skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's one way to look at it. However, having an object interface toward the SSD does not solve the problem of variability that the author mentions.

The variability is caused by the "incompatible" NAND flash interface (read, write and erase), while the IO interface to the host system is read/write (and occasional trim to let the device know of unused pages). Therefore, another interface, other than a simple read/write is the holy grail. This interface might be one that give various guarantees for the user, e.g. atomic operations, etc. It doesn't need to only be an object / page store.
I switched to mint online. Not quite identical to Quicken, but both my wife and I can access it where ever we are. Quicken always sucked at multiple users.
I don't understand your issues with Ruby on Ubuntu, setting it up with RBenv is fairly simple, you can see my build script here: https://gist.github.com/kaspergrubbe/5383877

About 1.9.3 and 1.9.1 are you sure that it isn't about this issue described here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8564210/why-are-we-instal... ?
I think PG is asking the wrong questions. None of merely plausible hypotheses as to the motive of an imagined government actor creating bitcoin is testable.

Perhaps more importantly, we've skipped entirely past the question -- a question we might actually be able to begin to answer with evidence -- what what bitcoin is actually doing in the real world beyond the obvious and superficial details that make headlines.
If its what the client specifically asks for, you probably have no choice. That being said, you can tell the client the trade offs. Specifically, make them aware of the fact that c++ takes more time to code and update relative to higher level languages.

In this case, since it seems like an ETL batch process that can be parallelized, your barriers are more the cost and time of development versus running time.
The author's point is valid for selectors, but he is not considering the plethora of plug-ins that are built on top of jQuery and just work.

Until browsers can support all of that, I think we are a LONG way from saying goodbye to jQuery.

For all I know jQuery is saving me a ton of time when working on my prototype for the new side project. Last thing I want to do is to re-invent the wheel at my own expense :)
It's hard for people to get data on flash chips / prices without signing an NDA. He probably found the data from various places and stitched it together from that.
Same reasons as Kaminsky, if nothing else.

There is a lot I hate about BTC but mainly due to it having wrong design goals, vs a wrong implementation.

The essential thing they got wrong was lack of using the market to price risk, and trying to be all or nothing.
International entrepreneurs in international waters
What are your thoughts on this ?
jQuery exists because the native APIs available in browsers are not cross-compatible and suck at the same time. jQuery can be left alone once browsers revert the historical decision of just shipping a small core language.
The problem is people also mine on dual core CPU's. When looking for total energy consumption you need to include the long tail of horrible hardware because of botnet's / school computers where the miner does not directly pay for energy costs and so does not care about efficiency.

PS: Consider a ten hour 600 mile trip by a 60mpg car and a 6mpg camper. The average fuel consumption is not (60mpg + 6mpg) / 2 = 33mpg, but (2*600miles)/(600miles/60mpg + 600miles/6mpg) or 10.9mpg.
Seems a bit of a bother to use chopsticks and the fishing line contraption. Since it's to test what the user experience is just get another person to watch the users gestures and click or touch the computer that's powering the display to translate those gestures in to pre defined actions. Would let you test all sorts of crazy things.
I would like to applaud this guy; he has got insightful and polite answers from Linus.
Many enjoyable films posted already. No one has mentioned 'Primer' (2004/Shane Carruth). Respectable as hard sci-fi, and inspiring as an independent project (Carruth did almost everything himself.) I suggest watching before you read anything about it.

For non sci-fi, 'Old boy' (2003/Chan-wook Park) was memorable - fun concept, well acted and a good ending too.
Let me make it short for you:

15 * Microsoft
8 * Intel
2 * Apple
1 * Android
4 * Tablets
2 * Smartphones
0 * Linux
0 * Amd
[Corp] Profits Just Hit Another All-Time High, Wages Hit All-Time Low
What is Python
You would imagine wrong:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillips_Academy

2096 for 2008.

Even Phillips has underachievers, though they are still pretty damn good.

