skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Imgur is set up to have almost the same structure and features as reddit. Users have images, there are sections duplicating the subreddit structure, images have comments, comments have votes and voters. That's a lot of related info that isn't strictly hierarchal, and I believe you'd run into the same problem described in the article - the need to manually do joins and associate types of data in your application code to ensure consistency and lack of duplication.
What if this was not from the publicly available list? How would they even know that the password used by the user on Facebook is the same as the password used by the user on Adobe?

They would need to have the decryption key to be able to verify that ...
It's funny to see you being so naive as to think that there are forces in politics that have gone to great lengths to ensure that peaceful dissent has no substantial effect.

There are the same organizations that have conspired in the murder, shaming, and threatening of peace activists across the whole world. What makes you think you are invulnerable from this?

Do you remember the case of the DC Madam, the lady who was being charged of running a prostitution ring in DC, who "committed suicide"?
Remember Iran-Contra?
Do you not see what they do against whistleblowers? Do you realize the only reason why you're hearing about Snowden is because he is the only dissenter out of many who actually got and change done? And this is because he went public so that, unlike all the poor saps who "believed in the system", and "went through the proper channels", the NSA had no choice but to do some damage control.

Do you remember the goverment talking heads calling Snowden "incompetent"?

You can go and believe in whatever you want, but the people who do that believing are not the ones doing positive change right now.
Why wouldn't it be a good idea, assuming we had tools capable of scaling indefinitely? We currently split large codebases into "repos" that are effectively isolated even though they're logically connected, and it would often be useful to do, say, atomic commits across them. This seems like a limitation of our current tools, not an intrinsically good thing.
It was accidental too. I was just showing my coworker something and I have a bad habit of highlighting stuff I am reading and randomly clicking on text, and I noticed that column was selected to be sorted. It blew my mind, this was in an SSH session logged into a remote server.
I am from Negros Occidental, Philippines and we were spared from the destruction of Haiyan. But me and my family are continually praying for more help for the victims especially for those who lost their families. We are also thankful for people from other nations who extended their help. Filipinos will stand up and rise again! God bless us all!
This is the basic cooperation vs. competition problem. If you have competition then people spend a lot of resources fighting because what matters most is being faster than your friends, even if that means working to slow them down. Whereas if you have cooperation then you get complacency because then nobody has to be faster than anybody, so everybody can sit on their duff.

It seems to me the solution is to rate people against absolute standards, never against each other. The article seems to think this doesn't work because you can't give a large bonus to everyone, but that smells like BS to me. If everyone is legitimately doing an outstanding job then the company as a whole should be doing outstandingly well, which means you should have plenty of money to pay everyone a large bonus. (Unless the metrics you're using are bunkum, in which case there's your problem.) The key is to make it absolutely without individual benefit to sabotage one's coworkers while still creating the incentive to excel personally.

Along similar lines, if you want to deal with the quarterly results bias, average it out. Publish numbers quarterly (or even more often than that) but set compensation based on an employee's five year average, not what they did just now. If you do poorly this quarter then you don't lose $1000 from your bonus this quarter, instead you lose $50/quarter for the next five years. At the same time, you still get a ~$1000 bonus this quarter, and you still want that number to go up next quarter, so you're keeping an eye on that average -- just not doing it this quarter at the expense of next quarter, because the psychological instant gratification of doing that goes away.
> defer inhibits refactoring since moving things to function bodies or inlining function bodies silently changes semantics, and cannot be optimized as easily, because of the dynamic aspects.

As someone who has written and reviewed hundreds of thousands of lines of Go code, I haven't observed this to be the case in practice.

RAII doesn't fit into Go, philosophically, as it lets you trigger hidden functionality on the creation or destruction of data structures, whereas a deferred function can only be run if there's a defer statement there in the code (where you can see it).

In Go, the only way to execute a block of code is to make a function call. There are no constructors, destructors, or any other kind of side effect to allocating or deallocating data structures. This brings a huge benefit in terms of readability and transparency.

Anyway, I'm not sure why we're comparing defer and RAII, because they're generally used for different purposes.
It's a nice example of an interface, and a handy initial resource, but the the features/tech of this site are in no way comparable to the healthcare.gov site as mentioned in another comment.
It's not like this is an entirely theoretical question, or a quaint question from history books. There are people in America who have stepped outside the bounds of civilization.

What do you think should be done with the MDs who designed and supervised methods of torture at Guantanamo, or the torturers themselves?

The people at the telcos who enable mass surveillance are comparable to the Stasi informants. These people had severely restricted career prospects after their roles were revealed.
It will probably not be significantly faster than Golang for this workload.
I will avoid a career in maketing the targets tenagers with the same zeal that I would avoid the plague.
The BitPrice team has been in discussions with the UK government and regulators about Bitcoin for the past 9 months. Although I share many of the frustrations expressed here, I am much more optimistic about the outlook for Bitcoin in the UK.

