skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That sort of thinking is what got a newly competitor a nice chunk of the market.

I'll say it again, one of THEIR OTHER PRODUCTS IS A BLACK HOLE.

So what I'm trying to say is, their primary product is a relatively easy SaaS to make. They made a huge mistake in building a secondary product in their offering and thus requires the 300 engineers.

Domain knowledge is something else that I and the other newly competitor has. HN developers who think they can build applications in a weekend completely omit this point.

Domain knowledge is what makes something easy, compared to someone who doesn't have it and then thinks it's hard.

Out of those 300 developers, how many in total have the domain knowledge. Not many I am betting.

> Then you're competing with a more experienced and focused company.

Yahoo was experienced and look how that turned out. Same goes for Bing.

Never discount domain knowledge.
This article doesn't make any sense.

Desktop Vs laptop - do a bit of thinking before buying, how, why, where and when will you use it?

Same thing goes for the iPad/Surface decision. Work out what you want it for, research to see if it does that well and decide accordingly.

Insufficient memory - look for devices that have expandable memory. This mistake should only occur once. Buy an item with no expandable memory, realise what a ball ache that is, avoid this type of device in future.

Unused devices - eBay/gumtree/shpock or whatever your local equivalent is. Get some money Mack toward your new/replacement device.

Hardware defects on a new item should mean it is replaced whether you bought it new or rented it.

Rent a second hand device to save money. Or you know buy a second hand device to save money.

The basic economics of it are that renting will be more expensive than buying because the agency renting you your item needs to make a profit. On a phone with an expected life of 2 - 4 years the renter wants to recoup costs in the first year when demand for the item is high, the subsequent years rent is the profit. So if you rent it in year one you will essentially be paying for the item. If you rent a second hand device in year 3 and 4 you will probably pay close to what a second hand device would cost you at that time.

Refurbished devices may only have a 1 year warranty in India but that second hand macbook you are going to rent had either been refurbished or will be when you drop it back and pick up a replacement (again refurbished).

I could go on, basically renting is not going to save you money over buying and reselling an item when you are finished with it.
From the moment that some ad sets you in contact with a product/service or a brand that brings value to you, it will become valuable to your life - on that particular moment.

Else how would you reach out to your possible customers, that would find your product/service of great value to them?

Do not fool yourself by saying that advertisement doesn't work... it does, and I bet it has influenced your decision plenty of times in your life - and I mean this in a positive way, not in a "mind controlling" way.

The problem of spamming is just a matter of cheap distribution, a lot of inventory and the need to monetize free content.
For a part-time programmer Mechanical Engineer, it is such a gratifying task to use ngrok. I first came across it a couple of years back. Great Project, great development, open sourced and well written in go. https://github.com/inconshreveable/ngrok/tree/master/src/ngr...

It takes two seconds to deploy an application in the evening from my kitchen table, check it also on my mobile and the next day access it from work also and show it to co-workers.

Call it "usability" for Engineers!
I love Pareto distributions but I don't like the author's framing of this as an inescapable law of nature. We have control over how society's feedback mechanisms are structured, and while it is foolish to try to reverse an inevitable trend we are by no means required to passively accept, especially when wildly disproportionate outcomes lead to systemic weakness.

It's worth considering that from the cellular point of view, cancer is extremely 'successful.' But at the human level, discovering a tumor is not a cause for celebration, but for anxiety and further investigation. Some tumors are benign, and can be thought of as a mere excess of a good thing causing only cosmetic or minor discomfort. Others are malignant, actively reproducing themselves to excess and pulling all the body's resources towards themselves, disregarding the health of the host body but without creating any sort of value (because of the impossibility of reproducing itself independently of its originating context). A benign cancer is tolerable; a malignant one must be excised or it will kill the host.

(This might seem like a hand-wavey objection, but systems biology suggests that Pareto effects show up in the development of cancers just as in many other natural systems, eg http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.... )

We should not fall into the trap of assuming that just because a social phenomenon instantiates some natural behavior, that it is therefore a Good Thing, aka the naturalistic fallacy. Nature is inherently fractal, and extreme outcomes may be instances of local maxima that are suboptimal from the perspective of the system as a whole.
It's well-timed, if the goal is to have Macron stagger into office as seriously damaged goods.
I definitely don't see it as hypocritical. Humanely designed systems are thoughtful in where they deploy implicitness. Implicitness can cut down on boilerplate for experts while simultaneously cutting down on confusing minutiae for newcomers.

On baked-in conventions, the implied design of a thoughtfully designed framework likely has wisdom that you shouldn't too quickly dismiss, and should at least fully wrap your brain around (along with the complementary design decisions in the rest of the framework) before diverging. The most baked-in assumptions in a well-designed system are the ones that exist for the strongest reasons.
WikiLeaks also a 100% track record of being correct. Biases accounted for, they are accurate.
What is so surprising about that? Societies operate largely on trust. Once you throw that out of the window you can do all kinds of things but you will mostly likely end up being found out and ostracized or jailed.

