skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think an important aspect that is often overlooked is how likely are the original developer(s), or people that really understand the purpose, going to be around later if it needs more work or a rewrite.

For example, I often take the approach that my first implementation, which likely will end up in production, is used for learning the interface, service or business need. It satisfies the problem as it currently exists and was defined, and generally has a few hacky parts as the needs were explained in more detail or changed halfway or more through the project. The next time anything more than a bug fix or trivial feature is required, I'll rewrite the most problematic behavior in a more extensible and cleaner way, since I now have a much better understanding of the problem. This is generally quick, as I can re-purpose portions of the original that are perfectly usable, and I have a reference implementation (the original) to compare against to find any bugs in the new version.

I can rely on this because the chances that I will be around at this company in the future are extremely high. This would not be a good approach for a company that sees domain expertise leave, or move to different departments that aren't easily approached for information. I've been on projects where you come in to rewrite on someone else's old code because nobody really understands it well, with little or no information besides the code itself and included comments as to the original design decisions. It's easy to identify the portions of the code that look like they were stupid decisions, and you would definitely never do that. You start writing code, and soon you run into unexpected conditions that require you to make the same or equivalent hacky choices, and you understand a little of the original developer's prior choices. You'll end up with the code rewritten, and possibly a little better and cleaner, but if someone comes along in a few years, they'll have the same problems you did. These are the situations you want to avoid by spending more time up front to make the solution better in the beginning, or at the bare minimum, documenting in the code the hacky abstractions you've been forced to make.
If you're in a situation like that, with literally no choice but to work in a smoke-filled bar or your family will starve, then for goodness' sake THAT is the problem!

;-)

As I said, a compromise could have been reached but the "aggressor", if you will, was not interested.

(Also, as an American working stiff, I envy you your sensible arrangement. But as a Bucky Fuller fanboy, I think we all should be working two hours a week, and retire at twenty having worked a full career for two years. C'est la vie...)
The Pomodoro Technique – Making the most out of 25 minutes
OK, he seems to want less of that. Drugs seem like a viable option. Or maybe the right spiritual/religious beliefs.
It's a function of diet and exercise. "Absorb" also begs the question "for what?" Your body can absorb protein and repurpose it into other proteins for muscles or whatnot, but turning that protein into energy is harder.

It's like saying that a city can absorb a terajoule of gasoline more easily than a terajoule of coal or a terajoule of lithium batteries. It's true, but "which is absorbed faster?" is a vast oversimplification of a more complicated question, which is "how much is needed?"

To extend the analogy further, if a city had mostly electric cars and a coal power plant, it would have no trouble absorbing the lithium batteries or the coal, but would have more trouble absorbing the gasoline.
Insider baseball here, but if you really want the inside scoop on the good and bad parts of C++, read both of these sites:

1. C++ Frequently Asked Questions Lite [1]

2. C++ Frequently Questioned Answers Lite [2]

I think it's important to note that not everybody agrees with either the FAQ or FQA sites, but this is a good jumping off point if you want to read the criticisms of the language itself.

[1] http://www.dietmar-kuehl.de/mirror/c++-faq/
[2] http://yosefk.com/c++fqa/
Why do we need to standardize sandboxing if that means having to install an application to install applications that are supposed to not need external dependency handling?

If Flatpak's main selling point is security, then it would be better served as as a sandboxing tool for AppImage rather than falling for NIH syndroming as is unfortunately too common in Red Hat's world.
Why Americans don’t trust government
41 Insightful Quotes on Data
Stunning 360 – degree video clips to enjoy music in every direction
I would think that a "No white fences" law would be unconstitutional no matter what division of government passes it (whether federal, state, or local). Unless there was some pressing public safety need (i.e. "White fences are a breeding ground for the white-fence-virus") I don't think any such law would stand up to a constitutional challenge under the same freedom of expression challenges that protect art from government censorship.
It might depend on libdbus, but it wouldn't require systemd to be installed and running
You need high labor force participation to make a system that can support a strong welfare state. Scandinavian countries have arguably the best welfare states in the world, but they also have the highest labor force participation rates in the world. Indeed their benefits like maternity leave help increase the rate, but I don't think they could support their strong welfare programs with less people working.
The repository for Shout prominently lists The Lounge as an official fork in it's README.

https://github.com/erming/shout/blob/master/README.md
The language of this article is ridiculous. I'm not sure I even disagree with the author, but the article is full of overly emotionally charged words and extremely obvious bias.

