skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This'll be a fun comment section.

Maybe Go isn't so simply the answer, but the spread of "write everything in Rust" or "Rust is the salvation of software" is crazy. It's got huge advantages but it's really a very difficult language for what it does. 80% of software (nonsense percentage) that gets targeted to Rust would actually be better in another language. Rust's focus is on (for most devs and software) the wrong things.

It's too bad something like a better OCaml or Nim weren't what people were going nuts rewriting stuff in but they don't have the mindshare. Rust evangelism is like using a very advanced hammer to do everything. We've got screwdrivers, chisels, and multitools, yall, use them! Is Rust actually the right tool for the job? As programmers we do tend to seek the one true language which doesn't really exist.
Killing of armed combatants is considered justified, as is executions of people for capital offenses. Neither contradict my claim (though they don't contradict yours either).

International law primarily regards the interactions between nations rather than the actions within a nation. It is debatable whether or not a nation that is non-signatory to a treaty has violated a law when they fail to abide by its precepts.

I think most people would claim that murder is intrinsically wrong, and is not bad merely because it is contrary to some words on a piece of paper.

People can disagree as to what is unjustified; one person might consider a death in an arranged duel to be murder, while another might consider it justified. Under the law of today it is unlawful, under many laws 200 years ago it would be lawful.
I code in Go for 2-3 years and tried to learn Rust for fun, but it was harder for me. While Go is very simple and it has almost no barrier of entry, it lacks much as well, Rust definetely looks more interesting and it would be another enlightning experience.
Yes, but "thier" problem is not that they aren't "mispelling", it's that they can't remember the character at all. It would be the equivalent of missing a stroke in a chinese character - if my minimal experience from Japanese is any guide, people would still be able to roughly figure out which character it was, but it would be considered a bit crude. That's where incorrect spelling is in english.

They're not talking about that, they're saying "We can't remember how the word looks at all". It's pretty neat as a problem to have, to be able to say it but not even have an idea about how it might be spelled.
> It's not a JDK/JRE. J9 must be combined with OpenJDK to be able to run apps.

well yes and no.
if you don't use anything from the standard class library (that's impossible) than not.
what I also guess is that you need a java compiler, since it reads that it uses a ibm created "rom file" that comes from java bytecode.

what the most interesting thing about that vm is, is a shared class cache.
which is like a *.so file, if one program loads a library and the library is already in memory another program won't add additional memory to the computer, this is a huge win, especially for memory hungry java applications (this already speeds startup extremly)
The argument was that this is inevitable due to basic economics 101 ideas about perfect competition. A specific argument was made about prices needing to be set near the cost of distribution.

The point of bringing up video, movies, and books is to show that it's not that inevitable and markets don't have to work that way. Netflix subscriptions pay for a lot more than download bandwidth. Similarly with Kindle.

So it depends on the specifics of the market. Currently, academic publishers are not meeting that community's needs very well (understatement), so it's ripe for disruption. Competing with Amazon, iTunes, and Spotify is a lot harder.

My guess is that eventually a better service will come along, colleges will be willing to fund it (at far cheaper than today's prices for journals), and many people will stop using SciHub. But, as with the music industry, that may take a while; it doesn't happen automatically.
Also: piracy in music is more bounded because distributors have adapted to add value for users, at a reasonable price, sharing some revenue with the creators. (I'm thinking Spotify, YouTube, etc)
It seems like this could depend on what is already in your tool belt. If I want productivity, I use Python. If I want raw speed and low overhead, there's Rust. So Go ends up eclipsed on both sides.
> Both languages seem to be competing for the same user base and they both seem to be "systems programming" languages, so there must be a winner, right?

Are they competing for the same user base? As far as I can understand, Go is mostly being used in distributed software systems (like kubernetes) while Rust is being used for more "systems" software where performance is critical (like a web browser).
I've always wondered what the deliverability of mail is that gets sent out from homespun servers with setups like this? I've always assumed it would mostly all end up in spam folders but genuinely curious if anyone has any experience.
It may be true that Go is easier to use than Rust but over time I have learned to essentially love Rust and hate Go. Rust isn't perfect by any means, but when I program in Go a lot of times I wish I could avoid costly abstractions that don't have any real reason for being required, and thus I usually avoid Go for any task I wouldn't just use Python for (sans the REPL).
Go doesn't let me describe data the way I want it to let me. Concurrency is not even incredibly profitable using language idioms. I like the syntax, but frankly Go is in an entirely different league than Rust is. And that is to say, when I want to write a program Go sometimes is just not an option. Rust is always available, even if you have to do a little bit of learning.
side note : someone's positive value might just someone else's negative. Example : software patents.
The comparison to the music industry omits that other than music, science tends to be funded by governments.
Looks like it's all here: https://github.com/pingtype/pingtype.github.io
Agreed. It's unfortunate that Go and Rust are frequently compared to each other, they're not really trying to solve the same problems, they just happened to be modern, hyped, backend languages. I don't blame this post really, it's trying to correct that belief in a way. Rust is roughly a modern C replacement, while Go is a modern Java replacement. (very roughly)
I was going to say the concept of zero, but your answer works well enough.
Freudian theories were never science (as we define it today) - as Popper pointed out after trying to reconcile scientific inquiry with Freud's and Adler's work - since they cannot be falsified, see e.g. https://cogsci.stackexchange.com/questions/12451/why-did-kar...

