skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
For all its goodness I think it was a mistake to make syntax changes and other non-backward compatible changes in Python 3.

My current projects are currently compatible with Python 3 and it's my main target whenever possible (depending on the dependancies).

But all in all this is one of these little things that make developping in Python less fun than before. This is not my preferred language anymore.
Show HN: Thank you for a wonderful year
That's nice. I don't care.
People who experience personality conflicts with each other can be civil to each other and interact in a professional capacity. Not being able to do that might be a problem, but we're all adults here.
"Or, that our policy on not doing a secure delete by default isn't something you agree with?"

This one. You have chosen a default that fails deadly. It's like designing a car that explodes when you turn it off. Oh, there's a button over here you can push to disable the explosion feature. That doesn't really make it better.

You've created an option that can and will deeply screw many of your users. The mere existence of the option is not wrong by itself. But the fact that it can and will so easily screw so many people means that the option needs to have lots of flashing warning lights around it and it needs to be on by default.

I just checked out the "Destroy" tab for my droplet. There is absolutely no, none, zero indication that failing to check this box will allow the next person to occupy my spot to read all of my data. Here is the exact text:

"This is irreversible. We will destroy your droplet and all associated backups."

"Scrub Data - This will strictly write 0s to your prior partition to ensure that all data is completely erased. Estimated Destroy Time: 11 minutes 22 seconds"

I would expect "destroy your droplet" to mean that the data gets destroyed. I would expect the "scrub" option to be for paranoid people worried about the FBI seizing your equipment and using electron microscopes to extract residual data. At no point does anything in here give me any expectations that the default is "hand over all of the data currently on the VM to the next random stranger who walks in the door".

Do you really speak on behalf of DigitalOcean? If so, you need to get your head straight fast, because this is not even remotely acceptable. You cannot defend the current practice, because it is not defensible. If you don't understand why that is, you need to sit down and think about it until you do.

Right now, as a customer of yours, my thought is this: if you think this isn't important and doesn't need to be called out, what else have I missed? What other crazy data leaks do you allow by default with the defense that I could turn them off if I cared? I hope and assume the answer is "none", but now I'm rather worried.

I can kind of sort of understand how one might end up building a system like this, thinking that it was a good idea at the time. But I cannot understand at all how someone could possibly defend it once it's pointed out that it's terrible.
plenty of them on the AppStore.
have you checked before posting?
https://itunes.apple.com/app/id405041233?at=11l6Tr
It wasn't until 3.3 that py3 was really palatable. Easier to support unicode running the same codebase in py2 and py3. yield from -- look, a py3 feature worth porting for! 3.3 was released in late 2012, and so, we can probably shift this "5 year" expectation to start from there.

In fact, it's 3.4 that really starts to wet the beak with asyncio and enum. I'm not sure 2.8 needs to happen, if 3.x simply, and finally, has good reasons to get on board.
Yep. It's baffling to me too.

http://www.library.drexel.edu/blogs/newsevents/2010/01/08/ta...
Your post is bullshit, and you are attempting to manipulate us.

Your argument comes down to this: people should not be reminded that war is hell. That's it. That's the entire crux if your poorly considered post.

If you're a pro-war sociopath, then you have a point. If you prefer a well-informed populace, then you have no point at all.

Worse than that, you're attacking people who can add additional perspective solely because they're not providing every perspective simultaneously. It is morally disgusting that you claim The Guardian damaged the search for truth by adding counterpoint to existing propaganda efforts.

It is truly sad that you felt the need to attack The Guardian for writing this. You are eloquent, but deeply misguided.
Developer winocm releases iOS 6.1.3+ untethered jailbreak for all devices
I think parent was saying that you can't run a single daemon on machine emacs-host and launch clients from needs-editing-a-conf-server1...n (possibly with x11 only running on different host workstation1)?

You seem to be running n daemons on needs-editing-a-conf-server1..n and launching n clients on each of these, and "just" transporting the display(s) back to your workstation via x11 forwarding over ssh.

