skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Not dying yet (I wonder whether it will ever die), but "fading away". Which seems obvious, but hey, let's hope for another bubble!

If you're convinced it is fading, be my guest. As far as I can tell adoption is continuing to increase. You can't take last years FOMO event as evidence that bitcoin is failing. We all knew it was being overpriced with people's expectations inflated. We knew because it had done this at least 6 times before, whenever a new media organization discovered it and announced it to millions of people who had not previously heard of it.

The difference in the 2017 bull market was that everyone heard of it. Even your grandma. Every media group published something about it, and everyone who had not previously heard of it FOMOd into it, expecting it to continue rising. An event like that is unlikely to happen again, because everyone has already heard of Bitcoin. There are no new people to inform, other than children who weren't previously old enough to learn about it.

Bitcoin adoption will be gradual as and when (if) people want to use it. It really does not matter if adoption stagnates, because there are enough existing users and enough liquidity in markets that existing users can still make good use of it, and trade with it.

Sound money will not really occur while bitcoin is under its inflation stage. It can only occur afterwards. Demand will increase if other currencies continue to decline in value relative to it. We have over 2000 years of economic history telling us this, although it was only coined "Gresham's Law" a few centuries ago. It all boils down to simple decisions people make. If I have an easy to obtain dollar, and I have a hard to obtain chunk of gold, which one would I let go of first?

Can you point to any examples in history where two separate monies have been in circulation and Gresham's Law has not played out?

This does not apply only to money either, but to many items which have intrinsic value (people desire to possess them) and are scarce. This is why original artworks continue to appreciate in value over time. Limited edition products tend to appreciate in value. Abundant items usually get trashed, until they become scarce, at which point their value starts to increase again (they become collectors items).

The dollar will not appreciate in value wrt to such limited items. It's just not scarce, nor does it have any intrinsic value. If Bitcoin has done anything, it has laid bare for everyone to see how worthless paper money is. I don't think this effect can be undone at this point. Too many people are too aware of this fact to ever revert back to using such a worthless store of value.
InSight Mission Shows That CubeSats Can Relay Messages from Deep Space
I agree that's what he should have done. Isn't that being more cautious?
"If the way Clojure works isn't for you, a process which produced Clojure in the first place, paradoxically, so be it"

The best conclusion :)
Bad Habits of UI/UX Designers
Commodore 64 Original Operating System Kernel Disk Found
That argument can be made from the other side about golang being artificially kept alive by Google.

The comparison isn't on equal footing.
I kind of wish people complaining about Clojure's development process (and of other open source projects) would just create a fork and implement their own ideas.

This way, everyone could benefit from the experimentation and likely some of their ideas would get rolled into the root project once they have proven themselves.
Programming is an open ended non competitive (generally) activity. I don't think there is any meaning in trying to quantify "goodness" and in fact might blind you to possibilities.

So, for myself, the thing I pay attention to is my ease of expressing the things I want to create. I also pay attention to my ability to produce things with certain "qualities" correctness, simplicity, and how modular and composable my code is. There is no objective measure of those things and my understanding of those things constantly expands. I learn these things through by my own experience and looking at what other people are doing and having in depth discussions about programming ( and outside of programming ).

So I have no idea how good I am, but I have confidence in what things I can create and confidence in my ability to learn more.
PHP is growing these days. Some of the hip crowd are coming back, small business never left and globally it is gaining as more developers come online. PHP offers so much so easily it's hard to replace.
Yeah I agree with this, finding balance between risk and productivity. Although doing something beautiful is the exception.
I IF because I get pretty sleepy during the day if I eat.
And this is why dietary science fails often. Because of the insistence that dieting is a matter of willpower whatever that means.

Lots of real research needs to be done on why people eat unhealthy even though logically they know it's bad for them.

And unless you're someone who's lots a significant amount of weight, changed your eating habits over a long time person and have maintained that you don't really have any standing to make such statements.
Well the code is free but the clojure trademark is his.

> What if Rich itself is the main bottle neck for his own masterpiece?

Then whoever thinks would do it better could just fork it and call it 'klosure' for sure!
This can only be answered with context.

Someone may or may not be a good programmer depending on a whole bunch of factors, the project being built, their familiarity with the codebase, familiarity with the technologies used, how happy they feel in their job, how happy in their personal life, if they really like the project they are working on, whether they get time/space to concentrate. It goes on and on.

There's no answer to "is person X a good programmer" within context and even then it's purely subjective.
The latter solution isn't much better - all the community momentum of the first project is instantly gone. Now you have a set of forks, all with a different small set of patches on top. Which are maintained? Which will be maintained going forwards? Any new user looking for this functionality has no idea. Maybe none of them.

