skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> So you _hate_ Python 3 because of two changes in syntactic sugar?

First of all, the tuple unpacking one is a HUGE readability AND maintainability issue; it's not just syntactic sugar. var[0][1][2] is not only far less readable than the unpacking notation, it doesn't even have the same semantics (doesn't enforce the structure of the tuple).

That means Python 2.7 helped me catch more bugs. Think about that!

Second, no, I just listed the two that irritated me the most every time I tried to switch, because they were the first things that came up by far the earliest and most frequently. Small inconveniences can be amplified through their frequencies. There are lots of things I don't like about it though... division becoming floating point division, having to say list(foo.items()) or list(map(...)) instead of just foo.items(), etc... again, more verbosity and typing for common cases where I really didn't mind the old way. If I wanted imap(), I could've just used imap; they could've just moved that to __builtin__ and made my life easier that way.

By the way -- the lazy nature of map(), etc. also means you catch fewer bugs now. Again, think about that! Just because it looks more efficient, that doesn't mean it's actually better. If there's anything I've learned, it's that even the smallest things tend to come with non-obvious tradeoffs.

Finally, regarding strings: if you look at my earlier comments, yes, I already acknowledged the Unicode changes were for the better. Awesome. I agree. Cool? OK, but there are other things in the language besides Unicode though, and they're not as awesome. I don't spend my entire programming life dealing with Unicode strings, so I care about other things too, and they make my life harder. Simple as that.
You should be aware Armin now has a more-or-less followup post telling people not to do what you just did (i.e., reference his 2011 post as an authoritative "Python 3 is bad" explanation, because both Python 3 and his own opinions have evolved since he wrote that post).
Shouldn't this thread be flagged? HN, HN...
I'm a pull engineer, and I work for a big, recognisable SV firm. I agree that hiring is fairly heavily biased towards push-types, but if you accept the premise and spend some quality time with some text books and online classes, you can come a long way (think of it as pull: if the goal is to work for Google, this is probably what you need to do).

One thing is for certain, carrying around a chip on your shoulder because you didn't go to Stanford will do you absolutely no good, and probably be a net negative for your career (and happiness in general).

For the record, no, working for Google and Facebook isn't the single only answer to life, the universe and everything, there are plenty of perfectly worthy paths that don't lead anywhere near them, and there's no shame in taking them. But they are juggernauts of our industry, they do pay very well, and for better or for worse, a stint at one of them does open a lot of doors.
> and dead simple FFI

That's very accurate. So dead simple that as soon as you want to manipulate something else than primitive values and functions from JS, you hit a dead end. How do you read a field from a JS object? How do you call a JS method? For all these things, you have to write "bridge" JS code that exposes JS libraries in a way that PureScript is happy with.

It's also striking to me that the documentation of PureScript FFI [1] has to teach you what the output of the compiler will be so that you can use the FFI. Am I really supposed to know about those `$`s? What if the compiler improves and changes its internals?

I'm sorry if my comment is perceived as a rant, but I can never understand how people can call PureScript's FFI good. Compare it to interoperability in TypeScript, ClojureScript, or Scala.js, and it is way behind!

[1] http://www.purescript.org/learn/ffi/
You need one of these.
https://golang.org/cmd/fix/
Why not 1.10?
Python 3 fixes no fundamental issues with python 2 and introduced far more warts than it removed. GIL is still there, crummy runtime is still there and unicode is now an even greater mess. I really wonder how many people who bang on about unicode actually have a good grasp of unicode and text processing because python3's unicode design is obviously terrible. I can now access or count code points in O(1) (neither of which is in any way useful) at the cost of tremendously increasing space and time overhead for any basic text operation on non ascii text and having some bizarre hacks to deal with the fact that pretending that stdin and stdout and sys.argv are always text.
You left the ending off your story! Nice ending too.
The point isn't to hurt Trump politically. The election is over. Trump won.

