skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It doesn't have many-to-many but in my experience most things aren't true many-to-many. More like, there are a handful of publishers in the system and each has a handful of subscribers.

Suppose your architecture is API -> Web sockets and you want to make it highly scalable, then what I'd do is:

1. Many API -> few relays (use doozerd to keep up to date as to where the relays are and select one randomly, use ZMQ_ROUTER socket type to enqueue API->relay messages).

2. Few Relay -> many web socket (again using doozerd for the web socket nodes to find the relay, and using ZMQ_PUB on the relay and ZMQ_SUB on the web socket nodes).
"The odds against winning the big prize are 45,379,619:1"

I have a hard time imagining how low these odds are but once my math professor gave us an interesting analogy.

One person drives from Los Angeles to Las Vegas and throws a quarter out of the window at any point in time.

You then follow this person along the same route. You win the grand price if you manage to stop your car such that your front wheel stops at the exact same position as the quarter (10cm tolerance).

This image made me never play the lottery.
Why couldn't competitors enter the market?
When they try, the monopoly lowers its prices until the competitors are out of business.
>It wasn't intended to be a demonstration of my programming ability; it was designed to be something quick thrown up in a day.

Well yeah then that's EXACTLY the impression you're gonna give off. This is the first thing a potential employer will see if you're already giving off a "I don't really care about the code" vibe I don't see how that inspires a lot of confidence in your abilities and especially mindset down the line.
Cheap Ugg Boots Clearance
Ugg boots on sale at website store,All cheap ugg boots factory outlet sale,they are good quality and low price for you.Buy now enjoy fast shipping and no tax worldwide
Yes, and so people would be glad to choose that. And others would prefer to pay for the content (presumably, Coursera wouldn't be the only ones blocked), much like they do with almost everything else. Is there any market where only the cheapest can sell? I doubt it.
With cumulative jackpots, it is indeed possible that the expected returns on some plays are a net positive. But if you just consider lotteries for what they are - a form of entertainment - that doesn't make so much difference...
Heh, thanks.

The mailing list suggests http://github.com/4ad/doozer and http://github.com/4ad/doozerd are being maintained as forks of the original. Or there's Zookeeper. Or brew your own central lookup server using 0mq that does the same job of "set a key, get a key, notify subscribers when it changes". It's a single point of failure, but since the system will run fine without it (only lacking topology updates) it's not a hugely problematic one.
British firm produces 'petrol from air' to solve energy crisis
Why couldn't competitors enter the market after the monopoly raises them again?
Fantastic lineup. Anyone know if there's going to be a live stream?
Contraband 2012 Chris Faraday once smuggled illegal items or contraband into the country on freighters. He left that life behind, got married has a family and went legit. But when his brother-in-law got involved with Briggs,
http://freemoviesite24.com/2012/10/contraband-2012-720p-blur...
> So why do I still buy lottery tickets? Definitely not for the expected monetary return on investment. I think of it as a discretionary entertainment spend. I get literally hours of enjoyment from fantasizing what I’d do if I won.

Why not spend it on hookers and blow instead? THINK OF ALL THE FUN YOU'LL HAVE. :|
Http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=250&pub=imnmaulana
Will OpenCL help displace GPGPU? Parallella, P2012, …
Yeah, I figured that is what was being referred to...it didn't strike me as abnormal though, but I guess it is. In practice this hasn't caused me any problems while developing on Android.

Anyone else negatively impacted by this?
Nothing is wrong with that. When I go to Las Vegas, I play craps for the same reason. But I didn't make a massive blog post that implied I could beat craps, get it on page 1 of HN and after 20,000 words and numerous graphs and tables announce to the World that it's ok that I donate some money to Bellagio once a year because it's my money and the waitresses are hot and it's fun. I wouldn't do that because no amount of eloquent prose and statistical evidence is going to change the fact that I just stated the blatantly obvious. That's why everybody gambles.
From what I've read about it--by people who thought long and hard about this issue--the generally most accepted solution seems to be the Wikipedia way: use the name of the language as its written in in the language itself.

