skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think that's a fair point. But organizational complexity is compared to other measures, such as the complexity of the software itself, the number of dependencies, etc - i.e. the size of the software itself - and the study found that organizational complexity is still the #1 method.
A long essay could be written about that. A few quick things. There's Scheme's simple syntax, which doesn't get in the way of what the book is actually teaching. The fact that, of the mainstream programming languages, Javascript is the most crufty and full of gotchas, with all kinds of weird, unexpected behaviours even experienced developers can't always keep track of, many caused by bugs in the first version. Javascript's tendency to fail quietly when other languages would shoot out error messages makes it an awful language to experiment and play around in. Javascript Stockholm Syndrome. Decades of tradition. The entire last section of the book's intimate relationship with Scheme.

The fact that this is a book about learning to program, not about maximizing your potential for jobs. It's a compsci book to learn to be a good programmer, not a book about synergizing industry trends to build your resume.

When SICP was written, most people still wrote in Assembly for most things but COBOL, ADA, and old-school FORTRAN were also popular. Part of the longevity of the book is its appropriate choice of language.

Would it be as enlightening to write a series of JS compilers in JS? Or are they writing Lisp compilers in JS? Doesn't that miss the entire point of the book?
Unfortunately, it exemplifies the USA-centric approach to names: First, Middle, Last. All with the first letter capitalized and the rest lowercase.

But that's not how things work in more than half the world. Just taking the capitalization issue: Even the French name DuPont will break your example. Non-latin scripts generally don't have capitalization, and even European ones have letters that can't be capitalized (for example ß). So using capitalization as a field separator simply doesn't work, because it was never designed for that purpose in the real world.

And people keep writing these simplistic systems because nothing breaks so long as all of their users are homogeneous. Except that the system they are building upon doesn't have the same implicit constraints as they've set up. And then things go very, very wrong in production.
Powerful fat burning Weight Loss program
Rohingyas are mostly Hindus?
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/05/myanmar-new-e...
The pianist who learnt to play on a paper piano
This is horrible treatment and will ruin the lives of millions. How can we not learn from mistakes in our past and grow as a global community
I Have Axn.live
What can I do with it?

I was planning on building a live auction website. So I bought axn.live

Looks like there is a TV channel with that name.

Can I sell it to someone please?
If your aim is to protect all people against religious persecution, of course you should keep your list of persecuted groups up to date and extend protection to Wahhabis and Salafists if they need it. Ideally, that process shouldn't require amending the original law, but only a judicial decision that (whatever specific actions are taken against the persecuted group) constitute religious discrimination according to the criteria outlined in the law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volfefe_index

Or one out of tons of specific companies:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/06/di...
I don't use Windows 10, but I from what I understand Microsoft had to make it GDPR compliant. I'm not sure they succeeded entirely with that (last time I checked, the German government did not find it GDPR compliant. Regardless, at the very least it was an improvement [which isn't an excuse]).
I agree with you that there is a deeper problem if choice of programming languages makes you miserable (with the possible exception of the situation where things are so bad that it makes it difficult for you to do your job and that makes you miserable).

At the same time though, I think you might be writing off the link between choice of programming language too easily. Rather than pens, where there is relatively little difference even between a fountain pen and a ballpoint, a better example might be a carpenter choosing between power tools and hand tools. There are definitely carpenters who are strongly specialized in using hand tools who would not enjoy being forced to use power tools.

I suspect this may boil down to different people coming to programming for different reasons. Some people are primarily interested in the end product of programming while others are interested in the process of using code to build abstractions. My opinion is that room should be made for each approach.
Show HN: Created this app for my 2y old toddler for his morning routine
Tuning is a very messy subject, though. For instance, I think you're not strictly correct in your third paragraph - pythagorean tuning does
theoretically admit of modulating to a different (at least "nearby") scale, since it is based on repeatedly applying the 3:2 perfect fifth interval! The actual problem is that it has bad thirds - hence "tempering", where basically, some of the 3:2 intervals are adjusted to move some of the thirds closer to being in tune. (It's true that this possibility of modulation was not musically exploited until after other tunings became popular - but strictly speaking, it is "just intonation" that can really only work for a single scale.)

For a simple introduction, I thought it would be better to skip the subject of tunings altogether and just focus on the structural implications that one would "read" in an actual piece of sheet music.
So, just a day ago, I got dragged into a meeting where many people were involved in a discussion about the new Cloud Enterprise Application Architecture Template. Or whatever.

It had a 3-tier architecture.

I asked: Why?

And they answered: Why not?

I answered: Because layers must only be introduced if needed. Is there a need?

They answered: The standard design is the need.

I clarified: Is there a technical requirement? Or perhaps an organisation one, such as disparate teams working on the two components?

