skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The history of "higher level" instructions isn't good. The DEC VAX had an assembly language intended to make life easier for assembly programmers, but it slowed the machine down. The Intel IAPX 432 had lots of bells and whistles, but was really slow. The RISC machines with lots of registers turned out not to be all that useful, and too much register saving and restoring was required. RISC is a win until you want to go superscalar and have more than one instruction per clock. Then it's a lose. Stack machines that run some RPN form like Forth or Java code have been built, but don't go superscalar well.

A useful near-term feature would be zero-cost hardware exceptions on integer overflow. This is an error in both Java and Rust, and tends to be turned off at compile time because it has a performance penalty. The problem is that people will want to be able to unwind and recover, which means exact exceptions and a lot of compiler support for them.

If you could figure out how to do zero-cost subscript checking, that would be a step forward. That check needs additional info about bounds, which usually means a delay.

I used to be a fan of schemes for safely calling from one address space to another. i386 almost has this, with call gates, which don't quite do enough to be useful. A few machines have had hardware context switching, but that hasn't been a big performance improvement. All that has to be tightly integrated with the OS or it's a lose. It's an enhancement to Plan 9, not anything anybody uses.

The same is true of fancy schemes for inter-CPU communication, but that probably needs more attention. Like it or not, we have to figure out what to do with large numbers of non-shared-memory CPUs. Some way to set up memory-safe message passing between non-shared-memory CPUs without involving the OS after setup would be useful.

An IOMMU that allows drivers in user space with minimal performance degradation is a good thing. Those exist.
Opera works - Safari is working on it? At least in my case, we sell web based phone system and pretty much that means we don't target IE/Edge or Safari simply due to the lack of WebRTC.
How to Work from Home and Get Stuff Done – An In-Depth Guide
The problem here is that publishing a single paper is often the product of months if not years of work. Saying: now add more work without more grant money, is going to be difficult to swallow. Even worse, it departments need to hire even more PhDs who are unemployable after they graduate.
Rolling a virtual DOM
WaitForMultipleObjects sucks, but that's because it got very little love since Windows 95. That's because Microsoft seems to have completely abandoned the Reactor (select/epoll wake-on-readiness) pattern in favor of the Proactor (IOCP-like wake-on-event/completion) pattern.

With the proactor pattern, you register events you care about explicitly, and your event-loop gets the next event to handle and schedules the respective callback/coroutine/future to handle that event.

With the reactor pattern you don't have explicit registration for completion status when you do an I/O operation, and you need to explicitly specify the file descriptors you want to select on in the point where you select on them.

Many people (including the author of the OP article) think that proactor is superior, and this was what the Windows guy in the parent post was referring to. In Windows you're NEVER SUPPOSED to use any version of select (including WSAAsyncSelect or WaitForMultipleObjects) if you have a large number of events. They don't scale.

Instead, Microsoft decided to put its scaling effort into the proactor approach, which they introduced in Windows NT 3.5 -almost a decade before Linux came out with epoll - and this was the right way to do async I/O on Windows ever since.

Linux, on the other hand, chose to perfect the reactor model, and with epoll it gave a very powerful select-like reactor implementation[1].
So yes, if you specifically want to program a reactor, go with Linux. Reactor-centric software and libraries (like libev or nginx) just don't scale on Windows. But that doesn't mean async I/O on Windows sucks - it's just optimized for a different model.

[1] kqueue could be better, but I don't know it well enough to make a call. And while it's I/O events are readiness based, as far as I understand it's general enough that it can be used to implement a proactor as well.
Publishing poorly-written crap will make you look worse than publishing nothing at all.

There's already a terrible stigma around negative results. Grant committees and tenure committees would subconsciously like to believe that you are not a scientist who need to test hypotheses, but a clairvoyant superhero who only has correct hypotheses. Yes, this is ridiculous and anti-scientific.
> (and the ETSA is already enough of a hassle)

I don't get this part? Can you clarify what part is a hassle? ESTA just seems great to me: fill a form online and get (most of the time) an "immediate tourist visa".

When you're from a country that isn't in the ESTA program, then it can be a hassle!

You don't really get a visa, but an approval for visa exemption I believe.
I agree... I remember an episode from "Get Smart" (60s TV show) where they make an joke on the dangers of "artificial sweeteners".

