skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
For me, it's not about notifications being so urgent. It's about convenience. I definitely do get very important notifications sometimes, but probably very few that need to be responded to faster than 5-10 minutes.

The thing is that I never have to even remember to check. That's why it's so convenient. I've completely eliminated "check phone for notifications" from my mental to-do list. That's a task I simply never have to do again. That might not count for much for you, but in my case I like just being able to place my phone down, forget about it for potentially hours, and still not have to worry about missing anything.
Articles that lead with a headline "Why", instead of just stating their thesis, are clickbait garbage.
Well then clearly you have no need of one while he does. Can't both situations be valid?
One of the arguments here in Germany is that if these billionaires were actually paying taxes, the country would have more money and there would be less to pledge. Generally the thinking is that public sector should run many basic services and should provide/organize enough welfare to those in need.
In the same vein, nim forums are written in nim and are exceptionally fast and responsive http://forum.nim-lang.org
There are configuration and package management systems (e.g. Salt or Ansible and apt or pip). Containers provide that + isolation, but I bet for majority cases no one cares if two services are walled from each other or not - as long as they don't interfere. Usually, they rarely do - and when it happens (say, an ancient blob wants an older libc), in most of cases a mere chroot does the trick, without need for cgroups/namespaces/extras.
You make it sound like Zuckerberg's donation in Newark happened in a vacuum. It happened in tight collaboration with the school system, who stated needs and approved every step of the process. It's not like Zuckerberg stepped in and said "you shall obey!!!" Course in this case it just turned out that not only could the democratically elected government of Newark magically waste all their tax revenue, they were excellent at wasting donated money.
"Contribu­tions to civic leagues or other section 501(c)(4) organizations generally are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes"

https://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Other-Non-Profit...
Compare the Federal Reserve to many of these subprime "technology driven" lending startups. Who is more professionally staffed?

Compare the NSA to Palantir.

Compare NASA to SpaceX.

Compare the Treasury to Enron.

Compare Bell Labs with WorldCom.

Your argument isn't as strong as your Econ 101 textbook made it out to be.
Ah, yes, I had forgotten structured programming. Yes, it won and goto lost, and the world is better for it.

What I was referring to, though, was what I think was Dijkstra's main idea: That programming should be done by a particular approach (the "postulational method") that allows/requires mathematical reasoning about code, and that code should be mathematically proven to be correct. That idea is used very little.
There are many problems to be solved in health monitoring and sleep- and fitness-tracking. And there is a real market for fitness bands, even if it's not a huge one.

There's also a designer watch/fashion market, which is the one that seems to be of more interest to Apple. However, it doesn't appear to be winning in that one.

The current Apple Watch market appears to be "geeks with iPhones who live in Silicon Valley, or wannabees". How is it doing there?
Can you or someone summarize the salient points, for someone who doesn't have time to watch an hour-long video?
No, the opposite claim is "Blacks are breaking into houses and people are calling police". The organizations listed are ones that represent Blacks and since there is no number similar to 911 to call generic Blacks you'd need to call one of those to have an experience similar to calling police if we want to compare Blacks and police like the message I replied did.
Huh - in the 4 years I've lived in Hungary I've yet to come across this. Of course that isn't that long - but enough that seeing Zoltan Istvan messed me up. Thanks for pointing that out - it's interesting.
> An MIT-style language would be Rust, which indeed struggled to get to v1.0 and Go vs. Rust plays out quite similarly to what worse-is-better would predict.

Not having to implement a userland OS scheduler, a production-quality garbage collector, and an industrial-strength compiler backend from scratch strikes me as a fairly New Jersey-style approach, don't you think?

(I think this whole "Rust vs. Go" as "MIT vs. New Jersey" argument is pretty silly. There are many factors going into why Go released 1.0 before Rust did, and both communities have consensus that you shouldn't treat Rust vs. Go as a horse race anyway.)
Six Key Flaws in the EU's Proposed 'New' Corporate Sovereignty Court
>democratically chosen

I think we can both agree that the term "democratically chosen" contains many positive connotations which simply don't apply to the current US government. If I were a billionaire, I personally would do as much as legally possible to keep my money out of the hands of the government and personally seeing that it is used for the betterment of society. Because frankly, the idea that the current US government is effectively spending this money for our betterment is ridiculous.
To be honest, it will have very little influence. Economists don't like to change their tools.
Note that the $100m was a gift to the government, overseen by thr governor of NJ, so it is hard to say that was a failure of private philanthropy vs government.
The Apple Watch is not a seriously compelling product, nor will it ever be as (a) useful or (b) revolutionary as the iPhone. Apple knows this, and despite what pundits and analysts might think, it doesn’t care.

