skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm a bit late to the party, but I'll nominate the company I work for - Canonical (although the part about no media coverage has been somewhat untrue the last few days ;).

Let me tell you why.

1.) 100% work from home (minus ~2 one week trips per year)
2.) Get paid to write cool open source software.
3.) Work with smart people from all over the globe.

#1 can't be overstated. This isn't just "flex time" or "work from home when you want to". There is literally no office to go to for most people at Canonical. Working at home is the default. The difference is huge. My last company let us work from home as much as we wanted, but most of the company worked from San Fransisco... which means when there were meetings, 90% of the people were in the room, and the rest of us were on a crappy speakerphone straining to hear and having our questions ignored. At Canonical, everyone is remote, so everyone works to make meetings and interactions work well online... and these days it's easy with stuff like Google Hangouts and irc and email and online bug tracking etc.

Working on open source is like entering a whole different world. I'd only worked on closed source before, and the difference is awesome. There's purposeful openness and inclusion of the community in our development. Bug lists are public, and anyone can file one. Mailing lists are public (for the most part) and anyone can get on them. irc channels are public, and anyone can get on them. It's a really great feeling, and puts us so much closer to the community - the people that have perhaps an even bigger stake in the products we make than we do. Not only that, but we write software for people like us. Developers. You are the target market, in most cases. And that makes it easy to get excited about the work and easy to be proud of and show off what you do.

Finally, the people. I have people on my team from Germany, the UK, Malta, the UAE, Australia, and New Zealand. It's amazing working with people of such different backgrounds. And when you don't have to tie yourself down to hiring people within a 30 mile radius, you can afford to be more picky. Canonical doesn't skimp on the people, either. I was surprised that nearly everyone on my team was 30+ (possibly all of them, I don't actually know how old everyone is ;) That's a lot of experience to have on one team.

Canonical's benefits don't match Google or Facebook (you get the standard stuff, health insurance, 401k etc, just not the crazy stuff). However, I'm pretty sure the salaries are pretty comparable... and Google and Facebook don't let you work 100% from home. I'm pretty sure they barely let you work from home at all. And that is a huge quality of life issue for me. I don't have to slog through traffic and public transportation to get to work. I just roll out of bed, make some coffee, and sit down at my desk.
How Hipsters Ruined Paris
The Secrets of Happy Families
> The future of computing, after about 2035, is adiabatic reservable hardware. When such hardware runs at a cost-minimizing speed, half of the total budget is spent on computer hardware, and the other half is spent on energy and cooling for that hardware. Thus after 2035 or so, about as much will be spent on computer hardware and a physical space to place it as will be spent on hardware and space for systems to generate and transport energy into the computers, and to absorb and transport heat away from those computers.

The computer almost sounds alive...
I use it everyday to send money to people around me, it is lightning fast and mostly reliable.
Show HN: open source Apple inventory monitor
How I Hacked My Way into The New York Times (Accidentally)
""nine salaried employees” of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), the global oil cartel."

So they get those guys via /.? Well I guess with the recent demise of theoildrum.com, they've gotta go somewhere.
one of my more memorable pr adventures over the years.. written up for the first time ever.
You don't need to know the accident rate--you just need to know the rates of fire from an accident per car-year driven. Tesla doesn't have a long history here, but they do have 10K cars on the road.
It says nothing. OLEDs are 50 years old now, capacitive touch likewise. Electric cars were around 120 years ago.
0 cost generics are a pretty good non-sugar reason to use c++ over c.
Wow, I didn't think of that. That is actually amazing.
I like to know whether this language support these stuffs.

- C++ level of const correctness or a simple way to make immutable data structure. Or immutable view of full data structure.

- Explicit symmetric coroutine with safe data sharing machinery. I mean something like Erlang process or Goroutine.

- Any meta-programming facility such as macro or template.
Is this for users accessing sites like LinkedIn without HTTPS, or do you suppose that the NSA is signing trusted certs?
Agreed. When G+ first hit the scene, before Google's big push to own and publish the unified identity for every physical human, Circles looked like a promising experiment. A lot of people I know who were fed up with Facebook started exploring Google+ because of that.

Then Google changed directions entirely (along with the big management shakeup that flipped Google from a bottom-up org to a top-down org) and those ideas were effectively killed. And every single person I knew who'd been toying with G+ dropped it like a hot potato.
Zero-based arrays and the mythology of programming
You know Google Code supports using git for version control, right?
To your first question: I had the exact situation with one of my former clients. The product didn't take of but still, i support them and if changes have to be made on their product i am still the one who does it. I guess, i would treat this new customer the same. This is basicly one of the reasons that i cannot assure more than 3 days - i sometimes want / need to work for my previous customers.

Second: my feeling is that there was nothing bad going on and the reason that he left is that he had to travel 2h twice every day. But i certainly will check that.

