skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's not the comment that's sad, it's the fact that for a pitifully low sum of money you were happy to shred the integrity of your comment.
The whole concept/category of infographics struck me us unnecessary. What started out as a few fairly novel, unique, and interesting approaches to display data spiraled out of control into these absurd comic-ish designs with a few stats buried in them.

I will take a nice clean table or chart over an infographic any day. Mixing 'art' and data seems to obfuscate the purpose of the two.
In case anyone is wondering, it uses an Arduino Due[1] board which has an Atmel SAM3U 32-bit ARM processor[2][3]. The Due is not yet available and is due sometime later this year.

You could theoretically build one of these fairly cheap. Google's posted the source code for everything.

1. http://arduino.cc/blog/2012/06/28/android-adk2012-is-here/

2. http://arduino.cc/blog/2011/09/17/arduino-launches-new-produ...

3. http://www.atmel.com/products/microcontrollers/arm/sam3u.asp...
Can you give solutions after the week is up? I really want to become a better programmer and I think this would really help me learn.
What's the pitch to the masses? "We make Bitcoin easy to use... and all you lose is anonymity and decentralization?"
He's certainly optimistic, but I notice a distinct lack of evidence.
Could you please expand on this a little: "With Safari, Apple can audit all the code necessary".

I'm still unclear why it's safe for Safari to execute unsigned javascript, but not UIWebView. Thanks.
The algorithm is obviously pretty easy, as has been demonstrated...

but I can't believe I just spent 20 minutes trying to come up with a scripted solution. Nerd sniped again!

http://xkcd.com/356/
I'm not sure who came up with the "should have 45db of background noise", but I worked in an environment like that for years and never liked it. Others I worked with felt the same way, and some dismantled them. I don't like audible distractions, but I think reducing them is better than trying to cover them up with even more noise, unless you are sleeping. If you do use noise, I think natural running water or a fan is better than digital.
I see 'believing that there is money to be made in Bitcoin services' as 'indirectly endorsing Bitcoin'
I'd start from the other direction.

The newness of this stuff is overrated. The bitcoin phenomenon isn't ultimately different from phenomena described by Mackey: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_Popular_Delusions...

As we know, each new version of speculative excess has the slogan "it's different this time". And each one is different, in some way. And you can extract various interesting particular lessons from all these newnesses - I'm sure after 2008, someone's written a deep, interesting article on the failure of the Gaussian copula‎ but really, you didn't need to understand the heat equation and Ito's Formula to know that synthetic bonds were a problem in 2006 (I'd recommend the enlightening discussions of Doug Noland of Prudent.com from that time).

But it is important to not allow ourselves to let the details of these situations distract us from the psychological dynamics which ultimately has carried all these phenomena. This psychological dynamic allows a slightly stretching of numerous points to add up to the concrete mistakes one point can point out later as "what went wrong". And these "what went wrong then" arguments are themselves dangerous since they general are coupled with "so this time, the different thing we are doing is..." and so forth.

Essentially, understanding magician's tricks are great. But never let yourself be fooled by the belief that you know all the tricks.

And I writing with the assumption that bitcoins aren't a "medium of exchange" in any meaningful way - for example, I could directly my car for something else valuablle far more easily than I could directly trade bitcoins and cars aren't a very meaningful medium of exchange today. This is the position that I believe most serious economists take, Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman being on record here (not that I think this is really a left-right question).
Relax. :) Now we're getting to the crux of the situation.

Let's talk spreadsheets. That's a pretty data-freshness-critical thing, yes? Jennifer gets an e-mail with an Excel attached. She previews the Excel, decides it needs an edit, and taps Send-To -> Numbers (the most common current scenario). A duplicate is created and shipped over to be owned by Numbers.

She makes edits, then clicks Send To -> Email. The correct version goes out. The updated version remains in Numbers. The user assumes that Numbers has the spreadsheet, because that's where she was making changes. The copy in the Mail Attachments archive remains old but it's never invoked a second time and the workflow never takes in stale data.

