skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Ask HN: Finding a comment on learning Node/JS
Apologies if this is an improper format for asking this. I'm looking for a comment I believe came from HN from some time in the past few days and all of my searching has come up with nothing.

The commenter discussed learning JavaScript but at some point they hit a wall when they got to Node. Then they described a website that had simple examples of web apps that you could learn and play with. I believe the commenter said you could fork them, build your own, and slowly build up complexity. Towards the end of it they said they were starting to grok the intricacies of Node.js better. I believe one of the examples was a twitter bot (or maybe a clone) that you could build.

I'm looking for that website the commenter linked to. I've searched through my history for the past week on and off Hacker News and I just can't find it. I'd love to find the comment again but I'd be very happy for the website the commenter was talking about.

Thanks!
Is this another situation where these are the only companies that can do the work, so the government has no choice but to work with them in order to stay on some kind of schedule?

It must be pretty hard to disrupt the "government contracts for nuclear weapons production" industry..
reposting a dead link for viewing, this collection is good info and applicable.

spurlock 1 hour ago [dead] [-]

Also handy:

https://privacytoolsio.github.io/privacytools.io/

https://prism-break.org/en/

https://myshadow.org

https://ssd.eff.org
Well, if the test is accidentally testing the wrong input/output pairs, your code can pass the test perfectly and still be broken. Especially if you follow the "build to the test" mantra.
TLDR;

Because everyone uses cell phones, 911 does not work the way people think it does. Let's use the celebrity of William Shatner to embolden the public to make a request of the government to use better technology to know where you are at all times ... so you'll be safe.
Yeah, this is why I always buy direct from you guys. You do a bang up job of rolling out updates.
Yep, I understand that, I only saw it as "funny", I am sorry, but it is stronger than me, you depicted verbally something very like the final of Terminator (1st), "a storm is coming":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5C6GZQ7UNaU

and I visualized that (or any of the movies where the car is a battered old car, possibly an old jeep or a pickup) before noticing the Ferrari logo.

Maybe this one would do (not a photo, but a painting) to better explain what I visualized:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/alberto_ollo/5229651715/sizes/...
Charge more.
I was in a really low place a couple weeks ago, but I actually honestly feel pretty fine now. I've given myself the space I need to process it. I definitely wouldn't have been able to publish this post when it first happened.

Also, I totally get that it seems like a total waste of time to engage with the comments here. A lot of people have told me the same thing on Twitter. But the thing is: I think it's really special that someone on the other side of a computer screen read this thing I wrote and is thinking about what they would do in my shoes. Even if they express it in a way that's kind of rude or condescending, it means something to me!

I'm sorry if it seems like I'm being defensive. When I think of what the word "defensive" represents, I think of someone who is totally unwilling to consider other points of view and is trying to shut out the world. I don't think that's what I'm doing. Nothing is more important to me than learning from what happened and growing into a better, smarter person. I totally appreciate the fact that I am just too close to the thing to really understand what happened. I need help from objective third parties to learn the most from this.

That's actually why I'm replying to the comments. There's the naive DHH-cheerleading reply to anyone who is "yet another dumb unicorn chaser". But I want to go one or two levels deeper than that. I don't think those replies are particularly helpful, but I think the people that write them totally could be helpful. They just need to actually have a desire to understand in more detail what my business is/was doing. I accept that most people here will never care enough to really dig in. But I think the probability is high that some people here actually might really care. So I'm engaging here while it's on the front page of Hacker News, because I won't get another opportunity like that for a long time.

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to think that through more. I hope it answers your question.
Unfortunately, the evidence you've brought to the table actually doesn't agree with your position, but you aren't trained enough to understand it yet.

Read the link you cited, specifically paragraph 5. Look up passing-off as a tort, then look up Subsection 7 c) of the Canadian Trademarks Act.

There are often trade-secret dimensions in situations where a supplier is committing trademark infringement, but this is a clear situation where there's PLENTY of trademark infringement going on.
No you don't. You just need to know what the unit you're currently working on does. And if you're working on it, you should know what it does. If you don't, that's a sign that maybe you need to have a conversation with someone.
>> if you were working on a big app and there was a bug, writing a failing test for that bug and then looking into the fix is very helpful.
> Well, first of all, that's not TDD. TDD is Test-Driven Development. In your scenario, you wrote the test after the code in question. In TDD, the whole point is to write the test before the code in question

It's a regression test, which is definitely TDD. The code in question is the fix for the bug, the test verifies that the bug is fixed and will remain fixed.
Mule never know what these Hollywood types try next.
When this article opened with the multiple proclamations of the return of the short story, I immediately thought, yes it is coming back because of the mobile phone and our short attention spans.

