skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Immutability as absense of over-writes or mutations of existing values (in Erlang one just introduces a new binding for a new value) is obviously enough.

State and I/O is easily incapsulable inside closures with CPS or with explicit message passing.

For a lazy language one needs some ADT, like Monad, for explicitly "enforcing" a strict order of evaluation for a specific set of expressions, because I/O implies a strict order. Think of it as a transformation from a set to sequence (by defining an order as an ADT).

Lifting State or IO into Monadic world is mere a trick to satisfy a typechecker and enforce a strict order by using an ADT. A strict language with optional lazynes could use ordinary type-tags.

Nothing to see here.
It's well written. It's clever. The comments style does a great job of explaining the concepts.

My only gripe is, although translating one high level language (lisp) to another (c) is technically a compiler, in practice most people think of something producing output at a lower level of abstraction than the input.

This would be even neater if it could emit assembly.
Is this a troll or are you serious? :D
The mobile commerce maturity and convenience that comes with wechat is years ahead of what Silicon Valley offers.

Really, America in general is backward when it comes to finance in general, it's not limited to Silly Valley and payments.
Link clearly states that this include all the Ubuntu userland (even apt-get!).
By different you mean they stopped using patent trolls to bully competition and make money out of Linux based software ? You mean they started to implement open formats ? Or do you mean they started to change their PR team so that now, we got a different image of them ?
NTFS supports 32k file names; the Win32 & Win64 layers, by default, only support PATH_MAX (260) characters for backward compatibility (compatibility with Win16, ironically enough). You can opt in to longer paths by prepending paths with '\\?\' to disable path length checking, but the check itself exists in the Win* layers. I would expect the Linux layer doesn't apply this check.
I know I'm being picky, but there's NO Linux here. Linux is the kernel, and the kernel is THE piece they're not including.

So rather than repeating "Linux on windows", this is "Ubuntu's userland on windows", or "GNU on windows", or any other variation, but NOT "Linux".
Exactly. Interviewing is a lot more comfortable if you do it from the security of having a job. If they don't want you, then no problem.

And more than that, the interview process is also to determine if you actually want to work for them. You can reject them, even if they want to hire you. Interviewing becomes a much more symmetrical affair. You have power too. You can afford to say no, and you can afford them to say no.
Just as it's possible to model immutability on top of mutable structures, it's possible to model mutability on top of immutable structures. Regardless of which way you go, you end up with the properties associated with the kind of structure you're building. This is not too surprising, I would think.
Quora's first-ever acquisition is discussion platform Parlio
Pelè accusa Samsung e chiede 30 milioni come risarcimento
I was speaking in the context of the question I was replying to, which was "why would you not just go with a Linux desktop for that?"

More specifically, it's the state of Linux device drivers and integration testing for laptops and consumer peripherals I'm complaining about. That's not a result of any inherent deficiency of the Linux kernel or its design. It's ultimately an economics issue.
'If all else fails' they would have to write the security firm a blank cheque. I know Apple have a lot of money but the fee would likely be astronomical. Unless, of course, Apple wanted an ongoing contract with the firm to dig out vulnerabilities (on top of whatever they already do). I wonder if that sort of relationship would be economical for both parties.
Also .. Linux is more than userland... mmu , cfs , kernel things in general ... i'd like to see real benchmarking of this.
Or you know, just lift one off the case which you spend all day touching with the fingers you use the phone with.
Wow, thank you for that reply!

I don't think that C stays alive because people just automatically rejected anything else. There is something to C that I appreciate extremely, and that is the clarity and simple semantics: there is not much hiding and unintentional obfuscation that one can cause when writing C code.

Maybe safety and simplicity are mutually exclusive if speed and fine-grained control over memory are the main goals.

For Modula, the tools and documentation are not being updated anymore, I could not find a programming environment for eg., emacs and on armv6.

Free Pascal and Lazarus are great, until I realized there were no resources to learn modern pascal from. The emacs mode is too basic and doesn't take any advantage of things offered by fpc. But I have to admit, I've never seen anything as good as Lazarus before.

D is more like a C++ successor that's aiming at Java than a successor to C. It is complex and does not seem to be making any effort in unifying its concepts: in the same spirit of C++.

Cyclone is definitely interesting, but unmaintained and not exactly simple, similarly to Rust but with a C-like syntax.

Julia crashes all the time with segmentation faults, sorry, the quality of Julia is super low. I would not use it for anything serious. It has great ideas though.

OCaml is super complex with its syntax and semantics.

I love Haskell, which makes great efforts to unify its concepts: the language is super simple (its implementation can be arbitrarily complicated). Haskell is where I go to write beautiful things. Fast (like, systems programming fast) Haskell code is ugly and unmaintainable and defeats the purpose of choosing Haskell in the first place.

