skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
with "34 clicks and 0 signups" I'm not even in the top 10%

Of course no human ever had clicked my link, but I'm surprised how many clicks other people generate (given they don't cheat as well, hehe).
I've experimented with this and with a little tweaking it works fine under NW.js's alpha support for running Chrome Apps.
It's part of the std lib.
But yeah you're basically on the same page as me.
Java doesn't have the ability to be extended in the ways that clojure or python can.

Python also allows for functional programming to a certain degree, but clojure is a lot more powerful when it comes to language extensions.

Threads as a library (for js environments) for clojure.
https://github.com/clojure/core.async

Logic programming for clojure.
https://github.com/clojure/core.logic

Declarative UI building, with dataflow semantics.
http://reagent-project.github.io

Additionally immutability makes your life a lot easier. Parallel computing in clojure is a no brainer, you just change your map to pmap, and that's it.
“There are hardly any excesses of the most crazed psychopath that cannot easily be duplicated by a normal kindly family man who just comes in to work every day and has a job to do.”
― Terry Pratchett, Small Gods

That quote summarizes perfectly my attitude towards the article. We create a system that incentives people to be inhuman.
Yet in the end, its business. Whatever gets written down, is what is enforceable. Fairness is an odd notion, with maybe little importance to contracts.

I've witnessed anger/frustration in 2-3 year old companies where one founder 'checked out' early. E.g. a college professor was offered a large share, for expert consulting privileges. Their expertise was perceived to have a large value to the new company.

After a year or two it became obvious who was getting the better deal. But too late for regrets - the prof still owns a small fraction of the company.
> But when I work in java, i miss the REPL much more,

Both IDEA and Eclipse have had a REPL for a decade, not sure what exactly you were missing(?).
Vague question; I think it comes down to "what's the best tool for the job?"

In my experience (getting the basics running): Yeoman is pretty neat. The one Rails ships with is pretty cool. A team I consult has had success using LoopBack's generator.

Plug because I think it's really cool (no affiliation, kind of scaffolding): http://prelang.com
At this point, you've defended the existence of racism, but you've abandoned the idea that there's something wrong with it.
> C runtimes do add extra issues but that's not relevant to my comment.

I really don't see how it is. If you're running on a desktop platform, you've got a huge exposed surface that is working with raw pointers to proprietary logic. That makes provable correctness a far, far more complex problem.

> I said I largely came up dry on methods to prove correctness of C++ code.

It is easy to implement a smart pointer that the compiler can prove will always do bounds checking before dereferencing. The hard part is proving that all the code that uses raw pointers is doing the same thing.
The articles you submitted when written should have been the coup de grace for anti nuclear sentiments. Perhaps radioactivity as an plot device for movies and video games have made an undereducated public superstitious and very afraid? Thus people rather live with the devil they know then the invisible thing they can't see.
Yes. But it is reassuring when a dependency facilitates a relatively painless deep dive into its guts.

Not sure if and how one could know this beforehand, except for taking advise from random strangers in places like this.
If you have time bugs that only manifest at the DST changeover then everyone knows why your bugs have happened and you look incompetent. I suspect this applies if subscriptions handle leap years poorly too.
I've been thinking about this lately, and it seems that you could use something like a book code. Client and server use existing internet accessible images as the book and then your communication simply references bytes in those images: client requests a URL that encodes the bytes it wants to send, server returns HTML containing the urls of images containing the bytes it wants to send in response (and any extra content that helps make the page seem normal, ignored by the client). Pictures could be anything anywhere (lolcats, wikipedia, etc.), client should only ever need to download the picture once. Bandwidth wouldn't be great, but if the server is accessible via a wide (and evolving) variety of domains it seems like it would be quite hard to distinguish this from normal browsing.
EDIT: I apologise, I'm wrong. It appears github has been updated to remove this warning.

and as it pretty says on github, the github repo is confiugred to connect to the development server.

So yea, trying to jump the queue by installing the dev blob from github won't work.
Why don't you just put it only and invite your friends first (and tell no one else about it) to see how that goes? Then start inviting your other acquaintances. If that works out well, start marketing it to the public.
Why Do We Humanize White Guys Who Kill People?
Which sort of behavior? Having their own root certificate?
Even the list you quote has features that are not in any version of HTML and never will be (automated tables of contents in HTML 3?). Plus, there is much else in pandoc-markdown that HTML will never be able to do, as it requires computing and is beyond declarative markup.
Evidation Health | SF Bay Area | https://www.evidation.com | Full Time | ONSITE

We are a team of mission-driven experts in precision medicine, machine learning, behavioral economics, health outcomes research, and design. We generate economic and clinical evidence for digital health technologies and enable regular people to participate in finding the best tools to help make managing health just a little easier for everyone.

