jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
>I would expect things to stabilize at a technology level of maybe the late 19th/early 20th century and start back up.

That's not how technology works. You can't rewind things arbitrarily backwards any more than than you can wind them arbitrarily forwards. The technology required to recreate my grandfathers feed and fuel business simply doesn't not exist anymore. The horses that pulled the wagons no longer exist and would have to be bred up again. All the manufactured fittings no longer have factories and there is no one that knows how to design the machines.

If there is a slip it would be to the level of small manually run farms. Those that could not manage that particular technology would die. Which would be almost everyone.

It would make a lot more sense to recover as many machine tools as possible and then try to recreate the existing technology from the wreckage
I believe this is the syntax highlighter’s repo: https://github.com/github/linguist/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING....
nuclear holocaust is what happens while you're making other plans.
That’s what the warrant requirement is all about, that’s where it’s broken. This technique should only be used for major felonies.

On the flip side, if you want to commit major felonies, don’t take your phone!
> But then, what else does one do besides regularly posting content?

That's the most effective approach. But there's a frame of mind that goes with it. And that mental frame isn't in it for the upvotes or likes, but quality. You can't control reception or even commercial success of your work. But you can control the quality of what you create.

This is hard, though, because it's easy to use quality as an excuse to never publish anything. So a key element of success is knowing what's "good enough." And there's no way to figure that out without publishing something because it's the first step in getting responses to what you've created.

> What sets the successful "creators" apart from the rest?

The successful creators have defined success in a way that they are capable of achieving. How would you define it?
It would be surprising if we weren't. We likely know far less than 50% of the fundamentals.
The local highschool running track was fine when the Boston Marathon was bombed, too.
"V8 was a readily-available fast runtime and people who already knew JS flocked to it"

That's basically all there is to a language's success. We like to debate syntax and closures and continuations and type systems and immutability and concurrency models on programming language message boards, but realistically, nobody cares. The two questions they have when they encounter a new language are "Can I learn this in a weekend?" and "Can I build cool things that other people would actually want to use?"

If you look at the history of programming technologies that have "won", the list includes C++, Java, Javascript, PHP, C, Objective-C, and to some extent Perl, Python and Ruby. The first 4 of those are terrible from a language-design standpoint, but the two things they all had in common were a readily-available reasonably-fast runtime (except PHP, and that was "fast enough" for the things people use it for), and a familiar syntax. C, PHP, Javascript, and Objective-C also had the benefit of being the "native" language for a major application platform, which seems to be the other major critical success factor for a new language.
I taught one as well. Always felt horrible because I gave most of my time to the couple of kids who were naturally jazzed about it. It felt like I could have done more to inspire the other kids who didn't seem to care, but maybe I did more good helping the ones who did.
Yes, that's how it works, except you would rarely sue yourself.

I work for a hedge fund. Every year we send a list of all our transactions to a company. They recover money on our behalf from any legal action that may happen.

These things take a long time though. We are still getting payouts from stuff that happened in 2014.
The Osmo is cool, it's playful and feedback is great.
I recommend encouraging your colleague to pursue a career as a Lisp hacker. Their inclination toward parentheses makes them look like a natural.

On the other hand, it may be wise to caution them against a career in the arts: An aesthetic judgement that extra parentheses express purity is of dubious quality.
Emulations have been a Unix feature for a long time actually. NetBSD has had 64 bit Linux emulation for ages, for example, but its not very complete because no one has cared enough to implement more. For example Illumos is AFAIK the first system to emulate epoll. The Linux API is huge and historically the process has been just fixing stuff for a binary someone wants to run. It is very tedious work...

I dont really see it as zones in linux. More a gateway drug for non-Linux.
And this, my friends, is where our liberty died:

“Doesn’t bother me personally,” said Jon Kaufman, an Oakland resident. “I have nothing to hide.”
I did have success once with sending an e-mail to tcook@apple.com. I have read that like Steve, he does read many of those external e-mails.

This was when the App Store review times had climbed to 28+ days. I never did get a response, but shortly thereafter they started going down, and within a few weeks were down to the 3-7 day range. I don't think they've gone significantly over 7 days since.
I am/was a bit opinionated, but within reason. I never made threats or claimed anything I said was fact.

It seemed like there were a team of people who were on news sites denying comments like mine, probably just your average tech site commenters though. Some people were adamant that brute forcing (algorithms and dictionaries) would not be possibly and would take 20+ years to crack one password.

The real interesting thing to me was how it was permanent ban without warning and without ability to be appealed.
> Supposedly, Braintree make it possible to integrate PayPal much more easily.

