skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It is true of all modern design. The smoother the lines, the fewer the parts, the larger the blocks and more direct the fall. Make the bridge look like a spiderweb and all that will fall is now. Make it a monolith and you get 100kg blocks.
I kinda thought the article was going to be about programmers that marked up a line printer output and handed it off to someone that keyed the changes into a line editor (or punchcards)
The competition is akamai. They've been here for much longer than cloudflare.
I'm confused with the way the "Supported features" section is divided.

Does it mean I can only use f''-strings if the target version is 3.5? Why such a limitation?
I really believe (mostly) self replicating robots are necessary for any serious space colonization. Starting with just humans is way more effort than it's worth. Imagine just sending a few rockets to the moon. Waiting a few years, and then humans arrive with a base and infrastructure already set up for them.

Self replicating robots don't necessarily need to be super high tech. A well stocked machine shop plus a simple robot operator could manufacture 99% of it's own equipment. I once saw an interesting paper proposing a series of small robots on tracks that could produce more tracks and more robots.

Even if this process is very slow, it's exponential. Soon you have 10x as many robots as you started with. Then 100x, and then 1000x...
A really good magician will make it look like magic even if you know how it's done. And a really really good magician will make it look like magic even if you can see how it's done. P&T do the venerable cups-and-balls with transparent cups so you can see exactly how it's done, and it still looks like magic. Or at least like a ballet.
The last several times I tried to update Sourcetree, it got significantly worse, with features and functionality being silently removed or broken left and right. Every UI 'improvement' they made felt backwards to me. Simple quality of life things like being able to drag files between the staged/unstaged area just stopped working.

Then, trying to guess/figure out the correct previous version you were running that had all the functionality you needed is a nightmare.

I tried to give this a shot.

1. Run the installer.

2. Prompt informed me that I should uninstall the previous version of Sourcetree. No other information on the prompt. Close the prompt.

3. Nothing happens. I expect that the new version can't install next to an old version. No problem, let me go uninstall the old version...

4. After about 15 seconds of going through the control panel, uninstall programs, look for sourcetree, etc...

5. Sourcetree pops up. No notification that anything was installing. No customization of install options. No warning of any kind that this was actually being installed on your system.

6. Oh, look at that. They removed UI components that I consider critical, with no option of 'toggling' those components - just a complete removal (ex: the sidebar that listed all the projects. I have a lot of projects, scrolling through tabs at the top is not good enough)

I really wish the Windows side of Sourcetree would get it's shit together. I'll be going back to my older version.

Sorry for being such a negative nancy. If anyone has a recommendation for another Git GUI client for Windows, please let me know.
I was given a burned copy of the original StarCraft when it was still a new game, but wasn't given a CD key or crack or any way to play it.

There was room for 12 digits, so I guessed 123456789012, and lo and behold, it worked.

Uber 1337.
As a former mechanical engineer, I'd be interested in more details about the same thing but the referenced article is the best I've been able to come up with absent doing some serious research.
PATH is at peak ridership. In 2010 it had a signals upgrade so that train spacing could be reduced, allowing more trains/hour at peak.

The single tunnel shared by Amtrak and NJ Transit trains is 100% full of trains which are over 100% full at peak.

So yes, PATH and other trains are extremely useful.
> Is software development easier today because the gain in programming efficiency is more than the complexity of software that needs to be made?

Yes and no. The truth is both yes and no, and here is why. If we consider programming along a timeline from yesterday to today, there is unique complexity at both ends of that timeline, and unique simplicity at both ends of that timeline.

Today there's extra complexity of an abundance in choice. There's also choice in documentation, which often comes in the form of blog posts which may or may be out of date. And by the time you start to get comfortable using something the new version is probably out, which happened to me with Angular 2 (you knew Angular 4 was released right?). So in many ways programming is more complex today. None of those kinda of problems existed when I was a kid programming on TRS-80 in the late 70's. There wasn't much choice of hardware, software, or much risk of getting overwhelmed by too many learning resources. Basically everything you could
know about the hardware and BIOS fit in a single book that Peter
Norton wrote. So yes it is more complex today.