Henche - either run "redundant" daemons or suffer long-ish startup times.

How much resources does your typical long-running daemon consume?
Yeah totaly, I'm working on a game right now that has been in development for 8 over years! But again, some amazing stuff is built at game jams though most need at least a month or so of polishing.
My problem with sleep in general is that I need about 8 hours to function and to get the most out of exercise and studies, but I have a much easier time getting up if I'm sleeping only 6 hours or even less. Haven't found a solution to that.

But if I allow myself to get up after 6 hours of sleep a combination of having drank too much before going to bed and not closing the blinds works best. I know that sleeping in perfect darkness is supposed to be a good thing. But getting up in the darkness doesn't work so well for me. The need to pee is a strong motivator as well.
Chelsea Clinton's Wall Street gig was at a hedge fund, not an investment bank.
Anton: A Specialized ASIC  for Molecular Dynamics
I feel frustrated too, but I think Ubuntu 14.04 will tip the scales (it ships with Python 3 by default).

Also, the core devs got at least some things right with Python 3.3 by making it a lot easier to write code that targets 2.7 and 3.3 at the same time. In retrospect, that should have been the focus much sooner.
Macros enable you to replace things at compile time.

The C preprocessor is a powerful and awesome thing by itself and I miss it when it's not available in other languages. It enables you to do things like pass line and file numbers automatically. For instance -

#define log_message(format...) _log_message(__FILE__, __LINE__, format)
void _log_message(char* filename, int line, char* format, ...);

And there's nothing inherently wrong with #define for frequently used magic numbers. They have the advantage of being pre-processed out rather than being separate variables at compile time.

Macros are also useful to simplify little repeated chunks of code that don't really need their own function.

I've not often seen macros used to try to speed up code.

--edit-- I don't know how long you've kept up with your C, but what you've realised after a year with the language doesn't seem as obvious to me after 15.
It's fascinating to compare this with ruby 1.9, released around the same time, but seemingly with a slightly better cost/benefit ratio, having nice new features and also significantly improved performance, and with ruby 1.8 being deprecated with a lot more speed and force. It got everyone to actually make the switch, and then ruby 2.0 came along, largely compatible and with a more improvements, and now ruby 2.1 seems to be an even smoother upgrade from 2.0.

The ability of the ruby core team to manage not just the technical aspect of making the language better, but smooth the transition in a way that actually succeeded in bringing the community (and even alternate ruby implementations) along with them, hasn't been given nearly enough credit. You could analogize it to Apple with OS 9 -> OS 10.9, versus Microsoft with people still running XP
> However, I was watching something on TV just yesterday about getting women into programming. My perception is that trying to get more women into programming is a much more popular issue than getting men into nursing.

Sure, you see it on TV more because it better fits a canned mass media narrative about the progress of women into male-dominated, well-paid, percieved-as-high-status professions. That doesn't mean its considered more of a focus in the relevant professions.

Its a mistake to assume that the frequency and intensity with which something appears in the mass media is somehow a reliable guide to anything about its significance outside mass media.

> If we kept up with industry news would we observe more "get women to be garbage collectors" and "get men into preschool education" news?

Garbage collectors I'm less sure of, but, yes, getting more men into most all levels of secondary-and-earlier education is a not-insignificant issue.
Google certainly has a monopoly on search, which is why it is being investigated for its practices by the EU. If I am using the word incorrectly, then so is the EU, but since the term is defined by policy, that isn't possible.

If you think the word monopoly means that there is precisely zero competition, then you are not using the word as it is used by economists, governments, and the law.