As a prospective UK Bitcoin exchange, we have managed to secure meetings with the FCA, HM Treasury and Number 10 Policy Unit - in fact we’ve managed to get into Downing Street twice to talk about Bitcoin. At the higher levels there does seem to be a genuine desire to engage with and promote new financial technologies such as Bitcoin, and to increase competition in the UK banking and payments sector.

Educating people is still 99% of the battle – explaining what Bitcoin is, dispelling the myths and spelling out the benefits, whilst not ignoring the risks. The VAT issue is an example of the obvious lack of understanding of Bitcoin in some quarters. We were also notified by HMRC that they consider Bitcoin to be a voucher: "most likely a face-value voucher", on which VAT must be paid. For anyone with even a basic understanding of Bitcoin, this obviously doesn't make sense: they aren't issued by anyone, they don't have a "face value" and they can be redeemed for a wide range of goods and services.
If they insist on using the "voucher" classification, the "credit voucher", which can be "redeemed at a number of retailers" and on which VAT is not usually due, seems more appropriate. Hopefully this issue can be resolved quickly by simply switching to this classification.

The upshot of these meetings is that we do now have a commitment from the Treasury that they will seriously consider how Bitcoin might achieve official recognition in the UK. In doing this the government is seeking input from Bitcoin businesses, for example through the FinTech Challenger Business Workshop that NewFinance organised a couple of weeks ago. Any interested parties can submit comments, which will be passed on to the government, see:

http://files.meetup.com/2243521/RFC%20-%20FinTech%20Challeng...

A common concern expressed by many fintech businesses at this event was the difficulty in obtaining bank accounts and accessing the UK payments network. This issue isn’t restricted to Bitcoin businesses – at the moment it is almost impossible for any money service business to obtain a bank account in the UK. The current lack of recognition of Bitcoin by financial regulators doesn't help the situation, but it is a wider money laundering issue.

Overall, I am optimistic that the UK will take an enlightened approach to Bitcoin, and that banking and tax issues will be resolved soon. London has become so dependent on the financial services sector that it simply cannot afford to ignore such a revolutionary financial innovation.

Tom Robinson

BitPrice

www.bitprice.com
Why even look for a distinction between software and hardware when it comes to "difficulty"?

Regardless of whether a system is software or hardware: simple systems are easy, complex systems are hard.

The more complexity, points of interaction and levels of abstraction you add to either type of system the more difficult it becomes for any single person to keep track of it all.

Writing a JavaScript form validator is easy, writing a full featured bare-metal OS is hard.

Designing a simple LED light circuit is easy, designing a modern CPU is hard.
You speak as if the mathematicians are proposing something illegal......

They're considering a perfectly legal route. Legal, and also most likely more effective than, say, sending letters to senators.
>I don't know whether this is common in other industries, but at top American law firms, salary raises and bonuses are lockstep. That means everyone gets paid based strictly on seniority. At many firms, this even carries through the partnership ranks.

This is really only true for the associates any more, and it's a source of a lot of frustration. Mostly, I hear complaints about how either senior associates or junior partners are "carrying" the senior partners in some cases because their billing rate and total hours billed is grossly disproportionate to their income. Also, while salary might be locked based on which year an associate is in, there are all kinds of games played with which year associates get slotted into, especially if they move laterally between firms.

I don't agree that lock-step systems increase cooperation; if anything, they turn competition into a winner-takes-all game because they're generally associated with a strong "up-or-out" culture where you either get promoted or culled over time. That's not likely to encourage cooperation between peers.
I hate it when people inject their own political bias into my statements, thereby misinterpreting them before they proceed to knock the strawman down. It's such a waste of time for all involved.

That statement included no specific reason for widespread adoption. I merely said that if people wish to use bitcoin for whatever reason, then I hope that they succeed. Whether they use it for convenience (the many) or for principle (the very few), I care not. Their reasons for using it are irrelevant. What matters in the long run is that consenting adults are allowed to do as they wish without interference from meddlesome third parties. That is all.
> As someone who has written and reviewed hundreds of thousands of lines of Go code, I haven't observed this to be the case in practice.

Sure, a lot of suboptimal design decisions don't cause problems in practice. That doesn't change the fact that they're suboptimal, and in this case lead to worse performance.

> RAII doesn't fit into Go, philosophically, as it lets you trigger hidden functionality on the creation or destruction of data structures, whereas a deferred function can only be run if there's a defer statement there in the code (where you can see it).

I'm focusing more on RAII as implemented with "scope" in D; whether stuff runs explicitly or implicitly is an orthogonal design choice (although I prefer implicitly running code since you need finalizers anyway in any GC'd language, including Go—so you might as well embrace it). With the "scope" statement you also always have to explicitly call the destructor, but in a lexically scoped way.

