skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's still there, but might have been obscured from the front page: http://www.macrium.com/reflectfree.aspx

(I used it about a month ago to attempt to clone a failing drive after Clonezilla choked and died horribly. It got significantly further, not sure if going to it first would've helped more.)
"While I don't doubt you've given talks about applying ML, I do have a little skepticism that the talks went any deeper than just application-related topics."

Let me correct that misconception; every aspect of the algorithm was custom, from tokenization through classification through smoothing and postprocessing. It was a more simple model and process, but it was not exclusively application related. Far simpler than many of the deeper models I consume as a black box, for sure, but I'd defend my competencies in that I'm not exclusively a plug-and-play data engineer :)

Let me also emphasize that I intentionally called out "driving" as opposed to "fixing". In fact I can't think of any car-fixing research going on just about anywhere, although I'm sure there is. My core point was that _using_ the tooling is key, and has been democratized in both driving and AI (the application layer aspect as you put it), the research point was merely an add-on that I've also seen a democratization of the knowledge needed to do even the basic level of novel algorithm development, even if I'm writing deep network papers or something of that ilk; I just find that to be the exception rather than the rule (per my "hardcore research is hard for the non-deeply-initiated once low hanging fruit has been pruned" comment)
Not with a good JIT compiler like PyPy.
That's not what they found though.

"Humans are batteries when the sun goes out!" Is easy for people to understand.

"Human minds are computers but in order to use human minds as computers we need to make the matrix as a semi-corporeal realm, oh and this is why people like Trinity can do impossible things like jump really far because their minds are so powerful and actually used in the calculations of the matrix that they can impact it's outcome."

Was the part that was too complex.
In the case of SQLite, it's 100% branch coverage and 100% MC/DC coverage: https://www.sqlite.org/th3.html
Yes, this is due to Intel participation. From their post on Steam forum:

======================

Vertigo Games [developer] 17 hours ago
Single Player Horde Mode & Apocalyptic Mode

These are two game modes that we have not focused on previously.

Working with Intel allowed us to create even more content than we originally planned, including these modes and the physics systems in the game, making Arizona Sunshine one of the richest VR experiences possible. We want to give 5th, 6th and 7th gen Intel® Core™ i7 owners first glimpse into these additional modes, but they’ll be available March 6, 2017 to everyone who owns the game.

Single Player Horde Mode is as you would expect, a single player experience in Horde Mode.

Apocalyptic Mode is the highest level of difficulty in the campaign. Its features include:
•	Only one weapon (handgun)
•	Very limited ammo
•	No checkpoints - you die and go back to the start of the game
•	One hit death

Completing this is tied to an achievement that will result in an award of a golden desert eagle pistol for use in multiplayer and future apocalyptic sessions. The gun will be added in a future update.
Automated testing isn't really a substitute for actually having a person use the application.
Location: Barcelona

Remote: Preferably

Willing to relocate: Probably not.

Technologies: Experienced Full Stack developer (13 years professionally). Mainly Python, Django, SQL, Perl, HTML, JS, CSS, Java in the past, plus less deep knowledge in many other technologies.I can do basic sysadmin and set up Linux servers.
I design and build maintainable Django applications according to best practices. I try to keep things as simple as possible, as complexity manages to work its way into applications eventually.

email: colinkingswood@gmail.com
> I think something that gives an inherent advantage to OO languages in IDEs is that SomeThing.<tab autocomplete> makes a lot of sense and is easy to compute!

F# (as well as OCaml) offers something similar in that you'll use a lot of functions that are within modules with the same name as the type you're working with. So you can write "List." and get a list of functions (map, reduce, etc.). I'd prefer something like Idris which will disambiguate functions based on the relevant types, but at least it makes IDE support easier.

> A lot of object-oriented languages have taken tips from functional languages lately (map/reduce/filter is the new hottie), but I think there's a lot of benefit still to get in the opposite direction.

Something in particular I wish F# would add it general non-linearity of definitions. All files and definitions in F# must be strictly ordered (either type A can reference type B or vice versa, but not both) except for specific, contiguous blocks. It presents a challenge for type inference, but I think just punting it back to you for the tricky cases would be fine (and it often has to do this anyway).
Why coal? We have nuclear.
Hmm...

Definitely DIFFERENT, and I ought to give it a deeper try before giving serious feedback. But I'll go ahead and give my initial impressions anyway since you asked. My first thought is that I don't like it much. Probably because there is too much that isn't visible: I can only see the one path through the tree that I am currently engaging with.

It might be better if there were some kind of indications to the left and right that gave the user some sense of the rest of the tree so they felt like they were navigating around through a tree rather than simply "swiping left or right" in an oddly hierarchical fashion.
I realise that it can occasionally be useful to have a canary that says 'something has changed' as long as its easy to reset. Personally, I'd rather such a canary operated on the visual representation plus interactions, since that is what the user experiences, rather than error on tree differences that produce no effective difference to the end user.