Tim Cook and Johnny Ive may present the Apple Watch as an incredibly novel, sexy-as-hell product in a nascent, high-value market, but they do that with every new Apple product line because it’s their job. They know very well that the Apple Watch will not see iPhone-like, extreme revenue generation.

Apple Watch was not designed to be a high-growth, standalone product. It was designed to be a companion to the iPhone. As such, Apple Watch success will be a direct function of iPhone success. As long as the iPhone continues to sell in mind-boggling quantities with a mind-boggling growth rate, the Apple Watch will enjoy a growing market as a complementary product with recurring revenues every 2 years or so, in line with the iPhone.

While sales of the iPhone and the Apple Watch will not match up 1:1, the ratio will still be high enough for Apple to make a decently profitable side business out of selling watches to a growing subset of consumers who will find some set of tenuous and borderline-indescribable reasons to purchase one. [1]

[1] http://roymurdock.com/essays/2015/07/apple-watch-form-factor...
I do find it rather disheartening that a tech inventor and a PhD in Biology are being looked to as legitimate critics and saviors of public education.
It also implies that there are no taxes in the USA i.e. no revenue whatsoever for the government to dedicate to social programs. Total government revenue in the USA (Federal and state) for 2014 was $5.8 Trillion.

The question arises: How would the government be able to "give" Zuckerberg's fortune rather than him giving it himself? Through extremely high taxation for the wealthy that would take away the lion's share of his billions so that the government can put it to work more effectively. So what? 90% tax rate on the megarich?

Government isn't known for it's efficiency in spending or giving. I'm left leaning, but we don't need to give the government new ways to not spend money where it's needed.
There's no way that women are better. The implication of that would be if you have a furniture assembly business of female employees versus male employees, all other conditions being the same, the female business would be more profitable. Which wouldn't make any sense.
Why be your career on just one language? Shouldn't be such an issue to pick up new skills otherwise you become obsolete.
I want to have an open mind about the smartwatch platform, but when I look back and compare my thoughts about the Apple Watch to my thoughts about the original iPhone, I find a few differences. Even in its v.1 state, the iPhone offered lots of value: maps, web browser, nice touch-optimized calendar/ email/photo apps. People were excited by that. I'm just not getting that same sense of immediate value from the Apple Watch.
Try not paying money to Nestle, Comcast, Unilever, ATT, TWC, Google, Apple, Microsoft, Facebook for 2 months, and tell me how you manage.
Doesn't have 200bhp though!
Custom Lists Made Easy
"CO2 isn't even the main greenhouse gas, that's water vapor."

That's ridiculously false. Nitrogen is the main greenhouse gas. It's also stable and thus not an issue for climate change, but trying to correct someone whose basic understanding is false is not worth the effort.
> Because the structure that enabled you to amass that amount of wealth is flawed, and disproportionately rewards "you" over the network that actually did much of the heavy lifting

This thinking is so poisonous and destructive and pervasive that I'm starting to wonder if it is either due to some natural law of human nature or some grand conspiracy to destroy modern society. Businesses are not built on the charity of the "system". Everyone is compensated in the building of a business, in exactly the amounts they demand to be compensated. The government gets its taxes, the employees get their salaries and benefits, the shareholders get their equity, and the founder(s) get(s) the rest. At that point, everyone is squared. Risk is appropriately rewarded, and risk is an absolute requirement if you want great things to happen.
Nothing happens in a vacuum. With great power comes great responsibility - at some point billionaires can't blame their shit going wrong on other people if they were the more capable ones and clearly felt they were more capable when they set out to do this?
Wouldn't be more pertinent to compare the watch against a smartphone?

1. Server goes down

2. Smartphone tells you about it

3. You can decide

3-a. Reboot

3-b. Replace

3-c. Call ops team

Conclusion:
Same same, and you still need the smartphone to use the watch. So not really that interesting.
My understanding is that the patent nonsense forced Apple to transform FaceTime from a peer-to-peer protocol into one that transmitted all data through centralized servers, specifically Apple's servers.

That meant that if the goal was for interoperability, Apple had to either provide server capacity for a bunch of other people's traffic, or they would have had to come up with a way to federate the system.

Federation certainly could have been done, but that's a lot of sudden extra growth in scope compared to just taking what they had and releasing it.
Yes it's a nice language. Now it just needs the libs for Linux servers.
Google Cardboard Camera app
No single man should wield so much power. That's part of the foundation of modern democracy -- we don't want any single person having unchecked power to do as he or she wants. Krämer's solution is the state taking the place of the individual, as intended in the democratic model. Otherwise you have an effective monarchy, with the only difference that power isn't only inherited, but can be acquired via mercantile means. I don't want the shape of my country to be decided by the whims of a super-rich elite.
The real news here is not the move to Julia (although that is likely to be the reason for most of the attention). The important thing is the move to open - an open language, movement to Github, nice explanation of the details.
Fixable but very unlikely to be fixed anytime sone. Plus the tons of technical issues that make it even more of a problem to use and maintain. To make it viable it would probably have to start over.

