skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Blaming Linus for whatever personal frustration with Linux is becoming a sport. From my side, I prefer simpler GUIs, without massive bloat.
Did not downvote. Let's take twitter as a well known and particularly bad example.

For a brutalist example, let's take HN. It works. Plus, I'm sure the code is quite simple.
I like it too but I've found it to be pretty buggy sometimes, especially if the contents of a folder change or the folder itself is deleted while you're viewing it, you get an endless stream of Delphi exceptions.
I had my own office once for a contract role I did. It was great. It makes employees feel more valued and reduces stress levels.

I find that when you're constantly around people, you are less reflective/creative and more prone to getting caught up in hype cycles and group-think.

My biggest problem with open offices is the constant stress that comes with people walking behind my back every few minutes. It's paranoia-inducing.
It will list the size of every file and directory in human readable form.

Output is related to your present working directory.
> I feel there's so much more collaboration happening in an open office.

The problem is that every time we have tried to study it, the opposite has been true. Are you sure your feelings translate into actual productivity improvements?
This company doesn't respond to all job applicants.
This study doesn't account for strict plant-based diets. There isn't a single reference to animal product portion size. It just lumps everyone together. Some groups had larger fruit and vegetable portions. But all had animals.
Are you in Minnesota, by chance? http://www.waymarking.com/waymarks/WMM82_Pneumatic_Air_Drive...

But yeah, that'd be pretty awesome.
Would have saying "fantasizing" instead of "drooling" have been acceptable? Would it have been to suggest that they -- not that person in particular of course, just anyone like them -- should be "kettled and subjugated"? And you really think talking that way about large groups of people in their absence is "civil" (enough), whereas being "abrasive" to such a person is not?

When someone in the subway next to you says "gas all Jews", and you turn around to them and say "Oh no, dear friend, I agree with this plan of action for several reasons, many of which I'm sure you will agree to if you would just let me explain them to you" -- that would be too friendly. I would even argue this would be very callous and abrasive to not just Jews, but any other decent person sitting in earshot as well. I'm not saying the alternative is to call them names, but you can be too friendly in light of some things. You're essentially asking me to choose this random, callous, unintelligent person over millions of people just because this random person is "here", which is just your own personal outlook on time and space. Which is fine, just be aware that that's what you're asking.

I'm not contesting what I said was unnecessary, I know this because I spoke in anger and and shot of a quick snarky reply. I could have packaged my disgust, and my will to do battle, more smartly. I could have been funny about it, or a million other things. But generally speaking, I still think your idea of civility is basically cannibalism with a fork and a knife. Or how does that expression go, penny-wise pound-foolish, something like that. If anything, I regret that word choice because when people literally drool, it's often because of health problems or old age or other reasons that have no business being mentioned in one sentence with someone... advocating, now there's a perfectly lifeless word... people being "kettled and subjugated". But otherwise, what makes me care for a sick person, what makes me give a friendly answer to a child, what motivates me to all sorts of "civil" things is also the exact same thing that makes me irate when I hear talk like the above. It's not even the same material, it's the same element. I respect your wishes in so far as this is private property, but I'm not holding my hat saying sorry for being out of line.
I'd love to see legit speakers come give talks about conservative philosophies such as those of Jeremy Bentham or Edmund Burke or other more modern conservative philosophers (though those are pretty hard to find nowadays). There's quite a few valid philosophies that could support the view that the immigration executive order is actually a good thing. The problem is that, when you invite a demagogue instead, by definition, you're not going to provide any new piece of information to the attendants, but only to appeal to their desires and prejudice rather then their rational. And frankly, that kind of appeal is dangerous to a person. As an example, someone who's a Debby downer and constantly reminds you of the worse case scenarios of everything will in fact eventually get to you, even if you don't want it too. You'd had been best to silence that person from the start, and make sure none of his message even gets processed by your brain.
"field" would be a strong word as it's more of a diy hobby thing, but in the world of FPV drones I'm excited for flight controllers with integrated 4-in-1 ESCs (electronic speed controllers). Wouldn't say it changed the game but makes it so much easier to build these quadcopter and opens up new possibilities.
It's on you explain, set boundaries and manage expectations.
Anyone, is there also a study like this where the consumption of red meat (or meat in general) affects the risk of overall cancer?
> You have to make assumptions to reach a conclusion.