The only scenario in which Send-To causes problems is in the case of two applications that have equal abilities to process a given filetype AND roughly equal chances of being invoked by a user, and how often is that going to be coming up on a telephone or an tablet?

You could always build a file locking system at the app-level or OS-level or cloud-FS level, but then we're back to Who's Freshest?, the hardest game of all to win.

Apple chose not to play this game and pushed all the filesystem yuckiness out onto a rarely-traveled edge of a regular user's possibility space. It's not ideal, but what is?
I stopped reading at

Though some say that Duff was never a “real coder” if he was willing to give up the life

Dribble.
If there is a lot of work to do, then that's a good thing - it offers a place where RIM's engineers can provide value to the android platform that you can't get anywhere else.

It might take time, but considering that BB10 isn't arriving anytime soon. To contrast, Sony announced their first Android phone in Nov '09, and shipped it in April '10.

Had RIM seen the writing on the wall could they have had a RIM Android phone around the same time BB10 is supposed to release?
Tech savvy users are not the main problem in malware.

The whole SiteKey/tiger image solution only gives you an illusion of the solution. What happens when the system displays "System error, unable to display the image?" How will a convincingly-written error message prevent your average gullible or below-average competence computer user from logging in to a phishing site?

Think of how many things can go wrong on a computer. Think of every time when someone asked you why something works one way in this situation, but another way in another situation, and you had to use a technical explanation (excuse, really) for that inconsistency. Computing is full of that. Until we get to a place where people can actually TRUST and expect consistent behavior in their computing devices, the SiteKey/tiger will be well circumventable.

As far as I'm concerned, SiteKey is a brilliant business idea for selling to satisfy the regulatory two-factor requirement, but a terrible idea in practice.
Don't take it personally, but I've seen a lot of confirmation bias from ex-PHP developers.

Often from developers who may, thanks to language Y, write more elegant code on the line / function level, but still create the same architectural mess as they did before in PHP. (Rails doesn't save you from creating a mess, neither does the broad separation of concerns of any MVC framework.).

There are thousands of ex-PHP developers out there that think they are now better programmers because they now use Ruby or Python, building thousands projects that proof otherwise.

Five to ten years from now, people will be bitching on HN about legacy RoR software like there's no tomorrow. And they'll probably be blaming the language and/or the framework.
Yes, we'll be putting it up. Stay tuned. Thanks for trying
Filenames are the keys, file data are the values, and there's metadata too, encapsulated in the directory data, inode data, etc. But the concept of a file is just a useful metaphor. A file is exactly identical to a directory or an executable, from the KV store's low level perspective. All the handling and interpretation happens up higher.

I disagree that (most) files contain their own schema though. Sometimes the schema is incorporated by reference in the metadata, sometimes in the key name (filename).

Some structured data formats contain a sort of self descriptive sub schema, but they always(?) require something higher up the chain to make sense of it. I can't think of any examples where that isn't the case, but I'll leave the question mark on the always because I'd like to be be proven wrong!
Yep, that goes without saying :). But even if the actual code/module never gets reused, writing something similar will take much less time in the future, even from scratch...which is good because I'm not quite yet lazy enough to abstract code as I write it...
Win the domain RubyRails.Com by helping Sortfolio
In other words, the people you sell it to are entitled to the source, nothing more.

The general public, given they are not customers, are not involved.
Compiler speed and memory usage are the focus of the next quarter for Google.
The 8th most dangerous software error (2011 CWE/SANS Top 25 Most Dangerous Software Errors) is not encrypting sensitive data.

If they ever want a paid-for version (maybe for future lessons), this will become an issue.

I'd just rather bake it in from the beginning.
Call for detailed enquiry into the UK banks
Labour leader Ed Miliband is to outline proposals for a "Leveson-style" inquiry into the culture and practices of the British banking industry.
As much as I like Linux, is this really the best outcome? A monoculture of any form is not helping anyone.