I do think though that neither of these should replace tests that test the actual postconditions of your code, and that the preponderance of false negatives and ease of resetting the canary discourages developers from spending the effort required to properly understand what is going on.

Almost all programming is about erecting firewalls to contain changes, so that as they ripple out from the change site, they hit boundaries beyond which things no longer need to be modified. As part of that, modules document what you can and cannot rely on. If you have a test that breaks because it's relying on some feature of a modules output that is not considered public behaviour, the bug is in your test, not the module that causes the failure.

> In the case you just described they correctly caught that something changed.

It is not the job of tests to tell you that something changed, but that something broke.

Perhaps I'd have less problem if people talked about them as canaries rather than as tests. 'Test' implies that there's something wrong if you fail.
At an x of .85 you still have (.15 * 106) / (.15 * 106 + .85) = 95% of the weight in the storage system rather than the hydrogen itself which rules this out for most applications. Even with an x of .99 it's 50/50 when a conventional pressure vessel can get the weight easily below 20%.
I think you look at it the other way round -- it is not so much Intel who wanted to win customers over compatibility, but rather the customers who had to port their software, and suddenly saw a possibility to not do that.

It took a while to Intel to accept that the mobile-app providers won't invest the same effort in porting their apps from ARM to x86 given the market penetration, but I don't believe it was a suprising outcome to them.
> That's a better target market than the idealized version of myself that makes only expert-level errors.

Not only that, but you have to be able to test against yourself a month from now or a year from now, when you've completely forgotten some aspects of the design and might overlook something doing a modification. I write a lot of report generators at my job, so there's quite often a bug or a new feature in a report I haven't touched for months at a time.
The key to success with that attitude:

>>I get paid for code that works, not for tests, so my philosophy is to test as little as possible to reach a given level of confidence (I suspect this level of confidence is high compared to industry standards, but that could just be hubris).

Is the humility in the parenthetical. There is a difference between arrogance and confidence.
The beer bottle system has also come under pressure. It used to be that most beer was sold locally, and that most breweries used the same bottles anyway.

Now, they choices have expanded and you might by a bavarian beer in Hamburg. And many have started to use individually styled bottles to strengthen their brand. These go to a local plant where, more often than not, they're now destroyed and recycled instead of returned to their origin to be reused.
Dear Mr. Trump, About Those U.S. IPhones
Why flash the BIOS?
I have a Dell Chromebook 13 (i5/8GB) and I upgraded the SSD to 256GB.
I installed Linux Mint 18 (Sarah) on partition 7 which I can dual-boot into and I have several crouton chroots installed to run with CrOS.
I find this a perfect setup for my needs.
Microsoft released a video[0] of this working on an Snapdragon 820 yesterday. I was extremely impressed with the fact that they were able to run a win32 app on it without any modification.

The future of Intel / AMD is definitely going to be very interesting to say the least.

[0] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_GlGglbu1U
This situation, from the initial complaint through to the apparent resolution, is absurd and strange. There were no winners here (besides customers getting extra stuff on Intel's dime, I guess?).

That said, I think this is a time that the title can stand to be summarized. Something like "'Arizona Sunshine' game locks game modes to i7 CPUs only"? Probably could be better than that.
How to Increase Customer Experience with IVR Payment Processing
Agreed. 100% line coverage doesn't mean that all functionality is tested; You don't test the full range of values every variable can take on, all possible throw-catch pairs etc. So the question is if the difference between 80% and 100% line coverage is that big. In fact, I think it can be decieveing to use the term '100%'. Arguably the reability of your program can be increased from 100% line coverage by adding an extra non-tested value check, effectively lowering the coverage.
I love this quote at the 1:07 mark in the embedded video: "To get the [soft] bot to move, half-strength rocket fuel is pumped into reservoirs in the body."

Depending on the strength, hydrogen peroxide[1] has a wide variety of uses from disinfectant to propellant.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_peroxide#Propellant
That's like saying that bounds overflow in C isn't a problem, just something you have to be careful of.

To tell you the true, I can't understand why the code the OP talks about has a problem, and I can't even reproduce the problem (and never saw any of the problems of lazy IO in practice either). But I also can not say the code has no problem, and that is a big issue with the language.
Most popular push-to-talk keyboard shortcut
It's one of the most successful top->down redistribution projects.
Do you mean test explicitly and fail graciously? So even test over false inputs, but check that the code fails with the right exit?
Faking DateTime using Microsoft Fakes seems to be broken
Thanks for all the upvotes everyone! If you'd like to connect with the author of the blog, Mike Schwartz, feel free to do so on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nynymike
I remember seeing something similar when one or more devices used the serial profile, or related ones (PPP for instance).

