skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You're ignoring distributions of Emacs which are designed to solve this problem by bundling and pre-configuring everything.

Spacemacs, Prelude, and Scimacs are all good options depending on your use-case.

I mean if all you want is a text editor, some SCM integration, some build tool integration, syntax highlighting, and code completion then going with a specialized tool just for that is a good choice.

But the power of Emacs is that it can do nigh-anything and everything is a few lines of elisp away from being tightly integrated.

* Organize your tasks and projects with org-mode and work seemelessly with your team by syncing with org-trello.

* Use mu4e and magit integration to seemelessly send and apply patches and pull projects and todo items directly from email.

* Use one of the IRC clients or emacs-slack to do the same thing. Generate snippets on the fly in your team's chat from the currently selected text.

* Use org mode with org-babel and TRAMP to create interactive notebooks carrying out tricky tasks directly on the remote server from within emacs.

* Use emacsclient --tramp when you're SSH'd on a remote box to transparently edit in your local emacs.

* Replace tmux and tmuxinator with emacs-server.

I don't realy think it's small step up.
Huge iceberg drifts close to Greenland village, causing fears of a tsunami
It has been researched:

>"In Project HARP, a 1960s joint United States and Canada defence project, a U.S. Navy 16 in (410 mm) 100 caliber gun was used to fire a 180 kg (400 lb) projectile at 3600 m/s or 12,960 km/h (8,050 mph), reaching an apogee of 180 km (110 mi), hence performing a suborbital spaceflight. However, a space gun has never been successfully used to launch an object into orbit or out of Earth's gravitational pull."
The part that I can't figure out is why everyone seems to act like driverless cars will be some kind of all-at-once phase change transition instead of being incremental.

It seems almost a certainty that we will gradually ease into the concept. Some cars will be able to do some things autonomously, a little, for some people, some of the time. Eventually the cost/benefit levels will improve, more features will roll out, and sure over a long time scale things might look revolutionary.

In other words this big complicated category of tech will grow like most other technology has. This isn't an individual app like Instagram or WhatsApp it's a whole category of technology, like the concept of automated factories, or container based shipping, or the internet itself. It could be decades, or longer. Or not.

But as a casual observer it's pretty easy to look around and notice that there really aren't any practical applications of autonomy with mass adoption, and conclude that it's going to be a minute, and that we'll definitely have ample time to notice as we slowly get closer.
This is a silly comment.

Of course you can read Orgmode in plain text, because that’s all it is. Maybe you looked at a file with a bunch of meta-data, or a file with a bunch of code blocks, but so what? Ignore the meta-data and just read the notes. They are all delimited by asterisks by their header level. Links are simple. Tables are simple, even tables with formulas are readable.

Further more Markdown is a poorly defined plaintext format, which is why there are so many variants of it, and processors specific to those variants. If you don’t believe me, remember that GFM is not official markdown.

Orgmode is at least well defined, so when other editors catch up and are able to implement all the features Emacs has when using it, they should behave similarly. If you want a well defined plain text format that exports to HTML/PDF/Word/RichText take a look at AsciiDoc or reStructuredText.

But don’t blame Emacs for leveraging its power over a relatively simple plain text format. There are even packages these days for Vim, Sublime, Atom, Jetbrains to make good use of Orgmode without Emacs.
Textedit
My 2016 23k Honda Civic can drive itself down the highway. Gas, break, stear - it can do it all on a clearly marked highway. As can Subarus and probably many others. I just know what my friends and coworkers have. Saying no car maker has shipped anything is a blatent lie.
Even still, isn't it ok for celebrities not to want to share every detail of their life?
I believe most modern ui clearly communicates that it’s between by putting the cursor “in between” two characters.
I read it. And then comes the second part: "If you choose not to add a billing account..." If a billing account is required then the second part makes no sense, because then it would simply say the service won't work at all without it, but it talks about the monthly free credit instead.

That second part is the difference between the docs for new users vs. existing users.

But we'll see who's right soon. Tomorrow.
For that to happen does that 2016 Honda Civic have to have a driver in it?

That's how you can tell if it's driverless.
> `snap info go` for the whole story

It lists the channels and some versions, and has a short description; "This snap provides an assembler, compiler, linker, and compiled libraries for the Go programming language."

When you said "the whole story" I expected there to be some sort of story but I guess I might have misunderstood what you meant.
Trump has said 1,340,330 words as president. They’re getting more dishonest
Now THIS looks like an opportunity to use machine learning
I think this is a bit of a unique case because we're assuming up front that we know how the problem would be framed.

In 2018, it would be odd to see a problem like this where people want pins shaped exactly the same way to be set up exactly the same way and that determine success for decades and decades. If (somehow, out of context) someone asked me for such a machine, I'd immediately be asking why not a different (or random) arrangement for a tougher challenge? Or for training? What about skinnier or fatter pins to control difficulty a little?

