skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There are Alpine Linux and Gentoo, but I don't know for what sort of production you need to be ready, so I can't comment on that.

I'm considering a switch to OpenBSD myself. None of the BSDs have the microbe that's systemd. I'm an Arch user nowadays, they switched to systemd recently, and I couldn't switch away yet.
Keitai Shousetsu: A Study of Japan's Mobile Phone Fiction
Ask HN: Anyone recommend any good hacker themed books for my hols?
I have worked my ass of this year, therefore, I am looking forward to a nice 2 week break in the sun. I read digital fortress by Dan Brown a while back (liked it except for the NSA being glamourised) and loved the Mother of God (the rise of AI by David Ambrose).

Would really appreciate some suggestions from the community on the best out there, hacker themed, AI take over etc etc.
Imo cloud connected apps are just an inevitable evolution from the technology advancements of recent years. It's just how things are now and will not go away because it has too many benefits, but of course also some downsides.

But tell your argument of independent "non connected" software to administrators who have to manage installations for hundreds of workplaces and they will tell you what a godsend cloud applications are.

I think it will become even more extreme, technologically it would already be possible to have computers or even smartphones be essentially just thin clients, which today is even working for the highest demanding apps like games (eg. Steam Streaming, Playstation network etc). For this to be a reality our network infrastructures have to improve a lot though.
Exactly! This is a subject dominated by imagination and fantasy. All that is needed is a spark. Arguably, the robot should be quite different from a real human, because they are available already and at a reasonable price.
The search engine that does not collect any personal information about you
Two New EBPF Tools: Memleak and Argdist
I think the post misses completely the point of technology replacing humans. Like autonomous cars, sex robots will be viable when they are better than the alternative. And for many people, this means better than nothing/sex toys. They don't need to be perfect as it suggests.
Scala runs on JVM and uses OS-level threads.

However, Actors are not threads, so in a way it's like user threads. One million actors will be scheduled to run on a pool of OS threads.
The kids are all right.

We know this because every two years, the federal government asks thousands of teenagers dozens of questions about whether they are all right.

I didn't read the entire article. I hope the punchline was at the end.
Just so you know, Google very easily identifies your clicks as fake or accidental so they are just thrown in the trash, nobody pays for them.
> it's a consumption device rather than both consumption and production, is just silly

It's not just the fact that it's an underutilized general computing device; just look at the apps on your phone and tell me the percentage of them that open to a blank "canvas" rather than some kind of stream / feed.

On the desktop, you have your text editors, word processors, photo editors, video editors, 3D modelers, IDEs, file sharing utilities, digital audio workstations, etc.

On the phone, you have your camera app and maybe an audio recording app. Everywhere you want to produce something on the smartphone is generally tied to sharing it with others -- but then to share a photo, video, or thought, you're almost always coerced into consuming some information first.

I think this is solvable, though, especially by this community. The mobile platform is still young, especially compared to the desktop world. There is time to create real tools that enable more people to create, and don't simply aim to hold users' stares and profit from their personal information.
You're so close! just change it to "Learn Raw Javascript - No React - no jsx ..."

But since its pushing people in the right direction, I approve your message.
Yeah, I agree about the term "threads" - it doesn't make for a very direct metaphor.

As for functions, I think the term makes sense, even with the non-mathematical definition, and especially in the context of OOP:

> an activity or purpose natural to or intended for a person or thing. synonyms: purpose, task, use, role

The "purpose" part doesn't make much sense with the way that we use the word, but it's certainly an activity. For example, a function of a stove is boiling water, its input would be liquid water, and its output would be steam & hot water. In OOP, "stove" would be the name of the class, and "boil_water" would be the function.
Well, no. There are lots of situation where a tiny screen and no keyboard is laughably insufficient.
Step 8: Listen what other programmers say

Step 9: Don`t listen to other programmers
Agreed. Facebook makes up maybe 1% of most companies ad spend. Source: I work at a digital agency.
I don't care about micro benchmarks ... but if you're gonna do one, make sure your code is decent.