Science isn't about assumptions, it's about evidence. People make assumptions every day, that's unavoidable, but we should be alert to the fact that it's not science, and be appropriately skeptical. We need to be able to separate the wheat from the chaff. That's all I'm saying.

Apropos: https://youtu.be/b240PGCMwV0?t=37
I didn't ignore your reasoning, I acknowledged it and said it was not insightful.

Unused CPU instructions are difficult (but not impossible!) to deprecate for completely different reasons than the critical functionality of line discipline that is used all day every day and for which nobody has proposed a viable alternative.
Today's startups are, mostly, tomorrow's failed businesses. The majority of the most successful startups of the last 15 years have generally used tried-and-true battle tested technologies in their successes: Java, C, C++ and PHP.

This isn't to say Go doesn't belong in that list, but simply to reinforce my point that what startups are using today shouldn't be an indicator of high quality technology that can (or should) gain more traction and use in the future.
Columbian Exchange
It is not necessarily easy to recognize when a loop is a map or filter -- I think that's the issue. It's why someone like McSweeney would bring it up.

The Python approach -- where maps and loops share a lot of syntax -- is maybe the middle way. On the one hand, it's not an approach that gives rise to `.map()`, `.collect()`, `.flat_map()` and so forth; on the other, it's marked out as something returning a result.
So in order to provide incentive for employees to come in 20 minutes early, your company is willing to handicap a percentage of its workforce all day? That doesn't just sound hostile, no, it sounds dumb.
Both local governments and popular opinion in those regions differ from your opinion, although you are still entitled to that opinion.

Local residents and voters have the right to keep others out if their laws allow for it. Outsiders/non-citizens don't get a vote.
Building a Lisp from scratch with Swift
> If you are all like 'lol JS has no types, look at my fancy Scala code' then I'll smack you with my Haskell ADTs.

Gave me a good chuckle... But on a serious note, at least the author is providing a programmatic solution to the problem, albeit being framed rather one-sidedly.
A 70 year fad.
Nvidia, Broadcom, ARM, Mediatek, Samsung... I don't imply they all do perfect job or open-source everything they sell, but there are noticeable amounts of code they put into mainline kernel.
If XP was secure, performant on modern hardware, stable and supported by new programs i would still be using it. More then that the reason i quit windows98 was that warcraft 3 doesn't work on it. Windows 7 configuration menus are god awful and windows10 ones are far worse then that.

You are making a fallacy in saying that old equals bad/ugly. XFCE is keeping it oldschool and can still look amazing (xubuntu looks great IMO).

There's much to talk about when talking about GUI things. Much indeed. Many things are even quantifiable, instead of being pure personal preference. Just remember that Microsoft spent a lot of effort into studies in what culminated to be windows95, while many other projects did not (the study that ended up being gnome3 is a joke in comparison).
To the best of my knowledge, mainstream quantum mechanics assumes continuous spacetime, so the argument that the primary reason it can't be reconciled with general relativity is continuity seems pretty specious to me. And it's possible to come up with a model where the universe is infinite but the visible universe is finite. In fact, I believe FLRW is one such a model, and is supported with high accuracy by the latest experimental observations. So again, your argument doesn't seem that compelling to me.
The presentations from the recently held SNIA PMEM summit would be a great start for a high level intro: http://www.snia.org/pm-summit
https://www.youtube.com/user/SNIAVideo/videos
It depends entirely on what kind of game you are making. There is clearly a market and demand for simple, fun, positive experiences. But there is also a massive market for games exactly like LoL and DotA and CS:GO, where a major part of the experience is failing, losing, feeling horrible about it, and then trying to do better next time. There is an urge for game designers to try to mitigate negative experiences, but in doing so, they make the game. You can't have the feeling of a competative game that ends in a crushing victory without the feeling of crushing defeat.
> You can't build for single-programmer productivity and then retrofit maintainability afterwards

