skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
US small business owner here, 100% remote telecommuting staff. (No, we're not hiring, heh.)

The first problem is your competition: the instant that a job doesn't require a physical presence, then you're going up against every possible candidate, in every possible location. It's easy to be in the top 1% of candidates in your city, but it's really, really hard to be in the top 1% of candidates in the entire world. Plus, keep in mind that your competition may live in a way cheaper location, and be willing to work for way less money. (Or, they're willing to take a pay cut in order to stay near their family or favorite location or restaurant or whatever.)

Whenever we post a consultant position on our site, we get 200-400 applications in a few days, and they're from a stunning number of qualified people. There have been hiring rounds where I wished we could hire a dozen people because they were all such good fits. Getting to the top of that pile is really, really hard.

The second problem is accounting and taxes. Every time we hire someone in a different US state, we have to deal with different tax laws, business licenses, and health plans. If I had to guess, it costs us 20-40 hours of admin work whenever we add someone in a new state (or when an existing employee moves to a new state.) Adding another country makes it even worse.

Another problem in your case: when you say "without any trips," that makes it sound like you don't even want to come into the office for orientation, or to do planning sessions with the team, or team-building, or even conferences for learning or growth. I'm pretty suspicious when I hear that someone doesn't even want to learn at conferences - that's one of the ways we get the team together each year. I'm not saying you can't learn unless you're at a conference, obviously, but saying no trips at all - that's a tough sell.
Destructuring assignment could also helps readability, for example:

function replace(text, {fromText = '', toText = '', caseInsensitive = false} = {}){
//
// ...
//
}

replace(
'Get on the Road',
{
fromText: 'road',
toText: 'bus',
caseInsensitive: true
}
);
This problem is no different in colo as it is in public cloud. If your business requires site redundancy, you build this capability into your app and stack and run a second warm footprint somewhere else.
I'd assume it's argument chaining, e.g.:

> find('elements').clear('contents').add('border')
California bans ITT tech from accepting new students
The latest scatter/gather vectorization tricks are missing. The SSE improvements are only minimal.

Maybe a very new compiler, like Polly or ICC can vectorize this automatically.

ICC has a special -qopt-matmul option. https://software.intel.com/en-us/node/524953
To find clients that will pay good rates you're mostly going to have to deal with them directly, which rules out most sites that try to act as a middle-man.
I adore outlandish conspiracy theories and this is an excellent one. Now, are the astronomers and government secretly working with the Nibiru aliens themselves to cover up the impending cataclysm? Could the sinister New World Order really be a Nibiru beach head? And were Erich von Daniken and David Icke right about everything?
We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12378011 and marked it off-topic.
You'll see a maturity in this space after the Open Containers Initiative standardizes the container image format. Then, developers can focus on UX improvements rather than worrying about what the build tool should even be producing.
children(function(el) {
var a, b, c;
a = input(props({ type: 'email' }));
el.email = a;
// etc
return [a, b, c];
})

Entirely guesswork but:
El is the form element you're defining children on.
You need to provide references to the elements you're creating so that you can use them later (el.email and friends) but you also need to return them to the children function in an ordered manner so that it can actually attach them into the DOM.
It wouldn't, actually, because gravity assists only add as much as the body's orbital velocity, which would be tiny for an object in such a distant orbit.
The trouble with explaining the double slit experiment with spread out waves is the electrons hit the screen at points leaving you to explain how that works. Video of it happening https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToRdROokUhs
How connected cars are turning into revenue-generating machines
Here is a starting point for one big movement in my field:

https://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?org=NSF&cntn_id=18934...

It's not quite "maintenance", but is definitely a step away from just writing software to get an answer and then abandoning it.

