skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Like I said in the original comment, it is pointless to get bogged down in the analogy because it doesn't reflect the truth accurately. However, you guys are continuing down the path an down-voting a perfectly legit argument.
The purpose of an analogy is not to maintain fidelity to the original scenario but to simplify it to convey the point of author (otherwise it ends up getting as complicated as the scenario). The analogy is only a coarse approximation of the actual scenario, a best-effort attempt to drive the point across.
I'm disappointed with the unreasonable down-votes and the explanation provided.
I wish that stackdriver documentation would be more clear that you should go for sending logs through fluentd, or you are going to have bad time.

I have been using python wrapper over the stackdriver http api. To fix a few frustrations I had with it, like big logs crashing the logger or lack of identificaiton of machine that sent the log (so you can't follow single flow of execution) I wrote the https://github.com/understandwork/stackdriver_python_logger . Then, some time later I realised that I have to use fluentd anyway.
Singly-linked lists are a fundamental computational structure. A singly-linked list is simply an item and a pointer to another singly-linked list. To add an item, simply create a new singly-linked list with that item and a pointer to the old list. Since you are not copying data, this is O(1).

Read more here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linked_list#Singly_linked_list...

If this interests you, read also about tree structures such as red-black trees. These kinds of structures support all operations that mutable structures support in O(log n) time. Of course mutable structures can always be faster, but immutable structures are far better than linear time.
I'm really surprised by these numbers. There isn't really any speed advantage or significant storage advantage to using tuples over lists. That really cuts down on the rationale for using tuples over lists, except for the "cultural difference" as discussed (and the ability to use lists as dictionary keys, which isn't something I think I've ever wanted to do)
There is still a margin if the intended buyer was willing to pay more or would just want to buy the milk at whatever price offered. Of course, the grocers could keep raising the price arbitrarily but there is still a delta that the guy in the Ferrari could overcharge.
I think you understand the point we are trying to get across but just trolling it. I'd have appreciated an honest discussion rather than a trolling attitude.
Why is that? It's not perfect, but we have a number of vital systems programming facilities available.

For instance, we can (through mdb, the debugger, and the mdb_v8 module) inspect all of the Javascript (and native) state in a core file -- all of the Javascript objects, the current stack trace with arguments for each frame, etc. That core file can be taken at our discretion via gcore(1) without terminating the process, or in response to an abort(3C) or unhandled Javascript exception.

We also have excellent support for dynamic instrumentation, via DTrace and USDT. DTrace has essentially zero overhead for disabled probes and doesn't require rebuilding, reconfiguring, or even restarting the process in question to start collecting data. We've added DTrace probes to "bunyan", our logging framework, so that we can get TRACE level logs as probe firings without needing them to be enabled all the time. We've also added probes to "restify", the HTTP server upon which we build most of our REST services, so that we can track the invocation of particular routes and handlers.

Both of these facilities are vital for chasing down and fixing bugs in production systems, without which many issues would be much harder -- or even impossible! -- to solve. This is especially for the not insignificant class of bugs that _only_ show up in production and are _not_ reproducible. Or the class of bugs that we have hit at most once in a week, a month, a year, or (practically) ever.

I'm always on the look out for new languages and platforms that provide these features, but in the mean time we do some pretty solid systems programming work with Javascript.
It really isn't helpful. Due to the high inclination orbit that the ISS is in, you can't actually get anywhere from there; it takes a huge amount of fuel to get into the right orbital plane. Plus the ISS has no real facilities for spacecraft construction, maintenance, or refueling. In theory those could be added, but at that point it wish be cheaper just to build a new station suited to the purpose.
I feel sort of like it's a fun hack for getting email addresses within minimal effort, but the material wasn't entirely new to me, so perhaps I am underestimating how genuinely interesting it was to other people.
OK, if you meant going from DOS batch to UNIX sh scripts, i.e., from one scripting language to another, as the "mental shift", then that's fair.

But using an alias for a program that may be called by a script is not going to address that.

A user can just as easily call curl.exe using BAT, WSH, etc., or PS.

As for DOS, keep in mind MS did not even write the software that became MS-DOS; they bought it.

Many believe it was a copy of the work of Gary Kildall whose CP/M was undisputedly more original and superior in quality to anything else for the "PC".

Using their usual tactics (remember "vaporware"?), MS extinguished Kildall's DR-DOS, and put his company out of business.

Later they paid a $150 million settlement for this move.

What is difficult to understand is why MS cannot make money without copying and interfering with other companies.

What's wrong with their "original" work? Can't they sell that?

Will they use the same tactics against open source projects that write software for UNIX? Maybe that is what concerns people here.

Also difficult to understand why they must force users to "upgrade" and OS that already works? Profits and revenues. Right. Rah rah Redmond.

