skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Capital is more mobile... so we'll decrease the taxes on capital and increase the taxes on labor? If capital has built in advantages, it doesn't need extra legislative/taxation advantages added to it. Regular people need to pay rent and eat.

The bottom ~40% of American workers earn under $20K/year -- I have no problem with increasing the minimum wage to the point where people can actually pay rent and buy medicine, it's not like I'm asking everyone be given a helicopter. I have no problem taxing houses that are vacant year-round. Capital is wasted and hoarded many places to the detriment of the 99%, and not even to the benefit of the 1%.

Your comment about the starting gun, I think that if you lose your job you shouldn't immediately be homeless or sick because of it. Do we want to go back to living that poorly? Does it not matter as long as it's not happening to you? What if, one day, it does?

I don't want to live in a society where you can't walk to lunch without being asked for money by the homeless, where homeless people even exist, where the emergency room is always too slow because people can't go to a GP, where working 40 hours a week doesn't mean you'll be able to get a house or food, or where two parents must both work full time to break even to the detriment of the nation's children. I'd rather pay a little more tax. I'd rather my capital be a little less mobile. We'll still have the most billionaires, the most valuable companies, and all of that.

There must be some floor threshold below which we're not willing to go as a society. Why have a minimum wage at all? Why have medicaid or guaranteed hospital access? The question is where should we put that threshold, my position is it isn't high enough.

Then again maybe all of this is a straw man, we could leave taxes as they are if we reallocated 50% of the military budget... we'd still have the biggest and best military in all of world history.

One more thing: there is more to capital motion than taxes, too, and the USA http://www.doingbusiness.org/rankings -- look at all the places we're ranked 30th to 50th in the world. So perhaps we can increase taxes while simultaneously increasing capital motion.

In the end, life's better if you're a little less greedy, who wants to be the richest man in a slum? Is it better to have a million dollars in Somalia or 100k in Boston?
Might be legal or illegal depending on where you are. But it's awful that it's even a thing. For example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_8_of_the_European_Conv...
says:

===========================================

Article 8 – Right to respect for private and family life

1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

=====================

So basically it's illegal until the authorities deem it to be legal.
Walmart's idea of winning cash based on savings deposit amounts reminded me of the Freakonomics savings lottery from the 2010 podcast: http://freakonomics.com/podcast/freakonomics-radio-could-a-l...
I'm so glad I have never used a check. I'm 40 and haven't even paid a bill without using the internet (so basically for 22 years now).
Doesn't really explain how he knows the mention of being a whistleblower is the reason he wasn't called back.
You don't order food from a restaurant and have the restaurant take/withhold a portion of your meal off you to cover the cost for bringing it from the kitchen to your table.
Good software is very persistent. Client doesn't care about underlying technology as long as it performs.
Freelancing for 20+ years I have active sw written in VB6 that still sells after 18 years.
Nowadays wherever I start a new project (web of course) I try to pick mature, fresh (if possible open source) frameworks, components etc. since you simply never know how long you're going to maintain it.
I worked on one such system (written in Ada, of all things) back when I was a fairly junior developer. I was hired to work on a major effort to port the system from SPARC/Solaris to RHEL/x86 and add some new features. It was designed by a crusty (and eccentric) old architect (who was still around to manage this major refresh project) who ruled with an iron fist, and the project was managed in classic waterfall fashion.

He was not afraid to look you in the eye and say: "Your crappy code is not going into my codebase until you fix X, Y, Z, and change your indents to match the style guide." There were no "unit tests", per se, only a test driver program that he had written himself.

He was a hard guy to like, but I had to admit, that system had a clean, coherent, and modular design the likes of which I haven't seen since.
Let's not forget the Silverlight debacle too, that made a looooot of entreprise people unhappy.
All maps are wrong. I cut open a globe to show why
Several other people are complaining about 100% coverage sometimes being misleading. One way to test your test is to randomly modify your code e.g. swapping a greater than for a less than. If your tests still pass, then they obviously missed this change in behaviour.

This is known as mutation testing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation_testing

I've tried it a few times, I generally found it too slow to be an everyday part of my routine, but interesting tool to have in your belt for e.g. evaluating test in a codebase you didn't write yourself.
Yup. I tend to be very aware and conscious of how people feel based on social context and facial expressions, but I am not a likable person. People do not feel comfortable around me.
Any causal phenomena has some number of factors which it depends upon. A test ought to provide large insight to the user with respect to which factors are the most likely culprits to a specific expression of the phenomena, and they also ought help a programmer determine the number of factors at play.

