skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I actually find Unix and Windows to be very fundamentally different.

There is a small child growing up in El Paso who thinks English and Spanish are "very fundamentally different", too, because in English there's no word for "quererte" or "sacartelo". But that's just because they've never heard Chinese, let along Lojban or Python, and they don't know how to read yet, so they have no idea along what lines languages might vary.

Unix and Windows are both single-node monolithic multi-user non-real-time operating systems built on a hierarchical filesystem (with names that are sequences of strings) with ACLs for discretionary access control, no mandatory access control, a global user namespace controlled by a single system administration authority, and in which executables (which share code using dynamically-linked libraries) run with the full permissions of the user who invoked them. In both systems you communicate with I/O devices as if they were files. The interface they provide to user processes uses system calls to present a programming interface that is much simpler than that of the underlying machine; those processes can have multiple threads sharing memory that block in system calls independently and can pre-empt one another, and by default their memory is not shared with other processes. They are both written mostly in C with some C++, and other programming languages are more or less obliged to use C calling conventions to interoperate. Both of them use sockets for network I/O. Users typically use them via a windowing system, which provides a huge variety of complicated ways of setting pixels inside a rectangular region on a virtual screen, and accommodates up to one mouse pointer.

Compared to any of PolyForth, Pick, Genera, Oberon, VMS, KeyKOS, VM/360, SqueakNOS, MacOS up to 9, MS-DOS, Spring, Sprite, QNX, and Amoeba, Unix and Windows are as alike as two peas in a pod.
One problem is that the majority of the population is not just poor. They are also intellectually limited in certain ways. They cannot easily assess the truth of what you say to them. In fact, they usually don't even try. They just trust you, or else they don't. Because of historical reasons, these people prefer to trust Chavistic parties on the left and prefer to distrust parties on the right. You see, the demographics behind the right-wing parties most likely have a history of contempt for these poor and often illiterate masses. Therefore, I would perfectly well understand that there is no love lost between both.

Another problem is that economics is barely a science. It does have its merits, but it is certainly not a set of statements backed by experiments that we can repeat in order to find counterexamples. Before the collapse of the Soviet Union, we even had two "economic sciences". The one of the West and the one of the Soviets. You cannot pull that off with mathematics or physics. There have never been two variants of those. It is perfectly feasible, however, to do that with economics. That is how incredibly unsolid that thing is. Now, based on that house of cards, go and convince the Venezuelan popular masses that the hated right-wing parties would be right ...
The US has been fighting deflation not inflation. The point of QE is to solve the zero-bound interest rate problem where the central bank can't reduce rates below zero. If there ever were to be an inflation threat here (which conservative economists have been inaccurately predicting for 8 years now) there is plenty of room for the Fed to raise rates in response.
Social security measures can only be paid from earnings from individuals. A government usually cannot earn any money itself, and particularly so in places with history of corruption and cronyism.

The governments job should be to maintain a peaceful society, protecting property rights and give people personal, economic and speech freedom. Those conditions lead to improvements in wealth,and at that point some of the he tax money can be diverted into safety net spending.

Arguing for it from the top down 'it's the governments job to help social security measures' fails to give the credit for generation of the wealth in the first place. Failing to understand the difference - the governments don't have and don't make money - leads to a fundamental mistake of 'the government has all the money, why not give some to me?'.
I'm glad that I didn't judge this one by the first 6 letters. Some great math and algorithms here.
I did. I love Rails. Love it. Love Ruby. I've been writing code for over 25 years this year, and I've been doing Ruby for 10. And I hit a big brick wall with a very websocket-heavy app I'm building.

I switched to Elixir and Phoenix last year and got the core of my app working.

It's funny though - the core is easier. But many freebies from Rails aren't there yet. So I still don't have password recovery emails or confirmation emails on signup done yet :)
> why the downvote. I made money betting the market would fall as well.

Bully for you. But you're being downvoted because your comment is cheerleading ("take that you nonbelievers!") without information or commentary.
A bit more background on how Venezuela got here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/07/opinion/francisco-toro-dor...

In 2003, a beleaguered President Hugo Chávez imposed currency controls to try to hold down inflation and prevent a speculative run on the Venezuelan bolívar. Over the years that followed, these controls evolved into the byzantine tiered system by which the government’s oil dollars are sold at three different official prices — while hard-currency dollars fetch a fourth, higher price on the black market.

An importer who pledges to purchase basic necessities to bring into the country can buy a dollar for about six bolívars. But walk up to a bank teller and the same dollar costs 178 bolívars: nearly 3,000 percent more. For the 264 bolívars that it cost at the time of this writing to buy one black-market dollar, you could buy 42 dollars at the official rate.

