skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think the author is correct that some people use an iPad as a badge of honor - I am a little guilty of this.

Both my iPad mini 4 and iPad Pro are fine for writing books in markdown, using an online publishing platform like leanpub, performing research and note taking, accessing servers via SSH terms, and consuming content. For work, the trick is getting really fast at switching between apps and have a good memory when you can't see things side by side.

Where they fall short is in programming. I do a lot of work on remote servers and have SSH + term + Emacs set up nicely, but sometimes I really need IDEs like IntelliJ or RubyMine to be really productive programming. So, I keep a few Ubuntu laptops around.
That commute is killing you. So is the perception that you aren't doing anything if you aren't doing something all of the time. Give yourself a break. Everyone needs to have an outlet and video games happen to be on the lower end of the scale in terms of harmful outlets. Now you just need to forgive yourself for being human.

If you are intent on removing video games from your life, please replace it with something that allows you to free your mind. Join or start a meetup for something fun and attend it during your usual video game time. Go to your local pool and take a swim. Do anything that will take your mind off of your crappy commute, job, and MSc.

And go talk to someone if you feel you might be depressed. Good luck!
11 hour battery life, built in SIM card, drawing UI sketches for clients (not an Air though, I have a pro)
How Two Facebook Engineers Could Decide the Presidential Election
Couple's Finances Not Risk Factor for Divorce, but Unemployed Husband Could Be
Some children wake early. A light that changes colour lets them know that it's still too early, or that it's now okay to get up.

Commercial lights with timers are available, but they often use blue for night time and I'm not sure if that interferes with sleep or not.

It's a gentle way to sleep train.
Maybe the hand crank could charge the battery as well. On long road trips just have your passengers crank through the night....
I appreciate that
> and have not ONCE had a use for namespaces or multiple DTDs in a single document.

I'm actually rather surprised about that. Take an XSLT document and you're bound to use multiple namespaces. Have you never used an editor which provides tab-completion, quick validation and documentation of tags on the fly? The systems I worked with heavily relied on namespaces for validation, exploration, versioning and prevention of naming clashes. These, however, were heavily distributed systems within government organisations.

Also, please note I'm talking about namespaces within and outside XML. I'm saying that namespaces are a cheap and easy to implement design rule.

Ok, now your references.

[0] is actually an argument for namespaces (and XML schema or suchlike). If I understand correctly, he proposes a system which allows you to specify part of an XML document post-hoc (using a namespace which references a schema which is specific to the module-writer).

The second one, I must admit that for me it had a low signal-to-noise ratio. The writing seems to refer only to XML and DTD, but nothing about larger ecosystem, which my arguments were about. Anyways, remove all the banter and you're left with a couple of arguments:

1. the syntax is verbose (yes it is, nobody disagrees, not even the designers).

2. there is no macro support (perhaps useful, one could embed an XSLT stylesheet if necessary). I find this a minor point. It would also severely complicate the parsers and make them stateful and memory-bound.

3. binary representation (in line with 1). How many good, portable binary structured editors do you know? How much does the size of an XML document improve with simple compression to binary? (hint, quite a lot). Also, when going to binary, there are many other design choices, such as: should it be possible to memory-map the document so the CPU is not involved? Should pointers be employed so we can skip sections of the document? Should we use names, ids, UUIDs? Do we optimize for processing use, network use, memory use? [1] seems to only argue about network utilization (which, for most applications, is abundant).

The rest of the document (I have to admit, I skimmed some parts), appears to be a rant on everything and everyone stupid. The king who shouts: "I am the king!", is no true king.

<skipping some parts>

> If it does know [the namespaces], they don't matter either.

To structure something, we first need to construct, e.g. bring together and later we need to deconstruct. In both cases, it helps to have namespaces because (de)constructing might involve many different distributed parties, with different versions of software. It is my opinion that in truly distributed systems, naming and typing are of utmost importance.

It's getting quite late here. Thanks for making me think about this subject again. Sadly I cannot answer all of your points within a reasonable time.
There is a very big difference - "with JSON one still must check the expected types anyway" is not really true, I can deserialize an arbitrary json and I will know the difference between 123 and "123" even if I don't know what's expected or, alternatively, mixed-type values are expected.
Money, Work and Marital Stability [pdf]
You come off as incredibly insecure.
Vacationing in a Police State
> Normal people use paradox more for things like the "French paradox"

Maybe. Certainly, common use (and traditional use, e.g. Zeno's Paradox) include things that are not strictly a logical paradox. But I think that most people (and certainly overwhelmingly most programmers) consider "this sentence is false" to be a paradox - which is part of why I picked it as a point of reference.
Category Theory for the Working Hacker
Show HN: Continusec Key Transparency Server
Very nice! Thanks.

