skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Perhaps it's regional. These countries are both huge, with a wide variety of social norms represented. Out here on the left coast, first names seem to be the norm, as the GP poster surmises.

I can't actually remember ever being in a business meeting/academic setting, where Mr. or Ms. was used, at any point. In movies, sure, but it really does seem quaint.
Well, I can't speak for tooling or productivity comparison to C/C++, but Rust has one of the best programming language documentations I have ever had the pleasure of reading [1].

[1] https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/book/
Their rule does work. The single quotes are transformed into '\''.

The first ' closes the current single quotes string. The \' adds a single quote character outside a quoted string (and outside single quotes you can use backslash escapes). Finally, the last ' reopens the single quoted string that we closed before.
I could imagine trying to capture and analyze at least a few words leading up to the trigger word of 'Alexa' to help make it more accurate.

Even if the trigger word is Alexa, different languages, dialects, and slang might vary quite a bit. Some significant portion of people might use "Yo, Alexa...", vs "Hey Alexa...", vs. <a second or two pause> "Alexa...". I'm sure someone with a spouse or child named "Alex", "Alexander", "Alexandra" and so on might also trigger it by accident a bunch, e.g. "Alex, uh, who called?".

Matching all of those trigger patterns would help filter out false positive matches, or take false negatives and refine them so more people can use the product with their own language style and be less frustrated.
I use http://dataquest.io and it works pretty well.
> I don't care if Herb Sutter can find 1000 "bugs" in my C++.

Until the new release of GCC improve its performance by 10% by optimizing more cleverly an Undefined Behaviour but OOPS it now breaks your code …

> I quickly dropped Rust upon realizing that the core of the language addresses problems I don't have.

Rust isn't only about safety, it's also a «C++ on steroid from 2015» with a ton of cool features : Modern type system, no null pointer, parallel code without fear, package manager …

Rust is a huge productivity booster IMHO !
Telecom companies which employed tens of thousands mostly young educated because of the massive growth since early 2000s, have been facing now slowdown if not shrinking because most people here are now communicating for free using whatsapp and viber. These companies were doing also nasty things like injecting advertisement codes inside plain html pages to earn money, as most people here are browsing only facebook and twitter which use https, it became harder for them to compensate their losses on their main service (phone calls). They were colluding with the government to ban some chat apps on 3g communication and postpone new technologies like 4g and faster adsl connections in order to make people obliged to return to phone calls. The government knows very well that these companies are too big to fail as they are maybe the biggest employer in the country.
I think they're talking about the distinction between the actual audio, which can be listened to and deleted from the Alexa app, and the processed data breaking it down into a (potential) query, possibly sitting nowhere but some query logs for underlying services.
Tsuro is another great one that can be taught in less than a minute.
Rust certainly seems to have a very enthusiastic (albeit small) user base. I'm someone who usually feels comfortable rapidly switching between a wide variety of languages, including unpopular ones (D is one of my favorites), but I've never seriously tried Rust. There are two reasons for this.

First (and this is the less important one), the syntax seems second only to Java in verbosity and often seems different for no readily evident reason. Secondly, virtually any time someone's advocating for Rust, you get a long lecture about how memory safety is the most important thing in the world and anyone who disagrees is so hopelessly backward that they should be disqualified from writing any code at all. Well, it happens to be very low on my list of concerns. In fact, for most of the low level code I write, memory safety, ownership tracking, borrow checking, etc. are wholly irrelevant. So, given that, should I look at Rust (as compared to C++ and D, which I use and enjoy)? Does it have meaningful advantages that compensate for its syntax, immaturity and performance limitations (vectorization, etc.)?

