jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
I have a few $300 Windows 8.1 machines and although they might have objectively better hardware, my Chromebook is nicer to work with. It feels a lot less flaky than some of the Asus and Acer $300-350 machines with Windows imho.
Anatomical differences are macro-scale, while connective topological differences are very micro. The article mentions that the connective differences are not associated with anatomical differences.
What every database client should implement but doesn't.
You should email the authors. From their contact page:

shithouse@goatse.cx

EDIT: link to contacts: https://olegdb.org/

scroll to the bottom
Given their mention of "individuals" sending more takedown notices, it might well be European "right to be forgotten" bullshit.
I feel we're approaching a resolution.

"Dead" is misleading hyperbole - pg emphasises that MS is "highly profitable". His data point is that MS, in his and startups' experience, is no longer a threat. It's just another big company.

I was wrong to say "constant" revenues. But I think my main point, the contrast between a rapid growth period and a steady mature phase, is accurate. The MAX graph shows it, but it's hard to appreciate the exponential growth on the left, because it's so small - expanding the scale would help show it. But MS was seen as astonishingly successful leading up to 1986 - data isn't even displayed for that far back. MS was founded in 1976, DOS released in 1981, which was an instant best seller, on the coattails of IBM's PC, which opened floodgates to the pent-up demand for desktop computers, with the reassurance of "I.B.M.".

So maybe "past its prime" isn't accurate either, but "past its period of incredible meteoric rise". Depends on the definition of "prime".

---

Above is the quantitative data you're asking about. But there is qualitative data, too, which is the basis of predicting what will happen next. By looking at the basis of MS's business success, and knowing how businesses tend to evolve from studying other business, we can try to predict what will happen next. MS's success was based on IBMs -> DOS -> Windows -> Office, leveraging each to the next. With IBMs, DOS and Windows no longer dominant, they are left with Office fileformats and skill at serving business customers. These are strong skills, but the aren't the terrifying killer competitive advantages MS used to have.

So, maybe it's mostly the dramatic constrast with what MS used to be.
If you didn't see what MS was before, the contrast wouldn't strike you.

I see that MS are having success with cloud-based enterprise stuff. This makes sense, if it's the same software; they are good at serving enterprise customers, who would prefer not to have to switch. It may also represent going up-market - which is typical for incumbents whose low-end is under threat. It often leads to better and better profits until the low-end is eventually good enough and takes over. (Christiansen's The Innovator's Dilemma). Resources and technical talent and business skill aren't enough to save a company when the grounds of their advantage erodes.

I think the basis of pg's idea is especially for web-based companies. You may have heard of startups getting killed by google moving into their space (or, buying them). It's especially dangerous for people making add-ons for twitter, facebook etc. Now, MS used to do with with Windows: you'd make a product, it was good, MS would roll out that feature in Windows itself... you are dead. But that doesn't happen for the web, because it isn't MS's platform. And so people aren't scared of MS - that's pg's point, I think.
hey acmecorps, glad you to hear you're planning to use HowsItGoin. We don't have emails implemented currently, but they are at the top of our to-do list. You can keep up-to-date with our progress at https://twitter.com/wecontrast :D
That is not a fundamental question. We don't care if it is natural or not, all we care about is whether it is acceptable or not. If it is not acceptable, you need a reason to ignore it.
I think that a PPP adjustment is required here to produce a reasonable analysis. Or, excluding primary residence.

For the 0.1% or higher (whose wealth is sufficient for them to take advantage of globetrotting) absolute numbers might be important.

'The 1%' is not simply a matter of wealth; a person with $500K in the UK and in Nigeria are not really equivalent. The former is just a person who owns a normal home in the South East outright, the latter may well be in a position of power.
Pilotlight | Moorestown, NJ (Philadelphia Area) | Full Time | ONSITE Python / Django Developer

Pilotlight is looking to add an experienced, full-time developer to our team. We are a small, boutique development shop located in Southern New Jersey (Philadelphia area) focused on building web applications for clients large and small. If you have experience with Python/Django or with similar MVC-Style frameworks (Rails, etc..) we would love to chat.

jobs@gopilotlight.com
> Question from a novice-ish developer: What is the purpose of porting things to the JVM?

Interop with the things that already exist in the Java ecosystem.

> I had this idea before that porting things like Ruby or Rails to the JVM was meant to offer ruby the advantages of having a java core (better threading, garbage collection, faster).

To the extent that those were effects of porting Ruby to the JVM they were mostly secondary, Java interop was the key feature (Rails, BTW, wasn't ported to the JVM, it just runs anywhere you have a functional Ruby implementation -- heck, before Ruby had executable specs, the test for a functional implementation was pretty much "does it run Rails".)
emerge go
How does Nancy stack up to ServiceStack?
My Poe's Law detector is itching uncomfortably right now.

