skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'd say that if any of that is happening, then yes, you're doing agile wrong. :)

Most importantly, a product where that happens is missing a definition of done. Done includes, among other things, automated tests, good code quality, and a product owner looking at it and saying, "yes, this will actually meet the business requirements." If it doesn't get done within the 2 weeks, then it rolls over to the next two weeks. If not enough shit gets done in a 2 week sprint (and yes, I hate sprint as a concept), then you schedule less work.

That two weeks are efforts to work in small chunks (something good developers do anyway) and give a general sense of when the project will be done. That means that everyone is aware earlier that a project's scope or timeline is unrealistic. You're doing this rewrite because shit is slow to change; it's the developers' fucking job to point out that repeating the same problem again is a waste of money.

(Agile means pointing out unicorn fantasies as early as possible as to make the hard decisions before the project is 3 months late.)

Now, personally, I prefer continuous flow boards and cycle time to measure that. Then, you can skip the sprint bullshit, but that's a detail.

Finally, the problem you describe is a rewrite. If the problem is that nobody wants to touch that code with a ten foot pole, then you are "fucking empowered" to spend that same time to clean that shit up. Unless business requirements have changed and the software is no longer the right thing to do (see: implements the actual business requirements) then the right, sane thing to do is get a copy of Michael Feathers' Working With Legacy Code and dig in.

Using an agile methodology to do a dumb thing doesn't make it any more or less dumb.
Traditionally Austria has many problems with founding of startups. In particular the culture does not embrace failure, the social security net is ridiculously tight and rewards people who do not work a bit too much, the taxes are high and the rules and regulations are strict. None of that is new however.

What is new is that for the first time in a long time this has been acknowledged as a problem and it would appear that the ones in charge are genuine about wanting to change this.

Taxation wise I think it would be nice to improve things a bit but if you do the math a fully insured person in California will have to deliver a similar percentage of their income to the state so I think this is mostly a marketing problem than an actual issue.

We will see how this goes. In the last few years many of my friends and collegues when to the states and I really wish that some of that talent will eventually come back. There is a lot that is wrong in Austria but the quality of living is great and at one point in life this matters a lot.
So let's drop the semantic distinction and call it a drone. A drone deployed domestically against a US citizen.
AliExpress is increasing serving more US customers for looking for bargain price. I guess that Amazon is aware of that so they take blind eye for the low priced counterfeits.
Finding Perrin Pseudo Primes: Sieving, Solving, and Code
This is how products and companies die.
> Edit: you possibly see why I and others were mistaken; you are the first one I know that has explained this. Feel free to tell relevant people why we misunderstood so we can clear up the FUD.

Right. There's been a lot of FUD on this and not enough has been explicitly said. I'm pretty sure this was clearly stated in some places, but FUD spreads easily :)

Maybe I can convince someone to write something about it.
I'm afraid no one in my EU high-skilled network is going to stay in New Little England long term after Brexit: there is simply too much resurfacing from under the elitist carpet of multiculturalism and cosmopolitanism, nothing of our strict business really.
SQL Server – Table partitioning
Google is a big company; I'm pretty sure not everyone there is against adblocking. Or perhaps they managed to sneak request blocking past those who were against adblocking by advocating a different use-case --- "reader mode" comes to mind.
Perhaps a better tag line would be "duplication is far cheaper than a bad abstraction".

The take-away from the article for me is if subsequent activity (the changes requiring parameters and if-branches) show it was or has become a bad abstraction, then undo the abstraction and re-introduce the duplication.
> because I can compromise the thing without opening it (just press the button and reflash with non-signed images).

I don't think so. With RDP enabled the only thing the bootloader lets you do is erase all flash. After that RDP is disabled and you can write your own image but at that point the keys are already gone.
And now UK is not even under EU's Fundamental Charter of Rights anymore, which declares privacy a human right. This is one of the reasons why Cameron secretly wanted UK out of the EU, or at least wanted to blackmail the EU into allowing UK to "opt-out" of the Fundamental Charter.

UK is so screwed now, in more ways than one.
badlogic started libGDX (and also worked on RoboVM)
Whether AI can replicate all human abilities is an empirical question, not a matter of "should". And it's clear it can't currently. Given that 30k people per year die of preventable traffic accidents, we obviously shouldn't wait to deploy AI until it is perfect. Adding magnets to all 160,000 miles of the US highway system would be a one-time cost of roughly $10B, which is small in comparison to the hundred of billion we lose every year that autonomous cars are delay.

Additionally, humans do fail to keep track of lane lines in bad weather, and this result in accidents that could be prevented if magnet-directed computers were driving the car.
Yeah when I find duplicated code I always ask myself is this duplicated because this is representing the same domain concept in two different places? Or is it duplicated by coincidence?

