skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You're not going to get it. They are spending their money on a train. It may work, it may not, but it is way over budget compared to what was on the ballot. How many more people would have been served by spending the money on buses, drivers, and bus exclusive lanes / roads?

At some point the roads will be used by what comes next so we might as well make sure they are maintained.
I can try. Amazon sells physical products, while Facebook sells eyeballs to advertisers. This is how both businesses are setup to make money, at least at the days of IPO. While with Amazon you use it because you want a product, with Facebook you do not want to be plastered with Ads, but you have no choice.

Amazon is a solid horse with no "kill me" obstacles on its way. Sure in 150 years you will have a machine a size of your fridge and you download blueprint from internet and the product is being 3d-printed for you, but since we not there just yet everyone needs products that Amazon offers and shift is towards selling stuff online. Mobile movement is to Amazon irrelevant while it may kill Facebook.

That's for start.
The first patent is pretty stupid haha
I hear nightmarish stories of micro-managers all the time. They feel that in order to do their jobs they have to tweak EVERYTHING that crosses their desk.

One memorable anecdote I came across was about an animation artist who was in charge of animating the queen for a 3d chess game. Because he knew his manager's weakness he threw in a duck... Yes, a duck. Fully animated with sound effects and everything.

Sure enough, when he showed his work to his manager he said "It's perfect, but get rid of the duck."

So maybe the moral of this lesson is that when things are running 100% smoothly, it's wise to toss your micro-manager a bone by doing something intentionally a little wrong to give them something to meddle with. ;-)
Typist - Add animated typing text to any block element
Honestly, this article is really bad and probably harmful to new programmers. I recommend against taking anything in it to be accurate, much less complete.

The author misses vitally key issues (like the inherent dangers of circular references in reference counting "GC"). I wouldn't even call myself slightly knowledgeable in GC, yet blatant holes in the clumsy analogies of this article are obvious to me. As someone who is not even slightly knowledgable in GC, it scares me that people are learning from someone who has massive information holes in the explanation -- holes in topics that every programmer on earth should know.

On top of all that, the only "Cons" that are mentioned of RC are absurd: "It's annoying if you forget to release your references." Wow. Profound stuff there - bugs and incorrect code is annoying. This isn't even a problem if your language supports RAII, in which it's impossible to "forget" in the first place.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Linux_distributi...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64#Linux

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Linux#Events_leadin...

Linux was written in the first place for x86. Nearly every distribution released since then, major or minor, has primarily targeted it. If a distro doesn't support x86, it's probably for a very specific reason. I don't have any numbers on this, but it's a safe bet that the number of Linux users not running on x86 is pretty close to 0% (plus-or-minus Richard Stallman). Linux runs on anything Windows does, and probably ran there first. There are probably an infinite number of mildly interesting ways one could harp on this general theme: It's not just a technicality to say that Linux already lives happily on x86.

The fact that you're familiar with the word 'distro' suggests to me this is just mild confusion. Benignly curious what your impression was. Were you thinking of Android or old Mac OS?
What's an x86 linux distro? (Aren't most distros designed for/work on x86?)
nice tip will try some networking on google plus but its creepy.
YMMV. Let me explain. if you walk into a tv showroom, can you differentiate tvs from 10ft away? It's a poor Rgument to use the 10ft.
The real issues are 1. Is it norm for companies/people to copy each other (eg. Apple iPhone from Sony). 2. How closely can you copy before you're doing real harm? 3. WhatP is the right balance in a patent that benefits society (NOT the inventor) the most?
There is no doubt that Apple copied Sony. There is no doubt that Samsung copied Apple.
If Apple win this case, patent madness will get even worse and society will suffer greatly.
If Apple lose this case, it will encourage copycats, but it will also challenge the patent madness and be good for society in general.
IMHO, the reason the judge excluded the Sony evidence was because Apple aren't on trial.
- sent from my iPhone
Do you mean this IndexedDB? http://caniuse.com/#feat=indexeddb . Or this calc? http://caniuse.com/#feat=calc . They look pretty supported to me, remembering that they're both based on a draft specs.
> they move on to other jobs.