Cutting the budget of a social program is not necessarily morally wrong or evil. Especially when the state has a serious deficit and things need to be cut. Budget cuts and tax increases will always be extremely unpopular, but sometimes they may be necessary.
So, this is http://shimmer.sourceforge.net/ rewritten in go?
JSON schema Powered React.js forms
Investors Give $7M to Digital Document Startup
Aha! That makes so much sense to me. My first PC, which I still have (runs OpenBSD nowadays), is a 350 MHz Pentium II. When I got my Raspberry Pi (a version 1 model B), running a 500 MHz ARM, I was a little taken aback by just how much slower it seemed than my old P2 box. It's got a faster clock and more RAM, how could that be? But it certainly feels slower!

Do you have any sources on this? Can you perhaps link me to something that explains the differences between the ARM and the P2 that lead to such a difference in performance despite the clock speeds?
How about another one?

Simple design that teaches people how to use it through doing stuff rather than forced tutorials. Old school Mario games were great here, the level design basically taught you how to play the game without as much as a message box in sight.

Unfortunately, a lot of modern apps seem to be some overly confusing mess that try to rectify UX design issues by use of tutorials and pop ups and arrows and what not, rather than simplifying things so people can figure them out on their own.
That's half, the other is execution. Even if you know all of the tricks to a competitive game, you can always improve, just like with a sport.

Different strokes. Some people just can't handle action games and get very frustrated at them, and prefer genres with no action at all that they can handle at their own pace. Others have to have their hand constantly held and can't be expected to figure anything out for themselves, but they're willing to dump hundreds or thousands of hours into multiplayer.
If they can break SSH keys like that, they'll easily compromise thousands of servers they can use to scale up their attack.
That sounds more like a theoretical solution than a practical one. You'd need to get most of the population to ignore short-term convenience and pay higher prices for things (optimizing for a different metric than lowest cost). I don't think that will happen.
But if the Girl Scouts also have a copy, that could help protect you if a state agent accuses you of something. The danger is a state monopoly on information.
Agreed. My point was that it doesn't deal well with "exciting" driving. Given a long stretch of mostly empty interstate highway Autopilot is great (and keeps it suitably boring/low stress). It does miserably in suburban areas (let alone urban areas).
I don't know that it would ruin anything to also build a Roomba competitor, or booze wagon or whatever Google had in mind.

If BD has any kind of intention of selling to anyone other than the military or researchers like themselves, they'll need a brand, manufacturing and distribution. Might as well bootstrap that now with some less ground breaking tech.
I think it's a bit more complicated than that.

Consider the game of 'Go' - there's a very small amount of rules, and once you know those, you know all the rules, but there is still a lot of higher-level strategy to learn. It seems bad to not know all the rules, but good to have more strategy to discover...

It would obviously be disappointing to then be playing an opponent, and discover they are about to beat you with a rule that's new to you; or to have played the game for a long time and then realise there was a move you never knew you could make. Watch someone learn about capturing en passant in chess for the first time from their opponent, during a game they are invested in...

At the same time, learning a new 'strategy' is quite enjoyable and delightful - maybe even if you learn it as an opponent beats you with it – as long as it is something you could have reasonably discovered yourself, even if you didn't. (?)

A disappointed sensation like "oh, I never knew you could do that" is bad; but "oh wow, I never realised you could do that" is good.

What's the difference between these 'rules' you should know, and 'strategies' to discover? Is there a real difference? You are ultimately just choosing an action from a constrained set of candidate actions in both cases; in one case not knowing the full action set is bad, and another it's good.

Clearly, you can think of a game at multiple different valid levels of abstraction - 'you can push these controller buttons'; 'you can move up, down, left or right'; 'you can sneak up behind the enemy'; 'stealth is the best strategy' etc.
Clearly, at some levels, not knowing all the actions is frustrating; whereas at other levels, discovering new higher-level actions is delightful.

So, which is shooting the crate to find a medkit?

It's not completely clear, but I can see how people would think it is a hidden rule, something they could not have been expected to realise themselves, but which was obvious to players of other games - a missing word, rather than a delightful high-level behaviour that falls out of the interaction language the game has taught them.
I am in the unique situation to answer your question. I know what it is being very poor, quite literally suffered from hunger in 1993-94. And now I am adjusting value propositions for old family owners real estate in Europe. The difference is that these old families in a way shaped policies in their countries of residence to make their lives comfortable. E.g. private islands with golf courses in the heart of national nature reserve, and no one else allowed build anything close, or around the location. They are not directly writing laws. They are influencing persons, incentivise entire lifespans of policy makers to make necessary outcomes. So the first and very important difference - planning horizon. Poor people plan for days if not hours. Super rich plan for years, if not decades. Really powerful people plan for generations.
That written in a world where you had one terminal on your desk or one modem to dial into the system.