The system gives rise to a mind-bending tangle of economic distortions. By one calculation, with a single $100 bill exchanged at the black market rate, you can buy enough subsidized gasoline in Venezuela to drive a Hummer around the world 28 times. A new Toyota Corolla retails for about 1.9 million bolívars — that’s either about $300,000 (at one exchange rate) or around $7,200 (at another), take your pick. As in our fable, the exchange-rate regime creates huge incentives for importers to pocket their cheap dollars rather than bring in goods — and that gives rise to lines. Long lines. For all the basics.

Alongside scarcity, a new specter — or rather, an old one — has emerged. For the last two weeks, the bolívar has been in free fall, evoking fear of devastating hyperinflation ...
I'm watching Bryan's interview, it's awesome.

For some history, the Jeff that he keeps talking about is a former student of mine at Stanford. I wasn't a big deal at Stanford, I was a TA for a Xerox PARC guy, when he retired Stanford asked me if I'd teach the class.

This was the papers class in operating systems. If you don't know what "papers class" means it means there are no text books, this is where you go to learn at the cutting edge. Pretty advanced class and Stanford let me teach it. To this day I wonder what they were thinking. That said, I'm proud of how I taught that class. The students learned a lot.

Jeff Bonwick was a student who was doing a major in statistics. Somehow he ended up in that OS class. I could tell he was sharp and I was working at Sun in the kernel group, I recruited him as hard as I could. He asked me why I would want him, his exact words were "I can't program in C". I told him that I could teach him how to program, I can't teach people how to be smart. He was very, very smart. I told him when he came to Sun he would go far higher than I ever did and I was right, he did.

Bryan is cut from the same cloth. He's an OS geek. There aren't many of those geeks around these days. Go him.
I would have to say, isn't betting on disaster going to end up one day having the counter party saying "sorry Nassim, I am bankrupt, I can't pay you"?
City planners already know the bus routes that would best serve the city. Unfortunately, there's no incentive to improve service or increase ridership since it already doesn't scale: for every 30 cents that bus riders contribute in fares, taxpayers put in one dollar collectively.
Blaming the population for being poor and stupid is inherently unfair.

Economics is not a science, and trying to understand it with equations is wrong. Economics is the study of human behaviour in a world of restricted resources and choices. You can study human behaviour quite well and determine theories, which can be tested between different countries.

At this point, there is no argument, socialism fails each and every time it is tried, usually in desperate conditions for the people involved. But the route back to prosperity is difficult if not impossible because people are welded to the dream of something for nothing. You don't need a highly educated population to build a successful economy and country, but the people do need to be able to resist the siren song of socialism, and those at the top need to shun corruption and society needs functioning institutions.
Fair, but when people talk about "real systems" built with micro kernels, as often as not, it could also describe Linux on xen with a watchdog restart. It's not especially compelling evidence that micro kernels are practical. Want to convince me that micro kernels are the bomb? Tell me about a system where no single service exceeds 40% of the code/runtime.
As mentioned earlier, pv have been around for ages and does this "the right way" (tm). Also, as an exercise, spot the potential buffer overflow in this source in less than 10 seconds for extra credits!
I would really love to use Hack, but I want to use it in the editor of my choice, not the editor of Facebook's choice.

Because Hack isn't PHP all of the foundations are gone, consider this text from the JetBrains PhpStorm team:

"We’d have to provide full support for a complete new language, which entails implementing a parser, type checker, navigation, completion, inspections, and so on. No part of PHP support that we have now can be reused for Hack, given the fundamental differences between the languages. We’d then have to maintain and enhance it, closely following the evolution of Hacklang."

Until those important issues are resolved, it's unlikely many people will be using these tools. Facebook should, pretty please, consider outsourcing the things in the list above (parser, type checker, inspections anyhow). Unfortunately I can't justify pigeonholing my editor selection for Hack development. Anxiously awaiting some form of resolution.

[1] http://blog.jetbrains.com/phpstorm/2015/06/hack-language-sup...
this reminds me of a truly excellent HOPE X presentation about elevator hacking[0]. one of the most entertaining con panels i've seen, and interesting information on an esoteric topic.

[0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOzrJjdZDRQ
xmonad is a window manager, not a GUI. You use it to move windows of a GUI around and resize them. The GUI is what happens inside those windows.
Top 5 Popular VoIP Phone Service Providers in the UK
This is not true at all and a common fallacy. See the gamblers attrition problem (or double knockout options for this who want to see the only closed form solution).

Essentially your wealth is path dependent. Though the expected value may be positive, once you are ruined you cannot continue to play (or in this case) invest anymore.

In math you could theoretically always bet (or invest) a fractional value of your wealth, but not in the real world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_ruin
The constant A/B testing of socialist policies alongside free economies does help to provide and endless list of economies ruined by socialism, though. It's tragic for the populations involved, but it helps blunt the constant cacophony of agitators everywhere for socialist policies.