... with their CVs exposing the fuckups as accomplishments: "Successfully managed a cost cutting campaign, sparing the company 2 bazillions in IT costs". The previous company won't admit it was actually a disaster.
I've heard the same advice applied to PhD theses: Examiners always want to change something, so leave something in which you won't mind having them tell you to change.
That's brilliant - thanks. It doesn't seem conclusive, because if the clock didn't get started, and the touch happened at 0.84, then the question is whether the delay was more than 0.16s, and further, why did the clock on the video still show 0:01, while the claim there is that the clock showed 00:00.

And if the clock showed 00:00, wasn't the touch out of time?

Completely unclear, but it's useful to have the extra information. Thanks again.
I might be showing a lack of knowledge here, because I doubt I'm as well-equipped to answer this as others on this thread, but here are my thoughts.

Learn functional programming, because it's going to become important when parallelism becomes important. Learn enough about concurrency and parallelism to have a good sense of the various approaches (threads, actors, software transactional memory) and the tradeoffs. Learn what databases are and why they're important. Learn about relational (SQL) databases and transactions and ACID and what it means not to be ACID-compliant (and why that can be OK). Learn a NoSQL database. I frankly don't much like most of them, but they solve an important problem that relational databases need a lot more massaging to attack.

All this said, I think focusing on "web scalability" is the wrong approach. Focus on the practical half of computer science rather than "scalability". I feel like "scaling" is, to a large degree, a business wet dream / anxious nightmare associated with extremely public, breakout success (or catastrophic, embarrassing failure) and that most people would do better just to learn the fundamentals than to have an eye on "scaling" for it's own sake.

Bigness is technology isn't innately good. All else being equal, it's very, very bad. Sometimes the difficulty is intrinsic and that's a good thing, because it means you're solving a hard problem, but difficulty for difficulty's sake is a bad pursuit. Software is already hard; no point in making it harder.

Finally, learn the Unix philosophy and small-program architecture. Learn how to design code elegantly. Learn why object-oriented programming (as seen over the past 25 years) is a massive wad of unnecessary complexity and a trillion-dollar mistake. Then learn what OOP looks like when done right, because sometimes it really delivers. For that, most scaling problems come from object-oriented Big Code disasters that are supposed to perform well on account of all the coupling, but end up being useless because no one can understand them or how they work.

Learn the fundamentals so you can scale, but don't scale prematurely for its own sake.

I could be wrong, but I don't think I am.
This is great. I like the search-by-license, but there needs to be more categorization for browsing. Where I don't have a designer on staff for my projects, I will often find myself browsing for a component that can "fit in". Paging through 50 pages is too much, though.
That is because prison is not the punishment for most of those offenses. Before you say shit about the U.S. judicial system, you should learn something about it.

SEC and FTC violations are civil offenses. The punishment for civil offenses are fines. Plenty of firms and higher-ups have paid fines.

Jail time only applies in cases where deliberate fraud is proven to have occurred. We all know that the finance guys were too reckless in their pursuit of profits. But recklessness is not a crime (and indeed, the only crime in the U.S. system for which "recklessness" is relevant is manslaughter/murder).
Excellent idea. This beats my mile-long Github watch list.
Well its easier to say what not to do than what to do, so here's some of that:

- cargo-cult buzzphrase/keyword engineering: saying "we should use <thing>, <cool_company_a> and <cool_company_b> use <thing>". If you find yourself debating technology where entire paragraphs go by without real metrics, then you're really social-signaling not engineering.

- scaling for the sake of scaling: there is a vast grab bag of available tools and techniques to scale, but for any given business the right answer is to take a pass on most of it. the overwhelming majority will either be unnecessary or even flat out counter-productive. the easiest way to separate what to scale vs. what to hack/ignore is asking yourself "is this what my users/customers love/pay me for, or something a grad student would love to spend a semester on".

