency of a successful business.

As for Google monitoring web usage, you're saying it like it's unique for Google. All advertisers to that, and ISP is not the best place to do it anyway (content-side is more efficient and not confused by things like HTTPS/SSL/VPN). Moreover, targeting ads is by far not the most evil thing one might do - in fact, if the ads were as well-targeted as it has been rumored for decades now, I'd not have to install adblocker first thing I do on the new computer. Right now I have to because the ads shown to me are so annoying and irrelevant. I'd like to discuss our all-knowing perfectly-targeting advertising overlords, but we'd have to get some first. So far they are nowhere to be found, and in the meantime our internet connection sucks and costs an arm and a leg. Is it worth having sucky internet access so Google couldn't nefariously target their ads for me? Not for me.
Yahoo is apparently creating a new search page now that Firefox will use it as the default search engine in certain regions.
Here in Seattle there seems to be this fear that not getting Google to install Google Fiber™ means we'll just have the crappy offerings from Comcast and CenturyLink for the next 50 years.

In reality, I believe not selling ourselves to a provider immediately will allow a better market to develop where we get real competition and the possibility of a city run fiber network. It may take a few more years than having Google build out the whole thing at once, but I think the alternative will be better and other municipalities will have wished they had waited too.
It's funny; some of the last work I did in Ruby was getting streaming support into Rack nearly three years ago. http://technomancy.us/109 It's a shame to see it took so long to make it to Rails.
Mailchimp's branding is great and the user experience is nice, except when it comes to actually using their web UI. It is probably the most annoying part of my workflow on any given day. Finding a control for a specific feature is like a bit of a treasure hunt. Their forms editor is a crash course in how not to design usable software.

It's sadly yet another app, which compromises usability for shiny design (another one is Convore).
Well from the account Accolade might not even have made any money. It's not really clear.

Also it's like quitting your present job for a possibly better opportunity. If you had the opportunity to gamble a small business for the opportunity of an explosive startup, would you do it? Should u do it?
One thing they really need to do, is have servers ready to serve a better error page.

On servers I maintain, if there's an outage, and it looks like it may be awhile, I have an outage page I can put up. Sites being down is bad enough, but an error page is better than connections timing out.
Very interesting. Thanks.

Almost missed seeing the Snap and Play stats because the preformatted text was getting formated into a side-scrolling pane.

Not that I want to code in Java, but the speed is impressive.

Still, I have to wonder what the JRuby speed would be for some of the other Ruby frameworks that are faster than Rails, such as Ramaze and Sinatra. (I doubt they would beat those Play numbers, but they would still do better than Rails. A Duby version of Ramaze might rock.)
Production use of Tornado should have nginx or some other server in front of it.
A mobile application is under development (aka starting tomorrow). The best we have right now is a map view.
Honestly, this headline would be perfect for False Medium: https://twitter.com/falsemedium
It could take 3-5 weeks, so don't make the mistake of contacting the manager because you "just wanted to check in".

Sorry. Waiting sucks!
Yes, that can be regarded as part of the field. See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropological_criminology
Good. Now will the Supreme Court consider re-legalising homosexuality after it recently re-criminalised it?
This is a great example, which is why I think "strong vs. weak" typing is properly thought of as a scale rather than a classification. Which is used properly in the blog post, merely comparing some instances of implicit conversion in JVM that make less sense by default (all of your examples can be argued to be deliberately useful, as opposed to Javascript WAT-style statements).
Ad servers keep track of the number of times the graphic (or other asset) for a particular campaign was served. Lots of other "pixels" also get bundled into the calls depending on what kinds of ad tech the advertiser, publisher, or middlemen are running.

How many people (living, breathing, checkbook-possessing people) actually see an ad is an entirely different question from how many it is served to, and there is (of course) a whole 'nother area of ad tech companies working in that space.
It always seemed to me that the military, specifically the Strategic Air Command appreciated that security and ease of use are trade offs, and consistently chose solutions very far to the "ease of use" end of that spectrum. SAC was considerably more worried that bomb security measures would inhibit swift retaliation than they were that poor security would allow for an unauthorized detonation.

More civilized individuals might call that insane as opposed to laughable.
Carl Sagan - Contact - awesome book, btw skip the movie

Philip K. Dick - anything!

Asimov - Foundation series

Cortázar - anything!
> So, would it really matter if you are hiring someone who doesn't remember the difference between .call and .apply off the top of their head?

A good developer might not remember the answer to half of these at any given time, but if they at least knew the answer at one point then that should be enough to give a decent answer to most of these questions. E.g. 'They are two ways of calling a method, one involves passing the parameter list as an array, the other involves passing the parameters as positional arguments.'

