skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I live in London in the UK.

These things are terribly hazardous. You can't ride them in the road as they are too wide and most of the drivers are assholes and will try and kill you at the first available opportunity.

That leads to the owners riding them on the pavement which is even more hazardous as they have zero stopping power, huge momentum and take up the entire width meaning people have to dive into the road when one appears (see asshole drivers above).

I really want these sort of things to succeed. In fact I think the best form of transport is a recumbent tricycle. But I don't think they work in most poorly designed cities or even most poorly designed towns.

I wouldn't even ride one in Cambridge to be honest.
Point is if you are going to be totally honest, that marriage won't work off really well. You need to be honest about some things but some small things you need to overlook (like her snooring, or eating her caked blood, or smoking or etc.).

If she did that, I'd definitely say it is a stupid/bad idea because X, Y, Z and move along. She just lacks context/knowledge why it is a stupid idea. If she is dimwitted to a point that she doesn't understand even when it's explained, I'd try to find a new wife.

Note: meant Wagner, and it's fixed.
this is a false dichotomy.

it's possible to be succint, harsh, and directly to the point without swearing or being abusive. for example, off the top of my head:

"stephen, this code is riddled with basic errors and is completely unacceptable. please fix a, b, and c immediately and know that if you make mistakes like this again, your contributions will no longer be welcome."

versus:

"stephen, WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU??!?! seriously, a FUCKING JUNIOR DEV would not make mistakes like this. why are you wasting my time with this FUCKING BULLSHIT? FIX IT NOW OR YOU'RE FIRED!"

imagine in both cases the person writing to you has only a professional relationship (ie, is not a friend who has the type of relationship with you where the 2nd paragraph would be an establish, half-joking form of communication)
Both of those links have comments that chide Torvalds for not being polite... and then call him names. Such hypocrisy.

edit: hrm, that rather seems your point in linking them.
I also don't really understand how not abusing other people is somehow fake politeness. I mean, who's to say that the abuse isn't fake abuse? This distinction just makes no sense at all to me.
>she should feel extremely dumb for even thinking of it.

I feel sorry for her and you haven't even found her yet.
>while people tolerate it at different levels, the phrase "some people" is misleading: almost nobody likes to be shouted at, or even feels neutral about it.

Well, most people don't like criticism either, even when it's constructive. Some things are necessary even if people dislike them, but I don't think shouting is like that.
So, basically your position is "If you don't like it, get out". I'm not sure this view is productive in any kind of discussion. Personally, I think the amount of abusive speech & profanity in the tech-field is way too much. I assume(incorrectly?) that it's because it's mostly male and a lot of men like to do that to each other. I personally don't do it to anyone and don't like it being directed at me.
How they push code at Facebook
Is it just another skin or more? Judge for yourself: A list of screenshots of iOS7 redesign vs the 'old' design: http://ios7redesigns.tumblr.com/
A good quote from Linus in the link is:

> So as far as I'm concerned, the discussion is about "how to work together DESPITE people being different". Not about trying to make everybody please each other.

One method of getting people to work together despite people being different is to get everyone to agree to a standard communication protocol when dealing with each other. This is often consider getting everyone to act professionally and in many/most organizations the standard of conduct is enforced from the top down.

It can be enforced from the top down because the people at the top can provide the right mix of incentives and can cull those who do not conform.

In most volunteer communities it can be difficult/undesirable to enforce a detailed/strict code of conduct. It can limit your access to volunteers and is one more hurdle to joining the organization. Think of how much sales/conversions can drop if a user has to click through one more screen or is required to click one more confirmation, now add on top of that the user is trying to volunteer, an action which is more complex if not more costly then a simple purchase. It would be interesting to quantify the codes of conduct(how they are enforced not written) from different web forums and correlate it with member growth, retention, and level of interaction.

So in a diverse volunteer community it seems advantageous to first encourage members to be generous of what they accept before encouraging them to be careful with what they share.
Emulating a Gameboy is fine, but emulating a large-scale scientific computation may be just a little bit more demanding, I'm afraid. :/
And that is the concept of the "benevolent dictator". If he is a dick, incompetent or does technical stuff you don't like, fork. IMO the best way to run FOSS project, but of course there are others.
Just use Qemu. It can run a number of CPU and architectures and is cross-platform. Link: http://wiki.qemu.org/Main_Page
Yes it can. Direct criticism leads to more honesty, leads to a more productive work environment. Just grow some balls and learn to deal with direct criticism..
How to: Gzip compression of CSS and JS files on S3 with s3cmd
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS_reparse_point

Seems to be from Windows 2000 according to Wikipedia.
This reminds me of stories and discussions about athletic coaches who belittle and insult their players. There is the same sort of division between reactions to them...some folks will say someone like Bobby Knight is a great coach and leader of men, while others will call him out as wacko who gets off pushing guys around.
Yeah, that's very useful context. Sarah Sharp is not Linus. She doesn't get to to dictate the tone of the mailing list, and was obviously trying to publicly shame/attack Linus. One doesn't have to endorse Linus' management strategy to grant that (a) it works and (b) it works without Sarah Sharp's input.
hmm. still a lot of "speculation/likely/...".