He didn't give anybody the power to do things in his name. He gave a stranger the power to contribute to a shared codebase. He never claimed to be a BDFL of this codebase. Your vitriol would be much better aimed at node modules which depended on non-fixed code which they didn't audit.
You're conflating "Open Source" with FOSS.

FOSS is the mantra of a particular community-oriented software-development zeitgeist, where things are developed by a community, without a project maintainership per se—i.e. where "the project" refers to whatever the most active fork of the project is, rather than to the project as maintained by some particular BDFL.

FOSS projects are usually maintained under the aegis of one or more software foundations, like GNU or the ASF.

"Open source", on the other hand, means exactly what it says. Microsoft does Open Source. Apple does Open Source. Oracle does Open Source. It means exactly as little as the image conjured in your head by that list.
how do you know the number? is there a table somewhere?
You're asking the wrong question. You should be asking "Am I an efficient or effective programmer?"

Do I get things in on time / under budget?
Do I avoid common programming pitfalls?
Do I solve more problems than I create?
Do I see simple solutions to complex problems?
Can I refactor terrible code to more easily maintained code?
Can I avoid terribly written code in the first place?
Can I effectively communicate with people in order to get the answers I need without wasting their time with needless questions?

Then you know you're effective when:

You're asked for help often.
You're the go to person by the boss.
You're often asked for your opinion for engineering decisions.
Your opinion holds weight with others.
TV-B-Gone’s Mitch Altman Created the ArduTouch Music Synthesizer
NPM repository is not "open source community". NPM is controlled by commercial organization ("npm, Inc."), which is fully capable of establishing rules, preventing package authors from selling to black hats (or even gifting for free to black hats). The author of the package could have formally given his Github repository to new maintainer without transferring package control . He didn't. Why? — presumably, because there is nothing in NPM ruleset, preventing him from doing so. It does not matter if he was bribed or not — there is an obvious glaring hole in notion, that widely-used digital assets may be covertly "gifted" to third parties.

This isn't the first time that has happened — the story with Google Chrome extensions being sold to hackers should have tought NPM, composer etc. a lesson. Maybe someone should finally sue them to drive the point home?
Check out: https://github.com/mtdvio/every-programmer-should-know
Scala driver for Neo4j
It's not, it's about the entitlement of many users of open source projects.
It is much less likely the original maintainer will turn malicious, especially a trusted member of the community.
Come on, you gotta start somewhere.
Somewhere I read a measure of intelligence is: the ability to achieve your objectives efficiently. You could say the same about coding. Are you achieving your coding objectives efficiently?
In the US we can negotiate payment plans for our medical bills. If that is an option, that could help stretch your savings.
this does work... but it also requires two very significant points.

1: you must do this wrapping yourself, for everything you wish to simplify, as few libs do it.

2: you now have non-standard error handling and your tools will not warn you if you handle it wrong.

the second one, to me, is borderline fatal for this pattern. You can't look at this code and realize it's missing error handling (or doing it incorrectly), and you can't run `errcheck` to tell you that e.g. you're missing `err := img.Get()`.
Writing negative comments/tweets is a helluva lot easier than staking skin in the game.
Facebook investors sound off about Zuckerberg after stock plunges 40 percent
I think getting paid (preferably well) is always one of the reasons why people work for any company, including startups.
The Chinese Room argument fails to make its case, but not for that reason - Searle claims that no such instruction book could be written, and so the experiment could not be performed, meaning that the subject would have no possibility of learning from the outputs generated by performing it. If the experiment could be started, whatever the subject would learn from performing the role would be moot, as merely by getting started, without the subject initially knowing anything of the language in which the questions were posed, it would have refuted Searle.

The reason the argument fails to make its case is that Searle does not have an effective response to the 'systems reply': in the paper, his response is a mixture of appeals to intuition, together with the erroneous claim that if the subject memorized the instructions, then the systems reply would not apply.
>> Cognitect does not make money from Clojure. Period.

But it makes its money because it is the company of the creator of Clojure. AFAIK the company was started after Clojure gained traction. That means they are well compensated, that's as good as money, IMO.

Reading the original post and this, I don't think Rich Hickey is a good citizen of the F/OSS community. F/OSS is not about cost. It's about sharing.
I wasn't intending to say reading every single commit of your dependencies is practical. I was arguing that unless you do that, you get absolutely no guarantee of security. If you take code for granted because it has 17k internet points, you're putting yourself at risk. I can't see how this is not very simple.
He is correct that open source developers don't "owe" anyone anything. But this is kinda missing the point.

The point is that if you have a bad development process, people are going to have issues. And these issues are real.

Even though you have no "obligation" to solve these problems that you have created for other people, you shouldn't be surprised if people bring them up, or perhaps even fork the project with a bunch of other people who also have problems with you.