There are other operating system platforms like the various flavors of BSD that might work just as well. Having more than one option is always a great benefit.
i can agree to that. i think people use bootstrap etc. wrong. It's a framework to start with, not to finish your whole project without changing anything.
Tasker IRL!
> if an app developer wants interoperability

Implementing interoperability with all the possible cloud storage systems shouldn't be left to each app developer separately. This should be a feature of the operating system.

As an Android user, I'm genuinely interested if iOS users find the sharing options between apps too limited. Do you often end up requesting new sharing options from the developers of your favorite apps?

Also, not every piece of data is a file I'd want to save to Dropbox. For example, I share article URLs from Flipboard to 2cloud many times a day (2cloud opens the URL on my desktop browser). I'd hate to have an extra save/open step between the apps.
I going to pretend you are actually serious about this. Let's make a strawman that actually makes it easier to suggest that this is "the same as banks".

Let's pretend for a minute that we're dealing with a non-FDIC insured bank (like some of the original online banks), with none of the regulatory controls that obviously provide a lot of protections.

Let's pretend for a minute that the bank stupidly keeps all of its holdings as cash that are held on site at the bank. It doesn't use notes or other securities for transactions, only cash. Let's pretend that the bank also self-insures those holdings (which basically means no insurance).

Okay, so I compromise the bank's security, take every bit of cash. I disappear to some island in the Pacific with every last cent.

How badly is the bank screwed? How badly are the customers of the bank screwed?

Actually, not that badly. I only wiped out the bank's reserves. That means both the bank and its customers have a short term liquidity problem, but not necessarily a significant asset problem.

A regulated bank would have 10% of all deposits in its reserves. Unregulated banks often have far less, but let's pretend it is 10%. The bank loses 10% of its value. If it can stay solvent, then nobody loses any money, but it might take a few days before people can make withdrawals (which could cause a bank run, but that's a whole different problem). If the bank can't stay solvent, it goes bankrupt, and depositors become creditors. It'll take a while to resolve the legal process, so liquidity is killed, but when it all ends, depositors are going to get back something close to 90% of their money back.

The key thing is that the bank lends out most of the money it takes in. Even if you rob the bank of all its cash, the bulk of the "assets" of the bank are all the IOU's from lendees, which is value that is really hard to "steal", because lendees tend to only pay their lender, and then tend to do so in installments over a great deal of time.

THIS IS WRONG: Hacking Coinbase would be more akin to hacking say Visa, and redirecting all payments to you instead of the intended merchant.... if Visa's transactions were all cash based, instead of credit based... and Visa was unregulated... and even then it is kind of different because Visa is a middle man between two banks...

UPDATED: Okay, I just read they are actually storing the bitcoins in the cloud, rather than just exchange the coins between the two parties.... So actually, it's not like hacking Visa, unless Visa didn't reconcile their transactions with its customers for extended periods of time and held all of the float as cash.
Congrats! There are 5 "scripted" solution till now.
I actually clicked on several of those failed tests and there doesn't seem to be anything critical there. Looks like some access problems (test setup) and at least one needed the test to be updated.

I'm not sure when these where run but it would be easy for someone went through all of them and give them a pass. A failed test doesn't necessarily mean that deployment should be held up. 700 failed tests is a different story.

> JS doesn't have all these other problems, though.

JavaScript has plenty of it's own problems. It has legacy things you should never do. PHP has different problems (not necessarily worse ones) and things you should never do. Lists of the horrors of PHP generally include all things you shouldn't ever do mixed together to make it look much worse than it really is.

I've seen similar lists made for JavaScript (you can get some really crazy results) but that doesn't mean shit for day to day use.
> It has yet to be shown that code signing helps significantly to improve security.

Hah! I needed a good laugh today.