Third: I don't like to compare salaries but i think it is beyond avarage in this town. The problem is, that Hamburg is not quite the tech city, it is really hard to find good devs here.
Thankfully they don't require proof of your name, or I wouldn't be called Kim Jong-Un.
bs. companies implement the most important things first. now maybe canonical is running to implement searching other stuff as a fig leaf -- oh guys, no wait, we weren't just doing this to sell your local searches to advertisers. but if that weren't the purpose dropbox and google drive would have been the first implementations.
Show HN: Arithmetic on elliptic curves in Ruby
Why not FastCGI? It is just another way to connect from the web server to a long running app, just like WSGI is...
Here is the id of this script for Backtick (http://www.backtick.io/): 7403858
Sounds good. Got any articles on this topic from unbiased research institutions that we can read?
Wealth Illusions
Show HN: Extractr, HTML content extraction as a service
Thanks for the feedback.

Re: scope, you're right that using "def" the way I did isn't very idiomatic Ruby, but I always run afoul of it because it looks so similar to what I'd write in another language. I took that example down for the moment; I still have a personal gripe with it, but my "fundamentally broken" language was a bit strong. If I think of a more illustrative example, I'll put something back up.

The currying example I still think is weird in Ruby, and it's because it interacts bizarrely with the syntactic choice about optional argument lists. The thing that is wrong with JavaScript and Ruby is that they both have dot expressions and application expressions; o.m and f(x). It looks like

o.m(x)

should be a composition of dot lookup followed by an application, since both of those raw expressions make sense on their own. But in neither does the decomposition actually work:

m = o.m
m(x)

There's no state or funny mutation going on here, but a simple kind of substitutability isn't working. JavaScript does it especially poorly, and Ruby has this awkward inability to decompose because of its choices about application syntax. Now, in Ruby I'm aware that with or without parens are actually both method calls, so it's not like there's a field access and an application in the underlying language model. But Ruby then adds the syntactic convenience of no arguments to make it look like access is possible, but that syntactic convenience is a bit of a leaky abstraction.

I should note that Python actually gets this nicely right IMO, and dot lookup curries self so this works out.

The underlying thing that irks me and I'm calling out here is the non-compositionality of what looks like two expressions that should compose. This is something we felt like figuring out and getting consistent for Pyret.
It seems unlikely that this is by accident and that people at Google are not aware of how annoying it is.

Perhaps, just perhaps, they've decided they will make more money by forcing people to use G+. I see plenty of comments on YouTube, still of YT quality, with "Real Names". It's not like there's really a useful alternative to YT for most people. Google gets nothing from people commenting anonymously on YT. Annoying those people is no big loss - they won't stop visiting YT to consume. And for those that sign up with G+, they'll eventually gain more money from advertising.

This whole attitude that this is sheer UX incompetence is moronic.

(Now, with respect to the whole accounts management stuff and Google Apps and what not, that seems like technical issues.)
It is not obsoleted because we better understand mental health. It is obsoleted because being mentally unhealthy is commonly regarded as bad, and it becomes to be used as pejorative term having no relation with actual illness. This, of course, annoys those who notice now actual mentally ill people are associated with something bad, through no fault of their own, and that's not nice. So they invent a term that is "pure" and detached from the bad meaning. Which in a short while again enters into use as a pejorative, and the euphemism treadmill continues to roll. It has nothing to do with better understanding.

Of course, there's another way - making the euphemism so clunky and unnatural that nobody outside of professional context would be willing to use it. Thus things like "differently abled".
> Take terms like "imbecile", "Idiot" and "retarded".

These words now have an everyday use. They are no longer used medically because medical science advances and we have much better understanding.

> They were medical terms applied using more or less objective measurements.

They were medical terms used to detain people in hospital, or to deny them medical treatment, or to keep them in prison, or to deny them rights to fair trial or to justice if they were abused or murdered.

> They became un-PC and were replaced by "intellectual disability".

No. They became outmoded and less useful because times change.

> Do you want to live in a world where you have to say that the umpire has "visual impediments"

I don't want to live in a world where it's acceptable to kill someone who has a low IQ just because they have a low IQ. I don't want to live in a world where someone with a low IQ is denied medical treatment. I don't want to live in a world where someone with a low IQ is raped with no consequence. I don't want to live in a world of lazy stupid designers who can't make a website accessible to all. I don't want to live in a hateful, hurtful, world where ignorant bigots can spew their bile and get offended when people tells them they're being an arsehole.
You only need to be able to state that if it is in fact what is observed. Which of course it is not, because "intelligent" is an extremely vague and ill-defined concept.

That's really the root of the problem, I think. People take data like, "blacks scored X percent lower on the John Doe IQ test (1987 edition)" and in turn say "black people are less intelligent". Then when you criticize it, they tell you not to shoot the messenger and they're just reporting what the data says.