(If I had the money, I would just buy fruit, stevia extract, Zevia, and occasionally eat "real sugar" products... just to be on the safe side.)
It is allows malicious code to scan ports. It allows easy building of difficult to manage tunnels (never mind corkscrew and port 443 SSH servers breaking out of 90% of corp networks I have been on via their HTTP/S proxy)
For a temporary fixed, I prepend 'www.' to all the links. It could be improved by having all the related frequently-used url of the sites listed e.g. other subdomains. Thanks!
There is alot of terrible history that isn't covered in a simple investors letter. I think the larger point he was trying to make in the letter was that the American economy works better because it has created a place where talent from anywhere in the world can succeed.

One of the hard lessons our society has learned is that putting so much energy into holding a group of people back hurts both those people and society as a whole. Of course, lately I'm wondering whether we need to relearn that lesson.
Bill them for every single second of work. Perhaps it's because I come from a family of lawyers, but when that happens the customer simply receives a bill saying

Research: 40 hours.
Not entirely true - at least from my experience studying in Australia. The first year of my degree was about a 50/50 split between the Engineering faculty and other faculties subsequent years were almost entirely (95%+) engineering faculty.

Year 1 was courses like:
Calculus, Linear Algebra, Statistics, Physics, Chemistry, intro to comp sci (non eng faculty)
Statics/Dynamics, intro to Electrical eng., intro to Materials, Engineering Management (eng faculty)

Years 2-4 were devoted to your specific engineering major there was some cross major subjects. I.e I majored in materials engineering I Studied fluid Dynamics and Welding alongside mech eng students, studied Benefication alongside mining engineers. Solid mechanics was with civil engineers.

The course was pretty tightly proscribed we got very little choice in terms of electives. I took one elective outside of the engineering faculty and that was in my fourth year (particle physics).
Most clients pay for you to solve a business problem for them. Assuming you're sticking within legal/ethical confines, the how of how you get from problem to resolution is immaterial to the client.

As others have said, find someone who can get the answers you need, and pay them. Even if your margin is reduced a bit, you're still doing what the client wants and needs - solving their business problem.

There is no shame in asking for help. Should a similar situation present itself in the future, I'd recommend being quicker about asking for help, when you reach the point where you need it. :)
But how do you do that when you're working with custom-built hardware that you have the only extant prototype of?

I guess I can put up a freelancer-wanted ad and specify that we'd need to collaborate over skype. Basically I'd be hiring a consultant, I guess.
The real question for me is: Is this happening more than it was before, or is it just being reported more?
The US consumes a disproportionate amount of oil and especially gasoline - that is not true for the rest of the world. On global average I believe my statement is correct, more data always welcome. For example, China: http://crudeoilpeak.info/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/China_pe...
There definitely does seem to be a bias against academia in industry. From my experience applying to jobs, most employers seem to value 1 year in industry more than 5 years in academia. The data science field is flooded with academic applicants right now, don't believe the rumors. But it can happen, I know of physics postdocs over 40 who transitioned to industry, and grad students do it fairly often.
I feel like there is a huge upcoming market for well designed developer-centric tools that allow developers to use stuff like SELinux without also becoming a sysadmin. SELinux feels like a tool only a system admin could love. Puppet (or Chef, Ansible etc) feel like only a tool a release automation engineer could love.

Startups and small companies rarely spend enough on operations and I feel as if there is bit of a death by a thousand paper cuts across the board for productivity and security due to tools written for sysadmins, and "devops" engineers.
Really found the community and structure of freeCodeCamp to be amazing for me to make progress. The actual teaching is not very detailed- they show you a little but then intend that you learn to Google and use the documentation to find stuff out. I recommend having some other source of learning in parallel with FCC. Can also be free.
This is honestly a really funny answer. It might not be the right answer for me right now, but the lawyer bit is kind of hilarious.
> nothing short of a Bernie Sanders style revolution is going to slow this process down

Or, to provide a counter point, a Libertarian revolution.

And I don't mean Trump's bastard version of Libertarianism that just means removing regulations from companies.

I mean the kind that lets people or all color, religion, sex, orientation, and place or origin live their life free and keep the money they earn.

Under a Libertarian system border agents that overstep and infringe on the liberties of people (citizens or not) would be taken to task. And if we treat the environment as the commons, it would certainly be better for the environment than under Trump as well. [1]

The poor would be helped in this scenario because instead of being thrown in jail for drug abuse it would be treated as a public health issue. And predatory government welfare programs (ones designed to keep you on them forever rather than help you get on your feet) would be gone. Under Sanders those would increase.

Now the "Libertarian Utopia" has it's drawbacks. I'm not going to pretend it is all roses. But I think it would be better for everyone than a Bernie Sander's style revolution and definitely better than Trump.

