skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My first job out of high school was entering those Columbia House applications into a computer database.

The amount of fake applications I, personally, came across was astounding. I can remember, on my first day, coming across a batch of applications that were so obviously all from the same person -- different CD selections (six-digit numbers, if memory serves) and different names but the same mailing address and same handwriting. I went up to ask my supervisor what I should do about them and was told to enter them in regardless. Basically, it did not matter one bit if the apps were fake or fraudulent. My job was to enter them into the computer. It was explicitly NOT my job to decide whether they were legitimate or not. I wondered then how they managed to make any money.

Even before I worked there, though, it was common knowledge amongst my friends in high school that you could put whatever information you wanted to on the applications and the CDs would still come in the mail.
The separation of powers is between divisions of government, not political parties.

Also, once you fix campaign finance, you'll have people who will vote to representatives who will fix redistricting issues. Probably not a representative sample, but the recent Ohio elections showed that partisan gerrymandering is not popular. Once the electorate has representatives that need not worry about appeasing special interests, their will will be done.
I did check this and it was not the problem, unfortunately. I've just nuked the partition from orbit and started over with Mint.
works for me, try this:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:tDSohcr...
or maybe this:
https://web.archive.org/web/20150925204600/http://www.sander...
<script type="application/wasm">
The problem is that new and better ways to do things come along (ES2015 versus JS, webpack versus grunt/gulp), but the old ways hang around like a bad smell.

How the heck as a beginner are you meant to fight your way through all the noise of the old, bad ways of doing things? How is a beginner meant to know that really they should be using ES2015 and webpack rather than JS and gulp/grunt? How does a beginner even come to understand that in the reactJS world they might be reading something relevant, but then again they might be reading something completely irrelevant and in compatible (i.e. ES2015 verus JS).

Really when a new technology comes along that is a clear "winner", serious consideration should be given to just getting rid of the "old" way.

Unless Grunt and Gulp are going to somehow make a big comeback, the should be loudly killed off.

Damn - whenever I read the React documentation I have to filter out all the irrelevant code that is not ES2015. Why is all that non-ES2015 code there still?

Old tech should be visibly and loudly killed. No wonder its hard for beginners - its all the damn noise made by the "old" ways of doing things.

The react ecosystem is filled with the living dead - technology that has died but just won't go away.

Things should remain backward compatible but only for a very short window, it's really unhelpful to have many many different ways of doing the same thing, it fragments everything including the learning curve. Witness Perl.

Beginners (and I am one) don't need to be shown every possible way to do things - they need be given a rock solid, opinionated path on the current right way to get the job done. I don't care if that opinionated path changes every month, I just want to not have to work it out by fighting through two years of zombie tech to eventually figure it out.
Just FYI for anyone clicking this link, this is a link that sets it to show the worst reviews on Glassdoor, not a random sampling. I wasn't that familiar with GD beforehand it and confused me.
Yeah, this is something I struggle with: Always trying to find something new to learn and not mastering anything. It is exhausting, but ultimately it depends on me.

That said, to me the React ecosystem is the opposite of "convention over configuration" which can frustrate a lot of beginners. There's no popular `rails new` or `ember new` to get you started.
This is terrifying.

Eric Posner, quoted in the article, isn't some far right nutjob. He's a well respected law professor, son of the famous Judge Richard Posner (7th Cir.), and one of the most cited legal scholars in the country.

I'm not one to sound the alarm, but I'm actually worried about the First Amendment for the first time in my life.
Whoa, I did not originally catch that. Thanks very much for pointing it out. I updated the title of the submission.

The original article is no longer available on that site, but here's the saved version.

https://web.archive.org/web/20150121075232/http://www.nation...
At the latest DockerCon Solomon told about solution - look https://youtu.be/at72dhg-SZY?t=1445
Aside from the privacy aspects, one of my main gripes with the surveillance state is the return on investment. Who are we protecting ourselves from again, and what are the risks of loss of life and property for me and the ones that I love? Why are 'they' trying to kill 'me' and break my stuff? Or, are they after someone else? And, if they really are after me, are there more effective ways to get them to stop? Is it really an 'existential threat'? (What does that even mean?). And, how does it compare to other threats that I face?