They answered: No! Of course not! It's a unified codebase for a single app written by a single person! But it is not Enterprise enough! It must be split into layers! And then, you see, it will will match our pattern and belong.

I verified the insanity: Are you saying that this finished, working application isn't currently split into layers, but you want it split into layers simply so that it can have layers?

They chorused: Yes.
How to earn 1000$ per day without investment
john Got Fired From His job-Now Makes 7-Figures & Travels The World! Get the video Training Now! Get started here>>> http://bit.ly/2Pz7JWY
Just responding because I feel similar to what you're describing and my partner is similar to what you described.

I agree that I think it's a common trait among people in our line of work.
AWS has launched a hundred small products which anyone can signup for on the spot, it’s not that different than consumer product releases. And it’s also not the opaque enterprise sales process of Oracle and IBM where things move at a way slower pace.

It’s somewhere in between and if Google started launching a bunch of new DB and other infrastructure products I’d be worried about adopting them individually - not worried that the entire data centres and business divisions getting shut down. Because Google will probably move on to another product without thought of the last one.
The article examines this through the lens of Windows Vista. Am I the only person who actually did like Vista and didn't have any problems with it? I gathered that most of the issues people had with it was caused by third party incompatible software and hardware.
Google is always building new data centers to handle traffic growth for their own services. GCP infrastructure wouldn't be turned off, but re-purposed for internal growth.
From the article:

> In the replicated study the predictive value of organizational structure is not as high. Out of 4 measured models, it gets the 2nd highest precision and the 3rd highest recall.
They probably thought how great it was that the new software system was successfully detecting lots of fraud that had probably been going on for years.
> We are everyday learning more about how much intelligence and consciousness something like cows posses

How can I join this learning ?
Is Mark Karpeles or any other well known criminals involved in Orchid? Is it a pyramid scheme? I don't want to get burnt again or help fund scams.
Consistent hashing by gTLD with a random local seed instead of simple randomization then. I’m sure 1/3 of your data is still valuable but 1/10 or less probably not. A sort of K-anonymity for DNS.
I was surprised that Conway's law was not mentioned.
My girlfriend was able to get on the phone with a tech support person for her small business ads and I was shocked she was able to even talk to someone at Google over a phone without being a major company with a big monthly bill.

The woman was still snarky to her and unhelpful but still a real human was available.

A lot of this has to do with our own perceptions and trust. Purchasing decisions are never fully rational or information complete.
Based on my understanding a common name would probably be Slimlane, or Blade...
Does this mean that a solo developer working on a SaaS product can avoid bugs?
I would call them out if they object and was to sloopy to write "either X or Y"
Steve McConnell identified it as the number of lines of communication in the team or dept creating the module, incl dependents and dependers.

It's why Conway's Law exists, and points towards the importance of well-designed and -specified APIs.
> verifying anything with science is not worth our time

You are apparently long, long overdue a revision of a few history books. It should very quickly become self-evident that it is in fact worth our collective time (and probably our individual time too, as it's a real achievement that everyone benefits from) to perform scientific studies.
XOR is the natural use of or in English. Do you want to get subs or pizza? Are you going to vote for A or B?

Logical OR is often written as ‘and or’. Do you want to see a movie and or get dinner? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/And/or

That said it’s not a universal standard and like most of English has wide regional differences.
According to the paper cited in this article, they may not be as dumb as you think

https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/animal-emotions/2017...
To your question of religion based immigration, this ignores crucial background - After the Partition in 1947, there were Hindus and other minorities who remained in Pakistan(including current Bangladesh) and Muslims in India. There was the Nehru-Liaquat pact which curtailed further exchange of population provided the minorities were safeguarded.

This agreement was drastically violated, especially in the 1971 war when Pakistan Army deliberately targeted Hindus.

This site run by Muslim Bangladeshis documents some details http://www.genocidebangladesh.org/

This lead to a mass exodus of Bangladeshi Hindus to India. In fact, the Communist Party, advocated for their citizenship status much before Modi came to power.

There has been further persecution of Hindus, both in Pakistan and Bangladesh

https://foreignpolicyblogs.com/2018/06/05/bangladeshi-profes...

Also, regarding Myanmar, note that this act also doesnt give refugee status to Hindus who are also being persecuted in Myanmar.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/05/myanmar-new-e...
> In order to do Big Stuff, you need a Big Team.

Depends on your definition of Big Stuff. If you mean send a rocket to Mars, then yes. But the vast majority of us are working on simple web apps that might call a few apis, yet these seem to require Big Teams. Compare that to what a single game developer might produce, and compare the complexity and performance of the product.

