skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
STOP. BREATHE. THINK.

Here's the Stack Overflow post that I think triggered this post:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/153234/how-deep-are-your-...

Yes, he said "fuck". Let's get past that, because it's a super boring discussion to have on HN.

Also: pointing out specific 37signals or Rails bugs as evidence that this view is flawed? Also a super super boring way to argue. Argue with the idea, not the proponent of the idea.

Ok, feel better? Now comment on this story.
great point! i like to share this previous experience. years ago while working in large os development teams my approach was it was not enough to write tools/automate such that less experienced folks could perform tasks that had usually been done by senior folks -- the implementation had to empower the folks with less experience to control their own destiny -- which meant simplifying the implementation to the extreme. This also empowered the senior folks too as often the tools are not a primary focus, they just want to get some done and on with it
Have you never seen a web site that uses a fixed width layout before?
If you're in Texas, don't swear in school -- you'll end up in court
You're thinking about 10 steps ahead of this guy. He's just confused about the 'reset' vector being hit even when the computer is NOT explicitly reset, just when it's turned on for the first time, or powered on after being off.
Brilliant article. Testing for testings sake is wrong. Testing for 100% coverage sake is wrong. Write just enough tests at the level where it catches most of your regressions. Drill down into unit tests for complex logic, because you can test that more extensively and much faster than an integration test. Then leave a case or two for an integration test to make sure things are hooked up right.

Don't be afraid to unit test little complex things here and there. Are you writing a function to parse a string in a certain way? Pick that function, elevate its visibility if need be, write a simple unit test to make sure you didn't make a stupid off-by-one mistake. Does the rest of the class otherwise not loan itself to unit testing? That's OK, move on.

We've learned that each line of code is a liability, even if it's a configuration file, which is why we have come to appreciate things like DRY, convention over configuration, less verbose languages, less verbose APIs. Likewise, each line of test code is a liability, so each line better justify itself.
It's not even Windows8 phone - they didn't have the N900 or a single other WP7-capable device when they declared Symbian to be a burning platform to be jumped off. Then they killed Meego and effectively disowned the N9.

They abandoned their suppliers, retailers and customers without any meaningful avenue for transition/upgrade.

What did they possibly expect from that disastrously stupid announcement Feb '11?
What was it about Instagram that made it worth a $1B acquisition by Facebook?
I fail to see the problem being solved by this lawsuit.

I'm sure there's some anti-competitive laws somewhere that have been violated, but I still disagree with the philosophy behind this action.

Consumers are buying ebooks and ebook readers like never before -- free individuals making a choice of their own free will to pay a certain amount of money for the product.

It is also hard to see how anything could be "anti-competitive" in a market where a lone person could compete by writing a book at home and selling it on their own website with paypal. Think that's an unrealistic example? You probably also thought that about the video games industry 5 years ago with big box stores, gamestops, and steam seemingly controlling all access to the market. Despite all that, a game involving digging blocks out of the ground made millions of dollars and completely side stepped the all the dominating distributors.

Don't under estimate the choices of the consumer and the power of innovative individuals. They will shake things up orders of magnitudes more than a small army of government lawyers.
Ruby programming challenge as job application
I agree that it's not much of a surprise, but tell me why wouldn't it work?

I don't have to reveal the hidden location and password to my air-gapped private key unless I am in court.

I agree that spending the rest of my life at Hotel Guantanamo isn't my favorite, but if he defies the Federal Gov't's established secret wiretapping, surely he has assessed the possibility of this happening already and he's not afraid?
This question should be answered with a challenge. "You won't use math, but your boss will."
You should first take a look at http://www.meteor.com as it's all the hot rage and uses Node.js and websockets.
It is not fun to pull out the power tools on a huge piece of software with 50 thousand unit tests and see that 600 of them fail because you changed an important part if the code.

It means the unit tests will have to be deleted, and or updated. If each takes 10 Minutes that is 6000 Minutes.

On the other hand, seeing one unit test fail in another module you didn't expect to fail can save you a week of work, so it's all in how brittle and organized the tests are.
مشاهدة فيلم المصلحة 
مشاهدة فيلم المصلحة

مشاهدة, فيلم, المصلحة,اون لاين

http://video.qlbak.com/11105.html
No. Unless you can prove that there was an actual conspiracy with intent, there's nothing illegal going on. Corporations are allowed to fantasize just like people (as long as there's no blatant fraud involved). Or did you mean some other difference?
fear of google
I've used this service in New York and found it a beneficial networking tool. Clearly, some individuals hosting on the platform will have more to offer via their networks or experience than others and those high value time slots will be harder to come by as the service grows. That said, the potential for a serendipitous meeting to create value for someone just starting out, or simply seeking advice, can be big especially when one keeps an open mind and goes in with little or no expectations.
I'm surprised no one is talking about the glaring hole, which is security. It's apparently on the developers' short list of high priority features (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10100813/data-validation-...) but it doesn't seem like a trivial addition.