- timing context matters, a lot: whats "right" for scaling a young company with very few engineers (and probably zero ops pros) will be a different answer than whats "right" for scaling a millions-of-users/millions-in-revenue company. whats right for twitter is wrong for a young company, almost by definition.

- "throw hardware at it" (the wrong way): throwing hardware at a problem is the best way to solve scaling problems, but only if you do it right. stateless request-response across large pools of identical servers scales better than anything else. however "give it a dedicated server" leaves you with a mine field of one and two-off setups that only scales into the dozens-of-servers before it starts to choke your business.
The story was linked on Marginal Revolution http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2012/08/ass...
Slowly over time clean up the code and educating though examples and approachs and standards and all agreeing and understanding them would be a good start, nomatter the direction. Also if its viable to document, albeit organicly in a way that you have a process to control changes, it can only help. One day you will have it fully documented or cleaned up.

Slowly, slowly catch the monkey was a comment a COBOL programmer I worked with in the 80's would put in all his code (along with naming all his procedures after drinks, but lets not go there - shudder). I now, know why.

Knowledge based systems are great, but they do end up mixing the data into the code in a way that over time is fun.

I had to work on a real crazy bit of C code once that was larger than I cared for. I mearly found the parts that effected what I needed to do and changed that. It worked, no idea what most of the code did but the aspect of being to work with more than one radio controler was easily enough to change. No documentation and was a bit spag bowl. But it was a easy change and in many ways it was due to design of the programmer who had written it. He had allowed for such a change, not documented but was easy and changing a few variables mostly. Leason there is you can have code that makes no sence, but it gets the job done and if you need to change a particular part, if you can locate that part then you can read the effecting code and change what you need. If when codeing you plan ahead of possible future changes. Well nobody can ask any more.

If it works, why argue. If you can slowly and saftly make it work better then fantastic. Remember not all new wheels go faster or better than the ones they replace. Think about that incase you argue a rewrite. Rewrites for the sake of it one day and next you will be flying with the seagull managment.

Also worth factoring in that spaghetti code saves jobs and lives, I understand that joke now.
The duck story is battle chess: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?title=Talk:Battle_Chess#The_duc...

I've often had the opposite problem: companies where the CEO is so disconnected from the company (usually by working remotely 80% of the time) that the company doesn't have direction and languishes.
No Job: Learn to hack
Giant-flashing-neon-warning: if your phone's rooted (needs to be to pull /data), an attacker can pull it too. Use a passcode and enable full-device encryption (passcodes don't block recovery) to defend against this. If you're making full-image backups, wherever they're stored (on-device or elsewhere) needs to be secure too.

PS: even if you aren't rooted, if your device can be rooted w/o a wipe, should consider yourself just as vulnerable and enable FDE as well.
CSS calc has been in Chrome (behind a -webkit prefix) since Chrome 19.

http://caniuse.com/calc
I have witnessed this advice applied to contract drafts. Lawyers from the other company were routinely given some bullshit clauses to prove their usefulness in vetting the contract.
Wandering a bit OT, admittedly, but I feel obliged to push back against this notion. I know you didn't mean it this way, but I see it too often to wave away worse examples of abusive behavior, and it's just not healthy.

The "nicest guy" would not use language like "bitch" or "fag" in comments (to pull the first example I saw in that post's responses), because this implies an assumption that comparing the target to a woman or a gay man should be received as a deeply cutting insult. And this alone acts as enough of a cover for me to judge that book, really.

No, these are in fact rather horrible little people, and it wouldn't surprise me if they were in league with the perps who erased this guy's stuff for teh lulz or whatever.
Leap seconds only occur at the end of a month, so an NTP client that accepted such leapseconds would be non-compliant.
Yes, of course Wikipedia is often bureaucratic, inefficient, and self-destructive. I wouldn't recommend putting a lot of time into it. But sometimes it's pretty efficient: some edits are simply accepted.
Handling good old IE: Backbone history with pushState fallback
My favorite of all-times bad-guy is Mr. Kenneth Lay, founder of Enron, supposedly RIP. Supposedly because the story of his death is crazier than most A. Christie's books.

