skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The most common use cases line up with those of JSON: communication between programs that don't share an address space. The main advantage over JSON (in my opinion) is the definition of an explicit schema. The second (and also important) advantage is in the efficient size of the serialized data, which limits memory, disk, and bandwidth usage. Another (less important to me) advantage is in serialization and deserialization efficiency. A disadvantage is that it requires deserialization for human inspection - that is, it isn't plain text like JSON or XML.

It is similar to Apache Thrift, if you're looking for a non-Google project with similar ideas.
I can't find any indication in this article that Apple's reason was the fear of dynamic linking as you claimed (in cotrast to erlehmann_'s claim that Apple had problems with the "no locking down" and "no patent lawsuits" clauses in the GPLv3).
I understand that. I wasn't looking for some long peer review process. But the post I was responding to was literally a catalog of just-so stories supported by the existence of a song, like responding to statistics about mistreatment of slaves with a paragraph about how it would be in a slaveowner's best interest to treat them well and here's a line in "Dixie" about happy slaves.
Agreed. It's an argument for indirect subsidies to his company on top of the direct subsidies he already receives.

Elon Musk is hardly a libertarian. He's just another crony capitalist.
Pigouvianism is inherently intolerant and totalitarian, not libertarian, as it relies on imposing one's value judgements on others. Using a tax to force compliance rather than more draconian restrictions may be 'nicer', but is not Liberty.
What is a Proof?
I'm not sure why Merkel is still in office. She's been behind most of that policy, along with the current immigration crisis, and the policies that Brexit was a rebellion against.

Ostensibly, Germany is a democracy, but she's had the chancellorship for 10 years and she uses her position to be the EU's de facto leader. There don't appear to be term limits.
True. But when using them, it feels like every field is "present" and you don't have to worry about the "optional, missing" case.
Performance and data size are much better with protobufs: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/549128/fast-and-compact-o.... Built-in serializers are only workable when both ends are on the same platform (i.e. .Net), and even then class versioning can be a problem.
Warp10: Optimized Node lib for transporting complex/circular JavaScript objects
I'm certainly not ruling out that this could all be true. What I'd love to see is a compilation of evidence.

There's a great site on Neocities that's been doing this with Scientology since our foundation and is regularly updated https://scientology.neocities.org

(Neocities is going strong, thank you!)
Mostly right, but one correction:

You actually _can_ calculate with the physical Lagrangian. This is what lattice gauge theory simulations do. But it's inconvenient and difficult in perturbation theory, so physicists use the Fadeev-Popov ghost trick instead. The resulting computations are _entirely_ mathematically equivalent, not "(mostly)".
Obviously I agree that scientific results must be reproducible. But I also realize that it's simply infeasible to repeat the entirety of every study, and much less to also go to the effort to write and peer-review those repeated results.

What I think is overlooked in this discussion as that a lot of confirmation work already happens. Most (all?) scientific results are incremental progress built on a heap of previous work. In the course of normal research, you reproduce existing results as necessary before altering conditions for your own study. If you can't confirm the results, well then perhaps you have a paper (though it can be politically challenging to get it published, and that's a separate problem). But if you do, then you don't waste time publishing that, you get on with the new stuff.

Ultimately, I don't think scientists do accept results in their field that they have not repeated.
The last sentence I meant more generally than the domain of cache algorithms, setting up "ideal" as a contrast to "pragmatic", since I'm taking flak for being "academic" (haha, you should have seen my grades). One lesson I've learned in my career is that there are instances where it pays to take some time, see what the research says, experiment, and then refactor. It takes a lot of time, but the best software is also long-lived so it can pay to take the time to make one's software the best. antirez has 24 bits to play with and doesn't want to make major changes, probably also doesn't have a lot of spare time, and that's his choice.

But I am also aware of the oracle algorithm.
Here is an example from Real World Haskell (pretty good intermediate book, although it is a bit dated): http://book.realworldhaskell.org/read/using-parsec.html#csv

A fully featured CSV parser in 20-30 [depending on how you count] lines of non-golf code.
I should mention that we use Ruby, Java, and Go. So protobufs are also the "lingua franca" for cross-language communication.
I worked remotely for Continuum before. As I mentioned in another comment, I think Continuum is a great place with amazing engineers, but my particular working style was not well-suited for the mixture of start-up environment and ad hoc consulting. My projects also did not happen to feature the use of any C stuff, only database stuff, pure Python, and pandas. I do think some other projects involved the Cython stuff, but nothing I was assigned to work on.

So unfortunately these types of options aren't likely a good match for the sort of work I am looking for.
In my country back in the eighties, the TV networks broadcasting scrambled content over the airwaves sued some people who were making a profit modifying receivers to unscramble the broadcasts without entering the numeric key (it was a very weak scheme).

