skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
AFAICT, Clojure has a big following in the big data & web areas.

I'm working on a side project, using Common Lisp for a webapp. So far it's nice. General reports indicate that current open source Lisp systems works reasonably well under smaller load.
Asia is not stuck on XP because it's more or less secure. Asia is stuck on XP simply because of piracy (which kind of seems to argue it's less secure, but anyway).

Most people over there are running pirated XP. I worked at a company that had Asian partners and we found even legitimate companies over there had office consoles on Pirated XP. That was a shock to us.

The really shitty downside of this is most users are using IE8 or lower and sometimes newer versions of .NET couldn't be used in our software builds. Business dudes always wanted us to design our web pages to appease these customers, which became increasingly difficult as technology goes forth.
wow! didn't expect to get a compliment in return. thank you! Feel free to join our community and hack on anything you're interested in: https://www.balancedpayments.com/open

Maybe this one: https://github.com/balanced/balanced-dashboard/issues/93?sou...
Your mountain bike exploits must be much more epic than mine if you can't get the muck off your bottom bracket.
>It plays into the stereotype that Haskellers tend to find their language superior to any other

So does everyone else. Ruby users don't advocate for ruby because they think ruby sucks. Replace ruby with any other language and the statement holds true.

>it has package management issues

No more so than other languages.

>Moreover because of its bizarre IO system (which mostly seems to exist for academic reasons, not for any practical purpose

What on earth are you talking about? Why is it that everyone I see posting "I totally like haskell but..." on HN displays a very basic ignorance of haskell? What is bizarre about the "IO system" in haskell? The fact that IO actions have a type? That is entirely for practical purposes.

>it demands the use of Monads everywhere

It most certainly does not. People use monads frequently because they are incredibly useful. You do not need to know what a monad is or how it works to use one.

>Last but certainly not least, its default laziness (once again, done mostly for academic reasons) can lead to bizarre performance issues, bugs which are hard to debug

The only criticism in your list that is actually loosely based on reality, and you still managed to get pretty far off-base. Haskell is not lazy for "academic reasons" (what does that even mean? Do you think they hand out phds for making a language "acadamic-y" enough or something?). Laziness was a choice, just as strictness is. It has pros and cons, just as strictness does. Being unfamiliar with laziness does not make laziness bad. For 90% of code, it doesn't matter. For 10%, you want to ensure strict or lazy evaluation. Regardless of which one is the default in your language, you want the other to be an easy to use option. This is the case in haskell.

>The amount of hoops to be jumped through to accommodate laziness in Haskell is significant, to say the least.

I have ~100k lines of haskell code in production. I have never even thought about having to "accommodate" laziness in any of that code. I have exploited laziness in a couple of spots as a free optimization, but otherwise it didn't even come up.
the reason I decided to implement this as a hidden service and not expose it to the regular internet (except through things like onion.to) is that my server sees every request as coming from localhost; all requests are processed through Tor so no matter what you search, as long as you aren't coming in through a Tor mirror, nobody can tell who you are
Please, come on. If only Google stops using tax optimization havens, Apple and Microsoft will get an edge simply because profits of main competitor decreased. The different guy gets the stick. This is exactly like DRM for digital media, think about that.
I am quite OK with Google or any other tech corp using these and other tax optimization techiniques.
Disclaimer: I am a former Googler in a third world country
If the advantages of using Haskell (or any other language) are so clear cut, wouldn't the market automatically switch to Haskell?

Clearly the fact that the most of software is not written in Haskell shows that Haskell is not the silver bullet for all software development as this article and other FP pundits claim it to be.
Thanks for sharing. The one difference I'd like to point out between this scenario and someone at idea stage is that you had a team together (resources to execute), and new $9 million to "play" with. Imagine if you went to those 2 in Europe and you were just getting started. They perhaps could have come into your market with investment money and beat you to market. This is why I think it's naivety whenever people say "ideas are a dime-a-dozen" or they themselves are unoriginal, uncreative and copy ideas relentless (and perhaps exactly) and that's a justification phrase for them to not feel guilty.
I wouldn't call places south of Mountain View and Palo Alto 'Peninsula'. San Mateo is an often overlooked option (not as cheap as SOMA, afaik) but in a way it means a commute both for folks coming from Cupertino/Sunnyvale/Palo Alto/Mountain View and for folks coming from the city.

I would say significant amount of startups would still prefer Mountain View to SOMA, but they'd probably prefer SOMA to Santa Clara or San Jose.