I'm much more aggressive about refactoring the former than the latter. When I was first starting off it was always hard for me to tell the difference so I abstracted a lot of things that I shouldn't have, and you could tell from the terrible method names that follow leaky abstractions.
> > Yet you expect other people, many of them volunteers, to take up the busywork of bounds maintenance, for free, so that your immense builds work.

> I have no idea how you came up with that absurd non-sequitur.

You can dispute the accuracy, but "the PVP as written puts too much burden on maintainers" was a part of the justification at the time for removing upper bounds. See, for instance, the following from someone with no connection to FP Complete that I'm aware of: https://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2012-August/...

"As someone who recurrently is nudging a large number of maintainers every major ghc release to bump their bounds, I favor the no upper bounds approach!"

It was not a non-sequitur, but an objection to your assertion that there was no problem with the PVP.
> In my current team, it's followed religiously.

So, not Agile then...
I think the point of the article is that, if you aren't totally sure that an abstraction is correct or justified, then it's better to avoid building one in the first place. Not saying to never make mistakes, it's highlighting a particular kind of mistake that people don't always think about, and suggests that you can avoid making this mistake by not being so obsessive with DRY
I love the thinking and agree with this as much as can be agreed with something general and lacking specific examples or specific situations. It's a nice reminder that there are other options besides modifying a base class to fit only one case's requirements.

I'd call it forking instead of duplication to emphasize that the paths are different, not equal.

When this problem does come up, it's not usually trivial. Often the abstraction doesn't break at the same time the second use is introduced, it breaks much later after the second use is built, making it more difficult to fix.

The much more common problem I've experienced in industry is people making an abstraction with only one use case, anticipating before even having a second use case. It's much easier to discuss and fix if everything you're facing is concrete, and anticipating uses without having them at hand nearly always results in a broken abstraction.

I'd love to see more about how to determine the abstraction is wrong.

> If you find yourself passing parameters and adding conditional paths through shared code, the abstraction is incorrect.

This seems too simplistic. The right answer for this description is often inheritance. What are better ways to identify a broken abstraction?
Create Hybrid Test Framework – Selenium Driver Controls
Can't you prove your length of stay with work/rent contracts? Do you know of this requirement from first-hand or where did you hear about this?

Thanks
Presumably the threat of using a trigger: exploding him and any electronic trigger he had probably amounted to the lowest risk according to their analysis. e.g. relatively low-tech assailant, some conviction they've actually planted IEDs. Perhaps they'd bluffed using a phone as a trigger.
I'm kind of surprised by this.

I've done some work for and remain acquaintances with people from a small anti-virus company, and have been suggesting a very similar approach to them off and on for at least 15 years but there was always too much other stuff they were busy with for them to pursue it.

I've not followed the anti-virus industry closely (most of my work for that small anti-virus company has been back end stuff, like payment processing, tax reporting, and analytics), but have always assumed that numerous others both before and after me had suggested and explored such behavioral approaches, and that they would be common by now.

I will definitely not be above an "I told you so" if this turns out to be an effective approach.
We're talking about non-UK EU nationals in Britain so chances are they're moving back to their families, support networks, and native language.
Why not just learn German? It's relatively close to English and one of the more useful languages to know.
You can have browser or browser extensions which block ads on the Play store. Apps which block ads within other apps are not allowed.
Moreover, Agile is about realizing there is value in reconsidering your requirements as you discover opportunities, or encounter problems. You may think you know all the requirements. But that it often an illusion or a rigidness that prevents a better result.
As a crypto layman, can someone explain to me how PFS plays into currently used TLS schemes?

Am I correct in assuming that each session would still need to be decrypted individually, even were one in possession of a trivially-decrypting quantum computer?
Duplication is fine until it gets out of hand, at which point you'll be able to identify the right abstraction.
It was cheaper to run (power, heat, space) than the equivalent pile of X86's of that era and for years to come. Each box cost between $250k and $750k depending on cores & memory. You didn't buy one unless you had a specific scaling problem that scale-out x86's weren't cutting it.
The whole PVP debate really boils down to one simple question. Do you believe that a properly functioning dependency solver is important for the community? If you answer yes, then I think it's pretty straightforward to get from there to the conclusion that version bounds are necessary. And by the contrapositive, if you are arguing against upper bounds, then you are actually arguing against the usefulness of a solver. If you answer no, then we should debate the merits of having a solver.
Perfectly put.

I've been trying to push this kind of thinking recently. Most successful big projects grow out of a successful small project.
Then, why not fix the abstraction instead?
I think you're onto something here. I like to refer to them as "little-a" agile (iterative delivery, accept change, basically the original manifesto) and "big-A" agile: scrum masters, stand-ups, all that.