I'll be taking a look at the rest! Thanks!
During the design stage, you do need working components, independently implemented, and experiment various combinations. If you use types, that means frequently rewriting types to match the reorganizations of control flow. Types still help to prevent mistakes, but the main part of actual design process (like working on clay, or, scrap & rebuild with Lego pieces) is just as tedious as other ways. I read that the original article is trying to address that problem.
A random example from google: anti-open-document lobbying.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2330040/microsoft-c...
I get your point and agree about assembly, but I also think most people would agree that C is a lower level of abstraction than LISP.

One reason to "stop" at C might be that assembly itself tends to be a bit verbose, so not very suitable when aiming for shortness of code as a major feature. Generating assembly would perhaps obscure the things being taught with a bunch of details that are of course interesting, but sort of beside the point. Just guessing, I'm not the original author of course.
i miss absolutely zero linux software.
It is a narrow application of general purpose machine learning approaches. Convolutional neural networks, supervised/reinforcement learning are not limited to Go. They've found success in a variety of applications.

And while those applications are narrow, they're significant progress in a short period of time.

In this game from only 4 years ago you could see one of the state of the art bots getting humilliated by an anonymous professional player: http://gosensations.com/?id=2&server_id=1&new_id=1392
Glad to learn that. I am sure it is gong to be a welcome step.
From the fact that they had to change their packaging, several times, to make it clear that these are not toys and are not to be used by young children?

EDIT: Packaging did not include "keep away from all children" and had "age: 13+" and "toy" on the packaging, and were sometimes sold in stores that exclusively sold toys for children.

After regulation the manufacturers changed the packaging several times, changing word "toy" to "desktoy", stopped them being sold in children's toy shops and told retailers to keep them away from children's toys, removed the "13+" age limit, included "keep away from all children", and included stronger warnings.
We're making use of the standard Go tools + Godep and as such with any Go version below 1.6 you can run the tests with "godep go test ./...", anything above 1.5 with "go test ./...".

Good luck!
But for the TrueCrypt dev(s) to enforce their copyright wouldn't they have to break anonymity?
The danger with small magnets like this is that, just like you did in this comment, people simply don't understand that they're more dangerous than other "small pieces of matter" no matter how many warnings the companies put on the packaging. Most other small items, even fairly sharp ones, generally pass through the digestive system without incident, but magnets stick together and trap intestinal tissue causing tissue necrosis and death within days without surgery. Lest you think I'm singling you out somehow, every discussion I've seen on this issue has unintentionally demonstrated the complete ineffectiveness of the labelling.
Totally agree. Mutability adds significant cognitive difficulty that just goes away with immutable structures. Here's a great talk by Rich Hickey on the subject.

http://www.infoq.com/presentations/Are-We-There-Yet-Rich-Hic...
Groundbreaking new magnets make for some pretty magic behavior
The article makes the argument that intelligent life a couple orders of magnitude larger than human would think very slowly, since the time for a single message to cross a brain 10 times the size is 10 times longer. This necessitates that every thought traverses the entire brain.

But, taking not too much poetic license, we can argue that human society at a whole is a 10^6m scale intelligence (well, more like 10^3 if we are only counting the pile of human brains, but the distances are still in the 10^6 scale). It furthermore has incredibly slow thought transmission outside of very small "fast" nodes. Yet it solves the problem by not requiring most signals to propagate very far. Only a few ideas need to be globally known by humankind, the intermediate filtering is still mostly local.

So, a galaxy-sized "brain" can exist, it just needs to be very hierarchical, since any global consensus would take hundreds of thousands of years to formulate, even at the speed of light. In computing / distributed system terms: locality matters.
> Progress in the theory of computation suggests that sentience and intelligence likely require quadrillions of primitive “circuit” elements.

Can anyone elaborate? What is the evidence that sentience and intelligence requires this?
Is there any reason to think that there exist a limit on how large or small things can be?
> While I wouldn't go as far as preventing the sale of magnets, education is definitely important.

Good thing that every reputable seller of such magnets plasters the outside of the packaging with warnings like "Not for children!" "Not a child's toy!", and includes very frank, easy-to-understand language about the potential hazards of ingestion of said magnets.

That story about that kid is a tragic story. It's more tragic that the warnings attached to and included in the packaging surrounding the magnets didn't make their way to the kid who chose to swallow the magnets and the friends who took him up on his stupid bet.

> As your comment shows, many are not aware.

That's reading a lot into his comment. If you read the last couple of sentences of his comment, it's clear that he's talking about dangerous stuff. One can infer from this that he understands that strong magnets can also be dangerous under certain circumstances.

Just because you're unaware of any deaths from a hazardous activity doesn't mean that you're unaware that an activity is hazardous. You dig?

