skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I agree here - there's no universally "good" sleep pattern. Some people thrive on pushing their minds and bodies to the limit, while others thrive on the downtime that allows their minds to reflect on their own thoughts.

Personally, I get a much greater sense of accomplishment when I can look back at a marathon 27 hour work session and see that, through it all, I did good work. But, more often than not, my work is riddled with errors that I don't see until later. So, I take naps and rest when I can, and try to get work done on an even, if not boring, timeline.
My C code doesn't share heaps. Strict privsep design meaning one heap per process and no threads in favour of "select".
"To start using Twitter, go get the app" - Twitter disables signups from website
Let’s Do It What Are We Doing?
Your power as a user of software is increased by learning how to read documentation efficiently, however.

It's even further increased by being able to read the source, but that's even more costly.
My bad. I confused it with "Practical Common Lisp", which strongly emphasizes doing OOP in Lisp.
To clear any possible misunderstandings, I am not from and I don't live in the US. I was not talking about US-specific governments, agencies or individuals as I believe such phenomena have no nationality.

The "father" example you are giving has been the very exact argument people have against this kind of situations: We don't want any structure to act like it is our father or mother while your daughter (and most daughters and sons) will probably start crying if you tell them you are going to go away from their life.

As a society we have agreed (actively or passively) to a certain set of laws, that should be it. No Uncle Sam or Brother Jonathan.
At first glance, it appears to be doing a lot of UIKIt Dynamics stuff, and that only came to 7.
> OpenGL != OpenGL ES != WebGL

Whilst technically true, WebGL is designed to have API compatibility with OpenGL ES (2), which in turn is based off of OpenGL (2). OpenGL ES 3 and WebGL 2 are beginning to emerge and are based off of OpenGL 3. In my experience shaders that work with WebGL will also work with OpenGL ES 2 and OpenGL 2.1. Equivalent versions tend to use the same concepts. On the other hand, code written for desktop (v3+) won't work on mobile, because the desktop version is one version ahead of mobile (and I imagind that it will be for several more versions).
>Once I hit 50 or so tabs scrolling becomes horribly jerky

That could be a GPU driver issue. GPU scheduling is generally horrible outside the "run a fullscreen game as fast as you can and screw everything else" usercase.
This makes me wonder what the 'next big thing' will be after the internet.

I watched this TedX Talk from Tomi Ahonen and I think he may be right in his 'mass media' perspective.

1st mass media: Print (500 years old) including books, pamphlets, newspapers, magazines, billboards etc

2nd mass media: Recordings (from 1890s) such as music records, videogames, videotapes and DVDs etc

3rd mass media: Cinema (from 1910s)

4th mass media: Radio (from 1920s)

5th mass media: Television (from 1950s)

6th mass media: Internet (from 1991)

7th mass media: Mobile (from 1998)

8th mass media: ?

He makes the argument that augmented reality will be the next mass media and I think he is right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvyfHuKZGXU
They are linked at the hip in many ways. Bitcoin is a speculative asset, but it is also a really well thought out accounting ledger and transaction protocol for that asset. Plus m-of-n transactions, watermarking, etc... lot's of cools stuff.

When people talk about the speculative nature, they tend to sound like Glenn Beck. When they talk about the technology, they sound more like techno-futurists. I like now that economists other than Austrians are getting into analyzing the possibilities. It isn't what the worst bitbugs want to hear (bitcoin taking over all currency and forcing global financial institutions to crumble), it is more contemplating how bitcoin fits into the complex monetary, financial, fiscal, etc world that already exists.
> This continues for 2 days

This thing made me scoff at the article the most. I've written a unix-like OS for ARM 2 years ago as a final project for an OS class I took on campus. There were 20 other people in the class, and all of us forgot to update the IDT at some point. It was a common mistake, so for this article to emphasize it like it's some bug that takes 2 days is just lame.

Imagine if my blog post would talk about my experiences with building an HTML page, and how it took me 2 days to change a <p> element to a <div>. Let's get serious here.

How long will it take the author to write a circular buffer to read and write characters to the UART? A month? That says nothing about the difficulty of the actual task.

You know, when it comes to writing operating systems, I like to think of this quote: "it's hard, it's harder than it looks, but it ain't THAT hard" (I first heard it when the commentators were laughing at Chris Andersen was struggling to dunk in an NBA Dunk Contest).

If you're interested in writing an OS, make sure your primary source isn't some blog post. My textbook was Tannenbaum's Operating System book, and it's a very solid book that I can recommend. Tannenbaum knows operating systems. He's not going to tell you how hard it is. He's going explain all the details to you and, when you understand them, you'll think how easy kernels really are.

Good luck!
> Anyone know of more?

