skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I work for Faraday (.io, not the car folks), and we use Rust in production. I personally suspect that Rust will continue to grow in popularity.

We've been really happy with Rust. Our Rust programs tend to be fast and resource efficient, and they tend to have few bugs (and most of those are cases of misunderstanding the problem or the spec).

The learning curve tends to be pretty rough for the first week or two, but you can reduce that by pairing with a more experienced Rust developer. And after that, it's pretty smooth sailing. Certainly any C++ programmer should be able to make the leap fairly quickly--it helps to have used at least one non-GCed language.

The third party library situation is better than you might think for a young language (the database clients, RabbitMQ clients, HTTP clients, compression, etc., are all basically usable), but I normally expect to fill one or two library gaps per project.

Overall, I find it difficult to articulate why I like Rust. It's pleasant to write (now that I know how), it runs fast, the CLI tools are pretty solid, and has enough abstractions to keep the boilerplate in check. And I can throw cluster-sized workloads at it and trust it to work, and work fast.
Humans are limited by the size of their skull. Computer systems have no such limitation.
Think about a real number with digits: 0.a_1 a_2 a_3 ... in which a_i encodes whether Turing Machine with index i (or program i) halts or not. Since Halting problem is not computable, we will never be able to compute the digits of this real number. Never in our universe.
I didn't go to a poor school, but there were poor kids in my school, and being friends with some of them, I know that there wasn't a 1:1 correlation between "poor kids" and "kids who don't study", there was some correlation.

I don't know why, but I don't think it was just because their parents didn't happen to have cash. My totally anecdotal view on this is that looking at income might be the tail wagging the dog. The poor parents tended to have less complete grasps on their lives, which gave the kids fewer role models to figure out what "good habits" were and how they lended to success.

These parents didn't have habits of successful people, which contributed to their poverty, as well as the (lack of) habits of their children.

The poor kids I knew who were successful academically found other role models, people to explain to them that you can take the SATs twice, and if you spend a couple hours a week studying for them you'll do significantly better, and yes, it is worth the time, etc.
Ordinary devs could have access to all the encrypted secrets without having access to the keys to decrypt them. If that's the case, the laptop is no more a risk than the git remote.
50 Things That Made the Modern Economy – Public Key Cryptography
That's not really a fair analogy. It's difficult (or impossible) to predict major events like terrorist attacks or weather phenomena that cause phone circuits to overload. And when these events occur, telecom companies lose money.

But flights fill up every day. When they do, airlines maximize profit.
Simple Website Fixes – Part 5
> First thing I do is do the math

Me too, but I guarantee we're outliers. You probably look at your credit card statements sometimes too :)

They could easily choose to make the exchange rate easy (at least in e.g. USD), or even better, forego the fake currency system entirely and allow transactions in the user's local currency. Instead they erect multiple layers of obfuscation to keep you from thinking about the idea that you're actually spending real money. Something tells me they spend the resources on this system because it results in increased net profits.
Neat. Thanks. Main thing I wanted to look at is in Springer. Ill have to dig up non-paywall stuff on him later. Especially the meta and supercompilation.
Exactly. When I was in high school, two other classmates and I would go to our English teacher's class during homeroom for SAT prep. We did this for 10 minutes a day for maybe a month. Outside of that, the only prep I did was studying for the SAT IIs the night before.

I did well in high school only studying on the train into school on the days of exams. That formula worked for me, and I figured everybody else did something similar. I knew I had to "study" for the SAT if I wanted to better than average, and practicing vocabulary during homeroom seemed like more than what everybody else was doing.

I happened to get into a good college and really struggled the first year. I studied harder than usual, but it wasn't until I started studying with some friends that I saw how much more work other people put into school.
My views are the responses you'll probably get from the people who've been doing systems programming in C for the past 20 years. I don't doubt lots of common applications have memory issues. Maybe not a definite segfault but it's incredibly disingenuous to act like it's a major issue (as if writing C and C++ are similar to disarming a bomb or something). It's nonsense and the same reason I have been learning C++17's stuff rather than bothering with Rust.

I want a better argument for:
1) A C++ developer who's been writing C++ for a long time and is skilled in modern C++ who is wondering why he'd pick up Rust for user application development? I await more superfluous bindings like "Rust-Qt".
2) Porting C/C++ to Rust code (with a rather large codebase).

Every argument I've seen for Rust is: out of context, disingenuous when they compare it to other languages, or just incredibly biased. I don't think it's ironic that the majority of people I've met who have started doing Rust are bad at C and C++ and have bought into the list of features on Rust's homepage without any knowledge of anything related to them.
It is a play on the seemingly random sentences Terry (the creator - or rather the prophet - of TempleOS) would include on his comments.
It hard to take a hardline stance on something with so much give and take.

