skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I wouldn't really consider it a competitor to Ableton Live, though there's some overlap. But, as a competitor to Pro Tools, it's hard for me to think of anything even in the same ball park as REAPER (and REAPER costs a fraction of what Pro Tools costs, as well). I use FL Studio or Renoise for the stuff that people use Ableton for; but, REAPER blows them all away for recording live musicians and then mixing the resulting tracks.

The term "DAW" has too many uses, and it can be confusing. REAPER is a Pro Tools competitor (and a good one). Ableton can be used for multitrack recording of live musicians, but I don't know of any studios that use it for that, unless their focus is on electronic production with some live music added on top. And, REAPER can be used for electronic productions and loop-based composition and live performance (and there's even a UI for REAPER that makes it act more like Ableton), but it's not its raison d'être.

If you're composing and performing predominantly electronic music in-the-box, then Ableton or others might be a better choice. But, if you're recording live musicians, REAPER is amazing. There can be some useful interoperation between them, as well. Live can plug into REAPER, so you can sync up your Live performance with your REAPER tracks, and produce a hybrid work. REAPER may be stronger for mastering, as well, depending on how you like to work.

Traditional recording engineers, who learned in a studio with tape and hardware mixers and patch bays, will be quickly comfortable with REAPER. The same can not be said of Ableton Live (or FL Studio, etc.). But, musicians who grew up on synths, sequencers and beat machines with sequencers (like 303, 808, etc.), may find the Ableton approach more intuitive. Both are high quality tools doing a very good job in their niche. REAPER just happens to be so good at such a low price that it stands out as exceptional and worth praise, IMHO.
Are you sending an image bitmap in the actual Intent? I'm surprised you're not having it break when sent to Android's IPC mechanism which has fairly low size limits.

I would use a Content Provider to share the image instead.
Steam deleted everything on system owned by user (2015)
> Not rocket science of course

And it depends on whether you're parsing or rendering. Rendering is much easier than parsing. But even parsing is nonetheless a solved problem :-)
Well they did patch things a few years after Jefferson's presidency ended. So much so that Adams' last words were "Jefferson still survives." And oddly enough, he was mistaken, Jefferson had actually died 5 hours earlier on the same day, July 4th, 1826.
Bloghunt
Charting a Cybersecurity Path for the Next Administration
No that I'm aware of. Can you try?
None of this internal faffery is evident to an end user. The only thing I'm disappointed with is the removal of lyrics
For something in a more... conventional language, here's a compiler/interpreter for a C subset in ~500 lines:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8558822
I remember audiogalaxy being the first web interface I saw that made use of ajax--clicking on the download buttons next to songs, not having the page refresh, and immediately viewing source to try to discover what wizardry this was.
"having non-standard configuration is inherently more complex"

I disagree. It can be more complex, but it is not at all inherent. If I configure my shell, my editor, my whatever software to work more like other software I use (keybindings, etc), I can actually make it less complex for me, because copying over a few config files on those rare occassions I need to is much faster than trying to learn a whole new set of keybindings/behaviors (and trying to keep all of the different ones in my head).

Yes it is possible to tinker yourself into oblivion (especially if you change the same items frequently, and never come to a stable state), but that is by no means the inevitible outcome.

I also very much disagree with this line from the fish shell design page:

"Every configuration option in a program is a place where the program is too stupid to figure out for itself what the user really wants, and should be considered a failure of both the program and the programmer who implemented it."

Now I understand what they are getting at, and if they didn't start that sentence with "Every" I would not disagree so much. Yes your program should make it as easy as possible for you to figure out how to do what you want to do. However, not everyone in this world is the same. People have different preferences on how things work, and some of the choices on how to do things are mutually exculsive. So every configuration option is most definitly NOT a failure of the program and the programmer who implemented it.

Granted there are programs out there that were seemingly made to purposefully obfuscate how they work (like the dev who wrote them gets some kind of sick pleasure out of making users' lives difficult :-D ). Obviously you should do your best to avoid that outcome (which almost aways comes not out of programmer malice, but other factors, I'm sure).

There is a place, I think, for a really good set of defaults that are consistent and easy for users to follow. I do not agree, however, that it must come at the price of forbidding users to customize their software. Tuck those customization options away if you must (if your philosophy is to encourage the use of the defaults), but I think it is a mistake to forbid user customization. If someone finds your program useful enough to want to customize it to their tastes, you risk losing a valuable customer/user who will move on to something that lets them shape it to work they want it to.