I've asked a few Rust users this before, but never really gotten a satisfactory answer that didn't involve the same memory/thread safety argument. Give me one and I'll happily give Rust a try, no coffee necessary. :)
If you need UDP, and a UDP connection can't be set up, aren't you screwed regardless?
The "Peace on Earth" feature is in pretty high demand too. Unfortunately, any issues that request this feature end up being closed with WONTFIX by the maintainer.
As I understand it, George Lucas prohibited Fisher from wearing a bra as part of her costuming for Leia, because it would be too dangerous to wear in space. In her book Wishful Drinking she retorted with a request for her obituary: "I want it reported that I drowned in moonlight, strangled by my own bra."
Or, rather, independent of an OS.
parameters are lexically scoped, environment variables are dynamically scoped. Today dynamic scoping is frowned upon as it is an instance of spooky action at distance, but in the 70s I guess it wasn't that obvious (and environment variables probably predate unix).

Also dynamic scoping can be very powerful when stitching together pieces separately designed. To this day emacs lisp is still dynamically scoped by default and arguably it derives some of its power from it.

I still hate environment variables.
Honestly, Making it to the end. 2016 had been a rough year all round for people as well as for me personally.

Technically speaking I learned a few things, like Ray marching and distance field stuff, but nothing much I can point to and say "I did that."

I'm still here though, I made a few friends, I made and drunk some cider.

If I am on a good enough footing to make 2017 better, I'll take that.
More specifically, there are several mental disorders that are defined, in part, by a lack of empathy (ex: Narcissistic Personality Disorder). Attempts to "increase people's empathy" will likely fail on those individuals.
Two player: Patchwork, quick setup, easy rules, fast to play. Even my wife got hooked on this one. Which means it is a keeper (both game and wife ;) ).
What other definitions for the quadrivium are you finding? The set and description I've cited have seemed fairly standard, though I'm not an expert in the area.

I'm finding the content and descriptions mostly interesting in a retrospective sense -- I'm not ent

advocating that the mediaeval curriculum be implemented in its original form today. At the same time, I find the notion of input, processing, and output to be quite useful, and one which might be considered as part of a modern curriculum.

For the maths progression of the quadrivium, there are a few other possible clusters or progressions. We've made some advances in maths as well.

I see a general structure of: quantitative notations and operations (arithmetic), solving for unknowns (algebra), geometry and trigenometry, integrals and derivatives, matrixes, differential equations and approximations (FFT). There's also logic (informal, formal, programmatic), programming, and artificial intelligence / machine learning. Genetic engineering seems also to fall somewhere on this axis.

Collectively, all of this falls under inforamtion acquisition, processing, storage, and transmission.
This only affects the withholding of bonuses (the amount the IRS has you pre-pay as an estimate of taxes.) It does not affect the actual income tax on bonuses.

(It's mostly a disadvantage. I get about 60-70% of my income in bonus and stock which is treated the same; it just means that, if I don't plan ahead for it, I end up with a surprise tax bill on April 15th. I do plan ahead, but the whole process is obnoxious.)
One thing missed in the various discussions of documentation here is that the Haskell ecosystem is actually highly variable in both the amount of and need for various types of documentation.

There's a pile of packages like diagrams (http://projects.haskell.org/diagrams/) or yesod (http://www.yesodweb.com/) which have tutorials, examples, books. People who have been working mainly with these should be completely expected not to feel much of a problem with the state of documentation.

There are also packages which have mostly/only API information. Sometimes, this tells you everything you need to use a package effectively. Sometimes it doesn't. And this is impacted substantially by people's level of skill -- at Haskell and at inferring usage from names and type information in particular.

