skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If an exception violates its (function's) contract, it can terminate immediately and not reach even a catch-all. That contract can be inside a function I can't even see.

Even if I do have a catch-all, what tells me that it is a "library" exception? They might have thrown a generic std::exception with a vague string description. They might have thrown an "int". At some point what I really want is proper language and compiler support for those boundaries so I can know exactly where an exception came from, and can trap it at those boundaries (or ask the library maintainers to do so).
Tell that to a FISA court.
> Google specifically bought Motorolla to use their patent portfolio as a cudgel to keep all the other Android OEMs in line.

Not just Android OEMs but other tech giants - remember this was not long after the Nortel/Rockstar episode. The patent cold war was heating up with proxy battles and occasional direct skirmishes; Google found itself with a 'patent-gap'. Fortunately things are much saner now after a change of management at several belligerents.
If you want a pretty terse way of defining a GraphQL API, Apollo works very well (with mocking, too).
> The death penalty relies on the "humane" veneer, or it would be abolished very quickly. If there were the slightest hint that the people killing other people in the name of the state are actually enjoying it, there would be a huge outcry.

It seems unlikely you know anyone you know supports the death penalty. The death penalty has almost universally been abolished despite public support for it. I say almost only because I am too lazy to check whether or not it was in fact universal. Norway was among the first countries to abolish the death penalty and they brought it back especially for Vidkun Quisling.

I'm not going to go looking through the Pew World Survey for attitudes to the death penalty but at a guess Sweden probably has the highest proportion of the population opposed. If you got less than 1,000 people volunteering for the firing squad for the kinds of crimes that get the death penalty in the USA I'd be very surprised.
I want to see the Go community and it's libraries flourish. But having libraries like this around which provide extra confusing and probably poorly maintained choices for users is detrimental to it's overall health. There's already great examples of maintenance rot found even amongst the very popular libraries like go-yaml and httprouter.

One thing you can say about Go is it has 1000 Micro-frameworks, ORMs, Routers, and Logging libraries. Most of them are within a percent of giving the exact same feature set with the exact same approach and and ever so slightly different API. Lots of them share the same mistakes as they are a user's first project or a learning arena (though routing has been a pretty benchmarked area so that's been better than the others).

As someone who has open source libraries, and who uses Go in their day job and at home my personal opinion is that Go needs fewer, stronger libraries. Well supported, well maintained pieces rather than this illusion of choice that's presented today. I'm sorry if I came off as crass in my reply to the OP but that's simply the state I see in the community today.

Ideally there'd be 2-4 ORMs in Go that would be the goto. And half would use a code-generation approach, half would use the reflection based approach.

https://github.com/astaxie/beego/tree/master/orm
https://github.com/cosiner/gomodel
https://github.com/jinzhu/gorm
https://github.com/go-gorp/gorp
https://github.com/coocood/qbs
https://github.com/go-reform/reform
https://github.com/vattle/sqlboiler
https://github.com/upper/db
https://github.com/astaxie/beedb
https://github.com/naoina/genmai
https://github.com/monochromegane/argen
https://github.com/square/squalor
https://github.com/theduke/go-dukedb
https://github.com/dropbox/godropbox/tree/master/database/sq...
(...and more)
And now: https://github.com/samonzeweb/godb

Do we truly need this? This one in particular feels a lot like upperdb. And if it's for learning only, don't publish it to things like hackers news which makes people seem like it's something you should use as opposed to the more mature libraries out there. This is what I meant by fragmentation, it's an illusion of choice. There are actually very few logging/routing/orm/micro-framework libraries you should really use if you're serious about a project.
Yes that sucks. So I have written / am writing my own code generation tool which runs only once and does not rely on any fancy instructions in comments. Ah yes ... maybe `go generate`. I hate a slow compiler.
The only person here I see here who's virtue-signaling is Trump, by making statements that are widely acknowledged to be just for show and not serious promises.
Doctor here. Never took the Hipp Oath and there's absolutely nothing binding about it. Regardless, most medical schools in the US are using the Declaration of Geneva in place of the Hippocratic Oath, since the former is more reasonable. Also not binding in any way.

Here's the philosophy I follow: do the best I can for the person in the bed and his/her family.
I don't think you've responded to the most important point made by the parent, which is that any pedagogical value provided by a pedagogically-designed language over an engineering-designed language must be very substantial to offset the specified costs.

You have drawn privileged lines of your own across programming languages by suggesting that languages designed for education are better in the education context, and that languages designed for engineering are less fit for education. Do you think there is a pedagogical outcome difference arising from programming language difference?

So how much is that difference? How does one demonstrate the additional pedagogical value? Conversely, how does one demonstrate the relative disadvantages of using Python in education? Is the difference from Python -> Pyret an interesting barrier to students of computer science?