But then the author says:

'Other recent announcements of the short-story renaissance include one in 2014, when the Daily Telegraph called it “the perfect literary form for the 21st century” because brevity suits our dwindling attention span (more on the stupidity of that argument later)'

And I waited for most of the (enjoyable) essay to hit on the insight:

'Given the need for a piece to be read at a single sitting – say, half an hour for the average New Yorker story – and the compression that demands constant and close attention to the text, it is bizarre to talk up the short story’s suitability for time-poor readers. War and Peace is enormously long but its chapters are short, taking five or ten minutes to read. It also includes a list of characters and, as Flaubert pointed out, Tolstoy often repeats himself. There’s a book for a crappy attention span.'

But if this is true, why isn't flash fiction more popular?

I think the reason is because the reader has to do a lot of work to get into a story. They have to like the characters, figure out the setting and connect. All the labor is lost each time a new story starts.

The solution is: flash fiction in a shared world with common characters and locations.
Not everything in this world is made to be a political weapon. Some of us enjoy tech for the sake of tech.
Out of curiosity (because this is what I was hoping from from the article), has anyone found a DSL in the wild that actually achieved its objectives?

That is, it either simplified the code necessary to write a program that there was a net savings for the project compared with developers just writing it in a language they were familiar with, or it simplified the business logic aspect to such a degree that even non-devs were able to be productive with it?

I admit this is partly determined by what we decide a DSL is, since it is, ultimately, at some level just an abstraction. But almost every instance I'd squarely say "that was an attempt at a DSL", it became just as complex as the underlying language, with additional gotchas, if it even 'worked' at all (i.e., allowed you to solve the domain specific problems it was intended to solve).
What types of users have asked you about that? I'm lucky if I can get regular users not to click their way through cert errors.
What about a kind of middle ground, doing a 'spike' when figuring out stuff, what kind of thing you should build, what the design should look like, etc then follow up with TDD to stabilize the identified interfaces and produce tests that act as a system health check?

Ok, for consultants, perhaps they end up doing the same kind of things for different clients to the extent that they can just jump in doing things TDD from the very beginning.
Ok, here's some advice from an Internet random person.

1. Yes, if you can take some time.

2. Do some crying. You probably feel depressed, burnt out, stressed out. Crying is a great release.

3. You don't need to do anything right now it's ok not to do anything right now.

4. If you're under personal financial stress try and resolve that. Perhaps move somewhere cheaper.

5. You probably don't need to think too much about what went wrong right now, maybe take some time first?

Realize that there will be a time when the stresses of this business will be long behind you, and you won't feel it with the same intensity anymore. Maybe read some good books, it can really help you feel alive again.

All this is very biased. It's based on how I would be feeling, if I'd gone through the same process as you.

Good luck!
$11B is the total taxi market in the US, and even if it were dominated by newly arrived travelers it's tiny.

Ground transportation is measured in trillions, which is the sort of market size a $70B company is expected to grow into. Uber should be grouped with self-driving cars and the auto industry, not with taxis.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2016/09/21/se...
And this has been the same problem with pgp and crypt ion in general. Too costly in man time. To much to manage, regenerate, etc. unless it becomes transparent or setup once and forget it encryption will never get easier to deploy or manage or be more widely adopted.
DayFlow 3.0
Regarding your second point, it is not only very difficult, but also not even how TDD was designed to work by its original creators at all. It is specifically not written by other people.

TDD, as outlined by the one who created the technique, as well as other big proponents such as Robert Martin, is done in tight 2 or 3 minute loops. As Kent Beck says, if you can't write your test in 5 minutes, you're doing too much.
It's really not. The Paris agreement focused on the particulars of one case. Deciding a single case is much easier then building a legal framework out of whole cloth.
> most devs believe they don't have time to refactor

tough to do something well if you don't spend time doing it
Temple of Gravity – Burning Man 2017 by Zach Coffin
If most devs don't have time to refactor, then most devs have not had much experience doing refactoring, thus most devs are bad at refactoring.

Sounds reasonable.
I feel this way about code coverage (need that 100% badge).

If I took on a project with low quality and had a limited budget to ensure QA - I'd prioritize E2E testing over unit testing.
Hello veritas, It might have replicated to the HN data set on Google Big Query [1]. Perhaps that might help?

[1] https://cloud.google.com/bigquery/public-data/hacker-news
> They do a LOT of transcription instead of copy and paste

Transcription makes you think about what you're typing in and avoids the whole class of errors that arise from copy-and-paste. Transcribing code rather than pasting it is not a red flag.
Maybe if they think it's a one-stop solution to hosting problems, yeah. But penalizing candidates just for familiarity with new technology?
Unless the causal relationship is the other direction.

That is, everyone always assumes in our industry that the chaos allows this volume of people to be employed. But usually large number of people leads to chaos all by itself. Maybe we have it backward.

