skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's something I've done time and time again, and seen others do too. It's easy to look at something and think you understand it well enough to know how it can be improved. But when you find out the rationale and reasons it is the way it is, it's kind of humbling. Like how it surprised me to learn that there's a lot of valid, practical reasons to use the Imperial measurement system over Metric.
Your Sales Success Depends on These 4 Data Points
PythonistaCafe: A Peer-To-Peer Learning Community for Python Developers
Even better - I have the intent to equalize in early 2016 board meeting notes...good idea
I bought a bunch when it was around $9; probably $1,000 worth, just for fun. Then I spent most of it on stupid stuff like pizza, and had about $5 left.

A couple years later that $5 had grown to become worth $200, so I again spent it on a couple stupid things.

I would be mad, but it was in my MtGox account anyway.
Crazy bad bug in Microsoft's Windows malware scanner can install malware
Micro economically, the same happens as interest rates go up. As interest rates go up, the demand at that price drops, which means that supply has to lower the price to keep a liquid market.

If you're in the currency manipulation / house flipping game, you ideally want to buy when interest rates are high and sell when interest rates are low.
I'd use gmail's native app for this but it's just awful.

All my fav native email clients get bought and killed by larger companies.
include_bytes! is for compile-time inclusion of files though, not for runtime.
Yes absolutely...currently have both just poking around for 2nd opinion :)
No other real benefits other than the advance, but that isn't specific to Apress. The tooling is easy to use, which I mention because I have heard bad things regarding Mannings tooling when it comes to writing.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_notation#Other_systems...
Its hard for me to imagine that requiring every value to be explicitly dropped would produce code which is easier to read and understand.
Wow. I have to say I hate this. This dumbs it down for sure. This is just one step up from guitar hero, which is at least premised as a game. It sounds like there is just no room for nuance and personality in that guitar. SMH.
I'm not sure if I'm making myself clear enough. I'm not arguing that this is great for everything. In the context of the post, that's good enough for a lot of apps just starting out WITHOUT the work of setting up something custom and durable ala Netflix's infrastructure.
Here is the video of that episode: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92vuuZt7wak
> Like how it surprised me to learn that there's a lot of valid, practical reasons to use the Imperial measurement system over Metric.

I've always wondered about that. Why?
That's true and a nice exercise for a programming class, but if you "reduce the problem to fixed stride for loops over arrays that can be fully pipelined." to make the game of life as fast as possible, you're doing it wrong (for those who don't know about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashlife)
> What are these basic engineering habits

IME, a lot of them boil down to the principle of least surprise and not keeping silent dependencies on things in unexpected ways. These sound trivial and obvious, but they manifest in a thousand different ways, and the habit of constantly and subconsciously checking for these things in the back of your mind while designing/coding/reading code is something that comes with practice. As I said, I don't think it's very difficult for intelligent people to learn this give a little bit of time, which is why I hire for creativity and problem-solving skills instead of direct experience with certain tools. Particularly at our current size, dead weight is infinitely costlier than it would be to a behemoth like Google. Our latest hire has never worked in anything but C and he's already more productive on our Python codebase than hire #2, who has the advantage of years of Python experience and months more tenure at this company.

> why was engineer #2 not able to adopt them?

It's not so much that engineer #2 couldn't adopt these habits: it's that he's apparently not capable of doing any actual functional implementation, which is a prerequisite for a functional implementation that's well-engineered. The point I was making was that an intelligent, creative hire missing engineering experience can easily and quickly be taught. But an experienced engineer without creativity and intelligence is not very useful.

As far as why he can't do any functional work: Every time I mention this to someone[1], people seem pretty put off, but I honestly just think he's just not a very smart guy. For some reason, the very idea of differing levels of intelligence seems to offend people, but I'm racking my brains here and I can't think of another reason why he would be so abysmally unable to do anything. In conversation with him, your response never gets addressed and he just rephrases his last point ad nauseum with no hint of comprehension. My (semi-technical) founder has pretty much been working directly with him and he hasn't had any luck in finding things for him to do either. I guess the silver lining here is that I'm batting 1000 on hiring recommendations so I hope in the future I won't be overruled on tech hiring.

[1] Not at work: that would be entirely inappropriate. I mean to friends/confidantes when they ask me how the new job is going etc.
The server seems overloaded (somewhat ironically). Try http://archive.is/stDR0 .
> short codes are rapidly becoming obsolete

I wish. With the prevalence of using SMS for 2FA, short codes are very much in use. When you've got a provider that doesn't work with most short codes, you run into a frighteningly large number of difficult situations. Some providers will give you a "I didn't receive the text, call me" option. Some (grr...Venmo) don't. But it's one of those features you don't realize how often it's used until it doesn't work for you.
Maybe for the US, but in other western countries the fee is generally zero for individuals, or a few cents for businesses, and the time a few hours at most (often seconds).
Ανώτερη η Ρεάλ Μαδρίτης στο ημιτελικό
Not only have tabloids been doing it, but all journalism--just look at the 1890s and how "fake" news was. The sinking of the USS Maine?

