skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If you want to trade off simplicity for lower costs or lower latency, you can also use WebRTC data channels that do p2p communication between the players.
> You can do this with Excel also. When was the last time you used Excel?

How do you do that then?
Well in this case they would be asked to provide a solution to an arbitrarily large NP problem (if they proved P=NP) or a counterexample to the Riemann hypothesis (if they disproved it)

But for the opposite case I don't think it would be easy
How is large good in a democracy? Are the Netherlands worse because they are small?
I get this all the time and initially have been nicely replying/forwarding, but after a while you have to figure they don't care, so it's either spam or account take over. After all, "I" own the identity, and "I" want my email back.
You don't always have the luxury of choosing the names that the files have.
> except your buying a pre-packaged consumer-friendly vacation

I know very very few people under 40 who travel like this. The common way seems to generally be grab an Airbnb and a cheap flight and figure the rest out.
> All buffers should be length prefixed

Fortran called that a Hollerith constant, but that was 60 years ago.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollerith_constant
I find that the coworking crowd is less religious than everyone else, and I think that religious people have a default community they can turn to
Yeah, I thought the same thing until I found a colleague who was very fond of calling exec_sql in stored procedures, with the argument being a concatenation of the sp arguments.
I'm a big fan of asciidoc - I started using it for all my technical documentation a few years ago and haven't looked back. It gets the balance between simplicity and features just right.
Which is a point in favour of Word, not Google Docs.
Roadrunner Email Sign in Problem Successfully Solved
No, it didn't. But is it so complex it requires 10x+ the resource use? I don't think so.
You would then not be allowed to call it GNU Parallel due to possible trademark confusion. This also why we have names like CentOS (not RedHat Free) and IceCat (not Firefox Free).

There was a court case in Germany about this (for some CMS tool - IIRC) where a forker used a similar name. The verdict was pretty clear: Forking was OK (copyright law - permission by GPL), but keeping the name was not (trademark law - no permission by GPL).
What about them? Does org mode handle them better/worse than other formats?
When Neil Postman was a grad student he followed Marshall McLuhan around for a few months. One thing he noted was that McLuhan -- when argued with or when asked a question never directly replied, but just came out with another one of his zinger "koans". Neil said he finally realized that McLuhan was not concerned about whether people were agreeing with him or even understanding him, but was most aimed at getting them to think at all!

I've never been able to pull this off, but McLuhan had a real point. Socrates had the idea (via Plato) that there "was truth" and careful thinking would get everyone to the same place. (Much of science has this assumption (if you throw in a lot of experimentation and debugging as part of the careful thinking). In any case, a reasonable explanation in science is not in the form of sentences.

One of the key ideas here is that modern understanding is a lot more than changing from one set of sentences to another. (This is a huge problem for humans because for tens of thousands of years and more there were no significant differences between our models and our sentences.) Now some of our models can't be reasonably represented in sentences, but for many cases we still have to use sentences to point at the models (or don't even use the models at all).

To me, the consequence of all this is that most of the work needed to be done on thinking about important difficult problems is not primarily "logic" (in the sense of dealing with premises, operations, and inferences) but "extra-logical" (trying to understand contexts and boundaries and models and tests before trying to do anything like classical thinking).

I often try to point out in talks that modern thinking is "not primarily logical" and this is what I'm driving at.
Because your data is being held hostage by the service provider. No more grandmas showing photo albums to their grandchildren when Facebook is long gone 30 years from now :'(
> And blaming this on the market is a cheap attempt to dodge responsibility. If programmers paid more than lip service to responsibility, they'd push for safer languages.

If programmers paid more than lip service to responsibility, the whole dumb paradigm of "worse is better" would not exist in the first place. As it is, we let the market decide, and we even indoctrinate young engineers into thinking that business needs is what always matters the most, and everything else is a waste of time (er, "premature optimization").
> If you wanted to, you could write a custom BIOS that would boot a Haswell-era motherboard with no CPU inserted, and it would run just fine—because the motherboard already ships with all the CPU it needs to act as a functional computer.

Has anyone actually done this? If you have a link to someone who's run a board using only the ME processor I'd be really interested to see it!

I thought the ME was covered in all kind of NDA and proprietary goodness. Booting a board without the main x86 installed would be quite a feat of reverse engineering!
Did it work for you, is the question :p
Oh lol! I have never understood how this site does not use react and nodejs.
Look in the right places and you'll find updated firmware images for various receivers which remove the limits.

That kind of limit is implemented in firmware (all the math is done in software), and they aren't generally protected beyond being an obscure architecture. When you've decided whatever vliw dsp architecture they use, finding a simple 'if' condition near the output logic is quite easy.
Ask HN: Is it still a good idea to start a web dev shop?
I understand that in 2017 a web dev shop needs to specialize in certain domains with specific tech stacks and have a solid solutions team.
I still come across web development shops that do simple websites but still survive.