Monopoly is defined by effective competition, barriers to entry and market power. Google qualifies.
I used to have an R script to generate csv's containing random time series. I could specify the frequency of the time series to my functions.
"I never borrowed your saw, and anyway it was broken when you lent it to me."
Awesome, contributed to the poll! Thanks!
Rename it as something else. Call it Cobra or something. Also remove all backward compatibility features. Maybe by taking away it's association with python, it will have a better chance.
How about a third scenario that may be closer to the situation we have been facing in the US:

Imagine you are stranded on a desert island with 3 other persons and the only source of food is coconuts for which you must climb trees. The 4 persons are you (adult 1), who is worse at climbing trees than your fellow cast away (adult 2). There is also child 1 who adult 1 is responsible for, and child 2 who adult 2 is responsible for. Both child 1 and child 2 have zero experience climbing trees and must depend on the adults. Adult 2 climbs the trees before you, takes most of the coconuts, and hoards them. When you ask him for some coconuts for both you and your child, he says you should have practiced climbing more as a child.

Whether his actions are considered fair or unfair, should your child have to suffer for your own lack of tree climbing experience?

Additionally, if you look at this in terms of evolution, is it okay for adult 1 and child 1 to die off, while adult 2 and child 2 to prosper, effectively moving towards a less diverse population?
I am going to do it everyday, starting Jan 1st
I do respect the strength of personality to speak your mind.
My habit: Once on workday and once at weekends. 1-2 hrs gym and 1 hr sauna/wellness. I am a coder with 8,5 hrs work on an average day.
I go bouldering (indoor rock climbing) at least once/twice a month. I want to go more, but it works out quite expensive. I used to do a lot of cycling (road bike) but had to sell my bike.

Really I want to start going to the gym. I'm 6ft 3", 10st and a terrible BMI - which is to be expected. Now that I've started putting on a bit of weight (I was 9 stone, regardless of what and when I ate) I feel like I could be doing more to turn it into muscle and actually tone myself a bit.

It's a thing for me to do throughout 2014 I think.
enthusiasm would be very useful, for example, python won't ever be SO #1 because it's an easy language to develop in. Java will consistently "beat" it in that regard due to its dumb things like turning List<String> into String[] having the dumbest syntax ever. The SO rank is two factors combined in a way that is very difficult to separate, usage and difficulty.
Haha actually that makes sense with the loan. Didn't think of that.

"If you take this therapy, you will be paying me a grand a week for the next 80,000 years. Sign here"
I never exercise, but I play drums for a couple hours multiple times a week and I walk everywhere.

I don't call it exercise because it's all a lot of fun
Numpy supports Python 3 since version 1.5, released in August 2010. Ubuntu 12.04 and the current Debian stable carry this version. Scipy supports Python 3 since version 0.9, apparently released in 2010 as well with releases in the current Debian stable and Ubuntu 12.04.

‘Just now’ is hence a bit too late, but it is correct that many users have only been able to use Python 3 some four to five years after 2008.
The Best Pieces of Advice for Entrepreneurs in 2013
http://www.generatedata.com/

It allows for many export types.
I do 30 burpees a day and a seven-minute workout. I will often do some dips between my kitchen stools also.
> ... there seems to be a fair amount of confusion
> about it on the web.

There's a lot of confusion on the web about this. And while it's true that this is largely a small technical point, this is an area where small technical details can matter.

> It's true that TSP is not NP complete because it is
> not in NP, because it is an optimization problem, not
> a decision problem.

So we make it a decision problem by saying: "Is there a tour with cost less than K?"

> ... if you have an algorithm that can solve any NP complete
> problem in polynomial time (ie. P == NP) then you can use that
> algorithm to solve TSP (actually any finite optimization problem)
> in polynomial time.

And, roughly speaking, you do that by binary searching on the cost of a solution. Set a lower limit of 0 and a random upper bound. Keep doubling that till you get a solution, then binary search.
That does not actually state anything that indicates they will just hand over all of your data to the next random stranger.
It is absolutely a DO problem in two ways: 1) they default to bad behavior and 2) their UI does not make it at all clear what the consequences of that bad default actually are.
i'm a competitive bodybuilder. every day
This kind of thinking is anathema to SJW ideology. Example: https://twitter.com/eassumption/status/416999484581625856
It is good to give users the choice. It is bad to default to the dangerous choice. It is even worse to not describe the bad consequences of the default anywhere.

