skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
We're doing the same for microservice deployments to kubernetes, using Jenkins' multibranch pipeline - Jenkins just watches the git repo, and any commit to a branch that contains a Jenkinsfile gets built. At the end of the build process, we publish a docker image tagged with the branch and build number, and then use helm to upgrade or create a deployment in a kubernetes cluster, tagged to run the just-published docker image. Our cluster's running in AWS and has a package deployed to it called 'area53' which can set up route 53 DNS records for kubernetes services automatically.

Upshot of all that is that if you create and push a new branch called 'foo', a few minutes later that branch's code is up and running in AWS, under the name 'service-foo.dev.example.com'. We can then automatically run integration tests against that endpoint.

Best part is that the build process defined by the jenkinsfile, and the deployment defined by the helm chart, all live in the source, so you can play with them on a branch. Want to add another testing step to the build process? Branch, add it to the jenkinsfile, and your build pipeline change gets executed just for your branch, without stopping other branches from building. Once you're happy with the addition, merge the change and now every future branch gets that extra deployment step. Likewise if you modify the deployment chart, you can test it in a branch.
> ... when the A380 Program Manager attempted to move the German designers onto the same CAD system as the French, he met a wall of resistance. Personal rivalries and national pride are reported to have been issues ...

And yet there are other, more objective motives for resistance. As all big-org managers know:

1. Reputational: Belatedly switching to your peer organization's tools suggests you made a poor planning decision earlier.

2. Work shifting: The switch itself will inevitably consume many weeks of calender time, though non-technical upper management will insist on pretending otherwise. While you're struggling to switch, the rival peer org will press its advantage, collecting milestone checkoffs and praise from higher-ups. Alternative is to block the change, so as to bury some considerable share of the tool mismatch pain and delay in the rival org.
> Agreed with the silly use of the name 'poaching'. But how exactly is the state preventing two people voluntarily entering into a contract a good thing?

Because any analysis of contracts that does not take into account the relative power of the parties entering them is an incredibly naive one.
Put this into a quick ruby class if anyone is interested: https://github.com/fredkelly/sense-client
sniper's stuff is awesome
> JITs can't do is to add and/or remove parallelism from the program

Of course they can. A trivial practical example is the JVM JIT using vector instructions to add parallelism to a program that didn't have any before. But a JIT compiler could also profile code and add thread-level parallelism if it wanted.
I'm always on the lookout for an interesting criticism of blockchain technology, this isn't one of them.
Mutual IP agreements are not protectionism just an equal playing field. Protecting domestic companies, but not foreign ones on the other hand is the definition of protectionism.

PS: Abolishing IP would also be a level playing field, but again that's not what they are doing.
Unemployment figures are people who aren't employed but are searching for work, so I'm not sure it says exactly what you're trying to say.

People who don't want to work, don't show up in unemployment.
Proton.B: What this Mac malware does
There has been a lot of debate on India's refusal (for political reasons around disputed territory) to join the OBOR. Such debates are tempered by math that show that the trains are actually less efficient than shipping in lots of cases [1].

I wonder if the pure economic value , minus the investment leverage, still makes sense.

[1] https://m.rediff.com/news/column/india-doesnt-want-to-join-c...
"The multiple passports are fascinating"

1. This is a broad assumption. "this means she would have had several fake passports." Make this a "should". I have checked so often into hotels that either did not check my passport or did not look at it.

2. 70ies passports were easy to fake. In fact, I knew somebody who "professionally" faked and manipulated passports to help people escape from the GDR (East Germany) when he was a student.
Yes, it's outside, but it's 8 minutes by train ride from the central main station.
> A lot of the problems are problems due to the architecture though, not necessarily hard to implement in more conventional architectures.

I think the biggest difficulty is due to the tiny # of instructions allowed per node. It's like 10, right?
Financial markets are meant for people to exchange financial products. People don't think very fast. So there is absolutely no value for actual market participants to be able to do sub-millisecond trades.