[edited to remove unintentional indent -- can't seem to break that habit of putting spaces at the beginning of the first line of a paragraph :D ]
Pause, We Can Go Back
LG G6 align the design and specification with iPhone 7 and Galaxy S7 Edge
Maker Project: An Internet-Connected Portable Air Quality Monitor for $35
I stumbled across this a few months ago while implementing basic TTY resizing and ended up learning way more than I needed to. Super impressive, thorough article. :-)
I feel like you should have read further into the article, where the author attempts to back their claim, instead of jumping to conclusions.

"
>Roughly $2.50 to acquire and monetize a new user (and getting more expensive fast with v low and slowing growth)
>Each user generates $3 in ad revenue per year
>Each user costs them $3.25 in Google data center costs per year to store their pictures (so negative gross margin still at 150M users)
>Plus another $1+ per user a year in R&D costs
>Plus another $1+ per user a year in G&A costs

Today the more users they get, the more money they lose. If they can double revenue per user, they are making profits. They need to more than quadruple the revenue per user to have the future profit stream to add up to $25B."
The Oberwolfach Library Terminates Contract with Elsevier
Probably a better link is this one: http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/02/trump-administration-...

I say that because the last paragraph starts "The Human Society", where author likely meant "The Humane Society"

Either way, I'm curious: If the USDA is putting the data behind the wall of FOIA, how long until people start to automate and centrally-track who is requesting data for which lab and what timeframe?
I would like to see this as well, sounds very interesting
Bots, Blockchain and Artificial Intelligence: NYU Unblocking the Blockchain
Datapoint: GNOME's Federico Mena Quintero is working on a file-by-file port of librsvg to Rust. Compiled Rust objects are linked with compiled C objects. Both Rust and C call functions in librsvg's C dependencies, such as Cairo. None of this is weird; it's precisely what Rust was designed for.
Online BBW Dating Sites Bringing Curvy Women and Their Admirers Together
Really nice. Clear and concise.
I think he is referring to the fact that the people "buying the shares" have invested money with a fund (401k? I'm not American) that will be presumably purchasing the shares."
Oh. Thanks ;)
I think asking someone to live in a home they own 6 months a year in the same city as their property(ies) satisfies 'fairness'. It's important to allow people to live their lives, but over speculation hurts many people to a much larger extent.
>This doesn't mean you're wrong; it just means that it's so emotionally loaded, and so devoid of clear, replicable data that even a debate with citations will probably be disappointing at best, and personally insulting at worst.

That's right. If one said women are better home makers, teachers, and parents, people would either agree with you or say you're being sexist. What is wrong with teaching, parenting or home making? Without taking a position on whether men are better than women at chess, why does it even matter if women are better at some things and men at others? It's so overwhelmingly political and emotional, and why should women be ashamed to be good parents or home makers? Those are no less respectable than any other occupation. However, as you said, you can't even touch this topic without getting in trouble.
can someone eli5 how to copy to the clipboard using this thing without spending 100 calories in my upper torso
There are poker experts, but they do not use their intuition (very much). Poker teaches you to make rational decisions while your intuition screams something different.
Are you telling me to read a history book? That's in the 'did you read the article' category of rude. The OP claim is utter hyperbole. The thing you linked is titled "Shooter sent Facebook message". How was the government involved in this?

Edit: I'll try to put it more clearly. Fascism is a real thing that really happened and killed real people. Claiming it as your own over some stupid shit that does neither and you disagree with (hell, I probably disagree with) is despicable. Please don't.
It amuses me that you complain about people taking things too seriously, being humorless, when that's exactly what you did...

My life hasn't been the easiest either, but at least I don't rely on that as an excuse.

There's plenty of positivity out there, as long as you're willing to seek it out. Have a nice day, hope you find peace.
From these slides it seems it started as a qemu fork: https://www.blackhat.com/docs/us-15/materials/us-15-Nguyen-U...

would like to know more about unicorn as well.
Climate and Earth’s Energy Budget (2009)
That's why I break out things that are platform-dependent. E.g.:

if-shell "[ $(uname) = 'Darwin' -a -f ~/.tmux.macos.conf ]" "source-file ~/.tmux.macos.conf"

Technically `reattach-to-user-namespace` is a macOS-specific hack to get tmux working, so there's no need to jam it into your standard config.
Un+Air+Bienfaiteur+(Extra+Large+Painting)
I wrote a simple C# code to explain Trump's policy #TrumpLoop #TrumpBan
Audiogalaxy was insanely effective at finding related music, due to, basically, human curation.
I will always be grateful of having discovered lamb and goldfrapp through it.
Don't complain that Chinese is ugly and unreadable just because you speak English as your native tongue.