By replacing the Go slice declarations (var x[]int64) with (x := make([]int64, 0, 1000000)) you'll get an algorithm that in my iMac runs much faster:

- your version: 4.93s user 0.28s system 165% cpu 3.151 total

- my version: 1.93s user 0.04s system 168% cpu 1.165 total

EDIT: I'm sure this happens with all the examples, and that's exactly my point. What is this exactly microbenchmarking? Bad programs?
Monetize with Google Admob in an Ionic 2 Mobile App
Scala runs on JVM and uses the same OS-level threads. What's going on here is the actors are being scheduled to run on a thread pool.
So much this. I have been working in a company which was run by sales, who thought 'how hard can it be?' all the time. Sales did not sell, company was sinking, sales disagreed. I left.
Or even, more fantasy and less reality. The measurements of a sex robot don't have to be even close to plausible.
Twitter is in Real Trouble
If you want to compare fast languages, you need to compare C++ with rust and pony, not swift and go.
This article could be summarised as "abstract only when you see a clear need to", something that seems to be the exact opposite of what a lot of programming courses teach; especially those dealing with object-oriented design. I think abstraction should be viewed not as a technique to be applied generously and whenever possible, but a necessary evil, resorted to only when nothing else can simplify the code.

A bonus of this style is that it often also makes the resulting code more efficient for the machine to execute, reducing the need for optimisations later.
How sad. You have to be equivalent for all the languages. Mr. Twitter Developer Advocate at Google
Scala does not have lightweight threading. It uses the same thread pools from Java. All your millions of Actors are scheduled onto one of these thread pools.
I don't think smartphones have ruined web design, it's actually forced people to develop responsive websites which work well on multiple screen sizes. Bootstrap makes this stupidly easy nowadays and probably would never have been created if it weren't for mobile.
I'd love to know the story here. Someone spent a fair bit of time on TeX to make this.
Well I read the document in its entirety, and I'm still a little unclear as to what the authors' specific point was. Perhaps a clearly articulated thesis statement might have helped.
So does Mathematica:

https://reference.wolfram.com/language/tutorial/Differential...
(Re)allocating arrays/vectors seems to be pretty much the whole point, otherwise both Swift and C++ could not only preallocate (reserve), but they could use iterators and elide all allocation instead, and then you'd get something along the lines of this:

> rustc -O test.rs -o test_rs
> time ./test_rs
9999010000
0.54 real 0.53 user 0.00 sys

here's TFA's C++ version by comparison:

> time ./test_cpp
9999010000
3.17 real 2.29 user 0.86 sys
I found the diagram on page 3 enlightening.
What? No. if you've done any online marketing employing a psychologists would be stupid for 99% of businesses (Walmart being the 1%). You just analyze mountains of data, learn best practices, and you'll be successful. That link is trash, asking people to pay for training.
Astonishing especially in the startup world. Where your product better get the respect of other innovators and early adoptors, or you're sunk. Yet sales asks for mainstream average performance/features. And can't seem to find any traction. I've unfortunately experienced more than one startup failure due to sales getting control.
Good point, it would be the allocation, not the GC that would be the problem. My mistake.
Makes sense - you can't know the right abstraction upfront.

As Hejlsberg said:

"If you ask beginning programmers to write a calendar control, they often think to themselves, "Oh, I'm going to write the world's best calendar control! It's going to be polymorphic with respect to the kind of calendar. It will have displayers, and mungers, and this, that, and the other." They need to ship a calendar application in two months. They put all this infrastructure into place in the control, and then spend two days writing a crappy calendar application on top of it. They'll think, "In the next version of the application, I'm going to do so much more."