With client-side DB access, and eventual consistency baked into the platform as a core feature, you can't just throw "if current_user == object.owner" in your controller and call it a day. I'd love to know what they're thinking here.

Certainly you could go with a row-level security scheme like CouchDB has, where you attach little javascript snippets to your database that check security. But then how does the client verify? Maybe you can just assume that only malicious users will ever bump into security problems and so client-side verification is unnecessary.

If auth is baked into the framework, then maybe they can give you basic row-level security for free by maintaining a user table with auth tokens that's only accessible on the server side, and passing the auth token along with every database request, and maintaining a meteor-controlled owner key on objects. But that doesn't help if your security checks are more involved. I.e.: "if object.owner.friends.includes?(current_user)".

I'd love to hear what they're planning for this.
Change where you work...
I don't get the "don't aim for 100%" point. What are you aiming for then? 50%? What happens when you reach 50% and remove some code - do you remove enough tests to match the ratio?

We may just phrase the same idea in 2 different ways, but I'd go with "don't force yourself to do 100% coverage if it's not that relevant" / "don't add a test for a simple getter if you have more important things to do". If you can do 100% and have time for it - you should definitely do that. For example in case someone rewrites your getter, but it's not that simple anymore.
Strongly agree, but also I think that the interesting thing is why this might be so and what it tells us about application architecture.

The basic thing about tests is that once you have them passing, they represent statements about constraints on the program. In other words, they express your opinion of things that should not change. Unit tests are a bet that certain aspects of the implementation will not change. Integration tests are a bet that certain aspects of the externally visible behaviour will not change.

Libraries tend to be smaller and with well-defined responsibility. Applications tend to be bigger and have many responsibilities. In general, I think it’s true that the requirements for libraries change less often than the requirements for applications. I think this leads us to expect that applications may need to be rewired “under the hood” and have their implementations changed as responsibilities are added, removed, or changed.

This, I believe, leads us to want to unit test applications less, because a unit test expresses implementation semantics, and we expect application implementations to change. No what about integration tests? Well, if we’re unit testing less in the application, we need to make up for it by integration testing more, otherwise where do we get our confidence?

Now if we throw the words “library” and “application” away, this suggests to me that those parts of the code that are small and tight and with a single, clear responsibility should be unit tested, while those parts that involve a lot of what the AOP people call ‘scattering and tangling,’ should be integration tested.

Thoughts?
I'd love to see it.

It'd save me from writing the same, if you post it as a gist, or post it here under a MIT license or similar.

I'm always testing different ranking algos for ChronX, my online CCG. Right now, a modified glicko2 has been best, but I'd love to try your idea here.

I've seen Reddit switch to the Algo, and it's clever, but I didn't think of applying it to game ranking.
I find James Plank's tutorials and accompanying code very good:

http://web.eecs.utk.edu/~plank/plank/papers/CS-07-593/

And if you want an excellent description of how Reed-Solomon coding is efficiently implemented in Linux, try this:

http://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/hpa/raid6.pdf
I got a completely different impression, it seems to me that Peter Kafka was ridiculing the conspiracy allegations in the DoJ complaint.
Meteor is just a toy
It does sound right, where is this quote from?
I'm not anywhere near an expert, but I wanted to point out that there is a difference (I assume substantial) between someone who drinks 10-15 cups of coffee a week for several years and then goes off permanently and someone who drinks the same amount but regularly stops drinking for a few weeks. The situation isn't exactly the same, but it makes me think of a person who's never run a mile before who can't do it any faster than 10 minutes and a person who runs a mile once every couple weeks and says "that's totally not normal; you should totally be able to run a mile in under 7 minutes" (whether you 'should' be able to as a level of physical fitness or not, it's unreasonable to expect of a person on their first attempt).
I completely agree with David's assertion that there is too little focus paid to how to test properly or what over-testing looks like.

Here's a question to the HN community... For a library you write yourself to, say, access a Web service, how do you go about testing it? (For example, if you want to write tests against an Akismet gem)

I tend to write both unit tests and integration tests for it. My unit tests mock out the HTTP calls made by the library and only test that the library is able to handle both good and bad inputs.

My integration tests allow the library to speak directly to the web service in question, to test that the correct connection is being made and the service is providing the correct data back to the library.

Is this overkill?
This just got my brain jazzed. Any other good resources or uses of Finite Fields that would interest a programmer?
Signed up and looking forward to getting things set up this evening but I didn't receive a confirmation email!

