skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> REST became popular when it was detailed and promoted by Roy Fielding as part of his doctoral dissertation entitled Architectural Styles and the Design of Network-based Software Architectures in the year 2000. Roy is well known for his contributions to development of the web, especially the HTTP specification.

So far so good.

> Roy advocated using the request methods he helped define in the HTTP standards to impart meaning to HTTP requests.

Not even close.

REST may be one of the most misunderstood ideas in all of computer science. As described in Fielding's dissertation, REST is a software architectural style whose main idea is that hypertext drives state changes, aka Hypermedia as the Engine of Application State (HATEOAS). Fielding leaves the transport protocol as an implementation detail.

In other words, an automated agent (API consumer) should interact with an API in the same way that a human interacts with a Web site. User browses to well-known URL. Page displays content with links. User clicks on a link. And so on.

A human doesn't need to read documentation on using any particular website any more than an automated agent should need to carry service-specific instructions on using an API. Media types and hyperlinks do all the heavy lifting.

The stuff about structured URLs and response codes came later, was created by others, and has almost nothing to do with REST's central idea. It's a different architectural style altogether.

From Fielding himself:

> I am getting frustrated by the number of people calling any HTTP-based interface a REST API. Today’s example is the SocialSite REST API. That is RPC. It screams RPC. There is so much coupling on display that it should be given an X rating.

http://roy.gbiv.com/untangled/2008/rest-apis-must-be-hyperte...
Quote of the day: " Uber isn't much more than a bro-themed ponzi scheme"
I see your point. I guess it also requires much larger screen. Because if 1 pixel man will be moving on my 27-inch fullhd screen, even though on 4k display it will be 4 pixels, it still be same physical size and not much easier to notice :)
Why isn't anyone talking about the lack of funding for universities and educational institutes? Isn't that too a part of the problem?

Or is there no lack of funding?
The cynic in me believes there will never be an IPO. They've started to hide their balance sheets, even from large investors. Their valuation is already sky-high, and it's basically impossible for them to realistically return 10x for new investors, but the risks are higher than they were two or three years ago.

They're a time bomb financially, a mine field politically, and a toxic swamp morally. The Uber->Under transition is just a matter of months.
Airflow is more about scaling your number of processes, not the size of your data. It's relevant if you want to have a higher-level system for managing processes independent of what those processes are.
It would work if it wasn't "pot calling kettle." Some people don't like to take responsibility for their own shit? You don't say, Travis, you don't say.
The day Amazon S3 storage stood still
Seeing this apology (that I didn't think was necessary) just made me more angry about their failure to acknowledge anything is wrong with their culture of harassment.

Obviously they can't actually acknowledge the harassment issues because it would put them in a terrible place legally, but it's funny how that omission makes this such a negative PR move in my mind. Better to say nothing at all and just keep pretending they can unicorn-horn themselves through the rough patches?
There is wide disagreement about drivers employment status.

There are several localities that have had legal status ruled one way or the other [1][2], but it's not settled enough to be able to claim that uber drivers aren't employees.

Uber, on the other hand, certainly would like to classify them as such.

[1] https://www.cnet.com/news/uber-uk-court-ruling-drivers-emplo...

[2] http://www.theverge.com/2016/4/21/11485424/uber-suit-califor...
Uber Case Could Be a Watershed for Women in Tech
I think it also has to do with how Uber (and its competitors) changed the Black Car market. From my conversations with Black Car drives back in 2011, they were using Uber to fill in time between there more lucrative contracts. In that way, it was a win/win. As Uber (and its competitors) became more popular, the more valuable contracts have dried up.Uber changed the economics of the Black Car business. I submit that if Uber had not done it, Lyft and others would have. That doesn't make it easier for the drivers, though.
Science support benefits of Creatine supplement
Their self driving cars is the end game.
>> The program does the mind-numbing job of interpreting commercial-loan agreements

A computer program that interprets written language -- natural-language processing -- is reliant on highly-advanced, complex algorithms and AI to do the interpreting. This is much deeper than mindless "automation" and requires absolute trust in the accuracy of the underlying algo (or, hiring back some of those humans).
That's not accurate either. Uber has maintained from the start that their driver's are independent contractors. You can make all sorts of verbal/casual agreements, but if "we will ensure you have X amount of work at Y rate for Z amount of time" is not written into your contract, you have no right to complain.