There are many positives you've described to places further South, but there are also issues: fewer other startups, less third places in walking distances, being rather far from any kind of public transportation. In terms of employees it's somewhat of a balancing act: there are older employees with family in South Bay, more infrastructure folks (ex-Google and VMW folks, as well as various infra startups), and there are also younger employees, front-end developers, designers, and people with finance/consulting who live in SF. It would be more far more difficult for SF set to commute to, e.g., an office park in Santa Clara than for folks in South Bay to commute to SOMA (fairly easy trip by either car or Caltrain).

That said, Peninsula is exactly what its name implies, and SF is at very end (with hills in between). There will be greater pressure for startups to go further South again, as well as East (if Berkeley/Oakland adopt more startup friendly laws), elsewhere in SF (already happening), and so on.
Most Liked and Disliked Programming Languages
Sounds like a bunch of BS. There are several logical flaws with the author's arguments. One of the most fundamental is the idea that your idea is of little value because ideas in general are "cheap" which is also something I disagree with but that is more philosophical than practical.

There are a lot of IT firms out there that are very much in a position to "steal ideas" by the nature of their better resources and connections, but that's not really the point. The point is that the author has no valid argument so that's all that really needs to be said.

What the author really should have started with is "I think I understand the value of my idea more than anyone else is capable of realizing. Given that assumption, then..." proceed from there.
>It seems you are trying to be cute/follow the meme...

Because no one that's capable of independent thought will come to a different conclusion than you did right? There's no need to be condescending just because you don't agree with me.

Paypal is a shitty company because it fails to support sellers in any meaningful way. Part of this stems from the fact that it isn't a financial institution, so it will always lose to industry standard financial institutions if it tries to fight fraudulent charge backs. Unfortunately this renders the service close to useless for anyone trying to sell anything that's worth more than about $20.

It works great if you want to buy something, because you have a 100% chance of getting your money back if the seller doesn't come through. Unfortunately, people committing fraud against sellers also have a 100% chance of getting their money back, because Paypal doesn't even attempt to investigate these situations properly.
Startups are machines for learning. This isn't limited to learning the market and finding business fit and reproducibility, it also applies to all the participants, whether they are founders or employees. No corporate job is going to let you become a DBA and a Frontend Developer and a Backend Developer and a Product Manager all at once, in a production environment, with no safety net. There is no other place where you can learn at that depth, and there is no other place you can learn at that rate.

There is also something to be said for the experience of personally identifying with a goal, no matter what that goal is. The other people at your startup will quickly become your best friends (sure, maybe that's because you are spending all your time with them at the expense of your other friends). You work together, eat together, play together. The level of camaraderie and sense of membership that develops can only be compared to military service (I've done both, and it is very similar).

If you are lazy, or you don't want to sacrifice in exchange for an amazing experience where you will learn and grow more than you ever could anywhere else, then you shouldn't be working for a startup. There are plenty of big companies that will pay you a decent salary and let you stagnate, work 10-4, never expect or require of you any growth, and let you phone it in until you eventually die. Good luck whichever way you decide to go!
Wow thanks! Mine wouldn't have been as pretty.
They ostensibly have this, a Resource Restriction Agreement. It does things like eliminate in season testing, which used to be very expensive, mandating a multi week summer shutdown during the middle of the season when no work is to be performed (even email is shut off for some teams). They also restrict time in the wind tunnel (even though most teams have their own wind tunnel(s), they can't use them all the time they are actually available, and limiting the computing power which gets applied to CFD in lieu of wind tunnel testing. There are a few notable things that don't get limited, for example, driver salaries, which can be very high.

In recent years, a lot of parts of the car are of a fixed design, and cannot be changed except for safety and reliability reasons. This includes the engine, the wheels and the main chassis monocoque (the latter is homologated at the beginning of the season). Chassis homologation caused a lot of teams problems in 2011 during the "f-duct" episodes due to teams having to find all sorts of clumsy workarounds to accommodate the ducting for the device without having designed space and openings for it in the homologated chassis.

Even the freeze on engine design (since 2007-2008 ish), has seen things like ferrari spending ridiculous sums to ostensibly improve the reliability of their oil pump, and oh, look at that, as a side effect, gain marginal amounts of engine horsepower.

Racing stresses components to their limit, on purpose, and fans don't like it when races are decided by attrition. So even well meaning attempts to limit development and restrict spending often fail. If someone has the money and the will to gain a slight advantage, it's hard to stop. Even templated designs and string limits on what development is allowed doesn't stop people from spending vast sums of money in search of tiny gains. Nascar is good example of this. While not all the spending is at the individual team level, you have large collectives and manufacturers doing things like designing their own suspension dampers and various engine optimizations. It's still extremely expensive in aggregate.
Sorry, but I'm confused - where does an interview come into play when you're sharing someone your ideas?
Google started out by doing the opposite: looking at other search engines, seeing specifically where they fell short, and then correcting those faults.