When those where in use, it would basically block all other traffic for the duration.

I noticed this back in the day when i really pushed my bluetooth usage.

My setup was a SonyEricsson featurephone, a Nokia N800, some Jabra headphones, and a white box folding keyboard.

As long as i used the "LAN" connection between the N800 and the phone to get online, it all worked fine. But switch it to PPP and the music would stutter whenever there was network activity.
Trees are a win-win all around, especially in urban areas.

They absorb CO2 and other particulate pollution, provide shade which has measurable reductions in cooling costs, divert storm water and improve property values.
How do you define "the first try"? Surely you're bound to have various trivial issues?
Holy smokes, this is such a useful tool! For any little updates that could certainly be applied in the future (e.g. adding more accessibility aspects, other color palettes, etc.), the sheer ease and speed with which I was able to create a website was absolutely astonishing, and overshadows any shortfall. I seldom share my email but submitted it in this case, because I believe this is a solid product, and I have this feeling the authors behind this tool really know what they're doing (as far as product dev.). Kudos to the creators! Great job!
I TDD a fair bit, and both kinds of tests are useful. I do really love the tests that I write to replicate a regression bug. The other types of tests are more like living documentation of my internal APIs for future developers, and are still useful.
What happens where trivial code later needs to grow? What happens when trivial code is invoked by non-trivial code and you need to make a change?

If it's truly trivial code, you should be able to test it trivially, so I'm a little unsure of why this becomes a make-or-break issue for some people. Pretty sure more time and energy is wasted determining if code is trivial and needs to be tested versus just testing the damned thing ;-).
I agree, for this to make sense you have to use renewable power source
I think the biggest issue I have with fake/spun news isn't the election but the fact that many fake news articles are used as an excuse by those who believe them for their actions. For example, I've seen all kinds of people buy into the transgender women being sexual predators in public restrooms thing. And every time a spun or fake news article alluding to such shows up they just use it as a bludgeon to say, "see your kind are sick perverts that need help." What's worse is when it's a representative or some other government official that can submit legislation or regulation on such matters. I wish there was a legal obligation for all legislators to provide evidence for their suggested laws the same way police and DAs have to do the same for their actions. Maybe then this wouldn't be a concern for me but the fact that this isn't the case means either I or someone else like me has to constantly take the role as activist to talk these idiots out of the most insane laws they can cook up on such matters. Hell, the same happens to some extent with liberals who are scared of guns, looking for any excuse to submit total bans on firearms. Anyways, this is the real problem with fake/spun news and not the current excuse of Trump's win (dude won because he pulled a smart gamble on the Rust Belt, I just wish the DNC would admit it and move to fix their strategy there).
Expect is the reason that I first learned Tcl. I haven't used it quite a while, though.
Done deal: Microsoft completes $26.2B LinkedIn acquistion
The Value of Sponsoring a WordCamp from a Business’ Perspective
Frankly on Android it went to hell when Google decided to drop bluez and go with a stack co-developed with Qualcomm from 4.4 onwards.
> As for performance and memory usage: it is always a property of the architecture or system, not of the programming language. Dropping to a low-level language, such as C, usually doesn't buy you too much these days. What is more important is that most C compilers in use have vastly more time invested into optimizing routines than the typical FP compiler. Apart from that, you can easily mange the same kind of data in e.g., OCaml than you can in C.

This is true in in principle, but not in practice. It is not just a question of whether a language is particularly amenable to optimisation and clever compilation (C is not, by the way), but also whether the baseline of naive compilation is efficient in itself. A naive C compiler will generate vastly better code than a naive compiler for most functional languages, if only because naive C compilation will primarly allocate statically and on the stack, while a functional language will perform an enormous amount of heap allocation. Futhermore, natural C programming style tends towards cache-friendly arrays and bulk allocations, while natural functional programming style tends towards lots of pointers pointing everywhere. Certainly, there are functional languages with efficient array libraries and the like, but they are less natural, and their use is often considered an "optimisation". And of course, most functional languages give you some way of accessing raw memory and essentially just writing C-in-Haskell or whatever, but then you're not really doing functional programming anymore.

Of course, if the problem is at its essence about pointer chasing, or composing IO pipelines, then functional programming is a fine choice, because the performance of the language is less important, and the ability to reason about complicated control flow is important. What I find interesting about Haskell is that due to the clear reification of IO, the compiler can actually perform optimisations on IO pipelines, such as fusion. Think about it - IO is usually the prime example of a fusion inhibitor, but GHC can actually do it for libraries such as conduit! It is a little ironic that Haskell is probably the best language I know of for describing complex IO operations.