Most true socialist parties and groups worldwide are a laughing stock as a result, and quite rightly seen by wider society as hopeless rabble.
You can structure an options strategy so that you get the money up front, eg selling calls. And exchange-traded options are settled through the exchange, which is more neutral than a specific counterparty.

It does get more complicated as you pursue more sophisticated strategies though.
Yes, but then you will sound like the right-wing parties. They have been saying things like that for decades. Then, they will not trust you. If they don't trust you, they will not follow your advice. That's it. Check mate.
If you haven't used a good type system (which has at least algebraic data types and pattern matching), it's hard to realize how many of those bugs might actually be type issues.
I believe the OP means governments know that central planning is a compete failure but they just can't help themselves.

Like alcoholics, 'a few beers' won't hurt. It's the same with planning - just a little five year plan. It won't hurt.
Awesome, I didn't know that!
The interface needs work. Sadly we don't exist in the 2^n dimensions needed to really understand the state space so all representations will be clunky.

It looks like the rows represent qubits and the colors represent phase. Maybe. I haven't quite figured it out either.
I imagine it wasn't that pleasant being one of Jenner's cowpox inoculees, either. But that was an important step towards eradicating smallpox nine generations later. And the electricity I'm writing this with is produced by a steam engine descended from those that blanketed London in deadly smog for ten generations. Lots of beneficial innovations go through an early stage where they're counterproductive or unpleasant.
Apple's buttons are well displayed, yet once i created an account and confirmed all emails and what not - it still won't let me to download damn free app, claiming that i "have't used my new account at store yet".

I am ok with small buttons as long as they work.

Make sure your backend actually works from this point on, not like apple's piece of crap they couldn't put together.
You're also neglecting capital costs. I think Uber's major business innovation is shifting almost all of the cost and risk onto drivers by selling them "independence" and "great money". Previously, cab companies had to buy and maintain fleets of expensive cars; the biggest risk a driver took was the cost of one shift's rental. Now some are in hock for tens of thousands of dollars. And possibly millions given that they are no longer covered by taxi company insurance.

Honestly, I think it's more risk than opportunity for them. Once driverless cars are ubiquitous, the barrier to entry will be pretty low. Currently to compete with Uber you need to sign up a bunch of drivers, trick them into paying most of your expenses, and then pay them just barely enough to keep them from quitting. But if all it takes is money for cars and the ability to buy an app, anybody with a strong brand and access to capital can go after them.

Imagine, for example, you're BMW's CEO. You can build custom cars tuned for taxi service. You know the in-car software very, very well. You have a mess of industrial designers and deep research on customer motivations. Whenever normal-market orders dip, you just keep building for your taxi fleet and occasionally declare war on Uber in a new major city when you can flood it with shiny cars. You already have a service network and get parts at cost. You have incredible access to capital, great relationships with millions of existing consumers, and one of the world's strongest brands. Wouldn't it be tempting to say, "Fuck it, we've been in the transportation business for 100 years! This is just the next step."
240? Wow, indeed. I am surprised an "outsider" would teach that.
Which is pretty much what people do in their twenties.
Just so you know. I'm not going to debate you further, because I refuse to debate someone who calls me willfully ignorant.
strcpy(new->format, format);
This fund is designed to appeal to people who believe the world is going haywire "any moment now!". That kind of sales pitch of expecting the apocalypse all the time has historically been quite successful, never mind the actual apocalypse frequency.
If it's a short sale, then Nassim already has the money and is actually the one at risk of not being able to pay if the price skyrockets. There is a bottom to how low a stock can go, but no theoretical upper limit. Although realistically he'd likely be forced to buy into stock if it got too high, keep some reserve of money on hand, and be insured against extreme upticks anyway.

A short sale is an agreement for a party to buy a stock at a discounted price on the condition that the other party buy it for that person at a later date. That is, I say "That Chinese stock isn't any good. In two months the price will go down. So tell you what, you give me the money for that stock and you'll get your stock in two months, no matter what the price plus some extra as a discount. If that price goes down, I pocket the difference. If it goes up, I pay that difference as well out of my own pocket."

The article is behind a paywall, so I don't know what specific strategy he used. But it'd probably be something along those lines. A bet against someone that the price is going down using his own money.

Besides, that sort of risk is exactly what stock traders do for a living - analyze and account for risk. And Nassim is a specialist in a special kind of risk: risks people don't encounter often and thus systematically underestimate.
I'm not minimaxir but anyway... that's an odd way to put it. My guess is, he/she is not the kind of software QA engineer you might be accustomed to depending on the kinds of companies you've worked at. Think of automated custom static and dynamic code analysis, continuous integration, build systems, deployment monitoring, etc. Places like Google and Stripe (and many other technical organizations with good engineering culture) have very skilled people doing these things.