If anything, it's more a signal that the fatality or grievous injury rate from that activity is rather low.
"Even though algorithmic challenges aren’t really used on the job much in production, it’s still really important to keep revisiting your fundamentals. It’s just like a muscle–if you don’t train it, it’ll become weak."

So we are testing for stuff that no one actually uses in the job. We are testing for those that have time to practice for interview tests·
Higher dimensions like in Hegel?)
Parallel construction is not legal. It's goal is to disguise the origin of information, but just because you get away with breaking the law that does not mean what you did was legal.

Proving this is very hard though.
Too bad that they don't offer a hosted version of left-pad stack, our CEO worries about privacy. And I can't find SLA.
> there's a philosophy behind the system. Users first!

This is true for a certain type of users (developers deploying on Linux).

For a different class of users (desktop/laptop users, or developers developing on Linux), Linux has a documented history of "Fuck you very much".

Microsoft has recognized that there is a large overlap between these two classes.
It's not that black and white. Sure, all the algorithms I use are available in published papers and often have open source implementations, but knowing exactly which combinations of algorithms to use on which datasets is a real value. As is knowing exactly how best to tweak those algorithms when the underlying dataset changes. Furthermore running a bunch of algorithms on some data is only the first and easiest step. Interpreting the results of that and then deciding what action, if any, to actually take is often the real challenge.

That being said I agree that having access to data that no one else has is a massive competitive advantage and with your skepticism about the concept being presented.
Git aliases we use at Deveo
The problem is that with enough math and big data it is possible to create a model with predicts everything one wishes.

Any digree of disconnection from reality is easily attainable.
The first C++ compiler produced C. I think this qualifies...
I read that more as attempting to appease the CPSC and avoid an import ban and mandatory recall. It's abundantly clear that the CPSC has chosen to take actions that are substantially out of line with the actual level of hazard posed by such products.

Anyway, do you have access to complete photos of all of the various revs of the packaging? I'm interested in seeing if there was ever a point at which a reasonable person would look at the packaging and accompanying instructional material and get the impression that either

* These would be okay things to give to children who would be unable to understand that swallowing them might be hazardous.

or

* There isn't any significant hazard posed by swallowing the magnets.
> Possibly the smallest compiler ever

>Run with node test.js
I encourage those wishing to learn more from a product design perspective of how WeChat has successfully tied together so many disparate elements to make such a powerful product take a listen to the official WeChat product podcast by WeChat product managers:
https://soundcloud.com/wechatpodcast
Actually Verilog developers are orders of magnitude more efficient than their VHDL counterparts.

http://www.bawankule.com/verilogcenter/contest.html
SQL for programmers – indexes are not magic
Yes, and also, who cares how long it takes to think?

The article points out:

> If our brains grew enormously to say, the size of our solar system, and featured speed-of-light signaling, the same number of message crossings would require more than the entire current age of the universe, leaving no time for evolution to work its course.

but this argues that stellar-scale life doesn't exist yet, not that it can't exist.

The universe is extremely young, ~10^10 years. Stars will continue to form for 10^14 years - ten thousand times longer than the universe has existed so far. And the universe will continue to evolve for many many orders of magnitude after that. There is plenty of time.
Or atoms galaxies?

It's turtles all the way down.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down
J++ was an example of the "extend" approach. They made a Java that was not compatible with the standard.
> -For Canonical, it reinforces the idea that Ubuntu == Linux, which is really good for their bottom line

And Microsoft manages to undermine RedHat at the same time. Win-Win for them, why the Linux community should be excited about it, I don't know.
In the case of entanglement though it is actually distinguishable from other, less "interesting" phenomena though, right? That's what the loophole-free Bell tests are about.
If you're asking questions to determine whether the interviewer is suitable for the job of interviewer, then you're pretending to be the HR boss. I can see how that turns people off.

But if you're asking questions to determine if this is a company you might want to work for; you ask them how they work, how they're organized, how they handle specific things, what tools they use, etc, then you're simply doing your job as an interviewee, and I've found it doesn't turn anyone off; they just think I'm well prepared and honestly interested in the job.
Do you mean that in the sense that there's also "very little risk in operating a nuclear power plant"? As in, we know how to do it safely and contained (perfect world scenario), but there's a lot of risk in non-optional secondary processes?
Thanks tobilg.

We choose docker-machine, because it also manages infrastructure, so this makes it much more easier for Administrators to manage hundred of build machines.

I'm thinking about an option to make it possible in one of the upcoming releases: how to scale gitlab-runner on other providers. You should look out for improvements in that department too!

GitLab CI Lead
Its a demo. Quite a good one.
> Try changing the battery in your iphone

Try changing the battery in your Lumia.
> How does the prosecution prove the plaintext came from defendants' devices?

You show the recovered key and plaintext and demonstrate that they match the ciphertext.