Also, anecdotally, a there is movement towards more open-source software. Slowly but surely, things are moving in the right direction.
What's your mother tongue?
One particular thing about the Earthsea series that impressed me was something I don't want to spoiler for others, yet which I think I can describe somewhat. Fairly early on, a basic feature of the world and how it worked was introduced, and I just recoiled. It so offended my poetic and rational expectations that I considered it a major flaw, until I got a few books further in. Then it was revealed that the feature was actually wrong, a symptom of damage that evil sorcery had wrought on the world, which fact had passed from the memory of many Earthsea people. Of course having reading that, and discovered a foreshadowing that took decades (from 1968 to 2001) to be fulfilled, I now consider it a major strength of the series.
fma may help to double performance，if you control memoryrw wrll
Zig: a system language which prioritizes optimality, safety, and readability
Not the OP, but first thing that comes to mind as to why you'd need a lot of datacenters are CDNs like Cloudflare or Akamai. Stuff like that, you need lots of servers, lots of storage, and low latency. You'd also need a good amount of configurations because things like video streaming would require different server settings than, say, protecting a site that's being DDOSed.
That's because it uses AES, and AES is accredited for Secret (but nothing more).
Inside the high-pressure world of China’s ‘overtime dogs’
"Sigmar Gabriel, who is also Germany's vice chancellor, compared the TTIP negotiations unfavorably with a free trade deal forged between the 28-nation EU and Canada, which he said was fairer for both sides."
This spirals as well: I've spent quite a lot of time recently helping people at the early stages of learning programming, and it's taken me a while to stop becoming frustrated with their misunderstandings. Sometimes it is just because something basic isn't clicking for them, but a lot of the time it's down to me trying to explain things through a prism of accumulated patterns that are seen as best practise/common sense, but stepping back and viewing objectively are opaque and sometimes nonsensical outside of very specific scenarios. There's a tendency to massively overcomplicate, but you forget very quickly how complicated, then you build further patterns to deal with the complexity, ad infinitum
>https://github.com/docker/swarm is going away.

Their readme says

"Docker does not currently have a plan to deprecate Docker Swarm."

Do you know if they officially say otherwise elsewhere?
somehow that reminds me of delete('facebook').lawyer('up').hit('thegym') ;)
I see that the deeper you go, the less you can keep common. I learned a lot from your answers.

I didn't understand why the nativeness of the UI must bifurcate (fork) the codebase. In your example, can't non-modal on Mac vs modal on Windows be a config value in the cross-platform UI?

I also didn't get an answer to one of my questions. Why can't applications have low level access to create controls on their own?
Attractivechaos's stuff blows my mind. Shameless plug - I've started dissecting his header-only hashmap library (khash.h) bit by bit, and I've been documenting my adventure here:

https://medium.com/@makmanalp/dissecting-khash-h-part-1-orig...

edit: and part 2:

https://medium.com/@makmanalp/dissecting-khash-h-part-2-scou...
I suppose a way to prevent governments from screwing specific companies that they hate for some reason, makes a lot of sense. Allowing such behaviour would enable corruption and nepotism. But if a company feels screwed because the government feels that an entire industry is harmful to the country and needs to be regulated or even blocked, like fracking, then the company should suck it up. That's democracy at work.
Aah of course; By reading the source code of the children function I figured the array of elements returned was appended to the parent element. The strange thing was that it was also adding them to `el` object but indeed it appears this is done to maintain a reference to the children so they can be modified later (which I would have seen had i read the example a bit more carefully :S )

I'm still not sure how I feel about that bit of code though but it sure is clever...
Well, you can look at the reversed bytecode and see that it's using AES-128 or AES-256.