We are Series A funded by GE Ventures and Rock Health with fast-growing revenue.

Positions Available:

Senior Software Engineer: http://www.evidation.com/careers/engineering/sr-software-eng...

Software Engineer: http://www.evidation.com/careers/engineering/software-engine...
Exactly the point. In many other languages, every programmer can write their own "even" and "filter" with their own idiosyncrasy. However, in Clojure, every one uses the same set of high level functions in the standard library, because they are sufficiently rich to express most of the programming concepts, without having to roll your own.

In Clojure, readability is obtained through standardization. Every Clojure programmer instantly knows what the functions in the standard library do. Because there's not much syntax in a Lisp, code is very easy to read once one knows the functions.
SEX Machina: Should humans and robots have sex?
20. I tried it earlier, but I just couldn't figure out the interface.
Higher order functions are _the_ defining property of FPL.
Even though a lot of FPL people might want you to believe it's types.

Lambda calculus (the theoretical foundation for all functional languages) was initially untyped.
Wolfram is known for this. He's clearly a bright fellow but he is not even close to being the only or the first person to work on stuff like cellular automata, computational theories of physics, or complexity. He did not invent everything he claims to have invented and while he does footnote he's definitely not drawing attention to any of the others in the area.

It's tragic really. A New Kind of Science is full of brilliant ideas but the narcissism that drips from every page ruins it and probably prevents some of these ideas from getting the reception they deserve.
Edit: My snark isn't toward rday's response, but rather, to the hypothetical downmodder from rday's response. I should have been more clear.

I think the fallacy that is committed in any alternative scheme is assuming a fixed value for each individual for the life of the company.

Why not just set the bar right to begin with: everyone contributes as much value as they can, and we all share it. Consider an alternative: everyone contributes as much value as they can, but the dude who put in $5 20 years ago and doesn't even show up any more gets 10,000 more parts of every $1 I produce today.

>The complication is that startups BPMF shouldn't be hiring at all, but few of them realize that

It is curious that you state this as if there are BPMF startups. How does such a thing happen? A BPMF startup sounds more like a research center.
Zoltan Istvan, presidential candidate of the Transhumanist Party
In a former life, I was a member of this system.

And this system is so fucking broken.

Let's make people broke using tax-payer funds, and put them in a position where they are likely to fail, instead of succeed.

Reminds me of being jailed for being broke. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/jailed-for-being-b...
Maybe the alleged incident was not credible/juicy enough? It's not like a security camera caught Murray smacking around his wife in a hotel lobby or a picture of his wife with a black eye leaked. Anecdotally, I live in Charleston where Murray/his ex wife live. Some years back a coworker was dating a girl who was a 911 dispatcher, and apparently his wife was well known to the dispatchers for making spurious calls on Bill. So my guess would be all the celebrity gossip rags probably didn't have anything good enough to run with.
The big difference is that Clojure defaults to immutable data structures. While you can chain functions together in Java and Python, you still have to manually keep track of all the references.

The main benefit of modern functional languages is in their use of revisioned data structures. This has same benefits as garbage collection.

Without GC you have to manually track where you allocate and deallocate things, and this is highly error prone. With GC the runtime does this for you, and you can focus on other things.

Same thing applies with mutable and immutable data. With mutable data structures all the changes are done in place, and you have to keep track of everywhere it's used to update it predictably. With immutable data structures you're "copying" the data any time you make a change, and the runtime keeps track of the references for you.
Because of questions like these, the widest table in every dimensional model I've ever built has been the date dimension.
To what degree has the U.S. government, through the NSA et al, provided moral cover for this sort of thing?
I'm not a down voter, but there have been volumes written about the pros and cons of Java. Every possible corner of every possible argument has been explored ad nauseum. I'm grateful they didn't waste my time rehashing the endless arguments. As far as I'm concerned, Blub beats both of these languages.
Thank you. I will look at the immutability part. I remember taking Racket in school a few years ago and that was a major thing about FPL like Racket / Lisp.

I have always wanted to look at building something again in one of the popular FPLs.
For SSL traffic, yes, but that wouldn't stop someone from using a different encryption protocol.
Gas turbines are still common on war ships.
I agree with some of the folks here. I have the utmost respect for Signal and Marlinspike but this seems like a weird direction for this to go in. A Chrome app? Tying it to the Chrome App Store? Requiring a Google email for the beta group? Just seems out of place for Signal.
Lets just remember that because of slavery we need to accept more commits from African Americans.
Loved that book. Despite the cardboard characters :-)

Please tell me that last act made your think of Cellular Automata too!
I am in favour of nuclear but some of the arguments you hear from advocates make my skin crawl. The caution people exercise over nuclear power is exactly what we should want for any activity that carries risk to health or the environment. Radioactive material is very dangerous, and fission is intrinsically difficult to control. We may be able to successfully deal with those risk, but it is intellectually dishonest to pretend that those risks don't exist just because physicists are so wonderfully clever.