Meanwhile, the argument about the cost of maintaining tools and environment stands unchallenged, and the argument about the inertia of moving to a completely different ecosystem remains unchallenged.

PS: What pedagogical literature guides the pedagogically-focused design of this language? I couldn't find any on the website.
That is an interesting headline, when I read it I immediately thought the coda would be, "... but advertising networks offer to share theirs."

There is absolutely technology already out there that, without your voluntary participation, puts you into arbitrarily precise boxes. One need only look at the targeting options on a Facebook ad to realize just how deep that data goes.

Adtech companies have invested billions in ways, legal, sketchy, and sometimes downright illegal to put together databases on everyone who ever connects with the Internet in any way on any platform. They do that because being able to target ads accurately makes them more money.
Probably the author was using an old unicode reference. They were added relatively late, in Unicode 3.2. Or could be he just missed them!
One is a potentially deadly weapon, bearing a serial number that might be especially useful if found at a crime scene.

The other is a largely inconsequential part of your personal identity, which has routinely been used as justification for persecution throughout human history.

(Personally: I support responsible gun ownership, but I don't think there's anything wrong with asking owners to register their serial numbers.)
Here's the documentation for graphql-tools, Apollo's API definition package: http://dev.apollodata.com/tools/graphql-tools/index.html
OSINT Tool: \w IBM X-Force, PassiveTotal, VirusTotal, ThreatMiner and More
You may be overoptimistic about the outcomes of folks saving up from working at McDonalds, but maybe you're not 'srs' about that thought.

Being entrepreneurial in itself is not Capitalism, which relies on arranging a system so that private ownership production of production leads to the private ownership of profits generated by laborers.

On the face of it, though, making it difficult for private groups to have enough cash to make $10M bets on small enterprises is not impossible for a state. I'm not advocating it, but to take your statment 'srsly' you're overlooking that aspect of the situation.
New theme chooser for GitHub Pages
Perhaps because no matter how prominent you or the company you work for is, there are 1000s of other IT workers who are less scrupulous, less conscious, and more motivated by money than you are. And they would do it.

That being said, who is to say that it would be those people who were asked to do it? Most unlikely. It'd be the grey people, those you don't even know about. Those already doing it.

And finally, it's already done, isn't it? Facebook, Google, et al. I've worked for small companies before that are able to identify demographics of users right down to their likes, dislikes, and ages, even without submitting that information.

You think there isn't already swathes of Island-centric data out there?
Because there are millions of people in the industry.. Without factoring in any exact data, I'd say it's no less than 20% of those millions voted for Trump and of those I'd be willing to bet a portion would support this initiative. It's "merely a gesture" because it doesn't mean shit and it won't prevent anything.

I do agree with the guy above that said that it'll start a conversation but I wouldn't be surprised if that didn't change anything anyway.
> It's funny, but people never seem to question if modern American life actually, you know, is good for mental health

Speaking as an outsider, it seems to me that the US lionises some mental illnesses. For example, someone gets up on stage and gets passionately frothy about 1776, and they get accolades. In other countries that person would be treated as a nutter.
FISA courts asking for the same data are also bad. The data asked for by a FISA court must be gathered and shipped by employees and lawyers who have agency. Those employees and lawyers can choose to fight, or not. This is a public pledge that says "we will choose to fight."

Leaking FISA requests to the press, choosing to face jail time, or trying a public battle over a FISA request are other options available to people at these companies, instead of just rolling over.

I don't understand your argument.
Your may have been downvoted, but it's true. I work for a company that drank the Google coolaid and it was a dreadful decision.

Virtually no one uses Google Docs or Sheets. Instead, they struggle on without it, or have their department purchase an incredibly expensive version of Office.

The Google experiment has failed in our organisation. Google Groups and Gmail is a bit of a disaster. Google can't even do basic things, like relabel all email older than a certain date. And the admin interface is ridiculously slow, and frankly buggy. One time, I logged into this frequently used interface and discovered that I got prompted with a post it note every freaking time. That might not seem like much, but it slowed me down and we are under the pump at the moment.

Overall, Google has such great ideas but is totally let down by an utter lack of polish and a total inability to improve their UX, and ensure that they finish off features and products.

So much potential let down by incredibly simple UX errors. It's unbelievably disappointing :(
Moody's: U.S. Telecoms are underinvesting in broadband
Your post is currently #2 on the front page... apparently a lot of people had no idea this existed.

Amazons marketing people have some explaining to do :)
Show HN: Open with Overleaf – A chrome extension to open/edit latex files online
> work as executioners currently in the US

[citation needed]
We really are in an awkward place because people simply aren't seeing the value in smart watches just yet.

The technology is also just a bit behind.

People see it as geeky and not really solving any problems they have.

Personally I am a fan of the new hybrid watches that are coming out.

