skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Because the GP comment was talking about HN "jumping the shark", and you were agreeing with them and adding that this was an "abuse of power"—both things suggesting that this action betokened bad things for HN going forward.

My point was that it doesn't, any more than a waiter asking after your mother's health when she's just died implies the restaurant is on a decline. That's not insensitive (therefore implying the restaurant is now hiring insensitive people); it's just a faux pas (therefore implying the restaurant is hiring regular ol' fallible humans.) The change to the article title here, likewise, was not an abuse; it was just an overly-hasty application of the regular HN guidelines—the thing dang does literally all day without anyone noticing when he's doing it well, done with slightly less care than usual.

dang is a regular person; regular people realize when they do things other people don't like, and then stop doing those things. Systems composed of regular people (i.e. not tyrants and sycophants) self-correct, rather than entering downward spirals. Not everything presages the end of an era. Most things, where conscientious people are involved, are just hiccups.
Oh, that's interesting. I follow rust development with interest but have only built a few toy projects in myself and was definitely under the impression that these sorts of issues resided solely in `unsafe { ... }` blocks. But, yeah, with this example it makes sense.

I'm relieved to hear that at least it doesn't pollute beyond module boundaries.

But now I'm questioning what the difference is between `unsafe {...}` code and within-module code that accesses it, if the latter also has to deal with memory safety issues? Should `unsafe` only be declared at the module level then?
I don’t even know why I would want to be on a label in a few years, because I don’t think it’s going to work by labels and by distribution systems in the same way. The absolute transformation of everything that we ever thought about music will take place within 10 years, and nothing is going to be able to stop it. I see absolutely no point in pretending that it’s not going to happen. I’m fully confident that copyright, for instance, will no longer exist in 10 years, and authorship and intellectual property is in for such a bashing.

Music itself is going to become like running water or electricity. So it’s like, just take advantage of these last few years because none of this is ever going to happen again. You’d better be prepared for doing a lot of touring because that’s really the only unique situation that’s going to be left. It’s terribly exciting. But on the other hand it doesn’t matter if you think it’s exciting or not; it’s what’s going to happen.

~ David Bowie, 2002
I'd not, but my self-interest is rational, I'd never risk loosing the companionship of my wife who's intelligence I admire, who I find a great mother and a great enrichment of my life. I guess we do agree. As I said, perhaps I tend to harp to much on the ethics of rational self-interest. I tended to ignore my own needs in relationships, the works of Ayn Rand were a big eye opener.
We may get an answer to that in the future via the Event Horizon Telescope [1] which plans to "directly observe the immediate environment of a black hole with angular resolution comparable to the event horizon."

[1] http://eventhorizontelescope.org/index.html
Why send one at all?
You can also drop the `<` in that example, pv takes a file to read from as an argument:

pv --buffer-size 1m /dev/sda > sda.file

Will do the same thing, and give an accurate % complete progress bar.
I think with professional level applications, the same thing can be said, but with a shift in gradient. Why wouldn't it be?

I've been working with logstash a bit lately and... oh my god. The documentation is outdated, the initial examples have examples without explaining core principles, the log messages are almost useless, it takes about five seconds for the damn thing to even /check if the config is valid/ and holy mother of god if I see another line saying that something's been deprecated..... Also for the love of said god, when a bug report is filed and the dev needs to explain in multiple paragraphs why something undocumented is actually feature, not a bug... there's something truly awful. https://logstash.jira.com/browse/LOGSTASH-1348

I can understand how these things happen, I truly do. But for something as widely used as logstash? No! Bad devs!

The simple fact that folks on stack overflow recommend to use two different grok creation tools to get logstash working properly (unless deprecation, because hey why not) is a complete and utter failure in my eyes.

Also, while I'm at it. I worked for an HFT firm that started going towards the devops stack, which required an install of Logstash. Installed it everywhere... I got woken up the next morning that every single machine was running cripplingly slow and that the trade desk had to cancel all orders. Huh. I installed it, but I never actually configured any of it to run...

Welp. A ps showed that logstash-web was running..... but with a 5 second uptime?

Turns out logstash-web's configs come installed with a bad config file that caused it to RESTART OVER AND OVER AND OVER. It killed any core the start job was running on for a good 10 seconds and immediately came up on the next. How...... why.... no..... :(

Thanks, Logstash. I seriously hope somebody from your team reads this article. You're in absolute desperate need of usability lessons.

/rant
Though unfortunate, I don't think this belongs on HN.
I'll second this.

Meteor is in fact the fastest way to achieve a webapp nowadays. You can learn it in a weekend if you want to, and drafting highly dynamic interfaces is a breeze.

