skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Background: I'm familiar with Sparkbox's 6 month paid apprenticeship and know a few people who went through it. I'm also a graduate of the http://bloc.io full-stack apprenticeship.

If I'm not mistaking, the current software "craftsman" and "apprenticeship" movement has been largely influenced by Dave Hoover's Apprenticeship Patterns (free on the web): http://chimera.labs.oreilly.com/books/1234000001813/index.ht...

A few quotes from that book:

============================================================

This book is written for software apprentices—for people who have had a taste of developing software and want to take it further, but need some guidance. Whether you have a college degree from a prestigious computer science program or are entirely self-taught, you recognize that there are great developers out there, and you aspire to achieve the same mastery that they possess.

...

When discussing what it means to be an apprentice, Marten Gustafson, one of our interviewees, put it best when he said, “I guess it basically means having the attitude that there’s always a better/smarter/faster way to do what you just did and what you’re currently doing. Apprenticeship is the state/process of evolving and looking for better ways and finding people, companies and situations that force you to learn those better/smarter/faster ways.” We think there’s a lot of value in having this internal drive that is not dependent on anyone else to bestow solutions upon you, and that leads you to find constructive ways of dealing with problems.

...

Apprenticeship is the beginning of your journey as a software craftsman. During this time you will be primarily focused inward, intent on growing your craftsmanship. While you will benefit from the attention of your peers and more experienced developers, you must learn to grow yourself, to learn how you learn. This focus on yourself and your need to grow is the essence of what it means to be an apprentice.

============================================================

In my mind, the key difference between an internship and apprenticeship is the focus and purpose. Generally, a company hires an intern as a cheap way to get extra help. Sure, they will help the intern as needed, but primarily so they can accomplish something for the company.

Whereas, when a company takes on an apprentice, the primary focus is on providing an awesome, safe learning environment. Sure, the apprentice will likely do something of value for the company, but that's a side benefit.

Also, generally people think internship == work while apprenticeship == learning.

So technically there may not be a lot of difference, but I argue that the difference in paradigms has a large impact.

---

I'm not familiar but any of the other apprenticeships, but Sparkbox's is much better than what's generally being discussed in the other comments here. You don't need to already have significant experience to join. All you need is an interest in web development. See more here: https://github.com/sparkbox/apprenticeships

So don't let one company's program taint your view of the rest!
It sounds like you're talking about multithreading in general rather than async specifically. If you don't need multithreading then you don't need async... that's not too surprising.

I write an application that previously wasn't using threading to avoid blocking the UI. Certain long-running tasks would freeze the app for some time. It's not a big deal since it's an internal app for my work team, but now that the async syntax and semantics are a bit easier, I've started using them and my app is more responsive.

Async doesn't do anything fundamentally new. If you already implemented multithreading in your application that you're happy with, there's no compelling reason to switch to doing it the async way. But for new development it seems like it should be the default.
The government's story has been "we need a way to access people's data so we can catch pedophiles, drug dealers and terrorists" and it seems there is a widely held belief that in order to do this, they would need to either ban encryption or weaken it sufficiently to make it effectively useless. However, as far as I can tell, backdoors into your phone or your desktop PC already exist. All the government has to do is convince Apple, Google, MS or Ubuntu to provide an 'official' update to a target computer, wait for the user to accept (or the OS to accept it automatically) and they have full reign over your device.

Many people say that opening our devices to a special chosen set of good guys is equivalent to opening them to all the bad guys as well. If that's the case, surely we're already vulnerable given most commonly used devices update automatically?

The only purpose I can see for attacking encryption in general is to enable mass surveillance. The government have in fact not been specific about what they are actually asking for, but if they want selective ability to search digital devices, they already have it. If they want further powers, then we need to ask them what they need them for.
I was never a big fan of spotify since it required a Facebook account to use it. A regular email sign up process would have been enough. So I went with rhapsody.
Well, kinda. A RIPA s.49 notice can be defeated with s.53 defenses.

Some people have failed to pass the test of "reasonable doubt" for s.53 (3) / (4) defenses e.g. ( http://www.alphr.com/news/361693/teenager-jailed-for-refusin... ) but in other cases they have succeeded (e.g. Lauri Love had his hdd's taken and the NCA couldn't decrypt them but had to release him on bail; http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-31544346 and subsequently returned some of the storage (before arresting him again))

There are also people out there working to help the reasonable doubt argument; https://brasshorncommunications.uk/projects/s53/
Counter argument rather than rebutal. What you describe does not take into account the possibility to have internal market pick up. "Sexy" can be counterbalanced by willingness to buy the local brand, because more atuned to local tastes and for patriotic reasons. It certainly happened in USA and Europe.
Fair enough. I guess my point should have been: With proper tracking of changes and work done between the environments, finding differing versions could be the lowest hanging fruit.