That's a great counterargument, and one I fully agree with. I've noticed that over the years, there has been a growing trend of promoting "readable, maintainable, clean, insert-fashionable-adjective-list-here code" which really amounts to a lower-common-denominator, dumbing-down perspective of how software should be written. In their perspective, code that someone does not immediately understand is "bad", seemingly regardless of how much (or little) knowledge that someone possesses. I think this is ultimately a harmful trend.

The opposing view, which appears to be largely a minority in more mainstream language communities but dominates in others like APL and Asm, is that programming languages are essentially like human languages: they need to be learned, are not necessarily "easy" or "familiar", and this learning and eventual mastery is wholly beneficial to their use. As with human languages, it is not expected nor a problem that a beginner will immediately understand code written by a more advanced user. Instead, the beginner progresses by learning the language and eventually becoming an advanced, "literate" user. This can be summed up in one sentence: "The code is unreadable because you are not yet qualified to read it." ;-)
Show HN: V0.2.0 of Px is out
> ... starts to noticeably flicker annoyingly

It's generally easy to solve problem with activating/implementing double buffering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_buffering#Double_buff...
While an interesting direction to consider, don't forget what a ballsy thing that was of Netflix to do. It wasn't at all the obvious right thing to do. Not to mention how well they are executing on it, producing content at the same level (maybe even higher) as HBO et al.
Well, everyone has a different view of what is big or small, so your position is just as invalid.

That said, I never said "right". I was quite clear about what facets of government I value (civil rights, transportation and social infrastructure) and what I don't like (war machine, fascist law enforcement). Oddly enough, there are political parties in line with that, so your unsubstantiated assertion that I don't get that choice is pretty ridiculous.
They're suffering from not-invented-here-syndrome.

Also while custom memory management made sense for Android 2.2, they should have just thrown it out after 3.0.

But giving up code isn't easy.
On a production server? You're doing it wrong.
Well NSIS (Nullsoft Scriptable Install System) is one thing that came out of Nullsoft which continues to be very widely used even today. Makes it child's play to write simple installers which are in mere KBs.
I programmed in APL circa 1980-83. It's not a normal programming language in that you don't use it to solve the same kinds of problems as you'd solve in Pascal or Fortran (then) or Python or C (now). Lisp and Smalltalk are a little like that. If you pick a problem they're good at, they're very good indeed, but if you're writing something they don't do, they're just Pascal/Python with funny syntax and nonstandard libraries.

APL really encourages code golfing. It's barely readable in the best of circumstances, so there's a lot of temptation to compress code. Er, it's readable, but it's like reading a regular expression. You read it character by character, not line by line.

The other thing APL encourages is writing dimensionality independent code. Just as a good C programmer will write a function to concatenate two strings that works independent of the strings' sizes, a good APL programmer will write a function to accept arrays of arbitrary dimensionality where that can make sense. That's because it was not uncommon to have intermediate results of 3, 4 or 5 dimensions. Also, most of the built-in operators do something useful with higher-dimensioned inputs.

So yes, it becomes second nature, more or less. But at the same time, it restricts the kinds of problems you think about solving with it.

Today I would not recommend APL for any purpose except studying its place in computing history.
I wanted to donate food to lawyers. I ended up part of a startup
My mom is a former nurse and she essentially diagnosed her catamenial pneumothorax (a collapsed lung that co-occurs with menstruation). Apparently elevated estrogen levels during menstruation can cause endometriosis in the chest cavity which creates punctures in the lungs. It's extremely rare so perhaps doctors didn't consider it, but she noticed it by keeping a log of when her pain was occurring. Originally more than one doctor missed the pneumothorax itself on chest X-rays and CT scans over a period of many years. She unfortunately underwent a procedure to remove part of her collapsed lung that left her with chronic pain before realizing the 'catamenial' aspect, meaning that a simple hysterectomy to induce menopause would solve the problem.
It doesn't explain either how the money is created in the first place or how actual resolution happens when coming across a block which differs from others' copies. Do I need to ping all the peers?
I assume you mean decrease the vacancy rate.
To slightly bastardize the term "burner", people might think they don't have any burners, but everyone's got burners. I started to notice that one of my professors, around every ~25 sentences, he would capitalize the first two letters of the sentence. I mean it's a dead giveaway, because most people do this a lot less frequently.