Rust's "tasks" feature isolated memory, and, thanks to the magic of linear types, passing data from one to another is both statically-guaranteed to be safe and is never more expensive than the cost of copying a pointer.
That's very true from both compiler and OS point of view. Intel machine code is so kludgy: variable-length codes, subtle differences in prefixes in different modes, exceptions in register handling all over the place, plenty of addressing modes for memory access, special machine codes for a qualified register (`mov %ax` code differs from `mov %cx/%dx/%bx/...`), more lengthy encoding for more often uses (like `mov (%esp)` requires SIB byte whereas it's not true for all other registers) and so on.

From OS perspective, it's also overcomplicated: switching from real to protected mode is an exercise in doing every action in a long chain properly and in the right order or the whole undertaking fails. Remapping IRQs into interrupts that do not mess with the CPU internal exceptions, weird legacy memory layout with BIOS, a slew of CPU modes (real/protected/PAE/long/etc), crazy format of entries in Interrupt Descriptor Table (where four bits of a pointer may be stored separately from the main part), where bits are often used differently for different contexts; redundant built-in features like poor multitasking support (Linux and other sane kernels try to avoid it as much as possible, but it's still is not possible to go into kernel mode from userspace without filling kernel stack pointer into a TSS entry), memory segments (in protected mode, where a pointer can address the whole virtual memory unlike real mode), four privilege rings (whereas all modern OSes use two: 0 for kernel space and 3 for userspace).

All that does not feel like it should be and often it only gets worse.
Going multiprocess and using IPC doesn't intrinsically eliminate any of the tricky concurrency challenges with multi-threading. Neither do coroutines (goroutines).

When you have multiple processes talking to another then, unless all your RPCs are completely stateless, you still need to orchestrate synchronisation in some form. There's also the problem that in 2013 we still don't really know how to do IPC/RPCs really well, and doing so portably is hard (Notice Mozilla are writing their own from scratch)

It's all very well new languages coming along and solving the trivial stuff (setting up message queues, isolating memory) but very few of them do anything to solve the real problems.
If you're considering a long-term gig, ask about the career path.
Classical libertarians are in the position of arguing that self-determination (the right of a free people to structure their society as they wish) is slavery, and that the object of peoples' political freedom should be circumscribed to a narrow domain handed down by an Inner Party of philosopher kings.
"Copying doesn't take someone's work from them, he or she still has access to it."

Understood, but as I guess I didn't state myself very well, I personally choose that it's theirs to control distribution of as well, so much as they're able.

I always think of it in a 'tragedy of the commons' sense -- what if everybody did it? What would happen then? And in the case of many of my favorite artists, if everybody pirated their work, they'd be insolvent, and likely stop making my favorite songs.

In similar comparison, what if I stood on your yard? You still have your yard. I haven't taken anything from you at all. I'm just in your yard. What if I invite 200 people to stand in your yard. What if we stand in your house?

Anyway, like I said, it's complicated, and I don't begrudge anyone for where they fall on the particular spectrum, because I by no means have what I consider 'ironclad' arguments that aren't informed by my own bias. That said, I choose to err on the side of respect for copyright.
The moderation glitch
AcronymsAndSlang.com - the best Aronyms and Urban Slang Dictionary
Interesting look at the lower bound that got a lot of bitcoiners angry. The comments are actually pretty good as the initial author did miss some of the finer points on bitcoin to which he responds in the comments.

http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2013/12/fair-price-bitcoi...
It's one of the most widespread scams around: Sell cheap counterfeits.
That fragmentation forces developers to be remained painful and, sucky old API and toolset. What really sucks is Google only advances to newer version, and don't give a shit on old versions - that's what they have been do on their services.

Google can provide something better even on old version of OS, but they didn't because it's annoying, so now all the 3rd-party developers must do clean the shit from Google.

Anyway, if Google is not idiot, they should know he problem is the fragmentation, and will offer some better abstraction layer which can cover any old systems too. And I believe the answer from Google is Chrome. Now I believe the Android - which is out of control - is out of focus in Google.
The Monkey Buddha Archive list is vibrating like crazy in chrome 29 under Linux D:
Post to Google+, Facebook and Twitter simultaneously with Buffer
Step-by-step tutorial on how to add your Google+ page and other social media accounts to Buffer, simultaneously publish your content to all them and schedule posts.
How many monthly active users do you have? Is it currently being monetized?
From the developer's perspective, this is just a shit. Now you have to deal with something like DLL hell in API versions instead of a few of fixed major versions.
Author assumes he's just as "good" as the guy he was talking to. Such optimism may be wrong.
I got an email from LastPass about being caught up in the Adobe breach and it took me one evening, two cups of coffee, and a lot of patience to switch all my passwords to auto-generated strings and enable 2-factor where I could.