Those things only seem strange now because we're all accustomed to bowling being played exactly the same way our entire lives. If it were invented in 2018, I don't think it would look the same.

You'd almost be irresponsible as a software engineer to have someone explain what a bowling pin-setting machine should do, and then build it to do exactly (and only) that. For anything other than "bowling, exactly as specified," you'd be over-engineering an exact-fit solution only for your competitors to build something better and more extensible (with more bowling features / challenges) in six months.
> Haskell use mostly concerns a few financial institutions

...who somehow have more resources to employ programmers than the organizations using Rust. Funny, that...
> The real world is always grey.

hm...
I was thinking of maximising the volume of the sofa in a corridor as tall as it is wide.
Sounds like the US practise of swatting transplanted to India
+1 for Joplin. The UI isn’t as polished as evernote, but it’s open source, unlimited devices, and no vendor lock-in.
I think Microsoft is one of very few companies (perhaps even the only one) that could actually replace all the google apps and run its own store.

If they cut the revenue share to, say, 10% (or a fixed fee + 5%), then it wouldn't take long until all Android apps are available on the Windows store as well.
> celebrities choose to put themselves in the spotlight.

It does not follow that e.g. if your day job is singing or acting, that you want people to interrupt you and take photos when you are eating in a restaurant, or discuss your relationships in a tabloid. Many would view it as an unfortunate side-effect of the job, or worse.
I somewhat agree to your point that the sheer volume of new stuff makes most things disappear rather fast from the public eye. But what used to be a moment among friends, let's say spontaneous skinny dipping or a badly chosen joke, gets shared with everyone in your extended circles and is easily saved and brought up whenever in the future.

Then there's the mob mentality issue you mention, and perhaps more relevant to this article. Even after it passes the names and images are still around when people search your name. It's on your permanent record.
The advantage of LINQ in my eyes is that it allows you to build an expression tree that you can wait to evaluate until a result is actually needed.

Then the provider can decide how it wants to do it, based on the types and operations involved. A SQL DB based provider can’t safely push any work to the database if it doesn’t know the structure or types of the objects and properties in the expression tree. It would have to return whole tables and perform all evaluation in the app where types could be handled dynamically.

I think something like typed racket or clojure may support it, but many lisps would not.
You begin your comment with a big list of extremely bad designs for config management. The least important flaw of those examples would be any limitation on comments in the config file — they have severe problems well beyond that. Papering over problems in e.g. badly misused package.json files won’t solve anything, and because it would run the same risk of those comments getting out of sync with the entries of the file as any other way of documenting it, it could even be harmful.

The rest of your examples just rehash the same fallacy mentioned in other comments (which I’ve given adequate responses to already). Large apps that use a local config file are no exception to what I’m saying. That’s still a terrible way to expose customization to an end user, and even if you are modifying some big local config file, like with Postgres, you should be putting your config file into a separate version control repo, versioning it, having comments as part of that repo, treat it like a mini package that gets deployed or installed when you make any changes (which should be code reviewed always, even if you’re just talking about your own config file for some app on your home PC).

Environment variables should not be set through config files, that’s terrible. Rather environment variables being set explicitly should be the way you override whatever default would have been chosen from the config file.
> ultra left wing ads

That might be pushing it a bit. We're talking Jeremy Corbyn here, not Amadeo Bordiga https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-leftism
On Preferring A to B, while also preferring B to A
I'm having a hard time believing the go core team changed its mind upon popular pressure only. Are you sure there wasn't a real-life painful scenario that appeared or grew in importance , and convinced them an alternative system had to be provided ?
(I'm a software engineer on Google's payments platform)

I'm sorry you've had problems adding your card. If there is a systematic problem with some bank, I can sometimes do something about it (but no guarantees). I've added my work email to my HN profile, incase you want to reach out to me.
Have there been any studies on 1980s cell phone use ('the brick phone') which had much higher power output?

Anecdotally you heard of 1980s stock brokers getting brain cancer but were there any statistically valid studies done on this?
I can't speak to this with absolute certainty, but I have some speculation to offer. The story of GOPATH is tightly intertwined with the story of package management.

Go is a Google project, and Google has a very unique approach to package management: commit everything to the monorepo. The GOPATH is, in essence, a monorepo. If you want to change the API of a library, well, you can just change all its callers across your GOPATH, too. And so for a long time the Go team was unconvinced that package management was a problem.

For example, the Go FAQ [0] still has this to say:

> How should I manage package versions using "go get"?