Sure, the community does not own your time, but neither do you own the community. A community is fully within it right to do something else with their time, or convince other people to contribute to a different project.
> If this is the case, why open source or publish it in the first place? If you want people to read the code, but not interact with you, why not write that into the license?

Because there's a difference between 'can' and 'must'. It's great when people use my OSS work, give feedback, and even file bugs. What's not great is when people adopt the position that they're entitled to a fix right now (or ever), or that they're entitled to new features or design consideration for their minority use case. In summary, strawmanning someone else's argument is bad, and you should feel bad.

> [W]hy bother with this angsty rant?

Managing large OSS projects is about doing things at scale, like answering a question exhaustively once, in one place, so you can refer back to it instead of having to explain variations of it repeatedly, ad infinitum. As far as 'angsty', maybe start with a little humility: check your own biases before reading an attitude into someone else's message.

> This is completely wrong.

Nope, you are. Both in the technical/legal sense and the historical sense. Recommended reading: The Cathedral and the Bazaar.
> You are responsible for your own needs. If you want things, make them.

>I am grateful for the contributions of the community. Every Clojure release incorporates many contributions. [...] Open source is a no-strings-attached gift, and all participants should recognize it as such.

>The time to re-examine preconceptions about open source is right now. Morale erosion amongst creators is a real thing.

Sad that it has to be said. I think as a creator you need to brace yourself for the reality of what it means to offer something to the world. There is a sort of normal distribution of consumers and some can be surprisingly toxic.
React does not have hundreds of dependencies:

└─┬ react@16.6.3
├─┬ loose-envify@1.4.0
│ └── js-tokens@4.0.0
├── object-assign@4.1.1
├─┬ prop-types@15.6.2
│ ├── loose-envify@1.4.0 deduped
│ └── object-assign@4.1.1 deduped
└─┬ scheduler@0.11.2
├── loose-envify@1.4.0 deduped
└── object-assign@4.1.1 deduped
"perfect is the enemy of good"
That's just your empty entitlement of "he should share his toys with me more" under the guise of "F/OSS" and, uh, being a "good citizen" or something.

You're a horrible citizen of the fantasy world where you give me things for free. That's some Kennedy inaugural address shit right there.
> But as a programmer at work, I often receive feedbacks from 1 or 2 persons at most

Oof, yeah, that's rough. It's hard to say something conclusive with little data, and most of the data is likely biased (yourself). I'd recommend finding opportunities to work with other devs. Open source is a good path forward.

Otherwise, estimating your performance is super hard. Are you right more often than you're wrong? When you're wrong, do you consistently fix your flaws? Are you learning? Are you contributing more and more business value? These are all very opaque questions, and even if you answer all of them you're likely to have gaps.

Get more data!
Hi Hackers I just launched my online, live-streaming 3D Printing Farm
The Principles Behind Differentiable Programming
And so it's clear to others, this probably the worst possible way for a language to go about implementing error handling (maybe aside from just not having any mechanism outright and terminating).

But alas, those are the choices that the Go language made.
Thanks for the help, but I don't see the need in perfecting the analogy. My argument is that volunteer work can be criticized, despite its altruistic intentions. I have no interest in debating with you about how software impacts lives. Apparently, this case has enough potential impact to be a much-discussed controversy.
To use your scenario, but slightly change it:

- Tell the manager you will no longer be doing any work.

- Not tell the manager you’re quitting and replacing yourself with a random stranger from Home Depot who seems interested.

It’s not wrong for the electrician to quit, especially when volunteering, but it’s wrong not to properly notify people and to just let a random stranger take your place without notice.
Thanks for the link DavidGould. Learnt me some I didn't know.

The '66 Impala was a heavy car and I didn't purchase it for racing. I did put a heavy duty clutch plate into it when I replaced the engine. It did burnouts just fine until I snapped the welds on the rear differential and sent the universal joint banging upward against the bottom of the car. Learned a little bit about welding, u-joints and spider gears on that one.
Be careful what you wish for... you just might get it.

Forks are not particularly fun from the user's standpoint.
I took Cryptography I on Coursera. It is a very comprehensive and stringent course, and therefore stands out among all the other watered down MOOCs. Yet the discussion forum and comment fields are filled with students angrily complaining how hard the course is and how the teacher is condescending in saying things like “it should be obvious”, “as is known to everyone”.

I guess these students ruined MOOCs for everyone else. Schools now know that when they put out an advanced course, not only do they reap little reward, but also alienate lots of people who think their intelligence is insulted.
Without all the nice bells and whistles github provides for collaboration like wikis and issue tracking I don't think google will be successful at convincing people to maintain their code here. I don't find the outliner useful. That's a common IDE feature and a repo is not an IDE.