You can read more here:

http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/permalink/did_ken_...
Its even funner at companies that cycle managers through business units to get them experience with the whole company. Leads to a "must make changes that are short-term budget wins but long term negatives" attitude.
That damn account password kills me. A single password which you have to enter heaps of times on iOS. If having one password meant you only entered it once id cope, but its for email, iCloud, imessage, home sharing music, home sharing video, notes, find my phone, AppStore. It's so slow to set a device up, especially if you have a decent pasword. I wish they would fix it.
It's called "a bungee boss": http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1994-09-07/
>> The team lodged an appeal

I read somewhere that the team tried to lodge an appeal but didn't front the $500USD required for the appeal to be considered. I found it extremely odd that at a place like the Olympics, you'd be asked to front money for an appeal.

On another note, I wonder when computerized judges will start to replace humans for stuff like synchronized diving. All of those post-dive slow-mo footage I've seen seems to suggest that computers would be much more accurate/fair/subjective than the human eyes that are currently being used for judging.
Which hackintosh tools did you use? I used Unibeast/Multibeast.
Samsung Galaxy S Duos S7562: Dual SIM with High Speed 3G Android Mobile Phone
if you lost truecrypt password -> http://16s.us/TCHead/faq/
Quora is acting badly. You don't start exposing "views" like this without at the very least warning users in advance, and more reasonably, defaulting to "off" for existing accounts.

You also don't have a "Delete" button that simply hides things. That really is unconscionable. Delete means delete.

I've been on the receiving end of thousands of user emails and that email is not even a 1 on the hostility meter. Personally I tend to appreciate very simple and direct email. The hardest users to help are the ones that aren't clear about what they want.

Okay, "deleting without a trace" probably should be "delete as much data as you possibly can". Remove from backups, archives, caches, do not simply "hide" my data, but delete it permanently. Every service should develop a process for doing this. I've developed this kind of functionality many times, and yes it's a pain, but no it's not particularly hard. Quora is clearly not responsible for Google or any other third-party generally.
IPhone & Android App Stores Lifting the Developer Middle Class
See update to story, it wasn't brute forced it seems.
So assuming this is correct, should not the judges, the officials, and the sporting bodies concerned make this public and transparent?
He never says what the company is or what it does.

After IT was cut, he says it would take a week before a computer was on their desk.

That sounds bad. But we have no idea what the company does, so we don't actually know if this is a problem or not.

Look, every division is not critical, and sometimes that division is IT.

We have no idea how much the inefficiency costs or how much was saved by the cuts. So we have no idea if this was a bad OR good thing for the company.
As Rob Pike has said about his patents, everything is obvious in retrospect.

In any case, if it's so obvious, where's the prior art? It's not as if web browsers haven't been around for nearly 20 years.

It seems to me that Apple has justification to defend wholesale copying of the myriad of little design decisions that they made that are synergistic. It's clear that they spent a huge amount of effort and cost doing this, and were able to succeed in a way that many had tried previously and failed.

The legal ways that one can defend such synergistic design work is limited. One common way, for better or worse, is to patent some of the individual elements to throw gum in the works of anyone trying to make derivatives of your work.
There are strong/long passwords that are easy to remember:

%Thisspasswordd1s1nhonor..ofmy246catSS!!

http://xkcd.com/936/

having a 20-30 character long password is fairly easy, it may not be 100% random, but (correct me if i'm wrong) a password that long with just a handful of random extra letters and numbers is going to be rather easy to remember and probably going to be just as had to brute-force.
UBER London offering free cars for GB Gold Medals - 1 Hour Time Limit
Fencing used to be scored entirely manually. This was a disaster (see anecdotes below) and the problems were solved with slightly-expensive but relatively simple electronic touch-detection technology, i.e. those crazy lights that you see flashing green, red, and white.