No, Apple has not blacklisted a developer's certificate that we know of to the extent that pre-existing apps on an arbitrary user's phone will stop working due to validation failure, but they have revoked certificates from developers that effectively prevent them from ever submitting another app to the store[1]. You're right that sandboxing is a stronger security measure in a general sense, but security isn't a black or white thing you can throw a single buzzword at and have all your problems taken care of. Code signing is an additional layer of protection for the average user so he/she doesn't download a fake AV program that grinds their device to a halt while offering to get rid of itself for the low price of $39.99. Yes, code signing also ensures that the manufacturer of the device can also get a cut of the profits of other people's hard work, but that is not it's only reason for existence and it doesn't always have to be employed as a revenue stream.

[1] http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2011/11/07/apple-e...
> how, exactly, would you get the virus on to a server anyway

The kind of server we're talking about is, by definition, on the Internet, accepting connections from arbitrary people. It's entirely possible for a connection or a family of connections to bring down the server software, which often provides a way to subvert the OS while the machine is in the unusual state of the userspace server software being down. This provides the avenue.

> if everyone was using it as a desktop OS, and was browsing, checking email, etc, there is more of a chance to attack it

I think this falls down, too: Linux has never been a single monoculture. Instead, there's been broad de fact standardization of some things but not others, making it more difficult to target malware to it, as malware is, very often, intimately dependent on not only specific software, but specific configurations of software and specific versions of software.

Also, Windows has never had a trusted source of software comparable to distro repositories. This is probably partially due to antitrust rulings, and the fact Windows caught on and had its first major flowering before Internet access was especially cheap or reliable (consolidating usage patterns around a non-Internet shrinkwrap software model). This means it's hard to get all the software you need from trusted sources unless you act like a distro maintainer and decide for yourself who in specific you trust. (You can do that in Linux, too, but you don't have to.)

Finally, Windows users complain about UAC. Linux users don't complain about sudo. Applications under Linux know they won't be run as root and behave accordingly.
A reliable BTC<->USD exchange is going to be a key requirement for any meaningfully large BTC adoption.

A year ago, when I was looking around, there was none. I have no real qualms about dropping a few bucks into BTC, but I have to be confident that I can exchange it for the ability to pay my bills.
I think "ex-PHP developer" just means someone for whom PHP is no longer the best thing for getting a small web app up and running quickly.
The above is correct.

What you're describing is called fractional reserve lending and we definitely aren't doing that.
You have to be kidding. What are the requirements for this? I haven't seen any published but I'd wager it involves something along the lines of "gigabytes of memory and disk space".
This way if you start a new social network, in addition to network effect it would have that huge disadvantage to Facebook that no programs are willing to interoperate with is because they only know that proprietary Facebook API.

Good for Facebook, bad for you and me.
The number of permutations impose a pretty harsh limit on how much progress can ever be made in this area. This is one of the reasons why I'm very excited to hear that Dart, when compiled to javascript, will only emit one for all browsers.
"unless the GIL is subverted via C extensions or similar."

I would hardly call I/O with Python built-in functions to be a subversion of the GIL.
Precise criticisms that are mostly wrong.
Something I did was to get a 4' x 8' board of something called either "shower board", "melamine board", or "hardboard" (depends on the store you're in). Here it is at Lowe's: http://www.lowes.com/ProductDisplay?partNumber=16605-46498-3.... It's around $13. They're not as nice or durable as "real" whiteboards, but they work surprisingly well, considering their low cost.

In a Lowe's or a Home Depot, you can have them cut the board to a custom size, usually for $0.25 a cut (or free if you're polite). So I had them cut the board into three panels, each 48" x 32". (Also makes it easier to transport than a single 4' x 8' board.) And then I got some "mirror clips" (http://www.amazon.com/dp/B001KAKT1O/) for $2 or so (for a four-pack).