This kind of shortcut is pretty common, of course. "People with net worth below X have a higher rate of conviction" becomes "poor people commit more crimes" and nobody really bats an eye. But that doesn't mean it's correct, it just means that people generally don't care.

Do this in the context of race, though, and suddenly people do care. And why shouldn't they? There's a long history of abuse in this area. IQ tests have long been biased toward the culture (and thus, almost inevitably, its majority race) of those who create the tests. People have then taken the results from these tests, concluded that their disfavored race is inherently inferior in some way, and used that to justify all kinds of bad treatment. And of course this is not a solved problem, not by a long shot. Truly unbiased IQ tests are an open problem, and then there's a whole extra layer of exactly what IQ is, why it's worth measuring, and what it leaves out.

By all means, discuss the data. But don't use the data to reach an unsupported conclusion that sounds kind of like data, proclaim it as fact, and then complain about "political correctness" when you get shut down. And think very, very carefully about what exactly the data says, versus what you think it implies, before making factual statements.
Why are lightweight fonts considered "modern?"
Some discussion on the Debian forums (Chromebooks are popular as cheap laptops that can run Linux) about actually using the ChromeOS, quite a few people dual boot [1]

My local Tesco is shifting the cheaper Chromebooks quite quickly.

[1] http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=107358
There are plenty of media where people can still express them, including here. Reddit is popular for example, and still keeps people's anonymity should they choose so. I defend people's right to express their opinions, but it should not be the primary option to do so anonymously IMO - it has acted as a vehicle for people with unpopular opinions to repress those who disagree respectfully in many places online, rewarding overly aggressive people.

It is my opinion that that is a worse reality should it be the norm, and wish there was more pushback. I have developed communities that try to show a better way by example (& that preserve anonymity), but that route requires active moderation, something that would be too time consuming/costly for Google to do IMO (and would likely be subject to backlash from a more anarchist contingent anyway).

In the end, I work with the dynamic that exists in the internet to set a positive example - if people want to abuse anonymity, they are more than welcome to create their own communities that make that acceptable. I will just continue to work in my own circles to provide environments that allow free exchange of ideas with civility, and everyone co-exists merrily.
My understanding was that since Florida is essentially at sea level the water table was high enough that it would not be safe or practical to put electrical wires underground. Could be wrong though.
C++ is large and has lots of history and legacy.
There isn't anything you can do in C that can't be done better in C++.

I enjoy C++, and learned as the language right after Visual Basic 6 at around 2008.

You can easily imagine how things "could" be implemented on top of C in C++.

The most difficult thing about C++ is passing over all the negativity hyped by the "other" camps, and then learning from the right people (who will tell you what things have gone wrong and have their own philosophies of using the language). The new standards of the language feel like they're more scripting than erecting object oriented cathedrals. I enjoy reading topcoder submisssions and editorials on their SRM problems. I believe it can give a perspective on how C++ can be used in a terse and narrow domain.

TL;DR: At any place where C makes sense, C++ has a lot to be offered to be ignored. Try to consider the source when checking criticism. Find legitimate examples of C++ from OSS and topcoder SRM submissions.
London would benefit from a pan-European back office outsourcing platform
Thanks for the links! FunScript looks really neat.
As Martin points out in his response, the Scala version of map isn't restricted to returning a list so (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b] isn't directly comparable. To make a similar version in Haskell you'd have to use a language extension (MultiParamTypeClasses?) and the type signature would be significantly more complex.

It's debatable whether the complexity of the API is worth the additional functionality, but the basic version of map (Data.List.map :: (a -> b) -> [a] -> [b]) is utterly trivial in either language.
Florence explains this to Helix here http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff900/fv00863.htm
That's silly. The name attached to your poat has no effect on your trackability, being logged in does.
I think where this might fork a little is consumer vs enterprise. Dropbox is meant to be understood by a much wider audience than Heroku. For a consumer facing company being easily understood makes you much more accessible to many more consumers. It also makes your service more memorable when your name is: simple, appropriate, and conversation-optimized.

"I'll put it in the Dropbox tonight."

If you treat this as an equation, you want to increase: % of people that 'Get' what you do (off the bat), and % of instances people can easily recall your name, the next time they have that problem you solve.
Chances are, the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit (the USS Essex is an LHD 2) will be responding. One of the main missions of the 31st MEU is humanitarian aid in the event of natural disasters in the Asia-Pacific region. Depending on where all the ships are and what they're currently doing, it shouldn't take too long for them to get there. I was on the 31st MEU back when the cyclones hit in Myanmar, and our response was very quick. Unfortunately, we sat off the coast of Myanmar for about two weeks waiting to help, but the government in Myanmar wouldn't allow us to.
Really, that's quite the problem: the desire for at least one-way compatibility.
Specifically what do you take umbrage with in the case of this bill and the EFF's position?

