skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
No. That's not what modern evidence based therapy is.

If you're talking about 'counselling' then yes, a friend can do it about as well as a trained counsellor. But remember that the evidence base for counselling is weak; that people often feel worse with counselling; and that counselling is sometimes actively harmful.

> covers something like 80% of 6 therapist visits, and after that it's all on me.

That's a shame. If they covered 100% of 8 visits they'd cover most people who need CBT.

> I've thought long and hard about how to solve this (maybe have a service that just handles all the idiotic HMO stuff for you to make it as low-effort as possible),

Maybe just "buddying" - someone visits or calls you and talks to you and watches you while you do all the stuff you need to do. This builds self-reliance.

But yes, anything medical is really tricky.
It may be a difficult client, but I can also see someone doing this out of curiosity: would it work? In a freelance relationship that is just beginning, there is not much to lose.

Historically computers have made micromanagement easier. Think about company vehicles being tracked by GPS. It also enables managers to manage more people more effectively, have a flatter organisational structure. IT people are doing this to others, there is no reason to expect it wouldn't happen to us :)
What? Samsung Galaxy Tab 7" came out in November 2010 and I'm pretty sure there were a couple more before that as well.
That list has nothing to do with being a full stack developer. It's a minimum set of responsibilities for a technical lead on a project.
Good point. I might try both with and without the fake monitor and see how they look.
>math is always tied to our physical reality

I'm sorry but even if this is objectively valid, this not a claim that you can support. There are entire sub-fields of maths in which there are no known physical attachments.

Now, that's not to say that some time in the future we won't discover the relationship between every mathematical concept and some physical system. But at this moment, the claim you are making has a numerable set of counter examples, with a very large order. For one example, take the Banach–Tarski paradox:

>Given a solid ball in 3‑dimensional space, there exists a decomposition of the ball into a finite number of non-overlapping pieces, which can then be put back together in a different way to yield two identical copies of the original ball.[1]

This is, as far as we know, physically nonsense.

That being said, there is quite a lively debate among mathematicians as to whether or not math is tied to reality.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banach%E2%80%93Tarski_paradox
Yeah, like very quick lowercasing of blocks of ASCII text, 8 characters at a time:

char *strlwrmmx(char *buffer,int len=-1)
{
if (len==-1) len=strlen(buffer);

unsigned __int64 a=0x4040404040404040; // 0x40='A'-1
unsigned __int64 z=0x5B5B5B5B5B5B5B5B; // 0x5B='Z'+1
unsigned __int64 c=0x2020202020202020; // conversion offset for lowercase->uppercase
asm {
mov edi,buffer
mov ecx,len

convblock:
cmp ecx,8
jl rest

movq mm4,c // Eight copies of conversion value
movq mm2,a // Put eight "A" characters in mm2
movq mm3,z // Put eight "Z" characters in mm3

movq mm0,[edi] // Get next eight characters of our string
movq mm1,mm0 // We need two copies
pcmpgtb mm1,mm2 // Generate 1's in MM1 everywhere chars >= 'A'
pcmpgtb mm3,mm0 // Generate 1's in MM3 everywhere chars <= 'Z'
pand mm1,mm3 // Generate 1's in MM1 when 'A'<=chars<='Z'
pand mm1,mm4 // Generates $20 in each spot we have a l.c. char
paddb mm0,mm1 // Convert uppercase chars to lowercase by adding $20
movq [edi],mm0 // Store back in buffer

sub ecx,8
add edi,8
jmp convblock
rest: // convert any left characters one by one
cmp ecx,0
je done
convchar:
mov al,[edi]
cmp al,'A'
jb skip
cmp al,'Z'
ja skip
add al,0x20
mov [edi],al
skip:
inc edi
loop convchar
done:
}
return buffer;
}
How about full stack DBAs and full stack system administrators? A DBA may be specialized and only keep database servers running, or they may work at all levels from developing code to tuning disk and network I/O. It seems that developers, DBAs, and system administrators all have an equivalent in working the full stack.
I still cannot understand the logic of people like you that will dismiss a product and call it obvious only after the fact. If it was so easy that anybody could do it why didn't anybody else do it before Apple?
I like this idea, but...