But there's complexity at the other end, too. We used to spend a lot of time trying to cram data and operations into small amounts of memory. We spent a lot of time inventing our own serialization protocols, writing lower level communication primitives that we don't think about today.

The efficiency gain is more than worth the new complexity. A novice programmer today is able to accomplish a great deal more in a month than a novice programmer of way back when.

For that matter, power users of today can accomplish way more than a team of programmers could back in the day for many applications. Much of the software I wrote in my first years as a professional developer can be done with spreadsheets.

The trick to keeping the efficiency is to not get lost in all the choices and remember to get real work done. Change how you do things too often and you become inefficient. Change not often enough and you become obsolete and inefficient. The real efficiency gains come from working the same problem domain for a while with the same tools. You develop a bag of tricks for dealing with the kinds of problems you run into in that domain and you become very fast. Change too much and you don't. But once every problem you encounter is pretty easy it's probably time to move to a new domain.
Simpson's on first 100 Days
I find it bizarre that the original blog entry was seen to be blaming the technology, quite the inverse in fact.
The Ultimate Playlist for Startup Founders
Because Python 2.7 is, IMO, a better language than Python 3+, e.g.:

- I like lambda a, b: a + b syntax better than lambda a_b: a_b[0] + a_b[1]

- I prefer map/reduce/filter to return lists rather than iterable

- I prefer dict.keys/values/items to return sets/lists rather than iterables, unless I call dict.iter[keys/values/items]
The Port Mann Bridge has it's pillars in the middle between the traffic lanes, and the cables splayed outward across the lanes of traffic. The bridge pictured in this article has it's pillars outside the span, with cables running parallel to traffic instead of above it. Should mitigate a lot of the problems Vancouver has.
Toronto has some of the worst traffic I've ever experienced anywhere. The drive from Toronto to Guelph at 2pm on a Wednesday (i.e. A time that is not peak) was nose to tail for the first 20 miles. The whole drive took just under 2 hours and apparently that's considered pretty normal. It's 58 miles!
> I'm from a generation where you didn't publicize this kind of stuff

Which is incidentally the exact reason why the posts are popular. There has been a taboo on hiring/firing literature, and only recently have people become more transparent with information that is very valuable. Having unique perspectives makes you stand out, although admittingly in the case of posts which make it to the top of HN, it's often the interview-from-hell from a Big 4 or a "my incredible journey" exit. (both of which are tropes that are not applicable in my blog post)
Haha yeah -- I live in Fairfax, and I did a brief double take (though B-17 implies it was a while ago).
In case anyone isn't aware of the details:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13764994

a year after they started the program they changed which cars were considered "black" cars and this guys Lexus?? Was no longer a black car. They said it couldn't exclusively be used for black and had to pick up Uber X riders as well. Uber x pays a lot less. The people this happened to were basically bait and switched when Travis changed the terms on them. [...] They cut rates and required you to pick up cheaper fairs and you're underwater.
Waze is very bad at notifying you of chains of directions. For instance "Take a left on Main St, then take an immediate right on to N 1st St."

It will say "Take a left on Main St." then think for a little while, and then beep because it needs to reroute you.

It's really annoying, because it means you need to look at your screen in order to figure out exactly where you are going. Google Mpas gives much, much, much better verbal instructions. I know WAZE doesn't have as much information on every given road as Google, but it isn't difficult to figure out if the next instruction is going to be given too late.
When you have digged a tad in the hell of the clocks/timer of a x86, it is very easy to saturate your capacity of having reliable timestamping

Modern computers are not only CPU bound, they are also interrupt bound, and sadly very limited in "available reliable timestamp" capacity. And controlling which clock you use is hellish.

And if the availability of a monotonic raw clock was not enough, I feel bad that in 2017 we still rely on 8254.