Did I enter the wrong email address or do you not send them out?
Wouldnt 0 cause problems? You accidentally branch to null, machine reboots.
Code-to-test ratios above 1:2 is a smell, above 1:3 is a stink.

I think this is stated backwards. A code-to-test ratio of 1:3 is lower than 1:2, and based on the wording (smell, stink), it sounds like David is saying it's higher.
It does look strong. I wonder what Apple is holding out for, or whether there is actually a defense.
I wouldn't worry about a "school to prison" pipeline if I were them. Sounds like you already can't tell the difference.
TI also makes a similar Bluetooth compatible watch:
http://www.metawatch.org/
A [beautiful] Regular Expression Matcher
Where do I see my account details like account age, (non-)expiry date, data-rate (or other) restrictions for my tier, sales page describing what cool features I should pay the higher tier to get, etc?

I signed up with your special link and can't tell if I did it correctly, or if I simply have some trial time left from a previous signup. (I remember signing up for a trial the last time you hit the front page, submitting some bug reports via twitter, then getting distracted by real life and forgetting I had an account)
Cloudfoundry announces new Open Source model
Slightly off topic but I wanted to repeat this sentiment. Do not ever include information in video or video-demo only. I simply do not watch them. I watched this one because it's gorgeous and I knew I had to pledge, but I almost never ever watch videos online unless I'm on YouTube/Vimeo/Netflix.
Does it work properly with Android yet? I bought the inPulse, but it didn't actually work with my Android. The website said it would only work with Cyanogen Mod, which is stupid to begin with, but even running Cyanogen Mod it never actually recognized the watch.

Unfortunately it was a gift out of the return period, so I couldn't get a refund.
I largely agree - there is a certain testing dogma that goes into testing that this article dispels nicely. Of course, it comes with its own dogma, though I guess that's a bit tongue in cheek considering the author says: "let me firebomb the debate with the following list of nuance-less opinions".

So let me add some nuances:

1) DO aim high though, just recognize that the work in getting there is probably better spent elsewhere in your app.

3) BUT ignore this advice if you don't write tests yet. When you learn to test, or start working on a new feature that you may not know how to test, it will take you as long to test it as to code it. From there on though, test cost of testing is pretty cheap, so the 1/2 or 1/3 ratios start to make sense.

4) Do test that you are correctly using features and libraries (yes, standard activerecord stuff is probably going overboard).

5) But dont forget that many bugs occur at the boundaries of functional units.

6) Do what works for you, and what makes sense for you code base and business priorities. I don't love cucumber myself, but when others swear by it I can see why they like it.

Kent Beck's quote at the end is lovely. The first and only book on TDD I read was Beck's, and it's good to know that he's not actually as dogmatic as the book makes you think.
Not too much time ago I looked for the same thing, but unfortunately, I never found anything of interest. Will keep an eye on this :)

EDIT: Where are you from?
From the doc:
"Currently the client is given full write access to the collection. They can execute arbitrary Mongo update commands. Once we build authentication, you will be able to limit the client's direct access to insert, update, and remove. We are also considering validators and other ORM-like functionality."
Startup Security Checklist: Things You Should Do Before Launching Your Site
There is actually a straightforward tip that is fairly reliable. Take melatonin 30 minutes before you need to go to sleep in order to wake up on time. This stops you from staying up too late because it softly commits you to only being up for another 30 minutes.
maybe I'm just totally blind, but I don't see a link on where I can actually read it at. I see the chapters links, but they only have a paragraph of text then an ellipses.
I was under the impression that iOS apps can only talk directly to Bluetooth Low Energy devices, not Bluetooth 2.1. Your Kickstarter page only mentions Bluetooth 2.1 support. What am I missing?
He Talks in Maths: Why Geeks Love Radiohead
Are there? How do you know if they do ethical coverage?

Not trying to be a jerk, seriously asking. How does anyone make those determinations?
It's not entirely fixed-width, though. One nested column (the one containing the actual content) is fixed-width and left-justified within another column that expands to fill the window with whitespace. It's hideous.
In my experience, it means that you have to treat your tests with nearly as much software engineering respect and prowess as your real code. You have to factor things out and try to avoid DRY (particularly tough sometimes in testing) as much as possible.

If there is one "concept" that you're asserting in your test suite, you want that concept to only be repeated once or as close to once as you can get. Often times, people copy paste sets of assertions that have mixed concepts. Then, when a requirement changes, hundreds of tests end up having to be updated.

This is why many large companies, that contract out test automation development or train manual QA people with enough programming skills to write tests, end up with brittle test suites. One look at those test suites by an experienced developer and it's no wonder: there's conceptual/semantic duplication everywhere.
I'll leave external benefits stemming from mathematics for others to discuss. When will you use the actual math you're learning? Never. Because you'll forget all of it within short order and when you actually need to use it, you'll be forced to re-learn it.