"Hey pre-industrial civilization, did you know that if you pack enough purified
uranium together in a small space, it will chain react and you'll get a big
explosion? I mean REALLY big, huge actually. Don't do that."

and the cycle begins a-new.
Come now, don't let facts get in the way of the outrage! We know Google just copied Apple, like they always do.
What would you suggest instead? I'm a developer not a designer and so I'm taking design examples from others far more qualified to makes those decisions. It seems the screenshot on device image is quite common but I can't think of anything else now!
Of course the difference is "just" better writing, but it's still results in exact opposites. In both cases they try to laugh at geeks, in one of them it's in a way that makes geeks laugh, in the other it makes geeks cringe.
The NT-based kernels were not as big a problem for Microsoft as CE-based OSs were. Nokia transitioned away from a Linux-based smartphone OS to Windows Phone 7, based on Windows Embedded CE 6. It is clear that Windows Phone 7 was uncompetitive with other smartphone OSs. That put Nokia in limbo for a year when they could least afford it.

Now the problem is not so much the kernel, but all the cruft a Windows-based OS drags along with it. The most visible symptom is the amount of storage used up by stuff that adds little or no readily apparent value to Windows RT.

Windows OSs are heavy compared to Android and other Linux-based OSs. That means inexpensive tablets and phones won't run Windows, and Windows is shut out of mobile device markets in India, Africa, and other developing areas. These markets are how Yulong (who??!!) became a top 10 mobile OEM.
ISS emergency spacewalk to repair ammonia leak [live video]
If it was so easy that anybody could do it why didn't anybody else do it before Apple?

Because they didn't think they could make any money.
Of course not. I thought it was common knowledge that it was Apple who had to "copy" everyone else, strategy wise at least, with a mini tablet.
Thanks for the advice. I'm on a PC however and I'm not aware of similar functionality.
I always enjoyed their take on piracy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALZZx1xmAzg
I remember early on in my web development career to make sure you are selling a service not a product. You aern't building a website - you are providing a marketing service, requiring expert advice and a component of that service is building a website. As people have said, websites are easy - Wordpress + theme + hour of time and you are done.

Sell your knowledge of digital marketing - SEO, Adwords, etc in order to drive sales for your client, which is ultimately the reason they want a website in the first place.
People keep failing to understand that Apple created a desirable brand. Apple achieved high social status. If somebody else improve on the design, people won't want it because it's not Apple. It's the same thing as a popular guy in high school telling a joke and a nerd telling the same joke -- most peers will only find the first one funny, even if delivery is worse.
> I have little tolerance for people that are hypocritical on that scale.

What are you going to do, write him a nasty letter? It's not even necessarily hypocritical. He didn't make the claim that one should value productivity over all other things. As can be said of all suicides, he lived his life as well as he knew how and then he ended it when he didn't know how to live it anymore. Let's enjoy what there is to enjoy about his legacy and let his mistakes, minor as they are, fade.
The bullies are whining they are getting bullied. That's...cute.
I fail to see a single use case for terminal transparency. It makes text less readable.
On the flipside, sometimes building something custom allows you to help the client focus on what makes their business unique.
@rbsn
I don`t know how much do you charge hourly, but i`ll assume that it`s fair price for a job done. If it is so, maybe your clients are cheapskates? There is a trend in thinking (especially within small business owners or managers) that good "website" is easy to make and there is a lot of people who can do it. I would agree with the second, but not the first. Usually after one or two bigger failed projects wise firms learn price to quality ratio. There rest are cheapskates that must be avoided ;)
git-annex + OrgMode + mobile-org? Works for me :)
> It is shareholder value.

