skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It sounds to me like these arguments aren't so much against JSON, per se. They're against using JSON.parse() (or json.loads() in Python, json_decode() in PHP, or whatever) as your entire data-import process.

Instead, the argument goes, one should load the JSON, walk the redulting structure, and use it to build your native data structure/objects/whatever. Similarly, when the time comes to save, you crawl through your native structure to build a dict/array/primitive structure, then call JSON.stringify() (or the analogous function) to serialize that.

Uncoupling your data structure from the serialization format, though, is really just basic good software design anyway, is it not? Does anyone argue in favor what this article calls "JSON-driven development" as a design principle? Or is it just a shortcut that developers -and I am no less guilty of this than anyone else- sometimes take in the interest of getting a quick-and-dirty solution out the door?

Yes, working directly on the output of JSON.parse() is a code smell. But I'm not sure that claiming there's a rising trend of "JSON-driven development" is entirely founded. It's just people taking shortcuts.
This is fair, and I agree with your characterization of the American judicial system, but I don't think I'd have any of your concerns here in Canada. Justice needs an overhaul in the USA. As for Gawker, they should have suffered for what they did, but they shouldn't have gone completely bankrupt. The amount was way too high for what they did.
NYPD stops sharing records on police discipline
Why the Cost of High-City Living Is Bad for Everyone
I have wondered if there could be a CoffeeScript or TypeScript of Bash. Basically a transpiler to Bash that is safer and more convenient to write in.

Then you just ship the bash script with no dependencies. The transpiler might even be smart enough to take GNU/BSD differences into account.... ahh another project idea that I do not have time to implement :(

EDIT: Apparently there is one and it is even the language I would have problem implemented the compiler in (OCaml) [1] . It is shame though it doesn't seem to have much functionality other than checking if files exist and string manipulation. If they had just focused exclusively on Bash/coreutils (and Powershell for windows) they could probably add a lot more features.... Windows seems to be holding them back.

[1]: https://github.com/BYVoid/Batsh
Also, read the post and looked over the docs, and don't see any explanation of what `.s` and `.ib` is supposed to mean (though I can figure out from context). Does anyone know what the letters stand for? Struct and instance b…???
Whatsapp founders mind voice - We just turned our users in to product because thats the best way to get billions in our bank account.
Do you move every time you change your job? And does rent price not ever get in those calculations? After you rent that home 24 miles away from work, you'll have to decide each day if you want to make that distance by bike or car.

The standard measure of transportation safety is accidents|deaths|injuries / (passenger * distance). There are very good reasons for this that don't change just because a transport modality is slower.

Really, the worst thing people can do about their safety is just putting their fingers on their ears and yelling while refusing to listen to reality. Let's have a honest assessment of cycling, because if it isn't as safe as we want, there are plenty of ways to improve it. But nobody will go fixing things if everybody denies that a problem exist.
Sure, but Apple is that central authority that both provides the store and the search functionality. They could do better.
I've never understood how these guys managed to get a billion dollars to fund this horseshit Brain Initiative in a time when NIH funding has been declining for decades. There is probably some serious graft/nepotism behind this.
I'm not talking about screwups. I'm talking about fundamentally unaligned objectives between academia (advancing the edges of knowledge) and industry (making knowledge useful in an economic sense).

It's not a problem, it's just something you have to recognize so you don't have the wrong expectation.
Yes this is quite common.

I would try telling them what you said here - "I know from my past experiences that my enthusiasm for the job is directly correlated with the degree to which I perceive their projects will be both meaningful & successful."

Then you can find a middle ground - maybe they can tell you about a past project, or maybe you sign an NDA, or maybe they can just tell you.
OpenSSL 1.1.0 is released
Dumb question time: Aren't 95% of these use cases more easily implemented with a single central source of truth, possibly with distributed read-only replicas?

