skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Be careful though, above poster mentions that a chain of CTE is almost certain to lead to sequential scans rather than parallelized (optimized) execution.
Which makes sense, because the methodology used in building applications is lead by people who invest all their time into developing. Simplicity costs you power, and most people crave power when they spend all their time doing something. That, and meeting requirements written by people who assume they're gods.

I don't find the struggle intellectually trivial at all. Over time you learn many ways to deal with it, and sometimes even get it right on the first try.

Those skills can be fundamentals about computing, architectures, programs, libraries or languages. Sometimes your knowledge of tooling, methodologies or coding styles get you there. After a while you can even apply some profiling to the author(s) something you're using, because "this kinda guy probably did this", "they always do that".

To me reverse engineering things, on every level, is very interesting, and part of the path to being a great (practical) engineer.

Not to mention, if there were a proven stack where everything clicked easily, and stuff just implemented itself, we'd have heard about it.

There are integrated platforms where anyone can get something up with ease, but if they added all the features you'll eventually miss, you'd end up with something as complex as starting from scratch!
The digital systems work pretty well.

The digital prescriptions are definitely convenient, especially as you can get them renewed via e-mail to your doctor and thus skip any visitation bills.

I also still remember my amazement when it took me literally 5 minutes to register a new company online, 10 years ago. Not that much different from opening a Twitter account.

An even older system is the tax one, where everything is automated and I don't have to even think about it. I can just annually review the automatically calculated data and press accept to get some money back.
There's also a more dystopian option (see Neuromancer or Elysium for examples): as the rich get richer they get more isolated from, and less empathetic towards, the poor. They control the information and the advanced military technology making a revolution impossible to organize, let alone win. They have long and prosperous lives on or above all the good land while everyone else is left behind in cities of rubble to fight over scraps.

To me, this seems like the default future if we don't actively prevent it.
>You are really equating every journalist working for a mainstream media company with the former head of the KKK? I'm not sure how I should even respond to crazy allegations like that.

Perhaps the concept of an analogy is alien to your world, so I'll try to make it simpler for you. If you hire someone whose views are well known to write for you, you have a pretty good idea of knowing what you are going to get without having to offer specific instructions. If you hire Robert Kagan to write a foreign policy column in your newspaper, you don't have to send him a secret message urging him to back an invasion. He already backs every invasion. Understand?

As far as your vapid conjecture about conspiracy theories go, the media is literally littered with writers who have either been directly paid, or who stand to gain (financially and otherwise) for endorsing certain positions. These are not conspiracies, its standard practice.

Whether these media pundits are paid by the White House to endorse their policies:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-01-06-wi...

Or secretly instructing retired military "analysts" on news networks on how to shape the narrative:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/us/20generals.html

And when you don't parrot the party line, they get rid of you, like they did to Phil Donahue when he was critical of the Iraq invasion:

http://billmoyers.com/2013/03/25/the-day-that-tv-news-died/

Or when government officials limit press access to only those reporters who are willing to offer the official narrative:

http://www.ap.org/Content/AP-In-The-News/2013/News-media-pro...

In short, you are delusional or woefully under informed if you don't think that the media narrative is controlled and shaped by the powerful interests that run this country.
How about:

Quitting your job to pursue your
passion is horse apples
How would you run Atom on a Linux desktop without X11? Honest question; I didn't think Wayland/Weston were far enough along yet...
I happen to agree with you about the author. My experience student teaching, though, showed me that for all the pedagogy I studied, the entire school system was still geared toward the same basic goals as it was in the 1900's. If you're studying pedagogy because you're wanting to enter or change the system, just be aware that the things you're learning are great ideas that may have very little institutional support.
Also interesting that the PATH, which serves parts of Manhattan (and I feel not a lot of people know about), ranks 7th on the list.
I've never used Nix for OS X, but I can confirm that the UI can definitely use some work, and the proposed changed which are in the pipe look fantastic.

But, comparing Nix on the simple operations is like reviewing a sports car after only driving it in a school zone. There is so much more that Nix provides that homebrew doesn't even come close to.

Nix has made managing of my servers way easier then anything I have tried before and I have no intentions of changing away any time soon.
Why, though? It's a waste of bandwidth to force someone to accept a bunch of information they don't need and didn't ask for.
If Blue Coat issues a certified for google.com, then its own intermediate certificate gets revoked by all browser vendors in a matter of days.
They can use rogue certificates for targeted attacks, not for mass surveillance.
I think there's two approaches, and depending on what you are trying to accomplish as your motivator to program, the best approach may be different.