They look great (they look exactly like classic watches, because they are), the battery issue is gone (modern hybrids last up to 6 months or longer) and do what people really want a smart watch to do:

see if that notification is something worth taking your phone out for. (most hybrids have different symbols or vibrations or lights that show what it is and who its from).

Throw in the activity tracking and controlling your music from your wrist and you have the perfect combo.

If the marketing is done right I can see hybrids really taking off.
> For example, the last item in an array:

arr[arr.length - 1]

Of course, one could argue that this just means that the length of an array is a less meaningful property than its last populated index (what Perl calls `$#array`); one can imagine

arr[arr.lastIndex]

or, which is probably better, just

arr.last

> Or a found item by index number:

if (arr.indexOf("thing") > -1) {

This comes from overloading return values to communicate errors. It's not clear to me that

if (arr.indexOf("thing") > 0) {

(in a hypothetical analogue with 1-indexed lists) demonstrates any clear improvement; something like

if (arr.member?("thing")) {

seems preferable in terms of clarity (ignoring the efficiency objection that one would probably immediately after look for the index).
The question articles like this never get around to asking is: What would "fair" look like?

The data is never going to be flat. That would mean the top earners and the lowest earners had identical incomes. Call that what you want but that's not a free economy.
However, the average Craiglist seller is often just as insane.

$500 for a Mesa Boogie Subway Rocket amplifier--maybe, if it's pristine

"It has new tubes"--that are never standard Mesa tubes
"Just got it serviced"--never has a receipt
etc.

On an amplifier that the reverb is clearly not working, knobs are cracked or replaced with generics, the jack is flaky, looks like it has been thrown down several stairwells (at least try to fix the Tolex as that's cheap unless you try to do a full re-covering), etc.

And then they get really incensed when you show them that the last successful ebay auctions were all under $350.

Have some realistic expectations, dude.
Well you don't need that many of them to do it.
Well, it doesn't say anything about 2017, just "there is no official ETA". However, when I looked at Youenn's edits, I found that he has been working on changes to the user permission code, so I'm hopeful we might see WebRTC in the Safari Technology Preview in the next 3-6 months.

https://trac.webkit.org/changeset/209082
Open with Overleaf is a chrome extension that I created which allows you to open/edit latex files online using www.overleaf.com without the need of any software to be installed on your computer.

Source code is available on github: https://github.com/ishu3101/open-with-overleaf
Yup, best way to think about them are as bonds in which the credit rating is determined by the underlying asset quality rather than the company itself.
Right, now they may possibly allow me to post the Snowden documents or let's say a report from SANA about a successful campaign to save people from terrorist captors.

But it could be marked by a stamp basically telling people: "Don't look at this. Don't take it seriously." People will be trained not to click on the reason for why, and they won't have the context to - as it was the case when the Snowden Documents were first coming out - differentiate "This post was marked fake news because the government engages in 'bulk collection' NOT 'mass surveillance'" from an legitimate reason to pariah the post and poster.

The type of influence this gives Facebook as a provider is one of scale, not one of instance. If large numbers of people are discouraged from engaging with certain ideas while each individual case has to be litigated individually and during a time later when the news and narrative making is already completed and people have moved on, it's a serious problem.

I would criticize China if they intended to put branding marks on reporting, analysis and posts that they don't consider trustworthy or factual.

It is this same criticality that I aim at Facebook and the United States. There are other, better solutions. I looked at the list of 'fact-checkers'. They don't pass the sniff test.

Finally, there's no way Facebook is going to mark its advertising, partnered content and purchased 'likes' as fake. It's just not in the calculation.

I will agree with you however that the abuse of taking down posts or ranking them so that nobody sees them (another issue I've encountered) is 'worse' in its immediate affect. Though I think it's more explicit. I can talk to other people who have had their posts censored and it isn't deniable.

This solution, on the other hand, is extremely deniable.

I don't like having to pick between two poisons. I've had quite enough of that.
If you limit it to US, I think you'll get more Trump voters than muslims.
This account has been posting primarily for political and ideological purposes, and Hacker News is not the site for that. we ban accounts that continue like this, so please stop.
Yeah it's entirely possible that there are a small percentage of tech workers who would fully support this type of move. I too have noticed HN users seem to just assume everyone shares their views.
Nobody punishes you for publishing in OA journals, what matters is the IF and JCR rank of the journal, not if it's OA or not.
Thanks for your comment.

And to be clear - I'm not 'blaming' anyone, I spent some time in Tunisia a couple of years ago. I'm just indicating that 'cultures' and 'centers of activity' and 'relationships' are important.

So 'I hear you' on that.

