skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Open sourcing Swift, though, probably benefits Apple more than it does the community.

As opposed to whom? Choosing an open source approach is a strategic decision, presumably to the benefit of the chooser.

This was even true of Cygnus, the original Open Source business.
It is not OK to "let off some steam" by verbally attacking a stranger. In retail stores, if someone's yelling at a front-line worker, they're likely to get thrown out of the store.

These managers need to show some backbone and consequences to angry assholes with poor impulse control, and throw them off the service if they treat the staff poorly.
Google is very bad at this but some sites are much worse. There are sites which plain refuse to speak English to me at any costs. No option, no nothing.

Some sites insist that if I do business with them, I must do through the local website. Fine, I can buy from your German website... if you speak to me in English. There is zero reason to assume that if you force me to use your German website I speak German. No reason whatsoever.

Look, if you want to have region specific websites, go for it, even though I will hate it. Just don't redirect me to the one you think I need. Let me make the choice. And especially don't do it if there's no way for me to get back to the one I wanted in the first place (looking at you Osprey).

And if you force me to use your region specific website don't assume that everyone who is forced to visit your German website speaks German.

It's also frustrating that automatic browser translation very often breaks the checkout process (not to mention the privacy aspect of it).

Of course the nail in the coffin is when a region specific website won't work with a credit card that is outside that region. Although usually that happens in the United States, where fortunately website do speak English but won't take my European credit cards.

This is all very simple, if you do nothing at all, you don't fuck up the user experience. It's great. Every little helpful "improvement" you make is a mistake.
I can't tell if this is wonderfully worded ("sounds so profound" compared to actually being profound) and understated sarcasm or if you are serious?
> At the same time, it's perhaps not as easy to write quick scripts if you don't know OOP (example: having to use the global keyword in helper function

Your example has nothing to do with OOP. It's simply how python handles variable scope outside of a class.
To understand why some people (including myself) are going nuts about Pico-8, here's one random feature: when you save your virtual cartridge as 'mygame.p8.png' it automatically generates a neat cartridge png representation with the screenshot of your choice from the game. Like so: http://www.lexaloffle.com/bbs/cposts/1/10022.p8.png.

Big deal you say! well, check this out: this png IS the game. It embeds the executable written in LUA. Try it for yourself - take the png I posted above, load it in pico8 then press escape: voila, full source code, sprite sheet, tracker data, etc. Type "RUN" and the game plays.

Pico8 (and its cousin voxatron) also contain an online cartridge browser that lets you discover and learn from everyone who contributed a cartridge.

Pico-8 is choke-full of these incredible little details that make all the difference. Unfortunately it's not open source itself, which some find a bit odd considering it encourages the open sourcing of the cartridge written for it. Good to see some projects such as TIC-80, LIKO-12 and now PX8 mixing things up a bit, that said it's still a nascent environment and let's not forget it's very much the arbitrary, sometimes amusing limitations imposed by the lead dev that makes these things fun.
GCE does not do the free tier for most stuff in the same way AWS does, it's more like they give you $300 and let you spend it on whatever.

That said I think the cheapest sql instance type is like $7. If your project isn't worth $7 it should likely just be kept locally until it is ;)
Banks exist because people gradually forgot how to manage and store their resources over the past few thousand years. Need a safe space to store "money".
That's not what IKVM does. It transpiles JVM bytecode to .NET CIL so you only need one virtual machine.
I don't think complaining about people buying $5 cups of coffee at Starbucks is helpful for making a convincing argument. When you make statements like that, you give people the impression that your true motive is to attack capitalism and that raising environmental concerns are simply an underhanded tactic to do so. I understand your point about driving, but the brand of coffee and the cost is irrelevant and complaining about it is counterproductive.

There's no reason we can't address climate change and have $5 cups of coffee at Starbucks (although I prefer $2 cups of coffee at Dunkin Donuts).
Or some combo of both of them.
>"Date of last commit" is probably FAR higher than any "social" bullshit in terms of quality.

That's the first thing I look at when I arrive on a github page, always.
There are a few bad implementations of Accept Language parsing out there too. BrowseHappy is one, it gets the weighting wrong and displays the wrong language a lot.
I don't think people are having problem with understanding how redux work, but having problems with the shear number of boilerplate files you have to write to get anything done. Often times the speed at which you can get things done is equated to productivity.
Cyberspace Everts into the Real World as IoT
Except that somehow it doesn't work reliably.

This problem hits me every time, I know about /ncr, so I visit it, and then it works for a while. Until it doesn't. It's beyond frustrating.
I am obviously not talking about dead projects.
An entertaining documentary on a Finnish startup failure
It depends on what you are doing but there are a ton of libraries in Java that have no equivalent in .NET. For a lot of projects it would be very useful to use Java libraries.
Is the DMV really that bad these days? In the four states I've registered a vehicle--Washington, Oregon, Texas, Illinois--it's been fine. No complaints.
I would love to get some feedback. It works using the google accessibility feature to intercept the keypress and then launch the google assistant instead.