I think the blockchain innovation is amazing in the context where you have no trusted party. Bitcoin, for example. But almost all the other blockchain uses I see discussed have obvious central parties that people trust. E.g., Nasdaq already knows exactly how to run a very reliable registry at low computational cost and very low latency. [1]

So what cases actually benefit, and which ones are more (mis)applying the latest fashion?

[1] As an example, look at the LMAX architecture, which is orders of magnitude faster and cheaper to run than a distributed blockchain: http://martinfowler.com/articles/lmax.html
> In both cases you will have a vesting schedule, just in the case of restricted stock it's usually a grant of the shares with no exercise price.

In practice, there are huge differences between them. Generally stock is much friendlier to employees and signals a company/founder which actually values employee ownership.

I'm surprised by the number of companies which try to pull shady stuff like not sharing the exercise price for options that are part of an offer. Lots of people apparently think that employees should value options at a substantially higher value than investors do. I've seen cases where the gap between the 409a price and the last investment is only a few thousand dollars, while the company insists this somehow makes up for a substantially subpar salary.

Equity is a risk, yes, but the status quo is that the risk falls much more on the people least able to bear it. Investors get all sorts of protections, while employees only benefit in a very narrow set of outcomes.
From the other side of the internet, I see two likely causes:

1. A company that is highly disorganized.

2. A company that is shady.

Roughly, I would associate the first with newness or recent high growth. I would associate the second with an established ongoing concern. Neither inspires full confidence in regard to getting paid fully and on time.

That said, it's really more of a spectrum. There are established slow growing companies that are highly disorganized. There are new fast growing companies that are shady. Pre-recession I worked for a Fortune 100 corporation expanding in pace with the housing bubble. The hiring process was more chaotic than it might have been in other economic times.

Having interviewed with and researched the company, there should be some basis for evaluating where on the spectrum it falls. My advice is to go with your gut and I suggest that continuing to explore other employment options is worth consideration even if the contract is acceptable and you go to work there.

Good luck.
That'll just make them consistent, not necessarily right.

Laws should definitely be more declarative though. There seems to be a push towards a more imperative style of law making which results in very inflexible legislation.
Well I was thinking more in terms of not only top down communication, but also bottom up (reporting, identification of problems on the ground floor, etc). The vast majority of our economy is goal-driven, with a very small percentage of workers actually defining the goals, doing creative work, or doing research. Consider the impact on the world if the latest research from the lab was instantly decimated to the entire community, feedback provided, and new knowledge spread to industry. This is the positive aspect of the technology I am thinking about (of course many, many years in the future).
Atari's chip company Styra (from the article) got me to search a bit and its only mentioned on 3 sites according to google, and this goldmine for an Atari fan was one of them:

http://mcurrent.name/atarihistory/tramel_technology.html
This is great! I too am working behind the scenes (nothing on Github yet) on a set of scrapers that pull in data from various financial institutions (my bank, a credit union, a CC account, ect.) along with a 'manager' application that recieves results from these scrapers and displays the data to me. That's step 1. Next I'd like to fully automate the paying of my bills and setting up arbitrary actions based on certain conditions. For instance, send money to some investment account when primary checking scraper sees a new ACH deposit from my employer, ect.

Have you opened this up anywhere yet? I'm interested in using some of your ideas and/or contributing to them. :)
Mostly? The Kremlin...
Realistically, Uber faces major competition from Google and Apple, both who are investing heavily in self-driving cars and have easy access to loyal consumers.
It is a free service as of now (at least for me, initially they said I would have to pay after an year, but this never happened). Technically, they don't even have a business model till now. What they have is scale. I think they are afraid that a subscription model will make users churn and they would end up losing the scale. The only other alternative is an ad supported free model or a freemium model. I am wondering if a freemium model would make sense for WhatsApp.
If you're worried about being a pain in the ass to administrators, with a web-scraper, they probably need to rethink the way they have their website set up.
Not to mention that if you wind-up with a bunch of fully autonomous vehicles whose owners put them up for hire, that market might look utterly different from the current market for rides and so Uber's "first mover advantage" is rather hypothetical - like a company that rents horses to buggy drivers saying "wait till we have cars, then I'll be profitable, I won't have to pay anything for horse!"
A fundamental limitation of the peer to peer setup for messaging is the lack of a reliable way to send a message while your contact is offline. If your answer to that is to have intermediaries that are always available and can store and forward, you run into issues of needing a lot of these intermediaries in a mobile centric(low power, intermittently online) world.
"lift heavy things without fear of injury"

