skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Options:

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/index.html (each state has it's own page)
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/maps/ohio_map.html
http://quickfacts.census.gov/cgi-bin/qfd/lookup?state=39000

http://proximityone.com/zipequiv.htm

http://www.spatialinsights.com/catalog/downloads/products/32...
Flipping bits in CBC ciphertexts works just fine without the IV.
Very nice design, a needed niche without a real competitor
but... I think paying 16$ for stackoverflow trends is way too much to be realistic, I won't pay for it.
I can get this information for free. and even more including HN trends, google trends and indeed job search trends, all this for fee, or with a few minutes googling.
Show HN: A date range picker for Twitter Bootstrap
Thanks for the information. We'll definitely check it out.
> Second, just because there is one bad example of a cathedral, doesn't mean the cathedral model is bad.

right, but this could be applied to your example of the "configure" script as an indictment of the "bazaar" model too. Surely there's software that's come from the "bazaar" model that you feel is of high quality ? There's none whatsoever ?
The power in Vagrant is not the technology, it is actually the workflow. Vagrant is now in use by thousands of companies worldwide (some of the bigger ones you can see on vagrantup.com), and they consistently tell me that the power in Vagrant is that every developer, designer, etc now knows they can get some code and just type `vagrant up` and be working within a few minutes. When they're done? `vagrant destroy`. Small example, but Vagrant provides a consistent workflow.

There is a benefit to having this workflow on other systems.

First, VirtualBox has major problems. VirtualBox routinely kernel panics on a variety of operating systems, even leading to the point that there is a commit to the linux kernel that ignores crash reports from VirtualBox.

Second, the whole goal of Vagrant is to have development mimic production as closely as possible, and to make development fun. Some companies that use Vagrant can't mimic production very well on a single laptop, so they have a private cloud. They still want to use Vagrant -- because of the workflow! -- and this caters directly to them.

Also, for people on Linux, I know its not full virtualization, but some problems can be solved with simple LXC. Those people write scripts around LXC because LXC is pretty simple, but it would be pretty nice to get the benefits of Vagrant there, too. That is coming! Vagrant will support LXC.

Libvirt doesn't compare to Vagrant at all. If anything, they compliment each other.

And veewee-like functionality will make its way into Vagrant core very soon.
A review of iA Writer through the eyes of an ordinary geek
Well said. The criticism comes from the generation that made us Gen Y's into the adults we are becoming. People born in the 1990's are beginning to enter the workplace, with self-confidence, and a general refusal to be treated like a doormat. If this becomes misconstrued as "entitled," or "spoiled," than so be it.
Thanks - we are fixing it now - you can contact us at info@10xlabs.net or on twitter @10xlabs
100% agreement from here. Andoids idea of a uid per app is a good place to start.
Boston Limited should be shipping Viridis units now [1][2].

[1]: http://www.boston.co.uk/solutions/viridis/default.aspx

[2]: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/09/boston_viridis_arm_s...
Actually I agree that new programmers are better of starting with .each, and also that experienced ones can also benefit from an overload of .each to change the patterns they are used to. I commented on why I disagree with Zed's decision that each should be taught later before even getting to this "trollish" thread.

Regarding your second and third bullet points: As I've tried to explain before, there is a tremendous difference between someone reading "The Ruby Programming Language" and "The Ruby Way" trying to "learn" the Ruby programming language, and a person who goes from tutorial, to example, to tutorial, to built product. I can certainly relate to the latter since I started learning C and even a little Asm (thank you SoftIce) by myself when I was 12 thanks to a small stint in a cracking group. These days, though, after programming for around 17 years, when I want to use a new programming language I read on it's syntax, it's methodology, it's patterns... Let's do the analogy thing here: If you want to "learn" multiplication as a child, you have two options. Memorize the multiplication tables, since it's improbable that you'll need anything higher, or actually learn the mechanics of multiplication and how to carry numbers up to the next order of magnitude. There are two completely different monsters. In one you learn what you need to do to create something specific. In the other you learn everything there is to learn about a topic to further your understanding of a topic. Learning the how and the why are two completely different things that get emphasized depending on you needs. My point here is that we're trying to discuss the best methodology for the teaching of a language. In a book. Generally meant to leave students with a complete understanding of the subject at matter.

A small aside, I didn't mean ruby blocks on that last section, I just meant block in the general sense. In any case, I totally agree on the last line you typed. And that's what I've been trying to get the OP to understand. I agree to teach each first because of a plethora of reasons I've already discussed here, but I don't agree Zed is a "troll" because he thinks the explanation of core concepts in his book should be more linear.
In the US, talking shit means saying something negative about someone. John said I stole money from him? He's just talking shit. This could include truths; perhaps I did take his money, but there's more to the story than John mentioned. John paid me money for a service I performed but he thought it wasn't worth what he paid. John said I'm a cheat when I beat him in poker, but that was just the way the cards fell. He's talking shit about me again.