Documentation for having a reliable clock on every OSes is close to 0.

Without reliable clocks, without reliable synchronisation, we are anyway unable to provide "good" distributed systems at low costs (yes GPS is a solution that can be easily hijacked).

x86 has won because of legacy supports, but the legacy support means we are stuck with outdated components
Is that a bad thing? I think we should celebrate the diversity of developers and perspectives that they bring.

Esoteric things are great but you'll never find that they reach critical mass in a way that's meaningful. I love ham radio but I don't think you'll ever see a day where everyone has a 2m transceiver in their car/house :).
You're seeing "reinforced" concrete beams. Parts of a beam are in compression, others are in tension and which part is in which can vary. The mechanical properties of the concrete and steel compliment each other.
WHERE ARE YOU 4 YEARS FROM NOW? – MWC17 STARTUP Barcelona
Oh, hey! Glad to hear you talked to a lawyer beforehand.
You didn't address any of the points I made. It's like libertarianism. Sounds right at the individual level but it doesn't scale. You also completely ignored price gouging and other factors that distort market forces. You appear to assume all parties have equal bargaining power and pricing power. You are looking at things superficially.
I take ACM queue magazines and chill out in coffee shops during days I don't feel like working. Always fills me with hope and confidence.
I'd forgotten what search engines were turning into before Google. Excite is a real blast from the past.
Hadn't known about that, thx for the info, should have been included in the article. New credit line makes sense then, not much to see here.
I wish I could disagree with any of this, as SourceTree has the potential to be a really good Git client.

SourceTree's design is nice (although it could use some improvement), but there are so many niggling issues that just get in the way. Combine those with frequent application restarts due to unresponsive tools and windows and you have a recipe for finding a better tool.

I recommend Git Extensions.
I would suggest reading the first couple of pages of any compiler book. e.g. https://books.google.com/books?id=_tgh4bgQ6PAC&printsec=fron...

Compilers are computer programs that translate a program written in one language into a program written in another language.

Example of a compiler in action.

$ cat hello.c
#include <stdio.h>

int main(void)
{
printf("hello world\n");

return 42;
}

$ cc -O3 -S hello.c -o -
.section	__TEXT,__text,regular,pure_instructions
.macosx_version_min 10, 12
.globl	_main
.align	4, 0x90
_main: ## @main
.cfi_startproc
## BB#0:
pushq	%rbp
Ltmp0:
.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
Ltmp1:
.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
movq	%rsp, %rbp
Ltmp2:
.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
leaq	L_str(%rip), %rdi
callq	_puts
movl	$42, %eax
popq	%rbp
retq
.cfi_endproc

.section	__TEXT,__cstring,cstring_literals
L_str: ## @str
.asciz	"hello world"

.subsections_via_symbols
Demystifying iOS Layout
You should have some sense of who the users are and what they would use. You're building it for them, not for your own convenience - what would they prefer?
Practically speaking, most REST based servers and clients are tightly coupled anyways.

That is why SDKs are so popular with developers. They just want to call a method and not be concerned with how the bits get across the wire.

And please do not cite the browser as a good example of a REST client. The browser is driven by an advanced AI (namely a human). We are not there yet with machine to machine interactions, and it isn't clear that REST is the magic bullet that will enable this kind of system.
There's a mountain bike trail in Camp Tamarancho named "B-17" after the crash. Though there is supposedly extant remains of a different crash on the slopes of Mt. Tam, I haven't personally seen them.
Learning Category theory should be as easy as A -> B -> C.

A is a category

A -> B is an arrow, often called a morphism, but we're not going to be all highfalutin about this.

Think of A -> B like a function which takes type A, and returns type B. After all, types can be seen as a specific kind of category, and functions can be seen as a specific kind of arrow. It can be helpful to pretend say A is an int, and B here is a string, maybe C is a float but really they can be any type as long as they are not the same.