If this behavior is what they must do in order to derive "profits and revenues" then why would you be confounded by people who would question it?

I'm all for winning in business, profits and revenues, but truthfully I am here because I like using, reading and trying to write software that is better than average.

Microsoft offers nothing in this regard.
You know Uber and Volvo have announced they are trialing self-driving vehicles in Pittsburgh this month. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-08-18/uber-s-fir...
Seq.asm: Minimal implementation of Unix seq command in x86_64 assembly
The Process of Personal Branding
Nobody said these are all Chinese letter? Japanese is "invented" and forced educated by Meiji government one hundred years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meiji_Restoration
Amazon product data
Mike Judge and Silicon Valley.
...and in the Eclipse, the Oracle eats the 日.

(https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E5%8F%A3#Etymology and
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%97%A5#Etymology if you didn't get the admittedly horrible pun.)
From Why Chinese Is So Damn Hard[0]:

> I was once at a luncheon with three Ph.D. students in the Chinese Department at Peking University, all native Chinese (one from Hong Kong). I happened to have a cold that day, and was trying to write a brief note to a friend canceling an appointment that day. I found that I couldn't remember how to write the character 嚔, as in da penti 打喷嚔 "to sneeze". I asked my three friends how to write the character, and to my surprise, all three of them simply shrugged in sheepish embarrassment. Not one of them could correctly produce the character. Now, Peking University is usually considered the "Harvard of China". Can you imagine three Ph.D. students in English at Harvard forgetting how to write the English word "sneeze"?? Yet this state of affairs is by no means uncommon in China. English is simply orders of magnitude easier to write and remember. No matter how low-frequency the word is, or how unorthodox the spelling, the English speaker can always come up with something, simply because there has to be some correspondence between sound and spelling.

0: http://www.pinyin.info/readings/texts/moser.html
That flower's partially wrong.
I disagree with the angry flowers possesive case.
The apostrophe in possesive case is confusing and illogical.
I feel like your reply here, and perhaps a few other comments, are confusing a few senses of the word "dynamic" (which, to be fair, is i.m.o. a reasonable confusion).

Python is "a dynamic language" mostly in the sense that it is "dynamically typed". (I'm sure you're aware, I'm not trying to patronize, just setting the stage.) That's one sense.

Tuples in Python are still dynamic in this sense, of course, because every damn value in Python is, for good or for ill. But there are at least two other senses in play here.

Compare C structs with, say, JS Objects. Both let you mutate the values they point to, but JS Objects let you add new property-names at will (or remove them). So one sense of "dynamic" is "resizeable".

We could also have a data type, e.g. linked lists in various "purely functional" languages, that can be resized (pushed and popped), but existing cells cannot be mutated. AIUI Clojure is full of this sort of thing.

Point #1 is that nothing in colanderman's comments argues against Python's dynamic typing.

My second and broader thought is that I agree with colanderman that it's weird that Python conflates these latter two senses of dynamism (resizeability and cell-mutability), and even more weird that it does so for one data type (the sequence) and more or less ignores it elsewhere (though e.g. frozendict does exist).
They're not technically immutable, but culturally Lisp programmers are not in the habit of mutating lists unless they know where and for what purpose the list was created. Mutating some list whose provenance you don't know -- maybe you got it by calling some library function that doesn't explicitly promise to return a freshly consed list -- is a bad idea, and experienced Lisp programmers know this instinctively.

So in practice you can often get away with pretending the lists you create are immutable, if that's what you want to do.
Care to provide a single fact in support of those two amazing assertions?
It took me three sessions of a few hours each to write the current one. If I start writing the next part now, traffic to current one will be dead before it's finished.

Also it's hard to get people to click through to anything, be it another article or a sign-up to get updates. Most people go back to HN and read the comments or another article. I know I do.

Edit: People didn't seem to be at all interested, so I removed the sign-up link from the post.
I wonder how many potential customers they lost with their downloader bullshit though. While my OS at the time did support it I couldn't be bothered to install a random binary just for a different music store.

Even if the album/single was $0.
Of course, some other common operations on singly-linked lists, notably concatenation, are O(n).

There are better choices for general-purpose functional lists.
It doesn't make any sense to put an apostrophe on a noun just because it's genitive, this is just a recent typographical fad.
> Fear is a powerful political tool. If you can make people afraid, you can control them.

I don't think that's the whole of it though. A large part of the American media / news system is still profit driven -- I'd say a large enough part to swamp editorial intent if the two butt heads.