Also, look at state propaganda in the media in the 1930s and 1940s and even during Vietnam--the contrived Gulf of Tonkin incident as a means of generating public support for expanding the war to include mainline ground troops.

I have to conclude that all journalism is mostly lies and state propaganda is behind much of it.

I should add that I was a sports writer for a local newspaper many years ago and that gig was definitely an exercise in embellishment and outright fabrication at times.

What I find most egregious about the recent "fake news" bs is that now private Internet companies deign to tell you what is and isn't truthful information and we just watched how these same companies sided with one and only one presidential candidate. The problem was, even they couldn't carry that side of beef over the finish line!
This phenomenon, where the need to license a patent is driven primarily by the need to comply with standard, rather than the advantages of the invention relative to alternatives, is accounted for in recent changes in the law of patent damages. See https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=175128776687856....

Under this 2015 case, the patent owner gets less money if people just use their patent to comply with the standard, and not because it's a better way of doing something.
New Infrastructure Should Be Smart, Not Just Big
Cisco has done that to Arista in the past. Apple has done that to Samsung. Samsung tried to do it to Apple, but Obama overruled that. (The President can block ITC injunctions.)

Usually what happens is a very fast settlement by the infringing party.
I didn't downvote you, but I also don't understand what your comment even means. Dimly lit room... what? What Reddit discussion are you referring to? What does your comment have to do with writing games in Rust?
I think of all the software I use, CarPlay + Apple Music + Siri has the highest "scream factor" (i.e. causing me to scream out loud with frustration.)
I'm not saying this can't be done, au contraire! Indeed cost coherent programming idioms can be converted into typed language primitives. But there
is a price to pay in terms of typing system complexity.

It's a slippery slope argument: if you add this, why stop there?
Especially if you require run-time checks.

If there was a compelling set of operation that preserved the
invariants without run-time checks, and it was expressive, i.e. it covered a large number of
cases that you'd otherwise had to put into "unsafe" and it didn't ruin
type inference ...
That doesn't really comport with what I see day-to-day. This guy definitely doesn't enjoy not being able to do anything and breaking everything that he touches; you can see that it upsets him. I don't know why HN (and people in general) are so desperate to avoid the possibility that differences in ability can exist.
My commentary isn't talking about HN denizens who sit around debating this stuff in their spare time. I'm talking about folks who buy surveillance-TVs 'cause they're new and cool, hook it up to their Wifi because that's what the directions said, and never thought about the idea that they just installed a remote listening device in their bedroom. And sure, probably only robots listen to it. Probably.

As for personal harms, I readily admit that most of my concern is about risk. It is more speculative - as far as I know, there's not been a huge number of targeted attacks on random people yet, and for those that do happen, people focus on the specific details, rather than the data that enabled it. You can write off the attacks on political figures, because you're not that important. But that ignores all the Gmail cracks that compromise other services because enough data about them is floating around to make an attack possible.

But 10 years ago, perople weren't worried about automated attacks on US tax returns, internet-originated bank heists and ATM harvester stories were novelties instead of near-daily occurrences, and so on. What data did I leak somewhere that will come back to bite me next decade?
Are those the only two possible scenarios? Either everyone has an Apple device within 5ft of them at all times or nobody uses Apple products?
In my area, there's been a big consolidation of gasoline retailers and distributors, so there is less competitive pressure to lower prices.

The biggest differences in price now are between people who use gas as a loss leader (wholesale clubs) and a chain that prices $0.05-0.10 more because the local supermarket subsidizes the gas.
Arch Linux is significant exception.
> And nothing about local variables/controls/etc makes T-SQL "terrible".

Compared to a full-featured programming language? It's good for its intent, which is to provide a minimal bit of procedural scaffolding for scripts that alter the database. It is terrible as a general-purpose procedural programming language, and I've worked with too much horrifying T-SQL and PL/SQL that pushes these tools way too far out of their intended workflow.

Yes, T-SQL is predominantely a declarative language. But it includes procedural components for writing procedural scripts. And unless we're talking about maintenance scripts or deployment scripts, don't use them.
It's killing me too because I'm waiting on the next correction to come before buying any more, but I thought that was going to happen earlier and I'm kicking myself for not buying some a week ago.