But in what timeframe? The article seems to imply they are thinking only about short term value and ignoring medium and long term.
Mini is way better, depending on what you do with it. The 7's screen is nicer, but lack of LTE and the 16:10 aspect ratio was deal breaker for me (I was looking for a "work" device).
>"The therapist says alcohol and other depressants have a depleting effect on nutrition."

Protip: if you drink quite a bit, chase it down with a pint of Pedialyte and a double-dose of multivitamin. It's the best hangover preventative measure I've found. Also, stay hydrated when you're drinking.
It's like I'm suddenly in an alternate universe where all products prior to Apple's have simply vanished.
I believe it. I also have a cousin who is only alive because he had a gun (wild dogs[1]). I think we need a psychological study to see what is this filthy obsession with authority figures anti-gun folks seem to have.

1) Once again, if you don't want the dog, drop it off at a no-kill shelter - not out in the country. Dogs will turn feral, group up, and try to kill livestock and people. Life isn't a fairy tale.
"Okay, you're in charge. Are you sure you can't find a better way to deploy shareholder capital than using it to remove win32k?"

Could that be why developing an OS inside of a shareholder-owned corporation is inherently hobbled compared with developing it as an open source project?
Surely choice is good? I fail to see a single use for comments that dismiss the right of optionality for others.
Show HN: Generic lists for C
As Nassim Taleb points out, you can't assess the likelihood of a high impact event merely from the fact that one hasn't happened for a while.

We can identify reasons that disease transmission rates may be lower. We can also identify reasons a pandemic would travel more easily, such as air travel and more open borders in Europe.

There are surely many factors that would only be identified as impactful after the fact. Likewise, we can't predict the virulence or transmissibility of any future virus.

Pandemics belong in that class of rare events where it's impossible to predict the likelihood, the impact, or the timeframe.

All this to say, you're correct that a 1918 pandemic is unlikely. But I don't think that's meaningful.
Why is this answer downvoted so heavily?

Edit: my upvote seems to have moved it out of grey.
I thought that the first season was much better than the others. The first seemed full of unique humour that captured the frustrations of IT support rather well, the subsequent seasons seemed to just move towards generic sitcom territory.

I think it went downhill when they brought Matt Berry in, as too much screen time was just devoted to him doing silly things.
@katzgrau
I also agree with that opinion. I think it could be extrapolated to making sth for money in general.
>>It's like I'm suddenly in an alternate universe where all products prior to Apple's have simply vanished.

Again with the silly comments. Is like taking a BMW and claiming that cars already existed before the BMW. Well yes, I'm not an idiot. But the specific form factor combined with excellent software did not. Add to that great quality and you have an iPhone, iPad, iPad mini.
Dubai Police with Lambo, Ferrari, Camaro: fastest cop cars in the world
No, choice is poison to a software program and should be avoided unless there are very good reasons to justify an additional option.
Linux is not about choice (http://www.redhat.com/archives/rhl-devel-list/2008-January/m...) was posted to HN a few days ago.
I like transparent shell backgrounds. I recently upgraded to Ubuntu 13.04 using Gnome 3.8 (using the team-gnome3 ppa), and my terminals still has transparent backgrounds (with a setting in the profile menus that allow me to modify it as well). So I guess either Ubuntu or team-gnome3 patches Gnome to keep the transparent stuff in?
I think that in the end, Google's greatest gift to the world will be all the experience and knowledge that they put into the minds of the world's best engineers that worked on big stuff there over the last ten years or so.

Those people are building truly amazing things now based on that (for lack of a better term) incubator for the wider industry.

The stuff that has been built directly by Google is tremendous, to be sure. But the fundamental understandings that have come out of their R&D to do it will benefit everyone across the entire industry. It's magical to watch.
Apparently nor do the Gnome devs. Shame they don't seem interested in listening to justifications.
I happen to agree with you and I don't use any degree of transparency in terminal windows.

I suspect the issue at hand is the removal of a feature that was available previously without explicit discussion or explanation.
I don't use transparency and I think it smells like feature creep... but taking it away from those who have become semi-dependent on it is very different from having the foresight to have not added it in the first place. I think those users have a legitimate gripe.