The rest of it is just stuff you already know. To qualify as a category it must be associative aka (A -> B) -> C == A -> (B -> C) and it must be possible to make arrows that don't change the category such as A -> A, B -> B and C -> C. You can see how if f = A -> B; and g = B -> C we can compose f, and g to make an arrow from A -> C.

Any time you have things (categories), and verbs (arrows) which meet associativity, and identity (which is usually the verb of doing nothing) you can do category theory to it.
Copperfield has since admitted using slight of hand to save his wallet at gunpoint was dumb. But it's really cool to know he did that. :)

I agree that learning magic can take away some of the mystique but having practiced it off and on since I was a kid, I can appreciate it for the art form that it is now. Which is why it infuriates me when some loud asshole announces, "It's in his pocket!" when a trick is done. It's everything I can do to keep myself from yelling back, "STFU and let an artist create his art!"
Assuming you dont do any input validation checking which is foolish for a database server particularly one dealing with SQL
Weblite-Go – A simple webserver written in Go
> This seems like the future of the gig economy. Same work load, less pay, less security, less employee power.

The gig economy is just a big scam on taxpayers shoulders. Companies get the benefit of low paid workers and low or not-at-all taxes. And the rest of the society has to pay the burden of increasing poverty. It is a kind of Tragedy of the Commons, one rips the benefit while the whole pays the cost.

It is fueled by the mentality of "at least they have a job". Having a job is not a goal in itself, the goal is that people are able to support themselves in a reasonable way. Having a job is a means to that end. People will be better with a Basic Income, waiting for a better opportunity that brings more value to them and to society. Once you land on a low paid, a-lot-of-hours job it is hard to get out of it. And companies that depend on this kind of jobs are inefficient and have no incentive to do things better.
A million times this. I'm CTO of a digital agency and implementing dropbox has been a huge productivity win for us. It's the little things: universal links to files, but they're still just files. It makes the onboarding so much more simple. We've actually just started using Office 365 as well, as the integration is great between the two, so you can edit dropbox files on 365 and it's pretty much seamless - Sharepoint/CloudDrive/whatever is a car crash, don't touch it.

I never thought I'd write excitedly about this, and was super sceptical at first, but honestly, it's great. GSuite feels like a toy at this point.
Same here: http://imgur.com/a/0o6XV

Interestingly enough I just booked this trip two days ago directly through the airlines (Air Canada and Delta).
Speed reading
So... The straights of Mackinac but the Mackinac bridge.

Pronounciation help needed.
I'm arguing against the "sky is falling" hysteria that many seem to have about this. If you'll review the rest of the context of that quote you'll see why it's in Comcast's best interest to allow Netflix to do business with it's customers.
If your examples are made only of the thing you're trying to explain, they're not examples.

That's just recursive definition. Some concepts demonstrably can't be exemplified otherwise.
The default case is the that the contestant's trick isn't original to them, and Penn just gives the trick's trade name or its inventor's name, obfuscated a little, and the contestant grins and waves goodbye.

When P&T actually make a guess about an original mechanism, sadly Teller either whispers it or draws it on some paper that they then dispose of in some suitably flashy way. (He's usually right of course!)
> The FSF has always made clear that they don't have any problem with people selling Free Software

Though I don't think the FSF speaks on behalf of socket0, or vice versa.
Did something happen that made this currently relevant, or was it referenced in another source recently? It's interesting enough, but I can't tell if there's some subtext that I'm missing.
> But it's also relatively hard to write great code.

What's the definition of great code? In all the languages and platforms that I know (C, C++, JavaScript, Python, Java, PHP, C#, etc) if someone wanted me to write "great code" without any other qualifiers I'd pick C# for the job. It's just such a nice well designed static language (except for nullable references) with a reasonably well designed framework that producing great code is pretty easy.

I'm patiently waiting for Microsoft to get .NET on everything but for now it seems like JavaScript is the king of that goal.
> A person who feels that they don't have the flexibility to quit

I am NOT saying "feels" - I am saying "they do NOT have the flexibility to quit".