How does an average citizen like me even rationally assign a price that I'm willing to pay when the facts are so obscured. I hear a lot of people (who I don't necessarily trust) yelling 'fire', but I don't see any smoke or feel any heat. And, conveniently, it just so happens that those people are the ones in charge of taking my money and my freedoms.
This is a common misconception. OPEC isn't unified and the Saudi strategy is far more ambitious; they aren't trying to choke out the frackers and other high-price producers, they're trying to choke out the environmentalists. 5 years of prices at this level will put millions more SUVs on US highways and will make maintenance of existing oil-fired infrastructure appear more economical than investment in new clean energy alternatives (solar, wind, etc as you said). Additionally, they get to kick the Iranians in the nuts, which is in line with their stategic goals, squeeze the Russians and the Venezualans, which makes them more popular with the US government which will already be happy about the economic boost from low prices, and yes, they would hopefully be one of the strongest producers standing when oil prices rise again.
I haven't encountered that issue as I only use that laptop at home (same subnet) but that's a very good point, thanks.
The flaw with this analogy is that when you need to revisit the house you built with a hammer and nails, you can continue using your nail gun. In S/W development, you have to go back to using the hammer and nails (or at the very least have a strong understanding of the hammer and nails). Furthermore, once you've built a house, it's built, and the work you will be doing on it will be minimal. Software development is almost the opposite.
Will mixmax finally deliver?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1025709
How can I write reusable components if my domain logic must be separate from my view logic?
> the move towards more tooling is terrible for what should be something simple.

I couldn't disagree more. I think the advances in tooling around web development is extremely exciting and absolutely necessary if we as an industry want to get our act together writing complex web applications. It's worse for getting new people into programming or web development, but there are always pretty simple drop-in scripts people can use to play with things like Babel, React, or even crazy stuff like full client-side module loading with SystemJS: https://gist.github.com/cem2ran/9be3dd3499566302d5ae

> HTML/CSS/JS are not rocket science - in themselves, they're simple languages for building a user-facing app.

I think that's extremely dismissive, and woefully underestimates the difficulties one faces building a complex long-lived web application.
Sweet. Now you can hit your monthly data cap in 40 minutes.
While I agree with the general sentiment here, I fail to see the relevance of the last three names.

Even though I'm infinitely appreciative of his work with RECAP, in the end Swartz was just some guy that killed himself because he was too scared to go to court.

Ellsberg had his charges dropped and is a free man.

Levinson just broke the law for no apparent reason. (Snowden absolutely expected that email to be compromised)
> Are you saying Coca-Cola creates thirst?

Really?
>>Honest question: what kinds of things are you doing with React/Angular that you can't do with jQuery? [...] Is it really higher productivity, or is it just keeping up with the latest fashion?

Answer to the first question: nothing. Everything you develop using React/Angular/etc. can be written using vanilla HTML/CSS/JS.

The difference is that, as your pages become more and more interactive, it becomes harder and harder to deal with the complexity. I recently developed a web form that has a little over 1,000 lines of JQuery. After a while, it became really difficult to keep track of various event handlers, when they would fire and how to make sure they didn't interfere with each other. If I were using a framework like React, it would have been much easier. Here's a diagram that outlines this concept: http://imgur.com/dSQTLDE

>>I feel like the vast majority of websites don't need more than a little JavaScript

Websites don't. Web apps do. The distinction becomes bigger and more important every day.
I think the problem is that the people using React see the grand architecture in Relay / Falcor / Om.next, and are trying to recreate those API's using current libs. There are still a lot of parts missing when you try to build an app with the same abstractions as the aforementioned libraries, and I think the author is correct about 2016 being a year where those gaps are filled.

What we really need is a translation of om.next to javascript. That library summarizes all the good ideas from Netflix and Facebook into a small library for every day use. The fact that it's in Clojurescript makes it a non-starter for others, too bad because it's a really great eco-system.

edit, list technologies:
React + Redux is a good start, but we need composable queries and a router (falcor) or reconciler (om.next) that manages data fetching / caching. JLongster has done some experimentation here with datascript integration https://github.com/jlongster/redux-experiments/blob/master/s...
In his defense, his team posted a story written by a writer at the National Journal.

But I do not believe you can separate Snowden from the surveillance debate until his fate is determined (and is acceptable). As the man who exposed the lies, he deserves not only thanks and credit but a fair resolution to his current situation.
Why are Americans so afraid? You are the most powerful nation in the history of the planet. You routinely bend the rest of the world to your will. Your military kills civilians with relative impunity.