There's room for people to have very different experiences
Totally! Meanwhile, here's the magnificent Herr, unser Herrscher

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIcinMxNYBc
That's what I do as well. Except instead of React, I use Redux off the DOM. It prototypes fast and I don't run into any configuration issues
The NeXT/Apple Objective-C runtime has been Open Source since the late 1990s, the API and ABI have been documented since the late 1980s so anyone could create a compatible runtime, and GCC has had a portable runtime almost since Objective-C was taken into its mainline.
I think he is saying, the world is changing, and everyone has to change with it. One of the things have to change is this old way of thinking about identity.
The comments appear to be written by Terry A. Davis, a schizophrenic computer programmer famous for creating TempleOS as well as his belief that one can communicate with God through random numbers. He was shadowbanned a number of years ago on HN for making similar off-topic and offensive comments.
This depends on the application recognizing the -- convention and also depends on having all the little scripts in your system remembering to use the --.
Programming from the ground up
I don't use Rust just because I want to avoid GC. I also use it for algebraic data types, compile time elimination of data races, sophisticated polymorphism, a clear and simple module system, excellent tooling in the form of Cargo and an unrelenting focus on providing abstractions with as little overhead as possible.

(I've used Go and Rust daily for the past few years. I love them both.)
C is a very small and very portable language. Rust is not. I wondering why people bother comparing them at all.
I can agree about the nullability annotations & generics additions, but having properties, ARC, & blocks made writing Objective-C programs so much nicer, IMO.
They probably can get at the text, but I have doubts about any formulae...
I honestly don't know, which means I need to journal more.

… I started to keep a paper journal this year. Maybe that is my greatest accomplishment?
CSV is a hazing joke we play on noob programmers to demonstrate to them the function that eats a string and a delimiter, and spits out that split string into an array. Then we demo it with the most innocuous plain vanilla csv formatted data we can imagine like '1,2,3' and then haze the new programmer by telling them that's all they really need to know to process CSV files, assuming they can read file lines into strings and manipulate arrays. ha ha noobs ha ha ha. Well its funny if you're not the one cleaning it up or getting the bug reports.

The other side is trolling noob DBAs into thinking they wrote babbys first fisher-price CSV exporter when they ran SELECT CONCAT(columnone, ',', columntwo, ',', columnthree) FROM tb_wtf; and then they get their first bug report about the column data containing a comma, perhaps as a full name.

Personally I think if we're going to haze noobs it would be more civilized to just spank them with a paddle while they repeat "thank you sir may I have another" (And that movie is I believe almost half a century old now) Or do the rituals the navy used to do upon first equator crossing. Tricking noobs into writing CSV processing code is just going to far.
“IN-CONTROL” Fully Automated Soft Technology for Forex Exchange Marke
If they're going to blow something up, why not a bus or a train or a bridge or a cruise boat or something? There's not so many people on an airplane that it's like it's your only opportunity to kill a lot of people.

The only (rational) reason I can imagine that makes planes different is that you can use it as a missile to attack a larger target.
Thank you, very interesting to read and think about. This is why I read hacker news. This line of research/reasoning sounds very promising!!
Tesla's new radar tech predicts an accident caught on dashcam a second later
This assumes that all languages have an equal propensity for vulnerabilities. Many people would challenge this assumption.
It's obviously not happening because C's design... especially lack of any guarantees... combined with what those checks required made complete, memory safety hurt performance a lot. Talking multiples worse (300+%). Things like Softbound+CETS and Criswell's SAFEcode have gotten it down below 100% worse performance in many cases. Others seem to explode in delay on specific routines due to how they interact with the bookkeeping methods.

Whereas, Ada, Wirth, and Eiffel languages were designed to make the job easier for users and tooling. SPARK was even tailored to make it easy to prove absence of C-style vulnerabilities with automated proving. That was done by a small team over a period of years whereas global assortment of teams putting decades into static analysis or proof tools for C haven't pulled that off outside even more restrictive tools like Astree Analyzer.