Is there any data that shows how profitable a web dev shop can be in 2017? if not, how could one collect data for such an analysis(anyone from data-science?)?
Hardly. Our culture is still valuing the same values. After some thousand years we learned to articulate socioeconomical problems and talk about pretend scenario without actually enacting them, but the hierarchy of value is more or less the same: occudental world was still deeply christian/judaic as recently as two generations ago and while we advanced fast on certain topics (family structure, for example) we’ve grown up to about gen x with the same values as expressed by those myths proposed during our upbringing by school, tv shows, cartoons etc.
Don't you think that a good GUI and visualization of the situations and consequences would do the trick (i.e. think about what the GUI accomplished for interacting with computers at all).

I fear that too many technical people have no feel for the plight of the users (and amazingly to me, for their own plight as users -- they are often willing to put up with execrable BS in their own programming environments).
Curious any companies in the Us can self-proclaim having similar environments? BBC only hires engineering in the UK
Someone has compiled a big list of alternatives: https://www.gnu.org/software/parallel/parallel_alternatives....

Most of the tools look unmaintained (last release over a year ago).
How can I construct a VPN from scratch?
Nope they'll knock on your door with a fat check.

Seriously though the changes being proposed and enacted in the regulatory environment around social networks mean that there is a danger the real police will kick down your door if you run a moderately successful social network.
This only means that Android managed to create something that's wors than html+css, which is quite an achievement.

Meanwhile, for every small thing that you need on the web you need to reinvent things from scratch. Animations. Lists/virtual lists. Containers. Toolbars. Menus. Keyboard shortcuts. Constrained layouts. Layouts in general. Interactions. Combinations of anything above. Any basic UI component and interaction you can think of is non-existent on the web, and is re-implemented poorly and inconsistently by an infinite number of various UI frameworks.
>What's odd is that this article is so well written that it really clicks with bitter developers who are just confused in the vast sea of alternative technologies

Hearn has a penchant for penning very well written articles but complaining about systemic issues rather than directly solving them.

He was the kernel of the block size split that occurred in bitcoin starting in 2015 whose vitriolic fruit still bears today. Rather than face up to the fact that his fix proposals were either technically and or politically dead on arrival, he claimed a vast conspiracy.

There are some valid claims in this post but again it’s too heavy on complaining and light on the solutions.
Seems like a decent matress but the reviews page were somewhat suspicious. 12,000 reviews most 5 stars and first time ever I found a website where each review is professionally written - with nice grammar, punctuation, full sentences, few nicely worded paragraphs. Most start with "client" fear of buying online and ends with full relief upon sleeping on it first night.
FIFA Rilis Tiga Kandidat Pelatih Terbaik Tahun Ini
What's New in Visual Studio 2017 [video]
Agreed. And yes, that needs some attention, but most people doing responsive web do not account for most of that either. What does changing fonts mean? You design something for a font and then change it afterwards or?

When I click on some languages (I am not native English and my native language, Dutch, is not very high on the list of priorities for most companies) in some of the biggest companies in the world, you notice it just wasn't designed for that. From just making it wrap and enlarge to break the design to simple sticking outside the box.

For some localizations (Chinese for one) you will have to redesign anyway because 'our' (not sure how to describe) designs simply do not work/sell over there.

Most global companies have a local presence doing their local sites; I know some, even inside the EU, very big companies that have a site per country and have the html/css look 'the same-ish' for the user but completely different when you check the source to accomodate for local taste / language.

I like the dream of this working, as I am a programmer, but I don't see it in real life and I find html/css just painful to work with; not difficult but painful compared to most desktop GUI tech. Flexbox etc is changing that a bit but still it looks like people are shoehorning everything in this html5 stuff just because they desperately not want to use/learn other things instead of using the best tool for the job.

Disclaimer: I am old and have seen this before. I do create webapps and use React (new license makes it workable outside hobby projects), but I will gripe about it like the author of the blog post.
Not sure which side do you agree with but it sure seems like you just conveniently ignored that besides Mozilla, all other major browser makers Microsoft, Google and Apple are for this as well and actually already have it implemented and ready.
pivpn
No.. The problem cited in the article is: a common operation that is invoked hundreds of times a day is bound to F2. An uncommon operation that breaks the user's flow is bound to F1. Users keep hitting F1 by accident.

The only proper and decent UX in this case is to remove the source of the error. You do that by removing the binding of F1
Well... that's the deal with unfixable things. You tear them down and try again from scratch. Sometimes a step back is a giant leap forward. But, regarding the comments here suggests that web developers will never cease to patchwork the web. So, there is no point in arguments, just do it and make it better. At some point web developers will realize that they were trying to fix a sinking ship.
1.) You can do open source or own project for portfolio, it does not matter. However, finding oss that don't ignore pull requests and has beginner suitable bugs is hard. You risk spending a lot of time on just looking for the place.