Really, was anybody asking for all this?
I think bower looks badass! http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/kopf/pixelart/...
Diglossia and bilingualism is very, very common in the world and probably the norm for humans: large monolingual countries are exceptional. Even in monolingual situations, people invent different registers for different formal situations. There is no reason that different linguistic codes cannot coexist for different functions.

This argument can easily be extended to the other national languages: Preserving a national language like Italian or French is all very well, but English is the language of international communication, science, and technology, and expending a child's language-acquisitive resources on a language which won't connect them to the rest of contemporary humanity seems like too high of a price.

The reason some languages are "dying" is because colonial powers attempted to exterminate those people and their community, through a variety of uses of power. In the article, the colonists exterminated more than 90% of the population and sent the survivors to a concentration camp. Just horrible. There's no reason to pretend that this community's precarious cultural position occurred through ethically neutral events.
I saw one of those manual-hand-cranked blower's at a flea market , it was old and I couldn't figure out what the hell it was used for now I know it came out of a 50's bomb shelter, the guy selling it didn't know what it was either.
I just got thrown the FizzBuzz test a couple days ago. First time I had ever seen it. Startled me that everyone else knows what it is too! I don't know if it would be blindingly obvious without the mod operator.
I stayed here for a week, and it was perfect:

http://www.villascarrizalillo.com/

- not a tourist trap
- authentic (but not "too" authentic)
- relatively easy to get to
- wifi
- quiet and you can be left alone with your thoughts

Enjoy your vacation.
If you're only making 26 grand a year, why don't you go try to be a real rockstar or ninja instead of the PHP version? You would probably make nearly the same wage...
Might have been the one where he advises high schoolers to treat school like a day job. Not exactly the same thing as dropping out.
I guess it would be similar in a way to how many algorithms/methods you are able to use from memory without referring to a reference in programming.
I think we have a tenancy to assume people from other professions are super human experts while knowing that even after years of experience in our own there is still a lot of times reference material needs to be looked at.
Funny, I don't understand the only one that sort of applies to me: "Syntax is the Maya of programming".
Here: http://userstyles.org/styles/16900
I like Lucidica better, myself.
Yes please.

lakshman8 gmail

Work: http://agiliq.com/ourwork
Very soon we won't need computers at all, just chips implanted in our skulls.
Fasting and training are both conscious deliberate choices - how will you frame the loss of privacy in such a manner that it can be agreed to with the same degree of intention? Most people have no idea and don't understand - if you wanna go with the "opt in" solution, you're going to have to make a compelling argument that the people making the decisions are educated enough to make them.
I suppose it comes down to who defines "the best" or what good and bad is. Your definition most likely won't be the same as mine.

Times that by 6 billion (and different cultural attitudes in different lands) and it's obvious we will never always agree. The World Wide Web won't solve the differences between people.

I think we should stop pretending it will, or expecting too much of a collection of computer-served XML. That's all it is, fundamentally.
I would probably say that politics and social movements should stay out of this serving of XML, as you can't keep all of the people happy all of the time, so why try?

Increasingly the machines we use are sending data back instead of serving us, frustratingly.
If you were buying winter tires sure but Halloween candy is on sale every year and the cost for most homes is negligible so it's unlikely people are stockpiling it
This was common in Chicago when I lived there from 2011-2013.

"I'd like to pay with credit card"
"Machine is broken."
"It's all I have."
"Fine."
Yes, like politicians that spend their careers compromising on every issue to keep in office, so they can press their serious issue they care about. And find a 20-year career has passed and they never did it.

People live one day, one decision at a time. Without a clear 'mission statement' and a clear knowledge of the risk carried by each decision, we all tend to be very conservative. Which means, support the status quo for now in hope of better change in the future. Which might never come.
We all know what truths and specific ideas those terms encompass. Stating them brings a flurry of downvotes. Even pointing in their general direction gets downvoted.
Yes but today you compete with everybody else. If you are in a crowded space, i.e. analytics, your ideas will have to compete with ideas of many other bigger players with bugger marketing budgets. You also more or less advertise in the same place where they advertise.
I lean toward the first option for the following reason: I doubt that physical processes can be simulated precisely by a Turing machine.

For example, if I'm living in a simulation and I move my hand an inch to the left, it occupies an uncountably infinite number of intermediate positions during that motion. A Turing machine can't calculate or even represent all of those positions, since the set of Turing-computable numbers is only countably infinite.

Of course, what I've written above assumes that spacetime is continuous. Is it?