If you are looking to present something to others as an interface, using tools and frameworks can help tremendously. Your success is likely somewhat based on the perceptions of others, and this requires mixing a few disciplines (design and engineering), so getting what help you can to achieve that minimal level required for people to not reject it outright is important.

If you are looking to transform or create something for yourself, just learning the tool is often better. You want to spider some sites and present some stats on what you've found? Learn Python, Perl or Ruby and that will take you most of where you want to go. You want to write a small roguelike game? Learn whatever language you want and get to it. In many of these cases, learning the intricacies of a full stack and then how you have to tweak it to make it work for your needs mught be counterproductive, unless it's aimed specifically at your need.
He probably already had X11 installed and Nix was downloading duplicate libs.
I like his style. It seems honest. Most of his rules described in the article are reasonable (like those about backpacks or cellphones). His book classification is strongly opinionated, but I'd consider it a feature.

> The customer isn’t always right. I am. People don’t like that. They think I should be groveling—I don’t grovel.

Again, very honest, and I think he has a point. Most businesses today are run according to "customer is always right - as long as he pays" principle. I.e. they'll pander to you if they can make money, but the moment the transaction is done (or you're deemed more trouble than you're worth), you're treated as trash[0]. I personally prefer an up-front shopkeeper than one that pretends to be my friend (and one that is honest-to-God friendly ends up getting my repeat business, including buying things I don't really need just because I like them).

[0] - See e.g. subthread about coffee shops here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11802667. It's all super cute and lovely as long as you take your coffee and quickly leave.
Starting an ISP is really hard, don’t do it
I don't understand the extremist views of blog posts like this. Do you really need to think in such simplistic "truisms" and catch phrases?

> Quitting your job to pursue your passion is bullshit.

Not at all true. I know plenty of working class people who have saved money at their day jobs, researched a small business opportunity, and chosen to pursue it. A decent portion of them are succeeding beyond their wildest expectations. All are glad to have had the experience and put their money where their mouth (dream) is. You only live once after all. Not starting a business you wanted to is not a stone you want to leave unturned, for a lot of people.

But there's some key points here. They saved money. They planned. They came up with contingencies.

> This messaging is only beneficial for privileged people and very dangerous for working class people.

Right, throw away that ambition and continue to be my employee until the end of time. This is the kind of thing I would write as a modern day "Lord of the Manor".

Once again, be intelligent. Have an idea of your worth. Use the internet to do research, learn about small businesses, and financial planning.

Of course there's a big difference between a working class person and the kid who grew up in the valley with parents working at GoogleSoftBook who gets shuttled into Stanford and isn't in a rush to pay loans or move out after graduation, preferring instead to make mobile apps with his frat. That doesn't seem to be what's being discussed though. It's just some vague attack at those who go out on their own. I'm surprised this sort of post is getting upvoted on HN. Are we a forum of spectators envious at those who chose to try that which we did not?

As a final thought, people complaining about other people's privilege would be doing themselves a much bigger favor if they got off their ass and worked to maximize their own potential. Don't try to bring me down, work on bringing yourself up. I'd be happy to help.
Serving HTTP requests has been commoditised, there is a hundred cheaper, better, ways to serve a webpage.
The only sensible case is non-mission critical SOHO scenario where you happen to have a mac mini or iMac idling around and gathering dust otherwise.
> Most of us spent years at each other's throats in a Lord of the Flies type environment, so it's natural for this behavior to transfer to the internet.

You are shifting the perspective here. Trolling in your sense, as a weak and vile but effective antisocial interaction would be significantly characterized by lacking better traits. Either it's institutional or school can't help with it. This is one of the things school tries to control for, so, if they can't control it, then because it's not from within their institution. Either way you can't just say that without any argument. I don't accept the irony that is mentioning the mandatory literature as an argument.

Since that topic is controversial and the tone mocking, I consider it flame bait. Did you enjoy writing this?
Wayland and Weston work and there's also non-Weston compositors (window managers) like sway, kwin, gnome and more that actually work decently enough with Xwayland integration for running legacy (X11) apps.
As someone who did the same, most people do not have the privilege of having an income where they can just quit working and live off of savings before retirement. If they have a college education or home, they most likely have loans that need to be paid and that ties them to a job.

> Am I not supposed to do that at all?

No one is suggesting that. We're just particularly lucky to be in this position in the first place is all.