The main thing I find suboptimal with "defer" is the choice of dynamic mutable state as compared to lexical scoping.

> In Go, the only way to execute a block of code is to make a function call. There are no constructors, destructors, or any other kind of side effect to allocating or deallocating data structures. This brings a huge benefit in terms of readability and transparency.

http://golang.org/pkg/runtime/#SetFinalizer
I know I like to unwind at the end of the day by sitting back with an alcoholic beverage and reading through a nice mixed set of song lyrics.

This rationale would prevent providing a cast list for a movie, because you're publishing the casting agent's work without paying them anything.
Automated Bitcoin Escrow
Actually, across the Go standard library, "defer" is used pretty much exactly for what 80% of C++ RAII is used for: cleaning up locks.
Wasn't this the idea with GWT so many years ago? In GWT's case, it was Java on both sides. I don't believe that it solves the problem and I don't believe Javascript on both sides will solve the problem.

This is a classic "impedance mismatch" like O/R mapping. At the end of the day, there may be no good, i.e. simple, solution. It is inherently difficult and messy.
The Amazing History of the To-Do List
How To Check And Fix Broken Links To Increase Your Blog SEO
Mopidy:  MPD + Spotify + Soundcloud + More for Linux & OS X
I hadn't heard of Amazon Smile until now. Why doesn't Amazon do this for every transaction? Would it hurt business to give 0.5% to charities automatically?
> ... making the NSA and its ilk socially unacceptable — just as, in the days of my youth, working for the KGB was socially unacceptable for many in the Soviet Union.

This could harm that interested 5% as well. At least I hope so.
I just took a look, and if I'm getting this right, it looks about as simple as it gets:

SELECT json_data FROM people WHERE json_data->'age' > 15

vs

db.people.find( { age: { $gt: 10 } } )

Personally, I prefer the postgres syntax. It's much clearer. I also don't buy your claims below about performance. Can you provide a real benchmark? Are you running with the safeties off meaning you lose data?
This appears to be a helper function used exclusively by the standard library to handle file descriptor closing (incidentally, the one issue I've had with Golang's concurrency model).
The OAuth flow is poorly done. It's supposed to be in an iframe/popup. Instead the OAuth window is full frame and I couldn't find the OK button on first look

Also, why does it need posting rights?

EDIT: Got the list of friends. Totally incorrect. People I rarely interact with are in the top of the list.
For years men were dominant in computer science and engineering and I really see no reason why this should change. Only in recent time with this whole third wave of post-feminism certain groups of females think it is their task to overthrow men supremacy in said fields. They are way too emotional for this profession and this results in drama and absolute shit code in production.

I am not saying the author of the article submitted has fallen victim to described wrong doings, I am only saying that at all cost unknown teritorry should be approached with extreme care. You don't know what is subliminally hidden until you realize. Too late.
I Just Presented as a Finalist at Launch Hackathon: Here's what I learned.
I wonder how Lua fits into the picture at CloudFlare with this Go infrastructure, since CloudFlare is also a heavy user of Lua [1] as well and key financial sponsor of LuaJIT [2].

[1] http://blog.cloudflare.com/pushing-nginx-to-its-limit-with-l...

[2] http://luajit.org/sponsors.html#sponsorship_perf
The fact that there's no immediate obvious answer is what makes it by definition clever.
One thing is you need to:

a) explain what this is a little better (how does it work)

b) have an about page, team etc.

c) inform people that when they click on the link they are going to either have to be already logged into facebook or that they will have to login to facebook.

I didn't try the product because I have no clue what is going to happen or what data you will get from facebook about me.

The site was also slow to load. I'm not sure if that's transient but thought I would mention. (You're not using godaddy shared hosting are you?)
It is a flaming title, but an actual good read if you want to know what kind of problems you might have when using Mongo.
Same. I am curious to see what sort of marketing treatment the feature will get come iOS 8 (hopefully 7.X), as it potentially blurs the line between apps and could be confusing if used for deeper integration than presenting a modal.
Coops, internships, design courses (like MIT 2.007), fabrication courses (How to build almost anything), undergrad research coursework, hacking w/ friends.

It sounds like many of these schools do a poor job... which means it's even more important for motivated students to seek out opportunities outside the classroom. College is (largely) what you make of it, not what the default curriculum spoon feeds you.
If I Did Marketing for Foursquare I Would...
True, but then again, the de facto dns library (https://github.com/miekg/dns) is simply amazing for all things DNS, including DNSSEC.
To be fair, the first user of the name was a bit obscure. Surely you don't expect Google to do some kind of search before using the name?
No, it would not, because a cast list is a set of facts and cannot be copyrighted.
> This appears to be a helper function used exclusively by the standard library to handle file descriptor closing (incidentally, the one issue I've had with Golang's concurrency model).