I know I've worked on a lot of projects that got version one out quick and could never get version 3 out the door. It gets old after a while. Why do I want to spend a few years of my life working on something nobody will remember? No thanks.
This is just a pitch to sign up for this company's beta - there's no real substance to the article
This was a great read, the conclusion of always monitoring, no matter what technologies one is using, should be obvious, but I've noticed that it really isn't, unfortunately.

Even I fall into the trap and sometimes I wish I knew about all this stuff but, alas, I prefer development.
And, worse, it keeps changing main characters. No star actors. You can't even have an ensemble cast, the protagonists constantly change as the story progresses.
Because libcs other than glibc are less bloated and probably easier to read.

~ $ cat empty.c
int main(void) {return 42;}

~ $ gcc -static empty.c -O3
~ $ strip a.out
~ $ size
text	data	bss	dec	hex	filename
677598	5792	10464	693854	a965e	a.out

~ $ diet gcc -static empty.c -O3
~ $ strip a.out
~ $ size
text	data	bss	dec	hex	filename
901	32	76	1009	3f1	a.out
TDD doesn't have a marketing problem -- all these sponsored wigs evangelized it for the last 20 years, there's at least a dozen at every conference, many getting paid thousands to give their gritty speeches.

TDD as these maggots explained it is: write your tests first, write your code, make sure the tests pass, rinse, repeat.
> As long as 95% (or whatever) of your logical branches are covered by tests, I don't really care whether you wrote the tests beforehand or after the fact.

Do you care that those tests reflect the business goal or just the implementation? 'Cause TDD is way, way more likely to do the former than test-last development.
You are correct.

Not only this, but it's a blatant violation of TDD. TDD is having a single test go red->green, not a suite.
> I'm not sure what you mean about Feynman

Feynman was known for being able to explain complex ideas (quantum, physics etc) in easier terms.

According to the article:

""Scholze is known for the clarity of his talks and papers. "I don’t really understand anything until Peter explains it to me" Weinstein said.""

"Scholze makes a point of trying to explain his ideas at a level that even beginning graduate students can follow"
You can throw away the test if you don't find value in it. This can be very useful for fleshing out an idea.
So... fix it?
If the requirements are unclear, then why are you writing code? Why aren't you having conversations with people to clear up those requirements?
The main benefit for TDD in my mind is that it mostly makes it painful to write spaghetti code. When I'm reviewing something that looks too integrated, I just ask for a unit test for that particular piece of functionality, and the author is effectively forced to go back and refactor. After going through this a few times, they learn to think about their design before they write code. Of course, many dynamic languages defeat this by offering hacks like Python's mock.patch which let you nominally test spaghetti code...
> First of all we have access to less than half of this organism only. What about root mutations?

The study specifically examined the issue of mutations arising in the cell line from zygote to terminal branches, since that is where reproduction takes place and we are most interested in mutations that are passed from one generation to the next. If stem cells at the root tips show more mutations, so what? The authors established (pending peer-review) a surprisingly low rate for this particular sequence, that's sufficiently interesting in itself.

> And second, we have accces only to the 'bad half' in our search for mutations...

"Sixteen of the 17 SNVs identified in the Napoleon Oak occurred in introns or non-coding sequences that are probably neutral... These results... demonstrate [the mutations'] gradual, nested appearance and fixation in developmentally connected branches during the growth of the oak tree. Thus, while the exact ontogeny of the Napoleon Oak may be difficult to reconstruct, our SNV analysis generated nested set of lineages supported by derived mutations"

They sampled across many independent cell lineages and across noncoding regions, and they are looking specifically at mutation rates in the cell line that leads to gamete formation. The kind of mutational "auto-cleaning" you describe is mostly just your unsubstantiated thinking about growth-related phenomena that are actually explained by a host of non-mutational factors; in any case undersampling due to rare deleterious mutation self-pruning would not have a confounding effect on the results here.

>There is not need here of a genetic mechanism to protect cells from mutations.

Just because trees can tolerate certain kinds of pathogen and insect-induced tumors doesn't mean they are entirely without need of protecting genome sequence integrity. Plants like other organisms do have sophisticated mechanisms to repair and maintain DNA, this becomes especially important in the stem cell lines leading to reproduction. The study shows these mechanisms in this oak are particularly efficient.
Like you I've never seen a "customer" user notice, which is why I was careful to use the word "stakeholder". For me it's almost always been product management/sales types in the company.
Again I think it is to reduce cost, you just need to add a layer on an area that is already taken care of (snow removed during winter, object and dust removed by cars and maintenance team).
The language I've been most effective with when using TDD is Scala.
Rereading my post, I see where it sounds more strawman of the "entire wall of tests." I did not mean it to be the final test suite is written first.