Obama is clearly trying to educate the US public in order to put pressure on the Republican congress. And for obvious reasons. Putin and many of his friends and supporters with the government are under active sanctions and have significant assets frozen in overseas bank accounts. There is the threat of Nato and the Missile Destroyer on Russia's backyard. There is the 500 billion dollar oil project in the Arctic. And clearly Russia still harbours ambitions of reclaiming their former superpower glory.

So any relaxation in Russia-US foreign policy is going to benefit them immensely.
The question now is whether Congress is going to allow this or not.
Python had a horrible story for international text before this.

No, Python had a horrible story for text, and people who worked in limited/sheltered domains didn't realize it. I personally lost all kinds of valuable hours of my life fighting with Python 2's "pretend everything is ASCII until it isn't, then fall over dead" model, because I -- a US citizen, working at US companies, and for quite a while dealing only with English-language content -- still ran into non-ASCII characters with regularity.

And here I'm being charitable; I simply refuse to believe that the overwhelming majority of people who used Python 2 never once had to deal with someone copy/pasting text out of Word or another program that used "smart quotes".
Android can get away with it, as it basically is what SELinux was made for. A device in "hostile territory" where even the user can be the "attacker".
And Gedit with Kate are ported from GNU/Linux to Mac nowadays.
> So even if no one ever uses it, it still renders the old one obsolete?!

This is a strawman, because I don't think this ever happens (feel free to give an example). There will always be people who try to use new standard; they may abandon it later, but they will at least try to use it.

In any case, this is not really relevant to Python 3, which is used plenty and more and more every day.

And your insistence that Python 2.7 is not dead really reminds me of this sketch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npjOSLCR2hE
Your comment is particularly apt as the programming language du jour is driven by fashion, not technology. We could still be using COBOL and be just as productive churning our CRUD apps as we are with the latest JS frameworks today... But one's hot and one's not.
Why polítics isn't been flagged anymore?
> You're two steps from impersonating the Government

In Poland it's normal practice. You register a company, you get serious looking email from private companies which names are very similar to related government entity which tells you to pay for registration (which is free).
It's going on for years, no consequences for them.

The same about golden and silver coins, gold plated religious stuff - company called freaking "NATIONAL TREASURY" aimed to look like national mint sells this shit for years.
This is super exciting stuff! We know that the two most accurate models of the physical world, Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity, contradict each other so at least one, and probably both, are approximations to the real laws that govern our universe. Since the QM and GR disagree about what happens for small massive objects, and in particular black hole event horizons, this is a place to look for divergence to existing theories. If these echos holds up under repeated measurements, it could be one of the most consequential measurements of this century. This is another example of how taking measurements to verify a theory you think you know can lead you in completely unexpected directions.

Though, for now, the LIGO team is apparently saying that these results could be the result of noise which would occur 1 out of 270 times. That's not strong enough evidence (in my mind) to overcome the overwhelmingly likely prior that General Relativity is correct. In time, we'll see.

Also, the article mentions that LIGO has witnessed 3 black hole mergers. Last I heard LIGO had only witnessed 2.
They've made it clear that this code doesn't come from the Windows driver, it was specifically written with the intention of being usable on any platform. Also, they seem quite willing to maintain it. The problem is that the Linux developers aren't willing to merge code that's usable on anything other than Linux.
And they are closed source. AMD tried to go open source and upstream and found out that that is not viable, because they would need to duplicate a lot of work in order to avoid putting abstractions in the kernel.

The upshot is, kernel developers have been complaining about nVidia lots for the route they took. When I install Linux on a reasonably recent desktop I still have to fiddle with boot options and/or blacklist the nouveau driver for some nVidia cards. And now nVidias approach has been completely vindicated.
Not only is Erlang's and Haskell's threading model unlike async/await, but Erlang's threading model is unlike Haskell's. So I'm just not sure what you're taking about.
that should be pretty obvious: lack of library support.

there is the famous example of the reddit founders, who believed pg's lisp story, and built the first version of their site with it. it went so badly for them that they had to start over again in python.