So for less than $20, you can have three mounted boards, each one being a pretty good size. And, actually, I only got one four-pack of clips, and kept the other two boards mobile, for moving around from one room to another.

So $15 for a mounted whiteboard and two mobile whiteboards. It's hard to beat that. (But I do think the bamboo boards look awfully nice.)
This is a good point, I think we'll change it to "It's quickly becoming an international currency." Thanks for the feedback :)
Thank you for taking the time to write this. You have sufficiently peaked my interest. My next personal project will be done in Ruby.
My favourite part was when Jeff said that his article wasn't another post getting on the PHP hate wagon and then he takes pot-shots at the language, classy. I'd equate Jeff's article to that of squirting a water pistol into the ocean. Everyone knows PHP has some downsides, but it also has its upsides. PHP does have its positives, but of course pointing out the negatives of anything is a sure fire way of getting a response opposed to writing positive things. You can fault every major language, no language is perfect regardless of what anyone else says, JavaScript even has downsides but you'll be hard pressed to find as many hating articles on JavaScript as you would on PHP.

PHP is simple to configure and deploy, I can get a client Wordpress site migrated from my local environment to their server all setup and ready to go in less than 5 minutes. I'm tired of the argument of: "Well, I just use Heroku to push my Python and RoR projects live so your argument is invalid" the real issue here is that the only argument haters of PHP have against it being easy to deploy, is using a third party deployment app like Heroku which costs you money as opposed to being able to push a Wordpress site live via SCP or FTP without paying a cent.

I think when people hate on PHP they're confusing applications like Wordpress or PHP frameworks with the language itself. Wordpress is not PHP, it's an application built on PHP and we all know WP is poorly written but works this isn't the fault of PHP.

Don't like the language? Improve it or shut up. It's like being who complain about the war, but keep voting for the same political party..
A clean separation of materials is not required at the recycling facility, at least in theory, as most of the recycling methods being explored involve shredding the product up front and separating the resulting bits.

The recycling process becomes extremely complicated when the composition of the materials is non-uniform. The common worst offender in this regard is plastic bottles with several different types of plastic layered together. The opposite is a glass bottle with a metal cap.

Provided you can smash and pulverize a product into sufficiently fine pieces you can separate it by material.
That is a FANTASTIC name! And you have to domain to match.
Down the road, after a few rounds of funding or customer input, you may look to change it, but it is great for applying.
No, we don't have a Bill of Rights. We have no supreme law. Nor should we. That just drags large, societal disputes into the courts rather than the democratically elected Parliament. That means that the highest courts become political battlefields. See also political appointments to the USA's Supreme Court.

The Bill of Rights Act and the Human Rights Act are ordinary law. If a future Parliament wanted to breach the rights provided in those statutes, they need to face the political force of doing so.
I knew I was going to get some code golf responses.

Simple and short are two different things. I value PHP over Ruby here because it's much clearer to the layman what's going on. To explain the PHP, all I have to explain is functions, variables, and the echo statement.

To explain the Ruby, I have to explain functions, variables, Objects (everything is an object), Libraries, I/O, and method invocations.

Also, in classic code golf form, your code eliminates a couple things that will make it do exactly the same thing as the PHP - you're missing your #! line, and you're not actually writing a CGI script, which is a second library you need to include and explain to your hapless newbie. And honestly, it's not just a newbie thing. I've written Ruby similar to that (with good error handling, etc.) Ruby only makes sense if you're going to do the job properly and put in error handling, etc.
Since many people use Bitcoin specifically because it is unregulated, they won't complain to the government when their Bitcoins are stolen. What trotsky is really saying is that a Bitcoin company can just embezzle its customers' money and blame it on hackers. It's hard to know whether this has ever happened, but there have been some fairly sketchy incidents.
I switched to DDG, and occasionally I go back to google when DDG doesn't get me the results I am looking for, or when I want to do an image search.

But you're right, for a segment of the market, the DDG privacy is a feature that would be a must have.