Devs have to act like adult professionals though, and keep their issues updated, otherwise they deserve the long, boring meetings they so loathe :)
Einstein: The Negro Question (1946)
I have read SJobs bio(s). My father, brother and fiance have Aspergers. My father and brother especially relate more to Woz and are scared of people like Jobs. I relate more to Jobs than Woz, and I am more OCPD. If Jobs is Aspergers, he is also very manic spectrum. My father/brother are strictly unipolar. Here is more on the OCPD thing if you are curious: http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/201...
Using Dublin as an example is like comparing Boston with SF. You just don't have the talent or the infrastructure or alumni there and it's not just something you build up like that.

If it's laughable then why does the EU have the lowest number of unicorns of any super region in the world? Why is it's growth declining? Why is it's unemployment increasing?

The UK is the country with most unicorns, most fintech startups, most important financial market in all of the EU.

Thats not just something they got because of the EU they got it despite the EU as they had it before too.

And if the EU is so important for trade and export why is it that a country like Denmark export to the US is now rivaling export to Germany and is said to go move beyond that.

EU is loosing it's economic power not gaining it.

There is not a single thread of evidence that the EU is making it easier to conduct business. If anything though it's great for big corporations because they can lobby any challenger out of the market because of the legislative burdens.

I am for the common market but the EU is killing the very advantage of having individual countries with different cultures by trying to harmonize their culture.

Diversity is an asset not a liability especially for startups.
Is that really a thing? That sounds almost as illogical as saying 'good programmers don't write bugs'. Should be more like 'good programmers are aware of undefined behaviour and try to not invoke it' or so.
Gravity Payments' Dan Price Wins Court Battle with His Brother
Whose knockoffs? There are some quality ones.
Unless we have high density super batteries electric vehicles will become a fad.
And ECR is pretty much just hosted Docker Registry. Try using it versus something like GCR or just Dockerhub and even it starts feeling antiquated.
It seems likely the email app would opt in to user certificates.

Once the university (and their providers) have modified their apps to opt in, the user sees a net benefit. I guess it might be hilariously optimistic to expect the university and all of their providers to actually fix their software, but that's the other way of looking at that specific problem.
This may be a conspiracy theory, but how probable is that this move is instead actually motivated by app developers that want to make reverse-engeneering harder? There have been cases in the past were hidden APIs were discovered that e.g. Twitter or WhatsApp were reserving for their own apps. (Not to mention privacy leaks). This will certainly become harder with the new change.
The trend I'm seeing is that PHP is still strong - in terms of usage and there are loads of companies using it. RoR has had a slight downward trend and that Go is in a massive up-tick.

For jobs in legacy codebase, PHP. For new stuff Go

But really, when determining candidate qualifications its more about shipping a project than which tools you use
I feel this is good advice. I think the harder problem is getting buy-in from everyone you work with to do this. Often times I take this approach and have to really try to sell it to people reviewing my code because they've bought into this idea of "DRY ever, no matter what".

DRY yourself is useful when 1. You're repeating yourself more than 2 or 3 times and 2. The inputs/outputs and intention of the code are very, very clear. If that's not case, I'm ok with a little copy/paste.
Sometimes you don't know what the right abstraction is yet, you only know it's not the one you have.
Have you tried posting this on upwork.com or similar sites?
Yes until the managements find out the they are losing Billions due to the ad blocking. IMO, not bring extension support on Chrome Android is the same reason.
I get where that's coming from – I've run Linux since the mid-90s, along with other rarely supported systems like BeOS and OS/2 – but … how many people does this actually affect? Linux on the desktop remains a small minority and the percentage of Linux desktop users who are unwilling to use Chrome is even smaller.

Again, I don't love DRM but we need a reason for a significant number of people to care. We've had a couple decades for angry nerds ranting on the Internet to show results and it's hard to say that we've done anything. The one area where DRM was rolled back is music and that was a combination of widespread unencumbered CDs and, mostly, Steve Jobs scaring the music labels more than piracy.

We need a better approach to avoid repeating that cycle of failure again. Most people think Netflix is good – what's going to make them decide to cancel their subscription?
Short-term gain, long-term loss for the American consumers. If the Chinese will simply copy and crush many honest businesses then not many people will want to spend on R&D, on developing novel designs. The result is stagnation in innovation and the decline in business ethics in the market.
Yeah. I'd agree with this. I've had to maintain some terrible codebases with duplication everywhere. The truth is, I have an easier time fixing bugs in simple but duplicated code than I do fixing bugs in super abstract but DRY code. Which has me thinking: clear, obvious code with duplication is better than magic code which is DRY.

Obviously, the best is DRY, obvious, and explicit...