... but i bet you are going to have a very plausible-sounding reason why it didn't work for them.
give me unicode support in python 2

If by this you mean "give me exactly Python 3's text model without breaking my unmodified Python 2 code", you should be aware that A) this is impossible because B) the Python 3 text model is backwards-incompatible with unmodified Python 2 code, and C) that's kinda why Python 3 existed and was backwards-incompatible.
Yup, or you get something like this -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EV_c1-YTk8M
How to show validation for a pitching competition?
Hey guys, I am representing my startup translation service and I'm looking for some advice on validating the business.
What is the best way to show to pitching competition judges that my business has real value?
Looking at demonstrating a clear and well defined exit plan with the hope of selling the business in the mid term (~3-4 years).
We are a B2B translation service, so what are some good metrics to show judges that will win them over on our pitch.
Any and all advice is appreciated, also if you wouldnt mind filling out my survey it would be really appreciated.
Thanks!
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfOUmJSatCQMuwvI0ebnShEWD_8wCeFh211sgL2fI7xoTfPdQ/viewform#responses
Fear of missing out on market segment, as well as support for super-computer configurations. Without keeping a foot in the door for these segments, they risk fading away into obscurity like 3dfx did back in the days (for other reasons, however).
Just call it Unofficial Python 2.8 instead of Python 2.8
This is just wrong. For example, the "best" recording microphone (to many artists), the U67, can no longer be made because the parts aren't available anymore. Yet it is the most popular mic, and 100% not obsolete.

Similarly, Python 2 might not be made anymore, but it is used everywhere, and people are making new things with it. So...it's also not obsolete.
Suppo – Create a Stunning One Page Website for Your Mobile App
This is how you end up still running fixed-format Fortran code in 2016.

If your software is being actively maintained, it's time to move to Python 3.
As others have said, maybe this project fixes some actual problems and backports some features from 3, but this isn't "Python". Beyond the fact that Python is a trademark of the Python Software Foundation, Python is more than the language, it's the community and the tools (as with every programming language). So while there are some vocal people that really dislike Python 3 (either in part or wholly), my understanding is that with the planned phase out of Python 2 and Python 2 only receiving bug fixes at this point, much of the industry is transitioning to Python 3 (either currently doing so or planning to) and so it seems relatively fruitless to attempt to build upon Python 2. I personally think the effort put into this would be much better spent making tooling around Python 2 to 3 transformations.

I also think it's pretty irresponsible of the author to call this Python 2.8, because it may cause confusion to developers unfamiliar with the history and come from a tutorial that is still in Python 2 (it does show up on the first page of Google for me). It's also especially irresponsible and hubristic to attempt to make a language that is seemingly compatible with both Python 2 and 3, because 1) I trust that if it was possible Guido and the other developers would have made it, and 2) it can cause significant confusion when code doesn't work when it hits an edge case, and then the whole tooling around it can't be guaranteed to work. The last thing I'd want in my programming language is unaccounted for ambiguity.
Are you not American? It seems like legal costs in the US are sky high and people are constantly afraid of getting sued. I think it's somewhat better in mainland Europe, at least I don't see such anxiety over getting sued or so many threats of suing someone.
Triangulation laser scanning is about the closest you get in terms of accuracy. It can work on virtually any surface, including specularly reflective ones (I've worked on bespoke systems for the steel industry). It's accurate down to microns, but the usual problem is the field of view sucks - either you go further away and sacrifice resolution or you go really close and accept that you need to move the scanner (or object) around a lot. For small things, it's fine. You put your doodad on a turntable. For cars, forget it.