Instead, I intended that to be the wall that you will be passing in a given cycle. So, for a small development cycle, you add in some new tests that will be this cycle's "wall" of failing tests that you flip to passing.

And don't take this to be an indication that I think integration tests are somehow superior. They all have advantages and there is a massive cost benefit tradeoff that has to be considered at all times.

It is easy to talk in strawmen. Such that I can confidently say if you have a set of tests that always fails together, that should just be a single test. However, I do not feel that statements like that are informative, precisely because it is a judgement call masquerading as a rule.
They do, but they also frequently offer in-plane WiFi so it's clear they're expecting you to know to turn your WiFi chip back on even though the phone is in Airplane mode.

IIRC the "put your phone in airplane mode" rule is a FAA mandate. Airlines can't change it.
> I've never heard TDD being that you write all of your tests up front, before you've written any code.

That's the only way I've ever heard it described. I thought that's why it's called "Test Driven"
I've been in awe of Zaf's ability every day to produce both excellent code and fantastic, intuitive documentation. This is the first in a series of blog posts this summer covering some of our areas of research at Datalogue. Feedback is appreciated! (as are pull requests on the provided code)
Survey: Half of Orgs Hit with Ransomware Experience Multiple Attacks
How old is "old", and what do you need it for? I've written code to parse the utmz cookie and separate code to recreate the whole organic/referral/utm attribution model in GA using first party log data. The only major drawback AFAIK is that adwords utm parameters are obfuscated and Google doesn't provide a way to resolve glclids to their campaign's utm params.
LabStack Platform – HTTP Analytics, Email, Logging, MQTT, DB
You mean the comparisons showing the USA had one of the lowest unemployment rates?
Sometimes state is an actual desirable thing and strategy can be a dependency.

Heck, higher order functions (functions taking functions as argument) are dependency injection personified.
Probably. I thought the BBC Radio plays did a reasonable job:

https://archive.org/details/IsaacAsimov-TheFoundationTrilogy

Whatever they create, it's something a little bit different than the source material, but will hopefully give a flavor of it.

The hardest part of the Foundation series is it's epic scope, in particular because it would be nice to integrate parts of the Robot series as well. But the essential message for me was humanity as his massive sprawling creature, slowly evolving across millennia.
Reading this reminded me of a google doodle,

http://www.doodlehistory.com/2012/valentine-s-day-2012-on-fe...
Create Responsive / Real-Time Charts in One Line of HTML – Webcomponents
You're often learning the optimal API as well. I've had several experiences where I write a library, write some tests for it, and then realize that the library's API is inconvenient in ways X, Y, and Z, and that I could have a much simpler API by moving a few tokens around. When I write the tests first, I tend to get a fairly usable API the first time around, because I'm designing it in response to real client code.

(This all depends on having a clear enough idea of what the library needs to do that I can write realistic test code...I've also had the experience where I write the tests, write the library, and then find that the real system has a "hidden" requirement that isn't captured by the tests and requires a very different way of interacting with the library.)
In two of those cases, some level of anxiety is justifiable.
Going have a right old trantor if they mess it up
P.S. If you click the [1] link above you will be taken to an imgur image making fun of Hacker News.

To read the real article you'll need to copy and paste the URL address in your browser. Looks like the site is reading the referrer and forwarding to mean things...
A TypeScript parser will be part of Babel v7
Sure, no arguments there. It does save time in JavaScript and a large part of that is because the language has been designed around mutability.

Part of that trade-off is that JavaScript can't make the same guarantees about what happens when you pass an object into a function. It's harder to be confident that a given program is correct.

Immutability is just a part of the "simple made easy"[1] ethos of Clojure and I think most Clojure programmers will argue that taking the time to understand that philosophy _is_ worth the investment.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rI8tNMsozo0
That's interesting although after a brief look it just looks like he is splitting the code into two parts, one part he tests and the other part he doesn't. I don't really disagree with this, my UI code has very few tests.

"which, if you're not understanding this instinctively, makes me fear for your code"

Thanks for the insult.
Obviously a case of not enough wealthy people being affected. If the poor are falsely imprisoned its just business as usual and they lack the clout to hire an aggressive talented attorney. This will likely rectify itself as soon as a substantially wealthy individual is imprisoned improperly.

Just a continuation of the sad state of our legal system where punishment is not so much an issue of guilt but of wealth or more specifically the lack thereof.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/inside-new-orleans-public-defend...
> This was timely for me because I've recently become (by atrophy) one of the most productive developers on my small team.

Does the author ironically mean... by attrition?
Flip raises $2.2M from USV to grow its marketplace for long-term sublets
This same argument applied back in the days of Real Programmers (TM) scoffing at the likes of Pascal. And yet, here we are.
TDD works for me and the rest of Pivotal Labs, maybe 1000 or so people. YMMV