What are you so afraid of? Just chill the fuck out, m'kay?
Stop Hair Fall and Regrow Hair Fast
Sell me on Webpack, and, in particular, on why I should care about this particular bit of plumbing.
Top List of CRISPR Predictions for New Year
I don't know how long ago you switched from FreeBSD but are you aware of FreeBSD's (relatively) new `pkg` tool and binary package repositories?
So was pets.com at its time (and countless others). The time scale is different, but ... if twitter crashes and burns soon because it can't make any money, it will have left more impact on the history books, but ultimately will be remembered as "a facebook like also-ran, that only had a whats-on-your-mind line"
Fair enough. Danger is a spectrum, not binary. I agree, a more nuanced view is that we (should?) view censorship as more dangerous than open communication of dangerous ideas. Or at least that's my understanding of why we have a First Amendment in the first place.
Our allies in various counter-insurgencies over the years have done such things, and many of those wars have been enthusiastically supported by the religious right.
The wiring is only temporary and can only be on the tree for a relatively short period of time before you risk permanent scarring. After being held in position for a long enough time, if done properly, will permanently shape the tree.

Everything is controlled, there are even techniques for which buds to pick out so that the tree will direct resources to the proper parts for growth.
Just want to second this book recommendation.

They cite examples of industries that have prospered without patent protection.

Outside of pharma, the pro-patent position seems quite weak. And even for pharma there may be better models (lotteries, bounties for drugs, public funding)
> Feedback: contact@

Posting about typo's and such here in the comments helps no one.
My (simplistic) understanding is that webpack is more simple than grunt and gulp to configure. Backed up by my observation that most of the most current projects seem to be embracing it - that's enough for me, it's the current winner so it's what I use. I don't have time and I'm not interested in doing a detailed technical analysis - my approach is just to try to understand what technologies are the latest - and on the assumption that they are the latest because they are better, and on the assumption that previous technologies that did the same thing will be superseded - I use them.

You can criticise this approach as just following the trends but I take this approach because it would be stupid to try to understand every single component of the ecosystem and then make my own careful choices - what is everyone else using right now? Probably good enough unless I know some good reason not to use it.

I am a beginner and struggle hard to understand the vast array of tech I need to do reactJS development. It hurts me very badly sometimes and I feel stupid because I don't grasp it all, but I have to get shit built so for the most part I'm just doing what others are doing and as I go I am learning more and more and in areas that I have gained real understanding I then make my own educated decisions about exactly how to do it in the right way.
Parks, libraries and schools are largely not communally-owned spaces, but government-owned. Crucial distinction. In fact, some of the best alternatives to the traditional classroom model (i.e. Montessori, Sudbury, democratic, etc.) tend to be privately run schools. As such, private schools are on the positive side here.

Again, this mystical "community" is mostly an illusion. It's either private ownership or government ownership via eminent domain. Commons aren't applicable in most cases.

Bonds with extended family are to be settled on an individual case-by-case basis. Many people rightfully may consider their extended families to be not worth interacting with, and in any event this is all a flimsy normative sentiment.

Beauty standards are determined first societally, then by entrepreneurs. The profit motive is intrinsic to a world of uncertainty (see Frank H. Knight's Risk, Uncertainty and Profit). It is wholly neutral. There is nothing wrong with pursuing profits, even though a lot of people have an anti-capitalist bias and are convinced it's demonic.

I mostly agree, except in the sense that people are maybe being sold a bad cure for an ailment they might not have had, spending money they don't have, perpetuating the problems that caused them to want to escape in the first place.

Clearly these are unresolved issues on part of the consumer.

Markets are flawed because the actors in them are not rational or well-informed (which is often an axiom of whatever model one chooses to use), and because the actions available to them are dictated by those currently on top.

This is the almost cliched refrain of every moral reformer. Market participants are irrational, therefore $SOCIAL_ENGINEERING_POLICY_OF_CHOICE. Of course, there is information asymmetry in anything one does (market or no market), and the classic resolutions are through screening or signaling.

(Also, the definitions of "rational" and "informed" in economics are quite different from their colloquial counterparts. Moreover, assuming universal irrationality by default leads to nihilistic conclusions. At least it should anyway, most people use it as an excuse for their pet reforms by completely ignoring the irrationality in state institutions.)

For instance, violence or overt threats of violence in pursuit of gain is considered to be taboo in markets (that I know of), since those who have goods or the means to produce them generally want to keep that relative power over those who do not.