If 2 person read the same news and send a trade order at the same hundredth of second, who wins the trade should be attributed at random, not to whoever is closest to the exchange.

Super fast trades only allow high frequency trading firms to skim the market...
> Banks dragged down by capital obligations from Dodd-Frank regulation are looking everywhere for cost savings.

Name a single bank who is using blockchain in an essential component of their operations (not just a proof of concept). Go on, I'll wait.

Sure, blockchain is "interesting" and the people involved are "brilliant" but where is it delivering a 10x improvement over the status quo?

Blockchain is a classic example of a solution looking for a problem.
This is what I was talking about elsewhere in this discussion about city people ready to believe there are packs of wolves out hunting humans. 95% of the time in the back country (over 25 years in the rockies) when encountering these large predators, I only see their backside as they run away.
My biggest complaint about RISC-V is its lack of condition codes. This is just too puritanical. I think ARMv8 strikes a nice balance here. Leaving something out that both ARM and Intel provide seems pointlessly austere.

As was pointed out in the A History of Modern 64-bit Computing cite, both RISC and Itanium show an academic bias. Yes, RISC-V is elegant and simple and that helps in a one semester upper div architecture class. But that doesn't help you much outside of a one semester upper div architecture class.

So what do you tangibly get with that elegance and simplicity? You aren't going to write RISC-V assembly; compilers are better especially for such a regular and spare ISA. This is 2017 and LLVM has been a thing for quite some time. Compilers are not a big deal.

Lower power? Chip area? How much lower power and chip area are we talking about?
Space/Time Trade-Offs in Hash Coding with Allowable Errors (1970) [pdf]
Generally this is covered under a confidentiality agreement, which forbids the disclosure of the company's intellectual property. The designs you mention in your example would be considered work-for-hire, and (depending on how specific/proprietary they were) if you sold them to a competitor on the sly, you might be in violation of such an agreement.

So no, a noncompete - even one that only applies to the time you are employed by the company - isn't typically necessary.
> What about the people who are unable to produce at least $X of value per hour? They don't matter?

They get fired as soon as statistics show they don't meet their targets. We already have tons of those jobs in existence and the rise of technology only oversimplified this further. Case in point: a call center. Say the goal is you need to deal with X customers in an hour. That doesn't mean their problems are solved. And even if the problem is (seemingly) solved that doesn't mean their problems are solved in the best way possible. And yet, this is the basis of how call centers operate these days.

What happens when people get fired? Well, in some countries you get social benefits and in some you don't but there's no country where those benefits are going to pay your bills AND allow you to enjoy any form of luxury. So what happens either way? They look for a new job. Preferably legal job, but if they can't, they resort to shady businesses. Grey areas. You know, like Uber*?
However that's an insufficient argument for non-compete. The non-compete would prevent that, but also would prevent something much more reasonable.
Worked pretty well for the US in the 1800s.
The HN title, which reads "Tesla's SpaceX settles..." is an error: SpaceX is not owned by Tesla. (The article's title does not include "Tesla's".)
Maybe after 25 more years in the Rockies with an active back country lifestyle, I will encounter a pack of human-hunting wolves. Hubris indeed.
"I feel pretty down and my dayjob is meaningless to me"

Do you have hobbies? There's many to choose from :) Ask yourself, what does have meaning to you? There is more to life than a job.

"should i pick up a sideproject I've committed to that i kind of care about instead, and think is interesting?"

This might be a good idea. If you would find it meaningful and emotionally rewarding.

"Or ditch that as well and just take rest/go travel?"

Is there someplace you have always wanted to go? Rest is good, but it sounds like you aren't overworked, as much as just not being stimulated. As far as I can tell.

"Can i still work while recovering? What's a good workload?"

If you have the savings, I wouldn't.