I predict this will happen again. Perhaps the referee will get a little box that, when a button is pressed, simultaneously shouts "Allez" in an authentic French accent and starts the clock. If the clock doesn't start, the referee will stop the bout, debug the technology, and reset the clock. (Welcome to fencing, where one's kit of electronics parts is almost as important as one's weapon. ;)

Now for anecdotes:

I fenced saber (terribly) back when saber wasn't electrified at the NCAA level - which is to say: there was no electric circuit to detect contact between Fencer A's saber and Fencer B's target area.

(Saber got electric scoring last, I suspect, because the head and arms are part of the target area and you need conductive gloves and masks, which cost money, particularly because it's harder to share gloves and masks between fencers than it is to share a simple mesh vest.)

Moreover, at a regular-season NCAA fencing match, there's no budget for five impartial judges per bout, and no spare unaffilated fencers sitting around. So the rule was that we had to make touch/no touch calls in matches involving our own teammates. This was, to say the least, a no-win situation for a beginner. I quickly learned to pretend I was half-blind and clueless – which, alas, did not require much acting talent – and round off all non-obvious calls in favor of my teammate. To do otherwise was to earn the undying enmity of one's own team.

The stress drove me crazy. In retrospect, I should have demanded to be switched to foil or epee – epee, in particular, with its electronic scoring and lack of right-of-way rules, was a gloriously straightforward sport; though I would still have been a lousy fencer at least I would have lost for clear reasons – but instead I fled after one season.

If there's a moral to this story, it's this: There is no way that this incident is the most unfair thing that has happened in the history of Olympic fencing. ;) They must have been really, really good sports back in the old days.
I had a micromanager who hit everyone with 3 to 4 status pings per day. Even on work-from-home days, which defeats the point. His status pinging was a compulsion like email checking, but it eventually caused the team to fail.

Consequently, I hate status meetings and standups and the various so-called Scr(ot)um tactics used to make people feel watched. I realize they're probably necessary as an occasional annoyance, but I think they're an unnecessary pain in the ass most of the time. Their real purpose is to intimidate people into being productive, and that Theory-X bullshit doesn't work in the modern economy.
Multibeast from CD. I don't think this is an install problem though, there's an absurdly large thread about this on insanelymac: http://www.insanelymac.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=273937
What is it like to work as an engineer at Mozilla?
View the video linked in this thread. They were tied 5/5
Regarding Google services:

When you enable Two-Factor Authentication, they give you the option of printing a "one time pad" with six codes on it. You then print this out and keep it safe somewhere. That way you can get into your account even if your phone and other contact points are compromised.

This won't do you any good if someone has deleted your google accounts or reset the 2FA system, but for more "normal" scenarios it can be a life-saver.
I though the issue was that the German had several attempts to strike the Korean during "the last second", which added up to several seconds in total:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qr_ug9mcu4c
How about adding a "request" feature? For example, say someone is looking for a Kindle DX hacked to accommodate a USB keyboard. It would be nice to allow him or her to post this request so interested makers could jump on it. Perhaps prices or bounties could be offered by both buyers and sellers?
No need to generalize based on your work experience. There are good AND bad managers.

The fact that IT gets cut does not mean the manager is bad. You work in IT, so I'm sorry I have to break this to you, but sometimes the universe does not revolve around IT. Sometimes there are more important divisions, and sometimes IT expenses have to be cut.

There's not enough detail in the article to know if the manager was good or bad.
A menu item for software (programs, apps, and sketchs).
the JVM (HotSpot) also uses this approach, the young generation is handled by a copying GC while the older one(s) use mark & sweep.

(to be fair, I believe this _was_ the default GC option, but it's not anymore, and there were at least 3 different young generation GC algorithms that used copying, so it's a bit more nuanced)