The privilege argument seems to come out when people like us lose that perspective and expect others to do the same or are shocked when others won't. I don't see this applying to you at all because

> I'm not going around telling everyone to quit their job and be as ostensibly great and care-free as I am.
> The author sounds pissed off because they took a risk that didn't work out

You didn't read the article, did you. He didn't take a risk, and it worked out just fine for him.
Because those species are sinking the extra resources into out-competing the local flora a/o fauna, and successfully displacing them. That's kinda a definitional characteristic of an "invasive species".
Amen. It just kills me. All politic factions are guilty of it.
Design and Implementation of Modern Column-Oriented Databases (2012) [pdf]
And you wonder why some people never catch onto programming.
Sort of.

From an individual perspective we're not interchangeable the way two ears of corn or two apples might be. Even two programmers with identical technical skills are going to have different personalities and values that make them good or poor fits for different workplaces.

From a whole-market perspective, programmers are commodities to a large degree. There's a market with supply and demand. In the long term a junior programmer can be hired and shaped into the mid-level programmer a company needs, and so forth. Even apples have different varieties and some that are objectively (fewer worms) or subjectively (more tart or sweeter) better than others or better suited for different purposes.

Large companies are more likely to (and can generally afford to) treat programmers as commodities than small companies. Small companies tend to be more concerned about fit and someone being productive right off the bat. Larger companies can afford to invest more in training and have departments large enough that everyone has to interact anyway with people who might not be their first choice of collaborator, so "fit" matters less.
If I was to give you some advice, it would be to find some way to scratch your own itch. For example, if you work in an office job, is there some part of your work that you could automate through scripting? If so, learn how to do that. You'll find doing small projects like this keeps you focused as well as offering a good way to learn the fundamentals of whatever language(s) you use to do it.
I'm very glad that a lot of people here have zero chance to have any political influence, ever.
Programmers? Yes.
Software Engineers? No.
People that can pass irrelevant whiteboard questions? No.
People that can actually create usable scalable software? Yes.

While advances in technology have reduced the barrier for many people to advance up the programmer path, the need for people that actually understand the problems has not diminished. Too many fresh grads and bootcamp kiddies are in the marketplace right now, this floods us with lots of inexperienced folks. Senior people, especially those with experience in scaling problems, are still very hard to find.
"...the way he did it -- was inappropriate and illegal..."

What the government was doing (and still is) is inappropriate and illegal. Can't Holder understand or accept the fact that this is why Snowden chose the option that he did? Of course, were matters of law are concerned, I'm not sure Holder is a good source - he after all, let the biggest heist in the civilized world go without consequence to those involved.
> this just creates two API's (instead of one) for humans to master

Not really, it's one mega-mecha-meta-API instead of hundreds of disparate small ones.

So you'd need to be able to find API bugs, I agree with that, but overall you'd probably need less knowledge. Especially if a large number of humans use this DeepAPI system, the bugs can be fixed relatively quickly.
I'm a coder. But I often do little side projects for things that I just wonder about.

Today I'm wondering how code is made into binary and how that flows through the processor and how the logic moves data to and from memory. I'm not sure how I'm going to code anything to represent that, but that's half the fun.

Last month I was a bit obsessed with organic tentacles and how to make them move using muscles. I coded this in javascript using canvas. Pretty fun. They make lots of interesting patterns.

Before that it was games like cookie clicker and candy box.

Before that it was neurons and AI - again I just coded little fish in javascript, hooked up a neural net, they gained score depending on how close and how much time they spent near food. Then breed them and repeat. Do this for half a day and they get really smart. It's cool how a few arrays and sigmoid functions turn out to be smart. Even though I coded it all, it still amazes me.

I think the thing is to find something that interests you. Maybe code your own blog. Or online text adventure. Or multiplayer pong clone.

Part of your problem is that you are trying to do too much. Libraries, code organisation, etc are all fixes to problems. You need the problem first (while you are learning) so write spaghetti code and it's not until you go 'OMG this is hard to understand' then you need to look up code organisation and only then use the minimum that is needed to improve your situation.
How is even related to the points discussed by parent comment?
Kubernetes Cron Containers
Clojure 1.9 introduces clojure.spec: tutorial with live coding examples
Yeah, it's just that-if you look at every language ever designed-if the language ships with a built-in construct developers will use and abuse it on every occasion, and every other approach lingers in obscurity.

> Which is expected since these two constructs are not aimed at handling errors: they manage missing values.

Which is a very small part of handling errors in general. As Kotlin offers special syntax for only this case, developers tend to shoehorn many errors into the "missing-value" design to get the "nice" syntax even if a different approach would have been more appropriate.