I think we need Big Teams for Small Stuff precisely _because_ of these 'modern development practices' that you mention. Getting things done in these paradigms takes _forever_, so you need a Big Team.
E-Mobility Network redesign (original concept)
Tons of projects. Even many well known today languages, frameworks, etc, started life as one man's initiative and pet project, which they worked on alone, inside a company.

But also tons of official projects in the enterprise. A company needs an X tool, Y is known for his capacity to deliver, they get assigned to make the tool.

Not every project requires a team.
This is mostly a US thing. If I don't implement a DIRECT competitor to my company in my free time, the company can do absolutely nothing about it here. IF I implement a competitor and put it on the market, they can fire me. They can't however, sue me for the posession of the software. That's just a legal nightmare in the US.
Signal (or Keybase), with expiring messages.

I've become quite paranoid about my digital communication, I've worked in the field long enough to know all of them are being scanned. I'm not even doing anything illegal, I'm just uncomfortable with it.

Or just never talk digitally, only talk IRL. All these guys lived near each other and worked at the same company, could have easily just dropped by each others desk with a wink or a nod.
When was the last time you installed and/or ran a Haskell program? If the answer is more recent then "never", then what was it?

It's possible that Haskell is like COBOL in that it's used in industry but not at all by the community. But I'm not sure how I would characterize it, then. Does industry use count as "practical"? I honestly don't know. Anyway, examples would be nice.
But did you try editing a multi megabyte file with that method? Cause I have seen enough editors struggle with big files (especially if the file is a single line and you're going through it with word-wrap on), that I think the basic straight-forward approach already isn't sufficient on such workloads.

from the article:

> Luckily, there are some nice data structures to learn to solve this.

You could have also learned a new data structure!

I mean, it should be obvious that "this thing that the cursor does when moving lines" isn't the big takeaway from this challenge. It's almost cute that the author never noticed it (as a programmer), because I actually use that behaviour to navigate code sometimes. Who hasn't done a quick arrow-left/right to make the cursor lose its memory of which column it used to be on?

> Even when DOS machines with <640K of memory and memcpy() speeds in the low MB/s were the norm, people edited text files of similar sizes, with editors that used a single array buffer, and for that purpose they weren't noticeably slower than ones today.

No way. Every reasonably performant text editor in those days used special data structures and not just an array. Imagine having to copy the entire buffer on each key press (so, when inserting at the start of the file). Believe me, on a 640K DOS machine you'll feel that.

This isn't new stuff, I learned about these data structures in uni -- except I don't remember them because back then I was young and arrogant and didn't think you'd need these fancy data structures for something as simple as an editor :) :)

... but if you never tried to write one, it's hard to see in what ways these editors are not as easy as you think.
Adaption - another term for adaptation.
Maybe they could consider applying more reasonable pricing?

E.g. Hetzner offers an 8-core 128GB Xeon SkyLake machine with unlimited 1gbps traffic for around $120/month while Google offers n1-highmem-8 with 8 cores and 52GB and no traffic for $240/month.

1gbps unlimited traffic on Hetzner means 324 TB/month, which would cost 26000$ on GCP at the lowest 0.08$/GB rate.

So I would consider cutting the instance prices by half, and dividing the bandwidth prices by 1000, and then they will be competitive.
Not OP, but to me this is the Unix philosophy of having many small tools that work well and interact well.

Even if your modules are very separated, if you can't individually use and play around with them they become a part of a big blob of software. Services may be products, but only if they're idependently usable.

If you have a small product that's useful in and of itself (e.g. git) you can much more easily make it work well and then integrate with other good tools and replace those if necessary (e.g. if you have problems with Bitbucket/Jira/Confluence, you can switch them out for other solutions, e.g. Gitea).

But if you have a huge clomplex product then at some point it becomes organizationally impossible to move away from it.
I think the point is that you might be able to build something else than a standard relational db and make it faster.

Something like VoltDB but there are other solutions. There used to be some blogs about their architecture and how they could avoid a couple of steps a normal RMDB needs that takes a lot of time.

https://www.voltdb.com/why-voltdb/
It said in the article G Suite might account for the bulk of Google Clouds revenue, since its combined in their financial reports with the infrastructure stuff and G Suite is extremely popular.
Conway's law strikes again.
Colors and Fonts a Library of Colors and Fonts for Devs and Digital Designers
I liked the 2s engineering and design but it's excessive weight and embarrassingly low pooling rate made me return it.

Picked up a 502SE which is perfectly addressing these issues with better button feel and tracking.

No wireless tho, and the wheel kinda sucks
Amazon Echo Loop – Smart Ring with Alexa
Animation studios will try and make you sign contracts that say they own anything and everything you pitch to them, regardless of whether they pick it up.

You can get around this or have the contracts modified if you have good representation, but most artists don’t or can’t afford to. I also know for a fact that studios use these clauses to mine and steal ideas from struggling artists.