It seems to me another explanation for the evidence is that people like being afraid.
I guess I am old and did not have that issue yet. I have fought computing for so long by using Linux as my primary OS since the mid 90s, I guess sometimes I stop thinking when something just works. I am not Stallman and I realize even there that I am limiting myself but when it just works and the damage is less than what is possible in my mind I will accept it. I cannot see a solution that works currently and Netflix etc do provide something that works for a price which you do not have to think about and you do not have risk of the feds running in. Maybe there is something here as a middle ground. Annoying as it is when you think about it, it seems to improve... You are right and yes when I think about it it is annoying as hell, but a) netflix simply cannot do without or they would have no content (my question about ownership remains) b) we have no good rapport for just opening up all. I understand we all are doing that anyway but not for most and so it is a hard sell.

Edit: as someone who grew up in the 80s, Linux is the best thing that happened to computing outside the internet and Linux was a large part of that as well. It was hell before with MS, Sun, HP, SGI, Digital, etc and their flavours of hell. They did a lot of good but the closed off nature was terrible.
I think that the credit is built by taking on debt and then paying it down. It shows that you can produce money reliably when required to do so, and that given some rope, you won't hang yourself with it.

Extrapolate that a bit and you're paying a mortgage using the same skills.
> Yes. And that's exactly what they do in Japan.

I'm aware that that's what they do in Japan. I'm pointing out that it's idiotic.
I had different alarms set on it for waking up, to getting to work on time, when work was over, and getting home, and going to bed. I never figured out how to make an app for it but it didn't have much memory on it and only so many buttons.

These days I am sick and disabled and cannot afford an Apple Watch and don't have an iPhone to work with it.

I remember stores didn't carry the Timex Datalink anymore, I had to find it at Walmart Jewelry sections and have them call different stores to see who had it in stock.
I had to look a bit to figure out how you got "qi" from a word pronounced "chi". 契, the right part of the character is pronounced qi4, as is the character 氣, which does have spiritual meanings. 契, however, has no such meaning (according to wiktionary), so I assume this is another one of those Chinese superstitious puns.

Is a preference for 食 a Taiwanese thing? All the mainland Chinese people I've ever heard say 吃.
Vanguard runs etfs mostly, so I'm not sure why they care about support small spreads since they probably do a lot of efp trades (I'm not sure how the underlying prices are determined, but I think they can convert at a set price). The mutual funds and hedge funds who are more fundamental will try and buy or sell large blocks, so they're more affected by adverse market moves from trying to dump $1M of apple. I could see VG's attitude change a little since there are more traders engaged in rebalancing arb. If you know that the S&P index has to allocate more money to a certain stock, you can buy it ahead of time and sell to VG for a slightly higher price. If you're a passive fund with $1B in an etf, everyone knows what you're obligated to do. It's basically stat arb with higher probability. I still buy VG funds though
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist%E2%80%93Shannon_sampli...
Singly-linked lists are a fundamental computational structure, and I'm not disagreeing with anything in the spirit of your comment, but I want to point out that linked lists are pretty much never the right implementation choice for an application programmer unless you're working in a language with no decent stdlib and you also care hugely about every byte of RAM/storage/etc. Which does happen, but is not very common, in practice.

For the benefit of the GP, what might be non-obvious about the way colanderman describes this, is that if you want lists that are cell-immutable but are resizeable with O(1) push() and pop(), you do your pushing and popping off the front of the list. So the pointer to the old list is still a valid pointer to its previous state. And at this point, yeah, go off and read the WP link. :)
Elon Musk's Greatest Innovation Has Gone Unnoticed
I'm sorry, but if we can't even agree about the facts, or even how we might arrive at the same ballpark of facts, what makes you think a debate of meta-facts is going to be productive?
Could you rephrase that question? I don't understand it well enough to answer it.
> Example: every bridge in Europe is 'pre-prepared' for demolition (..) the plans are already done. A combat engineer need only draw the plan for the database and execute one of the options.

You would think. But in reality, these one-off type preparations probably have a actual low chance of going as planned or being executed in a timely manner. The only exceptions being contingencies that are actively, regularly simulated by computer or otherwise. I don't think it'd be surprising to find that, bureaucracy & budgets working the way they do, no one there is simulating demolitions like that (at least not since the 50s or 60s).
US has a variety of mortgage products, but yes, a fixed rate amortized over 30 years is pretty standard.

There are 5/1 ARMs and the like that are more similar to what you describe, but most rates are locked.
In my understanding, in LISP-59, the only list-modification symbols are FIRST and REST. This makes me want to claim that in the one true Lisp, there are no mutable cells.

Actual useful implementations of Lisp, of course, may vary.

edit: s/list/Lisp/ in a particular place
Functional data structures are used a little differently from their imperative counterparts. Instead of saying

list.append(x)

you would say something like

list = list.withLast(x)

thus assigning the newly constructed list value back to the variable 'list'.