Also, a rule of thumb is premature optimization is bad. So is premature abstraction.
Not that I am that good at following her advice, but: you have to look at your code in a more dynamic way; you try several designs, thus several abstractions, and you know which abstractions are bad because they don't work for you at solving the problem at hand.
That and some generic rules of thumb, like: prefer composition over inheritance.
Citizenship might be unnecessary, though. People could apply for permanent resident cards. It looks like currently there's no such procedure for EEA residents, since they already have that right.

https://www.gov.uk/apply-for-a-uk-residence-card/permanent-r...
Robocop.
This wasn't a robot - it was a remote controlled vehicle.
I do share the sentiments of others here that there should have been a non-lethal option to disable the perpetrator.
But he entire point of Asimov's Three Laws was to be a literary device for stories about the Three Laws being a bad idea. They weren't intended to be taken seriously, they were intended to illustrate the unintended consequences that can arise from the hubris of trying to codify morality in the first place. Robots governed by his laws in universe harmed people all the time.

If we ever do want to tackle the issue of the morality that governs AI, Asimov is the last person we should refer to as a credible source of inspiration.
Yeah - being scared and trapped in a world that consists of a big error message filling your vision is worse.
Can you point me to an official definition of a stand up meeting? Or is this just another case of "your doing it wrong"?
Looks like another aproach of OnePF: http://onepf.org
Nah. buildings are alike because we have measured, tested and documented every damn material for their behaviors under various uses.

Thus if you want a wall of a certain size and shape, you have a list of materials to pick from depending on the weight is to carry.

The reason people insist on upgrading to the latest and "greatest" software is because there are no rigidity to APIs etc.

The Linux kernel gets more use than GNU/Linux user space because the kernel devs are held to a more stringent API rigidity. This makes kernel behavior predictable.

Similarly, Windows, for all its warts etc, gets used in business because Microsoft built a reputation for predictable APIs. Only with 64-bit Windows can you no longer run 16-bit binaries (dating back to Windows 3.0!), and that's because the 64 and 16 bit CPU modes are mutually exclusive.
It was a dumb referendum because it pitted a specific, known option (remain in the EU) against a complete unknown. The unknown option won by cobbling together a coalition of several different, mutually exclusive agendas (some of which were/are based on fantasies, like the EU giving the UK free access to the common market while choosing which regulations it would follow), thus guaranteeing that there's probably no conceivable exit deal that more than 20% of the country (certainly nowhere near 52%) would be happy with, and even more than 80% will be unhappy with the one that is eventually negotiated.

You don't have to be pro-EU to see this as a bad way to run a country (although it helps).
Brexit: Lessons for London from Montreal’s Fall
Not really a response, just venting: If you saw someone actually gun down a couple of your colleagues would you treat them as just a "suspect" or would you treat them as a murderer. I know why it's put like this but in some cases I find it a bit ridiculous.
Great programmers write code that even bad programmers can understand. Bad programmers write code that only great programmers can understand.
It takes time. I was actually working and taking German classes after work. But that adds to frustration, since you get more tired and you still don't understand anything because it takes a lot of time to get proficient.
And devops turns into "end user is QA"?
This is an interesting library to watch for sure. Personally I have built many scrapers and extractors to be used in house and I have spent many hours on tweaking Readability JS and I know how complicated and hard-to-test the code is. Seeing how Fathom does its job is cool -- it takes care of a lot of the low level, bookkeeping parts so that all you need to do is to focus on tweaking the ranking formula. I'm not surprised if in the future we will have a shared repo containing "recipes" to parse pages, and slap on a nice UI with DOM traversal then we'd have a Kimono-like app for parsing contents.
I'd go further, it's only reasonably to prevent grave and _imminent_ danger to others.

The situation is kind of ironic, because it was vaguely associated with the protest against how police tends to kill people because they can't be bothered to find non-lethal ways to solve problems.
So, it sounds like you hate your team, and agile just makes it more obvious.

So, here are the few quick fixes I see:

1. point out in retro that standups as currently constructed are a waste of time. Tell them you will utilize the law of two feet if they can't be tightened up.

2. Suggest a definition of done. If the product owner doesn't agree it meets requirements, code quality isn't high, and tests aren't there then it's' not fucking done. That means your sprints are implementing too much.

3. Don't pull in more work if other members are struggling to finish something. How can you help them out to make sure their code quality doesn't suffer? If your piece is adjacent to another that is in desperate need of refactoring/code quality improvement, just say that you needed to clean that up to implement your solution. Use that time to de-hackify.
I think such conservative approach can be justified when working on existing code, which has been somewhat proven to work. But I don't think it's justified when you're building the code.

I simply don't think you can always get the good abstraction right. But if you don't attempt it, you will never get it right. What you're advocating is not attempting it.
What sort of "gas grenade option"? Tear gas is only marginally effective. In reality there is no such thing as safe and effective knock out gas like you see in the movies.
What options does this leave for me if I do want to monitor traffic from apps on my device?