XML is great because there are plenty of fast parsers for it with bindings in pretty every programming. It can be modified with nothing more than a text editor, by someone halfway competent.

XML is bad because it will never be quite as optimal as some binary only solution and editing with a test editor is painful.

Its not like most programming languages would have a hard time with gzipped xml either. This grants most of the benefits of binary formats and is often smaller than all but the most carefully designed ones.

All of that even presumes config load time matters. I a crazy large case maybe 10MB loads from a disk and the important stuff is cached in memory, in the actual structures that will use the data later. It just doesn't matter. Gzipped xml is fast enough for realtime high performance games, who cares about this silly XML hating anymore. Just pick something that works and move on.
For the N queens on an NxN chess board, wouldn't you put them in a fibonaci spiral? Of course I can draw the board and explain it, but I have no idea how show that fibonaci formula modified for a chess board. Do you think that would be enough?
Yes, it is back to 1600.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/05/living/sat-test-changes-school...

The test will shift from its current score scale of 2400 back to 1600, with a separate score for the essay. No longer will test takers be penalized for choosing incorrect answers.
> Nominally BoDs are fiduciaries but frankly that doesn't mean much these days

There is a rich corpus on this question that you are needlessly simplifying [1]. TL; DR Boards have a measurable purpose.

[1] http://escholarship.org/uc/item/3287q5sk#page-11
when I think of all the segfaults I've seen in last few years - it's usually been in some horrible bindings to unsafe C/C++

"if you need segfault protection, you're a bad programmer" is a ridiculous statement - your personal data is one unchecked buffer away from being very public
> I've always wondered what's different about code written for airplanes. Anybody have any insight?

You might be interested in some publicly available coding standards for the Joint Strike Fighter (C++) and the NASA JPL (C):

http://www.stroustrup.com/JSF-AV-rules.pdf

http://lars-lab.jpl.nasa.gov/JPL_Coding_Standard_C.pdf
I just tried that example code in closure compiler, I actually got

alert("Flowers");

Can't get any better than that.
> The real solution is to design a test that you can't study for effectively.

There's a very strong pressure against that. The analogy section of the SAT was a proxy IQ test, though more study-able than Raven's Matrices. People objected to the parts that could be studied (infamously, "runner : track :: oarsman : regatta"), but the solution was to drop the entire section and preserve only the more learnable portions.

Which is frustrating, because as far as I know it undermined your last comment - SAT scores are actually more responsive to wealth than they used to be, because factors like study and the quality of the local math department are more important.
The problem with software patents isn't mixing software and hardware. That's actually a case where patents are reasonable. The problem with software patents is taking an existing process and patenting "do X, but on a computer". The patent as described here doesn't work like that, because what it's doing isn't something that you could previously do without a computer.
Great! Glad it was just an oversight. Creative Commons also has helpful descriptions on their website to simplify picking your preferred license. Will make it easier.
Idiot Drops Cash After Robbery
There is a scam in India that works like this:

A group will offer "guaranteed admission" to top universities if you pay them money and follow their program. If you fail to be admitted, they will give you your money back without hesitation.

Here's the rub: They don't actually have to help you that much. As long as enough people get in (who would have gotten in anyway), then they can be profitable in the aggregate.
1-3: You can define a (mathematical) real number that cannot be interpreted as a position in the universe that can be physically realized, taking the Planck Length into account.

4: At the precision of the Planck Length, you have two integers that are the closest physically-meaningful values whose ratio approximates pi.

In both cases, you're confusing mathematical abstractions with what is physically realizable in a discrete system. You can't (meaningfully) do that.
How do you design a test for which you can't study? Even if everything is laid out in the test with complete hypothetical knowledge (e.g. redefine addition for all real numbers from x + y = z to something else like x + y + (x/2) = z), you can still study for it by honing in on basic arithmetic and algebra.

This isn't meant as snark. I really don't understand.
'ryandrake expressed that by asking for the police, United was explicitly requesting a violent resolution. My initial comment is a reaction to the expectation that the resolution must be violent, which I don't believe is a foregone conclusion just by asking for the police to become involved.

The only thing the police have that United lacks in this circumstance is the monopoly on violence

United can't act as a third-party moderator, which can be useful in confrontations like this. The police can act in this role. Yes, part of their authority in this role is that they represent law enforcement, and the potential for use of force.

One point that perhaps has been made elsewhere in the submission comments but not in this thread is that simply arresting the man is a use of force, regardless of whether the man allows himself to be arrested peacefully or otherwise. In my mind that's significantly different from dragging someone off of a plane or beating them, though those, too, are uses of force. Is arresting someone peaceably violence? I'd argue not, though I'm open to hearing other thoughts on this.