I've recently gone through that process for our startup (https://sendingbee.com/) and I can attest to that. Once both of your Braintree and PayPal accounts are set up, you just link the PayPal account from the Braintree administration with a few clicks and it's immediately available to customers (if you use the Braintree Drop-in integration that is).
I can’t get this sorted out in my brain but y’all think self-help with breach of peace(had to look up that phrase) ought to be casually tolerated in a modern nation...?

...nevermind, I just realized that US is a union of States where a repossession man just casually walk into front yards and tow away a Camry from debtors.
Sorry if I was unclear. I was just using Linux as an example. The product I work on has plenty of users. I don't agree that it's orders of magnitude more difficult but that's beside the point.
I'm not sure which item in the Bill of Rights is the "right to go about our business" -- can you explain further?
Well, just a little while ago the roads were meant for walking. Pedestrians have been ejected from the space that was rightfully theirs.
I switched teams from one with a communal codebase to one with code ownership (within the same org).

The code ownership style has far better developer productivity.

But I think the issue is just not about team organization, but also of software architecture.

I think with code ownership the modules need to be small enough so that if the owner exits unexpectedly from the organization someone else can pick up from where the previous owner left.

With communal software that gets built and tested after each build its very easy to let the architecture slide into a structureless mud ball that works but nobody is quite sure how, especially with changes being diffused throughout the system with concurrent edits by different developers.l
The excuse I heard was that
an infinitive in English is two
words but corresponds to a single
word in Latin, and, of course, as
all good Latin experts know, English
grammar should be as much like Latin
as possible! So, since can't split
a single word infinitive in Latin,
we shouldn't in English! So,
"to be" is okay but "to not be" would
be bad. "To an infinitive split" would
be awful! So, string me up if I were
to badly split an infinitive!
Well, a long list of references... but most of them are a decade old.

Anyone has references to later research which shows that porter, ale and full bodied red wines are healthy?

1/2 :-)
Come on. This post is a waste of time. Arguing that the start up economy is going to suffer due to the release of an "awesome" video game = true waste of time.
The perspectives in the comments are more enlightening than the article. In some sense, the article sets up a false dichotomy. It's possible to be very critical while still being humble and empathic. But it's really easy to make criticism about yourself and your status in relation to the other rather than about the topic at hand. (cf. snark)
The sad thing is, the NPB may have had a valid point here. Unlike most forms of intellectual property, trademark rights do degrade if you don't defend the mark and it is deemed to be diluted. I'm not sure the ThinkGeek guys got this, since they referred to parody as a defence, and that would normally be used in connection with copyright. So we can all have a good laugh, but there might be a real point about the appropriateness of various legal standards for defending intellectual property rights as well.
Are people just not even bothering to format their websites now that Readability/Reader is available? I can't even look at that web page straight.
Yeah, that getting rid of the monarchy thing, that worked out well in France.
While Cardassians are far more popular than the Windsor Royals, they are fictional.

Which has advantages, admittedly -- far lower expenditures and a far lower rate of child-rapes among them -- a lot of the British royalists might object to a change of rulers on that basis.
A lot of people in the UK and Commonwealth have a link with the Duke of Edinburgh via the awards scheme that teenagers undertake: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Duke_of_Edinburgh%27s_Awar...
Unfortunately humans like to eat predatory fish - salmon, tuna, etc. So although farming would be a way forward most farming needs large-scale industrial fishing to support it. The pet food industry also has the same problem.

Moving farming to vegetarian species like tilapia would solve this but it's going to take a monumental effort to change the attitudes of generations.
I hope you feel happy that you are basically spitting on someone's grave in HN.

There is no point to what you are doing except statisfying your own narcism.
Even Nvidia is less terrible these days:

- Support for Optimus laptops with on-demand rendering offload, if one does the research and uses the correct env variables or tries the "Launch using Dedicated Graphics Card" menu item in GNOME.

- Some whispers of Nvidia finally using dmabuf in the next version of its drivers. With appropriate code/kernel module restructuring for GPL compatibility, I guess.
I would posit that those people spending $3-$4k a month are making a great deal more than the $15 an hour that this thread is talking about. Living in NYC, London etc is for people that make a vastly above average salary. Anyone choosing to live there on ~35k a year or under is asking for financial distress. Granted it is very hard to move to another city when you are making a low wage as moving is expensive but if you have a job making $15 at McDonalds in NYC, you can get a job at McDonalds making $15 an hour in Alabama or Ohio and enjoy a better cost of living. You wont have all the perks and nice to haves of NYC but a financially sensible person would not be enjoying them on that wage anyway.
Oh, 100%. I shared Thousand Year Old Vampire with a relative that matches this, thinking his love of history would make it an interesting thing, and his response was "I can already think of ways to beat the system", even before he actually read the system. It's like...yeah, it's a single player pen and paper RPG. You probably can. Why...why would you though?