The future looks bright for cryptocurrencies, but I don't want to buy some at 1700 and feel like a fool when it crashes back down to 1100
Can you assign it to a variable and then ignore it?
People are going to downvote you for mentioning cryptocurrencies, but your point is true even of much more conservative investment strategies. A home is not an investment, it is a depreciating asset. If you can afford to buy a home (in cash or on a mortgage), you will almost always come out ahead if you put the money into mutual funds and rent instead.
My guess is that a big reason a lot of people fail is due to the way food is marketed and sold. For example, the Extra Long Cheeseburger at Burger King is $3.99. They are currently running a deal, though, 2 for $5.

A lot of people who go in there and want to eat a single Extra Long Cheeseburger are going to see that and say "No freaking way am I paying $3.99 for one, when I can get TWO for $5". We have a natural tendency to compare per unit pricing, and see it as buying just one means paying $3.99 per unit, but going for the 2 for $5 means just $2.50 unit, and we tend to see the regular price as a rip-off compared to the sale price.

Yes, this is not rational, but this is how people work.

Similar thing with Subway, which ran a deal where most foot long subs were $6 all February. That made it real hard for many people who normally bought a 6" to do so. When your normal 6" is $5.89, and you can double the size for an extra $0.11, it is very very hard to stay at 6".

Another good illustration was an experiment I saw. The experimenters got to play with the pricing and availability of drinks in a movie theater. The theater normally sold a small drink for something like $1, and a large for something like $3. The large was much larger than the small, but the small (which was still kind of big) was by far the best seller. So then they added a medium, that was about 25% of the way between the small and large in size, but cost something like $2.75.

Note that objectively the medium is a terrible choice. It cost 2.75 times as much as the small for only 25% of the soda, and it only cost $0.25 less than the large but gave much less soda.

So guess what happened? No, people did not buy the medium...but now most people bought the large!

I'm not sure exactly where I saw this one. I think it might have been on the National Geographic channel, on the show "Brain Games". If not, it was on a similar show on the Science Channel or one of the other Discovery network channels.

Psychologists and behavioral economists have learned a lot about how we make purchasing decisions, and the marketing departments of probably every major (and a lot of minor) food companies follow that work closely and put it into practice. Most of us don't have a chance against that.
> A program is so much more than a flat collection of lines of text stored on a filesystem.
> Our tools force us to "reduce" a program and dumb it down to a bunch of flat files.

Agreed with a reservation: text sucks, but we have nothing better, and your post does not
suggest an improvement. If you have something more concrete on your mind, I have some
specific questions here I think we'll need good answers before we jump the text-based ship.

> It also adds cognitive overhead for naming things and so on.

I take this you advocate going without textual names. Presumably, if we didn't name things
in our programs, programming (both "writing" and "reading" them) would be easier.
If this is actually your point:

* How are our tools going to present "source code" to us?
* How are we going to refer to pieces of our programs, in spoken and written communication?

These things have great impact, right now I can get into a discussion of execle(), execl(),
execlp(), execve(), execv() and execvp() (these are pretty average regarding mutilation
in the interest of brevity, at least they're pronouncable[1]).

> Imagine an editor that allowed you to [...] view a function, select it in
> the editor and right click on its name and click "Write documentation", or
> "View entities calling this function", "View tests involving this function",
> "View authors".

* What would "view a function" mean in a nontextual programming language mean?
* "Write documentation" implies more text. Doesn't the argument against text
in programming languages apply to documentation as well, just more forcefully?
What is your proposed solution to keep documentation in sync with the code?
* What does "View entities calling this function" mean in a universe without names?

[1] cf. wcsnrtombs(), wcspbrk(), wcsrchr(), wcsrtombs().
Yeah, Lua certainly has it quirks. However binding to JS is a huge endeavor. For instance that v8 crate doesn't easily expose a way to call Rust from JS which is trivial in Lua.

Also the JS runtime is huge and the build system is complex. You can run Lua in ~400kb or less and LuaJIT tends to walk over any other jitted interpreted runtime.
Not really sure exactly what you're saying but I think this says a lot: "I also have a lack of motivation to do so." So don't. Compose the equivalent of Rite of Spring without the motivation to even play a single instrument proficiently and I'll concede instruments are irrelevant and DAW's are an appropriate starting ground for actual musicians.
You're looking for an honest conversation now? That's bold.
The standard .NET Framework has been settled and stable for a decade, and it's still completely valid for use.

.NET Core is a new project with a vast amount of reworking and as usual, version 2.0 tends to be the best release to wait for. Considering it's not even out yet, not sure what all the outrage is for.
Wow. I've made jokes 10x worse in meatspace. I'm thankful I grew up before the social media craze.
>maintainer is not needed to make the system running, if nothing changes

Something tells me that you haven't maintained badly designed systems. Some actually do require manual attention from time to time, even if nothing changes. A single non-rotatable log file becomes too big and a restart has to be scheduled or an application starts behaving weirdly because a buggy and rarely used bit of code suddenly got used once and it destabilized the entire thing... I'm sure there's a lot of other ways in which applications can require maintenance even if it hasn't been updated for months.
Are you able to use the Push as a generic input device? Could it drive something other than the Ableton software?

