skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'll second that. I keep getting redirected to the Canadian site.
A) That's only one direction, the other way doesn't work

B) Even going that direction, at times it corrupts the data
The Life Biz: How to succeed at work and at home
Even if those trademarks would include a tool like kik, it is completely brainwashed to enable trademarks for three letter words and enforcing them on software packages names.

What are we supposed to type for package names in 10 years. 'abshwjais_kik', or will it be hipster to use unicode like in 'κικ'.
HMMs are only a small subset of generative models that offers quite little expressiveness in exchange for efficient learning and inference.
Agreed! Anyone aware of any other similar blogs focused on otherwise mysterious industries?
Sorry, do you think the first example shouldn't be subject to opposition? The search warrant could still be over-broad or defective in one way or another, even if it jumps through the CALEA hoops and was signed by a judge. The concept of "valid" that you're using is fuzzy and unclear.

I agree that the second case - court order to create new software - is a lot more obvious and clear, and deserves opposition in court.

The reason I'm being so pedantic is that it's important to disagree with the notion that corporations should roll over in any situation that involves claims of terrorism. Lots of people think that, but it throws away an important part of our legal system.
I've learnt C/C++ (same category as Rust) & Haskell & Lisp, and I've had an epiphany with each of those, that significantly shaped my programming ability today. I have not yet learnt Prolog or Erlang.

Rust is in the same category as C - just better designed. If the OP wanted to learn a compiled, low level language, to learn the paradigm, I'd suggest Rust for minimised frustration. C/Rust has minimal static type checking system, is performant and low level, compiles to machine code. They are both imperative languages that map relatively close with the underlying assembly.

Haskell has a much more sophisticated type system that integrates closely with the rest of the language, e.g. pattern matching. I don't know how to describe it in detail without resorting to Haskell jargon. The difference between the type system of Haskell and Java/C is as big as the difference between Java and a language without class/types. I think I "got it" in the 4th of my 8 month honours thesis, written in Haskell. You know about Java's classes and interfaces? They're human constructs, like a set of paintings by the same author. You could put them in different arrangements but you're sort of limited in what arrangements you can put in. Imagine if those type ideas were distilled to a mathematical definition with some sort of axis (like the real number maths where you can intertwine +, -, *, % operators), that are building blocks which can build on itself, then you have the Haskell type system. It's a lot more "pure".

Lisp's type system is akin to Python's, it doesn't really check until runtime. The biggest difference between Lisp and Python it's meta programming abilities. Have you heard about C macros? Imagine a language where it's macro language is the language itself. You could write your own language constructs, operators, etc. That's Lisp.
Plan B is to be taken as an emergency contraceptive; it is should not be used as a normal, routine method of birth control.
You need to go something like:

module.exports = function leftpad (str, len, ch) { return Array(Math.max(0, len - String(str).length)).join(ch || ' ') + String(str); };

Unfortunately we need to wrap str twice so maybe a one-liner is not quite in place.
If he wants to control where people get his software, he should have published it under a proprietary license. Not saying he does, though.
Amazing Grace: The Woman Who Transformed Computer Science
It becomes even more important in an "enterprise" environment. I have machines here which are blocked from executing node.exe (at the time, the binary I had wasn't signed).

I have machines here that have to authenticate via SSPI/NTLMv2 to a proxy to get out to the net. And don't even get me started on the SSL MITM we have here.

I can't run your startup's app here. I can't run your new build tool here.
Rust/Cargo solves this with a `yank` option. Cargo will no longer automatically switch to that version, but if you already use it, nothing changes (though there might be a warning or something)
Realistically 17 lines of code is total overkill for this function. In many cases you could achieve the same thing more efficiently in a single line.
My biggest issue with npm is the lack of verifiable build. Even if I read it on github, I have absolutely no idea if that's exactly what the person uploaded to npm. I very well could have malicious code and not know it.
There wasn't any equivocation in the parent between this event and mass murder.

The mass murder example is a counter point to the (implied) argument in the grandparent that "[getting] the attention of an incredible number of people very quickly" is the same thing as an effective protest.

It is possible to get lots of attention for your action without that attention translating to support for you or your cause.

The parent continues to discuss how they believe there was damage above and beyond "wasting the time of a bunch of build cops" and explicitly states what they think the damage would be.

Perhaps choosing a different example would have been more tasteful, and may have avoided this side discussion and being flagged to oblivion, but it did not ever claim the two events were equivalent.

It's possible that the mass murder example, while not directly compared with the original action, is implied equivalent by the mere juxtaposition of the two but I don't think that was the parent's intent.
The author's explicit wishes, in no uncertain terms, are that anyone can "do what the fuck they want to with it" [0][1]. I think when he did this, he gave up (willingly, and with a bit of profanity) the right to have any say at all about whether, how or by whom it was published.