The court ruled that no law was broken as the signals were being sent over the air, and therefore had no expectation of privacy. And since at that time the descramblers were sold to the user, there was no problem with modifying the hardware.

This is why they switched to leasing the descrambler boxes when they upgraded their system (and chose a system for which descramblers were not easily publicly available).

It always seemed a sensible ruling to me. Though I don't think anything has changed legally, I suspect the ruling might be different if such a case were tried today. :/
>But wait, that doesn't really make sense. What is the LGPL guarding against that make it any better than MIT/BSD?

With LGPL you can replace the shared library by a version that you built/updated/... (thus gives freedom) which is not possible for MIT/BSD libraries.
One case where this question is important is when you are updating a record stored by the server. You only want to send fields you are changing because the record might be huge. But then how does the server distinguish between fields you didn't set and fields you want to set back to the default? The solution is to also tell the server which fields you are changing in a separate message.

Example:

{
'update_record': {
# Set foo=bar
'foo': 'bar'
},
'fields_to_update': {
'foo': true,
# Set some_int_flag=0 (default)
'some_int_flag': true
}
}

See also "Field Masks in Update Operations"
https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/referenc...
Agreed. That's how I read their platform.
Do you feel that your privacy is less at risk when you give your data to Google over Facebook?
Oh I was not commenting on what you do. I was commenting that many who hold that view of non repetition have leanings that are favored by soft sciences. They dont feel the "need" for repetition even in hard science. It is a personal bias thing that influences their need. It can happen when emotion overcomes hard logic and science.
> Isn't the current situation in Turkey just another case of shock doctrine

Sorry, when you start talking about tens of thousands imprisoned without due process, that's way beyond approving undemocratic legislation in opportunistic ways.

> If Front Nationale ruled France and pushed discriminatory policies, would we call Le Penne a dictator as well?

A dictator can be voted in and still be a dictator (see also the one-Godwin-stops-me-from-mentioning). In fact, the original Roman dictators were elected, and followed Roman laws. Modern dictators usually reach power with a golpe, but that's very recent; both Mussolini and Hitler were regularly elected and nominated heads of government by following their proper constitutional laws - the King of Italy was not deposed, nor was the German President (he died of natural causes and left the office technically vacant).

Dictatorship is defined by how power is exercised once attained, not by how it is reached. Removing regularly-appointed judges on political grounds, that's dictatorial; taking political prisoners without following due process, that's dictatorial; and so on and so forth.

> Speaking of Ataturk,

I agree that we (especially outside of Turkey) now carry a rose-tinted view of Ataturk, conveniently forgetting his ugly side: he all but deported and killed swaths of population in order to "solidify" the ethnic background of his state, especially in remote areas and on the islands bordering Greece; and was, after all, a dictator who might have wished for democracy but didn't practice it very much. He was very much a man of his time, from a generation that produced Mussolini, Hitler, Franco, Stalin and so on.
Can you actually live without NTP though? Isn't that a pretty critical service?
i only clicked on "article about" then "github"!
This seems to disproportionately generate languages where all syllables start and end in a consonant.

Example: lium / les / seap / lim / mus / mis / sus / nus / suis / san / sois / taum / puos / sais / mip / soup / lis / neuk / soes / nal / sis / sit / piom / puot / saos / luk

This is rather unnatural, even in consonant heavy languages like the Slavic languages. See: http://www.personal.ceu.hu/students/97/Roman_Zakharii/polski...

Don't read this as disappointment though. This is really cool! Just wanted to point out this quirk.
Is the primary difference between a bionic pancreas and an insulin pump that the bionic pancreas has glucagon?
Yes, that would fall under direct improvements, right? You can link the research to a profit use.
Then what is it? Please help me understand this research that proves my statement incorrect.
Free Gucci Mane
> The entire point of science, and this is not a hyperbole, is that results are reproducible.

No, it's not. The point of science -- its end -- is to understand the natural world. Or to cure diseases. Or, more cynically, to learn how build big bombs and more manipulative adverts.

Reproducible results are the means, not the end.

I know that seems like hair splitting, but it's important. Epistemological purity can do just as much harm as good, because even the most pure science is usually motivated more by "understand the natural world" or "improving our understanding of some relevant mathematical abstraction", rather than by episemological purity itself.

To be quite honest about it, I feel that this sort of epistemological purity that insists on reproducability as a good in itself feels a lot like some sort of legalistic religion.

> If the experiment is not reproducible one must take the results on faith. There is no such thing as faith based science.

I don't think I (or anyone here) is arguing against this. Or against reproducing important experiments.

