skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The refresh rate problem possibly has a neat solution from computing history. Surely those people using punched card and paper tape have some ideas that could be useful?

Maybe instead of updating the screen every keypress it could update every time Enter is pressed?
I think full feeds is a waste of opportunity for content creators. I don't visit websites that offer full feeds unless to post comments.

However, the problem with short feeds is the poor execution of most of them. It's more complicated than a simple character count. Your RSS feed has to entice me to visit. Your CMS has to support short RSS feeds as a native feature or it won't work.
That's exactly what I was thinking, just doing the simple example in the tutorial makes the urls.py seem bloated in my eyes.
JavaScript arrow function syntax is here
I guess he addressed this point. There are plants well adapted to life on top of a tall mountain... though it's not the beautiful tall trees depicted on the mockups. I'm guessing those plants probably are short shrubs with dark green leafs and contorted trunks.
> This is not about good design, this is about whether it's possible.

...but a good designer would have some appreciation of whether it's possible or not and thus not bother drawing trees on tops top of skyscrapers. Or at least they'd draw realistic stumpy trees.

> but you do reap the benefits of good design

Absolutely, yes. I need to be clearer. I am very grateful for good design. It has made my life better. Through HN I have developed a better appreciation for the hard, hidden, work of good design. In the past I automatically thought of of things I'd find on Yanko as 'designery stuff' - but I've learnt that many designers hate that kind of design just as much as I do.

dcurtis got some stick for taking so long to pick out nice cutlery, but at least he was only choosing the best from real cutlery. Yanko gives me things like this (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/04/fractal-utensils_n_...)
Correlation is not causation, my friend. I can't believe I have to say this on Hacker News. My God, what happened to us?

Reported cases of harassment are up, because of:

1. it is no longer socially acceptable to harass?
2. we have removed barriers to reporting harassment?

Maybe there are more women in the workforce because we made it safer for them to work and we removed their dependence on a husband for sustenance.

Let's do a little thinking about this. I feel like I'm listening to a conservative call-in show.
Ahh... no, I'd rather that didn't happen. Not yet, anyway.

We are jumping around between client-side frameworks, but I think that's because a clear winner hasn't emerged yet. Each new one is reacting to the last, and the decisions are still being tested.

I think the situation will solve itself when the winner shows up. It's not just an adoption problem-- it's a utility problem-- so having a big company put their weight behind one choice would lock us in prematurely.
First Solve the Selling Problem, and Then Build the Product
How to connect an Arduino/uC to the Internet for 10$
I meditated for 10 days 11 hours a day while on a Vipassana meditation course, but it is not really for me.
It's often said, "A comment is a lie waiting to happen".
I meant legally change your name. Of course you can change your name by going by a different one.

http://www.co.stearns.mn.us/Portals/0/docs/Document%20Librar... for instance for one of the hassels here
Parallelisation and QC are mostly orthogonal in that you don’t need QC to do parallelisation properly and most of QC can be done with the current state of classical parallelisation. I would also not suggest working on QC as a software developer just yet, given that QC theory is far more advanced than QC hardware already.

Nevertheless, what certainly is worth working on and an area that unfortunately does not get as much attention as I would prefer is ‘QC-safe’ classical encryption, i.e. encryption schemes implementable on classical computers that cannot be easily cracked by QC. Otherwise we’re just waiting for someone to build a QC and set up a website ‘Upload a public key here and get the private key via email’.
You shoudl read Robert C Martin's, "A clean coder". http://www.amazon.co.uk/Clean-Coder-Conduct-Professional-Pro...
How To Code a Header Navigation with Centered Logo
80 chars ought to be enough for anybody, right?
well, what's great about the web as a platform is that it is only one framework. the web. It renders HTML, styled with CSS, and is programmed using JavaScript. unless you count server side languages. you can use JavaScript libraries if you choose but that's your choice. If you decide to use Backbone.js and then you find out Angular is more popular, that's okay because in the end, you're still writing code for the same platform. that is why the web is so great. just write a good HTML 5 application and it will work on most devices--especially native html5 phones.
I am happy that I was able to fulfill your expectations...
I like this idea, but I can't see it's use. :(
80 characters seems like such an arbitrary restriction. Once upon a time we were limited to 80 characters but we were also limited to monochrome ASCII text. Just as syntax highlighting improves readability, I think the occasional use of longer lines where appropriate improves readability - the shape of the code gives your eye additional clues about where you are in a section of code, allows you to have more lines on the screen at once, find what you're looking for faster, and isolates details that aren't crucial in getting the big picture. E.g. - inline lambdas or anonymous functions, strings, etc.