> Kotlin is as agnostic as Scala for managing errors: you are free to use exceptions, dumb return values or smarter ones (`Either`, `\/`, `Try`, ...).

That's not true in practice:

Just have a look at funktionale: Despite providing almost the same as Scala's error handling types (partially due to the blatant copyright violations) almost nobody uses it. This is a direct result from having a "first-class" construct in the language: It turns library-based designs into second-class citizens.

That's the thing Scala got right, and many of the copy-cat languages got wrong.
Interesting. There were 2.3mm in 1910 (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/04/realestate/how-many-people...).
I don't think any professional class could be described as a commodity. In any job where people have to use their intelligence, experience and wits to effect an outcome, you will get widely differing results based on the individual.

But inasmuch as any professional could be described as a commodity, I think "programmer" is particularly fraught along two axes. The first axis is discipline: the differences between web, GUI, OS, embedded, distributed, and other programming disciplines is enormous. In order to be anything approaching a commodity you would have to choose such a narrow slice of expertise that there would hardly be enough experts in that particular thing to call it a commodity. The second axis is domain: the primary job of a commercial programmer is to translate some business logic into executable code. A good programmer with decent communication skills ought to be able to do a passable job at a new domain (assuming a competent domain expert to help work out the requirements!), but the value of really understanding the domain will magnify the value not just the mythical 5x or 10x, but potentially 100x or 1000x by identifying underlying truths and patterns that a "commodity" programmer would not necessarily discover until years of experience made them a domain expert.
The problem with this customization is that different styles end up with different allowed character counts in a single line. For linters to work as expected you still have to hardcode the number of spaces a tab should count as in the linter's config. At which point you could just use spaces and treat indentation as part of the content—not presentation.
Because they don't practice it.

Seriously, people devote so much time to becoming good at "structured thinking" that they spend less time talking to others, or doing big-picture decision making (the last one is easy - just start making decisions and facing the consequences of your terrible decisions, you'll get better).

Literally everything in the world can be solved through practice. (That's clearly an exaggeration, but its true enough).

I definitely don't think that "programmers" (whatever they are) are any worse at other things by virtue of their talents. They are less good at other things because they have not practiced those things.
I can't believe the standard for libel is so high. You can publish anything you want as long as you are stupid or ignorant enough to believe it?
The main advantage of IoC is to decrease coupling. The first code that you posted is highly coupled with FooValidator and FooFactory, every change to those objects (name, namespace, etc.) will have effects on your code.
Your code is also less flexible because is bound to exactly that validator and you have to explicitly change it in all the places where it is used if you want to use another one.
The better testability of the second code is just a nice side effect of IoC.
The fact that you cannot tell which type are your parameters is a ruby problem, certainly not an IoC shortcoming.
I've always just thought we'd make a system where storing some extra information was just the price of entry. That is, in order to torrent the papers you want, you need to first share an extra gigabyte or so of papers chosen via some algorithm to ensure their availability.
Frak [1] does something like that and was written with syntax higlighters in mind.

[1]: https://github.com/noprompt/frak

edit: typo
>This is precisely the myth of our culture that the article is trying to debunk.

So I can go murder someone I don't like because I am a 'wild human'. Personal freedom is different from social rules. You are not "wild" if you live in a society in any capacity.
Her clearest point to me was when she wrote:

"I don’t want anyone who works a 9-to-5 to feel like a fool for staying at a stable job, or feel wrong if they actually enjoy it."

The whole romanticized narrative of quitting your job to pursue your passion is certainly something I've encountered, and I appreciate her point of view on that narrative.
That depends on what you're doing with them.

If you're doing something mundane, easy, and well-defined, yes.

If you're doing something unique, difficult, or undetermined, no.
I know both well enough and I think it's very true :).

Christian Schafmeister's talks are great and I'm very impressed by his work. It was a great experience to meet him personally on this year's ELS. One thing I learned from chatting with him during the conference break is that his work on Clasp is actually pushing LLVM forward - when implementing Common Lisp / C++ cross-linking he found some bugs that were there because apparently no one before has been trying to do the stuff he's doing - so he had to nag some Apple engineers to get to work and fix them ;).
That’s not what OP asked for because it’s not optimized. You can e.g. optimize "I (love|like)" as "I l(ov|ik)e".
It's not generation. The generation born when it was part of Russia still lives there. Their land was stolen from them, they took it back.

Trying to cheat them does not work in the long run.
My Failed Side Project,a tale of social media,content marketing and astroturfing