Nowhere in the DO UI for destroying a droplet does it indicate that they will leak all of your data to the next customer if you don't check the box.
Me too, but starting Jan 2nd.
Could be. But there is the crux: A language should guide the programmers to good use of the possibilities of that language. If it does not, what worth are they?

You also must define "idiomatic Python" or "idiomatic C#" first. I would recommend, that you first write your post and than commence with the discussion.
Remotely - Find Remote Jobs in Design, Development, UX, and more
Well, apparently Perl 6 is a "spunky little sister" whose spokesperson is some kind of comic butterfly character.
I don't want a foreseeable death, and I don't think you or anyone else should be able to impose one on me.
Platform agnostic multi-factor authentication API
GNU/Linux distros have been shipping Python 3 for ages now.
crossfit 1-4 times a week depending on work
"Every single person" in the world has not been moving up. ;)

In the USA, there's a lot of data that says both absolute & relative mobility is getting worse:

> The income of a typical working-age family grew considerably in the late 1990s. Around 2000, it stopped growing. In 2007, it started falling.

and

> An under-rated source of income growth for the middle class in the last 30 years, in face of slow-growing hourly wages, has been increased hours and the rise of dual-earner households, where the mother and father supplement each others' income. As a result, household income might actually understate* the middle-class crisis by counting the rising participation of women.*

Source: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/12/a-giant-...

Because "absolute mobility" uses household income as a barometer, it appears on the surface that households are doing better. But we've actually added a lot of dual-income earning families since 1950, which skews those stats. In reality:

> The typical family with a stay-at-home wife/mom has seen incomes grow only 1 percent, after inflation, since 1980.

> The good news here is that women have the degrees, the means, and the freedom to work when they want to. The bad news is that the Typical American Family has only seen rising incomes in the last half century because of working wives.

Source: http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/10/how-amer...
The opposite of "securely wipe all the data" is not "give all of your data to the next customer".

The GUI does not indicate anywhere that data is leaked if you don't check the box.
Right. In fact, in my opinion, the most important thing a conference provides is the quality of the peer-review and the selection process. So a conference that claims peer-review, but does not provide it, is really taking your money and not providing value for it.
I like Python 3. I prefer it. It is better to program in than 2.x. Iterators everywhere, no more unicode/encoding vagueness, sub-generators and more. It is a much better language and it's hard to see how it could have evolved without a clean break from its roots.

However it has been interesting to follow over the last five years. It has been a sort of, "what if p5 broke the CPAN," scenario played out in real-life. Breaking compatibility with your greatest resource has a painful trade-off: users.

Everything I work on is not even considering a migration to Python 3. OpenStack? A tonne of Django applications that depend on Python 2-only libraries? A slew of automation, monitoring and system administration code that hasn't been touched since it was written? Enterprise customers who run on CentOS in highly restrictive environments? A migration to Python 3 is unfathomable.

However my workstation's primary Python is 3. All of my personal stuff is written in 3. I try to make everything I contribute to Python 3 compatible. I've been doing that for a long time. Still no hope that I will be working on Python 3 at my day job.

Sad state of affairs and a cautionary tale: "Never break the CPAN."
I'm also worried about their increasing move towards taking Android at least partially back proprietary. The original idea seemed to be an open-source platform, which is a nice way of spurring innovation. But they've slowly been replacing components with proprietary Google versions, which is making the core open-source OS less and less maintained. My guess is that the goal is to make it more like a Darwin/OSX situation, where the core OS is open source but lacks all the interface elements and is not really usable as-is by competitors. What would motivate that? One guess is that they're more worried nowadays about Kindle-type competitors than they used to be, devices that build on Android but hook into an alternative (non-Google) cloud ecosystem.