[0]http://www.wtfpl.net/

[1]https://github.com/azer/left-pad/blob/master/package.json#L2...
What is "uniquely American" about the word apple? Both the word and fruit come from elsewhere and still abound in those places: the word came into use in English over a thousand years ago, and the first apple tree to grow in the Americas would have been planted by a European settler some centuries later. There are cultural associations with apples in America, but do these attend to the word or the culture? And are they necessary for an understanding of the word 'apple' - whether by someone learning English as a second language, or as their first but in another part of the world?

Perhaps you mean that 'apple' has a different meaning in the United States than, say, in Wales, because its web of implications looks different in one place than another. Following that thought, though, the same would be true of two American speakers, who surely have their own idiosyncratic webs. It's an interesting idea. But are words not 'synonyms' that have the same referent, only because two speakers have different relationships to that referent? Is a word partly its evocation? Or can we look at its evocation separately from a stricter 'meaning' it shares between speakers? (Surely it shares something, or language would lose its point.)

Incidentally, synonym is not the word to be nullifying here. A synonym is a like word, something that may equal the original but usually differs in degree, amount, tone, allusion, or other effect. Anyone using a thesaurus without a dictionary is sure to embarrass themselves sooner or later: differences in meaning between like words are common, and it is no revelation to say that one speaker will have different associations with a word than another, particularly if they come from different cultures.
> Rob Kalin, the visionary who made his own underwear

I'm hoping this was intended to be snarky.
In their patent victory against Alcatel, their General Counsel bemoaned the fact that they had a lack of litigation now. Apparently as soon as patent trolls realize that Newegg never, ever backs down they withdraw their lawsuits.
I am a professional operating system developer. In 1990, I was hired to work on Ticketmaster's VAX operating system.
And sadly the holy war begins...

arguments over derivatives, clean room implementations...

something yanking out copyright notices to replace with "this code is now GPL"...
I'm really glad someone is producing a service like this and will start using it as soon as coverage is at least national!

I wrote a webapp hillmap.com that does client side slope shading for travel in avalanche terrain a few years ago using a usgs webservice that has since broken. I've looked into building a replacement but it is amazing how hard it is to find consistent elevation data across the globe.
Someone with more JS experience can chime in, but isn't this really inefficient in JavaScript? Wouldn't appending rather than pre-pending be better due to the way strings and memory are handled? Or at the bare minimum create the left padding in the loop and tack on str after? Can you use ch.repeat(len) + str; yet in node or if not just do the same idea of doubling in size ch until len is satisfied?

while (++i < len) {
str = ch + str;
}

And isn't this a bug?

leftpad("x", 2, '00') will return "00x"
If your code is GPLed you impose a cost on someone else to use it. Whether or not that cost is morally justified is not the point of the objection. I am making no judgment as to the righteousness of the goal of using a GPL or similar license.

By using a GPL you strictly limit who can consume your code to those who are willing to be bound by your views on what is right.

In this way (and limited explicitly to the scope of topics I am directly addressing in this comment), GPL licensing is similar to proprietary licensing: limits are imposed upon consumers of your code based on your licensing decision.

Again, I am not making a moral judgment or normative statement about what is good or right when it comes to code reuse or copyright in general.

Licenses which do not impose requirements upon consumers of the product are more free in the sense of allowing more behaviors, or placing fewer restrictions.

To me the key distinction is one of code freedom vs human freedom. Is the code free from malicious tampering or is the human free to make decisions and take action unhampered by another?

If I may quote the late Milton Friedman, "Heaven preserve us from the sincere reformer who knows what's good for you and by heaven he's going to make you do it whether you want to or not. That's when the greatest harm is done."

P.S. This is not an observation about you, because I don't know you, but I think we can observe the amount of hedging and defensive posturing I've taken by default in this response is illustrative of the type of response I can expect, based on observing similar discussions across various fora online. I hope that in this case that defensiveness was not necessary (:
Yes you got it right. The third point was the special exception / grey area.

For the record they made sure the exact same code was published to 0.0.3 so that I didn't maliciously inject anything. I control subsequent versions though.
It's that way in at least some cases in the US too. I mean no one has any sympathy for sex offenders but for instance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalinga_State_Hospital can/does hold people indefinitely.
...yes, but does the judge understand technology? "Unfazed by stress" doesn't seem like a very relevant trait. "Judge has aptitude for understanding the nuances of encryption" would be a much more relevant story.
Adobe has figured out clever way to track people as they switch between devices
Change to Worksnaps API Entry URL
> Same message, but it wouldn't immediately hurt people who trusted his modules.