Uber or any other company are not responsible for any tools a contractor might buy in order to complete their work, unless explicitly stated in a written agreement.
No, but it is plausible that some of its NATO allies are not quite as disciplined or altruistic, and IIRC, the treaty allows dissemination of weapons technology (and associated knowledge) among the allied states.
The driver took a risk, and went is possibly going into bankruptcy because of it. He did this based off of the pay structure which Uber offered him.

They changed that pay structure, and he got screwed, with little recourse. He had an opportunity to complain to the head of the organization which made that change and took it.

The CEO in this situation could have been more supportive, understanding and offered some recourse... even if it was just to email some HR or driver support person at Uber, that would have been a better response.

Instead the CEO felt attacked, kicked in his defensive mode, was flippant and dismissive of this persons struggles. Zero compassion or empathy, that's the problem here.
But I enjoy going to Costco.
I'm sorry; this is not about PR, and not about getting caught. This is about the leaders of our most admired and successful companies being assholes who couldn't care less about anything but power and profit. And it's changing, right now; because we're reaching the point where people had enough of the bullshit.
I have a lot of trouble believing that the author of this page has much experience with iOS development. As such it calls into question the rest of their evaluations. Cocoa programming is the place I can speak intelligently, so I'm going to limit my remarks to that.

Let's start with Objective-C which is being listed as "Enlightenment" on the cusp of "Productivity". Objective-C has been around for 30 years. Check out the Swarm Library. An Objective-C library developed first in the 90's for research into CA. I won't go into the whole history, but it's been a productive language since the mid 90's.

In Text Editors, Xcode is listed as "Challenged" by what? There's no mention of AppCode at all. The Cocoa IDE marketplace is so small I cannot name another editor without going to google. Listing it as "Challenged" may appeal to people who aren't experienced with it, but it's still the accepted tool for Cocoa development.

For iOS Development... I know React Native is popular among newcomers, almost exclusively because they'd rather not learn a new language, but I can name exactly 0 mobile professionals who use it. Yes, I know Facebook uses it. Facebook apps are objectively terrible. They get away with it because React Native is moderately better than mobile web.

/rant
I don't want to 'stick up' for the CEO, as there's lot about uber I fundamentally dislike - especially the way they typify this 'race to the bottom' business model which seems to be becoming prevalent.

However, I really think for this incident he has nothing to apologise for.
It is likely that the board has the legal power to fire him, but not the willpower, which would be due to him having control of most of the board's voting seats.
The difference between 11gb and 12gb isn't meaningful for most users of ML.

Yes, there are problems where squeezing in a slightly larger model than 11gb would give slightly better results; but that size of problem also would generally require a lot of computing power, at that point you're not comparing specs of a single card but benchmarks and scaling for clusters of multi-gpu machines.
This isn't anywhere near as horrific as the first Big Dog video. The movements are much more graceful and no one was kicking anyone.

I'd go as far as to call it a Gobot (after the Bluth, not the cartoon franchise).
I also don't get it. It can happen to anyone to lose their cool and it's not like he's insulted the driver or anything (in fact the driver is more aggressive). Also I'm not sure the driver should be video tapping his customers without their authorisation.

Maybe it's a way for Uber to divert attention from the recent scandals and allow the CEO to apologise for something that's actually quite minor compared to the rest.
This. I think it says something about the overall decline in the level of discourse that the acceptability of this kind of behavior by a CEO engaging with an employee, vendor, or otherwise is even arguable.
> This is not capitalism and is certainly not free trade

It most certainly is, sadly.