> "Go get" does not have any explicit concept of package versions. Versioning is a source of significant complexity, especially in large code bases, and we are unaware of any approach that works well at scale in a large enough variety of situations to be appropriate to force on all Go users...

> Packages intended for public use should try to maintain backwards compatibility as they evolve. The Go 1 compatibility guidelines are a good reference here: don't remove exported names, encourage tagged composite literals, and so on. If different functionality is required, add a new name instead of changing an old one. If a complete break is required, create a new package with a new import path.

It is true that if you write perfectly backwards compatible code, then you don't have a versioning problem, but if you think that's a viable solution you're ignoring certain realities of software engineering.

It wasn't until early last year that Russ Cox [1] publicly declared that versioning was a problem and set out to introduce a package manager into the Go toolchain. As it turns out, GOPATH is entirely incompatible with the approach to package versioning that the Go team settled on. You simply can't have two versions of the same package in your GOPATH, unless you're willing to rename one and rewrite all the import paths. Given that public opinion had turned again GOPATH [2], it was finally time to do away with it.

So it took about a year and a half from the time the Go team admitted GOPATH was a problem to shipping a release that made it unnecessary. That's really not too bad. The frustrating part of this saga were the first seven years during which the Go team refused to admit there was a problem at all.

[0]: https://golang.org/doc/faq#get_version
[1]: https://research.swtch.com/go2017
[2]: https://github.com/golang/go/issues/17271
I haven't tried using links after an export before. One thing to check might be the source code of the exported file? That might give you a hint of where the exported page is looking for its link targets.
You make the beam weak - strong enough to avoid accidental breakage, weak enough that a solid shoulder will break it. You also make the rotation cammed in such a way that gravity holds the beam failed open.
Another vote for Standard Notes. By far the best for my use case.
I wonder how much better Scheme with its static typing extensions fare im this regard.
What if both doors don't open in the same direction?
I don't think there is very much shortage of online tutorials and blogs showing how to create a basic Rails/Python/Node/whatever MVC monolith type web application backed by a RDBMS. Looking back at my career I can find plenty of valid use cases for needing to understand distributed computing for the most un-sexy of computing problems. One example was how to share a student's data in education software across school districts that each require hosting just their data in their own data centers. Another is making some boring CMS application highly available since you're customers are big paying Fortune 500s. Knowing this stuff helps IMO.
Motivation is a myth, purpose is everything
I'm baffled how "coding" equates to software engineering. If anything, scientists probably need to listen less to current Research Software Engineering dogma, and RSE types need to learn more about science. (Few will even take measurement seriously in my experience.)

The "reproducibility" mantra is at odds with a lot of real world science and serious computing. You don't/can't in general reproduce the sort of physics experiments and large-scale calculations with which I'm most familiar the way people are suggesting, and software engineering can't address bad science or lack of information. Revision control and "notebook" interfaces seem to have become the equivalent of waving XML metadata at any problem from the days when e-science was preventing useful work and research. Experience from a non-trivial research record and some decades doing and supporting research computing will be ignored, though.
Lower risk, I'd think, than now. There's only room for a few concurrent big memes on the internet, and the risk of becoming one of those is split among all of the people exposed to it. AI generating an increased flood of it would just increase the noise.
It's not the language, it is the developer. The developer can make trade-offs, optimize, test on different devices, etc...

In reality, this is expensive. Couple that with the fact that people who use low cost smartphones are not going to attract big capital, and thus they are left with average software developer.
Most banks don't have complex algorithms (the sort that some would consider OCaml or Haskell a good fit for) in general, they only have complex software because they have complex business and regulatory requirements, complex and incoherent existing systems to work with, cost constraints and organizational issues.
It's the opposite, be as public as much as you can. If your life already mostly public, the incident like this likely won't hurt you much.
8 Lessons from the Field on Building a Premier Brand
>While I can see the intention of Go modules, I believe that many people which belong to the first group migrated from other languages like JavaScript and expect to migrate the workflow as well. I highly encourage everyone to try the $GOPATH approach before rooting for any side.

I've tried it. Can we now get real modules?
The same celebrities that want to dictate every detail of others' lives?
Yep a private repo in GitHub goes a loooong way. With git you can be offline, dump whatever comes at any time. Markup syntax is remarkable in its simplicity but how much you can get out of it.

GitHub UI for on the move web committing is also pretty well done.

For a lot of things in life, you want to have simple interface yet sophisticated functionality. It’s incredibly hard to achieve that balance and so many software products screw up that balance.
> Are there _that_ many people who are interested in reading about Bézier curves?

That’s how Hacker News works. To make the front page, enough people have to up-vote the article.

I think comments might influence the article ranking too, but I don’t know that. If you’re not interested in this topic, why comment on the article?