If you had two logged-in terminals on your desk and ran 'logout' on one of them, are you still logged in?
The headphones are pretty bad -- and not isolated. So part of my brain is hearing "living room" while the rest is hearing "wide open space." I posit this contributes to the problem. Also two imperfect immersive sources (video + audio) that each lag is far worse than one.

I was glad to see Oculus was tackling the problem... then I got a look at what they were actually doing. Can't say more other than to point out there's a lot more work to be done.
This may look like an option, but once technology has a low failure rate, everything that doesn't match or that does seem unusual will trigger an alarm.

Just watch the airport security checks after 9/11 when entering the US: Either you provide a biometric passport accept x-ray radiation or you will be personally annoyed… for your own safety, of course. I believe this is not because of any bad intention, however it trains people to accept such strict rules and when it works there, why not enforce it in other parts of our civil life?

For example after some madman shot at a german court house a couple of years ago, they started mandatory checks on every single court house as well.

Another case from Germany: We have started to collect car plates from trucks on the Autobahn because of a new electronic toll system (only to catch trucks that don't have the onboard unit activated, no regular use case for visual checks). Of course those car plate recognition software by design is also able to save car plates… of course everything will be deleted… really? It might be true for the moment, but in the future?
Another one for the list. Hands on introduction to a lot of basic concepts.

https://m.youtube.com/user/codingmath
In comments:

"other things that do work well in practice but not in theory?"

"Levit's algorithm for shortest paths in a graph"

Hmm. Quick search, seems it's called Pape-Levit for independent discoveries, twenty year old benchmark paper at:

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.54....
"... privacy is dying ..." Even without discussing the merits of the idea, this is one of the most defeatist sentiments I've heard lately, and I'm an eternal pessimist. Privacy will not be dead so long as I have any say in how I live my life. Call me a tin foil hatter, but anonymizing/removing my internet/societal fingerprint, preferring higher anonymity when performing transactions, and taking steps to minimize my overall public profile are all actions I can, will, and do take until the day I die to sustain my personal privacy, and I will take any opportunities I have to impact change to support privacy on a broader scale.

Again, while the intrinsic benefits of privacy are discussed at length by those far more able to eloquently defend it than I, I instead make a far more tractable statement: My quest privacy will be dead when I am, and if that makes me isomorphic to a Luddite, I readily accept that hypocrisy. (Being progress seeking in almost any other domain I can think of.) There is too much benefit to privacy given the current power asymmetries, social climate, and frank human nature for me to ever give it up, for myself and others.

(as a postscript, your statement re: biomentrics as UID is absolutely right, albeit a bit repeated ad nauseum within HN nowadays, I just wanted to enunciate my distaste for any sentiment suggesting we accept a loss of privacy)
Everything you need to know about implementing iOS and Android Deep Linking
You know, I'm wondering: could part of Dijkstra's reputed arrogance be due to a cultural difference?

Dijkstra got a lot of attention from his essay, "Goto Considered Harmful." Even though he did not come up with that title, he learned from it that a hyperbolic saying can grab attention, and be used for good.

So thereafter, he spent a while when he would say things in the most flame-bait way possible, to gain attention, because it worked.
> Users should be free to reboot as often as they want.

Of course. But an init system should not be optimised for often reboots, since it's a marginal and unlikely scenario.
Not Indian, Israeli.

Patent differences i'm talking about: The justified way India doesn't follow the western law on pharma patents.

Historical point: Up until relatively recently,India did have a closed economy, but did a lot to open their economy to foreign trade and investment(for example in the past you couldn't open a foreign subsidiary in India, Now there's even Amazon in India).

As for capitalistic tactics etc, that's definetly true. Just look at how much of the important contributions to silicon valley came from Indian people, both brain-drained and outsourced.
The Nazi Tweets of ‘Trump God Emperor’
What about the people who got old and or sick? With all the people going poor without jobs some might resort to crimes to make a living.

You're absolutely right and things specifically like identity theft already work this way.

The draft can only take so much of the population. But our military uses drones a lot and might use robot soldiers that share memories and kill the enemy more than humans can and don't need any training. Is it murder if a robot kills a civilian?