Similarly, I don't remember offhand exactly how to fix a FUOC, all the nuances of the javascript 'this' keyword, or all the rules for resolving CSS specificity, but I could still probably answer all of those questions well enough to pass an interview. Unless the interviewer is super OCD, just saying something like, "There is an angular setting that can prevent most cases of FUOC, and if that doesn't work then you can manually hide the element until the page loads" should be good enough.
"// SagePay is a bit of hack on my framework"

Said framework also looking at lot like one big blob of hacked together tangle of PHP and HTML.
Yes, the tools are different and (very much in theory) more precisely targeted. But, at the end of the day, you're still mostly targeting populations based on their propensity to spend money with you. So you now target me with sports gear ads not just because I subscribe to Sports Illustrated but because I've bought sports gear and I'm in the Male 18-25 demographic.

I agree that attempts to target at an individual level feels different than just targeting a magazine's subscription base, but it's still targeting. So if someone wants to ban "targeting" they need to be more precise about what they're proposing to ban.
Tons of dangerous drugs aren't.
Probably the only company to thrive during the outbreak, unfortunately fortunate.
Presumably people who enjoy watching real F1 will enjoy it too then? Pro racing is already a lot more interesting on TV than in person (besides the experience aspect).
I appreciate Franklin's thought here. Unfortunately those of us being rational are subject to the whims of others :(
Isolate, test, quarantine, repeat
The frustrating thing about this is that you don’t even have to “spend a little more” every time. I make a lot of purchases from bigger stores like Target and Home Depot, and smaller local book, speciality food, home and garden stores etc., and back when I used to compare frequently, Amazon rarely had a better price. Eventually I just stopped checking.
Keygen cracking software would sometimes play music while the software was open. It was just for giggles AFAIK.
So how do you fight mutation? By avoiding further spread of the virus. So really, this "danger of mutation" talk does not add anything to the discussion. In fact, it could equally well happen that the virus mutates to something less lethal.
While I'm sure there is skills transfer, to highlight the above:

The Discovery channel had an episode of "On The Inside" where they profiled the Benetton F1 team. There was a lot of talk about how going into a turn and pressing the brake was like doing a one legged weight press while going side ways at multiple Gs. They showed all the conditioning that went into preparing for this etc etc

Then, they interviewed the team doctor who described how he got a chance to sit in the cockpit during a wind tunnel test. His recollection: "Everyone talks about the side to side Gs but honestly, after just a few minutes sitting in the cockpit with race condition wind speed, I could barely hold up my head. These guys really are super men."
What has that got to do with introspection?
Read the URL.
The point you make about the killer app is very true. Halo on the XBox came to mind. I think Google hoped turn-by-turn navigation would be it initially for Android, but I agree that (for the average user) there aren't any killer apps. If you get into domain niches (such as medical), that might be different.
Incidentally, the web has failed because there are 5 different major browsers, and personal computers have failed, because there is an infinite combination of available hardware.

How could anyone have tested on all those? How could anyone have ever developed a working web application? How could anyone have ever developed a working Windows application?

The non-sarcastic answer: most of the time, the differences are irrelevant. The rest of the time, you need to build an abstraction, and then the second case becomes the first! Forever!

(Android is open-source. If you need a function that only Android 2.2 has, backport it to 1.6! If you need an abstraction layer for dealing with 24-bit or 16-bit screens, write one and share it with the world! Android is open, and you have to exploit that fact to be successful. You can't go off into your own little Universe where there is one person with one phone running one app at a time. That may be the iOS strategy, but it's not what works for Android.)
No, I love my kids and they don't cloud my judgement. I mean kids work well with routines and what is wrong with going to work at the same time every day and coming home at the same time?
I was going to complain about the poster editorializing again in the title then noticed who the article was from.
Great tip! I will be using this one.
My suspicion is that the "killer app" is an artifact of the super-balkanized era of computing, the era when every vendor's machines ran a different bespoke operating system. That was true in the mainframe era, and it was true in spades in the early PC era, when the IBM PC and the Mac and the Apple II and the Amiga and the C64 and several dozen vendor-specific flavors of Unix all coexisted, all with different OSes and radically different hardware.

Just from the evidence, it seems clear that porting software is still hard, but nowhere near as hard as it used to be. There's been some convergence in hardware and operating systems. The rate of turnover in these things has slowed way down. But perhaps the biggest reason is that our hardware and the abstractions built on top of it are now so powerful that large classes of apps -- the ones that don't push the limits of the hardware -- have become trivial to port. The term "killer app" was invented around the time of Visicalc; Visicalc was written in highly tuned assembly language so that it would fit in 20K of RAM (no, that is not a typo!):

http://www.frankston.com/public/?name=ImplementingVisiCalc

Nowadays you can implement Visicalc in Javascript and run it on any platform with a customer base larger than five, while routinely creating temporary variables that are ten times the size of Visicalc's entire codebase.

