skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think it's hilarious. Pure distilled internet. I don't expect it to ever gain actual traction, but it'll stick around for a while. The internet loves a good joke.
So much LULZ
OT but 4MB sure is a lot for a static site.
"During World War I, the German military used a double columnar transposition cipher, changing the keys infrequently. The system was regularly solved by the French, naming it Übchi, who were typically able to quickly find the keys once they'd intercepted a number of messages of the same length, which generally took only a few days. However, the French success became widely known and, after a publication in Le Matin, the Germans changed to a new system on 18 November 1914. [1]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_transposition_cipher#Do...

Courtesy of M. Édouard Snoden.
We can't until we solve the ground-to-orbit delta V issue. You should play more Kerbal Space Program to study the difficulties of doing that.
you ask Moad to do it for you !!
Why would Indian people have to die of cancer, for the profits of the colluding US pharma oligarchy and their captive regulators?

Both India and China are nuclear powers. Between them, half of the world population lives there.

If I were India, I would not give in one single inch. Eventually, all respect is ultimately based on the fear for reprisals. Just as a matter of principle, I would rather press the nuclear button.
It's important to note that he wasn't merely wrong about technology. He was more so breathtakingly wrong about understanding the economics of societies in which freer-flowing information and pervasive connection between people exists. In my view, it's the equivalent of looking at the combustion engine or fire and not being able to project a utility or economy of scale surrounding it beyond drying clothes.
That's like dumpster diving only on planetary scale and no actual dumpsters involved. Wonders of technology and interface designers that don't realize people don't read docs and expect things to work properly by default.

But the dd thing is really embarrassing here, I mean I'd expect some data on shared hardware being recoverable using hardcore forensics, but there are enough levels between hardware and dd that using at least one of them to make old data inaccessible should be both possible and pretty cheap.
To whoever just voted on this, how could you have watched and approved of it in only 11 minutes?
One thing I've found helpful is adding git status information to my command prompt. (For this, I use oh-my-zsh.) I always know what branch I'm on, and whether it's dirty or not.

I still need to 'git status' (which I've aliased to 'gs') sometimes but more frequently I get what I need without it.
I don't think it is hard to think of history as a tree. SCM tools have been doing that for decades (with fewer branches)

Also, git history is more like a DAG.

Also, about that 'grasping in about an hour': way too often, reading some more confuses the hell out of you again. Witness:

You can grasp in about an hour concepts like "index", "staging area" and other that the article mentions.

So, is there a difference between index and staging area? Google "git index vs staging area" gives me top hit http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12138207/is-the-git-stagi..., which does not help me.

Second hit is http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4084921/what-does-the-git.... Again, far from a clear answer.

Further googling/clicking gets me to http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6716355/why-staging-direc....

And no, the git-scm book at http://git-scm.com/documentation did not help _me_ either. It seems to have banned the use of 'index' as the (almost? More or less?) synonym for staging area.

I think a large part of complaints about git are caused by its confusing user interface and confusing terminology. Yes, terminology may have been cleaned up officially, but 'the Internet' is littered with remnants of its history.

Apart from that, one thing that I find confusing about the staging area is that it is invisible. Consequently, there doesn't seem to be a way to build what would get committed on as 'git commit' (do a 'git add X', then edit X. 'git commit' will commit the old content of X, but 'make' will use the edited content of X. Or am I confused again?)
Actually I gave 2 examples of India (as much it dismays as an Indian) and US where these countries have supported so called "Freedom fighters".

The reality is Pakistan or Yemen does not want terrorist on their ground more than me and you. They want them gone too. But the so called drone strikes and random killings make people angry, so there is a grass root support for terrorist organisations (at least in certain part of these countries).
We are in a vicious cycle here and drones don't help.
What's this RailsApp.preload_all method mentioned in this post? Is that a github thing?

Great post btw. I am looking forward to getting some production apps onto 2.1 in the coming weeks and seeing how performance characteristics have changed in the new release.
I also found the paper to be very biased. I use the staging area all the time and like it a lot. Also, I really enjoy git's practical approach.

It seems the authors would find hg to be much more enjoyable. It has a stricter approach ("this is how you should do it, because conceptually this is what things should be"), which some people like.
I completely agree on the technical observation.

My trade is definitely computer science first, but every once in a while, I get in an artsy mood: https://picasaweb.google.com/samuel.jennings/Art.

My philosophy with art is that it is more technical than "artsy," and that the artistic aspect comes from the layers of logic. The more layers of logic applied, the more artsy it appears.

Art is largely a matter of identifying and mimicking color gradients, angles, proportions, etc., and then learning/practicing the various ways to apply the abstract objects to a certain medium (e.g., oil paint on canvas, charcoal on paper, clay for sculpture).