If you're willing to click past the website (DoD root certificates explained elsewhere), you could read more on the FAQ: https://www.spi.dod.mil/ewizardFAQ.htm#FAQkp.3

The difference between the two is that one has FIPS 140-2 paperwork and the other does not.
It is very strange to judge an author based on a sentence fragment from a 37-year-old, out-of-print essay collection. It also seems hardly snobbish to me to note that certain terms are heavily overused in particular genres of fiction.
Here’s what I believe will be an accurate translation of that example to the normal DOM API (without having actually looked at the RE:DOM source code):

const login = document.createElement('form');

login.email = document.createElement('input');
login.email.type = 'email';

login.pass = document.createElement('input');
login.pass.type = 'pass';

login.submit = document.createElement('button');
login.submit.textContent = 'Sign in';

login.appendChild(login.email);
login.appendChild(login.pass);
login.appendChild(login.submit);

login.onsubmit = function(event) {
event.preventDefault();
console.log(this.email.value, this.pass.value);
};

document.body.appendChild(login);

The children call produces an array of objects that are appended to the element, but the callback also takes the wrapping element (in this case `login`), and so to be conveniently able to access it later (`login.email.value`) it also assigns them there. A more conventional JavaScript approach would be to assign email, pass and submit as local variables rather than stuffing them inside the form object.

As for the other example:

const app = document.createElement('table');
const tbody = document.createElement('tbody');

app.appendChild(tbody);

app.update = function(data) {
tbody.innerHTML = '';
for (let row in data.tbody) {
let tr = document.createElement('tr');
for (let cell in row) {
let td = document.createElement('td');
td.textContent = cell;
tr.appendChild(td);
}
tbody.appendChild(tr);
}
}

document.body.appendChild(app);

app.update({
tbody: [
[1, 2, 3],
],
});

This is rather simpler, frankly. I prefer plain DOM for myself at this level.
> How do you propose to mediate trade disputes between companies and states without something like the ISDS?

The companies could try accepting the laws of the country they wish to trade in, rather than shopping around for dodgy countries and then trying to export country B's laws to override country A?
As a poster above pointed out, a lot of scientific code is an implementation of a mathematical device. And the scientist is trying to make their equations come to life. And in math, many equations are simplified to their variables in order to avoid insane complexity. Many of the scientists actually are thinking in terms of 'S', 't' and 'v', etc. What's the particle's x, y, t coordinates, and how does that get me v, p and l? So that they can write out:

v = ((x2 -x1)^2 + (y2 - y1)^2) ^ (1/2) / t

rather than:

velocity = sqrt(pow((locationX2 - locationX1),2) + pow((locationY2 - locationY1),2)) / duration

The latter is AWFUL mathematics, and very real code. (and that is an easy equation. I've had to implement very very complicated calculus into objective-c code and it is absolutely horrid what comes out as 'code', as clean as that code might be. It in no way whatsoever resembles the elegance of the math that birthed it.)

When I first started, I naively tried to write math code with the natural Objective-C objects and ended up on the very wrong side of the language. I realize the mistake now, but it's very awkward to ask the (scientist) programmer to go along programming with the language's tutorialed objects, then to tell them, "btw, that 'NSNumber' you have, can't be used as an exponent, along with that 'float' over there. And you can't add NSNumbers and 'integers'. Oh, you want to multiply two NSNumbers together? You want to write an equation with NSNumbers on one line!? Go for it. Oh, and you want to do a cross-product on a matrix? Ha!".
Most of us haven't studied grad level physics?
Good try. Although jQuery chaining api seems better for me.
Whoops...

"there are abundant opportunities for error, particularly when you
are relying on software to do much of the work. This was made glaringly
apparent back in 2009, when a graduate student conducted an fM.R.I.
scan of a dead salmon and found neural activity in its brain when it
was shown photographs of humans in social situations. Again, it was
a salmon. And it was dead."
> There should be unified standards.

Why should the people of Germany be bound by the whims of the people of Delaware?
Each probability field ends up interacting with a single point on the screen.
How does this affect (or does this apply to) the recent "new brain map" paper from the Human Connectome Project?