Still though - Tunisians tend to be great people, much more open minded and educated than, for example Algerians or Moroccans ... and the Tunisian government is not nearly as bad as others ... so it's still a paradox :)

Though it could actually be literacy, access to information, and basic financing which enables them to head out to war ... ironically. Certainly, Al Queda members were actually quite well educated, way more so than the average street Arab.
This reminds me of the predicament that young'ish hardware component supplier companies get into. They win a huge contract with a prominent customer, but then that one customer represents 60%+ of their revenues (ex: winning a Cisco, Nintendo, or Apple contract).

I've worked at a few such companies, and they all work extra hard trying to diversify their revenue sources, for both customers and industry. If it's a startup, then such revenue dependence can mean the difference between being able to go IPO or not.

For the situation you describe for restaurants, they'd have to be vigilant about catering to multiple platform providers, and not neglecting their in-person customers (I've definitely seen a restaurant cater more to delivery rather than sit down, and slowly deteriorating in reputation among customers as order times became longer).

It's just like managing an AAPL supplier contract. Some will thrive, and others will suffer, like the sapphire supplier in Arizona.
If you regard particle-wave duality as an "issue" that needs to be "solved," (other than perhaps "duality" being a poor choice of term) you're really approaching this from a strange and incorrect perspective.
HopelessIdealistsDB :3

I almost joined a startup with four hopeless idealists. And then I realized that they weren't really interested in making money (so that we can all retire early and send our kids to nice schools), they were chasing a windmill. It would've been great for all us to not waste our time interviewing & vetting each other.
I didn't see the referenced article and initially thought this was going to be a post about not using volatile instead of atomic load / store.

I suppose this could be a useful implementation, however, it's not clear how useful it would be since the main place it has an impact is if you have a large number of very small queues. The overhead associated with the unused element is sizeof(T) / (sizeof(T) * n + sizeof(RingBuffer) + malloc_overhead), where T is likely to be at most the size of a pointer on the platform. If we assume a standard x86-64 platform with a sizeof(T) to be 8, we can eyeball the struct and guess that GCC will probably spit out a 24 byte structure since it's going to want 8-byte alignment on the T* after the uint32 values. On top of that, not counting malloc overhead, the array will take up n * sizeof(T) bytes. For regular malloc, the overhead on an 8 byte allocation is going to be an extra 12 bytes (according to malloc.c). Assuming we are allocating our ring buffer on the stack, this brings our total size up to 48 bytes for the "correct" ring buffer vs 56 bytes for the "wrong" ring buffer. Actual savings will be at most 14% and go to 0% as the size of the buffer goes to infinity, proportional to 1 / n, which is less than what one might assume. Consequently, this means that for any buffer over length 2, the power of two buffer size requirement will likely waste more memory than it saves since we are saving at most 8 bytes, but losing the difference between a power of two and the desired queue size, so odds are it makes more sense to write a 1 or 2 element ring buffer as a special case than to use this implementation for all ring buffers.
Are you arguing the 1000 people who've signed the petition are not worth hiring?
That's exactly the reason why databases of people including their religious opinions are forbidden under EU Law. And it has been that way in France and in Germany since 1978.
I realize that people often choose to read more into their words than should be read. I'm explicitly arguing against this. The "social context" means that there are ideas we can't discuss without being socially lumped in with deplorable people - for instance the fact that blacks don't pay back their loans as much as whites, that they are more likely to be deadbeats/defaulters/etc. (As tptacek noted, there is no similar stigma about observing that whites are deadbeats relative to Asians.)

This creates a significant level of friction on one side of a discussion, and makes it harder for us to come to truth.

This also means that the only people who do discuss these issues are the deplorable folks. I explicitly want to reclaim the unpleasant facts so that the deplorable folks don't have a monopoly on truth.

I want to say "we should import hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees, a few hundred white girls will be raped as a result, and tens of thousands of lives will be saved. Good tradeoff." I want to say "black on white crime is the most common form of interracial violence, but we should still treat black people as equal citizens with civil rights. However our expectations of equal levels of police violence against blacks and whites might be unreasonable."

Lying/shaming/attacking the people speaking the truth isn't sustainable. When you lie to people and they notice the truth, they start to turn to turn to UKIP/Jobbik/other such folks. As a globalist and a universalist I don't want to live in that world.
Business does not require monopoly in the real world. Competition laws exist in almost all countries, and even in the United States, they are still on the books waiting to be enforced. The instant we enforce them and break up monopolists, inequality will go down.

Neither monopoly nor inequality has been shown by data to arise from economic efficiency, nor to create economic efficiency. Quite the opposite.
stock?
Me too (for both historical and religious reasons). I just meant to be "modern friendly" ;)
> Your smugness about this toward the other poster is not appreciated.

I don't see him being smug at all. Is it smugness to suggest reading material to someone when they've shown ignorance of a topic? People do that to me here often from time to time and I don't interpret it as "smugness".