I have tested it on my International S8, however I do not know if it will work on a US version.

BTW, if it does not work on the US version of the phone there may be a legal case against Samsung or the Carriers because of the Americans with Disabilities Act as removing the ability to intercept buttons hinders people with disabilities to use the phone.
That's a great point. I think it's very much dependant on the audience as well as delivery. One would hope that people you work with are receptive to curiousity, however it's not a given.

In those cases I tend to give a little bit of background as to why I want to know why. It helps show the person that you trust them, but you're curious anyway. Eg. "I think I missed some of the prior meetings on this, why is this the best option?" It adds a little bit of humility that prevents it from sounding confrontational. Sometimes I'll ask something that gets to the bottom of why without asking it directly. Asking "Did we test the other options before choosing this one?" Can help someone to elaborate their why and making yourself an active participant rather than listener only.
No need for the snark; obviously "other stuff" includes things you need for raising a family.
Holy shit this is so cool. I will never have a need for this but it's really amazing to poke around with. It kind of feels like Wireshark for files instead of packets.

They also have a web version[0] with a bunch of example files if you want to check it out without installing it locally.

[0] https://ide.kaitai.io/
When Cyberspace everts into the real world enabling communication and connection for non-computing related applications we call it IoT (the Internet of Things).

Original idea comes from William Gibson's "Spook Country."

Written in 2007, "Spook Country" carries the cyberpunk sensibilities of Gibson’s 1984 “Neuromancer” into what is essentially a contemporary fiction novel: in two decades cyberspace has everted from science fiction into contemporary reality.

Gibson anticipates another outcome: when cyberspace everts it disappears as a separate or distinct reality, now we are “always on” and always connected.
Actually, all three of those sound like a fantastic mix. I was taught Turbo Pascal at first, and then my college classes were in Java (mostly). So it was more concept based. But each of those languages that you've specified, highlight different facets. (Interpreted vs dynamic. Functional vs imperative - maybe toss in some C# for OOP)

And I totally agree. CS grads should be DECIDING (not at first) what languages are to be used at their shiny jobs... Vocational schools are for teaching the languages that are "in demand".
What about snapshots? Does APFS offer efficient user-created snapshots? I run Ubuntu with btrfs, and for me this is a killer feature.
Just a quick heads up. Ludum Dare 38 is happening this weekend (theme: "a small world"). And I've certainly noticed an uptick in gamedevs targeting PICO-8 and SCUMM-8 platforms. Rather apropos given the theme, no?

A few Gifs of WIPs:

https://twitter.com/Huginn18/status/855857089960345600

https://twitter.com/quaIiaa/status/855878802563633152

https://twitter.com/topkeki69/status/855743127616970752

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dISx_dR6kLI
Regarding Apple’s Open Source strategy, the WebKit origin story is a major disaster.

They forked an existing project, only did sourcedumps every few months, often stripped of all comments, refused to work with the original devs that they had forked from (the KDE KHTML engine), etc.
> We've fallen far, far short of the potential and dream of the Internet and the democratization of knowledge, and the state of things has become a norm; few even notice it or realize what they are missing.

Actually, the Internet has made this go backwards.

Most libraries had basic books on most subjects. And they could get other books as required.

Now, you can't find those basic books anymore on the shelves. "Oh, we can order that, it will be here in a week." Well, that's great, except that the book you ordered isn't a basic one. Oops. Well, there goes another week ...

And, even worse, computer stuff from about 1985-1996 probably isn't online. One of my humorous moments was watching a "Millenial" have to fix a VB6 program. The fact that the information he needed wasn't anywhere on the web gobsmacked the poor boy.
I am envious.

I find it hard to read on a kindle or iPad much as I'd like the convenience.

One reason is that they are so much slower -- you can go from page to page in a flick of an eye or a quick page turn. Another is that it couples the somatic memory, making it easier to flip back to an earlier place (I often read in a random-access fashion, especially as I proceed through a book. The paper typography is still so much better in almost every case. And of course there's the reflected vs transmitted light issue.

I really don't care what other people think about my books and have most of them hidden away in the part of the house where guests are not invited.
Hasn't there been increased electromagnetic activity on the surface of the sun throughout the week?

http://www.solarham.net/older.htm

Is the interference causing unexpected surges in old, unshielded equipment and infrastructure?
Einstein, in the famous EPR paradox paper[1] used quantum mechanics (then fairly new) to show that it predicted some truly unexpected behaviour that we now call entanglement, but which Einstein referred to as "spooky action at a distance" (This is the source of the word "spooky" in this context, which has been picked up on by new-age nuts). Einstein didn't think entanglement was real at this time, but that QM's prediction of entanglement showed that QM was broken or incomplete in some way. No method was then proposed of testing whether or not Einstein was right (it was likely beyond the technical capabilities of the time).