But no matter what, this is f*cked beyond recognition
No, it's rather "If you don't like it, fork it."
Perfect explanation, good was mentioned Flat UI by designmodo in this article http://designmodo.com/flat-free/.
Cloud storage should, first of all, be OS agnostic, secondly it should be content agnostic (meaning the provider doesn't review the content for compliance to its policies). Skydrive fails on both counts.
Another example of "he's not being polite, why can't be be polite, now I'm going to call him names", in this case, saying that he's mentally disturbed.

Why is it that so many people demanding politeness of Torvalds can't live by their own rules? Perhaps what Torvalds is saying is true, that people will find ways around the 'false rules'.
About professionalism. Have you ever been meetings filled with vice presidents when somebody screws up. What Linus does in mailing list is very mild compared to how CEO's behave in competitive business. Rest assured, Bill Gates or Steve Jobs treated their lieutenants much worse.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/15/407

" I really fundamentally believe that being honest and open
about your emotions about core/process is good. And because it's damn
hard to read people over email, I think you need to be more honest
and more open over email. I'm generally nicer in person. Not always."
He says he's angry in that message. Seemingly he'd rather lash out than be passive aggressive. If it was such a big deal, people would have forked the kernel under new leadership.
A Sober Look at National Security Access to Data in the Cloud [pdf]
I see. If this will be the case, one just should be careful to not leave anything unwanted in the Documents folder?
"I do not want to work with you because of reasons A, B, C."

Leaving out the reasons would also be ok, but don't be surprised if this results in confusion and anger. (However, the abusive alternative to this will likely not help reducing the confusion or anger.)

"This work is bad because of reasons A, B, C."

Leaving out the reasons would also be ok, but don't expect other people to agree with you if you do that.

Being straightforward doesn't require one to be abusive.
Exactly, you can save time, be understood about what is wrong, and not have to "criticism sandwich" everything. You just shouldn't be rude.
I remember that thread. You have a senior kernel committer breaking userspace and then turning around and laying the blame on the userspace application when it broke. In Linus' email I see cursing, and an ass chewing for all to see.

The thing is, the kernel mailing list being in the open makes it so we see conversations like this, but they should be seen as the equivalent of a private conversation, because that's what they really are.
Excellent, I hope the data hiding techniques are what I'm looking for. I was a little disappointed by this:
https://code.google.com/p/ooc/downloads/detail?name=ooc.pdf
> I failed to see any difference in running python or javascript as interpreted languages, and running go code with the go run tool.

These errors hobble Go for exploring and prototyping:

x.go:n: imported and not used: ...
x.go:n: ... declared and not used
Kolab 3.1 alpha released with iRony
(a) What I meant was some of the most important things people say are often the last thing they say. If there were some feature people wanted they might have mentioned or hinted it right before you part. It was to a product feature I was referring to, not to goodbye.

(b) I was also asking about what you do with planning when the solution to a homework unexpectedly comes to you, either when you are working on something else or even not working at all. It can throw off the planning if you are working on something else. At which point you might decide to switch back to that other subject for which you now have a solution. And now you are starting to multi-task. I was asking how you handle that. I am asking because that's something I have personally found to be a problem with planning. I am not sure if the solution to this is planning software.

I enjoyed reading your blog post and this is a wonderful project to work on.
The only professionals in this business are the people who are coding while everybody else is typing words that dont compile.
I'm not talking about what Go is; I'm more interested in what it might have been. There's nothing in the law that prevents mapping with side effects. If the side-effects don't require a particular order, why constrain them?
I don't buy that "people" need to swear any more than they need to lie, or that the result of swearing is somehow less damaging/more productive than lying.

Lying is dishonorable, counterproductive in context of multiple cooperating people, and a really bad idea overall, purely objectively. Swearing, linguistics-wise, is indeed a completely normal ("natural and ok") trait (present to some extent in individuals of all cultures, gender, professions etc., even in some higher animals) that is orthogonal to anyone's performance. How could you possibly equate these two is beyond me.
A VM is fine but at least it should be minimal so you can see what of the 400MB matters. A minimal environment (boot to TeX? Would be good).
>> The whole point is that he is not suppressing the urges.

> Freud would disagree and so do I.