[1] Example: Trump removed regulation from coal companies wanting to pollute the water. But a principled Libertarian could argue that such pollution infringes on the liberties of those who have to drink from or have wells that get fed from that water. Likewise, if a company wants to build a pipeline through your land and you say no, it's not happening sorry, find somewhere else to put your pipeline.
Student loans are now almost entirely held by the taxpayer.
I wonder if those stories that started appearing in the media since the Trump ban order are really showing a true change in US border control actions, or are they just a hot topic so both travelers and media are more eager to report on that.
It is likely that those kind of detentions were happening for years, but they didn't got much news coverage.
After all if you don't like Trumps policies you will happily read about related stories as it confirms what you already believe in.

Googling for some data yields some results, but those seem to be big immigration numbers, rather than incidental short detentions for random travelers, so it's hard for me to draw any conclusion. Examples:
http://cmsny.org/immigration-detention-behind-the-record-num...
https://www.ice.gov/removal-statistics/2016

I think it's best to not get carried away just because a few people got detained. It seems a bit too little to call it policy shift for border control officers, at least as long it stays just incidental issue. FUD is always quick to spread and hard to fight against.
Dropbox is using an unsigned binary to install kernel extensions on your Mac
Thanks to the USA, those body scanners have infected the Australian airports already (for international departures).
Oh the irony of leakers leaking information about an anti-leak meeting.

This is how a dictatorship starts in 2017.
Well, I wouldn't bet against him giving it a shot.
If this plays out as outlined, browsers would natively tie the comments to your site. That's the difference.

Mentioned above, like making restaurants display live scrolling Yelp reviews at the front door.

If not, then, perhaps more like Twitter.
Seems interesting. Biggest question that popped up immediately is what happens when my app inevitably outgrows Baaasic's functionality?
"One already had a degree in software engineering..." There's a whole other issue right there.
You could have a pool of them, right? Or would you have to actually tear it down after each packet
Posix is a great standard, but you need an implementation to actually run (and test) on. I've used dash for this as well, but heirloom sh should be pretty close (and at worst probably a subset and therefore safe).
All of the problems outlined are relevant whether you pre-fork into multiple processes or use different threads. I don't see what it has to do with pthreads.
I think the notion that negative outcomes are capital is a good one. And if the research has public money involved then we have a right to see them so we are not spending dwindling public money on unnecessary redundancy (as opposed to productive or confirmatory kinds.)

The second point about open sourcing tech that do not achieve its goal is also a good point. People who do that with great docs etc get a lot of respect. People who dump badly done work do not.

Businesses that fail but care about their customers often "donate" them to a competitor.

I think these ideas are quite valid and can and should be realized more often.
I have a lot of managing experience. Can I send you my resume? I'm a C Zerg user on the iccup server.
There is no "market" for (undergraduate) student loan lending any longer, AFAIK. The whole shebang is run by the Department of Education.
I didn't say necessarily a PhD in machine learning. I think, generally speaking, that a technical PhD vs an MBA could make for a better data scientist.

This said, I don't have an MBA, and most of the MBA people I know are not technical at all or try to stay away from the "technicalities". There's for sure a huge need of technically and business savvy people.
> Given int x and int y, the type of "x/y" is specified explicitly given the typing rules of the language. And that's why programmers rightly expect that "int x = 5, y = 2; double z = x/y;" yields z=2.0, not z=2.5

Red herring. Kahan advocated the approach of K&R C. K&R C didn't perform the division of two integers in floating
point. Your example would be 2 in K&R C too.

> the unintuitive FLT_EVAL_METHOD==2 semantics can be optimized into the less confusing FLT_EVAL_METHOD==0 semantics in many cases.

The example given is not "optimization" at all, it's required by the definition of IEEE 754, mostly designed by Kahan.

> That doesn't change the fact that they're confusing semantics.

I see that as confusion from you repeatedly misdirecting the discussion to the "FLT_EVAL_METHOD" which is neither what Kahan wrote in his Java paper, nor what's in IEEE 754 and even less in K&R C.

Disclaimer: I actually studied IEEE 754 shortly after it was standardized, and followed Kahan's work afterwards. The first C I've learned was K&R C, directly from their first book. I've implemented some hardware doing some IEEE 754 operations completely to the letter of the standard (to the last bit, rounding direction and trap, the control of rounding directions and "meaningful" trap handling is also what Kahan complained that Java didn't do) and implemented some compilers that used x87.
I know this is the opposite of the question you asked, but I'm in this spot and I hoped my answer might be interesting.

I'm literally going the other direction. I've got a sysadmin background, with little coding experience. Getting put in a DevOps role is how I'm learning to code more than just bash scripts.