If a competent programmer cannot quickly determine how many factors are in play, or if that programmer cannot constrain the number of relevant factors to a humanly manageable number, then I question how insightful the sum of tests were.
They are commenting on the disclosure of the exploix and how to exploit it. Obviously everyone will have the patch installed.
TFA is about the Brexit vote, not USA president.
PHP is the only language compared in the article that natively provides this:

"PHP also includes a functionality in its standard library that none of the other languages here do: deep merging. array_merge_recursive will recursively call merge on string key collisions."
They steal heat from outside. It takes less energy to move heat from a cold place to a warm place, than to create warmth "from scratch".
Reviving Manufacturing Would Help All of Us–Not Just White Men
Get your online marketing reports in your inbox every 5 days
CoDel is different from the packet scheduling algorithm even though both fight bufferbloat in different ways. CoDel is a congestion control algorithm for controlling what happens when outgoing buffers start overflowing. This is on a lower level than TCP and happens to any type of packet. The scheduling algorithm, like VEGAS or BBR, controls the transmit rate of only the TCP protocol.

When packets are being sent over the wires, the TCP scheduling algorithm (usually CUBIC, VEGAS, RENO, or now BBR) will send out packets until the parameters they monitor indicate the downstream device is about to overload. Then they will back off slightly to prevent packets from being lost. These TCP transmit strategies tend to either monitor packet loss rate or round trip time, sometimes both. What they do with these two parameters determines the biggest differences between the packet sending algorithms.

CODEL comes into affect when the scheduling algorithm decides it can't send out packets quickly enough without losing them, and they build up on local buffers. This can happen with TCP but also other internet protocols.

Something most people don't know is that without a scheduling algorithm like BBR,VEGAS, or RENO, you can send out packets at interface speed. In simpler protocols like UDP you need to do your own packet scheduling. Otherwise your machine will send out packets at interface speed until they are mostly dropped by the first slower link. This is why TCP has scheduling algorithms, they're all an attempt to monitoring the end to end link speed from A to B you can achieve without losing data.

Edit: BBR is a new TCP scheduling algorithm to fight buffer-bloat at the TCP level. Since the majority of internet traffic is TCP, wide adoption would cause a big improvement. TCP scheduling only affects outgoing packets, so its important to get this into Windows and Linux so we can get the full benefit of having buffer-bloat reduction on both ends. I'm looking at MS here because they're the last major OS running an aggressive and buffer-bloat causing TCP algorithm.
A heat pump extracts thermal energy from, say, air. Electricity is not converted into heat, but used to create a temperature difference (one part of the system gets colder, the other gets hotter). This is vastly more efficient than using resistive heating elements. Such a system can appear to be more than 100% (up to around 400% [1]) efficient, if you look at the electricity going in, and the heat coming out.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_pump
Strangely enough--I knew a lot of people that worked for the government for that reason.
You're expecting specific errors.
I'm a big fan of Hellthy Junk Food.
Link3D pitches a new platform for industrial additive manufacturing
How Homeownership Became the Engine of American Inequality
Strong beliefs, loosely held
Unit testing in C? Why???
Previous discussion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13963858
Hmm...I guess I was assuming they had fixed all the potential vulnerabilities allowed by running a virus scanner as root, not just the specific vulnerability described in the example exploit.
Are you seriously trying to claim that "What this says is that this person" is not an ad hominem? That's simply untrue, and obviously so to any reader. Also, I didn't move the goalposts. I asked for proof, and got back a non sequitur. The numbers didn't show what my interlocutor claimed they did, and I'm still waiting for piece #1 of the proof I originally asked for. You're awfully aggressive for someone who has engaged entirely in meta-argument without providing a single fact relevant to the topic at hand.
As a non-native English writer, I use Grammarly every day. It's a good product. In fact, it gave corrections for this small message thrice. It's really particular about commas!

But when using with long articles it's grammar check isn't perfect. I hope they get better. Best of luck Grammarly!
Even if the measure is accurate, there's an opportunity cost for spending time on things that are also important, but not measured. You'd need a measure that covered everything, from sufficient speed optimisations to fulfilling customer desires to complying with all relevant legal requirements, which basically can't exist.
The title does not mean anything and is basically a click bait in my opinion as it sounds cool to trash some ideal.
That said, the magic 100% number is far removed from reality and does not represent anything by itself.

100% coverage on project of which size? Imagine you have a single script project that does exactly one thing and 2 test are enough to verify that it works without doing it manually? That is not the same as writing test for file system or tests which consists mostly of mocks upon mocks upon mocks.

I think the real problem is someone comes up with an idea, like TDD, tells people about it, some people hear about, start preaching it, some people start believing it and nobody actually think things through, usually cos they don't have experience (it's not a fetish as someone said). Like everything in life, you have to think things through before doing them, ask your self is this worth doing and when it is worth doing. You can't just say: "Oh we are doing TDD thus everything must be done in TDD way".