Just like any idiot with a kitchen knife can walk into a shopping mall and kill people hacking email accounts and servers is quite doable. The only reason it keeps on happening is because it is hard to catch the perpetrators.
any MCU can "jam" a GPS receiver if the board is laid out improperly or without enough shielding
Yes, I find that it's really remarkable, but every time I take a handful of 4-6 jelly beans, there is a dominant color. Sometimes it's blue, sometimes it's red, but there is always a dominant color. It can be 20%-40% sometimes. Remarkable.

I think that I might write an article about this to justify current economic trends and hardships...
Good. This good old boys club of insiders is not good for the average person.

Research who is funding these people. Research what they do when they think no one is looking. Figure out who the media is pushing for, and vote the complete opposite.

Twitter is actively supressing the #MacronLeaks hashtag. https://twitter.com/search?q=%23MacronLeaks&src=tyah

The propaganda machine is supporting Macron outright: http://i.imgur.com/rDppmI3.jpg

Call this karma.
Which is the whole reason why open-AI is so important, and likely will fail. Once Google or Facebook or Amazon start the AI ball rolling, the inequality will explode in their favor.
Harvard Art Museums' Entire Bauhaus Collection
I was wondering the same thing. If ambient levels of radiation have been raised so much since the dawn of nuclear testing, could that be partially to blame for the corresponding rise in cancer about that time?
Libc++ – C++ Standard Library
Javascript because its used for websites.
I'm pretty sure humans can't scavenge entire 4,000 ton warships from bottom of the sea, leaving only their indentation on the sea floor.
I find myself wanting languages and frameworks that let me write the magic myself. Magic is about solving big sets of similar problems in really compact/effortless ways. Rails tries to solve a really huge class of similar problems, i.e. web development, and starts pushing back on what you can achieve without ditching the framework entirely. I don't mean that in the sense that you stop being able to write regular Ruby (which can do anything), I mean that it's smooth sailing until you want to add your own magic in 'userspace'.

Take ASP.NET, for example using method attributes for authorisation:

[Authorize(Policy = "AdminOnly")]
public IActionResult Method(int projectId)
{
return Ok();
}

It's great and magical if you want to lock down a controller or a method to admins only, or people whose standard user object has an Age field > 18 or something like that. But if you want per-project permissions, with a user->permissions<-project relation? Sorry, you can't easily pass invocation parameters to your AuthorizationPolicy classes because C# Attributes don't support that. You could try having a naming scheme for your url fragments and get the project ID from there, but this means you need to have project parameters in every route, which is often redundant and would need to be checked on any object in a POST request. Any way you go, you have to write code inside your method to get the job done. You have to break out of the magic, and let go of the automatic 403 responses to do anything beyond the simplest case.

To actually build this without a clumsy if/else and manually returning 403 with JSON (to describe the error) in every controller method, it was necessary to create an exception and a custom exception handler middleware, and in the handler, produce a non-standard HTTP code and catch it again in a second middleware after the framework would otherwise gobble up 403s and return HTML instead of JSON. Exceptions inside controller methods are a perfectly adequate model for authorisation failures, but because the framework expects you to hook into their middleware for it, they made it very difficult to do it any other way.

Ok, that was a lengthy example. But it illustrates what I mean by wanting to write my own magic. Frameworks shouldn't cripple userspace magic by design.
Might I suggest a very short video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rD9qK8-sMGQ
I agree with the author of this article. In general this is more about implicit functionality at the language level. Why is that much different from implicit functionality we get at the library level. In Java, when I use JPA, I am depending on massively loaded meaning behind a set of annotations... @OneToOne @ManyToOne, etc... at runtime you best know what all of those annotations are. I haven't really seen anyone that LOVES JDBC complain about tools like Hibernate/JPA. Yet it gives us lots of implicit meaning when we write this code that someone NOT familiar with JPA would be going crazy about - until they learn it.

To go a bit further and just state that suddenly it's NOT OK at the language level is kinda argumentless in my humble opinion.

And yes, there are degrees of acceptability. If JPA had an annotation like @OMGWTFBBQ and ActiveRecord supported something similar - it would be rejected. JPA and ActiveRecord do things like this, but much of the rest of these tools features outweigh their faults. I know for sure there are many Java frameworks that actually love it when you write your own annotation.

For example I use a @NoAuthentication annotation in Jax-RS. There is no standard annotation for that, yet in our company we all use it and know what it means. We mark this REST service as a service that anonymous users or authenticated users can call alike. This is because we favor a model of placing our authentication code inside the stack (in our case CXF) rather than adding code at EACH rest method. It's a very VERY implicit style, we can't look at and adjust our authentication model, but just the same, we SHOULDN'T be trusted to change our authentication model in each method.