> handing over jobs that should have remained in the West

Capitalism recognises no "should" other than the market.

> Indian companies have outsourced jobs in India to outside of India

Does it matter whether the jobs were in India in the first place? India is certainly an export market for the US: https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/south-central-asia/india

Three billion dollars of aircraft! That's got to be worth a job or two at Boeing or Lockheed-Martin. And then there's a little note at the bottom:

"Sales of services in India by majority U.S.-owned affiliates were $16.4 billion in 2011 (latest data available), while sales of services in the United States by majority India-owned firms were $9.3 billion."
Can someone give an actual moral reason why this is bad?

Can you explain to me why where you geographically located needs to matter? Or why Americans should be or feel entitled to jobs? If someone is willing to do it cheaper, than a business is dumb to pay more just to reinforce nationalism.

This weird entitlement around jobs in America is strange to me. I appreciate the living hell out of my job, because I know it could be done by someone outside the US for cheaper (and my Company has a tech office in Bangalore). You can't appreciate something and expect it/be entitled to it at the same time.

Regardless of the rest though, that moral question is what matters - what is immoral about hiring people outside of your country? Why is nationalism considered a virtue?
right, because nobody on here has read Zero To One, so nobody will recognize that "define yourself as a new category if your real category is highly regulated" game.

and because taxi companies don't already compete with car ownership.

sure.
What's missing from this apology is any statement about what, specifically, he's going to do to change.

If you're reading this, Travis, here are some ideas:

- Overhaul transparency at Uber because you don't know how to monitor your culture & doing so takes longer to learn than letting in some light

- Mindfulness meditation (lots of it)

- Become an Uber driver for a month and only live off what you make driving. Do the Undercover Boss thing.

- Brain programming (shameless plug: I invented methods for doing this & they double as mindfulness practices)
You just described the Nissan Leaf. And, yes, it has a hood. That's where the accessory battery and wiper fluid live (and some other stuff that needs access).
Gimme a break. It's a fauxpology designed to wedge people into a "well, at least he admitted he was wrong" mindset so that it all quiets down and people stop talking about the fundamental problem with Uber: it replaces solid jobs providing public transportation financed from public taxation with a private systems in which the individual peons are powerless, poorly paid and racing to the bottom.
Sorry but the words "I must fundamentally change and grow up" are unbecoming and not befitting of a CEO. As genuine and sincere as it may have been intended - if at all - it just comes across pathetic, weak and a failure. No one wants apologies. You're the fucking CEO, we want ACTIONS.
The web was also supposed to be only about hyperlinked documents.
The strategy here is that Kalanick is trying to kill two birds with one stone. Pretend he's apologizing for the sexual harassment issue, when he's really just apologizing for this one incident. From what I can see here on HN it's working.

The cynic in me is telling me that he planned this whole thing, down to paying the driver to tailor his arguing perfectly.
Travis surely realized he should have stopped once driver went ballistic at him with $97k. He should have just uttered: "Have a good day" or something neutral, stand up and leave. There is no win situation for a CEO arguing with angry people the same way as they do, even if he knows he is right. I believe that's what he meant by "fundamentally change and grow up".
Mozilla's donation page says: We are proudly non-profit, non-corporate.

I don't know the ins and out of Mozilla dual identity as a foundation/corporation. But it'd be unsettling to learn that part of your donations to an open-source project is financing a corporate acquisition.
> if [X] is not written into your contract, you have no right to complain.

Except that's not the way the law works, and there are cases where things in contracts are not enforced and things outside contracts are, because the law is all about how reasonable something is.
D has no overhead syntax for CTFE, "comptime" is from the context.
Airflow doesn't have anything to do with data storage, movement or processing. It's a way to chain commands together in such a way so that you can define "do Z after Y a Z finish", for example. Many people use it like a nice version of cron with a UI, alerting, and retries.
Google Assistant now has a slang dictionary, beer guide, and men’s fashion tips
Before you issue your fatwa, for the record, I don't smoke tobacco. Nor do I have a problem with places banning smoking -- I just believe it should never have been a law.