C is just inherently bad for safety despite safe ways of doing it existing. That's because it was designed almost exclusively to run fast on a PDP-11. That simple. On other end, Hansen wrote Edison for a ultra-minimal language for a PDP-11. It was smaller than C, easier to process, and still had safety features. Reiterates it was simply a personal preference by C's designers to not care about safety while many others did.
Tanis completely changed my opinion about audio drama! Got the recommendation through Reply All and I'm now on my third listen-through. It's insanely compelling and I can't get it out of my head. Gonna look into some of your recommendations here, thanks!
The ownership system isn't strictly about memory management and can make it easier to catch yourself making larger architectural errors, and you can have more confidence in a refactor with Rust than Go. In fact, I'd argue Rust leads to simpler architectures that fit well into the ownership model as opposed the the "ad-hoc" architectures programs written in other languages seem to invariably turn into.
I don't think i can't be, i just know i have a lot to learn. My understanding of math is criminally small (despite enjoying the subject). Furthermore, ML seems to be on the advanced side of things.. at least, for those like myself.

I'm going to put in the work to learn it proper, but i suspect it will take me a fair bit of time. I've got many years to make up for.

Luckily there are many institutions online to aid in fundamental education like this :)
Reminds me indeed on the idea on some Libertarians, who believe we all steal from each other. So making every legal would result in that you get an equilibrium in which everybody gives up something voluntary and nobody steals anything. This is probably badly summarised but I never believed that would a good idea or even realistic.
Well, as far as I can tell, the result only demonstrated a reduction of amyloid plaque in the visual cortex, so an experiment on humans wouldn't really work (you have to kill the subjects and inspect their brains for the current experiment).
Orbital Determination for Proxima Centauri
I doubt that a significant amount of C programmers will switch to Rust. On the other hand, rust is very attractive for us C++ programmers.
>You're both wrong.

Bah. How am I wrong when I haven't even claimed DSV to be the best? Just quoting that section in ESR's book does not imply I endorse or agree with it. Logic ...
In addition to htaunay's post about docs, Rust also has cargo and crates.io which are fucking awesome.

Blog posts are one way to showcase tooling, perhaps not this one, but they have their place.
The Android client does support regular SMS handling, which is what makes it great. Regular unencrypted SMS for users without Signal, and end-to-end for users who have it, all in the same application.

It used to support encryption over SMS, unfortunately it was removed and is now the primary focus of Silence[0], while Noise[1] is now for Signal without the requirement of GCM for signaling.

0. https://silence.im
1. https://copperhead.co/android/docs/usage_guide
> The only software written in assembler is high performance numerical code and certain hardware-specific kernel device drivers.

Don't forget the cryptographic primitives : coding them directly in asm is the only way (at least the only way I know) to be sure that the execution will be done in constant time to avoid «timing attacks».
I wonder. Every internet resource states that HR is there to look out for the company, not for you (well, for themselves, to be precise). Maybe people coming in who act as if HR is working for them are actually playing more elaborate mindgames than we can understand?
I think dynamic scoping is great for configuration parameters, which is what we tend to use env vars for.
I agree!

I'm saying that lots of people don't want change, and telling them they must change is unlikely to be persuasive. In a democracy, this has practical consequences.
I do wish I was working with something else. Something I'm still surprised doesn't exist yet. I understand the reason it doesn't exist is that a cherry-picked subset of C++ is good enough. This hypothetical language would be a greatly simplified C++ with a couple dozen small annoyances smoothed over.
Medical and Legal dictation specialists, for one.
Ah right, I forgot about the others. :(

Yeah, it's a real problem that needs to be addressed when discussing empathy.
Hear hear!

And then I watch something like Gary Bernhard's "Boundaries" talk[1], which isn't bad, mind you, and think "maybe this Brad Cox guy with his Software ICs really knew what he was talking about?"

Where Apple went off the rails with Objective-C was trying to make it into an OO language like Java. It isn't. It is a deliberate hybrid, with a component implementation language ("C") married to a component connection language ("Objective").

My own approach is to take this distinction seriously, and instead of doubling down on the "better Java" part like Swift does (which in Software-IC terms is focusing on the less interesting and mostly solved component implementation part) and instead expand on the ways we can connect components (dataflow, constraints, storage composition, etc.).[2]

Minor correction: GNUStep, libFoundation etc. happened around 20 years ago, not 10.