An interesting twist is of course when you construct a functional language with an eye towards efficient compilation from the start. Then the primary compound data type is no longer the linked list, but the array, and you tend to end up with an array language. Examples include SISAL, Single Assignment C, NESL, Accelerate, Futhark, Lift, etc, which are naturally fairly efficient due to their programming model, and which provide strong functional invariants that the compiler can then exploit. These .anguages are all still pretty experimental and unwieldy in practice, though.
Yes, and a special case of this, which is rarely correct in "I don't get paid for tests" code, is tests that make sure errors are reported or handled correctly. It's rarely a good idea to ship a NullPointerException just to see if you correctly turn it into an error code or something.
WPP will spend $70M on Snapchat this year vs. $5.5B on Google and $1.75B on FB
After getting an over capacity error, you always get a captcha verification error and have to reload the page
That sounds like something that would be an awesome demo, but not really useful.

I actually dislike tab complete in usual forms most times. Auto import is nice, but i feel that auto complete is a form of searching the code base. And, when I am coding seems a poor tube to be searching for the answer.

When debugging, however, jump to symbol and quickly listing alternative methods helps. And sometimes I am just searching. So, good feature. Just not something i want to rely on.
EDIT: I was wrong. It seems to actually just be a hideously inefficient in-memory representation of the data (akin to List[Char]) perhaps plus a space leak.

That's what I get for not reading the code carefully...
Perhaps I'm just an outlier, but I think every time I've gone in to write tests for my code (usually post-testing rather than red/green testing), it's rather quickly invalidated some assumptions I made when writing the tests.

"Oh yeah, that's going to need to be thread safe."

"Oh yeah, that might be nil. Rather frequently."

In my experience, testing has been much more beneficial as an exercise of my mental model of the code and its interaction than for refactoring. But to that end, I can think of quite a few times that I've been very grateful for a unit test suite while I did a large refactoring.
I'm surprised too. I work at companies that have their own data center so can't use new relic, datadog etc. I'm really surprised there aren't more free open source analytics platforms for small projects. I'm going to start one when I "get some spare time". lol.

Anyone know of anything out there?
I assume it's because "no code changes" implies you could potentially be creating something that doesn't run where you want it to. Modern JS development means you need to be aware of the EcmaScript version you're writing in, and the version you're targetting. Once you're aware of it, transpiling with TypeScript means you don't necessarily need to target `esnext`: if you write ES5 and target ES5, it'll just remove the types as expected.

The downside of using `esnext` everywhere is that someone might be employing a feature that is not widely supported in the target browser/JS engine. So it's pretty bad to start with that as a default without an understanding of the consequences.
I've found that this depends heavily on the software in question.

For most of what I do (basic line-of-business type webapps & servers) the vast majority of the code works on the first try and is obvious enough that I never break it; during development there tends to be a few sections that break repeatedly while I'm changing other things, and those are the sections I write tests for. (Generally this is a few percent of the entire codebase.)

On the other hand, more 'computer-sciencey' projects tend to need a correspondingly larger proportion of test cases. The most dramatic example of this was when I built a Lisp interpreter as a side project: this was the only software I've ever written fully test-first, and I don't think I would have been able to get it working at all without a full test suite that hit every line of code at least twice.
In a previous life I've implemented news clustering algorithms for a couple of companies.

I wasn't impressed with the results with k-means and I've always found that agglomerative clustering algorithms to work better for natural text documents.
Ironically, I have an NFC-enabled FIDO U2F card that works in Github on Chrome for Android, but when I try to use it with my Google account, it says "Security Keys are not supported on your device."
The FAQ states that you can't run a server yet.
Single use PETs are not that much worse or even better, for larger bottles according to this Swiss study:

https://www.newsd.admin.ch/newsd/message/attachments/36446.p... [EN: p25ff]
There are a few shops an hour away. However, like I've always said "it's not the same".

As an example, try having Maggie noodles (or even indomie noodles) from India, Middle east and North America - all taste different.
Ask HN: How are you doing performance appraisal at your startup?
Are you with a job at a startup or currently running a startup.
Do you do any form of employee performance appraisal? (either once a year or multiple times a year).

What format (top-down, 360 Peer Review) and tools do you use to facilitate that? Has it been effective?
> Refactoring the sumArray method to use map instead of a for loop shouldn't break tests.

What kind of test could you possibly write that would break because of this? Something that measures time or memory usage, or uses reflection?

If you have clearly defined interfaces between significant internal components (which you should), why not test that they do what you ask? Public vs. internal is often more about what is exactly the client of the code, not the code's function or structure itself.
> That's like saying that bounds overflow in C isn't a problem, just something you have to be careful of.

I think there's a significant difference between undefined behavior (hello security flaws!) and the program crashing in a (reasonably) well-defined way.