Chef stuff has me neck deep in Ruby. I'm wishing I'd have gotten into this 20 years ago.
> The Constituion isn't the end all be all law of the land.

But the Constitution says it is. If one law says "you can't do that" and Congress does THAT THING, what is the point? The Supreme Court just says "living document" and lets Congress do whatever.

> I'm unsure what the problem is with the federal government legislating laws into existence.

They're legislating things that Constitution says they don't have the power to do.
As someone peripherally involved with certain VR indie communities, I'd say it's simply that indies do what they want, and there are a lot of people who are extremely passionate about VR. As far as money goes, VR users are very hungry for apps right now, so it's a small but vigorous market.
How did they test the $10 million dollar system empirically? Did they send it on 500 missions before it was certified? The first mission has to start somewhere at some price... SpaceX will get there...

ULA is triple the cost of SpaceX and they have an $800 million rider with the DOD for "at moments notice" launch. That makes them almost quadruple the price SpaceX. [1]

[1]https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/03/ula-executive-admits...
>But numerical analysts really require being able to specify the semantics of calculations precisely in order to write libraries that mere mortals can use to get the approximate right answer.

>A quick perusal of any numerical analysis textbook should convince you that order of evaluation, order of truncation, overflow modes, and the like are very relevant for being able to write a library that has the right order of error.

I see your point. I've done more than peruse numerical analysis textbooks, and as an old-school CPU logic designer, I've forgotten more about implementing floating point than most programmers know to start with.

But your point is not in conflict with mine. Numerical analysis requires precise operation ordering. Most people not only don't care, they don't have sufficient understanding of the issues that you could even convince them to care.
On the other hand: https://qz.com/694340/the-richest-families-in-florence-in-14...
I want intimacy.

I don't have any of those fears. If I die, I die, I don't really care.
My understanding of Capitalism indicates this is an opportunity to improve results by experimenting with alternatives.
This definition of engineer is so broad as to be meaningless. There is no "fake world" with "fake world" problems, pretty much everyone is trying to create real world solutions to real world problems. Similarly most jobs are focused on the end goal. A data scientist job usually involves a mix of science and engineering.
I think we've conflated terms.

The lay public thinks "peer reviewed" means that others have tried it and validated the results. What it really tends to mean is that a peer looked at the procedures and results and that it passes the "sniff test" and generally doesn't have any glaring errors.

The more subtle problem is that in some circles, it isn't even that. Since fewer and fewer people want to be the person who damaged someone else's work and/or career, it's a blanket pass.

We're drifting away from scientific study and critical thinking to "reasonable" approaches and not upsetting doctrine and/or your superiors. That looks less and less like science and more like religion.
They do but it's usually not exposed in a useful way. Postgres once had this feature... https://www.postgresql.org/docs/6.3/static/c0503.htm
Does anyone agreeing with this tweet know what bubble sort is? It's fine if you don't but if it's explained to you it should be pretty trivial.

It's like saying "why should I have to write fizz buzz for an interview." Of course you'll never have to write it. You won't even have to use it.

I just need to know if you can write software at all for this software developing job you applied for. Sure, we'll evaluate other, more important, things too.
>> But from a game developer point of view, all this complexity seems like dead weight, when STUN, ICE and TURN are completely completely unnecessary to communicate with dedicated servers, which have public IPs.

> I don't remember this being complex (there was some off-the-shelf library for getting a data connection on the server-side), but YMMV.

I've implemented all of these protocols before for use in VOIP. It's only necessary to discover an open port. Once you have that, it's clear sailing -- you never need to do it again. So I have no idea what the author means. If you have a connection on the open internet, then all of these protocols will realise that they need to do nothing.

Having said that, I have never used WebRTC, so possibly the author is confusing some other WebRTC issue with this.
Are automobiles the largest consumer of oil? I thought it was plastic production and heavy industries?
That was what I resorted to, exactly how it played out. Every store nearby was out, went home, put in an order, had it 58 minutes later to the second.
Not the in process memory, but yes to the stored data, which is arguably as bad.
Still, it's probably safer than skateboarding IRL ;)
Have you successfully configured the ADC on this chip model before? I've been through the ADC docs for the PIC32MX/MZ many times and they're quite dense. It would be very easy to miss some required configuration bits.

In my experience, it's never a problem with the hardware itself, but you never know. I spent 3 weeks last summer debugging a problem with the MRF24WG0MA, and was almost convinced the chip was defective, until I realized that Harmony configured a few things incorrectly (the interrupt polarity being one of them). But yeah, for a show stopper issue that I'm not making any progress with, I would just get in contact with the manufacturer.