I've been trying to express that just asking for the police is not requesting that the resolution would necessarily be violent, that there are other options available by having the police there, while clearly acknowledging that the police, as law enforcement, are an extension of the monopoly on legitimate use of force (which is a type of violence). Reading the responses I've received, it seems that I haven't been particularly effective in making that point.

In the interest of learning how to better express myself, would you point out to me how I could have done a better job? In particular, what phrases or statements did I make that prompted your response? I believe the only meaningful difference between what you've written and what I've tried to express is that the only purpose of the police in the situation is the use of force (or the potential use of force). Is that a correct assessment in your eyes?
>No, but I'm sure it helps boost scores among people who don't want to study.

And this is not to be encouraged, which is my point. There is nothing to envy about someone who does not want to study and is compensating by throwing money at the problem. Most of these people will do poorly at some point in college (well, at least the non-highly-ranked one I went to).
Most of the cheap shared hosts: GoDaddy, 1&1, HostGator seem to be still using Apache. At least from what i've noticed with my clients
> I'd say, before Rust becomes really mainstream, we have to wait for the current generation of sysdevs to die.

Why?
How much money can your site make by placing it behind a CDN to help with HN traffic spikes.
About half of the comments blame the victim!
I've used Ada on satellite programs, it's still very popular for that sort of thing. Ada has managed to carve out a small niche for itself in aerospace and I don't think it'll be replaced by rust anytime soon.

Which is fine, nothing wrong with Ada.
Not in continental Europe for sure.
> The only apparent benefit is networking and I'd dare say that only matters in Finance/Law.

I found it valuable to have a curated list of things to learn (both the class list, and the syllabus within each class), the opportunity to work together in person with other students studying the same thing, access to professors, and to live in an academically-focused community.

I went to a well-regarded, but not top-tier, California State school. That school is currently accepting 4,500 new students every year out of a pool of 50,000 applications. A few years after I started working, I started being contacted by various famous companies. I'm more limited by not really wanting to move to Silicon Valley than I am by my choice of school.

In my opinion, university helped direct my learning path, provided external incentives to learn things that I might've been reluctant to learn otherwise, provided a great learning environment, and put me in contact with people that I wouldn't have met and benefited from without being there. Having a degree from almost anywhere will make it easier to find a first job than trying to do it through self-study.
The greenest cube is very rare. It's the only one of its kind. Same with the reddest, and the purplest, and the pumpkinest, and the cubest, and the ...
"The beatings will continue until morale improves."

(since no one else has said it yet)
I agree, that was rather brash. They're not bad programmers. I tried to clarify that in my previous comment.

I think C++'s biggest failing is how large and convoluted it is but, in relation to the thread's question, how many beginner C++ programmers are gonna jump straight into systems programming? I sure hope the answer is 0.

I just see too many people quoting the list on Rust's homepage verbatim when I ask them about why a skilled C++ developer should pick up Rust.
Agreed - most research on SAT studying seems to suggest that this is rare. Big gains are most prevalent with either smart-but-unstudied people who get large gains from learning what to expect, or under-educated people who weren't previously taught major test components like algebra. A 300 point jump is extreme.
> the old product was End-of-Lifed

To be fair, we did continue to support Deis v1 for 3 whole years(!), which is very long considering we're just a small startup. Being woken at 3AM from yet another obscure etcd/fleet server failure really sucked, and systemd never truly got along well with Docker making for some fun interactions with Fleet. Overall (speaking personally as an engineer and support engineer), we are very happy we made the decision to switch to Kubernetes. Mind you, we were as early adopter as you could get with Fleet and etcd at the time, and etcd in particular has been significantly better for us in terms of stability/error reporting.

> There is no direct upgrade path from v1 to v2

I agree that it sucks there was no upgrade path from v1 to v2, but we felt it was necessary to make breaking changes to move forward from Fleet into the world of Kubernetes. That doesn't change the fact that we never dropped the PaaS product as a whole, though.

> the branding was changed (new product name entirely) to coincide with the release of v2

This was actually more to do with us becoming "Deis the company" more-so than the v2 release. Lots of users were getting confused with "Deis the company" and "Deis the github project", so we decided to rename it Workflow to help make it more clear in conversation.

> and Workflow is a completely separate and different product.

Curious to understand how you feel like v2 is a completely different product. From a user's standpoint the product offering never changed. The API, CLI and `git push` workflows were all still present in v2 and were drop-in replacements, save for backwards-incompatible database migrations (hence v2.0.0). It was just the administration's point of view that changed (Fleet -> Kubernetes, deisctl -> helm). To me it still feels like the same product, but I'm curious to hear from you why you feel differently. :)
No, you can't expect the outcome is to be violently assaulted while doing no harm.