That was my response to your original question of how they found got to haproxy as the root cause so quickly.

Sure, mirroring hardware and performance can help, if you can afford it (which is rare). However, you'd also probably agree it's pretty rare to find an issue caused cumulative amounts of uptime or load. Mis-matched software versions or configurations are a far more likely culprit in my experience.

Horses not zebras...
It's fun, in Argentina we've had a case were a criminal releasing the key nullified the evidence, because the criminal's lawyer argued that (under Argentinian law):

* He was forced ("tortured" was the word used) to disclose the key by the police.

* You can't accuse yourself or direct relatives, and disclosing an encryption key that resulted in incriminating evidence was argued to be a form of "self incrimination".

* "Best" thing about this was that the evidence led to finding a body, but as it was nullified, legally the status of the deceased person changed from "deceased" to "missing" -- because the evidence they had used to find the body had been nullified, then also the finding of the body had to be null (I'm not kidding, people went nuts over this "technicallity").

* Eventually a more reasonable judge turned the previous statement and accepted that the person was deceased indeed.

Working in forensics (I do digital forensics) is weird some times...
Something like the compilation time printed in a log at startup you don't really care about

Unless the compilation time is the source of the bug :)
As wila noted, benchmarks are easy to get wrong. It also helps to remember that VMware has been in the enterprise space for a long time and a lot of people in that field have been burned by benchmarketing where a competitor would run an ad campaign hoping nobody would notice that their big performance lead was due to misconfiguration[1].

Even now, where it's easier to check the details, it's fairly common to see things like the HTTP/2 demo from yesterday (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10091689) which overstated gains by misconfiguring the HTTP/1.1 server used for comparison. That wasn't too bad because both were their own servers but if you imagine that they were comparing their shiny new server to e.g. Apache or IIS that way and you'd have the average late-90s web server sales pitch.

I don't like these terms but it's easy to understand why they became so common.

1. Stuff like different defaults for fsync, “accidentally” using different block sizes on a RAID array / filesystem / NFS mount, forgetting to use the same write-back/through settings on both, etc.
ext4 is really good at the single user (single process / single thread) use case.

Other file systems shine in different categories like number of features (btrfs) snapshots (btrfs) very large devices (xfs) really high concurrency (xfs).
High end flash is that fast. Btrfs is simply not a good filesystem (yet?).
Well, yes and no. In the grand scheme of things, sure, there are more effective and secure methods of authentication. But like anything, you have to weigh security vs. usability. If you make things too secure (read: complex) then users won't use it.

There is also a huge difference between the $15 fingerprint reader you buy off of Amazon, and the "professional" scanner found in enterprise/secure devices (which in my experience, consist of a high resolution camera combined with software that detects (and looks for) movement of the finger on the scanner, "flattening" of the finger as its placed on the glass, among other things).

Further, there is the inherent need for someone (user or malicious person) to be on-site to present the biometric, as opposed 'remote' access using a username/password combination.

Like anything however, you also need to protect the core infrastructure, as well as the end-user interface. All authentication methods are useless if someone has direct access to the authentication server.

Just my $0.02
There are only 4 circles and none of them touch
Great story.
Hopefully we can mostly agree that they're not really going to try to ban encryption.

Would anybody like to speculate on what proposals we might see in reality? Are they going to ban me, as an individual, from using GPG? Are they going to ban companies from operating encrypted messaging services in the UK? Are they going to block traffic from non-compliant overseas providers? Are they going to just have a quiet word with the SnapChat people?
PSVita: About the Pool Exploits
4 car dealer
A NASA Engineer Became an Astronaut After Being Rejected 14 Times
Agreed. I work for a business that provides fairly heavy RIAs, which we custom build based on customer needs on (typically) very short time frames. The applications are used by thousands of different users on massively varied combinations of OS and browser, and the flash+flex stack is the only way we can develop robust apps to the required deadlines. It's a shame but it's the way it is currently.
And he does it _in Paint_. I obviously spend too much time on technology and too little on content.
Both kinds of work are useful, and cross pollination is likely possible - the issue list here is enlightening:

https://reproducible.debian.net/index_issues.html

Almost none of those things are debian specific - they're things like "the timestamp of when this was built is put in the documentation" or "the kernel version is put in the binary".

Issues of those types would affect any OS and build system, and are would impact any system, even one with source purity goals like NixOS and similar.
I'm pretty sure Opera for iOS uses it's own renderer:

https://dev.opera.com/blog/opera-mini-8-for-ios/
What past experience would have given you the idea that a UK prime minister would let domain expects stop them from coming up with stupid proposals?