John Stewart Bell came up with with a theorem[1] that would be developed into experimental tests that showed what Einstein thought was an error in QM was actually observable. It's worth noting that closing all possible loopholes in experimental tests of Bell inequalities is difficult and elusive. The consensus is that QM is valid and entanglement does indeed exist, but there remains room for a tiny amount of doubt. Note: This is doubt the way scientists see it. i.e. A reason to perform further experiments. Theories can never be proven true, but teasing out every nuance and conceivable way in which they can be wrong, and testing them, is what makes theories accepted and useful. QM has stood up to enough tests that it's now a very well established theory. However, continuing to test QM is not useless. Searching for new ways in which well established theories can be wrong is how we found QM in the first place!

Note that QM does not say what, philosophically, entanglement is or explain the mechanism for how non-local correlations propagate. There are other theories that have attempted to explain this, but none have been successful so far in being both correct and, more importantly, testable.

There have been other inequalities experimentally tested in addition to Bell inequalities, such as Leggett inequalities[3]. To your understanding, these would not be interesting because they don't "teach us anything new". This is false. The question about QM and entanglement isn't as straight forward as a binary "yes it exists" vs "no it doesn't". There exist subtleties. Different inequalities have indeed enhanced our understanding of entanglement and proven useful in practical applications such as quantum computing and quantum cryptography. I haven't had time to dig into the work linked to here, but to dismiss it out of hand is not reasonable. The press release (to be taken with a grain of salt given the usual failings of science journalism) does suggest a novel approach that could be of practical use.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_paradox
[2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem
[3]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leggett_inequality
(Spoiler alert!)
Reminds me of Zootopia :)
It's possible you're judging 'em a little more than you think—though putting "adult" in quotes may have just been a slip ;)
Why should a beginning programming class have to include learning an IDE?
I’m sorry, could you expand on that?

I’m not sure if I’m understanding you correctly, that you’re saying Java is slower than .NET, and the JVM more vulnerable than the CLR?
Psychopaths are very much over-represented amongst the richest (didn't get caught) and poorest (did get caught.) There aren't too many who took a middle path and ended up with middling results.
Hah, know what's even better than that, when the PM company outright owns (or their owner owns) a whole arm of companies like that, AND has "exclusivity arrangements" with those.
> Does APFS offer efficient user-created snapshots?

Yes: https://arstechnica.com/apple/2017/02/testing-out-snapshots-...

I'm hoping it will make Time Machine a lot better.
Something I know has been a big roadblock for IKVM is the fragmentation of .NET with all the different profiles. The main branch of IKVM only works with the full .NET framework versions, not WinRT/Silverlight/Xamarin etc. There was a fork that supported Xamarin iOS but it was very rough and there hasn't been much interest in it since RoboVM and Multi-OS Engine came onto the scene.
What feature would you like to see first?
It seems to me that having to polish all feedback to a publishable level of quality would (greatly?) reduce the amount of feedback someone could give. I've appreciated informal feedback that I've received in the past and if that was the bar that needed to met I would have likely never received anything back.
Apple's relationship with open source is pretty average. In the end, they use open source strategically. If there's no benefit to open-sourcing something, they won't.

Clang, WebKit and Swift are "proper" open source projects, done in the open. But there aren't many of those. They have no open source apps, and most frameworks such as Cocoa, AppKit etc. are completely proprietary.

Some of their open source efforts have been half-hearted; Darwin was enthusiastically embraced by the community, then essentially shut down by Apple. The XNU sources are APL, but there's nothing open about its development. I/O Kit is closed, I believe.
It is not criticism. It's an observation, followed by a question. I'm honestly interested in why Apple has the reputation it does around open source. The replies in the sub thread have been enlightening.
You'd land slightly back because you'd lose contact with your impeller. I also think most everyone understands how a sling and rock work. Not sure I agree withyour premise. Could you shove a camera in people's face and get dumb answers? Sure. Not sure that's endemic.
It's way out of fashion now, but I thought Pascal did a really good job of being an intro programming class that wasn't too complicated, but forced one to learn the basics in a disciplined fashion.

I took Pacal first semester and then C++ the next, and the Pascal course really helped. As I was graduating, Java replaced C++.
I advocate the complete opposite, perhaps with digital logic (and associated boolean algebra), sequential/combinatorial circuits, building a basic CPU, before even Asm. Someone who has only had experience with very high-level languages will have a very inaccurate model of what actually happens which will confuse and conflict when they eventually try to learn a lower-level language, while the opposite gives a much better idea of what/when abstractions become useful (instead of blindly applying them everywhere) as well as the limits of the machine.