"I'm considering taking a sick leave till the end of my contract next month"

If you absolutely need to. But it might mean not getting a good reference. Can you stick it out(assuming you dont already have another lined up)?
"""
On Self-Modifying Code and the Space Shuttle OS

I was doing some reading about Metaprogramming and Self-modifying code at Wikipedia, a fascinating topic with many uses from optimization, patching, and genetic programming.

And it reminded me of my days during the early 1990s working as a software engineer on the Space Shuttle operating system (FCOS). Many people don’t know that the Space Shuttle OS implements self-modifying code for the purpose of “fault-tolerance”.

...

An alternative to self-modifying or patching code is to use conditions (if statements) and local store (such as in-memory) to store flags that are used determine the paths to take (assuming such paths are known ahead of time, which might not be the case on genetic programming). Being the Space Shuttle a memory-limited, non-dynamic memory map and management environment, it is cheaper, less complex, and safer to patch specific instructions directly.
"""

http://weblog.cenriqueortiz.com/computing/2007/08/18/on-self...

It sounds useful in the appropriate contexts, much like every other technique.
if you don't mind, what state / country?
What you're describing is the norm in capitalist Western countries. Other societies have different "things to chase", basically the values of their cultures.
Near real time monitoring of mass media is something that companies do for damage control and crisis management. It's done either by an in-house public relations team or by an external PR company. I thought it would be useful for Uber given how much negative PR they have to fight these days.
There are no wolves hunting humans, and the idea is so ridiculous it is astounding.
The term "the left" or "liberals" and such tends to make me tune out, figuring someone's about to make a straw-man argument or engage in the national pastime of our political pundits: shadow-boxing with figments of their own imagination that embody the very worst of the people they wish to argue against.

Also, it just entrenches this "us versus them" thing. Some people are obsessed with the idea of cultural appropriation. Make an argument about that. "The left" just dog-whistles that some other nefarious group believes something and, so, before you even hear my argument you should be biased against them because they're the "other," the evil, untrustworthy "other." Always up to no good, those "others."
You're thinking more of Theravada Buddhism which spread to Sri Lanka and Thailand, and the more recent Tibetan variety. The Mahayana version which took over China features statues of many different gods, often taken directly from Taoism.
I rent cars, pay for groceries, and basically do everything else with Bitcoin. I have to use card gateways like Bitwala for that, but it works for me perfectly. My debit card can be usually loaded with Bitcoin within 10-15 minutes (it is especially helpful as I live in 2 countries and travel a lot; bank transfers take much more time).

There are many companies now where you can get your salary paid in Bitcoin. In fact, it is so infinitely more convenient, I think that only the forces of mental inertia hold this approach from immediate universal adoption.
“Project Treble” solves one of Android’s many update roadblocks
What was Internet good for when it first came out? Like I said it was nothing more than a novelty fringe culture at best for a long time before it reached critical mass.

It's not like I'm working on some bitcoin business or anything but I am offended that you think Bitcoin is the same type of hype as "AI, IoT, etc.". Trust me I'm the biggest hater of the AI hype in 2016-2017 (driven by VCs and BigCos for their own interest). The reason I know these are hypes is because most technical people who actually have been working in these fields know exactly what's possible and what's not, but the non-technical VCs and marketers are driving the "market" (that doesn't exist) thinking that something groundbreaking has suddenly happened. The fact is: nothing groundbreaking has happened. The technology is getting better for sure, but compared to bitcoin these are nothing new.

Bitcoin is actually something new and a novel piece of technology, which is different from all the other marketing hypewords you compared it with. At this point I think the chances are 50/50 that it will succeed, but really nobody knows what will happen. Anyone claiming to know the future is being arrogant.
http://www.webmhs.com/2017/05/prediksi-tottenham-hotspur-vs....
>A company is paying me to work for them, they're not paying to own me. When I'm off the clock, my time is my own, up to and including doing paid work for anyone else I want.