(I was about to single out Cameron, but while I detest him, and while he seem to have a particular blind spot for technology, the problem is by no means unique to the Tories; e.g. consider when David Nutt was asked to go because his evidence-based advice on drugs didn't agree with the Labour governments policy)
Spotify doesn't require a Facebook account. I am signed up with a regular E-mail/password.
It doesn't require a Facebook account. I use Spotify and I never sign in with my Facebook account for anything.

edit: I live in the U.S.
No, I don't think that paying women to be cheerleaders for men provides what you describe -- when you are literally paying the women to make the men feel good, you aren't going to get an honest feedback loop. (Heck, you won't get that often when people are paid as equals in the same workplace, because of conflict avoidance, you certainly aren't going to get it when the women as entertainers for the men.)
They try really hard to make you login with facebook, but you can still avoid it if you want.
I thought WPF did that for you? I only ever used Silverlight but I seem to remember the UI was on a different thread to the rest of it anyway.
From a cost standpoint it makes sense. You're capturing most students. How many students will use a gifted program? They will require dedicated teachers and staff, and their own curriculum. That's not cheap, and not subsidized by the federal government, unlike students under IEPs.
This Week in Data (August 21, 2015)
Verisign presses Network Solutions for details on .XYZ registrations
Where is the source? The article links to nothing but a Facebook post. The whole thing was a joke that several Chinese companies made during this year's Apirl's Fool Day.

It is a very lame joke, though.
> anyone know if that is up to date and/or when it could be expected to be integrated?

If btrfs is used as an approximation, approximately three weeks after the heat death of the universe.
It doesn't require an FB account, it just heavily prioritises the FB sign in UX over the email/password one.
The key point:

"Network Solutions gave away perhaps hundreds of thousands of .xyz domain names last year. They weren’t just offered for free; They were placed in customer accounts on an opt-out basis. "
Node haha? Dang. As mentioned in an answer to another comment, perhaps framework was the wrong terminology to use, and something more all-encompassing to reflect what is wanted would've been better.

What do you think a developer using Javascript should use/know right now?
I have signed up to Spotify with a regular email. Their signup page still offers two options ( https://www.spotify.com/en/signup/ ):

Sign up with Facebook

or

Sign up with your email address
I think we are fighting the wrong battle here. The power equation is already in favor of the government snooping everybody, making it law only puts things in the open. We should fight in that direction, making it so that everything is more transparent. Wanna have my data? Okay, but I want to have yours. I specially want to have all the data about what you do with my data. I want to be able to request all the data you got of me. I want to be able to erase some of it (or at the very least mark it as invalid). I want to be able to add directly to it. I want to know whenever it is used. I want a due process every time it is used for something that affects me. And I want people that make use of data for their own purposes or that don't follow protocol to be prosecuted or at the very least banned from public office.
Will they keep the repo in GitHub? :)
> In a blogpost, Spotify said its new terms were updated in the interests of transparency.

Screwing people over is okay if you're transparent about it?
Not that I know of! I'd love to expand to other languages at some point.

One of the tricks is that I think it's important for there to be a best-in-class dictionary attached to it. If users feel like they'd rather use a different dictionary, then you don't get their dictionary history as flashcards, and overall you create a crappy user experience for them if they have to switch back and forth all the time.

Best-in-class dictionaries require someone deeply familiar with the language, and specifically the pitfalls of learning the language, to make. So I think to expand to other languages, I'd want to get passionate learners of the other languages involved as well.

Definitely a long-term goal though.
The problem with your interpretation is that bank communications are still a means of communication. So the vagueness of the law allows politicians to extend their requirements to any product they wish without exception. This isn't something I believe to be accidental either as terrorism laws are often written to be vague with the intent of common sense regulation - which often gets bypassed when a jobsworth believes they're in the right.
IIRC, iPhone apps can ask for permissions when they need them, but Android apps have to ask for every possible permission up front.

There's a better permissions system coming in Android Marshmallow, but that doesn't help anyone right now.
Waterfall Isn’t Dead
> "While everyone focuses on boosting the weakest students, America’s smartest children are no longer being pushed to do their best."

Ugh. I went to a so-called "gifted school", and this article's whole mindset is repugnant. For one thing, it's humiliating to anyone who got "weak student" stamped on their forehead... particularly galling coming from an educational system run by administrators who avoid intelligence at every opportunity. I know perceptive high-achievers haunted by revenge fantasies where they humiliate those who laughed at them for being in the remedial track.