You have inflated expectations because you associate yourself with like-minded, equally exceptional individuals, which, in my opinion, is one of the most terribly underrated aspects of child rearing.

Of course, I don't know if you were just naturally drawn to people of that level, or if it was something your parents/teachers facilitated, but I do believe in the notion that you are the company you keep.

I can only imagine how much higher my standards in high school would have been if I had hung with a smarter bunch.
That's about as silly as pointing to the Bible when somebody asks for evidence of Jesus.
bitcoin is designed so that miners have an incentive to work on it and not alternatives. The result being much the same as that predicted by Austrian theory: a single money winning in the market, and the rest being demonetized. (A caveat however, when it is easy to convert between the moneys, this need not occur to the same degree.)

One would therefore predict low-to-zero chance of monetizing zerocoin/litecoin/namecoin if they compete for the same resources that bitcoin would compete for, namely miner processing power.

(edit: zerocoin is not subject to this criticism, I stand corrected; thanks nawitus)
Nothing like getting a pile of slides without any presenter notes or anything else helping to interpret the slides.
I can't believe someone junked your post. It is an answer to the question, and it is the correct answer.
Founders: You don't own your employees
Zuckerberg said: "We have a strange immigration policy for a nation of immigrants". The economist says "insane" would be a better term.

I actually agree that we should be more welcoming to highly skilled immigrants in general, but the "nation of immigrants" rhetoric is getting irritating.

The US currently takes 1.2 million immigrants legally into the country every year. This will be true regardless of whether we award large numbers of work visas to the sort of people Zuckerberg would like to hire.

Our immigration system is more based on family reunification than the hiring priorities of the high tech industry. I would agree that there are better ways to decide who will get to come to the US.

But this isn't really about immigration per se, the specific legislation under consideration is about awarding visas or green cards directly to people with graduate STEM degrees. A good idea sure, but why does nobody at the economist point out that US takes huge numbers of immigrants every year and will continue to do so regardless of what happens with this legislation?
Yes, $20 for the memory, and $200 in time spent getting approval, another $200 to physically install it, because you 'obviously' can't just open up that server as there are procedures fr that kind of stuff, and then $2000 in time wasted by the users while they spent 6 months waiting for that one ram stick to get installed.

It's easy to think everyone has their acts together like facebook or google, but most companies i've dealt with have hardware upgrade processes measured in months or years, not hours or days. You absolutely have to take responsibility for your work as a programmer and make stuff run fast instead of labeling it somebody else's problem.
You're seeing a lot of self-selection in reporting I imagine. TJHSST (public) is still I think the highest at just under 2,200. Stuyvesant (public) is around 2,100, and most of the top private schools (Exeter, Choate, etc) are in the 2,000 to 2,100 range. A more typical rich public high school is likely to be around 1,800.

As for your larger point, I disagree. I think the rush to deemphasize standardized test scores is racism more than it is embracing a broader view of merit. When I went to TJ (late 1990's) it was about 1/3 Asian/Indian (well-assimilated) and 2/3 white. Culturally it was a good mix--nerdy and hard working but not overly serious or competitive. Sometime in the early 2000's, they made admissions race blind. As a result the school is now 2/3 asian, 1/4 non-latino white, and 4% black or latino. 1% are low-income. My brother went six years behind me and he definitely disliked the cultural change: it became much more serious, much less laid-back, much more competitive and cut-throat. The alumni rant constantly about how the place has gone downhill, even though by the objective measures it is doing better than ever.

I personally think the change was a bad thing. I'd rather go to school with the guy who got a 2,200 on his SAT without much studying than the guy who got a 2,400 after prepping for years. But it's total cultural elitism on my part. To asians from immigrant families that line of thinking doesn't even make sense. If admissions measures certain things, why wouldn't you do everything you can to maximize your score on those measures?