Annotations are not exactly the same as implicits in other languages, but it's the closest example of something in Java that makes our lives much easier and hides a LOT of explicit info.
Excuse me, I'm a bit confused by your answer.

Are you saying that Assembly is more implicit than Rust or C++?

What do you use to measure "implicitness"?
Corrine Erhel, Macron's person for everything dealing with surveillance, digital control and the like, dies suddenly of a heart attack yesterday. She dies the same evening the Macron leaks are released. Coincidence?

Considering the parallels with the USA 2016 election, and the murder of Seth Rich - I don't think so.
If it's grave robbing it won't be for long. Water is the universal solvent and fish need to eat too.
Yes.

There are caveats related to long term durability, but you said "for hobbyists" who I think are less concerned with that aspect. As far as up front performance the answer is yes. Others have explained the details so I'm just adding to the "yes" camp.

Brushless D.C. Motors are the way to go for robotics in many actuation situations for the near to medium term (next decade at least) and the lack of suitable
low cost controllers (this is "low cost") has been a major issue, so this product is excellent.

Source: am robotics engineer in Silicon Valley building my own brushless powered robot arm as a hobby and I'm an alpha contributor to the Odrive project. I've also designed my own brushless controllers [1] and built brushless linear motors.

[1] https://youtu.be/vbrzxlRpC0k
Yes, vote for the candidate the totalitarian is supporting, that's always worked out for the best.
I totally agree with everything you've said. I came here to post more or less this.

> On the other hand, Go is a bit tediously boilerplate heavy. I'm still looking for the right balance.

I've been working with Django (in Python) for a while now, and find it strikes a really nice balance. Almost nothing happens by magic, but there's also surprisingly little boilerplate. It used to be a little rough, but it's gotten a lot better in recent years especially (I think likely due in no small part to influence/competition from rails), so if you haven't checked it out recently, you should!
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278262606...

Let me know if you can't access the full article/the abstract is not enough.
>yes we said it

>but we didn't want you to know we said it
SPAM's Carbon Footprint for My Home Server
This is extremely dangerous advice. Refactoring for the sake of cleaning up code invariably introduces bugs. Decent code coverage and automated tests can reduce the potential of this, but not guarantee it.

The boy scout rule is, do not leave it worse than you found. That includes breaking the software by performing an unnecessary rewrite.
This is sort of a strawman, nobody on the explicit side of the debate wants people to write more boilerplate -- it's about how discoverable the code (and relatedly how many layers of indirection).

class Person < ApplicationRecord
belongs_to :company
has_many :assignments
end

For example what are the :company and :assignments symbols referring to? Why are they symbols? If they are models it would be better if they were required explicitly and that way I know where they are defined and can go read the code.
Excellent point! So far I get the impression that 'level of abstraction' and it's benefits/downsides can be separated into a bunch different categories (readability, conciseness/concision, ease of getting back into things after being away, protection from various classes of errors, etc.). Ease of debugging will now be another one on my list.
I feel differently. [1] And that's exactly why a debate is logical.

One useful thing you can do to enter the debate... define what you believe an ad is and why. Oh and remember, when you're driving past those big ol' strip mall signs... you're looking at a physical advertisement of location.

Maybe your definition differs, maybe it doesn't. Maybe you have a sound, logical argument for why it's different, or maybe you don't.

A debate is a good faith effort in trying to understand another's viewpoint while arguing your own. And I understand your viewpoint, I hate what some ads have become, and yet I still don't use an ad-blocker because of my own personal values.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13964498
It would make sense, yes, if someone would provide it for a useful price point. Given that they'd have to price in repair insurance and want to make a profit I don't see it happening for many use cases.

Short-term rental (e.g. for tests or if you really only need it a limited time) is a different thing and exists already.
There are usually a dozen variants of the same microcontroller design just with different peripherals, amount of memory, packaging..

You could just as well say STM32 or STM32F4 and that is pretty much 99.9% of the information you need to know :)
I go back and forth on if its helpful to set a goal on the number of books. Sometimes its a good motivation for me. Other times its a distraction to the goals of why I read: to learn and to enjoy.

The year my son was born I spent hours everyday pushing him in a stroller to help him stop crying and give his mom a break. I read / listened to 105 books that year, which ended up being too much. I couldn't remember most of what I read / listened to. The next year I had to re-read many of the books.

The sweet spot for me is between 40 and 50, although I've adjusted my goal from number of books to subject mastery. Focusing on a subject I care about and studying books, articles, etc. on the subject has ended up being more rewarding. In addition, I have a handful of books I read simply for the joy of reading.
They routinely make claims not supported by the evidence they have. They retweeted the pizza child trafficking garbage, made up facts about redirecting responsibility for attacks.
Implicit code is great for frameworks. The kinds of things you have to do over and over again and a lot of the things Rails is great at. Create a database table, link it to an ORM, take params from a POST request, save them to that table...all that stuff should be pretty vanilla and absolutely yes, convention over configuration is amazing for that.