You might be interested in this paper and code on the implementation of microKanren, a minimal implementation of core miniKanren. The core implementation is under 50 lines of Scheme code.

Jason Hemann and Daniel P. Friedman.
microKanren: A Minimal Functional Core for Relational Programming.
In Proceedings of the 2013 Workshop on Scheme and Functional Programming (Scheme '13), Alexandria, VA, 2013.

http://webyrd.net/scheme-2013/papers/HemannMuKanren2013.pdf

https://github.com/jasonhemann/microKanren
You could do make it more like S-expressions in JS if you really wanted.

{object: [
{id: "1234"},
{isEnabled: "true"},
{props: ["abc", "123", "false"]}]}

Not quite the same, but nothing keeps you from parsing an array of key/value pairs instead of a hash.
I'm really curious what sort of company you work for (industry, small/medium/large, and country).
It didn't need to raise $1.8m - the goal was $33k.

For a game like this where a big part of the appeal is the artwork there isn't really a clean divide between development and production, but it's fair to say a decent chunk of the money could be attributed to "production", sure.

What's the distinction you're drawing between kickstarter and preorder? Legally and practically they're the same thing, no? In any case I don't see what you could be considering "unfair".
What are the obvious reasons you cannot say what your company is called or link to it's website?
The linked post not really about hardware or UI design but how per app sandboxing and lack of a shared local FS has restricted productivity on the iPad pro.

I've always likened iOS to living in a bunch of lavishly outfitted tents: they look great and are really comfortable. However each tent could only be of a certain size since there is no solid foundation and when the heavens decide to rain it is impossible to go from your bedroom to the kitchen without getting wet. The other OS may be an ugly Stalinist house with very small windows and unpolished concrete floor, but they are objectively better at serving the purpose of in door dwelling I.e. shielding people from the elements.
I found the Associate level good for directed learning. I learned about some facets of services I hadn't been aware of and gained exposure to services I hadn't used for projects to date. It was my first cert in ~20 years of IT (sysadmin and dev), FWIW.

I've heard, as another poster pointed out, that the Professional level certs are well regarded. Associate, eh.

No one ever comes out and says "You were hired on the basis of a cert". It's just another factor. If you've got the experience they're probably not worth as much. If you don't, they'll help.
Visualizing iTunes Library Data in Excel
DNC policies affects way more people in the world that they should (innocent people in Syria and Libia, for example), so I see the leak as a problem that DNC is responsible, not the "leaker".
I was surprised they didn't vote more solidly Labour in 2010 and 2015 which might have helped.
And it is worth noting that the reason PIE is not enabled on Firefox on Mac OS X is because PIE executables are not supported on OS X 10.6, and Firefox still runs on OS X 10.6. Which won't be true in Firefox 49, due to release in 6 weeks, and that has PIE enabled (by the simple fact that MACOSX_DEPLOYMENT_VERSION was changed to 10.7 (the toolchain defaults to building PIE in that case), https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1269790).
Do you think physical activity would help? Building in a bit of exercise would probably have some benefit.

Would you be able to keep to a timetable of allowable game time? 30 minutes and no more? Because if so you cold use it as a reward for starting some thing else. "I'll do an hour of learning this other thing, then 30 minutes of games".
I know the song, I'm just saying, he has it in multiple area codes, so it can't be random.
Thanks for the kudos! Hopefully we can deliver where The Grid couldn't. We actually paid close attention to what they did and think we've learned a few things.

The main difference is that we are spending more time learning what the user likes first before offering design options. Options being a key word here, because The Grid doesn't really have much of a feedback system and even their latest V2 alpha resorts largely to guesswork, whereas our system will give you choices and ask questions like "Do you like this?" at the appropriate points.

The experience we're going for is the one you get from working with a human web designer: at first it's a two-way discovery process and then, over time, the web designer gets to know and understand you and therefore becomes better at nailing what you want straight away. Simultaneously, the platform will learn from anonymised behaviours from its other users, mixed with analytics monitoring, to discover recommendations that it can pass on to you as a user. For example, imagine you're a restaurant owner and you have a button that links to your booking engine which is labelled "Reserve a table". Our platform learns, from other restaurant sites on the network, that "Book a table" has a higher conversion rate, so it can pass that recommendation automatically on to your site. That kind of thing.
This is why I think Servo is particularly exciting - while it's still a few years off being a practical browser, it should be immeasurably more secure than the existing crop of crufty C++ codebases. I think it (along with Rust) is by far the most important thing that Mozilla is working on.
when an attacker is trying to access my Find My iPhone feature, I expect Apple to offer a different version of the their 2fa - either by user pre-authed device along with a special secret (those offline password print outs) or another form (landlines, biometrics, knowledge based, etc.).

remote wiping someone's one can a very serious threat if they don't offer something that handles both the usability requirements and the security of the service.
>> The babies seemed to figure out that when the experimenter’s arms were wrapped up, she couldn’t use her hands, and that must have been why she had used her head instead. So when it was the babies’ turn they took the easy route and tapped the box with their hands.