In my experience bicycling did the opposite of that for me. I love biking (way more than I like lifting heavy things, incidentally), but it does nothing to teach you how to lift properly, nor does it really even build the right muscles. Learn the hip hinge if you want to lift heavy things without fear of injury.
Hi! I produced this piece. Happy to answer any questions about the story or the presentation.
Traffic lights stop bicycles too. And pedestrians.
Sneakers is one of my favorite movies.

I don't believe that the scene you're thinking of happens. Whistler is pretty impressive, but even he can't hear the difference between keystrokes.

The other cool things that Whistler does are figure out where Martin was taken by the sounds that Martin remembers, and figure out what the various rooms in the building are via telescopic microphone ("Emergency exit stairwell." "How can you tell" "I can hear the emergency exit light batteries recharging") :D
A password manager shouldn't even need a tenth of that.
attr.s = "attrs" = plural of "attr"

attr.ib = "attirb" = alternate spelling of "attr"

It's too cute by half.
Learning Go: Lexing and Parsing
Remove Camellia ciphersuites (2014)
Relevant:

http://learn.filtered.com/blog/5-excel-bloopers-with-huge-co...
JSON is the equivalent of a UNIX pipe; it is for passing data between applications on the Internet, just like a pipe is a way for passing data between applications on a machine.
Is this really a concern people have? Do people think on-prem is somehow inherently more secure? They expose their services through the internet. Minus a few details it's all the same. There are pros/cons in both sides.
> Do you have a use case for cherry-picking which methods are inherited?

The most obvious is that it makes intent explicit in the case of multiple similarity (I prefer "similarity" to "inheritance" for non-subtyping implementation reuse.)

It might in some cases make sense to do this on an interface rather than (or in addition to) single method level; there's probably a lot to work out in the ergonomics of non-subtyping implementation reuse.

> Do you think there would still be a use case for “extends”?

Sure, classical subclassing (subtyping with implementation sharing) remains an important use case. It might be desirable to statically verify certain guarantees (some have been suggested in at least one subthread of this thread by another poster) to assure that the subtyping is reasonable, but even without such verification the use case remains important.
Indeed, as I mentioned, this doesn't help much in later rounds, but then again in later rounds salaries increase as well.

But for the early folks (B round or before), why not give them the maximum opportunity?
I meant, typed vs not-typed. Someone mentioned Clojure, and for me thats the whole point: on one hand, and for a whole category of problems the best abstraction is not to have a strong schema, given the variable parts. On the other hand however there are scenarios where you already know the structure sufficiently well. A matter of abstraction IMO
So, "no", then.

A one-time $50 application fee is not remotely the same thing as a $50 fare.
I had thoughts for some bci product. I have no clue about the feasibility.

Take an EEG like the emotiv Epoch. Get lucky and hope you can still get the raw data via emokit or something like that. Construct some sort of low level two character alphabet representation. I'd imagine something similar to EBCDIC cause I'm a tortured mainframe soul, so C1 is A and so on. Using some fancy ML (deep learning?), train for your alphabet representation using EEG data while loudly subvocaling "C" or something.

Once you get lucky and train a model, use your alphabet as some sort of string of consciousness recording/ instant note taking. Some how tag your thought notes so you can come back later or do some fancy searches. Do some fancy NLP on your notes or some conceptual blending or whatever is cool. Sell the software, but keep the notes "open" somehow.