Suboptimal if you're working for a direct competitor. Standard conflict of interest stuff. Would you accept Donald Trump working for Russia on the night shift?

Remember, non-compete is not the same as IP clause - which says anything you create on the job (and potentially off the job) is owned by the company.
duplicate of https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14332006
> Name a single bank who is using blockchain in an essential component of their operations (not just a proof of concept). Go on, I'll wait.

What a ridiculous argument. With blockchain really just becoming interesting over the last 2 years, you think banks, many of which use systems 20-30 years old (bonds are still primarily traded over phone) are going to switch over to it immediately. Give me a break.

> Sure, blockchain is "interesting" and the people involved are "brilliant" but where is it delivering a 10x improvement over the status quo?

International bank transfers can take days, have large transaction fees, and have a non-trivial amount of book keeping error. Whenever those same transactions could take 30 minutes with no human oversight I'd say the speedup is much higher than 10x. With that, it seems like you're more interested in making claims without being properly educated on what you're talking about.
The idea goes like this: drive to the bottom is not beneficial for the society as whole and therefore it is reasonable to establish some form of minimum wage.

As this prohibits very low paying jobs (i.e. better than nothing) then it would be fair to offer unemployment benefits in return.
Noncompete enforceability is, to me, a very interesting example of how individuals pursuing their own self-interest leads to a bad outcome for everyone -- a classic Tragedy of the Commons. In a state that allows noncompetes, it's in pretty much every employer's interest to use them and enforce them as much as they can; and yet over the long run, their doing that strangles the economy -- not fatally, but enough so that the Boston area, for example, barely competes with Silicon Valley as a startup hub, despite having an equally impressive local talent base.

Any state that wants to attract more technology companies should start by copying California policy on noncompetes. Yes, existing businesses will fight it tooth and nail, but it will make for a stronger economy.
I've had some fun solving very simple problems in brainfuck. This would be an interesting choice for a programming game because how simple it is. You can learn it in like 5 minutes. And also it's very easy to visualize the state. You can watch the program move around the tape and increment and decrement cells. Try it yourself, write a program to reverse an input string.
Specifically, "landing gear" vs. "SpaceX model"?

Don't you think SpaceX uses landing gear?.. You see what I mean?
Those are all important jobs that are being done today using non blockchain methods.

How does blockchain perform better at sub critical mass?
There are some interesting use cases around supply chain and provenance. Like Tim, I'm skeptical. It's probably overhyped--mostly because if cryptocurrencies. But I think there's at least the potential for significant applications for transactions among decentralized entities that don't fully trust each other.
> Guess that's not my idea of freedom. Freedom to me is what I can actually do, not what the government won't stop me from doing.

Isn't that the good ol' BSD versus GPL discussion? Gun restriction versus gun liberty? The socialism versus libertarianism discussion? One's in favour of an enforceable mechanism (by law) which restricts the freedom of a person (or their behaviour) so that the freedom of all is ensured whereas the other one is some kind of "let the survival of the fittest" figure it out.
EDIT: Autocorrect correction:
Yet, they did not engineer their software system according to the same standards of ++resiliency++ which is a part of engineering often forgotten about by many.
see this recent discussion:

"Self-Compassion Works Better Than Self-Esteem"

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14314958
Re 3., tell me one problem that blockchain solves that a regular db and authentication can't?
This is a kind of feudalism, where the peasants need to rely on the strength of lords and their knights (lawyers) to enjoy basic freedoms.
Yes! Static and dynamic code analysis (for JVM a popular analysis tool is Findbugs, which is incidentally built into InrelliJ; another one that's okay that I've used before is Coverity Code Advisor) are what you're looking for I think, instead of API endpoint analysis, which is what fuzzing usually boils down to (e.g. What can I pass to this program to make it barf).
Seems like a reasonable thing to do on a sandbox specifically set up for the purpose of analyzing malware. It's not helpful to just block all connections, because you want to see what it's trying to connect to and what it's trying to send there. You don't know what it's going to try to connect to, so you can't redirect only specific things. Letting it connect to the actual internet is obviously just crazy. Redirecting everything to an internal honeypot sounds pretty reasonable.
Maybe the confusion comes from how people are using the term "Blockchain", which actually is technically a term tied to Bitcoin but hijacked by VCs to create hype around it.