Perhaps he wanted (because of his rage on npm) to hurt people that trust(ed) npm?
Graphen patch tech can read blood sugar levels and inject diabetes medication
In an interview when asked why he draws stick figures, he answered something like, "It turns out that drawing is hard."
Well the code was open sourced. Isn't that sort of the point of open source?
The thing about trademarks is if you fail to defend them, they can be considered "weak" and you can lose your rights to it. If you have a trademark and it's important to you, it's in your best interest to defend it so you don't lose it. It doesn't matter if it's a "dick" move or not, or if the infringement was non-commercial, he was messing with their trademark, and if they want to keep it they have to actively defend it.
The order is undefined -> "I, the compiler, declare this branch can't happen" -> delete. The middle step is valid because "undefined behavior" permits the compiler to make that declaration, then act on it. If you don't want it to do that, use defined behaviors only, which is a great deal easier said than done. Partially because of how hard it is to avoid it in your own code, and partially because it is shot through all the other library code (which as pcwalton points out, courtesy of aggressive inlining, is also your code).

I was skeptical about all this about six months ago myself, but the continuous stream of articles on this topic, plus the spectacular and highly educational failure of Friendly C (and not just that it failed, but why it failed, which is why I posted that exact link) has satisfied me. It is also part of why I've stepped up my own anti-C rhetoric since I've been so convinced... as bad as I thought C was, it really is, no sarcasm, not merely "hating", even worse than I thought. I am honestly scared to use it professionally and pretty much refuse to touch it without good static analysis support.
I've dreamed of this for spam. You scan my email and find people who have spammed me, violating whatever laws govern these things. Then you claim the statutory penalty on my behalf, taking a cut. Then maybe people will stop.

I'm mostly talking about recruiters and salespeople emailing me direct. I'm not even sure if that's illegal though.
One might expect that eventually they would start ignoring FBI.
> If the company embraces a "full-stack" "we're lean so everyone wears many hats" attitude, it's an overt admission that the company couldn't give two shits about what you're actually capable of doing for them, and instead only cares that you do what they happen to tell you to do right now, even if it's hilariously underutilizing you or is hilariously inappropriate for someone with your particular skills, or is using in a way that fails to address critical business needs you've identified.

Another possibility is that the value of shared context and mutual learning is seen as desirable outcomes, on par with production outcomes.

I'm not saying specialisation is unnecessary. But it comes with costs of its own, so some overhead from wasting the specialist's time is worth it.
When I was at school in the 80s, people were saying this. They've been saying this every decade since. I just don't believe it anymore. It's like the boy who cried wolf. Not that that's a good thing. Didn't the wolf eat all the sheep in the end?
mogenerator 1.30
Show HN: Using Client-Side Routing to Route Bitbucket and GitHub Searches
Now that you own it what's to stop you from pushing out a new version with a slightly reworked string pad function under a commercial license (say a $100 per use fee)? Could make quite a pretty penny. Kind of crazy that this is possible at all.
Should Parents of Kids with Severe Disabilities Be Allowed to Stop Their Growth?
> My point is mostly that often, when it comes to law, lay-people talk about what they _wish_ the law was, rather than what the law actually is.

That is why the law should be formalized such that correctness proofs for argumentations can be given and in doubt even be checked independently by a computer. Exactly because of the possibility of different opinions and wishes, coming up with such a high standard should be considered a maxim.
Filenames were limited to 14 characters!
If I can buy a domain from ICANN for 10 bucks and then sell it to a company for a million... Why can't this guy reserve the right to sell this to that company for a million?
All of this is dependant on complaints. Certainly Twitter the company could come after and get twitter the module taken down. They have enough twitter related products that overlap conceptually with an NPM module. They've seen no need to up to this point. That doesn't mean they aren't theoretically violating the trademark...
Aren't trademarks only relevant to products or services?
"awareness". Awareness of what? His trademark infringement?

Imagine this from the perspective of a hypothetical user. He's cranky and on a tight deadline, and suddenly his project is broken because some dumb dependency three layers away that he's never even heard of broke because some guy decided to throw a tantrum, and now his software is broken and he has to emergency rewrite part of it. All because this guy didn't bother to check if "kik" was a name he was allowed to use.
Amazon's new NFL reality series follows one team for an entire season
I'd like to liberate your modules

The new pickup line
Seems that we should now prefix any package name with a random string like 'skdjdihsawqy'. This way you could maybe avoid to be the target for some of those 'has to proof itself' lawyers.
I feel the need to push back on this meme.

"Hiring is broken" for the same reason so many other things in this world are broken.

Because in the end, hiring a political decision, not a rational or technical one.