If you want to scale later, in terms of code complexity as well as runtime performance and so on, Meteor isn't that good, but having thousands of concurrent users is a luxury problem to have.

To get an idea out the door, Meteor.

(I'm a fullstack dev who has worked with dozens of languages and even more frameworks, and went through all the popular frontend tech's since jquery, so: been there, done stuff)
So your +1/-1 don't represent people who do/don't pay back their loans? Um, ok. Silly me for thinking there was some relation between that and the topic under discussion.

In any case, I don't think you are stupid, I think you are disingenuous. When I ask for you to clarify in unambiguous terms, you refuse. When I attempt to read between the lines, you immediately accuse me of deliberate misrepresentation. What I don't understand is what you are trying to accomplish with all this sophistry - clearly no one on HN is fooled.
I know that I'm not the only one crying.

Bowie's music meant a lot to me. He was a weirdo that made it cool to be a weirdo. His music was always on while I was coding, running, having a drink, taking to my daughter. Everyone in the house are asleep - they will be heartbroken tomorrow morning. His music was part of the soundtrack to our lives. My sister got me into Bowie and my older daughter and wife love his music. I thought that Bowie would somehow live forever.
> Owning a stock is never a liability. Never would a stock go negative dollars.

I agree that the market isn't currently quite saying that core Yahoo is worth < 0, but your logic here is completely incorrect. While of course this is true of an entire share of stock, we're not talking about a literal share of stock being valued at less than zero. Core Yahoo is a subset of what the share represents ownership of, and that subset is what people are claiming is being valued at less than zero.

This is quite clearly possible if the expectation is that the subset will use more resources from the overall entity than it will produce (for a trivial example, if we imagine that the subset is worth X billion and you expect it to spend its entire cash hoard of X+1 billion on unprofitable investments, then the subset has negative value).

It's far from impossible for the market to value core Yahoo at less than zero; it simply means that it thinks that Yahoo is going to die and on the way it's going to net-squander some of the other resources that are contained within a single share of YHOO.

Basic Finance 101.
In retrospect, it was probably not a good idea to allow Google to buy Youtube. Because at this point, I don't think they're intentionally going after Firefox, but the tight coupling between Youtube and Google makes it impossible for them to actually be neutral in terms of things like bug fixes.

It's way too granular to be handled through the legal system or any kind of government regulation, so it's an unfortunate situation that's going to keep happening.
This article is deeply flawed... change in wages != change in standard of living.

But that aside, in addition to people wanting to take part in higher standards of living, I'd hypothesize that another driver is social status. In our culture, wealth seems to translate pretty directly to social status, and I think that's a pretty core human need/desire that most people aren't willing to opt out of competing for.
Stackshare does this. Here is SeatGeek's stack: http://stackshare.io/seatgeek
Actually wouldn't it be better to learn multiple technologies while avoiding crossover? I suggest learning JS and JQuery for your front end. Writing your back end API in PHP and mySQL. Linking them with AJAJson.
You're of course correct, but the point was that the probability distribution is shifted. It's a blunt probabilistic instrument, but it's extremely common in hiring to use such instruments.
Talking about conflict of interest in general is fine, but making it be about one person is almost never fine. Egregious cases might be different, but to use it as a routine device in an argument is a personal attack and doesn't belong here. This is important because people on the internet are much too quick to jump to such conclusions about people they disagree with. See https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&prefix=true&page=0&dateR... if you want to read about our thinking on this; there's a lot of material there.

> contradicting me is not a personal attack.

You've moved the goalposts though. If I contradicted you by saying you were lying for personal gain, that would be.
The problem with IE6 was not that users didn't update. It was that IE created a monoculture among developers, using IE only features. Which resulted in code which got out on the web, and stayed there.

And then every browser had to either 1. be "broken" because the web-pages didn't work, or 2. forego W3C, standard-process and all that and emulate IE's bugs in order to be "real" browsers people could use.

And long after IE6 is gone, all that is still hanging around, causing issues to this day.

Right now we're getting a Chrome monoculture. People are using pre-standard Chrome and Webkit only features in production websites. In the future those websites will stick around, no matter if Chrome users update their browsers or not.

Chrome is the new IE. With Google giving a shit about real standardization, launching non-standard features in Chrome and production websites at the same time, they are the new Microsoft.
Show HN: Web Previewer for Apple TV's LSR Images
Agreed. Learn Bootstrap and safe design time, and give a fuck about all that hypster technologie. A framework in your favorite language with a proper ORM would definitly help tho.
It really depends on your usage patterns. I watch YT mostly for audio in the videos. Either it's music or some documentary or interviews or shows like This Week in Startups. Video is really not important and I don't want to waste my bandwidth on it. I watch all videos at 360p by default and only increase it manually when I really need to see the detail.