I don't think Google is evil for what they're doing with Google+. I think they're uninspired. They're not doing anything new, just repeating what others have done hoping to jump onto a bandwagon. Some minor Google+ tricks, like circles, are nice, but they don't address any of the reasons why someone might actually leave Facebook.

This practice has often proven to make a quick buck, but has rarely proven to be sustainable.
_Ak, meet Andrei:

http://dotsub.com/view/892ed71a-0d53-499d-aaa8-d5e642f2942c

Still, I think you raised valid question in the first part of your message, though the second is a bit offensive and I also thank Andrei for his clarification and use the opportunity to congratulate for this milestone of D language. I like D and even if I use C++ at work, I know I'd enjoy using D especially for the features that let my code "see" and "build" the other parts of the code.
The studies would vary over time because CPU design and bottle necks have changed. Early designs were of course limited by transistor count, now we have OoOe and physical registers are limited by muxers and latency (see the presentations by the mill CPU guy [1]

Saving registers in functions is mostly irrelevant - you only save what you'd use, so saving more means fewer spills within the function.

Saving on context switches (interrupts alone aren't a big deal) was indeed a problem back when AltiVec was designed, thus it has a special register to keep track of which registers need to be saved. In modern designs this is less of a problem, between higher frequencies, multiple cores, and the other effects of a context switch dominating (effective flush of l1 cache and predictors).

The interesting bits nowadays are that load/store is expensive power-wise, which was what ARM identified as the major motivation behind having 32 registers (fewer spills in functions) and OoOe designs.

[1] http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QGw-cy0ylCc&desktop_uri=%2Fwatc...
> A lot of stuff in D ends up on the stack rather than the heap, and D's GC ends up having a lot less work to do than the GC does in languages like C# or Java

This is true, however there's a compromise involved. Because D also allows for manual memory management and unsafe memory access, it means that the GC is not free to move stuff in memory at will ... which really means that garbage collectors, like the ones available for Java (precise, generational, non-blocking, fairly predictable and compacting) are very hard to develop, probably next to impossible. This is the price you pay for using a lower level language and it's not a price that will go away easily.

I've been using Scala a lot for the past two years, using it to build high-traffic web services and while Scala is pretty wasteful in terms of allocating short-lived objects, I've been surprised at how well the JVM handles it.

In terms of throughput for example, Java GCs are much better than manual memory management. Allocating memory usually involves just incrementing a pointer, so it's basically as cheap as stack allocation. Deallocating short-lived objects is also fairly cheap, since it happens in bulk and so the amortized cost is pretty similar to dealocating stuff on the stack (!!!). The JVM can do some pretty neat things, like for example if it detects that certain references do not escape their local context, it can decide to allocate those objects straight on the stack.

What really sucks about garbage collection is the unpredictability. Java's CMS for example, awesome as it is, still blocks the world from time to time. And when it does, you have no real control over how much time it keeps the process hostage. The new G1 in JDK7 is much better and if you want the state of the art in terms of near-real-time GCs, you can buy into Azul's pauseless GC. But they still suck for certain apps. Allocating objects on the heap also means you have to pay the price of boxing/unboxing the references involved. This sucks too.

On the other hand, by having a good GC at disposal, it's much easier to build multi-threaded architectures. In C++ for example, it's so freaking painful to deal with non-blocking concurrent algorithms, or really, multi-threading of any kind.
this article is terrible. simultaneously self-promotional garbage for the author AND "cult of Haskell" magical thinking.
here's a direct link to the decision http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-...

But what if you just run an imageboard or a forum? Any CRUD app with user generated content? Does it not matter if you have a policy of deleting generally threatening comments? I have a hard time accepting that interpretation, it's just too absurd to me ...
Congrats guys! Pinterest is a great company you'll be happy there.
Supporting some nonprofits, and some not
1. We're a staff pick and were project of the day last week, so they don't think we're violating their terms of service.

2. The whole point is to make registration convenient by having bike shops register bikes for their customers. We need to talk to the bike shops to do this.

3. The actual quote: "location specific advice for responding to bike theft." Have you ever reported a bike stolen? In Chicago you have to call at 2am to get someone who will take the report, and if you don't have a serial number you have to call a few times until you get an operator who will report it. More importantly we want to tell people about what they can legally do if they encounter a stolen bike - and how they can repossess it.

4. That was a reward created because someone asked for it. Sorry that you don't like it?

5. YOU WILL ALWAYS BE ABLE TO GET FREE REGISTRATION
Diamond is very much in the same camp. In the introduction to Guns, Germs, and Steel he stated that his motivation for the work was to come up with evidence with which to counter an Occam's Razor assumption (basically, that certain groups had done more smart things because they were smarter) that contradicted his campus political theory. The "academic's consistency" is the lawyer's consistency of only making the arguments that support what he has decided in advance to support, and the "attention to detail" is attention to only those details that support his case. The fact that his book presented no evidence in favor of the Occam's Razor position (the reason certain groups do more smart things is because they are smarter) but only a list of possible counter-arguments makes it not an investigation of an issue, but an attempt to defend a pre-existing political position.