They might be part of mainstream psychology (I have read conflicting accounts), but they are definitely not part of mainstream science; very little of psychology is.
I wonder what is the physical limit for 3.5" because my NAS has one slot left, and I was about to buy an 10TB one.
My argument isn't that it didn't take equity to get there, but that it's not intractable through "ordinary work". The big tech companies are essentially always hiring, and they're not the only ones offering marketable equity as part of the comp package. Yes, the performance of that equity can (and does) vary, but unless they're a company with Amazon's "total compensation philosophy" you benefit from the ups and the downs don't hurt too badly.

Between them FAMG employ hundreds of thousands of engineers, they're always hiring more, and within them comp in excess of $500k isn't rare (it's certainly not the median, but I suspect it's below the top quartile), hence my assertion that $200k can certainly be a stepping stone, if you're willing to put up with the BigCo open offices, reorgs, politics, etc. You seemed to be arguing that those tradeoffs aren't worth it as the $200k is very unlikely to translate into much more. I'm arguing the likelihood is higher than you were giving credit for, but perhaps we weight the concrete value of FAMG equity comp differently.
Mainland Chinese use 嚏 instead of 嚔. I suspect they don't often know how to write that character because the phonetic root 疐 is only also used in 懥. Anyway, when writing, wouldn't Chinese use same grass-script style shorthand for it?
The lack of spaces in Japanese is not a major problem. Japanese has three visually distinct types of characters: Chinese characters (kanji), and two phonetic syllabaries (one for foreign words (katanaka), one for native (hiragana)). Further, because of the grammar of spoken Japanese, almost all words are suffixed with some gramatical marker. In most cases, "words" will be written in kanji or katana, while the grammar markers are in hiragana, so it is easy to identify word boundries visually. There are some times where words themselves are in hiragana, but as long as you do not have a long sequence of these, they are not to difficult.

Of course, back when I was starting with Japanese, my teacher insisted that we use spaces until we knew enough kanji to make our writing legible without them.
I had somewhat bad back pain for a long while (squash injury). The thing that made the most difference was a core strengthening class I did (basically Pilates and specific stretches).
> Both languages seem to be competing for the same user base and they both seem to be "systems programming" languages, so there must be a winner, right?

No, Go isn't a systems programming language because it has a GC.

This matters in constrained environments, like when doing embedded development, or for real time systems.

Sorry, but Go isn't in the same category as Rust or C/C++.

Go is in the category of Java and C#. And IMO its only advantage is that it can produce lighter binaries.

And while Java and .NET are evolved towards building lighter binaries, you can't evolve a GC-ed language towards one without a GC.
Your first drive was in the GB range... I feel soooooo old!! Edit: Mine was 16mb and I thought it was a crazy new vista of storage.
Heh, good one. But maybe slightly changed to:

I don't care how well (as in perf)

unless you meant something else (not skilled at logic programming).
I bought WD Red and can hear Synology and it both :(
> One should not compare a JIT … with interpreters

Because ?
Yes, it's by no means a one way gate, I'm just saying that people perceive this incorrect dichotomy between "real" pain and "pain that is just from your brain". There's no such distinction, and all pain is actual physical signalling.
So how do we count the amount spent on US collegiate athletics that provides the bulk of training for most of these small-nation athletes?
Have 2.5" rotating drives stopped growing? Last time I checked, flash drives were too expensive, but rotating media topped out at 2TB

[EDIT] WD has a 4TB hybrid drive, but couldn't find any others larger than 2TB
What about Nim? I've found that a lot more productive than Rust even without libs.
I have personally gone through something like this. I have a degree in Biotechnology and stammer a bit too, which normally doesn't matter in conversations.

There are some employers who question my ability based on stammering while others on my Biotech degree. Even with 8+ years of IT experience, it hasn't gone away. I once had an employer who knew that I stammer a bit make me jump through 5 rounds of interview only to say - well you stammer so not a good fit. While there was one who refused to consider my resume because "non-CS".

I have compiled a personal blacklist of such companies.
I've never used Spotify, but even I mostly stopped pirating too... other legal means are just too easy and cheap, and increasingly likely to actually support the artist.
Or choose OCaml: http://engineering.issuu.com/2015/09/17/ocaml-production.htm...