But it's part of the public API. You can add a finalizer to any object. The semantics of Go say that finalizers are run automatically when the GC reclaims an object. So this statement is wrong: "In Go, the only way to execute a block of code is to make a function call. There are no constructors, destructors, or any other kind of side effect to allocating or deallocating data structures." It would be more correct to say "idiomatically, in Go people tend to prefer calling functions explicitly, and 'defer' encourages this."

I think the fact that it's used by the standard library to close file descriptors is actually really illustrative: you need finalizers in a GC'd language, otherwise you'll leak resources. Not all resources are stack-scoped. So implicitly running functions on deallocation is a necessary evil. You might as well embrace it in your language design.
Left it open, and now my laptop fans are spinning and the laptop is hot.
As soon as I first used errcheck, I thought the exact same thing... "this should be included as warnings"
YC companies always have the worst link-baiting lines to get you to click on their job offers. Just put them in a standard template so we know who is looking for what before clicking on the link. I propose:

{company}, {location} ({yc season}) looking for {role}

Role should be the actual function title and if applicable mentioning the language-stack (i.e. RoR, node) the candidate should master.

hopefully PG sees it this time
Fwiw an easy way to get started with Grunt & Bower is to clone Bootstrap [1] and follow the setup instructions in the readme. That'll get you up and running with a well-developed Gruntfile.js, Grunt, Bower, Less & JS compilation, testing, and a number of other things. Then you can customize from there with the huge package repository [2] - separate test and prod builds, htmlminification, etc.

[1]: https://github.com/twbs/bootstrap

[2]: http://gruntjs.com/plugins
Has the word "sherpa" ever been used in a negative context?
You might want to reconsider this approach. I do something similar, but my
remote backup also uses rdiff-backup. While it's awfully tempting to rsync the
local backup to a remote location, it puts your entire backup at risk because
rsync doesn't care about maintaining the state that rdiff-backup depends on. If
your local disk is failing with transient errors, or your local /backup mount
point disappears, the next rsync could mirror the corruption, leaving you
without any backup at all. It's not worth the time savings and after the
initial full backup the network overhead is negligible, even over ssh.
10.5.130.140:80

:)

NOTE:

Ack, is not responding to ping anymore... :(
But the passwords are encrypted (not hashed) with a key that as far as I know, is not publicly available.
Why not render the templates in PhantomJs and have a user account that can push the rendered template back into the server cache. No need to duplicate the work of writing two backends. Or hell, just use Rhino and generate the reified pages on the server.

Also, you can't patent this now.
lol for the first response...."Gone"... made my day.
It may be part of the "public API" solely because it needs to be made available to several different components of the standard library, which is itself at pains to implement itself primarily in Golang.

SetFinalizer feels like a low blow, here.
Update: there's a critical caveat to remote reflogs:

core.logAllRefUpdates must be manually enabled on bare repos!

To repeat: the reflog is not available on bare remotes by default unless core.logAllRefUpdates has been manually set to "true". See [1] for documentation on that config setting.

[1] https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-config....
And the really great thing that happens is when someone says, "Yeah, that code is an ugly hack, and please fix it up, but don't forget good reasons X and Y and Z." Then you get to make it batter without regressing, add the proper tests, and document everything properly, all because you spoke to someone first. :-)
Do/will you offer the contents in web form, or archive them somehow? I generally prefer this format, but even if not, would like to see what exactly I'd be signing up for. Just my suggestions.
Is it a derogatory term for those people? If not, what's the problem?
Issue author here.

I've thought about this quite a bit today and decided style-guides are a necessity, and permissible as long as they are living documents.

GitHub's open-source philosophy makes this easy, so I've forked airbnb/javascript to my own variation and strongly encourage others to do the same.

JacksonGariety/javascript: https://github.com/jacksonGariety/javascript
isomorph(ism) is actually from chemistry, not mathematics.
I had no idea people were using --force daily. I've been using Git for all my version control since 2008, and I don't think I've ever used --force.

Now I'm curious: How does it fit into people's everyday workflow?
including software that vast swaths of the US government uses

This always ceases to amaze me
"But if any healing is possible, it would probably start with making the NSA and its ilk socially unacceptable"

I'm surprised people are suggesting this as a solution. I don't see how creating an us vs them mentality is helpful here given that when you get down to it they are basically just folks trying to make a living and feed their family like any one else. A better and more positive solution could be for a bunch of private sector companies who opposed what is going on here to get together and aggressively poach their employees. It's hard to build an evil empire when all your best engineers have been hired away.
Where to Find Ideas for Your First Startup
I don't see why it's relevant that the standard library as opposed to user code needs it. The standard library is a library like any other. It needs finalization functionality because you always need that functionality in a GC'd language.

File descriptors are just one case of resources that need finalization functionality to not leak: the same applies to GPU textures, X server resources, etc. etc.