I've always viewed source control as a productivity tool more than infrastructure. With that mindset, it will take a lot more to convince people to do more than mirror their code here. Maybe that's enough, but mirroring has its headaches...
What was the cyberpunk worldview? Afaik it was something along the lines of "the world is run by vast networks of shadowy dystopian entities and we must use cryptography to resist this so we can have freedom" (basically, Information Technology libertarians)
Ask HN: How much equity is fair?
Hi, I'm a senior engineer with 8 year experience and a PhD. I'm considering joining a startup as one of the first 10 employees, how much equity will be a fair amount?
InSight lands successfully on Mars
Not sure PHP is the reason reason why Google failed at competing at Social
> Even though you have no "obligation" to solve these problems that you have created for other people...

Publishers of open source code don't create problems for other people. People who accept that code into their projects assume those problems for themselves.

If an open source package has bugs in the forest and nobody is around to install it...
If your employer is happy with your performance then you are probably "good enough" as you say.

However if you truly do always want to be improving your ability as a software engineer, then you are in luck, this field is so vast and deep that you can easily spend more than a lifetime improving! Finding out how and measuring it is another matter.
Broadly yes, but I'm guessing this one was sparked by this thread https://groups.google.com/d/msg/clojure/2GQQpxNcDlM/St3Can2x... and the indignation that spilled out elsewhere. We get these little brouhahas every couple months o_O

Rich put it well that Clojure is not closed, it is conservative. He made it to solve the problems he encountered in the industry, which were large multithreaded proprietary systems. It is a business first language (cognitect is a consultancy, after all). The fact that so many hobbyists like me ended up using it was kind of a happy accident.

These two audiences don't have completely opposed interests, but they do have different priorities. Businesses care about stability; they don't care much about whether the language accepts PRs on Github or conducts twitter polls. I accepted that a long time ago, and I'm still using it six years later.
This is really nice! It'll come in very handy for my next training class -- students are always asking why they shouldn't use floating point for money and I always explain it, but having a tool where they can play around with it is much better.
It has actually worked out pretty well in the case of Typelevel Scala. Users are free to compile using mainline Scala while using libraries that are built in Typelevel Scala. In most cases, this isn't even exposed to the user.
This post is absolutely correct. All your entitled to (if anything) is the code, as is.

You're not entitled to:

* Community engagement

* Bug fixes

* Timely pull requests

* Anything else

You get the code as it has been released. Whatever you do with it is up to you. The finished product you build using the code you have found is your responsibility and yours alone.
I believe your last two paragraphs are exactly what he's suggesting: complainers are free to fork and work on a better process if they're so inclined.
Oh my gosh, no. That might be a "good" software developer, but I'd probably think not on that, too.

I've had to follow behind such programmers who wrote their code with the primary goal of getting done as fast as possible never expecting to have to come back to it. It's literally the worst code that exists.

Usually they no longer work at the same place they created such code, because later they were asked to maintain it. That's why I got the job. Usually we start over.
Sucks man, I hope one day he kicks the habit and you guys can hang out again. It's tough seeing things like this.
If it's free for everyone to use (on the "lowest" tier) like 2.4 and 5GHz, won't it be quickly saturated as well?
Not sure how useful this would be to anyone but i built this tool last year to learn about Go and highlight issues with dependencies. This tool tries to enumerate dependencies of the project and highlight concerning facts for each dependency such as the size of collaborator, the age of the repository or if it has not been updated for more than 6 months, etc.. The tool currently supports go-dep, npm, pip, ruby-gem but ONLY support githubapi. The tool can be found here if anyone is interested or just want an idea to write something similar for the community:

https://github.com/GovAuCSU/DRAT

Disclaimer: I am not a dev, just a pentester by trade so the code is probably ugly as fuck for many of you =))
Rivian is building Tesla for Trucks
Bad example, because printers often are consumables. ;)
You raise some good points.

When I see that word mentioned in any business I get skeptical, especially one where there's a classical product involved, like bananas. Or cars. In this case I strongly believed it was used for adding feathers to their plume and so I used it in a mocking tone. Radio Bloomberg (broadcasts) mentioned the blockchain line with some skepticism for awhile and so it stuck in my head.

None of these parroting futurisms make sense for GM. Their largest customers are fleets like Enterprise Rent a Car, who buy massive numbers of new models before consumers can get to them, assuring delivery numbers. If they compete with them for rentals or ride-sharing, what if ERAC orders a bunch of Fords next year? They'd be crazy to endanger this relationship. GM should stick to making cars and messaging to that effect.

Anyhow, I stand firmly by how I interpreted this announcement. My overall opinion on GM, however, is probably very ignorant and naive.

"A GM spokesperson told Jalopnik over the phone: “We are ending production of the Volt March 1, 2019.”"
from them: best practices for physical media

I would add:
on the digital side, practice good identifier hygiene [0]

[0] https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/jou...