Some examples: Messenger seems to be in the process of being phased out in favor of Google Hangouts; Gallery and Photos duplicate functionality to such an extent that I suspect one of them will not last; even the main keyboard is no longer open source, as Google has more or less abandoned the default Android keyboard and is rolling all improvements into the default-on-Google-devices Google Keyboard app.
There's not as much profit as you'd think. And a lot less than lower priced phones from other manufacturers. Plus, the carriers have to assume a ton of risk by agreeing to buy millions of iPhones whether they sell or not. Verizon had an estimated shorfall of $12-14 billion dollars as of July of iPhones they'd have to buy even though they didn't have the sales to warrant it. Not sure how that would up.
OS X (at least the version on the Macbook I got from IT) also ships with a horribly outdated Bash, so I don’t think it healthy to put it up as a standard for anything…
From wikipedia:

"The second law is an empirically validated postulate of thermodynamics" [1]

And

"Empirical evidence (also empirical data, sense experience, empirical knowledge, or the a posteriori) is a source of knowledge acquired by means of observation" [2]

So, it is a law by observation after all.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_evidence
Unfortunately, medical technology is not even remotely advancing exponentially. The rate of new drug approvals is decreasing (and costs are rising); we are appallingly bad at turning biochemical knowledge into medical technology.

Now, I know you weren't talking about drugs as such, but they are a reasonable proxy for our ability to understand a biological system and then intervene. And the state of the industries that try and do this, strongly suggests that we haven't got a clue.

Just to lay the pessimism on a little thicker, we may even be lucky to stay where we are, given the spread of antibiotic resistant bacteria.

Never mind immortality, I'd be happy to know that we still have working antibiotics when I roll up to hip replacement age!

edit: My grammer sucks.
How about a simplification: chance that computational technology will increase by 3 orders of magnitude in 30 years: almost 100%. Chance that increases in computational power lead to increases in biological breakthroughs: 100%.

Therefore, we should not measure the current rate of anti-aging research but rather project it exponentially in some fashion to match the likely trajectory. This has been true for DNA sequencing for example.
Where Snapchat’s value truly lies.
This is a cute story about over-engineering and thinking outside the box to find the simplest solution, but anyone with manufacturing experience can tell you that many factories have compressed air lines at each machine, and frequently use it to blow bad parts off off of a conveyor/feed rail.

American manufacturing factories are actually homes to tremendous ingenuity and practicality. To an outsider they may seem loud, dirty, and disorganized, but the engineers inside routinely deal with issues like "how can we catch bad parts before they roll off the line, using spare parts, scrap metal, and a $20 budget?" I have seen some amazing Rube Goldberg feeding systems that can outperform expensive laser/optical/diverter gate packages.
I definitely feel we have not read the same text. It is clear to me that a problem that can be addressed by a 8M$ or by a 20$ solution, the 8M$ can be ruled as 'over-engineered' and very inefficient in this particular context. I don't see how this inefficiency is promoted by such a story?
is the eye test baiting me?!

INSERT INTO EyesTest VALUES('al', 'Male', 2, 1, 2, 3, 2, 2, 1, 0, 3, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 2, 3, 2, 0, 1, 1, 1, 0, 2, 0, 3, 2, 2, 3, 0, 1, 1, 0, 3, 2, 3, 2, 22, '207.216.200.118', '2013-12-30 17:22:41')

I bet you they've long since lost their database.
So then all time is "free time."

Excellent.
This is primarily a political problem. Talk to people who really understand the capabilities of state-level adversaries--applied cryptographers in particular--and you'll invariably get "well... what can you do?" Entities like the NSA are too powerful for you as an individual to defend against.

Crypto will help, and it will put a dent in dragnet surveillance, but it is dangerous to think we can "just put SSL in everything" and be done with it.
Coming 2014: A Smarter, Interconnected You
Actually, there are some minor performance increases, but there are tons of minor improvements, and the new async framework landing in 3.4 is very exciting.