skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The direction in which programming has developed over the past 70-some years is ever-increasing levels of abstraction.

40 years ago, good old C was considered a "high-level" programming language. Now it's about as "close to the metal" as 99% of software developers will ever have to get (outside of toy assemblers in school).

Now the highest levels of abstraction programmers work with on a daily basis are with scripting languages like Python that completely abstract away things like pointers and memory management, and that run on virtual machines and thus across completely unrelated operating systems or even CPU architectures. Many of these languages have rich ecosystems of packages that abstract away much of the tedious complexity of everything from making an HTTP request and parsing the response to reading and writing CSV files.

But even higher levels of abstraction are available to non-programmers - consider the marketing manager who strings together functionality from multiple richly functional SAAS programs to make a completely custom workflow in a point and click manner.

In another 100 years, the barrier to entry will be even lower; and more and more of the footguns will be hidden behind layers of abstraction; and complex functionality will be something that's pieced together from existing components.

There will of course still be room for defining custom logic. And someone will need to develop and maintain and update all those abstractions and the programming languages themselves.

But I imagine that to one of us, picking up the hot new programming language of 2118 would be a bit like how it would be for a 1965 Assembly programmer to pick up Python.

That assembly programmer would probably spend the first few days trying to figure out how to allocate memory or determine the contents of a register using Python and then realize how totally unnecessary that is and how much they can do in how little time if they stop worrying about being parsimonious with hardware resources.

We'd probably spend a few days wondering how to do something that seems unimaginable not to have to do - instantiate a class or catch exceptions or something. And then realize that those things are already taken care of and we can accomplish 100 times as much in a line of code as we used to be able to.
Top CIOs view on advanced analytics, machine learning, and AI?
Well I guess the question I have is: how the hell does it work?!
Tests help you unpack the problem you're coding for, so it's common to spend more time on them than the app code. I generally include tests for each acceptance criteria of the thing I'm working on, and also tests for "weird bits" -- things I'm afraid someone after me is going to break (myself included).

How do you get similar coverage in shorter time? Keep doing it. In a few years it will be second nature, and you'll stop seeing it as a separate activity, but a natural part of feature development.
Top Upcoming smartphones of 2018
Indeed, there were weeks early on where I would work upwards of 20 hours building the product (though it was launched and signing up customers after the first of those weeks.) The important thing is that it never consumed all my time or focus.

It wasn't my main revenue stream during the early years, and didn't hit the six figure, quit the day job level until maybe year five or six.

As to ladders, I spend most of my time here and on my blog [1] explaining in detail how to climb it, and encouraging people to do so. Sadly, few choose to. The VC route has a much better PR team, selling the benefits of rockets over ladders.

[1] http://www.expatsoftware.com/articles/
There’s no reason it can’t do both. Keeping foreigners out is four-fifths of the reason why China has banned foreign social networks in the first place.
The gender of the author is one of the least interesting things about this blog post, yet it's brought up in (at the time of writing this) three separate comments here.

Comments that just say "It's a she" or "she" are basically spam and add nothing to the conversation unless the gender of the author is really that important. Since the blog post doesn't mention anything gender specific, I think it's safe to assume these comments are just spam.
It's odd that this has gotten so many upvotes while there are thousands of other static site generators[1] and this one doesn't even provide a single explanation as to why it is different or why would someone prefer this over one of the most famous ones.

[1]: https://www.staticgen.com/
IKEA at the End of Metaphysics (1996)
My anecdata: perfect scrolling, super smooth using stock browser on galaxy S7e.
I get cynic when "modern style" approaches with their megabytes and gigabytes of junk code that does nothing (or nothing anyone could clearly define) is called "expressive".

Many of the modern conveniences might be expressive in the small (function level). But it quickly gets highly unexpressive as you move to a more global level. That is because this "expressiveness" is often achieved by arbitrary and non-orthogonal approaches, which increases dependencies and hinders modularity. In the end, it's only more convenient to paint yourself into a corner. Seen that in many codebases.
The Motivational Power of Dunkin’ Donuts
That is right. I fill in the fields, then submit the change and nothing happens and it jumps back to DHCP. Always have to just edit the network settings manually.
It's simply not possible to carry on business without a bank account.

For that reason I'd like to see legislation which makes it illegal to refuse customers on the basis of their business model, so long as it is legal.
I spend about 30% of my time on a new feature writing tests. BTW that is in RoR which the primary language I code in. I would recommend watching this video by Sandi Matz on testing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URSWYvyc42M. I have used this methodology a lot to determine what I should test.
That makes no sense, businesses that have been accepting Bitcoin generally charge the USD price at the current exchange rate and convert that back to USD not long after the transaction, for fear that Bitcoin would turn into funny money. We're talking business here, not investment.
> next to impossible to disassemble a piece of furniture to move it to a new house. They are designed to be single use.