I'm a normal/infrastructure engineer who reluctantly ends up focusing on test systems every once in a while. I get all the tests running, from a single script, with all results collated and machine readable, get CI set up properly, make the system reliable enough to trust, etc. Because someone has to do it! And yes I've done this in organizations where there was a QA engineer or two, who did reasonably cheap semi-automated QA, but couldn't put together a whole system and make it reliable enough to run on its own. But there are definitely a few places where QA engineer is not the "lowest rank".
Completely agree. What's worse is when services provide you a subdomain they expect you to never forget it and always go there with no login link on the homepage at all.

It's very strange to me.
Central planning is a single point of failure.
Virtual Private Cloud. Amazon's "branded" term for a private cloud with strict firewall inbound access protection.
3m - 2.7m = 300k. Not 700k as the author calculated.

I'm not sure I buy the argument about investing in oil production but what does seem to be clear is that as long as the money is flowing in due to high oil prices then everything seems to work. Once prices collapse, as Warren Buffet put it, we can see who was swimming without their bathing suits on...
I mess with radio's at work. The there are two issues.

Often for testing one wants to check the radio operation outside the normal band or modes of operation. In my case, sweeping the radio across a really wide and band noting where the pll fails to lock. I'm going to really twitchy if I can test the pll at frequencies outside the band. Doing things like, turn off spreading and checking carrier and tx power. I'm sure more complicated radio's than I use have similar.

The second is what is legal varies depending on where the product is sold and used. So so a mode that's legal in one country is verboten in another.

In general though, I'd rather hate for the FCC to try and force manufacturers to lock people out. Because likely it won't work well and there is a definite cost to implementing secure boot. But then again the FCC is historically extremely hostile to the idea of ordinary people mucking with wireless. So this doesn't surprise me at all.
Artisanal Water
Emails are very tempting. I am on the same boat but, I have been working with a remote team and usually happen to work a lot during weekends because of timezone issues. Working with 5 year old company (remote), bootstraped and I recently moved to Bay Area. Was wondering how it goes with other founders here. Thanks for writing.
Bounds checking is optional in Rust too. And I've never seen bounds checks show up in instruction-level profiling of Rust code, due to the way iterators work.

Can you elaborate as to other ways Rust has worse performance?
I prefer progress(1) written for BSD UNIX.

Dates back to 2002.
But you woudn't need gems to for recovery emails right?
Darn, I can't read.
What is Quantum Physics?
Rust's safety is not limited to memory safety; you get data race freedom too. But the memory safety is the same (assuming you opt into SafeD).
No, not unless the person who said it is attributing the racism to a race, rather than a family.
Hard Work Is Irrelevant [audio]
Yup, CS240, still have the class notes.
Protesters have no free-speech rights on Supreme Court’s front porch
I would like to get some insights from Netflix engineers instead of their PR machine. How do you like working at Netflix?
I don't think that would (necessarily) change it's business strategy or it's margins.
United States refers to the now (well, upon ratification) literally, united, individual states. This is plain and obvious just from reading the document. Laws refers to the laws of those collective states (including laws enacted in a single state and those enacted collectively through the Congress). It is not so much the pluralization in United States that is interesting (it is actually obvious that it must be that way [since we are talking about a collection of states]), but the pluralization in Laws. The Article refers to a collection of laws, not a single unit. US Federal Law is a single unit manifested in the U.S. Code. You will see these referred to as Law elsewhere in the document.

You are confusing courts, jurisdiction, and judicial Power. While certain courts may be established with particular jurisdiction, the judicial Power extends over them.

Congress has actually already ruled on this (See 28 U.S. Code § 1257(a) https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1257). You will be able to pull in any State law on (at least) Amendment IX and/or Amendment X grounds.

Again I ask, can you point to a Particular Case where the US Supreme Court is not empowered to rule (or will not be able to eventually, once all other levels have failed)?
Those researchers won't tell uber things uber wants to hear.

If they're serious about security they're basically looking at fundamental changes in the way automotive electronics systems are implemented or various ugly workarounds. You can't just plug anything in to the internet and expect it to be ok...
S&P returned 80% during past 5 years. In bull market Taleb's fund probably didn't made any money so it might be safe to assume they made 20% total during this 5 years. That doesn't sound spectacular.
Ironically, that's one of the few useless parts of mathematics, and the least favorite part of my elementary school education.

Suggest group theory or linear algebra instead. ;-)
This seems like an over simplification. Growth is not just the product, but the people executing. A founder who is giving away too much equity and money early may not have the equity and capital to attract all the talent she needs. Maybe she is more understanding about work life balance and doesn't push the team hard enough. But somebody else does, and this is often winner takes all.