Re-learning it will be much easier though. Kind of like remembering how to ride a bicycle.

Anyway, what are the times when you'll need math? When you're trying to solve interesting problems. You will never use math if you're doing routine programming work. However, if you need to create an algorithm that detects clients within a radius of 1 mile of your location, you'll need math. If you need to rate those clients on a curved basis, you'll need math. Not skull-fracturing math, but still math. Many, many other examples.

So if you're pulling data from a database and displaying it, no math. If you're actually creating that data or heavily modifying it, math.

I don't think anything past calculus is necessary unless you're doing some very specialized work, but up to that point is an absolute must for any computer scientist.
I liked the fast pace of "Do More Faster" and for $4.95 will probably check this out as well. But, I'm actually surprised there are no Amazon reviews yet of his new book (granted, it's new, but usually they solicit a few from the get-go).

Has anyone found any well-done reviews?

Irrelevant side note:
"Beyond The Blog: Brad Feld's Burning Entrepreneur - How to Launch, Fund, and Set Your Start-Up On Fire!" is one of the longer titles I have seen in a while.
You are not even remotely close to being correct.
Wow, I will never be the same person again...Earth shattering
Half the people in silicon valley are stoned nearly every night. Including all the ones that work at Google, FB, Twitter, whatever.

Trust me, I've known a lot of pot heads too.

Whoever you are, stay the hell out of California please.
Oh, it's not a quote -- I was just trying to find the most concise way of saying it.
Agree, though following this would lead me to extract all kinds of implicit library code from my applications. Likely not worth the effort without a genuine reuse story.
I work with therod and I basically do the same. Normally I do 1x 20min nap after lunch. If it was a rough night, with little sleep - one nap at 9am and one around 3/4pm.
When you say planned, do you mean for Microsoft to eventually purchase Nokia on the cheap, or to simply obliterate them?
Looks awesome, Eric! Can't wait to hack on one. If only it ran on a dcpu-16, you'd have a super marketing combo :)
Looking for open source Hackers: help improve this project
No, this kind of thing should be thwarted by supreme laws, ie, a Constitution, which require a super-majority to change. "Religious Freedom" could be such a constitutional right, which would make such "tyranny of the majority" more difficult (but not impossible).
> Corporations are allowed to fantasize just like people

That's not necessarily true, since groups of people fantasizing tends to involve a lot more externalized things that might be evidence. If I dream at night about bombing a federal building, I probably won't be arrested for it, but if I meet weekly with a group of people where we discuss bombing federal buildings and how we might go about it, that's starting to get a lot more sketchy. Similarly, if there are corporate memos flying around and strategy meetings/documents contemplating illegal activity, that's not necessarily a-ok.
I pushed this comment out to my peers for a read first, but thought I'd share here as well. I've been in the author's shoes as both an English teacher and band director (at the same time), and disagree wholeheartedly. As others pointed out, he's comparing hard skills (math) and soft skills (gained from anything, but in this particular case football and band).

No kid asks when band or football is going to be useful in their life because they already have a premise around it: start from the bottom, and you have four years to become a leader. Math doesn't provide this opportunity, because the moment you get a passing grade in a math course, you move on to the next class. There's no leadership here. No opportunity to lead that class you passed with what you now know. Nothing shifts. On another note, you do gain group work skills and peer bonding, like in other said activities.

The calendar thing pisses me off, like him, but for other reasons.

Primarily, this isn't because people don't know math. It's because they don't want to do it. We're currently in an era where it's easier to share information--good and bad--than for us to figure it out on our own. The problem here isn't that no one knows math, it's that "share" and "be a sheep" is much higher on everyone's bucket list than "do something by myself and learn from it." This is especially with kids. Instead of frustration, however, he's provided with a the perfect warmup problem. Ask kids to figure out if the answer is true or not using what they know about math, five minutes pass, and you show them how to handle it. You make two points now: math is useful, and don't always believe everything that gets shared around the internet.
I'm concerned that this isn't a joke. Or is it?
Yeah, I read that too. :) It doesn't really address my questions about how they'll pull that off.
Well - when you open android market, you see ebooks advertised. That's Play books. If you browse popular applications, you'll see Kindle.

I'm saying this from the point of view of possibilities / easy accessibility. No, iBooks is not an option for Android users, because they have no access to it. They don't care about it unless they have an iDevice - that's all I tried to say.

If you go for a Kindle device, your first option is Amazon of course. Actually a common user will probably know something about Kindle and that he can buy books on his mobile. The details about who they come from and how they work are not that important.