It's enterprise-ready. Seriously.

Hate the syntax? Wait a little bit and try out ReasonML (new syntax for OCaml), e.g. the following OCaml

channel
|> Channel.push "new_msg" [%obj { body = "a" }] ~timeoutMs:10_000.0
|> Push.receive "ok" (Js.log2 "Created message")

will become (pretty much) the following Reason

channel
|> Channel.push("new_msg", { "body": "a" }, timeoutMs::10_000.0)
|> Push.receive("ok", Js.log2("Created message"));
From the article:

> Go is not even a systems programming language.
What are some program that Rust is not always a reasonable choice to write in? Frankly, there may be some areas where another language is slightly easier to program in than Rust, but I see the value in trying to promote a lingua franca for programming. Different languages causes huge interoperability problems
You must not be familiar with the STEPS project, a complete OS project (with a compiler collection, 2D vector drawing and compositing, desktop publishing, online communications…), in 20K lines of code. Mainstream OSes by comparison are more like 200M lines (10K books).

That stuff is pretty concrete, with an actual GUI and real software. One can get their hands on the source code, though it's really not meant for public consumption (it was a proof of concept, not a commercial product).

Here are the progress reports (latest first):

http://www.vpri.org/pdf/tr2012001_steps.pdf

http://www.vpri.org/pdf/tr2011004_steps11.pdf

http://www.vpri.org/pdf/tr2010004_steps10.pdf

http://www.vpri.org/pdf/tr2009016_steps09.pdf

http://www.vpri.org/pdf/tr2008004_steps08.pdf

http://www.vpri.org/pdf/tr2007008_steps.pdf

That stuff definitely works out to a vision.
If you need what Rust offers, use Rust. If you don't need those things there are hundreds of languages that you could use(including Rust if you really want)
Whether it's OK is the wrong question. The right question is what people do, which is largely unrelated.

You can talk about how artists need to be paid until the end of time, but that won't change people's behavior much.
If you're curious what this is about, many paragraphs down, it finally explains:

"In the mid-2000s, Amazon had a problem. Every year, the company scrambled to find temporary workers during the peak months of hectic commerce leading up to Christmas. In some areas of the country, reliable on-demand labor was so hard to come by that it resorted to busing in workers from three to five hours away. Then, in 2008, a staffing agency came up with something new: inviting a team of migrant RVers to work at the facility in Coffeyville, Kansas."
how's the compile time with nim? go's compile time makes it almost as good as having a repl. i tried crystal a while ago and it has atrocious compile times.
Still waiting for Duke Nukem Forever, aka multicore, until then OCaml has major limitations for such a low-level and performance-oriented language.
I chose rust after endless annoyances in a 100kloc go program due to piss poor type safety and nil pointer checks, lack of meaningful containers, and working around GC when working with C libs. I didn't think I needed any of those things until it was too late. Any project of meaningful size will eventually need everything go avoids.
Various dictators and the vast majority of televangalists (e.g. Joel Osteen) come to mind. Are you sure you want to succeed that way? I don't; and while Freud's history has many redeeming features, the saying is "at least Mussolini made the trains on time"[0], so the latter might also have had redeeming features.

[0] But see https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2016/11/the-problem-w... ; likewise, it's possible that freud's positives will turn out not to be.
in what sense is ocaml production ready? does it have the tooling? ecosystem? is there even another stl than jane street's library?
Hmmm. If you know Rust well already, sure. But both Go and Rust have a much better binary a distribution story than Python once you stray from the standard library...
I've had some minor back issues in my life. One of the most thorough, scientific approaches I found was Dr Stuart McGill' s books.

A proper academic with a deep understanding of what's going on but also able to translate that into pragmatic advice for people in pain.

Highly recommended. You can find various YouTube videos with him in then, which gave me the confidence that he was a knowledgeable geek and not some huckster. Often the videos are related to his work with high performance athletes, but his books apply to ordinary Joes or old people just as much.

If I can sum it up poorly, it's about understanding which muscles and bones work together in various movements and avoiding putting them under inappropriate strain, by slightly altering habits and building up muscles to provide support.

He is also skeptical of the benefit of surgery in most cases. He does also touch on some brain related stuff but it wasn't related to my particular pain so I don't know much about that part of his approach.
I think that many see this coming, but democracy usually needs to be shocked to respond with big changes.
Much as I like Rust, I have to agree. When you have to get it done, use Go. When you want to explore advanced experimental programming constructs, use Rust. The Go guys knew when to stop. Arguably they stopped too early, before generics or parameterized types, and "interface[]" is used too much. But that doesn't seem to be a big overhead item.