I'm wholly supportive of reproducing results when it makes sense. But I'm also wary of, in a resource-constrained environment, prefering reproducing results over producing good science in the first place.

To be concrete about it, I'll always prefer a single (set of) instance(s) of a well-designed and expertly executed experiment over 10 reproductions of a crappy experiment. In the former case I at least know what I don't know. In the latter case, the data from the experiment -- no matter how many times it's reproduced -- might be impossible to interpret in anything approach a useful way.

Put simply, a lot of science isn't worth the effort of reproducing. Either because it's crap science, or because the cost of reproducing is too high and the documentation/oversight of the protocol sufficiently rigorous.

The point of science isn't an to perfectly adhere to the legalistic tradition of a Baconian religion. The point of science is learn things.
> "Reconciling" the data isn't my job; the user can use the custom fields for whatever they want.

I disagree strongly here and see this attitude a lot. It's easy to say "not my problem, you fucked it up, you fix it" but that is a very customer-hostile attitude.

Instead we should be giving users functionality they want in a way that prevents them from screwing things up through a combination of feedback and constraints. Sure, if a user types in blatantly incorrect data there's not much you can do. But you can do a lot more than say "here's a narrow ledge and a pit of snakes, if you fall in it's not my fault". This just results in unhappy customers who don't care whose fault it is, all they know is that your software ate their data.
The YC elevator pitch might be "build something people love and do things that don't scale".

It's implication is that the first step to marketing the app begins with getting a first iteration of the product in front of people and then taking their feedback and then improving the product and repeating the process.

Good luck.
CryptoBook, a Secure Encrypted Journal
If he/we really cared about CO2 production and Global warming externalities, we'd put a massive tax on service/product from China or India, whose CO2 production continues to grow:

http://blogs.nelson.wisc.edu/es112-304-4/wp-content/uploads/...
They'll have caught up enough when they have I/O coprocessors as general as Channel I/O. Are there any server standards close to that? And CPU's with the needed I/O accelerators?
Next week, a communist argument for private ownership of the means of production.
The Stone retrospective
Brain drain is a great way to improve your country's future prospects
Machine Learning is Fun – The world’s easiest introduction to Machine Learning
To be really fair, I didn't say they would. I was addressing the long-term impact of spending large sums of money without any clear benefit.

People are usually content while a company is growing fast enough.
Yes. The treasury depts in those French and German banks thought they were being smart buying Greek debt, because they got another 50 or 100bps from Greek euro govies as opposed to German, and they were both AAA. There's a reason you're getting those extra beeps! Because you're taking more risk! But in the end those treasury dept investors were made good by the ECB, as though they'd taken no risk at all. This was scandalous and an abuse of the ECB as an institution by the French and German govts. I voted remain on 23 June, but this kind of thing almost made me vote for Brexit.
> I don't think we do. I think we need to foster a culture of honesty and rigor. Of good science. Which is decidedly different from fostering a culture of "repetition" for its own sake.

No one is proposing repetition for its own sake. The point of repetition is to create rigor, and you can't do rigorous science without repetition.

> Paying for the cost of mountains upon mountains of lab techs and materials that it would require to replicate every study published in a major journal just isn't a good use of ever-dwindling science dollars. Replicate where it's not far off the critical path. Replicate where the study is going to have a profound effect on the direction of research in several labs. But don't just replicate because "science!"

I could see a valid argument for only doing science that will be worth replicating, because if you don't bother to replicate you aren't really proving anything.
Thanks! Signed up now.
The article makes some good points, part of the problem I have with describing "functions" is that there really is a LOT to unpack there, but after years of software development the idea of a function with all its nuance is a single idea, very compressed. To teach that you have to unpack it and take it slow.

I would also note that expertise in one field doesn't mean you have expertise in another field. Many (or most) expert software engineers are not expert educators. They are separate skills. It's beautiful to watch someone with both skill sets work. I strive for understanding and expertise in both, and I hope that it helps.
Source? How do I find such people in the UK?
Agreed, I was just trying to point out that it's not uncommon for very old companies to still be giants in the economy.

Even older companies I forgot to include: Citigroup, the NYSE.
The longer tail pipe thing is, whater. Annoying. An E.V. can be charged from any source. Electrons don't discriminate as to what excites them. With the purchase of SolarCity by Tesla, the pipe is now super short. From your room to your garage. Blaiming E.V. power source emisions is like blaming people with second hand smoke cause cancer for their ailment. It's gonna take awhile to regulate the smokers out of our shared space.
Three are many others that argue that a price on carbon is the best way. For example: William Nordhaus of Yale University and Nicholas Stern of the London School of Economics.

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/30760-carbon-tax-or-carbo...
Turkey had 2.5 successfull military coups.