I can think of a ton of things I'd like to do where having a custom "keyboard" would be awesome.
>why do people keep saying this?

Because they're confusing theoretical transaction costs with reality. This isn't an insurmountable technical limitation; this is a political issue within the miner community.
So just wait. It's going to crash again, it always does.
And when all your physical security tools are electronic the first step to physical security is IT security :)
I'm asking honestly, here.

Is this legal? Does this "not count" as a phishing attempt because they put a "disclaimer" in the email?
> - Extremely ungraceful handling of spotty cell coverage. Playback will abruptly stop to buffer, but the UI gives absolutely no feedback. The play/pause button just behaves as if I told it to stop, and is unresponsive to my input. This is especially terrible while driving, where playback can stop for other reasons (Like a bluetooth disconnect).

This seems to happen to me, even though I don't stream any music.
If you have a different figure, you should share it
The CarPlay interface for Apple Music is awful as well.
The bull run going on with Bitcoin right now is very concerning to me. There's been no recent improvements to the utility of Bitcoin, instead there's been scaling issues and an ugly, contentious civil war over how to solve it. It's utility if anything has dropped considerably, as mining fees have become far higher than traditional methods and more unpredictable, leaving smaller transactions to sometimes take 16+ hours to confirm, even with the default fees set by the wallet.

Historically, a lot of this activity tends to be from unregulated exchanges in Asia, many of whom could be engaging in some form of price manipulation (it wouldn't be the first time - google for Willy Bot). My Bitcoin friends in town have started to joke that the reason it's going up is just the word "China", because it tends to be a repeated explanation of why the price is increasing, suggesting to me that nobody really knows what's going on or even where the demand is coming from.

I'm not anti-bitcoin, but I'd vastly prefer to see a slow, stable increase in price based on the currency improving in utility, not these giant blasts of speculation that, IMHO, only work to discredit Bitcoin as a serious instrument for financial systems. An extreme example of how bad this is getting right now that I seriously hope is just a joke: https://np.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6a3lvd/today_i_took...
That figure isn't right, it's about 29 billion.

As for lost coins, we can only guess. Much of this depends on whether you think the coins mined very early on by Satoshi are lost forever, or could come back into play. There's very roughly 1 million 'Satoshi Coins'. I'd estimate about another 500,000 that are lost on discarded hard-drives and whatnot. 1-2 million coins seems reasonable.

The only ones we know for sure are ones sent to 'Bitcoin Eater' addresses. Example: https://blockchain.info/address/1BitcoinEaterAddressDontSend... IIRC there are perhaps a few hundred lost in that way.
Songwriting can be taught, yes. In most music courses you start by analyzing the Bach Chorales, which (along with some Gregorian work from the middle ages) is what really kicked off contemporary music composition. By analyzing the Chorales and moving forward from there you learn how to manipulate chord progressions, harmony, point and counterpoint.

Composers classically trained this way tend (!) to have an easier time writing melodies, harmonies, and progressions in a consistent manner, ie not having to wait for "inspiration to strike". The composer, of course, still needs to develop an emotional connection in the music, but the point is that it can, and routinely is, taught.
Keep in mind today Rust is intended to be a better C++. (For loose values of 'intended'.)

Destructors are a common resource management idiom there (although I guess most C++ programmers couldn't describe the behavior correctly), and there are no other really common idioms for that.

Better the devil you kind of know?
To all the people complaining, I feel you. There is not one tool that takes you through the entire workflow of making music well, but they sell software pretending they do support the entire workflow. In truth, you write and arrange in specialized notation software, create samples in specialized synthesis software, or record live audio, then you use audio workstations to fix, edit, transform, and mix. Even there you may rely on external hardware or software plugins. These tools aren't meant for a one-person creator. They mimic the specializations in the music industry. A good all-in-one software simply does not exist, and small teams trying to work on these projects are trying to bite off a real big pie. It's very complex and requires a lot of specialized knowledge, and many of the pieces are probably patent-encumbered, too. But good luck!
I can't tell you that Bitcoin is a scam, but I can tell you that if I were going to devise a Ponzi for the 21st century, Bitcoin is what it would look and feel like.
What are you listening to that you cannot find on there? I have a pretty eclectic taste and have been shocked at the amount of small time stuff that Spotify actually does have
Near LA you'll have a lot of military and space industry, including SpaceX. They typically use a lot of stuff like this.
That is an interesting comparison, especially given how long it took to make an average person even read those once they were on the box (I'm not even sure how many people do).