Perhaps my use of the word 'maintain' was confusing. I'm not suggesting that one programmer write such a system and others then take over maintaining it. I'm suggesting that 3 or 4 programmers write (and maintain) such a system together and all be intimately familiar with it.
So many good links here. Most interested in Dynamic Distributed Dimensional Data Model.

What are you working on?
This is actually weaker than the full axiom of choice, but you can still show that no such object is computable.

Presumably this is an ever-present hazard in any proof using the axiom of choice - in this case it is relatively obvious, but how easy is it to accidentally rely on such an uncomputable object in a dusty corner of your proof?
Loops are just implicit goto...

The argument for maps and folds is the same as the argument for structured programming in general: using common/reusable idioms brings clarity and familiarity.
iWoz was really interesting
In the 1970s, the USA sold a large amount of wheat to the USSR in a famous deal.

The contract stipulated that the wheat would contain something like <1% sand. US wheat at the time had effectively no sand at all, so they mixed in 1% of pure sand, staying just within the contract terms.

(I heard this from a friend whose friend knew something about it; in searching I can’t find a source online, so the story might be apocryphal. I also might be off on the precise percentage.)
I enjoy having a machine that ultimately I control. You just can't get the same level of control with Windows, Mac, Android or iPhone. You constantly have to wrestle your wants with the wants of the platform venders.

A key area where this is most apparent these days is privacy. If you want privacy you have to keep a really close eye on Microsoft, Apple and Google every update.

With a Linux Server/Desktop I'm free from their power games.
Mars, Inc. could save us all a lot of trouble by pre-sorting them at the factory!
Thanks for the comments. I would encourage you to attend or watch the recording of the live session once it is done, as it will give a more thorough answer than I can give here as to why. I've talked a little about the motivations for this in my above longer two comments, but briefly here:

1. It matters how much code you can see and work with at a time.

2. This code is using research level new algorithms for solving certain problems in the core compiler that are not a part of the standard toolbox of most programmers, and so, even if you did have the code laid out differently, it wouldn't necessarily be any easier. An early version of one of these new algorithms has been published and is listed in the set of publications:

https://github.com/arcfide/Co-dfns#publications

3. As mentioned above, keeping this code at the same semantic density as the core compiler allows you to read this code in much the same way that you can read the compiler code, making it easier to jump back and forth whenever you want throughout any point in the compiler and not adjust to multiple languages. This applies to the use of single characters.

4. The letters v, z, and s are all semantically meaningful to those working in APL, but they are also globally standardized "for the most part" throughout the compiler so that you know what we are talking about whenever the letter "z" shows up anywhere in the compiler. There are some exceptions, but these are obvious, and local, and can be that way because the use site and definition site are within a couple of lines of each other. So, yes, it's quickly obvious from the context.

5. I have tried many, many times to introduce comments. They almost never help, and almost always hurt.

6. If I were to change the style, it might be easier to understand what a given snippet is doing, but this wouldn't aid in your ability to understand what the whole compiler is doing or how it all fits together. It would be a false sense of understanding because it would be divorced from the broader context. The point of the design the way it is is to encourage you to focus on the macro level design issues, and allow you to see the whole context of the whole compiler more easily.
There are uses for pre with tags embedded.

pre provides the simplified line breaking and usually a monospaced font. However, tags are available to do whatever else.

A major example is that the Vim editor uses pre for formatting syntax colored code to HTML (when you do that with :TOhtml).