That can be tested by experiment:

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/9720/does-the-pl...

According to that link, spacetime shows no sign of discretization down to fourteen orders of magnitude below the Planck length. (The Planck length itself is so small that if an object that size were expanded so as to be a millimeter across, then a proton, at that scale, would be larger than the distance between the sun and Alpha Centauri.)

That suggests to me that while Turing machines can provide useful approximations to the behavior of physical systems, they can't represent or simulate them precisely.
I'm curious about the tagline "Ideal for resumes or team sites". Why is this ideal for these use cases, and how would it be implemented, and what is the benefit?
Both are very good options. Sooner or later I'd recommend looking at both of them. Preferably sooner, although you might just skip over most of it. Read their relevant "Getting started" tutorials (and/or screencasts), and just follow your hunch about language and its use.

There are other interesting systems, but I think looking at the two "big dogs" of the open source framework world is always a good start. Let's leave Nitrogen, Compojure and Hunchentoot for later…
So DEA has a secret database of some significant subset of American's phone records compiled with zero court oversight. Lovely. But the first question that springs to mind is: Wy would DEA not try to vacuum up email and other metadata records too?

The law the DEA used to vacuum up Americans’ phone records is 21 USC 876, which authorizes it to demand any info the “Attorney General finds relevant or material to the investigation.” (No room for misuse there, right?)

But if 21 USC 876 lets DEA nab one metadata database, why not others? Cell phone tower records? SMS records? Email To:/From: lines?

One answer is that Silicon Valley companies tend to push back against legally dubious surveillance requests. (Yes, it's true that if they lose they have to comply or go to jail, but at least they tend to fight.)

Examples I can think of offhand: Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, Facebook began requiring warrants for email content in 2010 even though the law remains unsettled nationally. There was Google vs. DOJ in 2006, Yahoo vs NSA in 2007-2008, Amazon vs DOJ in 2007, Facebook vs. Virginia in 2009, and Twitter vs DOJ in 2010 (though I recall that was notification, not litigation). My CNET article in early 2013 disclosed Google was fighting the FBI over NSLs in two different courts: http://www.cnet.com/news/justice-department-tries-to-force-g...

On the other hand, AT&T/VZ/etc. -- which also provide email hosting! -- have long-standing surveillance “partnerships” with the Feds, as I wrote about here: http://www.cnet.com/news/surveillance-partnership-between-ns...

Sigh.

PS: A NYT article covering much the same ground, for those of you who don't subscribe to the WSJ: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/17/us/dea-kept-telephone-reco...
Couldn't hurt to work/intern for a online news site and gain some experience.
Publishing already prevents that in most areas, but I guess that could lessen the chance you would have to challenge it.
It's a weekend project and he hasn't charged anyone for it, cut some slack here.

On my weekend projects, the thinking is usually "What's the most fun I can have building something?" and then I go build it. We don't need to apply deep level strategy to everything, sometimes it's enough to just build fun things. If it ends up being useful, damn, what a great weekend. Either way, your skills and experience by Sunday have grown relative to Friday. Any benefit derived by others is just a bonus.

OP, keep on jammin' on the weekends doing whatever makes you happiest. :D
It sounds like you share a common mis-perception about what exactly depreciation means. Your statement "Depreciation isn't further payment due,..." is correct but this part "...it's an asset write-off" misses the point.

Assets have "lifetimes", which is to say that if you are using something in your business venture, it will eventually be "used up." In the case of computers they don't generally break but historically they get faster and can do more for the same amount of power approximately, historically doubling in performance every 18 months or so but now more like every 30 months or so. When an asset is "used up" you are going to have to replace it to keep your business running. So you're going to 'buy it again'.

Consider an alternate strategy, lets say there was a company that had a credit card that charged no interest and had a 60 month (5yr) payment plan (kind of like some car deals I guess). If the payment is 1/60th of the price of the gear each month, then that is clearly a bill that we pay every month. Now at the end of 5 years we "own" our equipment outright, except its 5 years old.

Do you remember what was 'hot' in the PC business in 2006? Sure you do, go to blekko.com and type 'site:pcworld.com /date=2006' and one of the results is "Hot technology in 2006" [1]. Looks like 750G drives, and "the fastest desktop chips we've ever tested, the Intel Core 2 Duo." So if you had bought gear in 2006 you would probably have machines based on the Core 2 Duo architecture which is pig dog slow compared to a decent i5 or i7 motherboard today. Guess what? You need to buy new machines to stay competitive. (or as this is a web enterprise at least 'add' machines to stay competitive).