My perception is that elite colleges have started to emphasize soft factors not so much because they want more cultural diversity, but because they don't want their schools to be taken over by asian recent immigrants and the culture that creates. Why else are the measures that sufficed for so long suddenly inadequate now? Why do we let in a champion unicycle rider over a hard-working kid with an SAT score 100 points higher? It's not like elite colleges get a large number of disadvantaged minorities in the process--their numbers are still tiny. No, what the new measures do is keep out asian immigrants whose parents don't emphasize "soft" pass-times, who don't have the economic security to pursue unorthodox ambitions, who usually don't have the cultural integration to be active in the community, etc.
It's easy to calculate a number for the waste of Bitcoin, but it's not easy to calculate a number for the waste of the awful, archaic systems it could replace. Transferring money is done today with mainframes, paper forms, and middlemen galore. If Bitcoin replaced all that there's no doubt in my mind we'd all be better off.
`git subtree` seems like the perfect tool to complement `git submodule`.

Too bad it's not enabled by default: http://engineeredweb.com/blog/how-to-install-git-subtree/
Denmark: 1,000 Megawatts Of Offshore Wind, And No Signs of Slowing Down
Out of curiosity, how much did they personally sock away from BitCoin?

Was this done out of some ideological commitment, or just to get rich as the first movers?
I keep mine at school.
> You know what I love about jQuery ? It's readable.

Can you tell me what does this line of code without checking what the f value is?

$(f);
> You'll find yourself needing a method to add or remove classes eficiently. So you'll rewrite .addClass() and .removeClass()

You don't need to rewrite it, cf. this shim [1] for example.

> Then you'll need a clean way to make Ajax and callbacks. You'll rewrite .ajax() and .when()

They are plenty of good Ajax implementations, for example this one [2]. If you need promises, there are good libraries too [3].

> Then you'll need to fade something in all browser. So you'll rewrite .animate()

Applying a fading effect on an element shouldn't be a mandatory feature. You can just use CSS3.

[1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/DOM/element.classLi...

[2] http://jibbering.com/2002/4/httprequest.html

[3] https://github.com/kriskowal/q
I believe he's using meritocracy in an ironic sense, since on multiple occasions he notes that his only merit was being good at test-taking and displaying "aptitude".
'Drummond says: "A smartphone might involve as many as 250,000 (largely questionable) patent claims"'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/aug/04/apple-paten...

David Drummond is Google's chief legal officer.
Your code is fine for this use case. But I'd have to bite my nails hoping it would work on browser 'X' for other use cases, which is simply not worth the headache. Cross browser compatibility is a real pain, you know? For me JQuery does it very well.

And good luck using your new ajax function :)
Zerocoin works with bitcoins, though, it's not a different currency. 1 BTC = 1 "zerocoin", that you can convert back and forth.
Those statistics weren't very helpful. It doesn't matter how many sites are using the CDN, it matters how may people visit those sites. If only 0.05% of sites used it, but 80% of people visited those sites, it would be worth using.
As an idea, bitcoin is perhaps one of the most revolutionary ideas in our lifetime. As a practical, functional currency bitcoin may fall short. It is clear that the first two economists quoted in the article simply fail to grasp the gravity of the concept of a purely digital currency. It is without borders. It is beyond the reach of government. It is the future.
Because so far Satoshi has kept his real identity a secret.
...which makes a pretty case for the school to confiscate it/sue you for the BTC generated using their power.
Nobody mines on a CPU anymore, there's absolutely no point. At the current difficulty, you would barely even get a single share. For example, a single share on p2pool is at difficulty 725 now, there's no way a CPU miner can solve that.
I am not a git maintainer, but as someone interested in improving submodules I can try to summarize the thread.

Submodules are difficult to use in practice for a wide variety of reasons. There are serious, complex proposals that have made it into git-contrib to build a "better" submodule, but for various reasons these have produced systems that merely make the tradeoffs in a different way that some people prefer.

This is not like any of those proposals. His problem is that "git add" "git diff", etc., don't "understand" submodules. It would be as if ls, cd etc. don't "follow" symlinks, so that you had to navigate to the correct directory yourself before you can use standard unix tools.