I also know a lot of people who just start a playlist with music and leave YT in the background the whole day. They don't even have that tab active in the browser.
It is wildly known that hackers don't like music geniuses. And geek culture was not shaped by the music of the 70-s and 80-s. And Labyrinth. As long as there is crowd big enough to mourn, it belongs. Otherwise it will just slip from front page.

And Bowie was such an artist that he shaped multiple generations.
What was your best passive income in 2015?
What is your best source of 'passive' or recurring income?

previous links added in the comment
It's only forever. Not long at all. -Jared the Goblin King

First Lemmy, now David - one hell of a supergroup is gathering in the skies.
Much to the dismay of smaller creatures.
That sort of fits with both my and RogtamBar's points that you spend most of your time working if you include your own stuff but not so much on formal employment. Maybe what we need is for employment to be more fun rather than less of it.
previous:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8822151

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8107588

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8201392

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8395801
I'll chip in as a recent animator-turned-web-developer:

1. Learn plain old JavaScript(https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript), paying particular attention to both ES5 and ES6. Most of the latest frameworks work with JS as its base, so if you know JS you'll likely find it easier to figure them out.

2. Learn CSS(it's easy, shouldn't take you more than a couple of hours) and then dive into SASS or LESS.

3. Take some time to learn how Node and it's package manager npm work.

4. For the more back-endish choices, I'd have a look at getting a basic understanding of NodeJS, RoR and Django. One of these should appeal to you more than the others and I'd just pick one and stick to it.
Having used Prolog a lot myself, I'd guess it's just that the kind of problems Prolog is good at (i.e. ones that require backtracking and the user of an inference engine) don't occur often enough.
He also voiced (and digitally portrayed) one of the characters in the game. Additionally, there are three secret concerts which you can attend after finding their fliers at which original songs are played.
Wow, that's precisely how I wooed my mate!
The problem is not Google owning Youtube. The problem is Google owning a majority of internet real-estate and a web-browser.

Now they can bypass any W3C standards-comittee and launch whatever they want in production websites and their own browser at the same time, much like Microsoft did. They already have their own Googley version of ActiveX out there! It will be fun to see what's next! /s

Google Chrome is the worst thing which has happened to the modern web.
Well, that's bad news for the Labyrinth sequel, unless they've filmed it already.
And, crucially, disengaging - with a beep if you have hands on wheel and a panicky "crash imminent, we're all going to die, do something!" series of beeps if you don't. Being aware of the car's mode is not an issue.
What is so wrong about paying more to go to the head of the line? Surely, no one would have an issue with wealthy people jumping the line at the hospital emergency room right? /s
>

pub fn evil(&mut self) {
self.len += 2;
}

Does it makes sense to think if it takes a mutable instance of the "unsafe" structure, then whatever it does to it could be "usafe".

So it seems to fix it by hand, one could wrap all the calls which touch instances of this Vec with safe validation code -- basically guard code that runs at runtime to prevent corruptions from spreading. Can it be easily done during compile time?
Dependent types allow for this kind of thing.

Another possibility that doesn't require such heavy language machinery is something like OCaml's private types, where the scope of unrestricted access is unsafe blocks rather than the body of a module. In this approach there is no type-level correspondence between the value of the length member and the extent of the array: private types only ensure that any potentially invariant-breaking mutation is restricted to a certain scope, not that the code is correct.
Compared to your recent submissions?
The problem with several of the arguments made in this article is they are [at least initially] made as absolute statements. Documentation is always bad. Configuration is wrong. People are lazy idiots.

It certainly baits more people into response than a moderate argument but I'd rather see that version than see other programmers cite this one as a reason to document nothing. That's much worse.
There are some aspects of wealth that basic economic concepts and models don't capture. Here for example, diminishing marginal utility doesn't seem to play as big a part as it did.

My guess is that competitive dynamics dominate this issue. Within a career/job it is hard to progress with less than full effort because of competition, for example. On the consumption side, by working less an individual becomes poor relative to his peers. This in itself is meaningful. Where 4 kids in a small 2 bedroom was normal and middle class throughout Europe in Keynes' time, it is hardship today. Living without smartphones or Internet is hard because they are normal, both psychologically and practically.

Second, inflation is unevenly distributed. The average salary/price ratio for bread and cheese and cutlery sets improved miraculously but the ratio for a tennis lesson did not.