Stereo structured light is great, but doesn't work on specularly reflective objects. You've seen those amazing depth maps from the guys at Middlebury? Wonder how they get perfect ground truth on motorbike cowls that are essentially mirrors? Well they have to spray paint them grey so that you can see the light. The next problem is that you're limited by the resolution of the projector (so I guess if you own a cinema, yay!) and the cameras. Then you have to do all the inter-image code matching which sounds trivial in the papers, but in practice a lot harder (and since you don't get codes at all pixels you need to interpolate, etc, etc).

There are handheld scanners like the Creaform which work pretty well on small things, but I don't know what the accuracy is like.

The ultimate system would probably be a high-resolution, high-accuracy, scanned LIDAR system. Then you lose the problems with scanning ranges/depth of field, but you accept massively higher cost and possibly a much longer scan time for accurate systems.
I think there is more important problem to fix if we are talking about democratic election.

Programmer in video says it all:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1thcO_olHas&sns=fb
What if we separated his work from himself?

I don't know Eric enough. I know he is right wing, but not sure if he is racist.

Suppose he is a racist, can't his text about being a hacker be great?

I read "How to become a hacker" in 2014. It is awesome and he does not say anything about woman and race on the text.

According to some historians, Da Vinci was a dushbag. Should we ignore his crafts just because, apparently, he was a bad person?

I don't think so.
CRYTEK hasn't paid me (or my coworkers) for almost 6 months. HELP
Thanks for the feedback! Yes, co-relation among parameters would be useful. I am thinking through it.
My experience with Red Hat (or CentOS) is that the default SELinux policies usually work out of the box, so turning it off grants no benefit.

The few times SELinux has "broken" something the fix usually been as simple as creating an fcontext equivalence (if you want to install things in a custom path), enabling a SELinux boolean, or maybe a simple custom policy module granting some additional permissions. None of that is particularly difficult.

If you really want to lock down your custom software with SELinux or go beyond what the default Linux access controls grant you, that is definitely more work, but I've never felt that SELinux is enough of a maintenance burden that I should turn it off.
Even at launch time review, the critic was more concerned about trashing Myst than the game to be reviewed:

http://www.gamespot.com/reviews/nine-review/1900-2543940/
> Whereas other manufacturers keep dedicated GPU framebuffers powered up even when using integrated graphics (because the display is connected to the GPU), Apple connects the display to a custom multiplexer so the dedicated GPU can be completely powered down.
I'm pretty sure it's the other way around: the IGPU does the displaying and the DGPU just does 3D acceleration. Other manufacturers don't have a hardware mux because hardware muxes are expensive, and instead have driver support for handing over rendered frames from the DGPU to the IGPU for display. Indeed, NVIDIA has actually made GPUs with no display hardware on them at all, intended for exactly this application.
SiFive haven't completed development of their Linux-capable platform (and we haven't completed ours). We both make use of the Rocket codebase. Key differences include our support for tagged memory and minion cores.

Funding so far has been via private donation and a grant from Google. I expect we will be funded by a mix of corporate and academic funding going forwards. I believe we are in a position to secure enough funding to produce our open source SoC and low-cost development board. Our goals are completely different to SiFive so it doesn't really make sense to compare 'ability to scale'. Our targets are much more modest - we don't need to generate huge returns for a VC. The investment that SiFive and others are making into the RISC-V ecosystem is fantastic. The great thing about open source is obviously that we all make and benefit from a shared investment.
What does this have to do with Windows vs Linux? It's about closely working with hardware engineers.
Regarding tuple unpacking, instead of writing, say:

def foo((birthname,surname)):
...

you can write in Python 3:

def foo(name):
birthname, surname = name
...

It's not less readable. I also missed it in the beginning, but it's not really a big deal. (I think they couldn't keep the feature because of how '*' is used, but I am not sure.)

Edit: If you have problem with this in lambda expression, just create a named inner function. It's a feature/shortcoming (depends on POV) of Python that you cannot bind variables in an expression. I hope you understand that they couldn't keep the feature in lambdas if they didn't keep it in proper functions.