The output is a pre block containing various span elements which are styled with CSS.

BTW where in the HTML spec does it say that the interior of pre is parsed differently?

If we are parsing HTML (to Lisp objects or whatever), we should preserve the exact whitespace. The reverse generation should regurgitate the original whitespace.

If we take the license to eliminate newlines, then we ruin pre. The fix is simply not to do that.
How are they controlling for deaths from other causes, e.g. cardiovascular disease? If you're not dead from some other cause then you're going to be more likely to die from cancer, even if vegetables are actually conferring a significant anti-cancer benefit.

I see that they are using people years to track followup, but I'm not clear from the methodology whether this is enough to fully control for this issue.
GMO crops don't really use more pesticides. Very often less.

Nope:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/bethhoffman/2013/07/02/gmo-crops...

FTA:

Overall pesticide use decreased only in the first few years GE crops were used (42 percent between 1998 and 2001) and has since then risen by 26 percent from 2001 to 2010.

By 2011 there were also three times as many herbicide-resistant weeds found in farmer's fields as there were in 2001.

Now, I think the GMO scare out there borders on mindless hysteria. But pesticide and herbicide resistant crops are just... bad.
I had never encountered this setup before either. Hence my unusual solution.
> Particularly for webpages with complicated structures, we have to nest dozens of components from the inside-out, where those callback functions are passed through from parent to child components across layers and layers.

Does anyone have any tips for avoiding this extremely irritating 'props-nesting' (as I like to call it)? I'm pretty new to React, and the one thing that's bugging me about it is that in more complex UI (for example, a toolbar that independently controls a nested component), is how you can't just go through a top-level component directly; you have to go all the way up and down the chain. This gets very messy once you decide to change some of the intermediate components fundamentally.
Yeah but how do you do key distribution and management? The physical security and "forward secrecy" (in the loose sense) afforded by an ephemeral transmission that can only be received in a fixed location is non-negligible [1].

[1] http://www.gdsatcom.com/email/3-22-11.htm
Another oldie but goldie for Windows:

http://www.win.tue.nl/sequoiaview/
ah, not an apple person, didn't have it on my radar...
So that's half an order of magnitude in 70 years - which feels much more "Yeah, I can believe that". (Not that trusting gut-feel is a great way to do science or find truth, but checking facts when your gut feel says "Nope" is always a good idea...)

Also, that's a little bit of an apple to oranges comparison - I wonder what the numbers look like comparing a Concorde-vintage 1976 (or 1969?) 747 with a modern 747? Or even an A380 (Which I guess is the nearest modern counterpart of a mid '70s 747?)
Honest question: this seems like you are making your own PAAS that you need to take care of, why not just use Heroku, etc?
>I believe the biggest advancement in the field of education is going to come with VR

I'm 100% with you on this. I've been saying this since VR became mainstream, I'm dying to start something in the e-learning space that takes advantage of VR/Augmented Reality but have no idea where to start.
The author makes a good point, namely that the Linux desktopspace is too fast a moving target. The Linux kernel is exceptionally stable in its userspace facing APIs (the most important rule Linus holds up is "we never break userspace"). And userspace has been pretty much stable for a long time as well on the API and ABI side. But everything that's regarded with making desktop environments work, the UI toolkits, configuration APIs, essential DE programs, all that jazz is moving at a breakneck speed and more often than not even "minor" version bumps introduce regressions and subtle incompatibilites.

But this problem is not going to be resolved by coalescing all the various Linux distributions into a single vendor model. If anything that would just accelerate the troublemaking processes. What's really required is infusing a culture of high quality engineering, forward thinking and consequence estimation into the community. Focus on fixing bugs and regressions instead of implementing new features.
PDF sucks on mobile and ebook readers. Seriously sucks.