I'd go on but that's my idea. Steal it and hire me.
It's not clear to me why anyone would use Telegram over Signal.
Have you seen anything to support this theory or are you just practicing your creative writing?
I figured that'd be your answer.

I feel like the idea that you'd use ECC out of concern for advances in factoring or conventional discrete log isn't my own, but I'm not careful enough with this stuff to know the best thing to cite.

As always, I comment on crypto stuff principally to see if I can goad you into correcting me. :)
Yep, Excel can be amazingly stupid at times ;-)
Well, yeah, but you could implement it without __dict__ just by doing something like:

for attr, val in locals().items():
setattr(self, attr, val)

It still feels pretty un-Pythonic either way.
Facebook AI Research Team Open Source DeepMask and SharpMask
A lot of apps these days will not run unless they get access to the data they request. What I would like to see is android having the ability to give empty sets of information if so chosen instead of denying access, or to compartmentalize applications access to shared resources more.
The extra time it takes to ride a bicycle can be minimal. When I drive to work, it takes about 20 minutes; when I cycle it takes about 30. In urban traffic a car tavels only about twice as fast as a bicycle on average, and bicycles are easier to launch and park. I find that trips of 2 miles are less are faster by bicycle, and that's the most common kind of trip.

Most people who insist on riding bicycles for commutes organize their lives around that: living in a place close to work, for example. The author is a person who took up cycling and never stopped; in that case, bike commutability is something he probably planned for when choosing a home, work, and career. People who have organized their lives around driving everywhere have different considerations.

What his argument boils down to is that bicycles have similar or lower accident risk, much lower operating costs, and traveling by bicycle improves your health—and health is extremely valuable.
From the Boston exurbs, driving to New Haven and taking the Metro North into NYC is optimal. Also there's Frank Pepe to stop at on the way home.
NPM hydra worm disclosure [pdf]
Using national odds and figures to make personal decisions is a deadly trap.
If your area/commute isn't average then this statement has to be re-evaluated dramatically. Saying "Bicycling is that safest form of transportation" using this data is true only in a special situation.

His argument that the risks of cycling are exaggerated does hold some water. People are pretty bad at assessing risk.
The Idaho Stop doesn't apply to red lights - only stop signs. Its intended use is on smaller streets with low traffic.
Well said.

What's striking about the Amazon/brick&mortar comparison is that retailers' senior management did recognize Amazon early as a fundamental threat. (For example, Walmart.com came to life in 2000 and was set up in the Bay Area with plenty of love from the Walton family.) But on an operating level, few retailers' managers wanted to change the business rapidly enough to deal with it.

They fell into the Kodak trap of sticking with the old ways for a few more years of higher margins ... and thus building out online versions that were way too timid and deferential to make it big.

For example: limited supply of hot items? Put them in the physical stores, not the online one. Price war online? Can't compete, because it might mean undercutting the retail-store price and hurting high-margin sales.

It will be interesting to see if the car companies are able to build out new transport platforms that succeed by making life much worse for their existing dealerships. If so, they can give Uber a run for its money. If not, they will compete in slow motion.
The NEC V20/V30 chips were 8086 clones, but unusually they had an 8080 emulation mode. I recall that the registers were common, eg. %bx (8086) and BC (8080) were the same register when you switched between modes.

The "killer feature" was that you could run CP/M programs on your PC. As long as the CP/M programs weren't "naughty" and didn't use Z80 instructions (a different superset of 8080). CP/M itself had system calls which emulated the Z80 instructions (mainly LDIR), which could be "accelerated" if the processor was a real Z80, but of course programs occasionally ignored this and just used the Z80 instructions directly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NEC_V20
Uber has lots of problems with legality in Europe. In Germany it's basically nonexistent. Note that the regulation for taxis in Germany really makes sense (for instance background checks for drivers).
I'm guessing the Prometheus they mean is a time-series database. See: https://prometheus.io/
that video totally blows my mind, i must have watched it a dozen times.
Though the author is confused about Emacs history, talking about Stallman's and Gosling's Emacs as if they were the same thing.