This is a serious problem, but his solution is essentially "we should use hardlinks instead of symlinks". That is, he wants to take the code that understands submodules out of the individual tools, and pop them in the filesystem somewhere where they are "shared" among more of the tools and don't have to exist in any of them.

There are many objections to this proposal. The chief one seems to be that this does not seem to directly address any particular problem. I think Ramkumar perceives that the reason git add/diff/rm don't support submodules is as a metaproblem "it is too hard to add submodule support to arbitrary tool". Whereas the git maintainers are saying "It is possible to add submodule support to arbitrary tool." So that's the initial standoff.

Another problem is that this requires a filesystem change, and that is essentially the most stable part of git that breaks incompatibility with other versions. If you read Linus's rants, you know that he generally applies an enormous amount of scrutiny to breaking compatibility. And so from his desk, you would need not just one clear benefit, but an overwhelming number of them, to break the contract like this.

But what I suspect is the True Rejection here is that this will pan out like all the proposals before it: to be different, but not strictly better, than the current implementation. To return to the POSIX analogy: we have both symlinks and hardlinks, and which one is better depends on what you are doing, there is no "one true link". If you replace all the symlinks with hardlinks, I think you will run into trouble with the hardlinks too.

Finally, it is unfortunate that the flamewar is about the monolithic patch rather than about some of the principles that led to the patch. I think Ramkumar has had (at least) two very good insights: that "git add" and friends should understand submodules a lot better than they do, and also that they should have this understanding by way of consuming some API that understands them rather than incorporating separate code for submodules into every tool. These strike me as a concrete improvement over the existing system, and I wish that the energy that leads to huge unusable patches like this could be redirected into usable ones.
Aha! The new power-crypto-moocher class!
If you're expecting technology to just eliminate rent-seeking, you're in for an unpleasant surprise.
Yeah, my understanding is that miners are not just mining, they're also powering the distributed transaction engine of bitcoin. Is that correct? In which case the power consumption needs to be compared to (per $ or whatever) consumption for Bacs, swift, visa etc
Why not build a tool that takes in a set of JavaScript files, analyzes them, and outputs a stripped down, compressed version of jQuery with only the features used in the input?
Starting to Hack on Steel Bank Common Lisp
Why Medium Will Succeed Where Quora Did Not
$.get('test.html', function(r) {
window.document.body.className += " done";
});

But: This is not about short code. It's about readability. What's readyState 4? Why "open" a request before sending it?
> The problem is people also mine on dual core CPUs

That would only be botnets though? You'd probably make more money walking around outside and and hoping to find quarters
Imo the Bitcoin Goldrush is long gone. In mid 2011 you could make a couple of hundred $ per month with a decent Rig that had 3 decent GPUs. Todays numbers are far from that.
From what I know, I agree with you.

Bitcoin is fundamentally a heuristic to approximately solve the Byantine Generals Problem.
I was trying to find stats on the energy/environmental impact involved in producing a single penny. What I did find was that at times a penny costs nearly double its worth to produce [1].

1:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penny_(United_States_coin)#Meta...
I've long suspected bitcoin was created by Paul Graham. Bulletproof protocols usually require peer review, yet there have been zero leaks from the reviewers. Pools of crypto guys who don't leak stuff are usually employed by startup funds.

The part that puzzles me is why Paul Graham would do this. I can imagine several possibilities:

1. To finance his own black operations.

2. Because he thought digital currencies were inevitable, and he preferred bitcoin to some potentially more malevolent form. (Could bitcoin have been worse from Paul Graham's point of view?)

3. A friend suggested this: because he felt his currency would never become the standard reserve currency, and he felt it was better that no one's be if his couldn't be.

4. A variant of the above: Peter Thiel did it because it seemed inevitable that the PayPal account would eventually lose its place as the standard Internet currency, and better to have it replaced by bitcoin than Liberty Reserve.