Then you apply additional logic on top of that by learning (and ultimately extending) various "rules" that make something appealing. For example: rule of thirds, color contrast, and studying what stimulates the brain.

There was some study I read about in Scientific American magazine about how people enjoy impressionistic painting because the effort used by their brain to combine the various individual shapes (i.e., thick paint strokes) into an understandable picture is kind of like solving a puzzle on a subconscious level. That can be stimulating and exciting to the brain even though people may not realize it's happening.
> Communist hunters? Because I could have sworn we were smart folks trying to make the world a better place.

No, more like misogynist-racist-capitalist hunters. We HN types are trying to profit. At best grabbing so much money with uninspiring "tech" that some will assume their rightful place as benevolent plutocrats playing SimEarth.

> Shanley never misses a chance to go after Sarah Lacy

Anyone can see for themselves that Sarah Lacy is happy to dish out more than she gets, even using a gender slur against women just trying to talk (scroll down to the video): (http://www.lemondrop.com/2010/09/28/techcrunch-women-in-tech...)

> That's the modus operandae of these people: all it takes is one mistake

And evidence accumulated over time. And HN posters like you making wild accusations without one single cite to back up your claims... which turn out flimsy when you actually research it.

> It's not my fault I'm a white male

But it's your fault that you act this way. When someone mentions how Shanley gets threats of murder, you downplay. Your hurt feelings are far more important to you. At least you "get that anonymous death threats are an issue". (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6983085)

Like the kind that attacked Kathy Sierra and her children. Because she dared speak her mind. (http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/12/4693710/the-end-of-kindnes...)

Yeah, people like you make the world a better place.
Awesome, wall size poster, needed
> The company was still 90% men in engineering, because that's what your talent pipeline looks like.

Same here. I think we've hired all the women who have applied for Dev jobs as we expanded though not because of any positive discrimination (as far as I know, though hiring/firing is out of my remit). All two of them.

I get the impression that women are put off a career in the sort of technical role we need (or, to look at it the other way around, are drawn to other things) fairly early in their education. Those that stick with it are determined so tend to end up making the effort and being damn good, but the rest end up thinking it isn't for them for more so than boys in a similar position. A lot of that is going to be cultural (the "boys toys" attitude mainly) but I see this falling away as personal technology has become much more ubiquitous in the last decade or so with everyone having/wanting flashy phones, tablets, and other techie toys. The proportion of my younger family members' female friends who are specifically/actively interested in a technical profession seems much higher than was the case when I was that sort of age about 18 years ago (though game designer and game tester are the main dreams there, I'm not sure how to tell them about the disparity between their expectations and the level of stress people are under in that part of the industry!).

> I'm sure they were secret sexists. Valleywag would write a scathing article about them.

I think we are pretty much not sexist, or anything-else-ist for that matter, but in a way that might be a problem for some. I don't know if this holds industry wide, but our sense of humour can be quite non-PC though it is applied fairly: all stereotypes (gender, age, country, size, religion, diet, hair, ...) are fair game for a joke and we don't tend to reign it in for any particular group or individual (though we aren't completely heartless in that regard). No harm is meant and no-one has thus far taken offence but I imagine there are some sensitive souls out there who would find it makes for an environment uncomfortable to work in (so one of these days it might cause problems if someone goes too far and someone does take significant offence, I can certainly imagine circumstances where that might happen).
Perhaps it's more telling about how enigmatic the technology is, rather than the person making the awfully inaccurate prediction? Just some food for thought.
It tends to drop your connection on large packs.

Thats more a server configuration thing, many git hosts disconnect slow clients.

I was in Botswana for a few weeks in November and I can relate to that sentiment: git was unusable down there.
Consider this: Someone hands you a SD card when you need to transfer some data between some devices. You think you delete it afterwards, but the SD card has hacked firmware that just pretends its been deleted. You hand the SD card back, and your "benefactor" now has your data.

It's a flaw if people are not aware of it. Most people see things like SD cards and USB sticks as "dumb" storage devices with no real ability to run software, and are totally unaware of the risks they can cause.

It can be a feature if people are aware of it.
if you don't trust yourself to make that judgement, try this workflow:

stage, commit, stash

now your working copy does match the state you committed, and you can test away to your hearts content. if you find a problem, fix it, and commit --amend. keep this cycle going till you're done.

stash pop, carry on working

almost every time i see a criticism of git it's about the way you use it not the tool itself.
A natural monopoly is an economic concept about how high fixed costs makes a single company the most efficient. Regulation of a natural monopoly is secondary to that. A telco might then be a both natural monopoly, due to how the business works, but also have a government-granted monopoly due to licenes etc.
In my opinion implementing the deletion of data in a way that can be forgiven by the user (and even worse API) is a bad idea. It's like burying unexpected clauses in the middle of a 50 page terms and agreements.