Even anthropologists sharing the same campus politics have been unwilling to endorse Diamond's arguments with any real enthusiasm.
Ideas are cheap. Execution not so much ...
Some microcontrollers I've been working with, that had USB capability also supported DFU- flashing new firmware via USB.

I have also resurrected a write-broken flash drive, by re-flashing it's firmware (a tool for which was provided by microcontroller vendor, which I found out by looking at VID/PID values and googling them).
But what is the current open source version of Iconic?

If you click "Get Iconic", you are directed to the kickstarter page. No actual download anywhere that I can see.
> Enjoying the myriad little mysteries we call "bugs" is key to being a good programmer.

I disagree. I hate bugs and I do everything I can to prevent them from ever occurring. To me I find it fun to get better and better at preventing bugs.
So, I'm still not sold on this idea, mostly because this is a huge problem and you're going to have to hit every link in the chain: the sellers of new bikes, the consumers of new bikes, the sellers of used bikes, the consumers of used (or stolen) bikes, the police...

If this idea has a hope of working, it will be because they were able to get a critical mass of people on board. This will require travel, face time, salesmanship, etc. Point #2 seems not unreasonable to me.
It's just an exam? What the hell did I do for 4 years to get an engineering degree?
https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3A.onion

No results here. If they are crawling, the results are not shown.
Idealized Design: How Bell Labs Imagined - and Created - the Future [2006]
There are plenty of open source replacements for graphing data that involve computers. The calculator is a form-factor challenge and marketing challenge. Calculator markets are driven very early by what is acceptable for a High School Student to use.

Current US influential standards:

http://sat.collegeboard.org/register/calculator-policy
http://www.actstudent.org/faq/calculator.html
https://apstudent.collegeboard.org/apcourse/ap-calculus-ab/c...
We believe a registry is an important part of the solution. There will always be more tools and tricks that can be added on.

There was a bike alarm on Kickstarter, our friends the Bike Spike - http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1054587410/the-bikespike

And they want to incorporate registration into their project.
No, you can call yourself whatever you want. A janitor can call himself a "custodial engineer". You're probably thinking of the "P. Eng." designation beside your name.
We're going to be covering a WebRTC codelab (written by Sam Dutton at Google) at the SF HTML5 WebRTC Hack Day (http://www.meetup.com/sfhtml5/events/139666482/) tomorrow:

https://bitbucket.org/webrtc/codelab

Another good set of WebRTC resources: https://github.com/muaz-khan/WebRTC-Experiment

For STUN/TURN, you'll probably want to take a look at this server: https://code.google.com/p/rfc5766-turn-server/
> Whether or not it's effective, most content providers demand it

They can demand to give them the Moon. We are talking about W3C bending to these crazy demands. Instead of that, W3C could simply ignore this lunacy which has no valid reason to be heeded to whatsoever. To change that, standards should be governed by those who really put users first.
Is this feeling just because there is a larger pool of choices that know other options? Or do you feel LISP is actually a bad choice for large teams?
What are you saying? We should stop training and hiring new programmers?
I have the same ambition. Though I haven't written a novel (other than timelines, outlines, descriptions, and other notes), I have set some goals for myself:

If writing stories is like any other difficult skill, the important thing is just do it. Practice, practice, and practice some more. Knowing this, I've focused on completing short stories. Once I feel ready, I try my hand at a novel.

This also might be relevant to your interests. It's a snippet of Ira Glass talking about the difficulty of being a beginner getting into story-writing for the first time: http://vimeo.com/24715531
But it's hard to say what extent this can have. What if you like a video on youtube that happens to be related to a product and google decides to spin that into an ad? Product endorsements can be a valuable component of a social service but there is a great potential for manipulation here.
HAHAHAHA! I was scanning the comments hoping that I'd be the first to drop the 404 joke :D

I swear the moment I glanced at the title I thought it was an error message that someone accidentally posted.
They haven't saved money until they've spent it. They've deferred some taxes (not all, they're still charging things like VAT, and any taxes in countries where they have offices), but if they want to spend it on salaries or acquisitions, they have to repatriate it and pay taxes. They may be hoping for another "tax holiday". But putting foreign income in storage somewhere where it won't instantly incur taxes isn't really that crazy. Especially if they plan to later spend it in another foreign country (in which case in your dream would they'd tax it three times in three different countries)