I hate it when my development environment gets screwed with.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law
Do you also fail to see a single use case for politeness? The ticket responder could have taken like ~2 minutes to explain the decision to remove it instead of being exceedingly rude.
Scheme, Clojure, and most of Erlang are on an entirely different side of a fairly large chasm within the lay term "functional programming". Haskell, ML, Ada, Coq, and even some parts of Scala are just entirely different beasts. The underlying math is far more pronounced, leadi to new terminology and power.
The author is correct that somebody ought to do that, but he is wrong about who it should be.

Speaking in very broad generalizations, successful businesses in a market have one core competency that they relentlessly apply to maximizing profits.

Apple is in the enviable position of having two, design/marketing/brand to justify higher prices and logistics to drive costs down, maximizing margin.

The Chinese shops are strictly in the logistics business. Like Dell in its heyday, they put all of their energies into minimizing their costs.

With no brand to speak of, they have no incentive to differentiate other than to avoid lawyers. If one of them changed the bezel and it didn't work, they'd go out of business. If it did work, everyone else would copy them and they wouldn't get any additional sales or margin, since they don't have a brand name.

The people who out to be differentiating are companies like Samsung, not these bottom feeders.
GNU awk 4.1.0
I want to smack all the developers and designers who think Wordpress is "good enough". It's not. It's an unmaintainable mess. Every client-run Wordpress site I touch is disgustingly out of date and everything added since the first design looks like crayon drawings done by five-year olds with ADD. I don't see much Drupal in the wild so I can't comment on that.

Web development has not reached the state where non-technical end users can maintain websites. In theory, sure, in practice, there's tons of money to be made fixing hacked sites and cleaning up years of technical debt.

I would not recommend Wordpress for anything other than a simple blog. Do anything else with it, you need a developer on staff. And a simple blog will never be enough for the needs of a small business.

I'd much rather work on some 90s-era custom-built app than the vast majority of brutally hacked together Wordpress sites.
Python's sad, unimaginative Enum
I quite commonly use it when I want to see an application behind the terminal e.g. I might be editing code in vim whilst the application or browser window is open in the background.

Also, it just looks nice! By having an appropriate background image and playing with the opacity it has a negligible affect on readability.
For me "back in the day" was around 2003, but given that my country is "ten years behind the rest of the world" I guess that your was earlier?

And I agree with you. Entering web development I had to know about: OS administration, DB managing, backend development (it was PHP then), front-end development (JS but with good knowledge of HTML/CSS), and on the top of it I had to know Photoshop basics and sometimes talk with client and users.

But... I can tell you now that I landed a decent job - that was HELL. I would never, ever go back to how it was then. You know, it's easy to know basics of DBA, but to be good at it? It's years of experience. The same for PHP and JS, even CSS is quite a huge and complicated beast - and I won't say a thing about Photoshop, because I still wake up in the middle of the night, scared to death, because of it. I had to become good with all these technologies at once, and that meant compressing years and years and years of learning and experience into a week. Or maybe a year, but it still was too much.

At the end of it - two years down the road - I was burnt out and uncertain if I want to work with computers anymore.

I now do almost the same, but without clients and users and with only two or three areas I want to be good at, leaving the rest to the teammates. It's ok now and I sometimes wonder what the hell I was thinking years ago. I probably was just young and stupid.

The funnies thing is that whatever I learned then I already forgot and whatever I still remember is now outdated and not useful at all. Was I just wasting my time, trying to be a "Renaissance Man"? I'm still not sure, but many things seem to suggest that.
Allowing people to choose their own text colors and backgrounds is inefficient and can make text less readable. There ought to be a small set of allowed combinations that have optimal contrast, referred to by simple names.

Allowing people to choose their own fonts can make text less readable. There are only 3 or 4 reasonable choices anyway, so all others should be dropped.

Allowing themes to change window decorations can cause confusion and reduce usability. Let's drop that.