What the fuck? Violence is taboo in markets because the bourgeoisie capitalists want to exploit the underdogs? Could it possibly be because the initiation of force against voluntary actors is considered immoral by almost everyone? Hopefully you do, as well, but I can't deduce.

EDIT: The anti-capitalist and socialist crankery seems to be inherent from examining your post history.
The "statistic" seems to make a point that taking a bet on a strategy and losing is incompetence.
I was responding to a question about separating "the unique parts of your app" from other concerns like DOM and the network. I interpreted "the unique parts of your app" to be the way application state is represented and modified, which is a pretty reasonable definition for the common term "business logic."

Library-agnostic reusable components is another question, and certainly a good one. There doesn't seem to be a good answer right now. Web Components appears to be intended to solve that problem, but it isn't looking so good in my opinion.

I would probably go with a similar approach to reducers in Redux: a simple function that takes a state object and returns some library-agnostic representation of DOM. Of course there is no standard representation of DOM that I know of, but you could just output a plain JS object representing the DOM tree. There are probably many libraries out there offering a way to represent DOM that could easily to plugged into (with a simple wrapper) whatever new DOM rendering library is hot.
Makes me think that everybody's journey deserves respect.
This response sums up something important about the Javascript development community that I cannot put into words.
http://survivejs.com/webpack_react/webpack_compared/

https://medium.com/@housecor/browserify-vs-webpack-b3d7ca08a...
Totally. But if I'm being extreme I would say that keeping your application state "memoized" into a single value may or may not be necessary for your application. If it's not, you've just coupled all of the data models in your application to into the same entity, which makes it easier to turn those couplings into dependencies, which makes them harder to test and use separately later.
In order to be sold on webpack you need to understand the stack of problems it solves. I tried to do this during a talk last year; the relevant part is https://youtu.be/VkTCL6Nqm6Y?t=9m39s
Answering your edit: don't people have to come to this conclusion on their own, rather than be "convinced"? Doesn't someone have to pass through some period of anhedonia, and the realization that "things" aren't going to make them happier, before they can start to see the structure that will help?

If so, and if your desire is to help normal people, I guess your choices are to a) find a strategy that sells anhedonia against the formidable marketing budget of pretty much everyone, everywhere in this culture, or b) capture them on the other side and offer them the structure they need to build a life after anhedonia.

75% of these Robert Pirsig quotes [1] seem relevant, in some way.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10799124
Workplace drug testing is widespread but ineffective
Remember, ISIS wouldn't be around if it weren't for the US.

And even as late as 2014, the Saudis prevented the US from attacking ISIS.

So the US helps create ISIS and stands by while it consolidates power ... and I am supposed to pay for it with my First Amendment?!?
Tk was only ever feasible for very simple, often throw-away, UIs, and not much more than that. Tk can't be compared to Qt or the other full-featured UI toolkits that exist.
> webpack is more simple than grunt and gulp to configure

That's the first time I've heard that one. In my opinion, what makes Webpack great is its raw power and module-based (rather than file-based) focus. Browserify is easy to work with and get started with but less powerful. (Granted, it's quickly catching up.) Webpack is a lot of things, but easy to configure is not one of them.

By the way, Webpack doesn't really replace Grunt or Gulp. It replaces Browserify. That said, if you use Webpack, you can easily get by with npm scripts instead of Grunt/Gulp.
> That doesn't prove your idea correct; it's likely the case we're innovative despite patents

No. My claim is simply: "The US is the most innovative country in the world in terms of software, and has been for the past decades".

This is a fact.

Your claim is: "This has happened DESPITE patents".

There is little to no evidence for your claim and the burden of proof is on you.

> The system doesn't work, that's rather the point

It it didn't work, the US would not be the most innovative software country in the world. It is, therefore your claim is wrong. The system works.

Could it work better? Sure. Propose a solution and show some evidence that your solution will be better than the current situation. Then we can talk.
I am not sure why the parent compares webpack to gulp/grunt. The latter are generalized task runners (think "make"), but the former is a tool for bundling together many small JS files into one.

Webpack (and browserify, a competitor that's very similar) bring you a module system so that dependencies are explicit with a require() call and you don't have a global namespace with hundreds of objects. JS doesn't have any such system built in. Packaging it into one file in the end, which they do, is necessary for performance so you don't make hundreds of network requests.