For people that say tests are useless, or good code does not need tests, I ask, when you make a change do you still make sure your code works by hand? And if you do make sure, why don't you automate that? You are a programmer after all.

And for those that say you need to test everything, well you don't, specially if you need mock most of it or it is really not that important piece of code as it is dev tool or something. What you want to make sure works is customer/user facing stuff that must work for you to get paid and you want to be able to verify this at any time of day without losing hours clicking around checking for stuff.

So this is not straight forward, 100% means nothing without context and doing anything in excess and without valid reasons is pointless or even harmful. And this has nothing to do with programming but life in general.
One answer to that is to apply property based testing. If you're testing an addition algorithm, for example, you might test that

A + B == B + A
A + 0 == A
(A + B) + C == A + (B + C)
A + B != A + C (given B != C)
Because waiting lists imply shortage or rationing. Here this is not the case. It is mostly optimization of utilization of existing capacity.

It is best for both the purse of the system and the patient if needed but not urgent stuff is done at time convenient to all parties. This way everybody could be prepared. The hoapitals will stock the right amount of supplies, the bloodbanks will know how much and what kind of blood is needed in advance and so on. The patient will make sure all mission critical projects are taken care of for the rehabilitation time etc.
Just Serve
They are claiming he already gave notice he was leaving before then so they just accelerated the process.
Take the lowest pay possible
Common Lisp - well, depends on how you implement your maps.

alists and plists - just consing them together will do, though they're wasteful in terms of space as all the keys and values of both maps are preserved (or you can treat it as a feature - merging preserves history); anyway, it's easy to trim them with remove-dupliates.

hash tables - nothing in the standard, though trivial to add.
I dont know why are you complicating this.

First of all the shortage is only some specific sectors like STEM or schools in poor areas.[1]

So the question you should ask is why is there a shortage in some areas, it's because teaches are not being paid well so the supply is dwindling. This is exactly how the free market works.

The next question you should ask is why did salaries for teachers kept going down.

There might not be a shortage aspiring hedge fund managers but there is shortage of fund managers which good historical track records so the good ones get lot of investment money.

[1]: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/es_2017...
> CoDel is different from the packet scheduling algorithm

I didn't say they were the same. However, these two classes of algorithms interact in such complex and significant ways that it's practically impossible to understand one without understanding the other. An article about the history of one must IMO address how it has co-evolved with the other to be useful.
I like the idea of local service projects to get me out of the house.
Test coverage is a plus but not more important. We have an end to end test system that runs on each commit. What I am saying is perfect code, simply written is way way more important than complete coverage. Tests, on my experience, don't make code better written or more concise. Given a choice between coverage and good code I choose good code. In my experience time is always short so I choose the time on good code. In practice this is a compromise anywhere but the most cashed up companies.
I'm not talking about the rate of growth peaking. I'm talking about the size of the economy.

You've only illustrated my point. Everyone is very highly incentivized to believe that the growth of the economy is infinite. I mean, just look at the numbers! It only grows, never shrinks.

Is it really possible for economic activity in a country to grow forever with no upper limit? If not, then what's the upper limit?
> Doesn't what you're writing actually influence whether 100% coverage is a worthy goal or not?

Yes, absolutely.

> Suppose you're instead doing something very UX/UI driven. Why bother trying to cover that 100% with automated tests, when change is going to be driven by the whim and fancy of anyone who sits down in front of it?

It might make perfect sense from a business standpoint to have no tests at all.
Here's a reference for you https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulag People all across occupied lands were enslaved (on paper sentenced for some nonsense and send to workjails)
> and some companies go as far as requiring an FB profile.

I personally heard about a few small companies that wanted the employee applicants to submit their resume through fæcebook. And the biggest facepalm was that those were not "social media marketing firms" (whatever that is), but regular businesses.
Debit cards are popular in the US, but so are overdraft fees (from the bank's perspective, anyway). When I last opened a checking and savings account, I was offered overdraft protection on my debit purchases, and though the default was to have it, I opted out. Why risk the fee? Granted, I'm not necessarily in the same position as every American, or even those in the article, but I would rather be embarrassingly denied my $4 cup of coffee than have it turn in to a $104 cup of coffee.
Most standard unit coverage tools will do this for you, often with the CRAP (Change-risk anti-patterns) score:

http://www.ncover.com/blog/change-risk-anti-patterns-code-co...

"This is based on the methodology that the more complex code is the more likely it is to have errors, hence the need for greater code coverage.