2.) If you do own project, do something small. It is enough to learn technology and ability to come up with vision is different skill then coding. Technical demos or community challenges are fine for portfolio.

2.) The best way to find first job is through people you know. Yes, it is unfair, yes it requires social skills, but it is what it is. Go to meetups in your area even if they are about technology you don't care about. Talk with people and mostly listen to what they say. Something may get out of it.
In the US, I can say anecdotally healthcare was never quite affordable but it has been getting increasing un-affordable each year for at least the past 17 years at least. I know because I see the larger and larger premiums deducted from my salary every year of my professional life, even when not accounting for family-hood. It is the constant talk in October/November when most professionals have to sign up for health plans and get sticker shock.
The point I was making is that nobody uses XHTML thanks to the browser vendors' refusal to accommodate it early on when the demand was rampant. By the time the comparison was html5 vs. XHTML2 instead of HTML 4 vs XHTML1, it was too late as we had been trained to ignore the XHTML variant due to the vendors' absolute refusal to even make XHTML1 work. If you know of a single major site (not somebody's little side project) that uses the XHTML mime type, please share so I can be amazed.

The fact that the html5 spec does not permit self-closing CDATA elements is precisely the kind of legacy trash we'll be dealing with for yet another 10-30 years. (I understand that html5 didn't change the parsing rules from HTML 4 in order to be backwards-compatible, but it's still infuriating).
Sell fear, back pain, bed mites, lack of sleep, it's the easiest sell in the book, plus a high cost item that lasts is easily pitched, 'Yours for $10/month) (over 10 years...), throw in a 'if you don't like it send it back' (at your cost...), that's sales, it's irrelevant whether people need something, capitalism is can you sell them something.
So it’s really about setting clear boundaries.

Contrary to the Medium post, I schedule each meeting as first thing of the day, so it’s out of the way and doesn’t cockblock deep work I want to do. Even better is no meetings, but sometimes they’re just unavoidable.
I would do:

seq 10 | parallel long_process file{}

Or simply:

parallel long_process ::: file*
> But the way it is today, the web works.

Does it really? What would you hold up as an example of a powerful web app with significant usage?

All the major players these days (like Facebook) get the overwhelming majority of their traffic through their native mobile app, not through their web app. The web's primary stronghold is in publishing platforms (news, articles, etc...), which are not really what you'd call "apps" and indeed they are the one thing the web was actually built for and good at - static(-ish) content.
I'd say the burden of proof that your example can be turned into a genuine zero-knowledge proof is squarely on you.
To somewhat counter all the negative comments here - I read this article and agree pretty much 100% with every sentence in it. There are probably more people who agree with the post - hence the upvotes.
> What would you hold up as an example of a powerful web app with significant usage?

Google Docs suite perhaps?
> "Buffers that don’t specify their length"
This is a good thing. You just need proper escaping. To parse data with length field you need higher-level automata (maybe even Turing-complete parser) than for delimited or quoted/brace-enclosed data.
If you're a business with tons of cash in foreign accounts, you will have good credit rating. If you have good credit rating, raising debt will cost you next to nothing in today's low-interest environment. Both Google http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/markets/8517781/Google-ta... and Apple https://www.cnbc.com/video/2016/02/16/apple-taps-bond-market... have sold bonds. The creditors know that if the worse comes to worst, there's always the stash of cash that can be brought in during downturn years when there're losses that can be offset.

Repatriation is a red herring sold to the masses as a silver bullet solution to every economic problem. The money that could be put to use has already been repatriated, the rest can be repatriated on a relatively short notice, given the liquidity of the high-grade corporate bond market.
I have a Leesa and that surprises me - the smell was gone before I went to bed that night.

That said: I have friends with Casper and Tuft & Needle mattresses - they all seem pretty great
cheers.
"squared circle" = []()

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squaring_the_circle
To branch off of this, you're also 17 and have a better idea of what your cohort is doing or interested in than all the marketers in the world (who try and sell / create things for you). Solve problems you're interested in or come across that maybe your friends bitch about. If you're ever in conversation with your peers and you hear someone says "Man, I wish x could do y" then actually listen and think about it and whether it could be a fun and useful project.

Also, don't forget to be young and get out there in the world. You'll have your whole life to spend behind a computer screen and being part of the world gives you a greater understanding of the roles your skills can play in it.
Web apps are hardly a solution to this problem, those being always connected. If regular apps need permissions (for eg. opening photos on your device) then so do web apps. Are you comfortable with web sites sending your location home, or recording audio/video? If anything, web apps are too sandboxed to do anything useful.
I'm confused on multiple fronts.