Or maybe the babies had just completely forgot about the experimenter and his wrapped-up hands and didn't even "tap" the box but more like "bumped into" it hands-first. The difference between a "tap with intent" and a "bump without intent" or even a "tap without specific intent other than basic curiosity" is probably not even possible to measure.

That's why I find it very hard to trust experiments like this: they're supposed to tell us something about the way babies think but we can't actually check we got the right end of the stick. They're babies, so we can't just ask them. If we asked adults to do the same thing we wouldn't learn anything new either. So what's the point?

The result is that researchers get into this elaborate dance with their subjects trying to set things up so there's no plausible alternative explanation than what the research is trying to show- but a) there always is and b) it's pretty damn annoying to what lengths the research goes to avoid admitting (a).

Also, once I find one such transgression in an article I then find it very hard to read through with any shred of trust to the writer.
> You don't usually find people who enjoy programming primarily in Rust or C++ or even F# looking down on others [...]

Yes, though I think C++ might have gone through that phase when it was younger? (I am too young myself to say for sure, and wasn't really online in the much smaller communities back then nor working.)
I agree no VC backed company will be profitable for much of its early life, my point was you can't compare apples to apples between Gillet and DSC. If DSC is spending insane amounts of money on growth and discounting their goods, at some point they have to start making money. And at that point I wonder what their retail prices will be for their blades if they are buying them from a 3rd party.
Are you a developer? Advocate for pair programming.

It could be that this guy is bright and your boss is blinded by potential/flashes of greatness, but dude just isn't able to sustain it. Common in this field. Maybe I'm your co-worker.

If you code, pair-programming may actually make the two of you more productive as a unit than you could be individually. I never would have believed it until my current job.

If nothing else, at least you can force him to actually do some work.
> I count 27 mass shootings in that time period.

Mother Jones uses a different standard for what they consider a "mass shooting."
The FBI "defines a "public mass shooting" as one in which four or more people selected indiscriminately, not including the perpetrator, are killed"

Looking at the raw spreadsheet, Mother Jones (which has been notoriously anti-gun) seems to be using 3 or more as their criteria for a "mass shooting." That might account for the difference.
For completeness, Distros didn't actually fix the issue, they have much less to care about it: When you install a distro package, you get the application icon in your desktop environment. You don't when you download a firefox tarball, and unpack it.
Nice work!

A tip: You can use GitHub Releases for the compiled APK instead of having it in source control.

https://help.github.com/articles/creating-releases/
Agree to an extent, although I'd add that it's also similar in that people looking in from the outside frequently neglect to factor in the flexibility premium -- programmers who do consulting work frequently do so because they either enjoy or need to be able to set the amount of hours they work and when. Similarly, lots of Uber drivers seem to do it because they can just sorta fit in hours whenever they feel like it, without having to follow a manager's schedule.
I mentioned above, but "a team with enough tokens in their pocket would have enough incentive to do the same kind of user acquisition" is a pyramid scheme unless there's some genuine value for the people they will invite. And no, "the privilege to follow these people" is not strong enough of value proposition to make this happen. You can look at whole slew of examples of social networks that tried to bootstrap using celebrities but all failed. Then there are approaches where people get paid to invite others in (an actual pyramid scheme), such as tsu. None of these succeeds because these networks are incentivized by money.

A lot of services and apps we take for granted today work because the usage itself doesn't involve any monetary interest (at least among most casual users). As soon as the primary focus becomes money, the network's main purpose becomes money (vs. communication for example) and people will optimize their behavior towards that. And this is how it becomes inferior to the centralized (yet financially neutral) models.

Summary

1. Quality of service is inferior because everything involves money.

2. The assumption is that you will need to pay for certain things (that's how people make money). If I have to pay to post a tweet, I would rather post on a centralized twitter where it's all free.

3. I don't want to share my storage with the world (If you really wanted to be a contributing user of this decentralized twitter network, you should function as one of the nodes, which means you will be sharing your storage with the world. Again, personally I would rather opt for a centralized service.

4. Looking at all of the above, this decentralized twitter is pretty shitty compared to centralized version when it comes to end-user experience. Which brings up the question: Why would I invite my friends? Only reason I can think of is so that I can make money off of them, which is shady (and which is why I wouldn't invite friends).
The Science That Fueled Frankenstein
Microsoft pretty much standardised on XML all through the early .NET framework - app.config and web.config, plus most project files are XML files, and defining your own configuration (past simple key/values) is very tricky and error-prone.
1+1 = 0
Why will a thinner phone be mechanically weaker? What about if everything on the phone is flexible?
"Used during World War II to calculate artillery trajectories, the ENIAC was 1,000 times faster than similar electromechanical machines and 2,400 times faster than a human at calculating a trajectory."