But that's what I mean; exploiting perceived flaws in the system is a greater goal -even when it ruins the game for themselves-. Because there is a greater sense of satisfaction in finding loopholes. And I understand that sense; I just find more value in understanding the underlying goal and intent and delivering on that.
Their failure to take control over those markets is not the same as a failure to cause damage. They slowed down development of web standards by many many years, as one example.
And Raptor is an enormous achievement. A full-flow combustion engine that actually looks likely to be used.
Hate to be the whiny HN poster with an off-topic complaint about scrolling or whatever, but:

Pull quotes do not belong on the web. They are out-of-place anachronisms from print publications, intended to entice a reader flipping through pages of a magazine, which does not translate to how people read on a browser. There should be stronger stigmatization of pull quotes in digital design than of using Papyrus and Comic Sans, on the same level as pop-up ads and auto-playing video.

Pull quotes _demand_ that the reader draw their eyes away from the article text just to re-read something they just read seconds ago, or are just about to read. These quotes scream with font size increased +10pt, and random words capitalized. They slow down reading, break concentration, and destroy the flow and pacing of the writer's craft.
Oh yea, Thomas Sowell. The neoliberal/libertarians favorite snake-oil salesman.
From my limited experience, their finance writing (as the publication's name might suggest) is actually pretty good; I appreciate the skill it takes to write about financial markets in a way that's understandable to someone with very little financial knowledge.

Almost every other thing I've read from them is 1) total horseshit or, worse, 2) deeply right-wing conservative propaganda veiled behind a thin veneer of "we have a study that we cite!"
IIRC, they lost on the patent portfolio at the very beginning. That's how the case went to CAFC instead of the Ninth Circuit--there was a patent argument in the original appeal, which was dropped several years ago. And having already lost on the patent question in the past, any future case can point back to that decision and say "can't relitigate this point."
That first link has a guy saying there's a 50% chance most people alive today will live a thousand years.

So... it's a coin flip chance that no more money is needed, if that link is to be believed?
I like the approach of tailoring the app to the use case, so I'm not arguing you should do something differently.

The database has commit for exactly this reason. If you lose power, you will not acknowledge the commit to the client, so the client may retry. For example, the end user may get an error page. This is different from a case when the app would show modified values, but the next day, the modifications would be gone.

With the database, you still have the problem, that after a user sees an error, the transaction might have suceeded. Eg if connection drops at the moment when the DB receives the commit command.
awesome job john!
Nice query-spam suffix. Nothing personal, but it sounds less like a day job and more like a retainer for you to give RS presentations/info based on your normal travels.
This kind of situation is standard silo behavior. By making the import feature so mediocre, the browser vendor would pretty much ensure that the user would not switch browsers without paying a high price for it.

This simply does not hold up. The high price for a shoddy import feature is paid by the vendor of the browser the user is switching to. There might be a valid point if the discussion were about a shoddy export feature.

And yet, bookmark sync is yet more silo behavior: you can sync your bookmarks from Opera to Opera, but not from Opera to Firefox.

But the converse doesn't hold true. Mozilla's Sync is a documented, open API with several people having implemented their own servers, even, and you can use stuff like Firefox Home to access your synced data with mobile Safari.

I’ve come all this way without mentioning just about the most glaring problem that bookmarks have: bad page titles. … Quite apart from the length problem, web sites often prefer to give articles catchy titles rather than descriptive ones.

Or worse, setting the title text to something which isn't a title at all, i.e., clever web developers who abuse the title element by just regarding it as the text that appears in the tab.
non-programmer founder here,

Things I brought to our startup:

- convertible note on great terms

- crappy-but-functioning prototype

- fully-designed HTML wireframes for prototype v2

- meaty customer pipeline including 2 customers pre-sold

- extensive network of sales contacts in our space

- extensive network of press contacts in our space

- 2 years experience running a site where I used and helped sell the early version of our product

I feel I bring a lot of value to our company. And I am very intent on proving that I will continue to do so. I try to justify my involvement every day. So when I talk to technical friends of mine thinking about working with someone non-technical, I tell them about the stuff I do and that they need to ask these "biz-dev" guys if they can bring stuff like that to the table.

When someone's awesome, their value-add should be clear and obvious. If you find yourself talking yourself into someone, that's a bad sign.
Just thinking about the question with my nit-picking-bastard hat on, technically you're not actually a donor until you donate something. Until that point you're a potential donor, or an intended donor, or somesuch.