So the modern strategy is to test your software on one platform, and then if it takes off port it to the others. So why don't more people start on Android and port to iOS, rather than vice versa? Maybe it's the vaunted fragmentation problem, but I'd guess that it's mostly because iOS is where the money is. There's an app distribution model and a store. That makes it easier to iterate there. Release the app on iOS and see if it floats or sinks. Then spend your Android-porting energy -- figuring out an ad-based model, testing on many different devices, marketing to all those Android users who don't know what "Android" means -- on the winners.

There are other potential sources of killer-app lock-in. Hardware is one. People who want hardware keyboards can't choose iOS. But that market doesn't seem to have enough size for its killer apps to make news -- particularly because only a subset of Android phones have keyboards, and those keyboards are all different.

There's one very obvious Android killer app: Verizon. Not exclusive for much longer, though, if the rumor mill is accurate.
O(0) ?
It's worth noting that you can just install the app binary.

Compiling it is for people that want to hack the source themselves, it's not the main distribution method.
I live down the street from this datacenter and my home experienced this same power outage. Makes me wonder how they handle power failures. My guess is that they don't.
I don't get it.

Where I've worked, if an IT guy started accidentally nuking people's Blackberrys that IT guy wouldn't just be fired, he would be destroyed.

On the other hand, if your device is actually lost then you would want the entire device to be nuked.

I suppose it boils down to how much the employer is willing to invest in its employees. If the employer is not willing to pay for the devices the employee uses for work, then the employer is probably not going to manage those devices responsibly. For that reason, I would never connect my personal device to work unless my employer was willing to pay for it.

If your employer acts like they're doing you a favor by allowing your device on their network, then that's probably a good indication that you shouldn't do it.
I'm not going to offer yet another "You should've used..." comment. Instead, I offer a thanks. A nice little script, I used it to adapt a little IP address map (ala http://xkcd.com/195/ but with dots) for a firewall attack log.

I'll update this comment with a GitHub link when it's not embarrassingly bad and hacky.
How do we know if we were in the 500k group? When I purchased it last night it was very clearly still labeled as 500k. This was just before 8 pm PST.
Agreed 100%, that's what worked for me. "I've got this molecule here... [he then described it a bit, showed me the physical metal model he'd made of it (from a more permanent variety of the plastic models people use in organic classes)], and the current approaches are inadequate..." and then he lent me a book that would get me started on learning what I needed to know to approach the problem.

Basically, if you can largely offer a "fire and forget" proposition, i.e. you need a problem and pointers to learning but not a lot of hand holding, you should be able to find a professor who has one or more things he'd like to investigate but that he doesn't have the resources of one sort of another to do, and that you can offer your particular talents towards solving.
I suspect it is not a bubble though and rather it is the early stage of complete disruption of power in the investing community.

The thing is, every time there has been a bubble, one of the major arguments always presented is that well, this time it's different so the traditional measures don't apply.

In 1999 it was increased worker productivity (due to IT advances) that supposedly supported the outsized P/Es. That turned out to just be a smokescreen, of course.

It might even be argued that an excellent indicator of being in a bubble is the existence of arguments about why it's not a bubble even though it looks like one. That means you're at a stage where even the bullish market forces admit that traditional metrics do not support the increased valuations.
We consider many of Shakespeare's works to be classics, but he pulled a lot of his themes and ideologies from the Bible, the Illiad and the Odyssey.

One does not need to be first to be a classic.
This this this.

There are two questions you have to ask. One goes to the attorney's opinion of actual legality/defensibility. The other goes to likelihood that it will attract legal action. It's a business calculus.
I committed a patch that added a mechanism I called "bottom-up index deletion" recently:

https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/btree-implementation.h...

https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit...

Bottom-up deletion is specifically designed to ameliorate what the blog post refers to as "write amplification". Testing has shown that it's very effective with many workloads.
The presenter also has a blog post about this topic [1] for which there was a prior discussion on HN [2].

[1] https://ollef.github.io/blog/posts/query-based-compilers.htm...

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23644391
The fact that something is hard to do doesn’t mean that it’s impossible, or that a good faith effort shouldn’t be made. Nor does it mean that those efforts won’t have some deterrent effect that reduces bad behavior in the future.
In fact, what you're suggesting is known as a controlled natural language.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_natural_language
In streaming (physical) replication, PostgreSQL sends the WAL only, and it's applied on the replica; no "sending of queries" is involved, or even possible; with physical replication, the secondary has to keep itself identical with the primary, otherwise replication will fail. This is why you can't use physical replication across major versions, since they can't be bit-for-bit identical.

In more recent versions there's "logical replication", which sort of "sends the queries", in that the secondary node has its own database state that does not have to be exactly identical with the primary, allowing for replication across major versions.

In my opinion though, unless you really need logical replication for some reason, stick with streaming replication. It's much easier to understand and there are fewer failure modes.
Why don't you do it the other way around? Plan in some focus time to work when nobody can bother you, and for the rest be available for the team.