But I agree with you that "Blockchain is a classic example of a solution looking for a problem" assuming you're talking about the hijacked usage of "blockchain".

> Name a single bank who is using blockchain in an essential component of their operations (not just a proof of concept). Go on, I'll wait.

I think this is exactly the point. Banks trying to employ their own blockchain is the same as companies trying to employ "Intranet" when the Internet first came out. It won't work.
Not sure that'd help. I think that would make the problem worse, because actual market participants don't care about micro pennies.

When you buy a stock from your banker, you don't care that you buy it at 65 or 65.00001.

Same thing for time, you don't care that you send the order at 15:14:25.0000001 or 15:14:25.5

Markets should be tailored to the needs of its users.
Extremely difficult to enforce, depending on the nature of the designs. Cf. the Waymo case for an example of an easier-than-average, but still difficult, case to enforce.
I don't know of any in active production, but I know of many banks and multiple banking consortiums that are investing lots of IT dollars on near-term blockchain deployments​, and potentially at massive scale.
Sometimes you've got a deadline and you just have to ship it.
Wikipedia has good information about tipping customs and laws in countries throughout the world. Here's the Swedish entry [1].

As a rule of thumb: apart from the English-speaking countries in EU, tipping is not mandatory.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratuity#Sweden
Agreed. It's all a negotiation, though, and from the perspective of the employee you're going to want to present the confidentiality agreement (and possibly a term-of-employment noncompete) as sufficient to ensure your loyalty. You should under no circumstances agree to anything that restricts your options after term of employment.
You haven't rebutted his central argument, which is that for all the smart people working on it and all the important supposed political ramifications of the idea, no blockchain of any sort has been scaled to any mainstream consumer financial task.

He's not disputing that smart people work on it, or that there aren't variations on Bitcoin, and so pointing those things out doesn't respond to his article.

You can disagree with him as you can disagree with anything, but if you want to support the argument that it's "awful", you'll need to do better.
OK, so your source is not believing victims. I'd rather stick to science, thanks.
In the early 1990s, I'd co-founded an object database company, with a standard "east-coast-style" non-compete, which among other things, granted us injunctive releif. Our top developer left to work for our main competitor. We sued, and the courts ruled basically that there is no slavery in the US and our developer had every right to earn a living doing what he knew how to do. Maybe laws have changed, and maybe it varies by industry, but my experience is that noncompetes are meaningless. BTW, I don't particularly wish they had teeth, and my company was probably not significantly harmed by the outcome. Just saying I wouldn't sweat too much about signing a noncompete.
To whom can a survey company sell its data?
I want to build an app that pays people to fill surveys. Where can I get companies who would pay for such surveys?
The Financial Impact of Moving from VMware to Amazon
Just goes to show people will agree to anything under duress. (9/11)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14330707
That's a nice way of avoiding the substance of the article, which makes some excellent points. Whatever you want to call them, the people who habitually scold others for "cultural appropriation" are a blight.
Have you ever heard someone who identifies as conservative complain about cultural appropriation?
This is what the supporters of limping technologies always say: "it's only been seriously considered for the last year or two, so it's too early to consider the results". And yet clearly, it has not been just 2 years over which we've considered blockchains. Why are blockchains more credible than all the other failed technologies for which these kinds of arguments are made?

Whatever problems you may have with international bank transfers, they work: every business in the world relies on them. For all the supposed benefits of blockchains, no blockchain solution can make that claim, or any claim close to it.
Came here to say exactly this. I find this behavior to be silly as well and I'm just about as left as they come.