It's definitely not illegal or reprehensible, but anyone doing *aaS has exponentially more knowledge than it's users and knows it. Anyone who has once tried not to impose minimum password complexity knows what I mean.

To me it seems that data cleaning should be something you choose as you purchase the service. I understand that cost might be a factor in this particular case, but in then why not communicate about it and make a premium or discount system? It would probably come in good light to both users with sensitive data and those who don't care.
If they want normal internet access they can pay for it. The point is to allow for a cheaper option if people want or need it.
Ask HN: Multi-TSP, no return, known vertices and end-points?
Omertà - code of silence
Ahem. What on earth are you talking about? Krugman explicitly talks about things that he as gotten wrong over the years, the internet thing being one of them and some of his predictions regarding Japan being another. Compare that to almost all other punditconomist, who refuse they admit error. (Btw, one should never rely too much on advice from anybody who has never admitted being wrong. Those people are either liars or deluded.)

In addition to that, he _ALL THE FUCKING TIME_ writes about how recent years have shown that you cannot argue from position (in doing so often joking about "the award") but that your arguments must carry themselves no matter who you are.

So essentially, the Krugman whose blog I read, again and again states the exact opposite of the things that you accuse him and his "adherents" of.
The geek chorus
> what the US doesn't realize

Except that they do realize that (US government and military are not stupid). Everything is right on track on their book.

War on terror correlates directly to political climate for authoritarian policy
Side effect of war on terror correlates directly to produce more terror
More terror correlates directly to more war on terror

It's a positive feedback. They are aware.
Full Ack!

(awesome metaphor btw)
There are plenty of people willing to work for close to nothing. That doesn't mean it's right to pay them close to nothing.
I think Henry Baker had a paper on why generational and refcounting GCs are ultimately equivalent. Couldn't find it quickly, though, to give you a link.
The golden rule of buying a solid Internet business – with Justin Bieber
Good lord this is useful and a huge time saver.

EDIT: Oh I thought you could customize the colours. Still useful but not quite as useful now :(
Possible GMPlib licence violation, what was done in the past 8 months?
Used to use FlowDock and HipChat before that.

Asana is pretty awesome for most uses. For software dev, sometimes go with JIRA on-prem because of its customizability with plugins.

I try to trial a decent app before running with it for a while and not jump ship too often.
I don't think you mean "python" in this list. Anyway, you're right most of the time, though you can end up in the same situation with "optimistic downcasting" (eg, get an Object as parameter, and downcast it to whatever it is you hope the concrete object is an instance of).
You won't find someone playing NBA basketball in their 50's. But you certainly do find highly skilled software developers in their 50's, and much older as well. Intellectual skills are not tied to age in the same way as physical skills.

Yes, women who start in the field in college will be behind men who started in grade school in some ways, but not in others. However, women will catch up by their late 20's if they have the guts and determination to stick with it, because most of the men will have problems with ego that cause them to either stop learning and stick with the bit that they already know, or shift into a showoff mode where they become all talk and no action.

I find that once people get into their 30's it is hard to tell how good they are at software development if they are actually working at it professionally. You need to spend a considerable time with them to be able to rank them because for every weakness that you can detect there will also be strengths. This is why I think that women can catch up to men even though they started a bit late.
I'm probably misunderstanding you, but that is exactly what I'm doing. I have an emacs-server running on a remote server to which I connect via SSH to a tmux session and from there start an emacsclient gui via SSH X forwarding (you might have to set DISPLAY). Works like a charm.
> But it's your fault that you act this way.

And which way is that? I just shared an opinion. Am I not supposed to have opinions? Are there correct opinions?

> When someone mentions how Shanley gets threats of murder, you downplay.

Careful with that "you" there, pal. I have never done, and would never, ever do this. Jesse Noller will remember when I e-mailed him to offer him support when he was receiving death threats over the PyCon affair. Being stalked and threatened by the Internet is no laughing matter and I wouldn't wish such a thing on anyone. In 2005-2006, a younger me was fairly involved in 4chan (your guess is as good as mine) and I know firsthand the depths of anonymity. I'd hold the same opinion of someone and react to that person the same way if they threatened to kill either Shanley Kane, myself, or any member of my family.

So, you had a pretty good point going there and then did exactly what you are accusing me of doing, painting a caricature of me which is easy for you to whack on.
You may be right about python, I don't know it as well as the others.

> though you can end up in the same situation with "optimistic downcasting" (eg, get an Object as parameter

You can, though it doesn't happen much in practice. The complexity of the type systems (generics, interfaces, etc) are aimed in part at always allowing there to be a strong type.
The issue is never being able to complete the fetch or push because of a spotty network.