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v536/n7615/full/nature1...
This happens almost every summer for a few months. Pop musicians are thieves. This year we had even 2 themes being used all over, the second a special reverse guitar riff.
(an attempt to translate to standard english grammar, for the benefit of other non-native English readers, who may also struggle to parse this)

Beautiful is better than ugly.
Explicit is better then implicit.
Simple is better than complex.
Complex is better than complicated.
Flat is better than nested.
Sparse is better than dense.
Readability counts.
Special cases are not special enough to break the rules.
But purity is beaten by practicality.
An error should never be silently passed.
Unless it is silenced explicitly.
You must refuse the temptation to guess in the face of ambiguity.
There should be one, preferably only one, way to do it.
It might not be obvious.
Now is better than never.
But never is often better than right now.
It is bad if it is hard to explain.
It may be good if it is easy to explain.
Namespaces are a honking good idea - we should do more of them!
Some things that are fine in exceedingly short stories wouldn't work at all in a novel. Other SF authors have really short stories like that: Asimov, Wolfe, etc. When the story is less than four pages long one can afford to re-read the awkward parts.
I'd like to see support for optimized multiplication on symmetric matrices. I don't think BLAS can take advantage of that, certainly scipy/numpy doesn't.
It's feasible, as long as you can tolerate a bug for a short time. The advantage is that once you notice a bug, there's less in the way of getting a fix out to production.

And let's face it: we're all tolerating bugs in production all the time.

As an aside, CD doesn't obviate QA or testing. It strongly favours automated testing over the manual flavour, especially during integration, but even then there's nothing stopping you from conducting manual tests on your branch before integration.
Ghostery will report what it knows, what is part of its database. If we measure using distinct 3rd-party servers, I counted 92 of them:

https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/585534/18037421/6...

All this for a 6-paragraph article.

Edit: I should mention that when blocking all 3rd-party scripts and frames for that page, the article could be read just fine, with only one connection to a 3rd-party server, standard.co.uk (probably related to independent.co.uk).
It's more like some guy managed to get the German army to fund his pet project. A huge herd of white Lipizzaners would have been militarily Cool, but Ineffective. That's a parade unit, not a fighting force.

After the war, the Lipizzaners, both this group and the ones at the Spanish Riding School in Vienna, were rescued by US forces under Patton, who was a cavalryman before his tanker days.

A good horse is never the wrong color.
Please don't make cheap jokes that can only take the thread wildly and predictably off-topic. It's not worth it, and it isn't OK on Hacker News.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
That is a great explanation and after looking at the source code and reading the example more closely that is indeed what appears to happen.
I do think that, albeit very clever, it's a confusing pattern though...
I think he means if you model things as waves the uncertainty comes about naturally. For example if you send a wave through a small hole so you know it's position accurately on two axes then that causes it to diffract out so you don't know it's direction/velocity along those axes.

(sort of illustrated: http://physics.stackexchange.com/a/61475)
The reason why ISDS provisions are even discussed is that governments have become so overreaching in regulating economic activity that business owners today have the very real fear that they'll be put out of business because a government passes a law that will (sometimes even retroactively) force them to make gigantic payments.

ISDS provisions are in that sense a solution for a world where we expect that government power over the economy will likely increase even more in the future.

The solution that I prefer is to shrink government so it can't interfere anymore to a degree that turns good and successful investments retroactively into bad investments that cause investors to lose a lot of money and time.
I must admit I can't see any particular difficulty which would make the photoelectric effect more difficult to describe in terms of waves than other quantum phenomena.
It isn't directly linked from the front page, but they have a getting started section [0] that covers non-GKE options. I run k8s on AWS using the Kops tool.

Kubernetes is definitely more to learn before getting started than swarm, but that's mostly because it has different and more powerful primitives and more features built in.

[0]: http://kubernetes.io/docs/getting-started-guides/
https://www.reddit.com/search?q=English+AND+French+AND+%28su...
Imprisoning someone for refusing to pay a $5 voluntary debt is morally different from imprisoning someone for refusing to pay a $5 involuntary debt. It's important to understand that all government mandates are backed, ultimately, by the threat of violence/imprisonment, to inform our decisions about what behaviour to mandate.
Consciousness exists as much as the color blue or the soft hum of a clean sine wave — it's qualia.