When I work on a codebase with formatting standards I try to follow them. This is 2013, though, and when I work on my own stuff I format it to get the most readability on my Macbook or 32" 1080p desktop screen, not a VT100 from 1987.
So if we wrap this material in mylar and remove the air, we'd have solid balloons without needing helium? Sounds good to me.
I had to fight with my team over the 80 character limit, but they eventually gave in. It works great in nearly every editing environment, and I've started trying to use it as much as possible in non-python projects as well. I can neatly fit two windows side-by-side in my IDE and read them both easily. I just can't go back to the old way of having the ends of lines hidden off-screen.
I used expect a while back to write a small bash script that logs into my server via ssh and pulls the latest commit from Github. I have this set to run on an Alfred command 'deploy site name'.

This is much more secure, in my opinion, than using a webhook to deploy new commits.

You may have to tweak it a bit to get it working with your specific ssh agent forwarding and ssh keys by only by deleting a few lines, but it works out of the box without those features.

https://gist.github.com/srcoley/3299526
Or, "Lessons"
Long ago, I wrote Web pages to be served from OS390. Because it still enforced the 80 char limit from punch cards, I had to adhere to it, also. But no fancy editors for code directly in the machine. And when any line ran over 80, it would only render the first line of HTML. Took me hours to figure that one out.

But I never ran across anything I couldn't make decent inside those 80 characters.
That's what made the article rather provincial and a fail

You argue that you were unsure if the article was a humor piece, yet I find your comically haughty reply to be just as questionable, as are many other of the comments in here clearly by people who have never tried to grow anything in their lives. The armchair expert is as loud as ever.

I live near an escarpment, along which you can find countless trees surviving (sometimes barely) along the rocky edge, desperately clinging to life in the most unsustaining of conditions. Yet in perfect soil / perfect sun / perfect hydration I've barely been able to grow two trees in my back yard (I'll find out shortly whether they survived the winter).

You see in nature it gets countless tries with countless specimens to give it a go. For every one tree in harsh conditions you see surviving, uncountable others perished. The one that survived had the luck of being the perfect variation for the environment, lucking into the right conditions at the right times of its life, etc.

Is that how you garden a skyscraper? Just give it several million years to work it out?
>> How does everything fit together?

initialize models and controllers, then pass that data to newly initialized views. at any scale, this hardly differs.

>> How should I handle templates?

backbone is template agnostic so the answer is "however you'd like". because I use r.js, my preference is loading the templates as separate text modules and defining them on my view. when our production script is build, the templates are inlined into the javascript through r.js.

your qualms with the todo example (no AJAX, global variables, strange template handling) are things that are not at all pertinent to Backbone and are solved by other patterns. point being, Backbone has it's own model/view pattern, but you can look at it in isolation. your other concerns are things solved by patterns with no pertinent relation to Backbone.
Thanks for the feedback! Creating groups of feeds is absolutely on the to do list. Will think about the option to turn off icons.
Putting trees on skyscrapers is lame when its only purpose is to gussy-up an image, but honest to goodness metropolitan reforestation where condos and apartment buildings are self-sustaining and eco-friendly is something we should move forward with.

Instead of building outward as in urban sprawl, build upward with vertical forests: https://cbpowerandindustrial.wordpress.com/2012/03/16/future...
Someone on reddit made an auto-updating GIF which can be found here: http://primis.org/time/output.gif

Source: http://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/1aye8m/time/
As does Perl.

I used expect back in the day for a number of purposes.
> When I work on a codebase with formatting standards I try to follow them. This is 2013, though, and when I work on my own stuff I format it to get the most readability on my Macbook or 32" 1080p desktop screen, not a VT100 from 1987.

And then someone working on your code on an eeePC will have a great time!
The FedEx logo is the first time I noticed the negative space technique and really sparked my interest in branding. It's amazing how such a simple mark can represent so much.
this is a really, really interesting critique of why the current idea of trees on buildings is wrong, but it's a bit short-sighted in that it just says "stop". The next logical step in this is to contemplate how a rooftop environment would affect the evolution of trees moving forward; how human architecture will interact with the genetic lineage of trees in the future, and how we can encourage an evolutionary process so that we get to a point where trees on buildings are possible. Either way, upvote; there's a lot of interesting content in this article.
Figuring out what to do after you build a product is only hard if you don't plan to sell the product. For example, if you build a consumer-oriented service that you plan to offer for free, then, yes, developing the business model is hard. And by looking at lots of "pageview-successful" startups who are still trying to make their first dime of revenue, it may take years to graft a successful business model to a free service. Hell, I think Twitter is still working on this.

But if you build a product that you want because it fits a need that you have, then it'll probably fit other people's needs as well. And then you attach a price to it, and then people pay for it, just like any other types of goods that people purchase. Examples of products with simple business models? SaaS apps with monthly subscriptions. Build a good product, charge a fee to use it. Yes, you still have to figure out how to market it, but since the big hurdle is getting people to hand over money for the thing you built, you're well on your way.