As to why there might be a lot of developers on Hacker News interested in Bézier curves, they’re used a lot, and they’re taught a lot. More or less all video games & CG movies ever made use them for animation & modeling. Most fonts in use are defined by Bézier curves. SVG & web animations use Bézier curves. Motion planning and mapping people use them for boundaries & routes. And those are just a few applications.
Festus
www.facebook.com/abidoyeadewale
+1 - I believe that it stems from the monorepo mindset.

That's fine and works perfectly well in the appropriate environment (e.g. large structured work environment with processes etc etc), but for my personal work I prefer to just checkout wherever the hell I want and go from there. Really looking forward to module support so I can use golang for some personal small-scale projects easily without having to go through a lot of the ceremony of setting go up on say a raspberry pi - just checkout and go (no pun intended) will be a breath of fresh air.
Correctness does come first, or else you can't play games the wa they're intended to be played, but the way BSNES does it is wrong.

I believe that it does so through attemptng to mimic the working circuit logic and chips, the physical hardware, within code alone, hens it requiring a powerful computer. This is an incredibly unoptimized way of doing it, especially since it's formed out of incorrect assumptions n what "accurate emulation" is.

It's the effects that we want, not the logic. If you're going to emulate something that, through common sense, shouldn't even require that much power, you're doing it wrong.

The saying goes, "keep it simple, stupid!" To overcomplicate things, like the programmer of BNES did, results in unweildy an unoptimized code.

Even Nintendo doesn't do this tactic with their official emulators. Yeah, sure, they're known to be inaccurate at times, but that's only because Nintendo's not aiming to build a general emulator to handle all case scenarios. Besides, much of the inaccuracies, as far as I could understand, deal with undefined behaviors of the system, something only things like glitches and bugs ever take advantage of.
Writing to a (non memory-mapped) file takes a call to write(), whereas setting pixels in a framebuffer might just be a memcpy().

I think, given the post we are commenting on, it is OK to distinguish these things. Historically, framebuffers are packed arrays of pixel values, and files aren't necessarily even seekable. These are well established norms.

You could argue that the real interface for writing to an image/screen should involve two-dimensional locations, instead of a linear offset. This is what Plan 9's draw facility proposed, along with alpha compositing operators. That is certainly also a question of interface, but one at a higher level.

So I don't agree that "write X at offset Y" is the ultimate, universal highest-level abstract standard for drawing on a raw raster image. It's more like an implementation detail from my point of view, actually :D
>It's on your permanent record.

Absolutely, I have an effectively unique name as far as the Internet is concerned. So, if I were to become "Internet famous" for something problematic, it's pretty much a given that would be near the top of search terms any time someone searched on me whether a recruiter or anyone else.

Worse though is probably if you share a name with someone Internet notorious and plausibly could be confused with that person. A story I like to tell is pre-Web but someone I know in NYC shared a name with someone who got into a very public and polarizing local spat and something. My friend literally got death threats left on his voicemail.
Hear, hear! Even if they're not fudging them as such, they may have cocked up the measurements. You figure that out from hard experience in the field (or relevant experience from another, which is often very helpful), not with some trendy piece of software.
A piece of advice often given to people is "don't be the smartest person in your team", because then you don't have anyone to learn from.

I think that advice is wrong, because:

1) there are many different skills you can improve and you are probably not the most skilled one in the team in all of them

2) even if you are the most skilled, it doesn't mean you can't learn from less skilled people

3) 'smartest' is a strange criterion, because if there is one thing you can't learn, it's becoming more intelligent

However, if you truly believe there isn't much you can learn in your current work any more, possibly because of the skill levels of your teammates, switching to a different job is probably a good idea.
WhatsApp/Social Media have just begun to realize the nature of the beast they have unleashed. Like the US fake news uproar.
However adding technical fixes to the way we communicate via Social Media is like applying band-aid & treating the symptoms. We as individuals and society need to realize that the cognitive and social costs of these communication mediums are increasingly outweighing the benefits.
Likewise, it would be nice if on ARMv7 one could figure out if NEON is available without having to have permission to open a file under /proc.
However, there is a difference, and I think an important one. With the internet, every piece of needed technology was either in place or easily imagined; with driverless cars, I don't think anyone can claim that is true. While ML/deep learning have made impressive strides in the past years, it is still a big leap to say these same technologies are enough to drive a car in the wild. They may be, but it also may be many years until such a technology is realized.
You don't have to have ubiquitous Turing-test-passing level 5+ robot vehicles. Lane Keep Assist style things are a good start.
The word means a (leather) strap - which is why thong underwear and thong sandals are called "thongs" that's what they're made of ... like rubbers being called rubbers (kinda, note a rubber in en-gb is both an eraser and a prophylactic).
Edsger W.Dijkstra: Train toilet problem (1973)