For example, my sister and her husband do not have that flexibility. They are at the limit of what their "barely above minimum wage" jobs support. They have some savings and they are very good about managing their resources; however they are a job loss or injury away from going negative and both work in jobs that are physically demanding.
This looks awesome. I look forward to the usual hacker news banter of "yes this is awesome but this is awesomer, see xyz" :) yes awesomer is a word
Self-promotion is exactly what they're contextualized as in the article. These are aspiring entertainment media personalities.

edit: Unless you meant solely gp's context of an engineer posting about a similar topic. I defer on that, I was talking about the BuzzFeed employees.
300 million people can't do this. By and large, save for very few people, we all have to participate in the housing market. There are also long term, detrimental effects of having a large percentage of the population living on beaches or other designated areas.
I think it's the opposite though. Google Map is very clean. It certainly doesn't optimize route like Waze does (seriously I don't get it why, especially Waze is now part of Google). Google Map is known for taking the main road avoiding local whenever possible. BTW, I don't turn on voice notification, I read the graphic off the screen.
Iterables are so much better on memory though.

I wonder why isn't "lambda (a, b): a+b"
allowed?
The author seems rather incompetent and obviously doesn't know what he is talking about.

I could rip apart pretty much every second paragraph, but since being helpful is more... You know helpful here one tip:

For signal change it back to chromium and pair it again. The desktop client doesn't delete the history on an unpair and a re-pair will show your old history
That's a useful list, although I've read some of them. Cool app tho
It is technically k-means, seeing as there are always k=6 or a user specified number of colors reported regardless of the input picture. What k-means algorithm they are using though is uncertain. Could be some form of quantization, or a lloyd type k-means. Could also be hierarchical agglomerative or many-many others. What would be interesting to try out would be some non-parametric clustering algorithms like the image recognition staples mean-shift and dbscan.
I'd imagine the size of the bridge itself might be a factor. The two in question in Vancouver (Alex Fraser/Port Mann) would dwarf the Zakim bridge (that's what I'm assuming you are talking about).

I suppose an engineer would have more input on this though, I really don't know too much about bridge design.
Take a look at the first boring machine for Elon Musk’s Boring Company
Instead, keep secrets "out of band" and supply them to applications as part of your deployment process.

I definitely agree that tools like vault or keywhiz (or automated permission management using AWS roles) are the right way to do things. As as an added plus, a well-designed system can be configured to issue temporary credentials, where every AWS secret and SSH key automatically stops working within 24 hours. And you can log every secret request, and you can set explicit policies about who can access which secrets. Once you see this stuff working, it's hard to imagine ever going back.

But unless you're working at a very large scale, you probably still have an offline secret database somewhere, just in case you need to wipe and rebuild your secret management system. Or at the very least, you may need to keep copies of the individual key fragments needed to unlock your vault server's secret database when booting a new vault replica.

And at this point, encrypted secrets can still play an important role, especially if access is limited to a tiny number of people. Of course, if one of those people leaves the company, then you need to roll every single secret in your organization. (Which is actually an interesting exercise to do every couple of years, anyway. I increasingly believe all secrets should have TTLs.)
You still can't have universal links to an image in a Google drive folder, as far as I can tell. If you can, it's quite difficult to find.
Have they got rid of the treeview of repos? That was a vital feature. I never used the tabs because they didn't all fit on screen, and the tab UI doesn't allow you to distinguish between different repos with the same name. Ironically they seem to have adopted what I considered the worst feature of Git Kraken.
Oh, and it let you see all your repos' status (what branches are checked out) at a glance. This is such a pain. I will definitely need to roll back to the last version.

Totally agree with other commenters - this application suffers from the most "changes that randomly f* up the UI" of any app that I use (because it's still useful despite the havoc the developers inflict on the app)
And Netflix raises subscription rates to make up for the added cost. The customer still pays the vig.