1960 and 1980: Old school military colonel - generals. They thought they should show these puny civilians who the real boss was, hanged a few people including a prime minister, oppressed free speech and media.

1998 was different, it was a half coup, they disbanded government, created a huge vacuum of authority, caused the biggest economical depression in Turkish history, oppressed majority of people (Those pesky conservative people, why do they want to go to university?)

2016: They failed miserably regardless of their motivation. I hope this would be a lesson to them, Turks had enough of this crap.
Work from home jobs for moms
I don't know why that throwaway account's comment below was removed ... it's ubiquitously well-known that the code quality inside of the Quartz/Athena/other spinoffs at other banks silo is utterly terrible, like don't go within ten feet of it without a radiation hazard suit on.

This is not a controversial opinion, nor really even a swipe at anyone. It's just bad, bad, bad code inside of banks.

I remember talking to someone on the Athena team during a job interview there and they told me that they had to fill out paperwork and wait weeks for approval just to pip install a third-party package for a sandboxed and not-production-facing ad hoc data analysis task. I don't care what industry you're in, that's just taking bureaucracy way too far. I've worked in quant finance before in a highly regulated environment, and there was never the slightest worry that you couldn't just grab any third-party tool you needed to do your job. Getting into production would require a big process, sure, but not just grabbing pandas, say, and answering someone's quick ad hoc business question. In fact, this sort of thing also was never a problem in defense research either.

Anyway, I personally view the fact that the team who spun out of I believe Goldman originally to make the Athena/Quartz/etc stuff (I think now they are even infecting smaller banks like PNC with it too?), is easily one of the worst things that has happened to the world financially in the past 15 years. Sadly not hyperbole.
I was hoping for packed serialization of non-primitive types. I once used Protobuf to serialize small point clouds, and ended up needing to serialize them as a packed double array and reconstruct the (x, y, z) structure at read time to avoid Protobuf malloc'ing each point individually. Not a huge deal, but it would be a real pain for more complex types.
This is a candidate for something like a schemaless datastore or a PostgreSQL JSONB column. Depending on your choice of datastore you can still at least get some indexing and schema help if you choose. With EAV you generally throw all of that out.
What Marissa Mayer Brought to Yahoo That Can’t Be Bought or Sold – Hacker Noon
The people behind this coup is also islamists and most of the people in Turkey support Erdoğan so I doubt it. A civil war is quite possible in that scenario.
>> What we figured was the biggest problem with any form of machine learning or data based system is that we require high quality historic data. When a company starts the heavy dependance on free/freemium analytics services it means that all that data is usually lost for good. [...]

At the risk of shamelessly promoting our (also open-source) product: We also didn't like the fact that all commercial event analytics tools were completely proprietary and would effectively be closed data silos, so we recently released the open source EventQL event analytics database [1]. Maybe it would be an interesting target to support in octo.ai?

[1] http://eventql.io/
In this case it is not about indirect subsidies to his company, but about removing indirect subsidies from the combustion engine industry. Their "freely available externalities" are polluting the place.
OK, but c'mon. If the definition of "moonshot" means you built something without benefit significant previous work in the field, then sending a spaceship to the moon doesn't qualify either.
This is what it looked like before the iPhone:
http://www.technobuffalo.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Scre...
So, yes, it was "just another OS" in the grand scheme of things. A blackberry and symbian competitor. A footnote. An explorer of new frontiers it was not.

http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/04/14/exclusive-android-...

" The change log of the planning document conveys the rapid change that occured in April, when suddenly there was a "major update." Among the changes were section 3.11.2 Touchscreen, which now read, "a touch screen for finger-based navigation—including multitouch capabilities—is required. Stylus-based navigation is not supported."

The iPhone had the android team sweat bullets. They were working all this time on a Blackberry clone, and had to re-purpose their UI to become 100% multitouch friendly before releasing it.

Android might have been released earlier than it did if the iPhone hadn't been a thing. It had to be remade to not become a laughing stock. It still was a laughing stock at release though.

" When it was released, Android still lacked support for touchscreen typing by finger. And while the phone shipped with hardware support for multitouch, its software was patched to remove support for the feature. In late 2009, Google released Android 2.0, adding software support for multitouch. "
But, that's not what this project is about. It's not an either-or situation.

There are chips in the wild today that give you the option to move some or all of your cache to manual control if you want to. This project is about giving you the software interface needed for you to get access to the feature those chips already have.

I feel I have to point this out not necessarily to usefulcat, but because I see a lot of comments arguing against a false-dichotomy strawman of this project.
Here is how you can use the lambda calculus to compute factorials in non-geological time:

http://www.flownet.com/ron/lambda-calculus.html