The reason for the latter is that, say the site is originally presented in Russian, I don't know how "Dutch" is written in Russian so I couldn't pick it, but I do know what "Nederlands" means (FYI, that's the Dutch word for "Dutch", beats me why you English-speakers don't call it "Netherlandish", but each to their own I guess ;) which again demonstrates names of the same language in different languages can vary a lot).

Though I suppose if you're really tight on space, ISO codes would probably also work.

Note that Wikipedia itself is sometimes a rather extreme example; most websites/applications will only offer a choice between a small handful of languages.

When the list of languages in the sidebar of Wikipedia is very long, it's not the most user-friendly method of selecting one. On the other hand, with flags that would be much worse, bordering on impossible (while the UK and US flags are pretty unique, there's a couple of flags that are very hard to distinguish from the flag of the Netherlands, for instance).

I really wonder if there might be some creative better solution to language-selection than "the Wikipedia way", but I really want to stress that using country flags is not that solution, for a variety of usability reasons, political reasons and emotional reasons, most of which are probably outlined somewhere in this discussion so I won't repeat them all.

I have to admit I have been guilty of using a German/Dutch/French flag for language selection on a website I developed many years ago--I didn't realize it was a bad idea back then (for instance, the flag of Belgium has the same colours as the flag of Germany in a different order, but they speak Dutch and French there, while the flag of France and the one of the Netherlands differ mainly by a 90 degrees rotation) (and the blues are subtly different, afaik).
This is exactly right. Bureaucrats in general have lifetime employment, so the only check on their power is the press. In this case, they made the colossal mistake of attacking Coursera without thinking through the optics. Most of the people the Minnesota Office of Higher Ed intimidates are not Stanford professors who run internet businesses with millions of visitors and have friends at the New York Times. Usually even a state government has a bigger megaphone than their target; this time they didn't.

It's going to be more interesting when the federal Department of Education gets involved. Federal bureaucrats aren't super smart, but they do have smarter people than state government; when DoE attacks, maybe a few quarters down the road, it will probably approach via the angle of "widespread plagiarism" or "unaccredited institution" or something that would at least win some supporters in a comment thread. Humanities professors are the big losers in a Coursera world, as they teach classes that are less practically useful and therefore less likely to attract visitors/monetization. They are also more politically connected than their science/engineering peers, and more likely to resort to government when they realize the extent of the threat that online ed poses to their sinecures.

I give 50/50 odds of some kind of federal showdown of this nature between Coursera and DoE as the tuition bubble pops and universities start to go bust over the next 5-10 year time frame. The government has a great deal invested in the higher ed system (and vice versa) via Sallie Mae, NIH, and dozens of other vehicles and will strenuously resist disruption.
I buy lottery tickets occasionally when I feel a bit down about money - doing so is a win-win.

If I win a prize greater than my stake, then that's great.

If I don't, then it reminds me that I can still afford to throw away a few pounds every now and then without it being a significant loss.
It comes down to the utility of money, or roughly speaking, how happy the money will make you. $20,000 is a lot more valuable to someone with $10,000 than someone with $50,000. In other words, having $10,000 is worth, say, 10 utility, having $30,000 is worth 20 utility, and having $50,000 is worth 25 utility.

Starting with $30,000, buying insurance which has a small chance of saving you $20,000 gives you a +10 utility gain if it pays off. Buying a lottery ticket which has an equal chance of giving you $20,000 gives you a +5 utility gain if it pays off.
You should be able to see who downvotes you and have the option to individually block them from seeing any of your comments in the future.
From what I've seen, wepay.com is pretty easy to use and has more functionality.
It is good to see the book is still alive.

Django is one of the best documented projects I have ever seen. But I know people who have problems with the way the documentation is structured. For some parts you have to understand a completely different part of the framework to follow the documentation. This is to some degree a price you have to pay for a complex framework and is IMHO fine.