There is a small literature within computer science on efficient implementations of functional data structures. While some tricks are involved, I think it's safe to say it's a solved problem, thanks to people like Chris Okasaki and Phil Bagwell.
Maybe it is not clear from my other comments but we are in violent agreement :) Tagged unions (and even more general RTTI) have a common interface and therefore are homogeneous: a well-written iteration always accesses such elements first through the tagged-union (or RTTI) interface.

To me, code which acted on such elements without first consulting the common interface would be "smelly". e.g. code which assumes every other item is a string, or code which uses a list as an ad-hoc structure. There's almost always a better way to write such code.

(As an aside, I find the explicit use of RTTI a smell in and of itself, but one unrelated to containers. Code which today does two different things to some input, based on whether it's an integer or string, likely tomorrow will need to do three different things, two of which involve an integer. Tagged unions are almost always preferable.)
Isn't this client-side? So, what could a malicious user DoS other than their own browser? Am I missing something?
I doubt they'll bring back DDT spraying programs. But there's no question it was effective.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDT
If you want to learn more about the history here, check out The Dream Machine by M. Mitchell Waldrop.
From the linked "FOXACID SOP for Operational Management of FOXACID Infrastructure" document:

> What can cause [FOXACID] exploitation failure?

> JavaScript turned off

> ...

> Browser has extensions loaded. This causes certain exploits to fail.
In Chinese, 'eat' is usually '吃'. We use '吃了 (le)' to say we 'ate' and '在 (zài) 吃' or '吃着 (zhě)' for 'eating'.

It is really interesting that in China people often ask their friends '吃了吗? (Have you eaten?)' rather than '嗨 (Hi)' in daily life. So initially I thought this post was describing something in Chinese w/o my noticing the URL.
Consul is probably one of the best pieces of software I've ever used and is the category leader for service discovery
https://pypi.python.org/pypi/frozendict of course
Tangential: why use a rare (and dying![0]) word for turns down ? I had to look up whether he was unhappy about it, disapproving of it, or turned it down.

[0]: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=spurn&year_sta...
Packer was great when I was doing immutable infrastructure with VMs, but for Docker it doesn't offer a compelling story anymore.

I still think Terraform is great though.
Thanks for your comment/insight. I understand what a PaaS is but what does the 'masterless' qualifier mean?
Nothing?

We don't know that they didn't buy (some of) these particular exploits (in the recent "dump") and, in fact, it's very likely that they do buy exploits. I imagine that CNE of high-value targets is an area where they could "never have enough".
It seems the act of coordination itself can be modeled similarly to not eating a big mac.
Wired on https
I think it would be best for the NSA to keep working on creating exploits but practice responsible disclosure.
Yes!

TerraForm has been huge for us. Packer has been great. We plan on rolling out Vault fully and consul to our entire infrastructure.

The tools I listed above are essential along with Chef, ansible, and git are essential for our tools stack.
Probably because Chinese characters are a poor fit for Korean and Vietnamese grammar/vocabulary. They are a poor fit for Japanese grammar/vocabulary, too, as you can see by the fact that every character has multiple possible sounds depending on which word it is used in. In Chinese, however, the characters very much make sense for the language. Most words are one or two syllables, and correspond characters correspond to both the meanings and the pronunciation. A large number of characters even have a pronunciation hint built in. I, personally, think that Chinese is much easier to read in characters than pinyin, and you certainly won't find any Chinese ever using pinyin for more than a teaching tool. (Especially because nobody except foreigners seems to put tones on the pinyin). The fact that China has kept using them, despite a very pragmatic government that wanted to move the language more phonetic, should say something about their utility.
This is the most accurate description of OpenStack i've ever read. Congrats!
Prescription Drugs Associated with Reports of Violence Towards Others
Generate leads and subscribers
If you're looking for something that is a little more flexible for deploying Kubernetes, I recommend either KOPS[1] or kube-aws[2]. kube-aws is tethered to AWS but is much more flexible than the standard kube-up.sh script. KOPS is the heaviest lifting tool I've found for deploying Kubernetes. It's short for Kubernetes Ops and (I believe) it can even generate Teraform configs so you can get the upgrades without re-creating everything.

[1] https://github.com/kubernetes/kops
[2] https://github.com/coreos/coreos-kubernetes/tree/master/mult...
Genetically Modified Bacteria Conduct Electricity
I, for one, think your tools are brilliant and have made my life as an engineer in a highly regulated environment much easier. I don't make many comments here, but I feel taking the time to thank you and your team for your hard work is needed.

To be sure, there is always room for improvement. HashiCorp does an incredible job at providing active support for the tools they create, and the active community that they've built up over the years is proof of their dedication to their ecosystem.

Keep doing what you're doing, Mitchell!