Only now in this fleeting moment do I realize that i'm now tied to LastPass's ecosystem.
You are the second person to bring up sociopaths as if they don't match the definition of evil I wrote above. The thing is, they are the very personification of lacking empathy. They believe that their own welfare is more important than anyone else's. They don't see that as evil, they see it as the way of the world.
Stolen cobalt-60 found in Mexico; curious thieves likely doomed
I don't think it's particularly unfair to do it the way that I'm doing it. As 'fair' as it would be to remove the links for display, the counter argument to that is that I'm not infringing the right of free speech of a member of my sites, and I see that as a threat to one's civil liberties that I won't tread upon without being ordered to by the court.
The patent system of today depends on a single core concept left from the 19th century: Government knows everything. It's a 200 year old administrative artifact, removed from every aspect of law, except patents.

The assumption of the 19th century patent system was that everything that should be patented already was patented already; therefore, when you would bring a invention to the office, the correct way to determine whether it is novel is to ask whether it is novel in light of the art already in the office. When asking whether it is obvious, you are essentially asking whether the very semi-skilled form of art knowledge possessed by the patent examiner would have regarded this as a natural extension of the existing art deposited in the office.

In other words, determining a patent comes down to searching the patents offices' own archive. If the old patent texts would be so lucky as to say: "To unlock the cellphone, the user’s finger moves across the touch screen", it won't match when Apple adds the word "continuous". The patent examiner is forced into a position where the least resistance is simply to grant Apple the patent.

This system is not working. The patent office archives do not have every iteration and written description about everything. By certainty, they won't have all the implied descriptions. As such, one should not assume that it is efficient to do an binary determination - 0 or 1, novel or obvious or not - on the basis of the consultation of the patent offices' own administrative records.

The simple change suggested by the article would only remove the ability for companies to brute force a claim phrase so it does not match exactly something in the patent offices' archives. It would not fix the patent system, but it might patch it up so exploiters can't run a brute force method like some script kids attacking web forms and see what string returns a SQL injection vulnerability.
So let's reinvent the pop-up blocker. Nuke the model dialogs and "click to continue to article" pages.
That's the old "there is no morality without God" argument. Just because rights aren't handed down on stone tablets (i.e. natural rights) doesn't mean that there are no rights. In the English tradition, rights arise from the long-standing practices and beliefs of a society. Thus, unless we have a society that embraces savagery and murder in general, it's not "just fine" for the majority to cause the genocide of a minority.

Also, what's worse: a system in which the rights of minorities may occasionally be trampled, or a system in which a minority of philosopher kings by design circumscribes the political self-determination of the majority?
Origami for the web: Fold up the DOM
> seems relatively small, and it seems to be mostly restricted to non-Americans or people that the American public don't really care about.

For what it's worth - that's the very point of the poem, that it always starts with the undesirables, minorities, or peoples to whom the population wouldn't object to. The tacit implication there is that those people were all portrayed as evil first, allowing public acceptance of their abuse.

For the most part, even after Hitler started murdering Jews, he was still enjoyed pretty strong popularity.
Thanks, but I think I will take it as a sign that I should just move on to some other site. The internet is a big place.
I agree. After talking this much about complexity, it is rather simplistic of him to praise Ritchie over Jobs in terms of impact.

On the one hand, I can imagine where the computing world would be without the work that Jobs did and the people he inspired: probably a bit less shiny, a bit more beige, a bit more square. Deep inside, though, our devices would still work the same way and do the same things.

Well, actually you can't imagine what computing world would have been like unless you assume technology develops in a purely deterministic manner, in the absence of any market or cultural influences. There is a name for this line of thinking: hindsight bias[0].

Also, in the presence of this level of complexity and different layers, comparing people's impact would be necessarily subjective and rather reductionist in that, a la computers a bit less shiny, a bit more beige, a bit more square sans Jobs. This would do disservice to the legacies of both Ritchie and Jobs.

[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindsight_bias
Adsense is down
Young Invincibles Spurn Obamacare
You can use an enigmapass or a few of the other browser extensions to avoid this. Also there are iphone and android apps.
How Buffer Handles Team Emails
Surely you can't litigate against someone until you have a granted patent? You can't infringe an ungranted patent - that would be ridiculous in extremis.
What a linkbait headline. It might as well be, "Trolls hate this one weird old trick that could fix the patent system"
Good luck? It's a done deal.
Exposing DirectX to JavaScript would be like allowing the browser to run VBScrpt code. They tried.
Homejoy (YC S10) Raises $38M as It Looks to Expand Beyond Home Cleaning
Should Startups Make Acquisitions to Drive Growth?
Congrats! For GNU/Hurd it took years to achieve it.
"I wish shared heaps would have been a specially enabled feature not the default."