Explicit code is great for business level logic. In any business, and especially startups, things are changing so frequently that there's often very little in the code that could be set up as a convention and the accompanying "magic" that has to make it happen. Sales processes change weekly. Frontend features change daily. Reporting needs can change hourly.

In those environments you have to be able to quickly look at the code and see/know exactly what it is doing now and why so that you can be better able to make changes without introducing defects. Testing helps this a lot, but succinct, readable, explicit code makes life so much easier.

Implicit for frameworks; Explicit for business.
By your logic, since the media seems to be pushing for Marcon, do you prefer Le Pen instead?

Edit: Since I saw you replied to this post that you do support Le Pen, and think she is best for the French people: Are you French, and if so, why do you think she is best? I'm not French, so I'm curious.
Start reading a long series by a prolific author - like Bernard Cornwell or Patrick O'Brian on Kindle. Watch your bank account dwindle.
But they are neutral! It's like running into an Elemental Ice Golem. It's not good or evil, it's not left or right. It is just made of ice. WikiLeaks is an Elemental Truth & Leaks Golem. It doesn't give a shit whose agenda it helps, it just wants to expose more.

I would rather have a WikiLeaks that release everything that it can receives, rather than one that curates it's leaks for an agenda.
Trello itself is the perfect example of "remove features to serve simpler use cases".

All sorts of business and development process tracking software has existed for decades. JIRA, FogBugz, PivotalTracker, MS Project, and so on.

Trello got rid of 90% of their features, and just kept "list of lists of short text snippets". That makes it great for planning small software projects, but also shopping lists, travel plans, or sales pipelines.
The ‘propaganda machine’ is supporting Macron because the alternative (Le Pen) is terrifying.
The propaganda machine, as you call it, may be supporting Macron outright.

But the hacking machine is supporting Le Pen outright.

Who is funding the hacking machine? Why has only one candidate's emails been hacked? And why does this sound very similar to the 2016 US election, when only one candidate's emails were hacked?

In the US we know full well that the two parties are effectively the same in terms of corruption and back-room dealing. I'm guessing the same is true in France. How do we know what the "good old boys club" is doing if we only see half of that club? How can we fairly figure out what "these people" are doing if we only see the sordid details of some of these people?
You can still make good abstractions with explicit code, and remove most of boilerplates. But please at least be explicit about the fact you are using that abstraction.

One problem with Rails is that these abstractions are applied implicitly and burried deep in the framework. For DHH it's easy to know what it's doing behind the scene. Not for people who did not create these implicitly applied abstractions.

So.. Either you will have to learn ALL the Rails conventions, or you can create your own abstractions and use them explicitly. Also, it will be easy to put a breakpoint on the call site to your abstraction. Try that with Rails, you don't know what/where to put that breakpoint.
Vimflowy doesn't say what it does so I checked Workflowy - but this also doesn't say what it does.
I think he doesn't describe GCVOE but rather uses it to explain the apparent paradox.

Naively expecting "better" organisms to win fails to explain why these birds are evolving progressively "worse".

But if you go down and look at genes which handicap the male while triggering some silly attractiveness glitch in females versus genes that don't, it becomes clear that as long as the handicap isn't too strong, the former genes may easily win.

I think that's a point for the GCVOE this time.
Ben Heck Makes the Nintendo PlayStation Fully Operational
It's parametric, once you know the math it will transfer. There are (or were, not sure if they are still in use) 5 and 7 phase stepper motors to help combat these resonance problems.
I'd say it's because of advertising mostly, but a lot of similar tech (that is usually ad supported) like Disqus.

It's interesting that today cross-domain sandboxing applies to almost everything except JavaScript. If I load an image cross domain and draw it into a canvas, the contents of that canvas are sandboxes, but I can cheerfully mix and match code across domains too.

Seems like it would be a good thing to do but it would break a ton of stuff.
Whoops, just noticed the bad copy-and-paste. Meant to link to the HN discussion for that article: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10381015 .
This is correct. The goal is not to elect La Penne.
One thing that's missing from this narrative - recreational Adderal users tend to use dosages which are in the 40-60 mg range per hit.

ADHD users tend to be in the 5-30 mg range, often in extended release form. Most neuraltypical people won't even notice any difference in concentration or energy from such small dosages.

I am at the 15mg end, and the energy hit is not even enough to affect my sleep if I make a mistake and take one at night (it's happened). A single coffee, on the other hand, is enough to keep me up for a few extra hours.
The fix for that was to bolt an encoder onto the stepper just as with the servo, but in practice these systems do not work very well.