Our interpretation of the physical world doesn't necessarily exist anywhere but in our minds.
Being able to rebuild critical infrastructure from source, and know that you'll be able to reliably deploy it, is a _huge_ win for security.

In that case, you might be interested in bosh: http://bosh.io/docs/problems.html (the tool that enables the workflow jacques_chester was describing). It embraces the idea of reliably building from source for the exact reasons you've mentioned.
Yes, but my point was that with an earth quake (>6 richter) the copper earth lines will likely be more broken than slow G3 air lines.
Ok, no GTK+! (Could this be fixed with GLib?)

I didn't understand this. When you say you implement the UI as a thin layer do you mean you wrap only the few controls you need?
This is just the copenhagen interpretation which says nothing about the physical ontology of the light before it ends up as a point on the screen. Unless you are saying the probability amplitudes are physical things-in-themselves rather than calculational models. (side note - Feynman did not think of a probability amplitude as a physical thing-in-itself)
Object-Oriented Philosophy: What Is It Good For?
Chrome.
Recent discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12032269
I would say that my experience with Docker has been fantastic. I run over 10 Ubuntu Trusty instances on EC2 as 8G instances, mounted with NFS4 to EFS. This makes it super simple to manage data across multiple hosts. From that you can run as many containers as you like, and either mount them to the EFS folder, or just spawn them with data-containers, then export backups regularly with something like duplicity.

I use rancher with it, and it's retarded simple using rancher/docker compose.

For a quick run-down see: https://github.com/forktheweb/amazon-docker-devops
* Don't buy service from a single CDN. It's a recipe for disaster because even Akamai have outages, and having a traffic management setup that lets you move partial/entire traffic to a different CDN will let you not only mitigate their outages, but also move traffic to a cheaper/better provider.

* If you can't CDN all your traffic, a CNAME with low TTL that can quickly switch to a CDN/WAF endpoint can be helpful.

* AWS, Azure and GCP all have mitigations for L3 attacks built into their infrastructure. Because you don't know how they operate, or when, don't rely on them. Accept they may break your service and be prepared to have downtime or the means to shift your product quickly if an attack is big enough or presses enough secret buttons.

* Identify and remove all potential means of amplification both at networking/infra and application. This means not exposing your own nameservers or NTP servers publicly, for L7 this is more complicated as it'll depend on how your APIs and products interact with themselves and each other.

* Load test your products often to know what breaking point is and when performance regressions arise with a given amount of resources allocated. Fixing these early may mean you can ride out a DDoS without needing to do anything if it's small enough and your application efficient enough.
The dead Salmon was taught in one of our classes in 2010, and still nobody gives a fuck, they just fMRI on. Its not a software bug, its a people bug.
The Docker team is doing more than anyone to move container technology forward, but orchestration is a much harder problem to solve than wrapping OS APIs. I wish they would stick to the core, and let others like the Kubernetes team handle the orchestration pieces. Swarm is hard to take seriously right now. I'm not sure bundling it into the core was the best way to handle it.
That doesn't sound right because it got the voyagers to leave the solar system.
Light painting with smartphone
Thanks, will do! We are starting a new dev team and I would like to get these practices going immediately instead of "oh, I lost the code cause it was on my laptop" (which happens right now)
My solution to this would be to shrink the governments power in economic affairs so every investor can be sure that it wont retroactively change the rules of the game and punish them for investing in our economies.

This could draw in a lot of investors from around the world.

Foreign governments then can decide between either continuing going down this path that will leave their population impoverished in the long term or they may also choose to open up their economy to investments by signalling that they wont cheat investors whenever they feel like it.
> I doubt I need to tell you this (although Google seems to recently have forgotten it), you app needs to use the patterns of the platform it is on

Not that I agree with it, but I am fairly certain Google has not forgotten - they have just remapped the definition of "platform" from "the operating system" to "Google's app constellation & sites". The pattern commonality is no longer with other apps on the OS you are currently on, but with other Google property.