(And, just one more clarification, talking to potential customers and integrating their feedback while you build the product and making sure that at each step you're building something people want is a good way to make your marketing/distribution problems a lot simpler.)
At first brush those comments seem overly verbose and obvious:

/* Do we have any named arguments? */
...
/* If so, we must apply reorder_function_arguments */
if (has_named_args)
{
args = reorder_function_arguments(args, func_tuple);
"the notion that inanimate objects and even trees have feelings is fundamentally unsound"

It may seem unsound from the perspective of ordinary waking consciousness, and certain materialistic[1], physicalist[2], or naturalistic[3] philosophies.

But it seems quite sound from the perspective of many non-ordinary states of consciousness, animism[4], panpsychism[5], pantheism[6], panentheism[7], various types of shamanism[8] and religions which hold animistic, pantheistic, or panentheistic beliefs.

Now, you may argue that there isn't any or enough evidence to support animistic beliefs. But then the question becomes one of what evidence do you accept. Do you accept the evidence of your own senses while in a non-ordinary state of consciousness? If not, why not? Do you accept as evidence the communication you or others may have had with what you or they consider spirits of other worlds? Do you accept the evidence of sacred writings? Etc..

Perhaps you don't. But is there an empirical reason for not counting this as evidence? It's not like you can "scientifically measure" which criteria are "better". Even if you could, there's the question of whether something that's "scientific" should be chosen over something that isn't. And whatever you chose, others would be free to disagree with you.

So, "sound" or "unsound"? It all depends on your point of view.

Anyway, I'm not saying I'm convinced in ordinary waking consciousness that trees or inanimate objects have feelings. I'm just open to the possibility. Anything is possible, and I'm ok with that. I didn't use to be. I used to be quite dogmatic in clinging to what I considered to be a "scientific" and materialistic world view.

Having psychedelic experiences and learning more about philosophy helped me to question these strongly held beliefs. I don't know if I've found any answers, but I am more open to the possibility that reality is not necessarily the way it appears or the way I think it to be. It could be some other way. I could be wrong. What I think "sound" could be "unsound", and what I think "unsound" may in fact be "sound". Or maybe there's no way it is at all. Who knows? Who is to say? I'm certainly no authority.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialism

[2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicalism

[3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism_(philosophy)

[4] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animism

[5] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panpsychism

[6] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism

[7] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panentheism

[8] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shamanism
Personally I find the splitting in the for loop much harder to read, though the smatch splitting is fine.

I would favor splitting only if you're indenting to line up with the first couple of tokens. In those cases the pattern is obvious as soon as I start reading, and my brain switches to scanning vertically. I find it jarring to have to switch from having read most of a line to suddenly scan vertically.

It seems like the example doesn't demonstrate the point that precedes it at all. Apparently in this example an 80 character limit doesn't promote re-factoring, it promotes splitting lines. Which makes the justification for 80 characters being a typical line length + 4 indentations a bit weak and 80 is back to being arbitrary.
I love to work with a 79 chars per line limit.

For those using vim, I use this snippet to automatically split my window at startup:

https://coderwall.com/p/suj3fq
My guess is that the raw exposure is a big deal. Trees on hillsides or mountainsides only have one side fully exposed, so there's a dominant direction they could brace against. They would also benefit from having other trees (and a mountain) next to them to help dissipate the energy from the wind and rain.
I prefer a far more stilted comment style otherwise you have trouble remembering the code between the comments and tend to scroll a lot more. I mean /* The error cases here shouldn't happen, but check anyway */ is really not that helpful.

Also, all the long descriptions before function calls are mostly redundant. If i want to know what a function does I can go there and look, but it really should have a sufficiently descriptive name that after the first time I don't need to check again most of the time. Unless something non obvious is going on.
I think the writer is being a bit unrealistic.

So long as you aren't somewhere at a rather high elevation to begin with, the temperature, elevation and wind chill factors seem like they'd be quite easy to work around. Even something as simple as buffering vegetation from the prevailing wind direction ought to go a long way.

Perhaps a more relevant point might be that the architects aren't fully designing their vegetation's support systems, but that seems like it would require a higher burden of proof. I wouldn't be surprised if issues such as 'what if a large branch fell off 500 feet above street level?' aren't fully thought out, either.

But I don't think there's any reason that someone using careful engineering and design couldn't put healthy plants on a tall building.

If he was merely intending to point out that many architects are placing vegetation without proper design and engineering, he may be right, but I don't think he really succeeded in making the point.
Show HN: My 3 weekend hack, Movie meets Movie
With the long variable/class names used these days, and the availability of clear, small fonts and 16:9 displays, 80 columns seems silly. But I'm against raising it, even to 100 columns. 100 really isn't much more than 80. And then you start to lose things like being able two view two pages of code side by side.