> Surely we banned it because it is highly irritating to people who don't smoke?

That part is correct.

> The medical aspect was used to win the argument with selfish smokers who don't give a crap about the well being of other people.

Stated another way, the second-hand smoke research was glommed onto by puritanicals who enjoy bossing people around - because the irration argument would never stand up in a legislative committee or a court of law - it would have rightfully been called a blue-nose law.

Maybe the term "bossing people around" is a bit loaded but without the second-hand smoke studies, no one would have felt the need to ban smoking everywhere. Another system might have emerged where some places ban smoking and others don't. There's a restaurant in my town that banned minors instead of smokers to comply with our state law (actually not a bad trade, imo.)

But that wasn't good enough for some -- smoking had to be banned everywhere -- because certain people felt entitled to walk into an arbitrary venue and not have to smell cigarette smoke -- hence the use of the terms "puritanical" and "bossing people around."
How I built Programming Podcasts
Travis is nothing, he never was anything. People got momentarily confused by his alpha ego and the big pile of money, but they're catching up fast.
This isn't really responsive to my comment.
I grew up in cars with column shifters and front bench seats, but they were all automatic (my mom had a 1985 Oldsmobile Ninety-Eight Regency (lemon!) and a 1993 Pontiac Bonneville SE). I can't imagine the awkwardness of operating a manual in that position.
I've started working on a code generator for Airflow. Not primarily because I needed dynamic jobs, but more because I didn't want to keep writing the Airflow boilerplate.

I imagine I'll eventually need to add some sort of management system to move these dynamic jobs in and out of Airflow to keep them from bloating the database or cluttering the UI.
I had similar feeling regarding their experience with iOS.
Show HN: Tired of the non-portability of my playlists, I wrote my own format
How does Doom take advantage of 4k?
Even with Kotlin Native in mind, we have no plans to break Kotlin's backwards compatibility guarantees, and we do plan to support the new JVM features such as value types. So if Kotlin works well as a Java enhancer for you today, it will only work better in that role in the future.
I know this... I was just trying to make an analogy for others. (Poorly, it seems)

It's the same IT structure that you'd have at any major company of the same size. And even at that scale you have good IT departments and bad ones.

However, it can be rare for the University IT systems and research systems to share too much infrastructure, aside from maybe a building with common networking and power. For one thing, University IT typically supports Windows desktops and servers while research systems are by and large Linux/Unix based. They also have different security requirements. Research usually doesn't deal with PHI, and so doesn't have the same backup security concerns that IT does.

In the specific case of UCSF, they already made the decision to offsite all of their business systems (I think it was because of local power costs, seismic concerns, and lack of a modern datacenter). But they still maintain some research computing onsite, but it is not centralized.
Ask HN: Why doesn't Uber pay drivers using free market bidding?
There seems to be a lot of debate on things regarding the amount which companies like Uber and Lyft pay their drivers, whether surge pricing is ethical, etc. But all of this stems from the fact that the company directly sets the price of the service.

To me, it seems like it would make more sense to let drivers set their own price per mile / minute and to have to service automatically select the cheapest nearby driver. That would also give the user the ability to request a higher rated driver or quicker pickup (and pay more) or a lower rated driver or longer wait time (and pay less).

Why haven't they gone this path? Are there ecomnomic considerations in not thinking of? Is it just a matter of being too complex to implement?
The user never was in control, given that the majority of the logic runs on a server that the user never sees or has access to.
That's not true in any way. Verbal contracts are harder to enforce, but enforceable they are. And if you say something that both parties agree on in good faith, you can't just back out of it!