I apologize for the language but I find no other words that work.
Libraries may be a stumbling block for Go, though, because C interop is somewhat slow. Photoshop, Python, Postgres, &c are not all likely to support plugin/extension interfaces based on Go calling convention anytime soon.
No, it just isn't. When I work from home it invariably ends up being a free-for-all from my wife (who works from home full-time and suffers this daily when I'm at the office, the saint that she is) and kids making demands on my time. In order to work "from home" what actually happens is I find a nice, low-traffic coffee shop where 95% of the other patrons are doing the same thing, work odd hours and take an extra long period in the mid-morning to mid-afternoon to take care of appointments and domestic issues.
> you'd want to do caching

That's not what I meant. I understand caching helps.

What I meant is will there ever be a way for caching to happen automatically behind the scenes without me ever having to do anything at all to make all this happen.

For example, the OS caches files, but I don't have to configure the OS file cache by hand. The OS takes care of it.
The perspective in that picture isn't exactly a good one. But there should be enough space to pass by them on the right side. This one is good and shows what I mean with "shopping cart + person".

http://www.lebensmittelzeitung.net/gallery/media/156/4733-de...

Is it? It's a line that's not relevant to you (it's for paying, not for getting out), so I don't see why one shouldn't just pass it?
AV1 Is Making Progress as a Royalty-Free Video Codec Based Off VP9
If Your Team Agrees on Everything, Working Together Is Pointless
We know that processed red meat causes cancer.

The quality of the evidence is very very good.

The strength of the effect is weak.

Because the quality of the evidence is now very good (as good as for smoking) the WHO information was widely misreported as "red meat as bad as smoking".

This is likely to make web searches less useful.

Here's something from the English NHS about it: http://www.nhs.uk/news/2015/10October/Pages/Processed-meat-c...

> A key statistic provided by the infographic is that if everyone stopped smoking, there would be 64,500 fewer cases of cancer a year in the UK, compared with 8,800 fewer cases if everyone stopped eating processed or red meat.
To me that quote says that there's no such thing as a perfect language.

Different tools for different jobs. If you wander too far from the main domain of the language, you'll find quirks and it's maybe better to use something else.
There are actually issues with Windows XP, the only thing is that IMO people learned how to work around those issues.

I think UIs should either change very gradually and only in ways that literally are better, but also have a way of ensuring the options aren't removed entirely, or at the very least if the option is obscure ala options removed in Gnome 2, then they should be kept and allow someone to create a tweaking tool to change them.

If a huge change is to be made, like the Gnome Shell, then it should be done in a development release and ALL of the compatible UI should be kept on the desktop, with an easy UI option to switch between the modes. It turns out that Gnome Shell could do this - but only after a time.

UX and UIs are one of those things you really should be incredibly careful about foisting on anyone. If you do it, you need to do it somewhat gently.
Nope. I have a MIDI keyboard, but it doesn't work half the time, so I rarely bother with it. You can do everything inside the DAW with the MIDI roll or notation editor.
Federated microblogging engine Mastodon 1.0 released
A lot of startups incorporate in Delaware instead of California.
I think you've missed the point of safe spaces.

These are places for people to figure out who they are outside of that "protection" that parents and the rest have put over these people their whole lives until this point.

The reason people go a little crazy in college is because they're forced to confront the idea they've never had the autonomy to be themselves before. They're exposed to people who lead lives that they had no idea were a possibility, let alone something they might want to become.

And the reason the left is practically universal in higher education the same reason why the left side of the spectrum is represented pretty much universally across every other government in the developed world: Education forces you to consider things larger than yourself and your little tribe.

You want the students in the "real world" to consider things the same way you do, but when they reject your opinions, it's not because they're brainwashed.

It's because you've not presented an effective argument.

When they show up in masses to shout down your ideology, I'm curious why you don't question your approach.

But no, it's the children that are wrong, isn't it Principal?
KDE: Filelight, https://docs.kde.org/trunk5/en/kdeutils/filelight/introducti...

Windows: WinDirStat