Talking bullshit would mean knowingly lying. John paid me for a service I told him I could perform, but I was bullshitting him when I said that. I can't actually perform the service. The mayor campaigned on lower taxes, but he knew he wouldn't be able to change that law.
Making the machine check as much as possible about your code is a worthy and practical goal. I often try long and hard to capture as many invariants as possible in the type system. And even though the language that we are using, Haskell, has one of the strongest typesystems you can find, that's still not very much logic guaranteed by the compiler. Of course, run time checks can catch a few more errors, but I'd rather catch mistakes as early as possible.

You seem to have lots of experience with expressing intent in code, and making that intent 'canonical'. How do you make the machine check the accuracy of your code? What language are you using for that?
I suggest not using light grey type in the URL input field.

Also, could it sense what country the requester is from and use English if from the US?

I tried this on three sites:

1) http://www.bostonreview.net/BR37.4/oded_naaman_israeli_defen... -- looked perfect

2) http://www.freakangels.com/ -- formatting error at bottom text

3) http://mikecanex.wordpress.com/ -- it substituted the typeface

I think there might already be other services like this out there.
I do ?
Liverpool and Arsenal fans, Be positive
And an incredible amount of energy from the Sun.
Too many entrepreneurs create products that are solutions looking for a problem.
Yeah, I see they have the same sort of "talk to us for pricing and more info".

Important things to note is that each of the nodes in this Slab have their own local SATA solid-state storage, and the individual CPUs are quicker. The Boston thing has higher density though.
It's definitely way too easy to get crypto wrong especially if you don't have the basic cryptographic knowledge as you note. I think it is much better for developers to just try and use existing proven solutions and not try to make their own crypto solutions. I've worked on one project where it was possible to use the sessions that came with the web server (tomcat) which were implemented securely. however, instead we decided to do extra work to roll our own sessions which were implemented incorrectly using the database rand() function.
Vagrant author here.

This is incorrect. I am not trying to reimplement libvirt at all. If anything, I'm providing the infrastructure to use libvirt WITH Vagrant. Actually, surprise! I'm working with RedHat to do JUST THIS.

I applaud the libvirt project for everything they've done. We've had our difference, but I have no intention of competing with that project. The power in Vagrant is the workflow of Vagrant, not Vagrant's ability to abstract away the hypervisor (and I certainly don't want to play that game).

The power in Vagrant is the workflow, and that is the game that I'm playing.
I found this a very interesting article, particularly the first 4 points (the last is a little more vague).

However, this article mainly helps formalise my previous beliefs, so I wonder if I found it interesting just because it agrees with my point of view?
Off site considered?
Hire competencies but remember: hire with your heart. Make sure new workers fit into the preexisting culture, while also importing their expertise. Become their sponsor – onboarding is essential. Spend time listening. Give them what they need to succeed.

Absolutely fantastic advice. Too many employers bring in someone new, help them get up to speed and then abandon them to assimilate themselves into the workplace.

The best leaders listen to their employees and give them the tools to help them play to their strengths. It's also frustrating how few people realise that the simplest things can make the world of difference to an employee such as a better chair or fresh fruit deliveries.
It is totally possible: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

I like this article because it seems to be more informative than persuasive.
Walmart Censors Facebook Comment About Mugging at Oakland Store
He (or she) is just early on the path, and like a newborn kitten their eyes are still closed. In the mean time keep them away from pointy things.
Personally, I don't think that we should worry about lone suicide bombers unless it becomes an issue. Israel is justified in considering lone suicide bombers in their security planning, the US... not so much.

Also, it's a matter of practicality/trade-offs. A lot of airports are isolated, and it takes less money to secure an airport perimeter than it does to secure (using your example) Times Square. There is a middle ground. The attitude doesn't have to be "we can't protect everything from suicide bombers, therefore we should attempt to protect nothing."
Not a cathedral because it was not on a software but a near-monopoly market? I love taking metaphors too far, so I'll just notice that "near-monopoly" is what cathedrals are all about.
I'm a free thinker.

I don't really appreciate people who want to "sit around and wonder about shit they can look up". I'd much rather sit around and think or discuss things that cannot be looked up, to define myself as a person based on opinions I form within documented knowledge...