Actually, ENIAC wasn't completed until after WWII was over. A history of ENIAC tells us:

"But by the time Eniac was completed, the war was over. The machine did not boot up until November 1945, when 300 neon lights attached to accumulators lit up a basement room at the Moore School."[1]

WWII ended on September 2, 1945.

[1] http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-brief-history-of-t...
That's what the spec says. It remains to be seen how connectors perform in the real world, with all its dust and dirt.
The intro to this article is great. One of the reasons to avoid negotiating is because it's scary. All of us are smart people and can read tips on the Internet but it's hard to follow them it. Having someone in your social circle guide and coach you helps.
I wish there was something less fancy, less automated, less AI, but that just displayed content we dumped into it in a more-or-less sane way.

Write anything, upload files, anything, and all will be there in the website somewhere.
My points are clear to anyone trying to understand me.
Why not make a 32 core arm chip with an amd pin out so it can fit into existing low cost motherboards ?
Don't pick up the slack.
Multilinguals have multiple personalities
Building Ambitious Web Applications with Ember.js
That quote will apply up until we encounter real AI.
It was a (failed) joke in reference to a flurry of initial negative/content-free responses. I was trying to be gentle about it, but I'd have done better by being as straightforward as your response. As an HN n00b, I appreciate the feedback.

From a designoper POV, the idea is sound (visual and information design isn't magick) and I wish them all the luck in the world. A good solution will fill a real need.

The comments about "The Grid" are irrelevant, except as (surely known) lessons to the Firedrop creators. Anyone with industry experience understands that attempts will fail, until they don't.
Injectable Oxygen Particle Enables Life Without Breathing
From what I can tell, this is the sole benefit - in principle - of a random number generator. If you assume an adversary who can predict a deterministic world better than you can, then you can remove most of that adversary's advantage by making the world unpredictable.

But that's a very far cry from what this article is pushing. Randomness in this case is not making any system work better as the article discusses early on (and incorrectly hints at in some of the examples). Randomness is just a blind woman shutting off her lights in order to hinder a sighted man trying to harm her.
Since most everyone can live on less than they have, this is already the case for almost everyone.

Deciding to live permanently at your current level is actually step 1. If you can't do that, then you'll have to increase salary, yep.
> I'm not using an alarmist language.

Yes you are.

> nor do you enjoy the guaranteed buyer protection as you would as a consumer buying a product.

Is this actually true? I mean when you order a product you pay for a contract, it's possible the company will not deliver and go bankrupt - isn't that exactly the same situation as when you order via Kickstarter?

> there are too many companies that use it as a marketing and pre-order platform instead of what it originally was meant to be - a place to get funding for projects that would not be able to be funded through normal means.

A lot of websites end up being used for something different from what they were originally intended for. Heck, the Internet itself was intended for quite different purposes than those it serves today. Who cares?

> If this trend continues and everything moves to kickstarter like platforms you as a consumer suffer, you lose the rights and benefits that consumer protection laws provide, while still paying the same price and sometimes even a premium.

In a competitive marketplace there is no anti-free-lunch. No-one is getting rich off board gaming. Rather, more and better board games are being created. Customers aren't being stupid, they're accepting the risks because they're worth it.
> Desktop Linux is like having a machine shop. It's a steep learning curve, but you can do amazing things.

IME, the learning curve for Linux (post-installation, at least) is waaaay less steep than Windows. When I went off to college and got tired of my Dad calling me every few days with another question or concern about his Windows computer, I switched him to Linux Mint and haven't been bugged since. It's too much to expect of the average user to use a Windows computer: constant fears of malware, a system tray polluted with two dozen startup programs that they didn't consent to, frankly idiotic design decisions like "Let's install updates and refuse to turn off for ten minutes, regardless of whether this laptop needs to be shoved into a backpack right now".

The main difficulty in desktop Linux is hardware compatibility stuff, but IME that mostly boils down to a couple careful decisions right at the beginning. I've had something like four Thinkpads over the last ~10 years and I've yet to have hardware problems of any significance. People occasionally comment that it's ridiculous to have to constrain one's hardware choices based on the OS they want to use, but that's pretty much exactly what many people do for Macs, so I don't think it's all that weird (and certainly worth it).
Note that there is a 2.5mm variant of the connector, which I'm surprised hasn't gotten more common as a result of the whole thinness trend.
For the average user (who uses w10 or osx) linux is miles more difficult. Turn on your mac, login to apple, and 1 click download anything and it works. Linux has dependencies, and not-so-straightforward app store, and plenty of little differences that aren't obvious like osx. Thats what makes it so powerful though.