Once they start thinking about how they're actually going to implement all of these other concretizations of their abstract design, however, it turns out that their design is completely wrong. And now they've painted themself into a corner, and they have to throw the whole thing out. I have seen that over and over. I'm a strong believer in being minimalistic. Unless you actually are going to solve the general problem, don't try and put in place a framework for solving a specific one, because you don't know what that framework should look like."

http://www.artima.com/intv/handcuffsP.html

So of course write it dirty, clean it up afterwards seems like a better idea, because it lets you feel what the right abstraction is. However it takes discipline to always refactor something that works fine already
You really shouldn't use apache default configs, since they probably leak info about your server and your users via /server-status
A Riddle About Love and Coding
---The Easy Side---

□ Philosophy:

》 Know Yourself

》 Nothing Too Much

---The Time-spending Side---

■ Epistemology:

》Ok... let's take 2000+ years to define "know"

■ Existentialism:

》Ok... let's take 2000+ years to define "yourself"

■ Geometry:
》Ok... let's take 2000+ years to define "nothing"

■ Ethics:
》Ok... let's take 2000+ years to define "too much".

---The Cool Side---

○ Coding:

》Ok enough... Let's do Knowledge
OTOH sometimes you ought to think about it the way the type system does, because its own limitations reflect those of other users of your code. The biggest one is consumers of your (public) interface, whose code shouldn't fail to compile if you merely change the implementation to use an additional struct member.
> This is not true of games. Can you name any? Yes, multiplayer games require a server component, but they're not thin clients. And games that are not multiplayer generally don't require a server at all except possibly for DRM.

Well, who cares. Try playing Star Craft II in 20 years or whatever it takes Blizzard to go out of business. All while v1 will keep working, even in multiplayer (LAN mode over VPN).
I hope you are being serious cake42, because if you're not you're only mildly funny, but if you are, you're hilarious.
No, that breaks the fair comparison. Other language examples do not pre-allocate all the vectors.
"Use keywords do define what you are looking for" "Google.com"
I know, and that is exactly my point.

Micro benchmarks across languages with code that doesn't do anything interesting is pretty pointless IMHO.

Also, am I a twitter developer advocate now? what is that?
Yes, thanks, I meant Paredit.
Ultimate solution for broke guitarists?
sorry but the scala version is actually pretty pretty dumb.

also go is not better than all of these languages.
what we learned here, is actually that go is easier since you only have one common way to do this task. go has goroutines, but go doesn't have runnables, futures, actors, completionstages, executioncontexts. GO has GOMAXPROCS and not dispatchers, thread pools, etc..

Also the JVM eve Java only code would actually beat golang in many ways, but thats nothing you should be scared of. Golang is 1 1/2 year old, the JVM lives like 20+ years and they spent numerous times about the GC implementations (they could be even changed so that you could use a better GC for conurrency or for parallelism or for synchronous execution).
Go is good for the task it is created. Other languages maybe tend to be more general so that you could do many things and due to their years of knowledge they are actually more optimized than go could be / they could be more optimized than go could be.
The point of this, as posted previously, is given in this 2014 post: https://scholarlyoa.com/2014/11/20/bogus-journal-accepts-pro... (also previously submitted to HN as http://www.vox.com/2014/11/21/7259207/scientific-paper-scam)

Essentially, predatory journals spam scientists, seeking to publish their paper for a small fee. Someone wrote this in 2005 as a joke response to spammy conference invites, then someone else more recently sent this to one of those predatory journals.

>After receiving a spam email from the International Journal of Advanced Computer Technology, Dr. Peter Vamplew of Federation University Australia’s School of Engineering and Information Technology sent the anti-spam article as a reply to the spam email without any other message, expecting that they might open it and read it, but not that it would be considered for publication.

>To his surprise, the journal accepted the paper and sent him an acceptance email that had two PDF attachments. One was a formal statement of acceptance and the second was the reviewer report.