The problem is not lack of support for nuclear but tolerance for dirty and unsafe fossil fuels. We need to deal with that using nuclear or solar or whatever.
In much modern Western popular music, authenticity is a huge component: we expect musicians to write and perform their own music and to have the lyrics be honest and at least somewhat autobiographical.

This makes listeners feel they have a connection to who the musician actually is.

Actors, by the very core of their occupation, don't have that level of immediate authenticity.
I built a system on top of yesql* and eventually threw most of it away because it was a lot more trouble than composing queries with honeysql. I prefer honeysql to yesql for the same reason I prefer hiccup to enlive. It's just easier to compose things with native data structures using the full clojure language.

* I even maintain a fork of yesql powering several of my production apps to use that has features that were never merged (such as making it possible to insert maps as jsonb into postgresql by deferring to the underlying jdbc libraries for serialization).
Are you scared these will fail? Perhaps tell yourself the success is the launch. Anything good after that is gravy.

Alternately, pretend a competitor is coming out with a similar service and it's a race to go live...

I know this is a gross oversimplification but it seems your overthinking it and need to do.
> if you don't believe consciousness is more profound than other things, I honestly think you are fooling yourself, and also limiting and reducing your own value

Your reasoning just seems like an appeal to emotion. You might feel like consciousness is profound (a vague description without a clear meaning), but you haven't offered any reasoning as to why this is the case.
Entirely unrelated. FGCS was a massive government-funded effort, and this is a submarine article about a single startup.
Of course, dynamically typed languages will win on one liners against Java but in the long run, the absence of types can really bring an entire code base (and project) down, which is why Clojure is hardly used at all and why Java is everywhere.

Besides, Clojure doesn't even win in the one line department against modern JVM languages (e.g. Kotlin).
In your original reply, your first sentence was false. Your second sentence was an unrelated truism. No contrast, no point in in adding the connecting "but".
What I wonder is: how does the fact that we live in a 3D (spatial) world come out of this model? Or is that also part of the a-priori model?
Arguably, first class higher order function (and immutability) is defining characteristics of functional programming.

Although, I don't think the functional/ imperative is necessary a good axis for categorizing languages. There are potentially more differences between Clojure/Ocaml than Python/Clojure, for example.
I don't think Bill Murray worries too much about "remaining relevant".

He's pretty much been in semi-retirement for some time now, as far I know, and doesn't seem to care if people notice him. Just my take - don't follow so closely.
I meant China's behaviour, e.g. orchestrating a DDOS attack against GitHub for political reasons.

The root certificate thing is 'merely' a violation of the rights of their own subjects.
As a better comparison, the Transamerica Building in SF is 260M tall -- so more like the height of a very tall building..
You know what else is easy to work with and deploy? PHP.
More like systematic class warfare in action.
Enough - please! Stop reposting.
I wonder how much larger a Makani kite would need to be to equal the power generation of one of the Enercon turbines you've mentioned.

It would also be interesting to know how they both perform in strong winds. Can one keep generating power while the other needs to pause?
Ah, ok that makes more sense.
Tried charting the many Kubernetes volume types
I've always loved Bill Murray's comedy. He's funny in a timeless way.

But my favorite story about him is how he calls Kelly Lynch's husband every time Roadhouse is on TV to tell him that she's having sex with Patrick Swayze. Apparently this has gone on for years.

I love that he'd do that to begin with, but that he'd do it for so long without any expectation that it would become public knowledge is awesome.
Out of curiosity (and possibly a dumb question), what is the main constraint preventing modern (subsonic) bombers from carrying CIWS-type defense system against missiles? Is it size, weight, recoil, aerodynamics, or special radar requirements? The initial push behind removing gun systems appears to have been development of AA missiles and increased reliance on fighter escorts. Yet modern CIWS on sea vessels have become so effective against missiles that they significantly upped the cost and requirements of anti-ship warfare, to the point that a single missile fired at a ship is not expected to be successful. Given advanced enough CIWS (using directed energy in near future?) one basically doesn't need stealth or other fancy/expensive/less reliable features.
Hm. I think you're confused about what 'ad hominem' means. That or you're struggling to read more than one sentence at a time as a coherent thought. Do you realize that every sentence past the one with the word 'crackpot' in it was a justification of that statement?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem says "... is an attack on an argument made by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, rather than attacking the argument directly".