That's not the ways things work, and it's not even how they are meant to work.
The Origin of the idiom: “March comes in like a lion, and goes out like a lamb”
> When you encapsulate most of your operations under POST you basically create your arbitrary protocol. No assumptions can be made about your service.

And you shouldn't make such assumptions, you should just use the input parameters exposed in hypermedia which you obtained from a public service entry point. It's called encapsulation and that's REST. Again, what's the problem? All I hear is complaining that REST doesn't work the way other architectures work. Big surprise.

Certainly REST's HATEOAS can sometimes make a service less efficient as compared to some alternatives (so it can preserve encapsulation and support upgrade), but that's not the claim you're making. You're claiming some kind of insufficiency.

> The problem would be that it wouldn't be REST compatible. You should clearly read a few books on the subject. Friendly advice, not a snarky comment.

I've read Fielding's thesis, thanks. I understand REST perfectly well.

> REST already has idempotent mutating operations, like PUT and DELETE. It's not just GET that's idempotent.

So what? PUT and DELETE don't have the necessary semantics. GET representation, apply operation listed in representation via POST. What more do you need?

> Honestly sorry if I sound snarky, but after 10 years on working with such APIs, and after reading countless books on the subject, it never ceases to amaze me how people still think that GET and POST are enough

You still haven't pointed out a single reason why GET+POST are not enough or how they "break REST". I'm not asking for "a ton of bibliography", I'm asking for a single example. An existence proof that my claim is false. It should be trivial if this shit ton of bibliography exists.

Frankly, most of this vaunted "bibliography" since Fielding's thesis has been non-REST crap. It's amazing how easily people can misunderstand a 150 page thesis.
Probably not, but most 'laws' are generalisms drawn from repeated observation as opposed to iron-clad rules, anyway.
But then who do you expect to pick up the slack? Taxis? The government??
5G and Autonomous Driving
What no c++? Perhaps it should be stateofwebdev.com. Or web.stateofdev.com ;)
Yes, I still remember the days when we could have core Linux experience on one 1.44MB floppy disk. This keeps reminding me how bloated most modern software are.
> a CEO of a billion dollar company should have been coached about how to politely react to criticism.

yeah, he should have been coached on it by his parents when he was five years old.
Put another way, only in the US do businesspeople have to publically apologise for not-being-nice. Towards the end of the video, Kalanick was brusque and even demeaning, but I don't think his position as CEO grants me the right to get high-and-mighty on my keyboard and demand he "grow up." Nor do I expect much insight into anyone's character can be gleaned from a 30-second argument in the backseat of an Uber.

I'm not saying Kalanick is a good (or a bad) CEO. But his job is to build the company, not to serve as its' Mascot-in-Chief.
On the flip side, it's also frustrating to know you're right about something, but because your co-workers don't have the same education as you they completely ignore you.
The JS devs don't really need wasm. JS works just fine in browser. I find the use cases mentioned (js app + high performance wasm modules) limited to a very small niche. WASM is supposed to be a target language. Are they trying to convert current web devs to C++/rust devs? It doesn't make any sense to me. If wasm was designed just to help JS to do more then it is doomed to fail.
The front page returns a 500 error and is blank. On the upside, I like the minimalism!
I definitely wouldn't use it if it was more expensive. Heck, I'd probably become more motivated to save up and buy a car if Uber wasn't so affordable and accessible.
Totally. Ban him or Sell it to him. Deescalation or scorched earth. Enough of this pesky middle-ground.
The Future of the Gig Economy
It is if nothing else a bad look for technology workers, who are in the business of eliminating jobs. If a business can shed 50% of its payroll through efficiencies from technology, we cheer. If it can shed 50% of its payroll through efficiencies in sourcing, we break out the pitchforks. That's a morally incoherent position.
PUT and DELETE are just HTTP verbs and don't directly have anything to do with REST. You can support all verbs and have a garbage REST implementation, and (while obviously more difficult) have a great REST implementation for a handful of verbs.