I'm not holding my breath.
Neat. Interesting that Slack (et al) seems to have succeeded where Wave failed.

Is it just that Wave was pitched as obsoleting email instead of complementing it?

Or does Slack actually have a better feature set than Wave ever did?

Or is the world just "ready for it" now in a way that it wasn't when Wave was proposed?
The SPLC has retracted their links to this story amidst doubts about its veracity.

https://twitter.com/splcenter/status/672466511886422018
As one of the companies that is most successful in their focus on making money of user data: what could be the reason they are doing this ?
This reminds me of those grocery store carts that lock automatically when taken off the lot - and then the ones that malfunction and get stuck locked.

What about the hazard of emergency situations: fires in crowded places, heart attacks - you really want your phone wrapped in a Yondr when there's a chance that every second could be fatal.
Well, as I said initially, I don't think that this product was ever going to be a home run.

Regarding busywork, it's worth recalling that "the enemy of art is the absence of limitations."

A circular UI would introduce some very interesting constraints and give Apples designers a chance to work in a new problem space. The tension and interplay there could lead to more interesting innovation than the scaled down mobile screen they are currently have.

And using the bezel, rather than a tiny crown, as the rotational input, which a circular watch allows, is an obvious usability win.
I don't think it matters which one is more likely to happen, rather, which one would be more devastating. And quite frankly, in the case where a cofounder left in less than a year, nobody else has really lost a lot.
> And you're saying this is a bad thing

Where did I say that?

I'm not the cynic you seem to whom you seem to be responding; I believe that the internet age will empower nonviolence from non-state actors as well as an end to the violence of government.

Although we may have needed government to stifle private violence in the past, I don't think we do any longer.

> the people staffing the bureaucracies and agencies don't have their (non-existent) bonus tied to how hard they fucked a customer over.

For most reasonable definitions of "bonus" for a bureaucrat, I think that this statement is false. Oliver North and John Yoo is not in prison. Hillary Clinton is running for President. These people all received bonuses for wrecking havoc on a level about which no private entity can dream.
It seems that my site has problems when it's visited for example from behind a firewall which doesn't like my SSL-Proxy. I've heard that sometimes from people visiting the blog from work but at gome everything was fine...

Are you behind a firewall?
Shameless self-promotion: Here is a great way to learn Swift on your phone: http://swifty-app.com/
Would it be successful today, though? I say that as someone who bought and loved the iPod touch...but quickly abandoned it since it can't load any of the modern music apps...I've pretty much abandoned not just my physical CD collection, but iTunes as well, for Spotify. I'm not saying the old iPod touch is useless...it's just I'm not going to bother to turn it on and maintain it when I have an iPhone 6, even though the phone is much bigger and not quite as nice for working out with. I'm hypothesizing that such tradeoffs in software usability will outweigh the form factor.

I thought the problems with the Watch were bigger than just its physical limitations, though...Even if the iPod lacked wireless and cost more and had less HD space than competing MP3 players, you don't have to "sell* the concept that a portable music player is going to be just awesome...sure, you may not be able to afford it, but at least you can aspire to it, because virtually everyone loves music, and before the iPod or any mp3 player had come along, they had Walkmans. Or they plugged their headphones into their laptops.

But that universal appeal didn't seem to apply to the Watch. I don't have a watch because I don't see it as a necessary fashion accessory (I think it goes without saying that a watch is no longer necessary for telling time). So whatever non-obvious features the Watch has...Apple can't rely as much on my consumerism-fueled imagination to aspire to buy it...even if I'm not falling into the mindset of "well my phone, which I already carry with me all the time, does everything the watch does".

I don't think I'm underestimating the appeal of the form factor. The original iPad has been the only thing that I've ever waited in line for an Apple opening (OK, that and the first Apple Store in Iowa)...yeah, you can call it a "big iPhone"...but I already know that I don't really enjoy reading/writing things on my iPhone...or, at least I can imagine such activities being much better if only I had a bigger screen -- and if I didn't have to pop-open a laptop.

I don't have the same imagination for the fact that I can look at my watch without pulling it from my pocket. I already hate that I pull out my phone almost reflexively to check it while I'm idling around in real life, so being able to do that on a tiny screen on my wrist has very little appeal to me, certainly not enough to pay hundreds for.
You can buy the Mondeo in the UK with the 1.0 Ecoboost (yes, even the Estate version), which you'll know as the Ford Fusion.
Would it help you if it were "Free Hawai'i"? That timeline is comparable.