So can we agree, at least, that I have attacked the argument directly, at length, and therefore the "rather than..." clause is not satisfied?

Moreover, even if you don't agree with that: I have no obligation not to attack a person directly if it gets the point across faster. I am, after all, writing to the readers as much as gd1 - and if gd1 is truly irrational then I'm not particularly interested in trying to convince them of anything, nor avoiding offending them. And my attack (if you can call it that - I did say "Really hard to not take you for a crackpot", which intentionally gives him a wide benefit of the doubt) was, I think, well-justified:

The definition of the word "crackpot" that I am reaching for is that of "a person who believes absurd notions". That would be as opposed to "a person who believes rationally justifiable notions". I called gd1 a crackpot because as a way of capturing the notion that they were not defending their argument via rationality, but by insistence that it was correct, and were (as I pointed out in my original post) intentionally evading challenges to the argument - but responding to things to that did not challenge it. These to me suggest that they had no ability to defend the argument (and I invited a proper defense), and therefore that they would be a person who believes an argument without rational defense, aka a crackpot.

So I posted the argument that "gd1 is behaving like a crackpot for reasons A, B, C, D", and I listed the reasons. We can substitute the phrase "one who believes absurd notions" for "crackpot". Both the word and its substitution are derogatory terms - we can't get around that. It's a negative quality to believe absurd things.
It is related, and is called the inspection paradox. Identified for me by Allen Downey, with some explanation below:

http://allendowney.blogspot.com/2015/11/recidivism-and-singl...
How about this then?

IntStream.range(0, 100).filter(::even);
Definitely agree with you on the bad error reporting. As to the other part, at some point you have to make a mental adjustment to the "Lisp way" of doing things, and that may not be easy. Out of curiosity, which materials (online, books, etc.) have you used when trying to learn Clojure?
Using the Java 8 'stream' API:

IntStream.iterate(0, i -> i + 1)
.mapToObj( i -> Collections.nCopies(i, i % 2 == 0) )
.flatMap(Collection::stream)
.limit(1000)

Generate an infinite series of incrementing numbers, starting from 0, map each to a stream of boolean indicating true/false, flatten that stream of streams, then limit the output.
Some people obviously need better sleep hygiene than others. It's not a question of social life vs health. Both those things are factors that affect quality of life in general. If your body simply couldn't cope with poor sleep you would change your opinion on the relative importance of your sleep vs your waking life.
It's not about tact, it's just the algorithm doing its best. In order for the algorithm to be capable of "tact", it needs to recognize that it's looking at a person (or whatever). And if it recognized a person, then there wouldn't have been this problem because it would just label it correctly.
That is the million dollar question as power generation is driven not by acquisition cost but by the total operating costs.

One of the challenges with the big turbines is you lose a lot of capacity with one of them off line, and it is there perhaps that kites have a small advantage.
> OK, so one can derive Special Relativity from simple models based on networks. What about General Relativity—which, after all, is what we’re celebrating today? Here the news is very good too: subject to various assumptions, I managed in the late 1990s to derive Einstein’s Equations from the dynamics of networks.

What a crackpot. He links to his own book, which is a non-mathematical, non-technical book.

There is no mathematics in the linked material, so it's impossible to see whether he is correct, in fact it's impossible to see what he means at all!

Nobody has seen this mythical derivation he did in the 90s.

Amazing how someone brilliant who used to do real science fell into crackpottery like this.
The Future of Legal – Announcing Custom Client Intake
Do you happen to have a reference to any kind of freely available technical publication (blog post, etc) that goes through some core points to reach this conclusion? I read many things around for years and I agree with the general statement, but I failed to find a recap that can be used to explain the core points of differences to people not familiar with the matter.
It's certainty easier to haul 12 Kites to site than props for a 198 meter wind turbine. I'm thinking deployment might be easier as well. Plus, if one kite breaks you only lose part of the electrical output as opposed to a large machine going off line. I wonder if hauling the thing down by line and repairing it on the ground might be easier than climbing up a tower. I would think so but could be wrong. Of course a larger fleet of individual machines probably means more frequent (smaller) repairs so there is that. How high do birds fly? Could these maybe solve the bird killing problem traditional wind turbines have had?

It's a cool idea. I'm excited.
What I've always wanted, and no one seems to do, is to have the update box pop up on startup (as usual), and then have a button that says "Install on quit." Then I wouldn't have to be interrupted when I opened an app to do something, and it would be taken care of when I finished so that it's ready for the next time.
I could not even find a thorium commodities contract nor a stockpile of thorium. Same for monazite which is 23% thorium on average. That's how fresh or bottom floor" this market would be.

Torium Investing: http://www.thenuclearmetals.com/thorium/