The chance that several gigabytes of encrypted data accidentally happen to decrypt with wrong key to a different several gigabytes of perfectly valid data is rather slim, which means that any key which produces valid data is the key you are looking for.
Human society is certainly a distributed intelligence. Elements of collective memory are external and persistent, and communication between individual units can be both remote and highly abstract.

Unfortunately it's not a very bright distributed intelligence. Memory has scaled successfully, but the strategic insight needed to guarantee self-preservation hasn't.

>So, a galaxy-sized "brain" can exist, it just needs to be very hierarchical

Or it could just think very slowly. For an entity that big there probably isn't any real hurry or much need to worry about external threats. Slow thinking also means that the speed of light stops being a problem.

It's a huge problem for humans because we don't live very long. If we lived for millions of years at one millionth of our usual pace we wouldn't find it limiting at all.
Bluebee secures €10M to solve one of the biggest bottlenecks in DNA analysis
Here's some documentation of me getting one running. http://www.lshift.net/blog/2015/03/31/lets-run-science-part-... In short, yes they're open, but they tend to be what I call the 'science' coding style.
You forget - the ones who get displaced, the poor, the third world - they are going to blame the west squarely.

That negative sentiment will take on a life of its own.
Well, this might just replace my current Debian setup as a daily driver. I've been wanting something like this for a while but had no idea how to do it technically in a feasible way. I guess you've done it for me.

Thanks for posting this and (if you still read this) the thorough followup in this thread.
> This is exactly the kind of problem that functional programming was supposed to help us avoid!

No, no it isn't. Just like you wouldn't expect 2 * 3 + 8 to suddenly return 22 when you intend it to, you shouldn't expect the order in which you apply functions to not matter.

When you pass around a changing state object to every step of your program, you are effectively doing normal imperative programming with global-ish state.
On frontend I use Redux so redux dev tool.

I'm interested about FalcorJS, does anyone use it ? I found it very interesting, check this out for more at: https://reactjs.co/2016/02/03/what-is-netflix-falcor-and-why...
Look at interviews as an interesting opportunity to learn. Try to make sure that the company who is interviewing with you respects that. If it's going to be all one sided / grind you in front of a white board, I'd skip it. Make sure they let you ask questions about their stack, their development methodology, etc. That way interviews are always a profitable experience.
The fact remains that after the words “National Security” have been uttered, the Constitution and the Law go right down the drain.
Fairly sure it is just short for application.

They used to be called apps when we made them for J2ME phones. Symbian apps were not sandboxed, but J2ME ones were, and this was the majority. Later on apple brought sandboxed apps to the iphone.

And no-one knew what an app was back then, most seemed surprised that a person even made the games they played on their phones.
For me, I use Scripbox for my mutual fund investments. There is no customized portfolio like betterment or wealthfront. Scripbox believes in a one-set-of-funds approach coupled with annual review and rebalancing for long term investing. It's available for Indian users.

Full disclosure: I used to work here.
I take your point as well.

I guess I'm coming at this as a novice with a recent interest in compilers. I was working through a tutorial series for writing a compiler in Go, but it got frustrating when I realized the author's example language wasn't going to output anything lower than C.

I've since found a series that does show how to output to assembly (68000 no less) and I'm finding it much more rewarding.
TPP is not law. TPP is a proposed treaty that is far far far from being ratified and hopefully never does.

Even if ratified today, I doubt Zen could use it as it was not law at the time of the action.
Why Microsoft just made a big bet on bots
Battle for the Galaxy Apk
Thanks! I was just telling people yesterday that I have decided to learn more about either compilers or operating-systems. You made my choice easier, I am going with compilers by studying the Super Tiny Compiler :)
Well essentially thats how a hive mind works but I think it's a stretch to classify, idk say a bee colony, as constituting a single organism.

Considering my lacking but informed understanding of the fundamental requirements of life as it exists here on earth, I see a fundamental flaw with the idea that a galaxy sized organism could sustain the engine of life, protein folding.

There has to be some source of external energy that is fueling these organisms and galaxy sized anything make even the most massive stars in the galaxy look infitismally tiny in comparison.

Perhaps gravity of a super massive black hole could kick-start and spin some sort of electric turbine like biological organ or something to get things put into motion but considering life starts small such a scale would hit hurdles.

Of course this is assuming that life on distance planets all use the primarily carbon based deoxyribonucleic acid system of life.
You might want to try doing a SCM reset. I was having the same issue and did an SMC and noticed that opening a new tab went back to being instantaneous (also using about:blank).
> And if this mystical top 5% can't spare the ten minutes to run through what is essentially an interviewing captcha

Every coding test I've been asked to take is a 2-5 hour job. I'll do it for a company I really want to work for... But not for a "maybe".

E.g. If I know you are paying 25% over market then 5 hours becomes worth it.

Now 10 minutes? I can spend 10 minutes on a maybe.