I'm asking as someone who agrees with your overall point but is mystified about what made you post it here under this article specifically.
Yes, but it's the intention of the teenager what's matter. There's a difference between Mel Gibson talking ill about jews and Sara Silverman or Lisa Lampanelli doing the same.

Another thing I don't buy is that idea that if you use "the N word" you're reviving two hundreds years of slavery, oppression and racisms. Certainly, if someone is racist, he'll use the word with hate. But pronouncing two syllables out loud doesn't transform you in a racist.

I think that most people can discern when you use a word with hate and when you don't. But there's some power in banning in words, in becoming a self-appointed speech police and to attack people by the way they talk instead of the content of their thoughts. I consider more dangerous to make certain words a taboo.

There's an old saying in Spanish: the word "dog" doesn't bite.
Office 365 sends your IP-address by default in the X-Originating-IP e-mail header. See here how to remove the IP from you e-mail header http://community.office365.com/en-us/forums/158/t/20470.aspx
This is slightly incorrect, it's more how Facebook ranks for searching. Those numbers are for search bar ranking of objects (users,groups,etc) you recently and/or most interact with. You can check yourself by typing the first letter of any of those names and that name is probably the first selection in your Facebook search bar.

A better ranking would be to look at communication_rank and observation_rank in FQL (https://developers.facebook.com/docs/technical-guides/fql/)

SELECT uid2, communication_rank, observation_rank FROM friend WHERE uid1=me() ORDER BY communication_rank
Well according to Wikipedia (yeah I know, but I don't feel like searching elsewhere) it may or may not be taken with the meaning "center of the world." And even if it is, it's more of an observation than a boast, since from their perspective they were in the middle of a bunch of other countries like you said. And hey, they call America "beautiful country" so they're not being stingy.
Ripple is a premined, centralized system. You have to depend on the creators benevolence for coins.
I'm glad you asked, this was a nuance of the enhanced tracking rollout I hadn't explored yet and thought they had finally changed. :( (I haven't bought ads since the enhanced tracking rollout) I had read about the mobile side but didn't realize they hadn't expanded the desktop side. My bad.

To atone for my error, I did some poking around and found a good summary hack of the display ads network (AdSense) that gives you some options.

http://www.makeitbloom.com/blog/advanced-mobile-targeting-in...

You can also use the retargeting feature in GA to help convert people once they find you.
http://www.lunametrics.com/blog/2012/07/30/adwords-remarketi...

You can use "device" as a proxy for OS though quite substandard.

A slightly more elegant way to do this is to do a device specific landing page.
http://searchengineland.com/new-valuetrack-features-for-enha...

Given Apple's poking at Android, my sense is that Google doesn't have a real interest in helping Mac People find each other. Sorry for leading anyone astray.

It's also really got me wondering why they persist. I'm assuming it's because they'd make more money this way. You pay for "BS" windows clicks, given Apple's 7% OS market share (non mobile). The same way they closed the tablet arbitrage (you now have to pay desktop PPC prices for tablet.I bet if Mac users gained share over windows desktops that would change, like they had to in mobile.

One way to thwart them would seem to be to focus on paying per conversion, and using retargeting. But I'll let others with deeper mac marketing experience than me, add value here.

Hope this helped.
The real ugly truth is all of our code (mine included) is pretty laughable and bugged.

But I made no actual asynchronuous messaging system that actually can send messages with a 99.999% reliability, and hardly no noticeable memory leaks. So since I haven't coded any better, given that it works and suits my need, I use it.

And since my code is almost correct (okay, there are places where I wish to use an obfuscator to hide the hideous), replacing zmq with something else, should be quite easy.
Powering Actions with Elasticsearch Percolate
My point is fire spreads fast and time to escape or no warning signs in other vehicles, where as Tesla has it designed well.
Yes, my very point is that it is unfortunate that my use cases and personal preferences are not what Kotlin devs consider important. This is not a matter of “Waaaa, they don’t consider me the center of the Universe as I do!”; it's simply the case that my “personal” preferences correspond with reality and safety more closely than do theirs.

A priori, it would be better if they conformed to my expectations; anything less than awareness and deference to the last 40 years in PL research is uninteresting and unhelpful.
I really don't think asking too much of our presidents to try an instill in the public the value of Liberty and Democracy; nor is this some Herculean task. It costs nothing, nor does it require a PHD from Harvard to explain, but it's an investment that will continue to pay off for generations without end.

As for Nuclear Weapons, Al Qaeda obviously does not have the technology to make them, so their safety is almost entirely a factor of international cooperation in regarding their security in countries that do. Such cooperation regarding their most sensitive and strategically valuable weapons requires trust, something that will be in shorter supply if we continue unhindered economic and political espionage.