As is most furniture?
Rare Digital Art / Crypto Collectibles are "assets" on the Bitcoin or Ethereum blockchain that have two qualities:

- They are rare

- They have meta data that associates them with something we would consider "art". That could be a music file, movie, but is most often an image or a "card".

People buy and trade them either to collect them because they think they're cool or to "play" them if they're associated with a game. Some artists create extra incentives involved in owning their art - for example one I know keeps a locked playlist on Soundcloud that only people that own his token can listen to. In all cases, any assets you buy will end up in a "wallet" that you can think of like a trading card binder. This wallet is public, so anyone can see what you own and prove that you own it.

Rare Digital Art takes a lot of forms and is an exploding medium. Rare Art Labs (rareart.io) helps traditional artists make RDA, Spells of Genesis is a card game using RDA, Crypto Kitties is like tamagachis on the blockchain, Rare Pepe Wallet takes the "rare pepe meme" concept from Reddit and makes it real, etc.
Somewhere in all this we need to study people's willingness to do things they don't understand. Humans have been creative risk taker as well as sheep through out time. I wonder how many of these people are creative risk takers and how many are simply followers.

What motivates people to do this? Is it fear of missing out? Is it the potential to be a part of something new? Is it greed?
I'm calling it smug because all this argument is doing is making hypothetical dystopian sci-fi statements with no base in reality. If you actually take a look at the reality, you quickly realize it's nearly impossible to find these cases unless you're watching a sci-fi movie.

Any technology that has potential to do good for the humanity will eventually be shared with the masses if it exists. For example, RSA and Diffie-Hellman algorithm--arguably two of the most important technological inventions of the 20th century--were originally invented by government secret agencies but kept from the public for many years before being "rediscovered" by some other people later and made available to the public. And this was even before the wide-spread of the Internet.

It's becoming increasingly difficult to keep things from the public. Unix was kept away from the public by being super expensive, and Linux came along to made it completely free. Wikileaks came along and made classified information no longer classified, giving more power to the public. Drug companies which charge tons of money to people (see martin shkreli) get slammed and hated in public, giving incentive to upstarts that try to be more transparent and ethical as a marketing strategy. The only place where information is kept from the public is dystopian sci-fi films.

Unless you truly think this hypothetical immortality technology can be kept completely private from the public FOREVER, what you're basically saying is "Only the rich will have access to the technology initially, and that's not fair, so we should ban the technology."
How is it songwriters aren't negotiating these individually? Copyright Royalty Board sounds like a union.
Fine on iPhone 8 (Safari).
Time is a human invention that controls how we work
And what does the label get?
Just looked up the Vogons. From Wikipedia:

> Vogon poetry is described as "the third worst poetry in the Universe"

That's quite a good insult, really. Well, if what I had done was poetry. So a good insult in a different situation.
"Do The Right Thing And Measure It": words to live by.

This article has also reminded me of just how painful the main GCC codebase is. If you have a choice: Use LLVM for your compiler-hacking.
Even more importantly, if you change the navbar, it changes everywhere, no chance to forget, no tedious and error-prone copy-pasting.

Also, applying syntax highlighting to code fragments, doing the right thing around pictures, e.g. set explicit size, and many other seemingly trivial but tedious things.

In short, static site generators remove the legwork from static HTML.
Mysterious 15th century manuscript decoded by computer scientists using AI
Very considerate that they mentioned negative impact for users in the last point. I wonder though how well that is measured and controlled in real-world applications of this design style.
Is that data that valuable though? Its not that unique, off the top of my head there are several companies that have similar datasets, Every movie theatre chain, every online movie booking service, every movie review site
If we don't solve the problem by building more, how is your ideal outcome going to look?
All of the above, but I would add in many cases people truly do want to own the art because they admire the artist or admire the creation. There is some intense creativity going on in the space right now.
I think that the disagreement stems from the difference between what you and him mean by definition.

We use words to describe, and to categorize stuff. But naturally this vague. Everybody undestands if you describe a shirt as blue.or green, but most people would find it hard to describe when one turns to another, where the boundary between them is. So we use other names for that, or describe it as blueish green, or something similar.

To get rid of confusion, handle edge cases, and for other reasons, we define formal defenitions, which are different from the ambiguous idea we have of something.

What the comment you replied to means, is that the formal definition doesn't fit his idea of what is natural. You on the other hand are saying that the formal definition is the only (valid) meaning of the word, and so it can't be good or bad.
sounds like a recipe for confusion

“Do you want to meet up and pay me in Starbucks?”

“Sure where do you want to meet?”