To use your example, someone used to Python and its "infinite precision" bignums may become confused and frustrated by the fact that lower-level languages actually have limits on how big their integer types can be (and the behaviour that occurs when they overflow), while someone starting from the other end will, understanding how data is represented, find it a natural consequence of the fact that bits, register sizes, and memory are finite. They will also understand that, for the vast majority of calculations, this is perfectly fine; and when it isn't, to switch to bignums and understand the associated overhead.

CS is not like traditional science in that the majority of the time people are focused on building new systems instead of analysing existing ones (although I'm not saying that RE/analysis is not important --- in fact, quite the opposite.) Thus I think a bottom-up approach will be superior.
How to Trick People into Saving Money
No.

I am saying, the people here could actually make qualified comments, if they wanted to. They could learn about the topics they comment on.

But they choose not to.

Which is a different story from most of humanity, which doesn’t even have a choice, doesn’t have a chance to learn.
Malbolge: Programming from Hell
I have yet to see anything superior to the TeachPack languages in PLT Racket, though a friend of mine is building a similar incremental system of instruction in Python.
At the end of the day, net zero water is 'used' it is all returned to the ground.

Its actually a strong net water savings: the production of electricity in Montana uses around 16 gallons of water per kilowatt hour.
And keep in mind that atmospheric pressure (and thus the partial pressure of oxygen) routinely varies by 10% or more due to weather, and people live at altitudes where the pressure is as low as 50% below sea level.
To be honest, though, I think the author recognises that, which is why he specifically praises MdI in his post. Knowing that he's tired and just plain pissed-off with both platforms explains both. You're right, he doesn't come out of it well, but I've certainly had days and even months when I've felt like that, and he's making the right decision: he's moving away from something that is, for him, toxic.
That's only possible to do if you're the copyright holder. What Google would have been doing would have been specifically for orphan works, meaning no known copyright holder was able to be found. (as for public domain works, in America[0] you can't claim copyright on them again unless you significantly transform them into a derivative work. It doesn't stop museums from claiming copyright on public domain paintings regardless though...) Besides, I'm not sure Creative Commons would have helped—since I'm assuming you're referring to non-commercial—because the settlement depended on Google being able to pay anyone claiming the books, pay the publishers, and sell the books to recoup/profit. Just merely making the books free online would enrage the publishers class who would feel that they are losing possible profits.

[0]: For countries that follow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweat_of_the_brow doctrine they might actually be able to but that defeats the purpose of wanting to make public domain works freely available
The point of real computer science programs is to teach computer science, not specific programming languages or IDEs.
Fuel: not Uber's problem. Any solutions/advances benefit all market participants equally.

Cars: also not Uber's problem. Any solutions/advances benefit all market participants equally.

Salary: very much Uber's problem. Also Lyft's problem. And Didi's problem. And a taxi industry problem. Self driving tech will solve this problem in time.

So the first two will improve over time. The third impacts every player in the market.

Seeing that there is a definite need and this market isn't going to go away, it seems like Naked Capitalism is focusing on the wrong problem (or is focusing on the right problem if the problem is how to drive clicks.

The right problem is who in this market that isn't going away is going to be the best at optimizing for utilization of fixed cost assets (cars), variable costs (fuel/energy) and gets enough IP in the self driving car space to have a defensive patent portfolio.

Uber is really the only player that has a strong presence in multiple markets in addition to human transportation. They have food delivery, courier services, long-haul transportation. I wouldn't be surprised if they go after UPS/FedEx and Instacart at some point. The more diversified they are, the better the utilization they can achieve. To me that suggests that they can play the subsidization game against everyone else much more competively since instead of subsidies, they can provide their contractors with more opportunities to earn when behind the wheel.

To date, I have yet to hear a single argument why Uber is doomed that doesn't apply equally to every competitor. The only way I can see Uber being doomed is if the ridesharing market is doomed. That said, I'd love to hear more arguments about why the entire market might be doomed or why the future might favor Tesla's approach or why one of the other competitors in the market has a better shot. I don't see it. Uber near as I can tell is Amazon, Part Deux.

This biggest question on my mind iswhen investors for all these ridesharing companies tire of this war of attrition and no longer want to subsidize the purchase of market share. When that happens, Uber won't be the only company that needs to raise prices by stopping subsidization.

Again, I would love to hear more arguments that aren't simply driven by dislike for Uber by some astroturfing comment army.
The experience varies, depending on the office. It feels like they have little leverage to do anything about individual agents that have crap attitudes.
Those manager-types are the ones that tend to get a final say on what the devs use (rightly or wrongly), and if they feel they need those features, they are going to want to use a different tool.