Then, there are many markets that are zero sum or reduced sum. The price of real estate in many limited supply areas like cities rises to the limit of affordability for the corresponding percentile of the population. IE the median house corresponds to the maximal borrowing amount for a median household.

I also think "you make what you measure" applies. Our governments' highest measurable priorities are usually gdp and employment. Then there's wealth distribution. Will the median person's wealth increase 8 fold?

All that said. I think number of working years is a place to look for any changes that did occur. College, travel retirement. People had longer working lives back the, especially considering life expectancy.
This made me deaf.
A whole lot of comments here assume that the rating agencies are doing this because they're totally driven by greed. I think what people neglect to mention is understand is that rating agencies are overwhelmed by complex securities partly because they're made up of B-players.

In b-school, it's very common to see all the finance A-players gravitate towards PE, banks, HF and prop shops. Then the student sub-layer below them go to boutique versions of the aforementioned entities and it's usually Group B.

Believe it or not, this has a harsh impact on the culture there. Ask anyone you know who works at a lower level bank about how pointlessly harsh the culture is. My hypothesis is that: being made up of B and sub-B professionals, rating agencies just don't have the in-house intellectual capacity to do the levels of diligence they'd be expected to do to prevent the A-players in banks from cheating the market
I doubt it was legally mandated, but it certainly isn't now: Model S brakes itself and IMHO it's much safer.
http://uivideos.wordpress.com/
Can you think outside of the communist box?

Competition is in part due to the fact there are more humans alive today fighting for the same resources.
It's kinda similar to dating, where things are not getting easier(except for those who inherited good genes).
Today with dating you have to do more to get the same result people use to get with less effort.

Lack of social safety net? Why do you care about that? You don't have a safety net when you get dumped. You know, if your girlfriend dumps you, you don't get another girl to give you blowjobs, because otherwise you might get depressed and suicidal. You're expected to figure it out on your own and you might not do it - you might end up lonely, without dates and maybe even commit suicide because of that.
So, why not hold wage earners to the same standard? Don't be a hypocrite!
Your experience makes sense. I've read articles analyzing happiness at work and there is a very strong correlation with job autonomy. (And that explains why executives often love work - studies find that executives control their time and choose their work. That is also why bosses are so often surprised when their subordinates aren't equally enthusiastic about the work they are assigned.) Really, it takes somebody very disconnected from the reality of working people to think that everyone wants to work at jobs as they are currently constructed in our society.
There is Firefox on iOS:

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/ios/
HN on firefox is bad. Comments doesn't have any hierarchy. HN has to fix that.

I use firefox on android as it is the only one that has extensions. I use uBlock and mht extensions.

On linux desktop too firefox is used mostly as it uses less memory than chrome when you have too many tabs open
You don't actually mean "the rest of society", you just mean some other programmers. Why don't you ask Serena, (the heavy View user mentioned in the article), any of her friends, your mom, a niece or nephew, anyone going to school, or any other random sampling of the population who would know about the app. If you don't think consequences and happy users matter then it's hard to have a discussion about ethics.
That sounds pretty legitimate.

My first thought is that what you're worth is not what you want, and not according to your contribution to productivity. You're paid according to what you'll accept.

So you gotta wonder, if there starts to be a slight shortage of jobs, what do the different actors do? The middle manager and the employee... Well, as an employee you have less and less say, and you probably want to try to prove yourself and work harder or longer. Motivation is toward equal or higher hours than normal.

And the employer just wants to get the job done. They don't want to sift through MORE employees to do it. That means more training, more managing, and generally more hassle. Motivation is toward giving employees equal or more hours than normal.
CL21 – Common Lisp in the 21st Century
Excellent Massage Spa Franchise Opportunity High R.O.I
HN's guidelines suggest things hackers would find interesting; Bowie's genius, non-conformity, and willingness to experiment with musical form are certainly characteristics hackers would find interesting. His loss is a loss to the entire world of art and music, and he was one of my favorite musicians — my single favorite for a very long time. May he rest in peace.
It was a nice surprise to see this on #1 here on HN.

Farewell, Major Tom.
Cigarettes are immoral in my opinion despite extremely clear warning labels (which are on them due to government mandate) and nothing that would trip the moral filters expressed in the article.

If you don't think consequences matter, you're welcome to your view. I happen to have a different view of morals and ethics, and one that I studied to attain.
What on earth happened to this project? It looked really promising. Is it all left to racket now?
The editor of the post, Ravenbrook, maintains a very well written Memory Management Reference: http://www.memorymanagement.org/
Url changed from http://gizmodo.com/microsofts-making-its-own-sim-card-to-pro..., which points to this.