Do I personally subscribe to absolute or relative morality? Thanks to documented knowledge, I have a decent grasp of the concepts, so I can have an informed think about the question. On the other hand, I could sit around arguing with a bunch of hipsters trying to figure out what the difference is (if there's enough time left after the preceding argument over whether or not water boils at lower temperatures in high altitudes).

And honestly, I've always looked things up, I had a set of old encyclopedias I bought from the library for about $10 when I was a kid, and if they didn't have what I was looking for I could go to the actual library and look through drawers of cards or microfilm to find the answer. I remember looking stuff up on computers about 20 years ago on SIRS, and even before that via BBS files.

Finding information is mainstream now, and all the pseudo intellectuals are crying because their power base of personally invented knowledge is crumbling and they lack the mental faculties to think freely on a higher level and reason for themselves.
Fair enough, trello is pretty great! TaskUp is more of a GTD tool and each task is a single item vs the multiple boards/cards view. We don't currently have the multiple projects functionality live but when it's out, I hope you give it a try and give up some feedback!
Different approach, you have to use the one that you're most comfortable with.
I get tired of hearing these black and white arguments about this case. He says who cares if Samsung copied Apple? What if Samsung created a product that looked indistinguishable from an iphone in every single way? That would be a problem.

So the question is, where do we draw the line? It's ludicrous for Apple to try to patent a rectangle, and that's what people are angry about. But somewhere in between there's a middle ground, and that's what these court cases are trying to find.
> If the author's open-source credentials are part of his argument, then he needs to make them part of the story he tells in his article.

PHK is one of the most prolific contributors to Queue. Most regular ACM readers know who he is.

> I'm frankly pretty surprised that ACM Queue would publish this.

Again, see above.
Thanks! Vagrant will soon be able to control development cycles around private clouds just like this. This is exactly the use case I am building for. Let your friend know!
When she saw me, she said, "daddy, let's go do some business!"

Did you?
Nice job, very clean UI.
I think the point of this kind of server is to build the fault tolerance at the rack, or at least 1U, level, not at the level of individual components.

If an individual server fails then your service shouldn't even blink.
Unix!

http://changelog.complete.org/archives/7562-i-introduced-my-...
Distributed Database Concepts and Configuration
So what you're saying is that progressively tidying up a codebase to simplify fulfilling current requirements is always a bad idea because you might remove something that might make a hypothetical future requirement easier to fulfill?
Did you actually read the blog post? I've been following it for some time now and stating it has been "ported" implies a complete system that is nearly fully operational, which it is not. You still have to serial in to get any sort of output. No keyboard. No HDMI. The title is very misleading and slightly belittling of his progress. Instead you could point out he's gotten UBOOT ported which is fantastic news all around. As well as the NetBSD folks have gotten into multi-user mode(!)
I only accept PayPal. I send invoices to registered PayPal addresses and have them paid that way.
Seems more professional than drawing up my own invoice and posting it to the client.
One part of this article I want to address is 'respect'. Speaking as a gen y, if I give an opinion at work, I do expect it to be considered - but that's not due to some sense of entitlement. If I've taken the time to give an opinion on a topic at work, I'm jepordizing my reputation; I'm giving my peers and superiors a chance to evaluate me. This neccesarily means I've thought about what I said, I believe it's actually a good idea. Young people often times do have good ideas, and it's important not to dismiss their validity.

It's unfortunate that some older people can't grasp this concept. In business, where adaptivity is key, I find this not to be so much of a problem. However, academia seems to be the exact opposite. Last year, one professor told me to express my opinion once I "have over 30 years of HR experience". Meanwhile I was thinking, "that'll be 30 years too late."
Why Can Some People Recall Every Day Of Their Lives? Brain Scans Offer Clues
I think you're confusing two largely-unrelated issues.

Whether products are developed according to what users want vs what builders want has almost nothing to do with bazaar vs cathedral.

Indeed, many bazaar-style projects (the linux ecosystem in general, gimp, etc) are almost cautionary tales about "builders creating what they want for their own niche purposes and if anyone disagrees they're free to fork off".
I'm going to go ahead and strongly disagree on this first point -- I've seen no correlation whatsoever between education background and propensity for strong system design. In fact, my background is mathematics with very little formal CS-related education and I'm firmly in the cathedral camp.

I really think it is a matter of exposure -- at one time all anyone ever saw were cathedrals, and so that was all anyone ever built. I feel now we've swung too far the other way, where there are many in the craft who've never seen a cathedral and have only known the bazaars. The reality is we need both, and the craft of building cathedrals is becoming endangered.
I care, sort of. But more in the sense of how absurd it is that people continue to claim Samsung didn't copy Apple when they so shamelessly did. I'm not sure Samsung deserves the punishment Apple is seeking, but they brazenly ripped off Apple designs and are now brazenly pretending they didn't.