It goes without saying that source control should not screw up my local or remote copies.
The end result of people taking MMOs way too seriously.
Agreed (also as a DO customer), DO please follow the instructions of Aaron Friel:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6983270

It's a win-win :)
I am talking about one of two typical situations: either you want to commit all your changes to a single branch, but in more than one commit, or, you want to distribute your working directory changes between two different branches. In the first case the problem does not occur, in the second one you can run the tests on both branches after doing the commits, and before pushing rebase if necessary, or you can use git stash --keep-index, and good unit test coverage and CI infrastructure, a good idea regardless, should also help to stay out of trouble. If you keep in your working directory serious changes that are not meant to be comitted at all but used during tests, then Git can't be blamed for that I guess.
I'm surprised I didn't see anyone raise the issue of Data Protection given DO's European presence. This comment below [1] appears to confirm that customer data is mishandled in violation of EU Data Protection law. When you ask 'is it the hosts fault?' I think the answer is a most definite YES.

Surely some lawyer out there took a look at this, so maybe I have missed something, but this looks like a big problem to me.

From my own experience using DO I can say I'm a happy customer and I plan to keep using them. I tick that box when I've used anything remotely sensitive in a VM when destroying it, and leave it empty other times (like when I've made a mess experimenting with something and want to quickly trash & re-create a droplet).

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6983260
DO please follow the instructions of Aaron Friel:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6983270

It's a win-win :)
Concentrating on absolutely ONE GOAL at a time. Crucial for lean growers grasping at a MVP.
If the underlying data is structured as plain-text or JSON, I think that’s the way to go. But I’m specifically thinking of collaborative rich text editing, in which case you’re probably using HTML both as the data format and the presentation/editing format.
> Get rid of the masking stage and you've got the missing link to 3D printing. But that would require nigh magical levels of control over a particle beam.

Quite like in an electron microscope. Ok, most electron microscopes are way less precise than top of line lithography, but there there are some that are more. 3D printing with controlled ion deposition would be expensive as hell, but I see no reason why it could not be done.

Anyway, I was talking about iterating the filter - add - subtract pattern. Our current low precision is the reason we only iterate a few times. With increased precision, we can do it more. Yep, any advance here requires years and a lot of investiment. But they always come through.
It's from Microsoft Research. Research that doesn't go off on a tangent is bad. Focus is for when you know what you want.
ZFS and btrfs both let you do this, as do qemu COW images.
Isn't it actually kind of sad, that such important researches don't get considered until 40 or 50 years later?
But this isn't the war we fought in Iraq or the war we fought against Japan or Nazi Germany. If US declares war against country X and I loosely identify with the objectives I will support it too.

This is war against terrorism. We are not in war with Pakistan. In fact we send them billion of dollars as aides. Then as reasonable Citizen it is my duty to ask - hundreds of billions of dollars we are spending in war against terrorism, are we anywhere close to winning it? Are we even using a winning strategy? If not, why spend american lives and money pretending world police where we should leave it to the UN?
Say you have 2 credit cards: 1 from BoA with USD and one issued by a third party linked to your BTC account. You enter in a grocery store and you need to pay, which one you think most people choose? The rational choice is to use the USD because it's an inflationary currency, while BTC is not.

It doesn't matter. Say you want to maintain a portfolio of 90% bitcoins, 10% dollars. You have $100 USD and $900 worth of bitcoins. If you use the BoA card, you spend $50. Then you shift $45 from bitcoins to USD and maintain a 10/90 portfolio. If you use the Bitcoin card you instead shift $5 from dollars to bitcoins.

The only reason to choose one over the other is transaction costs. I.e., if it costs you $1 to make this transaction, and you expect a $50 USD deposit in the next month, you'll use USD to avoid the $1 transaction fee. If transaction costs are a % of the transaction size, you'll pay with the BTC card (and pay only x% of $5, rather than x% of $45).

Your post still doesn't explain why a deflationary currency will cause a person to stop consuming. Just as we could hypothesize a BTC backed credit card, we can also hypothesize an SPY backed credit card. The mechanics would basically be identical - at the point of transaction, the card company converts from the buyer's preferred asset to the seller's preferred asset. Both BTC and SPY backed credit cards already exist - it's equivalent to getting a regular USD credit card and selling BTC/SPY whenever you want to make a monthly payment (modulo a couple of extra clicks).

Incidentally, your post completely ignores the reason central banks manipulate currencies. The reason has nothing whatsoever due to the distinctions you make between currencies and assets (which, if I'm understanding correctly, is merely liquidity and the ability to pay taxes in them).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_rigidity
Good illustration of a time when a logical argument makes no sense but pointing out the ridiculousness shines light on the point!