From that point of view I am a potential donor.
Did you have any problems with only hearing the language and not being able to see it?

I tried Pimsleur and couldn't stand not seeing the words--I felt like I was both adding and missing letters.
Indeed, there are other technologies that can build a digital clock more easily, but I think the point was to further demonstrate the versatility of CSS. I've personally never before seen CSS do something like this. I also enjoyed how the author took the time to explain how div borders were used to create the numbers.
Thanks for a great reply!

Looking at the original episode of "Happy Days," I find it difficult to believe that the producers were not keenly aware that they had walked away from the show's concept and were now milking cheap popularity for all it was worth.

I suspect that the definition you give and the one I use are compatible even though they differ. Under the definition you give, the defining moment is really set by the viewer. It's the instant you know it's all downhill from here, not the actual peak. So Gruber's phrase might be the defining moment for Hank.

It's also possible, as was the case for Happy Days, that the producers turn cynical and start resorting to cheap tricks like throwing out all character development and turning the show into a parody of itself, focusing on a caricature minor character rather than the more well-rounded principals. That's the definition I prefer.

They could go together, and I would say there's value in combining them, as in:

"I realized that HN had Jumped the Shark when Paul introduced the Date-a-Hacker feature."
Alt-tab works. You can alt-tab to your email and still mouse around the UI. It's not perfect but it works.
Ah sorry, I was sure I'd read NFD. Will look more.
Hello - I also worked with Java, Scala, Clojure, Groovy, C#, PHP, Ruby, Perl, Python, Javascript, PHP and C and have been playing with Rust, Haskell, F#, Erlang and Scheme as well.

In my opinion it isn't just an easy context switch and the principles aren't necessarily similar between OOP languages and functional languages, or between dynamic or static languages.

Some things remain the same, but some things are different, like the design patterns used, the techniques, the libraries and tools available, the mentality as a whole. When picking a language, you're not picking just a bunch of syntax and type system rules, but the ecosystem around it as well. It takes me one or two weeks to learn the basics of a programming language (i.e. the point at which I'm actually able to start coding and solve problems), but it takes me a year or more to learn the ecosystem around it.

For example doing functional programming doesn't fly in a language like Java, even if you can (as painful as that may be), because then you're the odd duckling swimming against the tide and you can't do that if your peers aren't doing it as well or if the libraries you're using are working against you. LISPs are very FP, but the abstractions used in comparison to what people do in a static language like Haskell are very different - for example LISP people don't think in terms of monads or applicative functors and they do like wacky things like rules engines. Erlang's or Akka's actor model is also very different than any other model for dealing with concurrency, because even though the rules look simple at first, that "let it crash" mentality and the ability of actors to communicate across address spaces changes everything. Ruby's meta-programming is also very foreign to people accustomed to Java or Haskell. Scala looks familiar to Java developers starting out, but beginners shouldn't be fooled, because Scala in common use is actually closer to Haskell and combined with OOP it sort of makes it unique in the approaches used. FP developers in general tend to prefer doing things with FRP, rather than MVC. Etc, etc...

Of course, you also have families. Python and Ruby are very similar, in spite of the seemingly different mentalities of their communities and after learning one, then learning the other is barely worth it. Ditto for Java and C#, many people would argue that C# is the nicer language, but Java has the nicer ecosystem of libraries and on the whole developers barely have a reason to jump from one to the other.

I'm not sure if I have a point - I guess what I'm trying to say is that developers should expose themselves to different ways of approaching problems. And when you're learning a language, one should go past the superficial syntax differences to discover the goodies and that takes time.
I think this phenomenon is an artifact of the media that we as programmers consume. The easiest way to become an programmer celebrity is to build tools (languages/frameworks/etc.) for other programmers. Many programmers of equal skill are out there programming to solve actual problems, but the HN sphere and like are awash with people programming on programming itself. Which, while is surely intellectually stimulating, does seem a bit 'meta' and removed from why we're all doing this in the first place. But people who work on programming tools get the most press because those topics appeal most broadly to the audience of their peers. Then people in that audience see those topics as 'hot' and focus their energy on them. It's a reinforcing cycle. It reminds me of the ideas in this article: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/17/the-toxoplasma-of-rage/
How about an open padlock? If I saw that my initial reaction would be "WFT?", mouse-over it, and then get a dialog explaining it.
> The only solutions available seem to be running a proxy between your client and hubiC.

Actually hubiC doesn't want you to use its API unless you're a developer, which means you must pass the steps necessary to "create an application", after which you will be able to use all API calls. It's burdensome but doable.
Are the RA team ex-Microsoft?