To get hired anywhere requires the consensus of, say, 2 to 6 people (maybe more!), and that becomes the realm of the political.

These people have to like you as well as think you can do the work as well as about 10 other things...

And in the end, unless the process is automated by AI, the decision will always be political-by-nature and thus subject to all the attendant issues that brings with.

And thus the process stays "broken" (whatever that really means) and will continue to resist all efforts to remake it.

[edits]
But none of Fileutils, Shellutils and Textutils was ever as tiny as many npm or gem modules.

I thought how commands are bundled into packages was the entirety of what we were discussing. That was my interpretation of larkinrichards's comment (way) up above. Packages are the unit of installation, not use. Packages are all we're arguing about.

My position: don't put words in God's mouth :) The unix way is commands that do one thing and do it well. But the unix way is silent on the right way to disseminate said commands. There you're on your own.
These things continue to show up in the weirdest places as never-intended consoles.

Phone switches, network devices, control panels, etc.

There were so many of them leftover from the switch to PC's and they always seemed to work (once you got the parity right). Usually in some closet somewhere, balanced on top of a box with the keyboard leaning against the wall. Need a power cable? Grab one from a PC, use it to power up, change some settings, turn it off and put the cable back.

Thank you Ken Olsen.
The truly wealthy (typically old/inherited money) have this freedom.
More humorous than snarky..
Hey Matt, appreciate that you open sourced this. I always learn something by reading such code that other people have written. This one is an interesting problem to tackle in C++ for the reasons you mentioned.

For the same reasons I feel D seems a very nice fit here. You may enjoy digging into that. Coming from C++ context switch would be a minimum. You will enjoy nicer way to metaprogram and enforce compile time properties, you can lean on a garbage collector should you need one, and whole lotta shorter compile times. DMD is the fastest among GDC and LDC but the generated code is not that fast. So in theory the best path is to develop using DMD and once the code settles out you can switch to better codegens. It doesn't quite work as well as it should because DMD and [G|L]DC are sometimes a few versions apart, but its still quite reasonable for medium sized repositories.

But again thanks for open sourcing your code, I look forward to digging into it.
And what if in the judicial system of the country that the programmer lives in there is a different legal situation than in the country that the Node.js Foundation (the US)? And what if there are npm mirrors in third countries where the legal situation is different in a third way?
Linux version is delayed. I'll wait for it to come out.

I wish they'd focus on sequels rather than on remakes though. For instance Full Throttle 2?
I've been reading in the comments regarding 1) the practical effect of breaking builds and 2) the security issues of how package names can be reused on npm once they are unpublished (versioning aside for a moment).

I wonder what other, similar, packaging distribution platforms are vulnerable to this sort of thing? I am not speaking from knowledge of any of the procedures of any of those I'm about to mention, but I have and do depend on some them. Thinking about this issue and some of those other tools that pull long strings of dependent packages does give me pause. Especially the replacement of some dependency with less than friendly code... breakage can be managed, but silent invaders...

Does Perl & CPAN, Rust & crates.io, or Ruby & RubyGems.org suffer these same issues and it just just hasn't been a problem yet? Do they have means of avoiding this? Again, I haven't studied the question... but I think I may :-)
It will be interesting to see companies like Airbnb and Uber go public after taking on private funding rounds much later in the business cycle than Wall Street analysts are used to. A lot of the hockey stick growth that analysts will expect out of these companies will have already happened. I wonder if analysts will revise down their expectations of growth for these companies, or they will come crashing down like ETSY.

If so, definitely doesn't seem like an opportune time to work at any of these mega valuation "startups."
I agree, women should not be discouraged from the CS field. It is in fact bizarre to me that someone would tell women they don't belong in CS.

But my point is that this is not particularly offensive, it's purely a pun. I think being oversensitive can be as damaging as being unsensitive.
So data from a foreign national held in a computer in a particular State isn't within that states jurisdiction?

If the 4th requires warrants and the 14th requires state to treat all people as having equal protection under the law in their jurisdiction I don't see where the FBI can go [legally speaking] to do warrantless search of foreign nationals.

In short, how then can a State allow the FBI to operate within its jurisdiction in a way that doesn't provide all people equal legal protections. The State would have to prevent the FBI from operating?

Thanks for any further insights.
Not saying it doesn't work, just wondering why the duplication of functionality. Which you answered, thanks.
Long Plagued by Glitches and Hacks, Uber Launches Bug Bounty Program
I have to read that in my internal naive MBA's voice. After enough "optimization", one is left picking up pennies in front of the steamroller. Many things can go wrong at sea. Many of those things will send one's ship and all cargo aboard to the depths. Insurers will not embrace the technology TFA describes.