>It’s clear from examining the reviewer report that the same filled-out form is used for most or all submissions. Certainly, no peer review was completed despite the journal’s claim to be a peer reviewed journal. The acceptance indicates that the next step for Associate Professor Vamplew is to wire USD $150 to the bank account of Tej Pal Singh, and the paper will be published, but I don’t think he’ll be doing that.
Show HN: Pairing digital challenges with Startup solutions – automatically
Smartphone are really bad for power users. Android is good, but to me it doesn't allow users to really do what they want with it.

It works well, but if you look at its software design, it's miles away from what you could do with linux.

I just WISH there was some code editor designed for a touchscreen. I have this idea of a graphical code editor like scratch.mit.edu, except the editor already has this code hierarchy, and it shows text directly. This would be perfect for a touchscreen.
Analytics breaks with ghostery, which is annoying.
If the C++ version didn't use vector.reserve(1000000), what justifies the reason for the Golang version to use make(,,1000000)?
Forget it. Camels are obstinate, violent and disagreeable. No way anybody wants to farm them for milk if they don't absolutely have to.
> And imagine the nightmare of testing the device pre-release, all while faking out the dates

Huh? Why would you set the date to one in the future? Make the date be the one of the build.
One of the earliest experiences I had as a professional software developer was taking over an app that had originally been developed by someone with 30 years of experience. He had looked at the problem domain, said "these things are all similar", and so had constructed his code so that every one of those things shared a huge amount of their code paths. It worked for the two, three things he actually coded, but as soon as I and another dev started to add more (around 12 total I think), it got hackier and hackier. Because the conditionals needs to distinguish the two or three he had originally handled were easy to ignore, but the conditionals needed to distinguish the 12 were littered all over the place, with no real predictivity to them.

We attempted to isolate it as best we could, pulling out into new methods and such, but it was bug whack-a-mole; we reliably were finding a new bug within a week of each fix we made, nevermind any we introduced with new features, because trying to isolate and fix one of the things invariably broke one of the others.

So, finally, I took two days and rewrote the shared logic of the application (only around ~10k lines). I borrowed liberally from the existing code, but basically isolated each thing entirely from the others. They still had the same structure, same interface, but rather than all inheriting the same implementation, they all had their own copy of the implementation, which in turn meant each one was far simpler, and could be tweaked in isolation.

That took about two weeks of use to flush out the bulk of the bugs. And after that, our mean time to failure kept improving; we went with maybe one bug the third week, then one bug a month for the next two months, then it essentially stabilized; it was only in introducing new features that we'd occasionally find/introduce new bugs.

That whole experience taught me not to worry about DRY until you actually have done the work. DRY is to ease maintenance and future development; it should not be a consideration for that initial implementation of a given feature. Because things that look similar enough to share functionality between often aren't once you become more familiar with the domain. If they turn out to be related enough to share functionality, it was trivial to not repeat yourself (copy/paste), and it's trivial to refactor. If they turn out not to share functionality, the effort to try and make them share code was higher than if you'd done them separately, and the amount of effort to pull them apart is huge.
If a ban on autonomous weapons is negotiated, there won't be much of a market for military robots. Real mules are much cheaper than robot mules.

Autonomous vehicles are another matter, but robots that walk have limited use cases.
Judges are not deciding whether they believe these rights should or should not exist. They are deciding whether these rights do exist in the law at the time the case is litigated.

If you believe you should have a right you don't have, or that you should or shouldn't be sent to jail for a particular activity, the right people to contact and hold accountable are your representatives in the appropriate legislative body. Judges are only supposed to interpret the law, even if they personally do not agree with the most accurate interpretation. Changing law or creating new law is the province of the legislature.
Cool. One can probably estimate the age of an area by the irregularity of the field perimeters. In the central and west US those would be rectangular.

I wonder if and hidden roads with stones are left.
This is just FB data, which (at my agency) makes up <1% of b2b or b2c leads.
Mauro mendesak Paul Pogba untuk mengubah mentalitas
That's really cool. I think we need more of this kind of easily hackable resources.
That is called awareness, the 1st step in the marketing (purchase) funnel.
Exactly because the smartphone will be the first computer for the next billion users, the points made by the linked article are important.