It's ballsy, I'll give them that. Ignominious, though.
This is a great read, and I believe it's spot on. It's also a perfect example of what Alan Kay means when he says, "We see things not as they are but as we are"..."We can't learn to see until we admit we are blind"..."A change in perspective is worth 80 IQ points."

Humility is a key ingredient because it saves you from the mindset of "Success comes from proving how great you are. Effort is a bad thing — if you have to try hard and ask questions, you obviously can’t be very good."
I'd like you to offer some examples of code that successfully documents its own raison d'être - in a way that a comment couldn't do better - instead of repeating this 'crutch of poor developers' rhetoric.

I mean, I can write self documenting code without any comments, and it's perfectly understandable.

before_create :auto_increment

def auto_increment
self.count + 1
end

That code fails to tell the programmer why it's in the application logic and not defined in the database schema. What should I do instead, so I can code without crutches?

def auto_increment_natural_key
self.count + 1
end

That's not a great deal better, it's still just saying what it does, not why it's there in the first place.

def auto_increment_natural_key_because_another_app_relies_on_it
self.count + 1
end

Is that it?
Thanks mate, i'll check it out
You mean like by having package managers that are built into the OS distribution that can install the applications you want with a single command?
Love it! Nice UX with the not-allowed cursor on the little FROM and TO boxes. It's amazing how painful date range selection is on so many websites.
I'd say it's really strong everywhere, particularly technology and programming.

Thing is, unlike the average folks with lofty ideas of self-serving "fixes" for every irritation in their lives, people in technology aren't just consumers from a distance - they're builders, maintainers and influencers.

It's a dangerous problem when these "active" people don't understand context, concessions, dependencies and just generally what it takes to actually create things in the real world.

I believe it's one of the roots of various stifling attitudes of conformance and covering your ass above real, forward homegrown engineering.

Apologies if that doesn't make sense. I had a hard time trying to articulate my ideas there.
This is a great point. Although it's a slight extra cost, we have adopted this a best practice because it's still cheaper than a more responsive DNS service.
I went through some similar situations. Early on, one of the very senior developers -- and one of the smartest guys at the place -- figured out that I knew what I was talking about. Sometimes I might raise a concern out of ignorance, but even then, I was asking good questions.

When things moved from simply "compromise" or "somewhat ugly" to an outright risk, occasionally I'd have to escalate past a senior developer or architect to this guy.

It rubbed some people the wrong way, but over time, when they learned that I wasn't doing it out of ego but simply out of concern, most of them at least partially got over this.

P.S. Fortunately, many of them were already fairly seasoned and "battle scarred" and had themselves learned to focus on what mattered. As often as not, my concern was an irritant as much as anything because of the additional time and attention it would demand of already loaded schedules. I reserved escalations for real risks and/or long term implications, to minimize this.
I second Phish! Upbeat, mostly instrumental, epic!
Here you can "talk shit about" which has the meaning you use (e.g. "I was just talking shit about my colleagues"), whereas just "he's talking shit" is similar to bullshit, except maybe a little less angry and more dismissive.
How Silicon Valley Distorts the Value of Education
So each quad-core SoC appears to the outside world as its own system and only communicates via Ethernet? Not useless at all, but it's not clear how the SoCs are presented.
Do you have github/sourceforge? I'd love to read some of your non-trivial code.

I'm not trying to be an a$$hole btw. I am not a coding guru, I genuinely want to minimize the need for comments in my code and am willing to learn from examples.
Well, kind of. Wouldn't nicer UX be: let the user type the date if he or she wants to?
In your video "most every web project" is not grammatically correct.

"most every" is nonsensical. It's two determiners juxtaposed, and conflicting ones at that. It's either "every" or it's "most". It could also be "almost every".

Later on "a couple clicks". Do you mean "a couple of clicks"?
"1. The Mars Science Laboratory project was started eight years ago in 2004. So, all the technology on it is at least eight years old."

This doesn't seem quite right. From watching documentaries on the past Mars missions, it seems like each piece of scientific equipment is done separately by various engineering groups around the U.S. and the world. They are only integrated at the end. And those individual pieces of equipment are getting changed right up until the deadline if they aren't working up to spec.

So the requirements are eight years old, but the tech isn't necessarily. They are just very conservative in their requirements.
I am attracted to children, not children who appear as adults. Do you find it equally mysterious that someone can be attracted to a person of the same sex? Would you expect a gay guy must only be attracted to feminine looking men?