Rust has the complexity of C++ plus additional complexity from the functional community. Plus lots of fancy template cruft.

The trouble with language extensibility is that people use it without an overall plan. The end result is a Winchester Mystery House language.[1] LISP went down this rathole, and Scheme had to be developed to get out of it. C++ went that way when nobody stopped the Boost crowd before it was too late. Now it's happening to Rust.

(Anyone involved in language design should see Václav Havel's "The Memorandum". Or at least read it; I've seen it performed, but it's not performed often.)

[1] http://www.winchestermysteryhouse.com/
> Glacial pace?

Try to make a chip, you'll quickly realize that your challenges will be primarily non technical in nature. It wasn't always this way, the semi industry was once incredibly innovative and open to new ideas, and that helped drive exponential progress.

>Who will produce your chips then?

I meant "die" to mean stagnate as the common euphemism in tech.
Is the US Falling Behind China in AI Research?
The compile times are on par with Go. The Nim compiler (written in Nim and containing ~100k LOC) compiles in under 10 seconds on my MacBook Pro, and this is from a cold cache. It's even faster when making changes as the C source files generated by Nim are cached.
In the end i think he, like many intellectuals, overestimate people's interest in learning.

Aka you can bring a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
yes, piracy is good.

if you think artists should be paid give them money directly, or go to shows and buy merch.

nearly all intellectual property barriers make no sense in a post-internet world. we effectively live in a world without intellectual property barriers (because piracy is easy and prolific) but for some reason people refuse to acknowledge the free and open flow of art and information as a good thing.
I would argue almost anything. Nim writes like Python. The average programmer never worries about lifetimes because there's a GC, which the vast majority of programmers (especially application programmers) have gotten used to over the last 40 years.

Rust is a big sidestep in usability, which makes sense if you want to replace C and C++, but not much sense elsewhere. Humans are really, really good at juggling multile languages, it's why we make a new one whenever we can.
"Rust and Go are both systems programming languages, so we have to compare them! Go wins because it's easier. By the way, Go isn't a systems programming language and would suck for systems programming."

That's basically what I got from this article.
People are people. We have a classless society in the U.S.. It would be far more correct to refer to differences in income, rather than using the word "class".
In my opinion, at the root of a lot of these problems is the fact that copyright has moved from being something designed to have a very limited duration and then expire, to something that lasts far more than a lifetime.

If copyright still expired in 14 or 28 years, we'd have a rich public domain from which to draw from. Think about all of the "fan fiction" that could be commercialized, or the textbooks which could be freely modified and redistributed by students and the academic community.

Because the public domain has been cheated out of such wealth (in no small part due to lobbying by Disney and other IP-based corporations) it really doesn't surprise me that piracy is so popular.
An option for doing it without a transpiler or another language: https://sanctuary.js.org/
Can vouch. They're awesome but loud about it.
Go is for distributed systems. It can be for system programming, depending on what you mean by system programming.

I would personally not assimilate system programming to embedded.
There's another dimension to this: how big is the codebase you have to maintain? This is a "pets versus cattle" thing.

If you like artistically crafting small bits of code, Python may work fine. If you're building something to last and need to shovel large amounts of code around while migrating API's, a statically typed language with a fast compiler will do more to help.

Python in the large is not very maintainable. I expect that a Rust codebase will eventually be pretty nice to maintain, after the tooling matures more. Currently, Go is probably easier, and quicker to write.
> but the spread of "write everything in Rust" or "Rust is the salvation of software" is crazy.

Sorry to burn down your straw man, but the overwhelming majority of "Rust evangelism" points out that Rust is not always the right tool for the job. The intersection between people who write both Rust and Go (for instance) is substantial, and people in the Rust community (more precisely: communities) go to great lengths to point out that it's not an either / or proposition.
Most of the RIIR! hyperbole is something that happens to the Rust community, not on its behalf.

> As programmers we do tend to seek the one true language which doesn't really exist.

This seems somewhat at odds with your denunciation, mere sentences ago.
> it's about nationalism than protection from monopolies

Well if I was Chinese I guess I'd hope my government was making some effort to protect the national interest at least.

Of course they are developing their own monopolies and have some pretty terrifying social control programs in the works. That can be criticised in its own right and hopefully it will be. But to try and make the case that FB is a benevolent saviour of the Chinese citizenry from their evil government is nonsense and whataboutery. If you must believe in the US as some kind of global beacon of free speech and democracy, then at least don't think that just being the lesser of two evils is a really great way to promote this.

The hard problem is that any proprietary social platform has to have a mass of people using it to be particularly useful, and any social platform that big is collecting data that makes it a huge security risk and economic factor at the national level. The only solutions I can think of are to have social networks under national control or to promote interoperability between smaller networks and partition data collection to an acceptable level for national security purposes.