Depreciation is a way of capturing a "future" expense in today's revenues. If you are profitable, even after including your depreciation costs, then you should be 'banking' those costs so that in five years when your gear needs to be replaced or added too, you've got the capital you need to do that. If on the other hand you aren't profitable when you include depreciation (a state known as being 'under capitalized') when the time comes to replace your gear you won't have the money (capital) to do that, and you will either have to raise money, go into debt, or fade into obscurity with increasingly out of date gear.

The bottom line is that rather than being "an accounting trick," including depreciation in your cost structure helps you understand the total cost of owning, and operating, a bunch of gear which is powering your business.

[1] http://www.pcworld.com/article/128176/the_20_most_innovative...
Only one of the files you dropped was the location log.

The script shows what's there, and isn't trying to be the cleverst visualizer I'm afraid
"Correlation does not equal causation."

Sure, but if causation is effectively impossible to rigorously determine, it can end up being all you've got. If you've got the choice between going with someone whose presence correlates with success on the project and one who does not, my inability to be rigorously sure about causation isn't going to make me lose much sleep at night when I chose the correlative one.

I'm coming to dislike the citing of "correlation does not equal causation" when there's no way to determine causation at all, and when scientific certainty isn't the question at hand. At that point it's an excessively-powerful criticism, one that can't be discharged, so is it really a useful criticism at all if so?
long? There's 1 import statement, 1 optional type declaration, and 2 lines of code. It could be just the import and 1 line of code, but that would violate 2 Haskell best practices: include explicit type declarations for your public interface, and separate pure and impure functionality.

Honestly, if the intent were to be pedagogical in this specific regard (which is isn't), I would say that the example is unnecessarily terse (which is why you describe it as "weird").
haha i can relate to that too.

on 3rd grade i argued with my science teacher when she 'taught' us that the Moon was bigger than Earth. or something as bad as that.

She kept her point and i mine until she sent me to the principal for disrupting her class. Principal lost words when i explained her the reason I was there
What major investment would be required from the city or developers to set up cycling infrastructure? Painting some cycle lanes onto the roads? Marking a few car parking places as bike parking places? That's all that cycling infrastructure really is, so it's super cheap. A lot cheaper than, say, building charging stations for electric cars.
This is not hundred dollars vs billions, it's hundred millions vs billions , you are risking hundreds not to make billions but to the possibility to take some thousands from a billionaire investment co or from someone who is even more careless about money than you who will buy when you are willing to sell something hugely overvalued... This is a game.. and at the end i think that highly efficient and organized players (edges) at the end will take a lot of money from retailers (and maybe melvin)..
"We were supposed to have an ice-free artic year around by now, but here we are. Not sure I’d put much weight on the worst case scenarios."

I hadn't heard of an estimate of being ice-free by 2020-21. Per this recent National Geographic source, it is likely to happen as early as 2035.

[0] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/arctic-su...
Can't wait for AMD to focus more on GPUs now that zen 3-4 are done
I was referring to tech interviews in general, not a specific company. Interviewing's like dating: if you do all the right things you may still not charm the person you want, but the odds are very good that you will be able to find a good partner.
For open repositories like this I certainly agree. And when I worked at a smaller company with no dedicated QA team we never closed bugs, either.

But in game development with dedicated QA I feel such scrubs are necessary because when they're not done you end up wasting days just confirming that old bugs can no longer be reproduced and flagging them to be closed. Most bugs which linger are symptoms of other bugs which have been addressed.

If they're still there they will almost certainly be found again by QA the moment you close it. In fact, old bugs often even have newer duplicates.
I too loved programming on the 6502 processor. I did a fair amount of assembly language programming on micros that had it, like the BBC micro and Commodore 64, very early, when learning programming. I liked its instruction set, with all those addressing modes, such as indirect indexed or vice versa. Later when I learned a bit of 8088/8086 assembly, the latter seemed more complex, with its segment:offset format of specifying addresses.
No, you've misunderstood the situation here.

OP is not "paying for a platform" on Shopify -- they are not a customer of Shopify running a store. OP is a Shopify partner offering a service to Shopify's clients, through Shopify's own web site, and is expected to pay Shopify a cut of their profits in exchange for being featured this way. This is a standard practice for this type of partnership.
Yess, this! Can reccomend!
They’ll pay better when they cant hire people at the current salary?
Like others have mentioned, the possibility of a brain-drain from SF is a very likely scenario in a few years (if the cost of living stays this shitty). It would be more beneficial if startup land would decide on one of the secondary tech hubs as opposed to everyone going wherever. Having 2 people move to Seattle, 4 of them to Boulder and 3 to Phoenix isn't gonna establish much in either of those. But having 10 people all move to Austin seems like a bigger impact.