To better understand, let’s assume a scenario where you wanted to keep your change risk anti-patterns score below 30. To maintain this level with a code set that has a cyclomatic complexity of 10, you would need to achieve a code coverage (as defined by branch coverage) ratio of approximately 42%. If however, the complexity of your code was greater and you had a cyclomatic complexity of 20, you would need almost 72% code coverage if you wanted to maintain the same risk level.

Complexity increases risk. Testing decreases risk. The change risk anti-patterns score give you a metric to measure the correlation between the two."
London's DICE now does refunds to sold-out gigs
There are a lot of good responses to your question, sibling comments, but let me provide an orthogonal view: consider how many innovative companies are NOT being formed because worried workers cling to their generous big-company insurance plans -- plans which are so costly to buy independent that they are not real options. This is a major concern for me as an entrepreneur and parent.
You'd also have people performance plastic surgery in their shed killing people.

There's obviously middle ground somewhere, it's just we as a country lately have a REALLY hard time accepting the fact that compromise isn't a four letter word. At least some of us...
There are many, many problems with healthcare in the US. Off the top of my head, the big ones are:

* Endless number of middlemen and administrators.
* Every player in the healthcare chain benefits from higher prices.
* No price transparency.
* Tacit collusion is rampant.
* "Cost no object" mentality to treating the dying.

The last one, while insensitive, is true nonetheless, and it's alarming that over 50% of all healthcare spending takes place in the last two years of a person's life. We have basically decided that it's okay to spend literally any sum of money on a dying person in order to prolong life by an average of a few months. And the problematic word there is average, because some people do live a lot longer, and that's what we all look to. I realize this is grim and seemingly lacks humanity, but unfortunately that doesn't make it not true. Charlie Munger, who is on the board of Kaiser Permanente, said this same thing yesterday..."over-treatment of the dying" was the biggest problem they faced.

It's reminiscent of our approach to college education - justified at any cost. So we push millions of kids into a schooling system that's not right for them, and the result is a lot of crappy education, worthless degrees, student loans, etc. Once we flip the switch to "there is no price you can put on _____" things get sideways FAST.
That's exactly what I would claim if someone accused me of unlawful termination.
Watching this kind of complex distributed system in the throws of random failure every day at work, I wish we actually did this instead of just reacting to one nightmare after another.
A couple of hours ago, I sent an e-mail to the moderators to do something about this.

I can't delete my comment anymore, so I can't do anything to stop the comments.
Tips for Android App Development
Microsoft heralded as an innovator – it always has been
So, you mean it's OK to charge a woman for adultery?

Whatever the woman is charged with, it's not right. If she is a rape victim, she should be left alone at the very least, and protected with the rapist prosecuted for the best. Charge her with any crime is a horrible thing to do.
London underground trains are fitted with sensors that can tell the weight of each carriage and there's a good chance that the data will be available via Transport For London's API, if it isn't already (I worked on the API two years ago)

City mapper has their own data sources but a lot is still from the public API that TFL provides for free with the reasoning that app developers will do a better job than TFL could.
"For day-to-day healthcare, that should just be included in "cost of living" calculations. General-purpose welfare programs (or ideally a minimum income) would guarantee that people could afford checkups, birth control, etc."

That sounds reasonable, but is it efficient?

1. It discourages "routine maintenance" -- it's a lot cheaper to go to the dentist annually than to get a root canal every ten, yet there are many who if they only had catastrophic dental insurance would skip the annual.

2. This "cost of living" varies drastically based on age, sex, pre-existing conditions, et cetera. So it couldn't be covered fairly by a single fixed UBI. So you'd need bureaucracy to determine who is eligible for extra coverage

3. Every small doctor's office would need a billing department. In socialized healthcare countries, "billing" is not much more work than filling in a time sheet, and is often done by the doctor themselves.

It's cheaper, more efficient and more fair to cover day-to-day healthcare for everybody than to just cover only catastrophic care.
Coverage isn't the goal. The goal is understanding.

Write a test if you don't feel confident that a piece of code does what you think it does. If you're not sure what it does now, there's little chance that you or anyone else will in the future, so write a test to understand it and to make that understanding explicit.

Use curiosity as a driver.
Being able to scale-up is interesting, both human logistics-wise and machine performance-wise, but the ability to scale down is also interesting.
The first thing they need to change for .Net Core is the name. "Core" is such a meaningless term. Call it something like .Net Multiplatform or something.
Because they benefit more from the society our "expensive" government has created. If they want capitalism without government, move your business to Mexico. What's that? There's a massive divide between the have's and have-not's and you'd never be able to make a profit?

I guess those taxes aren't so bad.
‘Help Him Up’: A Witness’s Account of Panic on a Subway Platform