My understanding is that ZKPs require you to prove only to the verifier that you have the secret information. If proof is convincing to the whole world, that's "too much knowledge" for ZKP.

See the Wikipedia article [1] where they use the example of the ring cave with a wall halfway through that requires a secret password. If you wanted to prove to the world that you have the secret, it's enough to go in the left side and come out the right (or vice versa). But that isn't (traditional) ZKP because it proves to everyone that you can bypass the wall.

Thus (per discussion page), they have to use a more complicated example, where no one gets to see which side you went in, and the verifier calls out which side you must come out of. [2] In that case, it's only convincing to the verifier. Everyone else (for all they know) can't rule out the possibility that the verifier told you which sides they'd call in advance, allowing you to always go the side that doesn't require you to bypass the wall.

OTOH, maybe zcash-style currencies aren't zero-knowledge in that (stronger) sense, because you are trying to convince the whole world of something!

That's also why ZKPs have the general format:

A) randomize the problem,

B) split the knowledge into two pieces where each is useless by itself,

C) commit to each piece, and

D) allow the verifier to pick which piece you must reveal.

How would that work with your Waldo example? Something like:

1) Prover puts a picture behind the cardboard in a position they can't change.

2) Verifier chooses which challenge to give:

A) Take off the cardboard and reveal the original picture.

B) Punch a hole where Waldo is.

3) Repeat until verifier confidence is high enough.

Only a legit prover can always pass. A faker can pass if they cheat and use a fake picture only when the verifier chooses B. (Edit: or if the verifier always picks A)

This is not convining to people other than the verifier because they can argue "Come on, you could have told the prover which stream of options you'd take."

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-knowledge_proof#The_Ali_B...

[2] Each time you play, you have a 50/50 chance to pass by dumb luck, but the odds of passing every round decay exponentially in the number of rounds.
The beauty of our business is that anything is still possible.

You can reg a domain name and have your own project or idea/app/affiliate/Adsense site up and running for next to nothing, except your own time.

Similarly, you can build a small Windows or Mac app, a little $10 utility or tool.

I don’t think an OS related portfolio is needed at all, actually.

I personally would start in that way, as you are in full control then in what you do. It could be something sustainable you build, make money with and looks good in your portfolio while doing so!
IndexedDB is seriously one of the web's biggest mistakes.

WebSQL was awesome, and most people already know how to work with a relational database and SQL.

A virtual file system API would be great. It's definitely one of the core features still missing from the ecosystem.
Manual review is the 2nd step of the process. First they need to add it in their ToS before anyone can be reviewed for compliance. I am sure they might have their reasons for not doing it but their response currently is rather insincere about handling this issue.
Sometimes, it seems, even a step behind.
Check this out: http://www.georgeandjonathan.com/
Learn data structures and algorithms really well.

Code a lot. Understand non-blocking I/O, memory management, parallelism.

Learn everything about networking you possibly can. At every level.

Hone that skill set over a few years and you’ll be invaluable.
There's a version of that in the travel blogger / digital nomad market where they shill their e-books about how to be a successful travel blogger / digital nomad. I assume Step 1 is to write an e-book.
Apartments in Turkey Available for Purchase Using Bitcoin
Wages excluding healthcare costs haven't, wages including healthcare costs have. https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-09-28/health-ca...
Reading https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/304828/its-details-baby, game play is fluid, so the game likely would get quite a bit faster if one used computers for doing calculations.

For example, those fuel leakage calculations on 1000+ units, for 100+ turns involve carefully writing down 100,000+ numbers. At two seconds per number, that’s three days of work over the entire game, or, if that 1500 hours is accurate, around 4% of playing time (.4% if ten players shared the work load)

A modern computer could easily do that in one second.

I think someone (truly) dedicated could build a version where every piece had an e-ink display that gets updated automatically to show each unit’s food, fuel and ammunition status and strength, and speed up game play tremendously.
"Google offered to donate their engineers' time to implement Dart and/or NaCl in Firefox and Mozilla still refused."

I did not know that - that is really a bad move.

"while Mozilla was napalming skyscraperfuls of $100 bills with their Firefox OS nonsense."

Well, I do not believe Firefox OS was nonsense. It was maybe just too ambitious and too many mistakes were made, like focus on low end. But allmost all of the development for Firefox OS directly helped also the Web in general, because most work, was work on WebStandards anyway. Just the ones for calling and sms you cannot really use, but all the other things like battery were beneficial.
how is that an android problem?

the internet is borderline unusable without proper adblocking. Its the same on all platforms.
You can still goof off and get a lot from it if by goof off you mean partying, going to sports events, etc. I went to a large public school, learned a lot, met lifelong friends (some of whom have gotten me jobs), worked part-time throughout school, and also had a damn good time. This was 2001-2005 so I'm sure things have changed. Costs surely have.