That argument is not as relevant as evidence of the importance of the invention of the smartphone vs the laptop with a modem.
Building a website After building a website
Agreed, I usually warm up the engineering crowd with a few quotes from Shopenhauer or Malthus, but Sartre is always good for a few yucks.
It is already broken ;)

In c++ indexing vector does no range checks while in Go indexing slice checks validity of index.

And vector in gcc growths by factor of 2 while slice in Go grows by 25% after it's bigger than 1024 elements. So there is a trade-of between memory usage and number of allocations.

And... I could go on, but the point is that microbenchmarks are in general not that useful :)
More about 9front:

http://fqa.9front.org/dash1.pleaseexcusemetheoutflow.pdf
"Schooled" is a bit of an exaggeration. They just place bets on the outcome of physics from time to time.

One thing is strange though, they're conceding bets on outcomes that are far from conclusive/decided. For example, the bet about the black hole & information paradox. There are many different ways both of them could be wrong/right. One such possible answer resides in string theory. A few string theorists put forth the idea that black holes may not have a singularity at all (thus, no paradox). Let me explain:

Massive enough stars collapse into neutron stars when they die. A neutron star is made out of neutron degenerate matter. Basically, when a star dies, gravity rips apart/compresses/implodes everything down to neutrons. The gravity is so strong that helium, hydrogen etc. cannot exist within the star, it immediately gets broken down into more fundamental components. It gets ripped apart and turned into this "neutron degenerate matter". This is because neutrons have enough energy or "strength" to resist gravity. This is why a neutron star is stable. But if a star has enough mass (more gravity), it's possible for even neutrons to break down and succumb to gravity. Some people have hypothesized that they can break down into quark stars but we have yet to see them. Instead, we currently believe they form singularities (a black hole) since there is nothing more fundamental to hold back the force of gravity.

Massive enough stars collapse into black holes/singularities because after neutrons/quarks, there is nothing more fundamental to break down into. But in string theory, there is. In string theory, strings are the fundamental component of the universe. A few (not all, it's pretty fringe/new) string theorists have hypothesized that a black hole could be simply a "fuzzball". It's basically a star made out of strings. It would behave and have the exact same properties that current black holes have (light cannot escape, no limit on size, extreme gravity, etc) but it resolves 2 of the paradoxes -- no singularity (no invoking infinity & breaking QM) and no information paradox.

See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuzzball_%28string_theory%29

If string theory is correct, and fuzzballs are the true description of black holes, the bet itself is wrong. It would be like betting whether the sun was made out of cheese or wax. The answer would be neither.
Fast Data Project
https://wiki.fd.io/view/VPP/What_is_VPP%3F

src: http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Linux-Foundation-will...
Does it have to be a platform for creation? I use my phone as a sort of amalgamated media consumption device. I listen to music and audiobooks, track my fitness, read (research) papers, I use it for navigation and maps and of course for communication. I don't want to 'create' on device the size of my palm because it's a poor form factor.

Fundamentally I want something in my pocket that I can query to find information quickly. This is truly sci-fi terminal stuff and we have it today.

Tablets - yes, this is a big problem. It annoys me that I can buy a tablet with great CPU power underneath, but I can't do any real work on it. Real work being development, access to a non-emulated terminal. We're getting closer to this with the MS Surface since you can run desktop applications on it, but I would never buy an iPad or an Android tablet because to me it's just a big phone without the data contract.
Boulder is comparable to SV, hippy start-up whatnot. Denver, not so much.
Java, Scala, F#, C#, C++, JavaScript, SQL.

VS, Netbeans, Eclipse, Android Studio, SQL Developer.
I know we're all joking here, but the final figure (last page) intrigued me. I generally read the X-axis first but this would have you read the Y-axis first. Is that something people generally do, or were the authors going for a left-to-right consistency?