But especially for those people is a book, which gives a structured way through the whole framework, a great thing.
A quote from Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance comes to mind:

> You are never dedicated to something you have complete confidence in. No one is fanatically shouting that the sun is going to rise tomorrow. They know it's going to rise tomorrow. When people are fanatically dedicated to political or religious faiths or any other kinds of dogmas or goals, it's always because these dogmas or goals are in doubt.
Isn't the lookup server a SPoF?
This is very long and there is a lot of white space (hard to skim). I honestly would not enjoy having to read this, and the lengthy anti-skim style comes off as somewhat arrogant to me.

Resumes are typically one page, so you should really consider either supplementing this with a one-page version or shortening it.
Ah, but that is not a contradiction. If two people differ one some item of discussion it is not a contradiction. One of them is wrong.
A Game Studio in the Clouds
Development halts on successfully funded Kickstarter game Haunts
> But I don't think any of the so-called Constitutional guarantees are absolute.

What does "absolute" mean?

The Constitutional guarantees are probably absolute, depending on what your idea of it is. What they aren't is comprehensively understood. You don't really seem to understand how the government works. This is what happens.

A law is written. This is the first gate; someone has to actually care enough to put it down on paper. This law can have arbitrary text and mandate arbitrary terms. It needs to be agreed upon by a good 500 people who are at least nominally looking out for the best interests of the full 310-million-person population. In the specific case of the OP, the Minnesota Legislature is about 200 persons representing 5 million. That's the second gate; a court of mild scrutiny. Then it has to be plausible enough for the elected president or governor to agree to enact it and actually do it. That's the third gate. At this point, and only at this point, does something like this have the opportunity to happen. This is the point at which something like owning a machine gun becomes illegal, and the police are allowed to arrest people who do.

There are a couple routes into the next stage, but this is the easiest to understand. The state decides to press charges against the offender under the aforementioned law. The lawyers involved may wish to ask the judge about the constitutionality of the law. Groups like the EFF and the ACLU watch for opportunities like this to step in on behalf of the defendant or plaintiff precisely in order to point out the unconstitutionality of certain laws and bring to bear the not-inconsiderable weight of their legal experience to prove it to the judge, who must make the final call. And, in case the judge makes a poor judgement (corruption, ineptness, etc.), there is a hierarchy of appeals that ends at the SCOTUS. It is usually through this mechanism that something like yelling "fire" is made illegal: Justice Holmes used it as a metaphor to establish a precedent, a test by which future judges could determine whether or not this was a reasonable exception to the broad stroke of the First Amendment.

Democracy is a lot more than a list of ten short paragraphs. Each of those rights have to be justified and defended and their nuance spelled out clearly based on actual events that occur in reality. What does free speech mean if, let's pretend, we had people who could reliably and provably enact mind control through speech? Is executing a heinous criminal without last rites a cruel and unusual punishment if we were certain there existed a Hell to which they'd be tortured for eternity? If everyone could be reasonably expected to own and effectively use a sniper rifle, is it self-defense to murder someone who threatens to shoot you? Upholding one's rights isn't easy, and it's made especially uneasy by the minor detail that we occasionally have no idea what they actually are in some specific case.
Sugar. Javascript Sweetened.
This reply link just appeared for me. Not cool -_-

The lookup server is a single point of failure. And while it's not a hugely problematic one, it also is a dedicated machine whose sole purpose is keeping the other machines running. Which feels wrong to me.

It probably wasn't the best business decision to invest time in this, and I won't even argue this is the best technical solution. But it's the only technical solution that didn't make me feel like I was working around limitations; things just worked they way they were supposed to. The API servers received an event, they told the WebSockets servers about it. It felt very conceptually pure to me. I'm a sucker for that.
Sounds like it would work, and have great availability and scalability. It just, conceptually, doesn't mesh with how I think about the system. An absolutely aesthetic distinction, I know.
The ugly side of the latest Java updates
Java 7 on OSX: how to report a bug
Kari Enqvist, a professor of cosmology, said something very insightful in an interview about gambling in general:

"Insurances yield a peace of mind and lotteries yield dreams, the values of which cannot be measured in mere terms of probabilities or money."