Much like tragic losses of soldiers that occur during special ops missions are categorized as a soldier dying in a "training accident" one might assert that if a robot kills a civilian it would be chalked up to an "industrial accident."
I'd rather use ROT-13 said the brogrammer.
Why would they change that? Isn't that exactly why you would ever nohup a process?
Also this is interesting...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gutter_oil
> UTexas, in this case

Got a reference for that? The Wikipedia discussion suggests otherwise: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming#Hi...
Bears like to chew on armoured Teck cable too. Thought it was the taste of smell of the rubber insulation.
48-volt mild hybrids: A possible cheap way of improving mileage?
HN threads are casual conversation, which is as far from mathematics as you can get.
Which is why it shouldn't say "its (Mankind's) flag".

The USA (to its credit) dedicated the Apollo mission to Mankind (which Soviet cosmonauts were pleasantly surprised by) but the flag was planted as a symbol of the USA. (Other considered options, such as the flags of all countries, were rejected.)

The flags, if they still exist, are likely to be blank now anyway.
Twice I've fallen into the trap of using a VCS for the "data" layer of an app, because the data needed versioned and hey you can just store it in XML/Json.

First time a senior dev overrided my choice, and to my dismay we did a pure DB solution that took longer and was far inferior in its version control capabilities than if we had done it in VCS/XML.

Second time I was in charge and pushed this "great idea" through. We ended up with awesome branching, cherry-picking, diffing, etc capabilities (which were not in the requirements and nobody really used), but ran into big problems later when we needed more thorough data consistency checks, incremental non-GUID id's, speedier centralized inserts/updates, etc. Second step was rube goldberg, and third step was rewrite given the actual requirements using a normal db store (probably half the code, better performance, easier to use, no "extra" VCS functionality that nobody needed).

Lesson learned: don't use VCS as a data store unless it's kicking you in the face. Or, maybe there's a market for a VCS with some DB-like properties.
Thank you for saving at least me from having to argue this viewpoint again, as I have done in the past:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6617312

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6482192

You did it even better than I did, I think.
If she did I suspect the motor would suddenly become a bit more expensive.
> Would there be enough interest in having these letters in searchable form to motivate the effort?

Yes, please :). Esp. Dijkstra's letter from the 5th of Apr '79. It's a bit hard to read.

Thanks for making them available.
Encryption isn't an obvious solution in a world where three letter agencies have the financial and technical wherewithal to PWN my devices and manipulate the entropy pool. I'll put on my tinfoil hat and imagine how many man-years agencies foreign and domestic have devoted to breaking cryptography since 1930 and the level of commitment patriots have to doing what they believe is patriotic before I evaluate the likelihood that commercial and amateur interests have the will and resources to thwart state level actors.

The problem of secure messaging is that there are exponential mismatches of resources. PGP and TLS are only as good as the entropy pools upon which an implementation relies.

Good luck.
>Those who can afford only public school are at immediate disadvantage at college or the workplace because of dire undereducation, and it makes itself felt in the bank account.

Is there any evidence that better education causes increased earnings? I've seen a lot of articles arguing that it doesn't. Particularly this recent SSC post: http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/05/19/teachers-much-more-than...
Speed Matters – Google Research Blog
Ok that makes sense for random numbers, but I'm not sure how it would apply to a real world election.
by "this functionality" do you mean things like

* connecting to different wireless networks that use wpa enterprise authentication (which I think some of the bsds only recently added support for)

* bringing up usb networking interfaces via cell phone tethering on demand

* managing multiple different vpn clients and profiles from a single interface

Or do you mean things like

* Bringing up a networking interface with a static ip address

Because I use network manager for the former on laptops, and remove it on servers that only need the latter.
This is junk, why is it being up-voted?
> I wish I'd downloaded it all back then.

IIRC there were some license issues.

> I'd like to see a QNX-like OS in Rust.

Hm... now that would be an interesting 'side project'.
Ask HN: Reducing the cost of meetings
Given how long it takes to resume productive work after a meeting (for people on the maker's schedule [0]), the productivity value of getting meetings right can be pretty big.

What do you do to reduce the number or cost of meetings? (either as an individual or as an organization)

The main technique I have been using lately is preemptively blocking off chunks of time long enough to get something done (3-4 hours), and declining any meetings that are later scheduled over that time. This groups meetings together, incurring the "resume cost" once per group instead of once per meeting.

[0] http://www.paulgraham.com/makersschedule.html