Only in a fascist state.
Why would nature care?
Rust is the first language since C++ that can improve/not hinder runtime speed while making development safer, so I definately see its future.

The only problem is that the compiler is very slow now, so it doesn't scale to large code bases, which is a no-go in my company. Hopefully the Rust team understands that this is not only a would-be-nice to have feature (I see learning the borrow checker as a smaller problem)
Thanks for the reply. As to why- there are a bunch of reasons. It's so obviously slanted towards the young, and I'm getting older. I work at a place that anyone on HN would recognize, it's supposed to be one of the "good" places. And it is, generally, but I occupy a shitty position there and am tired of fighting for a basic decent work environment. I receive positive feedback all the time and try hard to be easy to work with, but I'm tired of all the last-minute shit, tight deadlines, lack of rigor, and mounting tech debt. I'm tired of dropping everything because a 25-year-old billionaire asked me to tweak some tiny thing. It's just insane. (And like I said, this is supposed to be one of the good places!)

I am mostly just wanting to hear about what others have done, or what options there are, or what resources there are for same. I'm not looking for a slower-paced version of my same career, I just want to try something else.
with 'rich kid' levels of prep, how much can one reasonably expect scores to increase vs baseline?
Maybe it means at runtime, as opposed to at contribution-time?
Also, the phone system!
That you're supposed to try to "game" it any way you can and that it's not a one-off attempt to genuinely assess your ability might not be obvious to everyone.
Right, and the smallest conversion was $5, so more often than not you'd have to spend an extra few dollars.
> Note that research shows SAT prep only increases scores by about 30 points

Simply retaking the test increases scores by 15 to 29 points.

https://psychsocialissues.com/2011/07/20/sat-the-validity-an...
Eh, not especially fair. The SAT is harder to study than most of the claims here suggest, and they already have your zip code and extracurricular list. Those are a much better proxy for wealth than the SAT.
>For most, studying at all was something that only the more ambitious kids did.

So now we know the secret of poorly performing kids. Well, of course, if you want an ambitious score, you study. If you don't, you do not get a good score.

I think my other point was that it does not require a lot of study! I studied more for my usual classes in school than I did for the SAT/GRE. But if you try to cram it all in 3 months before the SAT, you're setting yourself up for trouble.
Likely because of the volume and rate of comments. There's a "overheated discussion detector" algorithm that can push down a story. There may be some user flags as well (though not enough to display the [flagged] tag), which can further lower it's ranking.
AMR and such, is that our famous pink slime that became all the rage/outrage awhile back? To the point we have quite a few establishments making it well known they never used such products.

industrialization did not do any favors towards animals, especially in regards to processing and such for food
That philosophy is just that - a philosophy that sounds nice and applies sometimes. It's not a rule.

The deployment and upkeep of components is a major hassle and yes, having it all bundled into the same running application (which is the only thing it can be used with anyway) decreases the amount of stuff the end-user has to worry about.

Scaling connections reasonably is something basic any database should handle natively - or better put hitting connection limits without yet another program to help is rather silly in 2017.

You can make the same argument about replication but half this thread is about logical replication being moved to core so we can get scalable distributed clusters in the future - something even fewers users would use but clearly has many benefits by being included in the main release.
If you get into the details, to some degree, many homeless people made a choice. Some left an abusive situation. I left a corporate job that was helping go keep me sick.

If I had other options, I would have made other choices. This isn't what I wanted. It was just less objectionable than the alternatives. This is probably true for most homeless people. They don't really want to be there, but given the fabric of their lives, this was the least worst or most viable choice available.

I would like to see better options available. I write about that.

I am trying to get off the street. I am aggravated with the whole thing. I also do freelance work, usually at a library. Starbucks is a bit of a luxury for me.
Detail lost in the headline: Room & Board are not included.

What I foresee as a result: schools hiking Room & Board charges because "people can afford it." This step would've been far more effective if the state covered everything and price-locked it as a result; now schools will see the balance not paid by students on tuition as room for Room & Board charges to grow.
Source right here: http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary-negotiation/ (and it isn't a wikipedia article)
Yes but you defined the number just fine, right?
"Compute" is a separate issue from "define", you can't compute a lot of things. Is this going in the intuitionistic logic direction?
great analogy. also does a good job pointing out the type of vagueness and subjectivity in meaning that makes it hard to pin down consciousness.

the vagueness- which parts can you remove from a car before you wouldn't call it a car anymore?

the subjectivity- which parts can you remove from a car before I wouldn't call it a car anymore?

bald is another funny example of emergence (though not my own). how many hairs must one grow before they are no longer bald?