Your last statement confuses me. What does Dalai Lama have to do with Buddhism? The Dalai Lama is not the head of Buddhism but the head of Tibet, which is a tribe seeking a political state. Tibetan Buddhism is a sect of Buddhism practiced beyond Tibetan borders. Much like a great many Shia Muslims live in Iran, but we would not confound Iranian political independence with Shia Islam. Let's not forget Buddha was "born" in present-day Nepal. Certainly, the Dalai Lama is no fool and uses his religion for his political agenda, seeking to perhaps to conflate the two. By your post it seems he is succeeding.
I could say the same about your black and white thinking using outdated Chicago/Neoclassic economic theories when applied to aggregate economies, but I digress.

I didn't say they were built on the charity of the system, just that they were built using the system.

You act like the first 50 employees of your stupid app company aren't taking a risk too. But they get 0.01%, while the founders get...? Fairly early on, you literally don't have enough time in a day to do it all yourself, even if you wanted to, so you're quite literally taking credit for more risk than you were actually able to take.

Considering Paul Graham's essay about how most of the work is ahead of you even when you start adding employees, how is the risk so skewed towards initial conditions versus the long path ahead?

This toxic thinking that a twentysomething takes more risk by trying to start his own company while early in his career deserves orders of magnitude better compensation for the risk he took, over many career people that will have to be persuaded to risk their career and reputations on this new company, who have families, mortgages, and serious obligations to others?

He really took 1,000x more risk? Bullshit dude.
In terms of time taken, the men took 22.48 minutes with instructions, on average, [...] compared with the women taking 23.65 minutes with instructions, on average,

I [female] would lose 5% in time over a median guy just by slower screwdriving, never mind cognitive performance. This is why I assemble Ikea furniture with a power screwdriver - it's not easy work if you're not used to it.
The maximum estate tax rate in the US is 40%. Sure, donations are tax free, but the donated assets amount to at least 2.5 times what the government would have gotten.

Is it acceptable to have the privilege to choose where your fortune will be allocated when you give away a supplemental 150% of it? Maybe it's not or maybe it is; I would strongly lean towards the latter.
Democracy implies there is a leading class.
Tesla requires you to keep your hands on the wheel, doesn't it?
import frege.prelude.Math (cos)
cosines = iterate cos 1.0
pairsOf xs = zip xs (tail xs)
head [ x | (x,y) <- pairsOf cosines, x == y]

gave errors.
Shake it like a boss
> I think we would all agree, regardless of level of income, we would rather our own money be allocated to the causes that we support, rather than the causes that 51% of people support.

Exactly. Nobody thinks that the government can make better use of their own money; however, many people want to use the government to tell other people what to do with their money.
And that’s how the US ends up with horrible roads, transit quality going down, and so on.
Into a new era
Currently there is an invalid certificate from happy hacker fake CA. It is the testing Let's Encrypt CA.
In terms of how to spend "extra money", I would have agreed with you before Bill Gates' foundation delivered result few governments ever did.

Heck, I'm in Alberta where we've had a government returning taxes when we had budget surplus... just before the election.
If you're saying Christians are called not to condemn LGBT persons, I would agree with that. Forgiveness is supposed to be prevalent in Christianity. People that are LGBT should still be treated as people, and as far as Christianity goes, everyone is a sinner, and everyone has their own temptations and battles.

OKWU is seemingly fearful that allowing that culture into their student body would affect it in a way they deem negative or counter productive.

As far as LGBT not contradicting scripture, I have a hard time coming to that interpretation. From what I've read it seems clear that the bible is against that.
This is a really important point to make. The government may be democratically elected, but that doesn't mean that much, because of how the political system works. When people have the choice directly, they don't vote for the government. Also, comparing track records, the government has a really bad one when it comes to actually helping the poor, not just giving them enough money not to die.
Then you have honestly not paid attention in the world today.
Thanks for the link.

I think, the function type :

(Int, Int) -> Int

may have been the main reason, but having

(Int, Int) : Int

func nameMe(name: String, calName: ((Int, Int) : Int))

would still have worked, and made the syntax more aesthetic.
Oneplus 2 no longer needs an invite
In a really good text book, this is left as an exercise that the reader won't do.
Yep. In fact, some people did wear iPod Nanos as watches, and there's a CNET video that compares them side by side.

http://www.cnet.com/uk/videos/apple-watch-vs-ipod-nano-watch...
Great points. I think I'm just not a smart watch person in general. The added convenience factor just doesn't seem worth wearing a bulky device on my wrist that I can't use to get work done. I still have an iPhone 5s because I like being able to easily carry my phone in a pocket everywhere, and still have full-fledged input/output and connectivity capabilities. If I had a phablet things might be different.
It's really great to see Apple investing in package management for Swift. Handling dependencies and versioning well is so important for a language to get right out of the gate.