I am sure if you think about other things, there are good reasons to do it the way Python 3 does it, usually there is a hidden case where things need to be disambiguated (like your list() examples).
How to pronounce “Porsche”
Your description marks you as about average. What GP is describing is not being able to hear/understand people that are right next to them in a noisy environment, unless someone is literally talking directly into their ear.

That said, yes, it is entirely possible that someone at the other end of the table could hear and understand you.
Cuz you have too much free time?
You should be aware that trying to badger people with strict adherence to an arbitrarily-chosen definition of a term as a way to avoid countering their arguments does not make you look intelligent, does not make you look well-qualified to argue the topic, and does not make you look like you're winning the argument. Resorting to technical haranguing about the definition of a term typically, in fact, gives the appearance of someone who does not have an argument to make and is searching for any way to try to salvage a declaration of victory.

Just so you know.
Original email: https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dri-devel/2016-Decemb...

Proposed driver code: https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~agd5f/linux/tree/drivers/gpu/d...

The file with the atomic functions: https://cgit.freedesktop.org/~agd5f/linux/tree/drivers/gpu/d...
I wish I could downvote. I specifically said I hate the tuple unpacking syntax change in lambdas. That's where I used it so much to begin with, not in defs! I obviously can't put statements like that in lambdas, and until now I didn't need to do that to make my code readable. Now I have to name all of my lambdas just to make this syntax work, which is nonsense. It used to be there and it worked perfectly fine.
It's hard to express sympathy when you can't be understood. :)
Feel free to think otherwise, but we are living in a corrupt society. This isn't any news to anybody except those with no experience with any part of the government system.
What Are You Going to Do When They Come for You?
Recently I got into this relatively new iOS app called Really Bad Chess that is a lot of fun along these lines. My partner was never taught Chess but wanted to learn, and this made it entertaining to get started for both of us.

http://reallybadchess.com
Scientists discover nature’s algorithm for intelligence
> SELinux as a whole is binary: either it is on or off. You can't run a specific program as unconfined, generate a policy from the errors, and enable it after a while.

You can make individual domains permissive with the overall system in enforcing. It's available in RHEL6 and RHEL7, I'm not sure about RHEL5.

"semanage permissive -a httpd_t"

https://selinuxproject.org/page/PermissiveDomainRecipe

https://lwn.net/Articles/303216/
Automatically pwn the top 1000 WordPress plugins for fun, profit and school
A machine-learning system that trains itself by surfing the web
> In effect, if you wanted to run linux, you were best off without NVIDIA.

Depends on your choices. I guess if you throw Intel in there as an option, then maybe. But as of 4 years ago, if you were running a desktop -- Nvidia was pretty much the only acceptable choice if you wanted discrete graphics on Linux of any form, IMO, and driver quality was a massive part of why this is true.

Optimus, though -- that's what was really the debbie-downer for Linux/Nvidia, and Optimus is what inspired the question which lead to Linus's "Fuck you" rant, because Optimus support was so bad, and is still bad.

But the mainstream cards have worked fine for a long time, and, at least for me and everyone I know -- were the only acceptable ones for Linux, until relatively recently, and most certainly as of ~5yrs ago. As opposed to AMD, where I don't think I ever heard of a single instance of fglrx ever being anything but a nightmare.
I had this with my last employer, they shed most of their staff over that six months yet the company is still around and operating. Some of the people that moved on got their missing pay, others did not.
Venezuela seizes Christmas toys to distribute to poor
GPU support means high-performance computing.

Today's 3rd spot on Top500 is occupied by a GPU-based supercomputer.

...which is equipped with NVidia cards.

https://www.top500.org/system/177975
For reference, at least in particle physics the standard for a discovery is usually taken to be five-sigma, a 1 out of 1.7 million error probability, plus an independent verification to eliminate systematic errors that would not show up in the statistics.