In my view, lottery tickets are not meant to be rationally justifiable, nor should they be required to be. Yet, I don't fancy the idea of committing to such vain pursuits comfortable at all, but I can understand people who act upon their dreams, and will not berate those who do.
Note that this feature is far from being useful only for class Read.

The Monad class actually depends on it too:

class Monad m where
(>>=) :: m a -> (a -> m b) -> m b
return :: a -> m a

The type of "return" can only be expressed with return-type polymorphism.

This means you cannot really implement Haskell-like monads with dynamic typing. You have to implement them in a less general way.

As for dispatching on runtime values, that is ordinary pattern matching:

f (RuntimeValue1 x y) = ... case 1 ...
f (RuntimeValue2 x y) = ... case 2 ...
Famed iOS hacker Comex is no longer with Apple, but don’t ..
I disagree, because they're completely arbitrary and a full bar can suggest that you either know everything, or you can't improve any more.

Trying to represent knowledge or skill on a finite scale is a bad idea, I think. If I got this CV in a pile I'd want to see examples to demonstrate that skill in place of this section, not a set of percentages pulled from thin air.
Visitor was about multiple dispatch, which multimethods, type-classes and pattern-matching can all handle.

However, it was also about iterating an entire data structure (in the GoF example, a document hierarchy).

This creates confusion as some emphasize the former (multimethods! pattern matching!) and some emphasize the latter (fmap! map!).
They're static:

https://github.com/philipithomas/cv-philipithomas/blob/maste...
Modern iOS twists on retro arcade games
I don't think that's a problem to be solved by the core documentation - rather it's the role that tutorials, howto's etc solve - taking you from 'what' to 'how'.

Maybe the Django docs should guide people to a few more of these before hitting them with the authoritative docs.
No, the dreams are free, as I make software for a living anyway.
I doubt that his students understood that gambling is something you could be addicted to in the first place.
Ubuntu Demoed on Nexus 7 Tablet
The only prominent Fossil user I'm aware of is Zed Shaw, and he's since recanted after losing data and having trouble upgrading: http://sheddingbikes.com/posts/1306005291.html
I hazard a guess you aren't a web-developer. Imagine that for every fix, new features and improvement to your platform of choice you can't use it until 95% of your audience has the ability and incentive to upgrade.
> get it on page 1 of HN

True fact: not all submissions to HN are by their authors.
That's really interesting. Seems pretty obvious she cheated in some way.

If something only happens once every 'quadrillion years' that's pretty much evidence right there, but given all of the other suspicious things as well...ya - I think there is basically no chance those were legit wins.
I don't understand why this is a downside

"Cryptography is hard, a single character difference will result in a completely different value."

HMAC is designed to guarantee the integrity of the message. If a single character difference didn't result in a completely different value, the whole method would be completely flawed.
I read this book when it had side comments - they were fantastic help
...because hookers and blow are expensive and have a lower money-to-fun ratio?

And, honestly, I wouldn't actually have fun with hookers and blow. But that's just me.
The reality distortion field is indeed real. Apple is training their employees in the art of customer manipulation.
The imagery of this explanation adds to the lottery-aversion on a subconscious level, as well: it reverses how a lottery is usually portrayed. Instead of 'only a dollar' entry cost and 'millions' if you win, this analogy associates entry with a long and costly task (some or most of a cross-country drive) and winning with a single quarter. Clever!
To get the reply on a deep comment, click "link" first to get the comment as a single page, and "reply" will be there.

Doozer is only slightly a SPF, it has high availability by having multi-master replication. It's also not doing a lot of communicating, or a lot of CPU work, and it keeps its data in RAM, so it may be OK for it to live on a non-dedicated machine.