And it's really discussing a certain kind of intelligence. Smart children are often booted from the institution and end up selling drugs or whatever. The desirable "smart children" have assignable curiosity, can be herded into professional/managerial type jobs, etc. Maybe they despise the know-nothing teaching the class, but they'll do what it takes to get to the next rung. (http://disciplined-minds.com/ and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bR8hfUkmk6Q)

A lot of people walking down the street no doubt have great ideas for how a fundamentally better educational system would work. But they can't really do anything about it; who'll listen to them?

> "If we cannot bring ourselves to push smart kids as far as they can go, we will watch and eventually weep as other countries surpass us in producing tomorrow’s inventors, entrepreneurs, artists and scientists."

Always at the end an appeal to patriotism, partitioning ourselves into nations where the weaker ones get bullied. Gotta "push" kids around (don't want to rely on dangerous self-motivation), because we'll weep if those we're sitting on start doing something better than us!
What would you say is the best way to describe React?
We cannot read what does not get written. We cannot discuss the merits and demerits code that is not public.

I'm in full agreement that HN is an informational bubble. I'm not so clear on exactly what HN is doing to aggressively exclude people. And where you see exclusion, I see an attempt to encourage people to join the discussion: "hey, why don't you put this up on GitHub so we can take a look", "this would make such a good topic for a conference talk."
I'm not necessarily afraid to jump out of the box, I'm just unsure which direction to jump. I could work myself into a product manager (I've done stints to fill in for short staff), but I guess it would take some research to see if reinventing myself in any specific direction is worth the effort in the long run, because in the short term, I expect to not be considered for a senior-level in that position, same as with any other development skill.

But you mention "adopting entirely new strategies for finding where your skills have value...those types of jobs aren't posted on HR job boards.", which would bypass the HR filter that I would worry about. Do you have any examples of these types of strategies? Is it more of networking? Cold calling into industries you've worked in? Anything that works for people who aren't natural sellers?
The LSAT only has English, no logical symbols are used. The the English in the test often has logical meaning. So when discussing that online, by convention students often use ~

If strikethrough is available, students use that instead quite often.
Using Firefox profiles might make simplify some of your separation goals. I create and destroy profiles regularly, and also have a few long-lived ones. Some are site-specific.
Highly cache-friendly data that can tolerate being slightly stale should be cached or kept in application memory, where the most recent version is returned. In this case, if the data is being used from a foreign source, then a separate thread processing a stream of incoming data that updates a shared/static state may be best.

Requests as part of a Service pipeline are best served as async. User -> http -> service endpoint <(requests to db's, and another service as async)> -> async response

In general, if you are IO bound (waiting on IO/service responses), then you will be well served with async. As part of a service pipeline that will access multiple backend resources it makes a lot of sense. If you can share/cache foreign data sources, it makes less sense. Cache first, other optimization strategies second and as needed. Unless it's a green project, then try to be async from the start.
As long as I can opt out of providing access to those features (photos, contacts, sensors) and still use the app, then I will do that, even if that means I get "reduced functionality" or however they spin it. I just want to listen to my music, I don't care about social features or anything like that.

But if I can only use the app by giving access to those features, even as a paid subscriber, then I will absolutely cancel my paid account and look to other services.
> People are quick to point out the sexism here, but NFL and NBA cheerleaders are totally cool?

Lots of people have lots of problems with NBA and NFL cheerleaders and the way they are employed, but that's not the subject here.
Media players: browsers don't have native support for H.264 over HLS or RTMP, and MPEG-Dash seems native to Chrome only. If the browsers could accept these natively, this would certainly speed flash's demise. Until then, what are the alternatives?
Oh my God, WinG. That lasted for what - a year? I think I was using it seriously at one point. Part of the ultimate quest for a generic graphics library (suitable for gaming, or whatever).
It used to require a facebook account initially (at least here in Germany, right after the launch). I had to create a one in order to open a Spotify account. The option to register using an e-mail address was added later and I migrated my account when this was done.
Wasn't loading for me, here's a cache http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?strip=1&q=cache...
Either:

a) they ban all end-to-end encryption

or

b) this law is ridiculously easy to circumvent for even non-technical users

An example of b) would be: piggyback messaging on an existing service that has a valid reason for being encrypted
Project Code Rush – The Beginnings of Netscape / Mozilla Documentary
Also, a sexy brand or product could arise at any time. You just need the right company with the right leader who can read the people correctly and give them something culturally appealing with taste and design. The next Jobs is probably around the corner, and he might be Chinese.
Well then, that's another problem they've got to fix.
To all those saying "it's not about banning encryption - only encrypted messaging then surely either:

a) they ban all end-to-end encryption

or

b) this law is ridiculously easy to circumvent for even non-technical users

An example of b) would be: piggyback messaging on an existing service that has a valid reason for being encrypted