IMO, America is far too biased overall towards employer versus employee rights and this is a problem in a lot of fields.
>Other than in niche or pet projects, can this even work?

All kinds of projects have been written in Forth, so yes.

Also, regarding "You step down on the level of assembly language which may sound daunting, yet gives you full control over every aspect of memory layout.", until around the 80s, tons of software, commercial or not, including full blown games like "Prince of Persia", was written in assembly, so again, yes....
TL;DR: Lots of small modules (they could be drivers or classes), with narrow, well-defined, highly agnostic intersections.

Most of my coding work has been done as a lone programmer. Even when I was working as a member of a large team, I was fairly isolated, and my work was done within a team of 3 or fewer (including Yours Troolie).

I have also been doing device interface development for most of my career, so I am quite familiar with drivers and OS modules.

When I say "sequestered," I am generally talking about a functional domain, as opposed to a specific software pattern.

Drivers are a perfect example. They tend to be quite autonomous, require incredible quality, and have highly constrained and well-specified interfaces. These interfaces are usually extremely robust, change-resistant and well-understood.

They are also usually extremely limited; restricting what can go through them.

The CGI spec is sort of an example. It's a truly "opaque" interface, completely agnostic to the tech on either side.

There are no CGI libraries required to write stuff that supports it, there's no requirement for languages, other than the linking/stack requirements for the server, etc.

It's also a big fat pain to work with, and I don't miss writing CGI stuff at all.

It is possible to write a big project his way, but it is pretty agonizing. I've done it. Most programmers would blanch at the idea. Many managers and beancounters would, as well. It does not jive well with "Move fast and break things."

But there are some really big projects that work extremely well, that don't do this. It's just my experience in writing stuff.

When you write device control stuff, you have the luxury of a fairly restricted scope, but you also have the danger of Bad Things Happening, if you screw up (I've written film scanner drivers that have reformatted customer disks, for instance -FUN).

YMMV
Most of his direct reports at L10 are going to be $M’s and for those with larger scopes, $5M+ is very easily possible. For someone like Dave on the S-team he’s going to be $10M+ and I couldn’t even begin to guess at how much over that.

It isn’t incredibly uncommon for L8 offers to be made around $1.5M USD today in AWS - the market is very competitive for excellent leaders in Seattle. Long-time employees can potentially make more: appreciation of their equity; you have specialized or niche knowledge which commands a premium; retained because AMZN can’t easily replace you.

In summary, senior leadership positions at Amazon are extremely well compensated. It’s very rare indeed to lose someone good to another company over money.

Throwaway because its taboo for an L8 or L10 to be openly discussing $M+ compensation packages.
Nah, that's OK. Thanks.

Just to clarify. I have been down this road. I am not interested in sacred cows or third rails.

I'm trying to do all my writing and commenting, based only on my own experience and insight.

I'm done with fighting on the Internet. I don't have the energy for it anymore.
I mean, the restaurant claiming copyright on e.g. recipies is the same situation as whatever is going on here.
I was lucky that I've always had my own projects/products and I was employed as a full time software developer only once in my life. During the hiring they brought me a contract that had this sleazy IP clause. I told them that there is no way I can sign anything like that but will be more then happy to sign simple and fair non compete clause. The employer did just that: they replaced the IP ownership clause.
Krita Receives Epic Megagrant
Brain cancer – alternative treatments that work?
> Everybody is allowed to have more than one job if they please.

In my country, it's generally illegal to work for a company also work for a competitor. It's a breach of the duty of loyalty to your employer.
Islam is a curse on this world.
Good work.

I have done something similar by creating bash functions in a file then sourcing that, making them available as and when I want.

This looks nice though.
Hi there again knight!

As you can imagine, we are a Startup actually consolidating our product. We are in Seed stage so every feedback we receive (like yours) makes us very happy and prouds and helps us tons! So thank you again for taking your time to ask me questions!

Since we are validating some of our visualizations and insights, not all people will find the value, while others do. In our case, some of our customers are using the "Impact" visualization to gamify some way the code process with the engineers so they are more motivated and have increased the quality of their processes overall.

You are probably right by saying that our provided data could be not the right data to make decisions. It will depend on you and the value you find in that information we provide.

As I told you, we are validating and you are free to talk to me and write me your pains if you have them!

Thanks again knight!
Any cyber security firm that says the risk of a hackers not leaking data because they got paid a ransom, is one that should be blackballed for negligence at best, and fraudulent collusion at worst.
The most obvious explanation is that they were making a joke by picking the most greasy, unhealthy thing they could think of and had no real desire to go to KFC.

"What are you going to do with your new heart?"
"Clog it up just like the last one. duh."
this provides an incentive for someone to provide vpn/tunneling service with IP pool large enough to prevent blacklisting to be effective