“Starbucks”

“yeah i know you are paying me in starbucks but where you wanna meet?”
It doesn't offer more. It actually offers much less.
In more-or-less the same niche as Gatsby there is my Sitio[1], which also uses React (so kinda isomorphic pages), main differences being:

- No GraphQL stuff, but instead you'll use imperative JS code to tell the library which pages you want to build, with data from anywhere (files, CMSs, hosted contents elsewhere etc.) you can fetch using the same JS code, transform with any library etc.

- No Webpack, no Webpack transforms. I suffered when I tried to use Gatsby because of the gigantic dependencies on Webpack. I guess it's changed nowadays, but still I'm hurt and won't go back there. Here we're proud to use Browserify and go with more modular architecture.

[1]: https://github.com/fiatjaf/sitio
Sure, but in this case, it is just like not being able to use the e-kiosks at the train station to print your ticket. Chinese simply don't care about foreigners, they aren't threatened by them.
>Is there an in-between type of user technical enough to use a static site generator but not able to write their own?

A lot of people who want pretty websites without writing or learning a lick of frontend technologies.
> a different type

This is true in C++ but not in C.
The parent has a point.
She knows gender gender doesn’t matter. And the author of the article wouldn’t mind either.
> Do you think they would come up with exactly the same text if they were alive today, with the benefit of hindsight?

With respect to property rights and a citizen's right to arms, yep pretty close.
You’re right, sorry, I jumped on your second paragraph a bit too eagerly. Pet peeve against the “technology is applied science” view.

That said, Kuhn definitely does not ask that we dispense with the notion of science making progress. New paradigms are accepted because they’re better, after all.
Is there a cryptocurrency equivalent of "buy 10 drinks get one free" yet?
How much a civilization throws away and what it throws away is a very rough gauge of its technological and scientific level. At the far-future side of the spectrum, you only detect very low levels of heat energy close to zero Kelvin, and some similarly low leakage of EM. They’ve mastered nanotechnology say, and what we throw out today is high-energy, rich feedstocks to them.
Is that really true? That seems pretty insane.
I cant say that i want to support this direction videogames are going in. We get less content and still need to pay full price and then theres the pressure to buy all the dlc and microtransactions. At least before lootboxes you could buy exactly what you wanted, now you need to grind 100h and just hope you get the correct one.

Im happy i bought my overwatch key on g2a, those people buying keys in bulk and then doing chargeback can have the money rather than Blizzard.

edit: To expand upon, most of these costs are invented the game makers. In games like CS source you didnt need to buy any skins, you could make your own and replace the in-game models to see them client side and if you wanted everyone to see it you could have the server you ran the game on use it. But now no one lets you host your own server and prevents you from mixtering with the game files, so now you need to pay for simple recolors that you could have made yourself before or get through the community.

And another reason not to buy games anymore is that you really dont own them. When steam finally dies one day your 'license' expires and all your games are gone, not like it mattered anyway since more and more games require verification from servers owned by the developer/publisher either to play online or to verify your copy (doors in Diablo 3 are server side iirc). These servers then close down to force you to buy the latest game in the series. Or nobody bothers to keep them online when the company gets purchased or closed. And rarely to never at all do they let anyone set up third party servers because why would they.
/rant
Maybe: They are slowly building trust of not fucking you over so that when they do fuck you over you don't expect it.
An island that switches countries every six months (2018)
In this particular case I'm not sure that blocking internet access at the base will solve much since the data is stored on the device, and it's enough to bring the device to a location with internet access?

Basically people go home or whatever and plug in their Garmin and then it'll just upload the last 6 months of data, and there is the same issue.
>Is there an in-between type of user technical enough to use a static site generator but not able to write their own? Or maybe the proliferation is only because they are both easy and fun to create?

Not sure if you mean to ask why people don't create their own static sites (without generators), or did you mean dynamic sites using PHP/Ruby/Python?

For the argument over dynamic sites:

Yes - the type that does not want to worry about security vulnerabilities.

My blog is made via a static site generator. I updated infrequently (once every so many months). I want to have it up and running for years without my intervention (i.e. maintenance).

I once had a Wordpress blog and treated it that way. It was hacked.

Then I built my own in Django. Then at some time it went down because my service provider updated Python libraries, etc.

The funny thing is: Using a static site generator is no more work, and has no fewer advantages. Why should I use a dynamic site or build my own?

For the argument against static sites, well then you'd have to maintain lots of links manually. A SSG gives you a lot of that for free. And you can use templates.
Ponzicoin: The World's First Legitimate Ponzi Scheme
Wow, that’s the first site I’ve ever encountered, that actually respects the Do Not Track setting, and actively prevents third-party content from loading!
That's going a bit far.

You can just opt out of the apps as well? I don't have either of those. I don't use Google Fit (or whatever that broken thing is called these days).

True, my phone can track my position and steps etc. - but I made every effort to opt out of bullshit and to not opt in into worse things (aka .. Strava etc.).