I hope to someday see the language at least do the opposite, have a specially-declarable "isolated" goroutine. In theory, the compiler ought to be able to analyze a goroutine, determine that it shares no data at startup with another process (i.e., nothing in a closure or something), determine that it only communicates via value-passing channels (which courtesy of my previous restriction, can be analyzed by simply looking at what channels are passed in at startup time, and some analysis of the types of the channels), and thus guarantee that at least this goroutine is fully isolated. Pervasive usage of the new keyword I'm hypothesizing would allow a diligent programmer to recover most of the isolation advantages without having to rewrite Go entirely. It also ought to enable some other optimizations against these guaranteed-isolated goroutines, the biggest of which is that they no longer need to participate in a global stop-the-world GC, both in that they can continue running while that is occurring and that they also relieve the global GC from the task of scanning over them.

(In fact all the analysis ought to itself be fully automateable, and the user shouldn't have to declare it; I'd want them to still have the option to make a declaration so the compiler can tell them if they screwed up, though. I don't like such critical functionality being behind an opaque optimizer.)

But this certainly won't happen soon; there's a large enough list of stuff that comes before that.
Why couldn't patents simply expire after x years? 2-3 years would give small companies with groundbreaking ideas enough time to develop and differentiate themselves from their competitors. After that everyone would have equal access to the idea and the world would be a better place as a result.
On Linux (I assume Mac too but haven't tried), you can force yourself to OpenGL ES. In fact, I would recommend it. The nice thing about OpenGL ES is that there is only one main way to do things so it is a lot harder to use something slow like glBegin().
Some people will sell, but in reality this is a great time to buy assuming the price slumps a little.
Did your spelling corrector just mutilate HP-UX?

BTW, as long as it can run X, compile Python from source and run Emacs, I'm perfectly fine.
>Any kind of barter is illegal?

Don't know the situation in China, but that already holds for some countries.

E.g in my country, any transaction over a certain amount of money (not very big), has to be done through a bank to be legal.
I don't think corporates have regular refresh cycle. They don't spend money if they don't have to.
Comparative advantage[1] would be reason enough by itself. Why invest in becoming a good programmer if you're bad at programming if you'll probably never be as super-great at it as someone who found it easy and does it all the time? It would make more sense for you to work on something you're already really good at and trade with them to get the code you want.

In terms of the generalist vs specialist thing I'm reminded of the idea of T-shaped people. Broad general competence to allow you to meaningfully be part of the system, and deep specific competence to allow you a comparative edge.

Always end up wondering what the trade-offs are on how deep the tail of that is compared to the height of the top though.

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage
It's certainly a nice, central place to ask for help. That said, we got by pretty well with mailing lists in the past. Stackexchange did a lot of work to reduce the friction of asking and answering questions, but the basic mechanism was there in the past.
No, they feeling of being verified for what is a very obvious belief, compared to people going for the gold rush like fools...
Microsoft use to be on the OpenGL board (I believe in the 90s?). OpenGL was geared towards scientific development, and we know Bill Gates wanted PC to be gaming platform. OpenGL at the time wasn't good enough, nor were they willing to make the necessary changes to meet Microsoft's goals.

DirectX was born out of necessity, not proprietary greed.

Edit: Maybe its time to take another look at OpenGL - open is better than closed, especially for the multi-platform aspect. But does it have the same features as DirecX? Tesselation, shader programming, etc.
I thought it was pretty funny coming from grandfather sql queries.

The thing is, most of the money/credit that has ever been created (derivatives and such) makes the amount the physical money in circulation a joke in comparison. It's as if some bitcoin enthusiast decided to etch a bitcoin wallet onto gold (because that has "value" since jewellery and electronics have been deemed "valuable") and placed a fraction of a bitcoin on it compared to the total that have been mined so far.

It's also interesting that an ever so fluctuant of a social construct is used to justify existence of one thing over another thing. One would think existence alone would suffice, but I guess that is not what man seeks…
Jupiter is there. Press on the (i) icon and it shows constellations. Jupiter's orbit is shown in green.
At our offices in China almost everyone naps during the lunch break. Lights gets turned off and fold out beds dominate the floor space. Took a bit to get used to when I first got here but it's actually quite nice to get a short nap in the middle of the day.
Works normal here, I guess this is a case of a/b testing (gone wrong, lol)
Yes.

Or same if you agreed to pay in diamonds or gold or jewelry. If the original item can't be recovered (it was sold) I am guessing the worth in USD would be substituted.
"They will, without a doubt, die."

Pretty grim news for the thieves but you can't say they weren't warned. Medical waste has pretty big warning stickers all over, and you'd think the radiation symbol would be pretty universal in this day and age.
Central bankers screaming is a tune to dance to.
'Only nuclear power can provide clean, abundant energy'
So what vendor neutral DB interface do you recommend?

Btw, this is an HUGE step forward, and i can only imagine the amount of pressure well known vendors tried to apply..
ToyMail