IIRC (I was around the AI Lab a bit after the fact) Richard Gabriel and Guy Steele (MIT AI Lab) wrote the original Emacs (editor macros) in TECO under MIT's ITS, which was a huge superset of the original DEC TECO. RMS took it over after a while, since RPG and GLS were mostly doing academic stuff. (Mike McMahon (MMcM) and others ported the ITS version to TOPS-20.)

Meanwhile, Bernie Greenberg wrote an Emacs in Multics Lisp, which was a huge influence on future Emacs implementations.

Eventually, RMS and others wrote the current Emacs.

Gosling's Emacs (nicknamed Gosmacs, written while he was at CMU, I believe) was a C-based implementation for Unix, and a poor-man's subset of the real thing.
I recently started looking into XMPP again a few days ago. I have a few ideas for projects built on top thereof.

Can anybody recommend XMPP servers? I know duckduckgo has an XMPP service up and running, but I can't seem to find any relevant API documentation. All I found was this [0], which doesn't go into details about encryption settings and isn't very useful for programmatic interaction.

[0] https://duck.co/blog/post/2/using-pidgin-with-xmpp-jabber
This is amazing! Time to fire up my Atari Falcon again (anyone out there willing to sell a CT63?)

These schematics could be used to implement the entire Atari STE's or Falcon 030's in a single FPGA. In phase two, new chips could be added, or existing chips enhanced (Blitter with texel and shading support, anyone?) The best part is, as the Amiga 600 Vampire II accelerator proved, the FPGA implementation could be anywhere from ten to 50 times faster and cheaper than the original hardware![1] The possibilities are endless with these schematics...

[1] https://youtube.com/watch?v=lEjtc6JWlsk
hexadecimal, was originally and correctly sexadecimal, but when it got wider use somehow was turned into hexadecimal instead of the also correct hexagecimal.
Every Git thread makes me so happy I use Perforce.
Yep. And social unrest — if such changes take place too fast. Reminds me of luddites: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddite. Then again, revolutions take time :)
I'm assuming grandparent is assuming injuries incurred due to bike mishandling. It's fairly common amongst the training crowd to take spills resulting in road rash or a broken collar bone due to poor roads or just mishandling.

Taking a hit from a motorist often results in more traumatic injuries.
Quantum computing confuses every thread about RSA and ECC.

Shor threatens RSA and ECC. Neither RSA nor ECC are considered post-quantum schemes. If quantum computing is really your threat model, you want to be doing what Google did: run both a pre-quantum and a post-quantum key exchange and mix the results with a KDF.

Which post-quantum approach you choose, I don't care. (I'm a quantum computing skeptic).

What you do not want to do is build a cryptosystem using solely a post-quantum key exchange algorithm, or, even worse, try to build a cryptosystem without any asymmetric key exchange at all. In both cases, implementation errors --- some of which, in the latter case, are probably inevitable --- will doom your system immediately.
The direct problem would be that we don't think in letters, but I like the idea.
> Blockchain, on the cloud. Synergised and vertically integrated for streamlined UX.

Shit! Where's my checkbook?! I have to cut these guys a seed round before they try to actually build anything.

Otherwise it'll become apparent that this series of words have nothing to do with each other!
The car turns out to be pretty useful for traveling long distanecs. I've both driven from NYC to Montreal and taken the train. The train takes 12 hours. Driving takes 6 hours.

Now, if you happen to be traveling on a route that 400,000 other people travel every day, trains might win. Tokyo to Kyoto is a 2h 19m train ride, while the drive is 6 hours.

Europe does a little better than the US, but not as well as Japan. Paris-Frankfurt is 4h by train, 6 hours driving.

(Everything is always 6 hours apparently!)
I think we might have just found the Ken M. of hacker news.
Simple, just don't use WhatsApp.