A phone is problematic these days. But I do believe that it mostly does what you want it to. People just love to share their lives online?
I love this sort of static generator for a non-obvious (perhaps) reason: you can version control the source. I find that hugely useful when maintaining a complex site.

I wrote a similar tool, years and years ago, that took what looked like "troff -ms" input and spit out the whole website, complete with a site map. Here's an example

http://www.mcvoy.com/lm/bkdocs/UG/tmp/Introduction.html

if you go up a directory level and poke around, that's the source to website and webroff is the script that produced that website.
As a lifelong citizen on the USA, I agree, and so does Paul Graham ("Made in the USA," http://www.paulgraham.com/usa.html).

Most Americans are uninterested in craftsmanship. Actually, I think it's more basic. Most Americans are unaware of craftsmanship. They just do not understand what it is. They think it is a flourish that maybe adds 10%. A knife is a knife. If one costs three times as much because of "better craftsmanship," an American is likely to think that means it has some decorative etchings.

A knife is a knife, so for most Americans, shopping is just about finding the cheapest one. They are all knives, so only a fool would pay $100 when you can get one for $10. They figure that the one that costs $100 is because its maker hasn't put together the most efficient factory, or that it somehow became fashionable, maybe because a movie star had one --- certainly not because it lasts longer, will stay sharper longer, or anything practical like that.

Americans are sometimes okay with spending more on a particular manifestation of a general item. For example, it's okay to have an expensive car. But even then, they don't think Porsches are crafted better. It's that they look better (but for no objective reason, it's just what you like) and that they go faster (but not for any clever reason, they just have a big engine, what's so hard about that?). Or if you're not into sports cars, you might spend a bunch of money on a Jaguar. But the Jaguar is not a more comfortable ride because of more craftsmanship. It's just a matter of adding more padding to the seats and using bigger springs in the suspension. Anyone could do it. You just make things bigger. Bigger is better. More is always better. "Less is more," is some kind of Buddhist mantra by people who can't afford the nice things in life, so they kid themselves.

There are many exceptions. For example, Steve Jobs. Also, I find that many craftsmen appreciate craftsmanship: a plumber, mechanic, or carpenter. The problem is that most Americans don't work in these blue-collar jobs. The goal is white-collar jobs, and maybe that is the root of the problem. In America there are so many ways to make money at a desk or through a clever deal, that that has become the aspiration.
Having read both Kiyosaki and Ferris, I see their views a bit differently.

Neither of them suggest a goal to eventually quit working. They might say stuff like "never have to work again" for marketing purposes, but the key there is the choice to be able to decide whether to work or not, and on what.

They're both advocating a level of financial independence where you can pick and choose the work and do what you want to do rather than grinding at a job that's not particularly interesting to you just to pay the bills.
I have lots of forceinline and always_inline in my code, but you can do too much of it, so always benchmark to be sure.
Centre for the Study of Existential Risk made a Civ V mod about apocalyptic AI
I guess diebold makes their atms just like their voting machines. https://www.unhackthevote.com/
The same with most point-of-sale machines. I worked for a point-of-sale vendor for a while that had both Windows and Linux versions of our software. All but one retailer chose the Windows version because they felt it was much easier to manage 10,000 Windows machines than 10,000 Linux machines.

BTW, that one retailer that used the Linux version? They replaced it with the Windows version on their next hardware refresh.
And yet, looking at the way Twitter has been used as a tool to accelerate the divide of American political discourse, it’s hard to see this in quite as negative a light as I used to.
> If I write a theory and take over an existing word in everyday use, it seems a bit much to accuse every one else of colloquialism when they use an existing but less strict definition?

It does, but engineering is a technical profession and it's practitioners are likely familiar with the mathematical concept.

I've read about applications of chaos theory in system design, and I expected 'Principals of Chaos Engineering' to be about that topic.
Building Your Own VS Code Extension for a Mac Touch Bar
https://github.com/TomTasche/OpenDocument.droid/
American Illusions and Korean Realities: Preventing Conflict on Korean Peninsula
As soon you want to mention names of people, English text often requires Unicode characters. Looking up some examples, the first random paper I took from arxiv mentioned three surnames that needed Unicode, the second needed four, including the name of one of authors herself.

Even if you're talking purely about people in USA - for example, a page of MIT faculty https://www.eecs.mit.edu/people/faculty-advisors includes names like Jesús, Corbató and Tomás.
I'm intrigued.

Around here a lot of places don't allow USB drives, but .. I think that's mostly a "Do Not Steal Our Data" policy.

Not, my real question is: Does that make sense? People talk about USB HID things, but .. I would expect that most keyboards and mice these days are using USB. So if you find a way to block USB drives for mass storage aka "Do Not Steal Data" uses, are you still open for all the "I type in exploits because I'm not really a USB drive, I can be a keyboard too" things?