So one can not curse out of anger or frustration without there being suppressed urges? I do not think Freud would agree with you.
> As was shown on a recent post - Linus reverted to swearing in his native tongue

Actually, he swore in Finnish in that post, and as a Swedish-speaking Finn, Swedish, and not Finnish, is his native language.

http://www.muktware.com/news/2857/which-linus-torvalds%E2%80...
What is your open source journey?
Agreed.

It's quite easy for an open source project to just waddle around and start blindly accepting things random developers contribute with no real decision or filtering process (cough PHP). They may verify the code's not buggy or that it at least does something that could be of use to someone, but they generally don't care if it fits in with the overall design and goals of the project.

Having someone who has the complete vision in his head, who's also extremely technical and knows what changes are good and bad, is absolutely invaluable.
A classroom full of guys is why some people (guys and girls) don't major in engineering.
Food labels do account for all the known digestive factors, but as I noted, they're estimates. Monitoring your diet and watching the result is still the best method of weight control.
imho, he is missing the most important point, and walking in the wrong direction instead.

He is true, that science requires recomputation, the ability to verify or falsify results. But recomputation in science is more then just the ability to run the black magic box again. A black magic box makes it worse, because the box might change and fail over time, and its black magic VM. Recomputation requires source code, that is human readable.

So my suggestion instead is to use a combination of Gentoo and Linux Containers instead. Gentoo enforces that everything on the machine has its source code that did run through the compiler, and Linux Containers encapsulate the project in a way, that a simple backup can preserve it.

well I normally prefer Debian because of lower maintenance cost. But Gentoo could play out its strength in this edge case.
This is the nerd equivalent of "MAN UP, BRO."

It's not how grownups deal with each other.
For anyone else wondering, links plus taglines

http://bourbon.io/ A simple and lightweight mixin library for Sass

http://inuitcss.com/ a powerful, scalable, Sass-based, BEM, OOCSS framework

http://compass-style.org/ Compass is an open-source CSS Authoring Framework
I much prefer being publicly berated. There's no question of what was said, and there is pressure on the one doing the berating to get it right and not be unreasonable in their expectations. It further urges consistency -- if one person is dressed down for doing X in Y circumstances, failure to do the same to the next person who makes the same error will either reveal obvious bias, or make clear that the original berating was undeserved.
That's a very hypocritical approach I believe. A few years' ago our ex-prime minister said that if you don't like what's going on in the country, you're free to leave. It doesn't work like that.
It’s not as black and white as you make it out to be. On one end of the spectrum, we have the inane “compliment sandwich”. On the other, we have Linus saying “your code is shit”. In the middle, we have professional yet effective criticism. Something like, “Sorry, we’re not going to take this code — it’s too half-baked and exposes some serious security vulnerabilities.”
The most interesting thing about this post is that, were it not Linus, this comments page would be full of people calling him out.
There is also speculation that....is very likely...and that 'metadata' appears to be....it is believed....and one would assume...

Thanks for the concrete feedback. I was wondering for a sec if this was just blatant fear-mongering and imagination stretching.
In gaming world it seems like it's always hard to emulate the last generation, and quite easy to do ones before that. (E.g. Xbox not emulating their predecessors.)

It's not my area of expertise but I expect to see something similar here. If you need to emulate hardware you might take a 10x hit, which might be unacceptable for very large scale computations. But in the longer run that might not be a problem as more resources become available.
He's sarcastically showing the negative consequences of attempting to enforce professionalism. This is very different from a strawman. His argument is not 'you want bad thing B'. His argument is 'your desire for A causes bad thing B'.

The only thing worse than someone using a fallacy is someone calling out a fallacy that isn't there.
Isn't that like writing your diary in the corner of the room where the telescreen can't see you?
No, you don't understand. It's a conspiracy. Big Sugar. Cooked up in a lab, they probably cut it with cocaine and old vinyl records played backwards.

It can't possibly be something simple and emergent like "HFCS is cheap" and "people like sweet things".
That's the point. We aren't nearly at the point where we can no longer sustain growth here on earth. I think in the event that that did happen, we'd soon explore living in Antarctica than on Mars.
Linus gets to do what he wants to do because he was extraordinarily successful in his field from a very young age. In other words, he's spoiled.

If he had to "work for a living," ie: work in a job he needed, rather than a job he wanted, he would likely have had a job which enforced behavioral norms. He probably wouldn't have been as happy, but he likely would more polite.

One of the things schools do is to socialize us to maintain civility. This only works for some people. It's clear to me that Linus is rather incapable of realizing he's being a douche, and even if he does realize it, he's not interested in changing for other people. And since it's Linus' sandbox, you either deal with it or go home.

However, the main point of his argument is valid. People are different and we should align ourselves with people that support our preferred way of working. If you can't work with Linus directly because he's a douche, then you better find an insulating support structure, or find another project.
this is a false dichotomy. the choice is not between "be polite and evasive" and "be honest and abusive". it's easy to be direct and honest without being abusive. see my example in another reply:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6051057
If anything, that makes it even more impressive.
When you have a nail in your eye, everything looks like a nail
The worrying thing however is that so many of the touted replacements are proprietary systems like Twitter, Facebook or Google+.