[1] https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/boundaries

[2] http://objective.st/
You are making an all or none fallacy. While those things do exist, we can't use them as an excuse to prevent the common case.
We do as well, but good luck figuring out which of the dozen of layers of shell glue code set up that specific variable and why.
You can no longer get a job as a programmer?
I don't think you have to assume that at the time of the shift there are lots of jobs to shift into, only that as it shifts the economy will create new jobs. Further I think those shifts are on the order of years not days, as things shift over its going to be useful to cross train. For example, right now there is a possibility that trucks can become self driving so if you drive a truck you need to think of three things; 1) How much longer might this be a viable way to earn a living, 2) what sort of new jobs are currently being advertised as unfilled, 3) what resources can I apply to cross train into something different than truck driving.
Many popular languages nowadays essentially have just one viable open source toolchain: Go has the Go toolchain (gccgo being niche), Python 3 has CPython (Jython and IronPython only support Python 2.7, and PyPy is not up-to-date), Swift has the apple toolchain, Haskell has GHC (none of the other compilers is widely used).

That's not necessarily a bad thing since the compilers are all open source and you can port them to whatever platform you want anyway. C managed to spawn a lot of adequate compilers, but the language itself has seen very few changes since it was standardized (27 years ago), while all the other contenders (including C++!) see a major release at least every 2-3 years, and up to several times a year (for Rust).

You can't have that pace of changes and still maintain compatibility between all the different implementations.
I don't know much about Kip Hawley other than he worked at TSA and was the brain behind disallowing liquids, for whatever that is worth. This is a nonsense piece. Not sure who he's shilling for now.

> Just to be clear, unless a PreCheck passenger is randomly tagged for a more thorough check, he or she need only avoid setting off a metal detector to gain access to the secure areas of airports. In other words, these travelers could carry a pound of C-4 plastic explosive in their pockets and get onto any airplane in America.

Let him. We could hand out C-4 to everybody during boarding. Without a detonator, the terrorist would have to gag each passenger his pound of might-as-well-be Play-Doh.
If you use some API other than system(3) - even if you literally use a shell-script - it's:

1) serialize data structure to semi-typed array of strings
2) pass array of strings directly to target program
3) have target program parse the array of strings to flags & parameters

With no shell or C library touching the command line arguments at all.

The only way this could be more direct would be if you used JSON instead of arrays of strings, web-API style.
It can be, that doesn't make it popular in general. Duck Dynasty has zero viewers in my living room, does that make it an unpopular show? Having a small number of absolute fans in isolated clumps does not make something popular unless you specifically scope the definition to make it appear so.
Plus, just providing that EDN link is hardly proof that it is the best ... And further, "best" in many cases is subjective. You want to claim EDN is the best, you lay out an objective proof.
Rust has by far the best tooling and documentation support out of all languages I've seen. Library support is great too, at least in that Cargo is an amazing platform and it's too easy to import C libraries.

What do you feel is actually missing from Rust? Nothing has stopped me from replacing C entirely on the low end, and even the high end for application software development.
Hugh Howey is one.
when someone refers to their parentage/ancestors as their "lineage" it almost always means they are royal/upper class/landed gentry, etc...

example:
http://all-that-is-interesting.com/lineage-british-royal-fam...
I get that the parent response about EDN isn't particularily enticing but you really shoild give it a look.
I'm the guy that made Agar.io, Diep.io and a few smaller games. I analyzed the possibility of using WebRTC in my games several times so far, but it seems that right now, it's still hard to use in a server-client architecture. You need to bring this [1] behemoth and all of its dependencies to your project dependencies on the server side, even though you only care about a tiny bit of it (unreliable data channels). It's unlikely that people will start using it until there is an easy stripped-down version that only deals with data channels.

[1] https://chromium.googlesource.com/external/webrtc