The other problem is that 100+ column lines are just flat out hard to read. It's hard to follow text that far across these screen. A few years ago when I was working with Objective-C I came across methods used with each variable on one line and really grew to like that.

It's similar to the way source code is laid out in books. But is that because the code is more readable that way, or is it a consequence of the layout? Books are taller than they are wide and usually have generous margins.
I'll be sure to keep checking this out. It could end up being pretty good.

A bit off topic: I'd love to see something like this but for motion graphics. I had planned to try to build it but that's clearly not my skillset, ha.
In vim (appears the author is using macvim) you can use

:set cc=81

to mark the 81st column and visually nag when you go over 80 chars
Volescu wasn't gay; the scientist Anton was the one for whom homosexuality was strongly implied. And while I see what you mean about him not really treating homosexuality with respect/dignity - spoiler alert, gay character marries a woman and decides that having children is the end-all final meaning of human civilization - he doesn't exactly demonize the character, either.
Amazonica: A comprehensive Clojure client for the entire Amazon AWS api
As mentioned in Clean Code, beautifully and concisely code doesn't need much of commenting. It's pretty much self-explained.
If you're doing a lot of development on an eeePC then line length may not be your biggest obstacle.
80 characters is an accident of history, an accident that should be corrected. With an 80 character limit, you need to be mindful of the length of your identifiers. You start compromising recognizability in the name of fitting the line to an essentially arbitrary length (drop a few vowels, maybe use a less precise word).

Using a width limit to coerce into indenting less is just plain silly. If you don't want high levels of indentation, put THAT in your coding guidelines. Don't rely on side effects.
TBPP2012: Looking Forward with Andres Glusman of Meetup.com
The options are: use smaller font size, enable word-wrap, buy a higher-resolution display (or two), use your IDE to auto-format code according to your preferences.
I don't really see anybody using eeeePC for serious coding in 2013.
There's always at least one person who responds in this kind of aggressive tone. I don't think the question is about good web design, but about good data structure, doing things in a maintainable way.

It's like "Why don't you comment your code?" "Perhaps the value of my code is unrelated to whatever [blah blah] nonsense constitutes good programming practice? My code is functional. You don't maintain it. Who care's if there are comments?"
I hope we see lots of these from startups. The technique produces simple, meaningful, and memorable logos which also look really good.
Nokia throws spanner into Google's plans for VP8 codec
I agree. Labelling music is one thing, but outright censorship will ensure your project never takes off. However, after looking at your site, I don't get it. I thought the music would be embedded in the page itself. Also, you have music and news/editorial links on the same page. What's more there's no tagging/categorization so I have no way of filtering music to my tastes.

The site looks slick and you deserve kudos for the effort. But I think you should seriously consider the value proposition of "The Next Big Thing."

EDIT: I just went back to you site and discovered that you do in fact separate music and news/editorial links.
ServiceStack - a simpler, faster alternative to WCF and WebApi
Sometimes documentation is just a way to (try to) make up for poor code.

I usually pretend I can't document my code while developing. I'll sure add some anyway.

This doesn't apply to public APIs. There, you of course need to be more explicit.
I'm wondering if the author has ever seen a tree on the side of a mountain or cliff - it's hard to stop a tree from growing if they are left alone. He makes trees sound like whiny children who require constant pampering. Not the things that have been on earth longer than any invertebrates and will most likely out survive our species.
Pretty much all of the Go standard lib.

http://golang.org/src/pkg/time/time.go
Toronto requires green roofs for new building projects. Grasses and shrubs are typically grown, and they survive just fine with minimal care. I suspect the only reason that large trees are not typically used is that there's fear that tree roots will damage the roof of the building. Oh, and the weight of the soil required for larger plants is an issue.

Yep, looking at the bylaw, the growing medium - soil - is only required to be four inches deep. Weight of soil and drainage starts to be a problem - you have to figure that the soil may be 100% soaked...

It's going to be tough to grow trees in four inches of soil.

So, nutshell, tree survivability not a problem, but engineering a roof to hold enough soil (and therefore water) to grow a large tree is expensive, and root damage is a problem, and therefore - no large trees on skyscrapers. Still, there's nothing magic about it, just engineering problems. I could easily imagine a high-end residential tower with a forest on the roof.
I wasn't commenting on Backbone itself, I was commenting on getting started with Backbone. I've held 15+ workshops and presentations on Backbone and helped a lot of people getting started. These are the issues I have most often heard from them.
The Oak Bros. logo took me awhile to figure out. Also, did you notice all of the hidden symbols in the "in woods" logo? There are 4 in there.
No, Dapper does not suck. I too have been using Dapper at our company recently and its been an incredible boon to our db performance and code readability.

Plus, if its good enough for the Stack Exchange team, then its plenty good enough for me.