For all their problems, www and smtp are standards - you can use them with a whole range of different browsers/clients, from kludgy bash scripts to the fanciest commercial GUI offering - and they just work. (Well 99.9% of the time).

There was a time when IBM SNA, DECnet, CompuServe battled it out - and all lost to the OPEN, and Free (both ways) Internet and it's protocols.

Let's not go back.
Dear IE user
This just further reenforces to make sure you get enough money to get where you need to prove what you need to..
Western Australia.

And I don't know, the movie looked terrible so it never came up :)
Amazed by Microsoft Developer Support
Sample error.

When you had 100 users, it was feasible to get detailed feedback on 90 out of 100 users. When you have 1.5m users, you cannot get detailed feedback on 1.35m users. Dealing with much smaller fractions of your user base, sampling error grows into larger and larger an issue. That's not to say there aren't wonderful statisticians working on sampling issues, but fundamentally it's not the same as actually interacting with the vast majority of your user base.
People seem to be mistaken about why most teams accept certain standards. It's not about artificial politeness, it's about trying to get the best out of the team.

Not shouting people down is good because it means that people who are more reserved but who have valuable things to add get their say.

Not calling people stupid is good because generally people working on a project such as this aren't stupid and you're missing a chance to find out what really went wrong (misunderstanding, miscommunication or whatever).

Even if what they have said IS stupid, not abusing people for mistakes is good because abuse is a sub-optimal way of teaching.

Yes modern organisations have taken much of this too far and ended up as insincere, inefficient behemoths, but some of the standards within the community seems to be throwing the baby out with the bath water and taking almost gleeful pride in doing so.
It will be slower, but I don't think unusable. Actually, comparing gameboy (and other consoles) is not really a good idea, as they are systems where getting all the processors exactly in sync is important and difficult. Emulating a PC is much easier, as no-one expects to get exactly equal speeds out of processors, as every PC model is slightly different.

As I say, I (and many other people) emulated x86 windows on PPCs for years. I ran visual studio and it dragged a little, but was fairly usable. Certainly it won't be as fast, but then again by the time x86 has died and people have moved, hopefully systems will have got fast enough to make up the difference!
> You've obviously never worked in an office, or you have taken a big step away from reality.

I understand the whole "you've obviously never ..." thing that people do to state that their experiences are not representative, but it just sounds dickish in your post. I think it's pretty obvious that the person you are replying to has worked in an office, and has had a good dose of reality.
Freud's own work is considered heavily out of date, even by Freudian psychologists. Appealing to his image doesn't really lend weight to your argument.
I want to buy a nice town house in the middle of London / New York / etc. but they are all owned by property squatters who will only sell for a stupid amount of money.
I looked up the mail you're referring to: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/13/132

My Finnish colleague seems to like it. I'm told shouting "Perkele!" is a great stress-reliever.
Even "your code is shit" is direct, but directed at the code, not the person. He seems to sometimes take it even farther and call people stupid, which just seems wrong to me. "This code is shit" seems like it'd be even better, as it takes even more of the 'you' out of it.
Indeed, it's self-medicating - like coffee; You can wake up different, better ways..
I started writing this exact post before I saw yours. It boggles my mind that programmers complain about having to write four lines of code (if properly formatted, which yours is not... but I'm guessing the people that complain about not having a map function also complain about gofmt :)
Gallup whistleblower gets $1.9 million
I've seen it in a couple of low-key (read: Non-FDA) trials, but for anything FDA-scale I think most people are wary about submitting studies that presume their subject can't possibly have -worse- results. If it's one of the early Phase 3's, it's just an unwarranted assumption, and people will be all over you for picking a more lenient study design without damn good reason to.
Lets move this issue forward: gender inequality in tech workplaces...
If they commit code that is fucking stupid, they should be called fucking stupid for it.

Why? Wouldn't you achieve the same thing by calling the commit fucking stupid? Why resort to personal attacks?
argv & argc! :)
I upvoted you and would like to add a reply to emphasize how correct I think this is.

honest open criticism != rude dick

It takes a little more work, because you have to think carefully about your words and calm down, but that action itself makes

a) the criticism more useful
b) creates a frame where the criticism is more likely to be acted on and leave no resentment

Also, I believe that apologizing is something we should do more often. As in "I don't apologize for my behavior" is not as good a path as "I'm sorry I blew up, but I did have a point".
This email makes me wonder if Linus just likes hurting people.
Man, you were in navy. You got completely different prism to look through.
Femtocell hack reveals mobile phones' calls, texts and photos