I realize some of these explanations are pretty far fetched, but so is a government cooking up bitcoin as an political exercise. Whatever the explanation of bitcoin's origin turns out to be, it will probably be pretty weird.
Hence your statement "It's not the engineering which is at fault here" is a truism, and didn't need to be said. Everything falls on management, so with any problematic large-scale build site you can always say there "constant fuck-ups by the political management."

Here's what the court said, regarding the reactor:

Der 11. Senat ist der Auffassung, dass die streitgegenständliche Festsetzung der Flugroute rechtswidrig ist und die Kläger in ihren abwägungserheblichen Belangen (Gesundheit, Planungshoheit) verletzt. Der Festlegung des angegriffenen Flugverfahrens liegt ein Ermittlungsdefizit zugrunde. Das Risiko eines Flugunfalls und eines terroristischen Anschlags auf den Luftverkehr und der dadurch ausgelösten Freisetzung ionisierender Strahlung des Forschungsreaktors wurde nicht hinreichend in den Blick genommen. Eine solche fallspezifische Risikoermittlung wäre notwendige Grundlage einer Abwägung gewesen. Die Risikoermittlung war auch deshalb geboten, weil die Risikobetrachtungen für den Reaktor in Bezug auf den Flugverkehr veraltet waren und die Beklagte darauf durch die Atomaufsichtsbehörde hingewiesen wurde.

Reading the decision (through Google Translate), the planners used outdated information about the crash probabilities, which did not take into account that the flight path would go over a nuclear reactor which was not shielded against airplane crashes. The court took into account information from the Atomaufsichtsbehörde that it was not possible to structurally modify the reactor. There are other factors as well, but using the wrong information is predictable.
I suspect -- putting words in the OP's mouth, admittedly -- that the argument isn't that Bitcoin is exploitable in terms of software engineering, but rather in terms of BTC market manipulation, given that he mentioned the arbitrary cap on the total number of Bitcoins possible as a limitation. (I recognize that whether this is a flaw or virtue, or perhaps some of both simultaneously, depends on who you ask.)
I do this:
*Ncw (then change the variable name)
Then just n.n.n.n. until things are replaced.
Boostrap: The Premiere FED Prototyping Framework for Ghosts
Almost no-one really needs to write code like your “bad”
example today, and even if they do, it’s the sort of thing
you only do once and wrap up in your own library so you
can reuse exactly the ideas you need and optimise it using
the same tools as any other JS you write.

If you're going to do that, it'd be good to open source it so other people can take advantage of it. Maybe abstract out some other cross browser stuff as well. Also, it would cool if it made the DOM api nicer to work with.
One reason a government might do it is to shine a light into the dark corners of the online black market. As I understand it (not a crypto expert by a long shot), bitcoin transactions are traceable but not personally identifiable. So even if they cannot see who is transacting, they could build models of the networks that are transacting. Perhaps this could be married up with other sparse data to improve their understanding.

Another reason would be pure research--not a specific goal in mind, but simply to see what happens when this sort of tool is released into the Internet.

One thing a government would have going for it is a complete lack of interest in the actual monetary value of bitcoins--it's a tiny drop in the bucket of most large governments, and top-secret-level crypto teams are not likely to spill their guts for a few millions dollars...particularly if they know that their transactions would be easily traced.
You're right, it's better to write it with a CSS3 transition.
It is a means of lowering wage rates among engineers and software developers. Rich for Zuckerberg, with > $10 billion in wealth created by those engineers and software developers to want to lower their wages even further.

Of all the top large technical companies (Microsoft, Apple, Google, Oracle, Intel, Facebook, ...) only Google has a major presence in Manhattan (in Chelsea) for software developers and engineers (it owns the second largest office building in New York City). If Zuckerberg and friends would read a some of Richard Florida, he'd find that young people don't want to live in boring Silicon Valley (many take a long daily commute from SF) but rather in places like Manhattan. Disclosure: I live in Manhattan

Lowering the wage rate is not the best way to get technical talent. The best way to do as Google has done and go to where a lot of smart, enterprising people want to live.