Having more than one window manager available is inefficient and means that more developer time is wasted in duplicative effort. Only one window manager is needed.

Having more than one web browser is inefficient and means duplicated effort. Drop all other browsers.

Having more than one Linux distribution is inefficient.

Having more than one OS is inefficient.

Having more than one system architecture causes needless work.

Supporting any NIC that isn't the best makes the system less efficient. Drop inferior NICs.
This is exactly why I love evernote. You can still set links between notes, and the search index across documents is amazing
I have a cheat sheet open behind my terminal, for say c-vim keybindings.
Instead of switching windows continuously

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=660711#c8

RTFA it does not make text less readable:
https://bug698544.bugzilla-attachments.gnome.org/attachment....
And still, a lot of seemingly smart people are baffled by the fact that Linux has failed to penetrate the mainstream OS market for personal computing...
Small screens.
Until they insist on using the email service that is packaged with the shared hosting plan.

And they, or an unwitting employee, start using it to communicate information they shouldn't.

And their account gets owned. (Keep in mind, the content is no longer just public web pages...)

And... Even if the web site hosting should have been done this way, they still needed help/advice/pressure to be more clueful about their IT deployment and use.

A lot of small businesses look for the minimum and think things should just work.

Separately, as a favor, I spent a weekend cleaning such a business's systems after an employee clicked on a malicious attachment.

When I told them what that service was worth (particularly on short notice and over a weekend) -- mind you, I wasn't charging them anything, just trying to put the fear of God into them to prevent a repeat and to motivate some better policy and behavior -- they completely balked. One partner "called someone" and claimed a simple sub $100 scan with a packaged product would have taken care of the problem. (Never mind that they had multiple infections on multiple machines and a raft of outdated products presenting serious security implications.)

They were in a cash flow crisis. If I hadn't had billing up by Monday morning, they would have been severely screwed. Yet, they were unwilling to assign any significant dollar amount to what I'd done.

The other side of businesses that pay too much for custom web development, is businesses that treat their IT systems like a consumer-level Windows XP box. And we know what happens to those.

P.S. IT, IS... whichever acronym floats your boat.
Tai Chi Chuan - The ASCII Art version
It's /definitely/ not my password for anything super important...
I've never heard about this effect, it sounds amazing. Do you have some more information about it?
I am using Zim Wiki (http://zim-wiki.org) where the notebook directory is shared with Dropbox. It has nice features and is cross platform. There is also a Git-backend plugin that should me more robust from what I use.
If the ref counting is manual or optimized, it doesn't happen after every assignment, only ones which change object ownership. If you're really nuts about avoiding cache hits, you can pack most ref counts into the low bits of the class pointer, since allocations tend to be 16-byte aligned, including allocations for class objects. Assuming you use the object at least once following a change of ownership, the overall cost in cache misses becomes 0. Or you can store the references in a global table with better cache properties (IIRC this is what ObjC does). Or you can rely on the fact that cache lines are typically large enough to grab a few words at a time, so fetching the class pointer will automatically fetch the refcount (again with the assumption that you use objects at least once per assignment). Honestly, I'm having difficulty imagining how cache behavior could become a problem unless you wanted it to.

As for not allowing cycles, I consider that a feature. The headache of memory management doesn't go away with GC. You still have to avoid inadvertently keeping references to objects through the undo stack & so on. Unintentional strong refs creep through GC code just as easily as memory leaks creep through code with manual memory management. Almost universally, I find that GC'd projects large enough to have memory management best practices implicitly do away with this freedom at the first opportunity by calling for acyclic or single-parent object ownership graphs. These restrictions primarily make it easier to think about object lifecycle -- the fact that they allow refcounting to suffice for memory management is icing on the cake.
> The renaissance man that emerged in the 13th century was someone who could “do all things if he will”. The renaissance man of the 21st century is the developer who’s capable of executing a software project from the bottom up.

Because the only thing anyone ever needs to do in the modern world is develop software projects, of course.