But these figurative "burners" are everywhere. Little, tiny, seemingly untraceable ticks, invisible to the naked eye. Computers are telescopes in the bit world, eyes on us at all times. People don't seem very concerned. You can't just pour water and sand over your digital footprints to erase them... I would not be surprised if FB held on to my data 7 years after I deleted my account.
what are those 3 settings on vim ? I assume line numbers is one of them, which are the other 2 ?
It was completely obvious; it's historically the only way a video distribution channel survives once it has competition.
That's less accurate than my original post, especially given I was commenting on the performance trade-offs of RN's architecture. I highly recommend watching this official video about the internals in order to gain more of an understanding:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N4f4h6SThc

In short, there aren't too many interpreted languages that don't rely on "native bridges" for things like UI and access to system libraries, but I wouldn't call desktop GUI frameworks for non-native languages like Java Swing or C# WinForms "native" even though they also use what you call "native components."

On the other hand, I would consider iOS Objective-C/Swift, Android NDK, and MFC/QT/GTK+ in compiled languages like C++, Rust, etc. to be truly "native" (but not Android Java, of course).

React "Native" is still very much interpreted code (if anything, RN is a different kind of "browser" that runs JS code -- yes, the JS that runs in browsers still has the same "orchestration" role that you've described from an architecture standpoint).
Someone linked a photo in another comment in this thread (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13566519). If it looks significantly different to that then sure, I wouldn't mind seeing.
Yeah, I use https://github.com/tmux-plugins/tmux-continuum to auto save sessions, and https://github.com/tmux-plugins/tmux-resurrect to restore them when tmux is started.
From that thread: http://up.metropol247.co.uk/davidlees/daybreak_sky_sports.pn... - what the wineglass looks like
Wow! PREFIX t displays the time!
Not unlike setting up a gold mine to "create" money.
IMO D is exactly that, "a better C++", and does not try to be anything more. Rust, on the other hand, is more of a "this is a tool that should address all your C++ needs" (which means it won't be better than C++ in all aspects), and it does try to be something more.

D seems to be designed to be a language that has the exact same powers (or better) as C++, but tidied up. C++ has over time grown to be a very powerful language but these powers are all bolt-on and don't interact well together. D is a language designed from the perspective of "Okay, we have all these C++ features being used in these ways, let's build a more holistically-designed language that has the same features, and correct all the mistakes along the way". I think it's good to have language refreshes like this. You get a chance to fix all the warts and make improvements without breaking backcompat. It's very useful alternative to C++ when you need something that behaves very much like C++. Plus, it has `extern (C++)`, which makes it super easy to incrementally drop in to C++ code.

Ultimately, Rust is pretty different. It doesn't have template metaprogramming. It doesn't have inheritance. While most of the problems solved by these tools can be solved in other ways in Rust, it doesn't change the fact that Rust introduces more paradigm shifts. Of course, safety is a benefit that pretty much overshadows this, but there is something to be said for languages like D which are "better C++"s without changing the paradigms involved.
But try remapping C-w in bash. The tty remaps it on the very next line. You'll have to stty werase unmap it to be able to change it in your read line .inputrc.

So the tty cooking still has charge of some things.
1995, 2005, 2015. Literally, three decades. But, maybe the point you're making is that the story - like the technology - got shrunk.
I understand that there is variance in interviews. However, I don't understand how interviewing.io is fixing it? Or are you just collecting data to prove it?
Could Synthetic DNA Be the Next Tech Breakthrough?
True, but how often are candidates truly rejected because of non-technical abilities? I'd guesstimate that 75% of candidates are rejected because of technical abilities (didn't get design right or algorithm right or coding standard is poor, etc).
Thanks for sharing that. That's a great link, and I agree, they are talking about the same thing and reaching pretty much the same conclusion. The talk is well worth checking out.
Never used a less bureaucratic language. And am using it everyday for business.

Shortest path between my ideas and a running implementation = Pharo.

Ok, took me a couple years to become decent enough for my needs but this is one of the best decisions I ever made.
A guide to marketing your WooCommerce store
NOAA whistleblower claims 'Pausebuster' paper is based on unverified data
Please don't ever work for NASA!
Books are here http://files.pharo.org/books/ and the "by example" one has been recently adapted.
The strangest comment along those lines was by a UK colleague when we were discussing the potential of Iran opening-up for tourism, which seems like an amazing prospect.

'Of course I wouldn't fly there on Iran Air,' he said, 'because they're a dry airline'.

It seems bizarre to me to base selection of an airline on the availability of alcohol in-flight, but there it is.