Sorry if I come across as criticizing your admittedly cool creation. It was just that you said there weren't alternatives, and I knew of one.
But our explanation, that "Lottery tickets are foolish
because they have a negative expected return" isn't
exactly credible if we think insurance is a good deal.

It's my experience that if you offer homeowners the opportunity to gamble all their properties, double-or-nothing on a gamble biased 60:40 in their favor, no-one will take you up on that. Even though the gamble has a positive expected value.

My theory is the marginal utility [1] of your first home, which you stand to lose, is greater than the marginal utility of a second home, which you stand to gain.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marginal_utility
"The expected value isn't flawed, but it's often not an useful guide to what action you should take."

Yeah, I agree with that - if good decisions could be made that easily we'd all be phenomenally successful. There are mountains of complications (both qualitative and quantitative) that must be heaped on top of expected values if they're going to be any use at all in deciding what action to take. Perhaps this was the author's point, but perhaps that's sort of obvious anyway.
No, I definitely appreciate the conversation, because I looked for forever for a pre-built solution to this, and couldn't figure out how nobody had needed a solution before now. So I'm glad there are solutions, and I'm not just crazy.
"So, on the one hand a certain openness and teachability is necessary, but
then at strategic points in the development of an idea, a certain
stubbornness and myopia seems to be equally important to the ultimate
execution of a vision."

I think that's the reason why I don't seem to be able to commit myself to
one thing.

But is it mostly a personal trait and forcing yourself just can't work?
How should it be possible to switch between openness and stubbornness on
demand?

Perhaps that's the reason why there are different personal traits, because
switching doesn't work, so it's easier to get the balance by different
personal traits, arguing against each other.

There might be personalities, which are able to balance themself better, but
I don't seem to be one of them.
Checked your profile some more. You have a good show to back up the profile. Nice.

Since you are also using hResume, why not use http://judy.github.com/ which would do a better job of showcasing your side projects like "twitkural" in a better way?
Well I'm a founder myself and I absolutely did think that we were special and had a much higher chance to succeed than the average person.

Unfortunately at this point it's impossible to know if we were just lucky noobs or actually had some idea what we were doing.
An interesting addition to other replies to your comment is that the word "insurance" has come to be thought of as a good, safe thing by people (I'm not saying it shouldn't have).

In blackjack there's a bet called Insurance which you can make if you have blackjack (21 in two cards) and the dealer has an ace. Essentially it's a bet that pays 2-1 if the dealer's second card is a ten/face, the odds of which are 4/13, making this the bet with the worst odds for a player on a blackjack table. But because it's called "insurance", a huge number of people take this bet.
'Dirty secrets' Facebook pages should be banned
I have used a friend's Lumia 900 running WP 7.5 actually.

I hate the fact that apps are not retained in memory long enough. They always start over. Also, launching an app from the home screen launches a new instance instead of resuming the current instance.

Notifications are even more terrible. There's no way to access previous notifications. There's no central place where all notifications live. You can't access them from the lock screen.

Yes, all these are quirks I've found as a tech savvy user. Because of these reasons, I cant see myself ever using WP.

Besides, just the fact that you cant run unsigned applications (and there's no viable "jailbreak") is an instant turn-off for power users. So, to suggest that these people will leave Android is hilarious at best.
Reddit troll 'Violentacrez' speaks out
Hijacking the topic on P2P: is there a good library (any language will do) for P2P message passing (as opposed to information storing in a DHT)?

I'd like to experiment a decentralized twitter/reddit-like system using p2p message flooding and machine learning to weed out spam.
What I meant by that is that, in WP, if I leave an app running, and then come back to the home screen and tap on that app's tile, it will start a new instance; not resume the old one. Also, WP closes apps way too early in the background.
http://tent.io/ ?
What makes you think there is no food in Zimbabwe?
Reddit v Gawker: Why Can't Both Lose?