skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
That's the problem. I had some suffering from procrastination. Suffering does not exactly helps against it. A self reinforcing feedback loop so to say.

The Now Habit has solid advice. But it takes a lot of effort to implement that advice.

Get yourself together first. Sleep! A minimal Schedule! Rituals! Build a structure for yourself. If you fail here assess yourself and build up a structure for your in small steps from there. This works for me. If it does not work re-examine the situation, adapt. You need a minimal structure before you can even start to working on yourself.

Learn about stress and how it affects your mind and your body.

The basic idea is to switch your mind into a more mindful state so you can act conscious. You don't need meditation for that. That is in my experience too complicated if you have bigger issues. But these mindful moments. Work towards them. Their effects multiply.

Nothing will work without effort. That's a sad truth but a little momentum (even if it is external) can go a long way.

No need to be perfect. No need to aspire some vague world class. Just do the next logical thing that needs to be done. If this thing is to big, divide and conquer. Iterate.

Ah well... honestly would be nice if my words would help. Without being able to act upon it's all just talking and no walking.
I think the idea would be to do something like Racket's approach to Scheme, wherein the vast majority of the language is implemented via macros on a very small core language.
If the goal is to provide liberty, as in letting people choose what to do with the code for themselves, then MIT might be a better choice.

This really depends on whose liberty and what kind of liberty you have in mind. From a GNUish perspective, the MIT license gives you the liberty to... restrict downstream users' liberty to modify the software and distribute the modified versions. The GPL restricts your liberty to restrict other people's liberty in that manner.

Which is more free in some kind of libertarian sense probably depends on what you consider the status of copyright in the first place. If you think the ability to restrict downstream users through the copyright system is a kind of natural right (perhaps by analogy to property), then the GPL is adding restrictions on your ability to exercise that right, and MIT/BSD licenses are freer. If, on the other hand, you think the ability to restrict downstream users' distribution through copyright is an artificial privilege granted by the State, then the GPL constraining your exercise of it is not really a loss to liberty.
>Also I've seen this tried and inevitably rules have to be put in place because no one wants to sit in the big room and everyone wants to sit in the cubes to do work. So you get people arguing about who's work is important enough to require the cubes. Which is not terribly motivating to people demoted to working sullenly, silently, in the big room.

Bingo.

The next time you see an open floor plan office, look at the 'quiet area' or the 'heads down space' or whatever they call it. Dollars to doughnuts the most senior person that doesn't have an office has claimed it as their personal domain.

You end up needing someone to go around and evict people, or a big shared calendar where everyone has to schedule their important work time, or...

The best solution is for the company to provide a private office for everyone and enough space for teams to work in one room as needed. Unfortunately it's also the most expensive solution.
Photography, hello
That's true, but the great-grandparent post was already talking about PPP-adjusted earnings, so that aspect was already addressed when I wrote the grandparent post.
Maybe headphones with white noise is an option? And perhaps also headphones that actively reduce outside noise.
Hiring Wisdom From Kleiner Perkins’ Michael Abbott
Sorry if the "mindset" comment seems offensive. New students unfamiliar with the topic are up against others who have been programming for years already, who (sometimes regardless of opportunity) managed to get programming books from the library/web, found an affordable computer to work on, and despite any/all hinderances made it happen - to wit, a succeeding mindset.

It was a casual comment in a casual conversation. Apologies if it rubbed you the wrong way; please focus on the well-meant point.
Is anyone aware of a particular reason that making a ruby plugin would be difficult? Seems like it would be a lot like the python plugin.
You can state intent all day long, but even while meditating your brain is keeping state. Reference breathing, heartbeat, intent, etc.

I believe meditation is pulling focus into the present moment, but I also believe that moment is far from discrete.
Does a set do so much that you'd be worried about doing it wrong? Not to say having it in a common mature library wouldn't be an advantage, but it's something I'd be pretty sure I could implement and get right the first time.

I'd be more worried about having two programmers write two implementations in the same project with subtly different interfaces, and having different parts of the code use each one. This is a cost and maintenance problem, but that's also a social and communication problem common to all projects.
Your post was crystal clear. Well-written, good points.
No, a single, unconnected atom would be just that. The ideas of solid, liquid, gas, plasma, Bose Einstein Condensate, ect... are defined by the interactions of atoms in varying energy states and degrees of freedom.
The door was invented before the headphone as a signalling technology. I can personally verify it works very well. There is also an elaborate exception handling protocol, knock on a closed door if its a total emergency, but there better be something close to a fire.
Hah! I read that abstract and thought, ok this reads like it was auto-generated. I'm withholding judgement until I've got time later to give it some additional reading.
Bucks:

http://www.davidco.com/organizations/trainer-certification
Mocking environment variables with Browserify
True, but this doesn't fix the comfort factor. It also doesn't change that headphones are just a bandaid for the core issues which are excessive distraction and ambient noise.
It is not that meditating disables anything; rather, meditation consists in observing consciousness in a way that is orthogonal to these things. When meditating, sometimes (often!) you are remembering things, but sometimes you aren't. And in fact what you come to realize is that this is also true in daily life: there are many, many gaps during the day when you are not remembering or thinking about anything. According to your question, wouldn't you just immediately forget what you are doing and stop in the middle of your day? Well, no, you don't, and you can hypothesize as to why (unconscious processes or whatever) but the point is that unconscious processes can be explained without hypothesizing consciousness (isn't that like what a robot has?)

All I can say is, try meditating sometime and you will see. (I don't recommend mantra meditation, but rather something more like Vipassana or "mindfulness" or any meditation that is not about distracting your mind by keeping it busy).

When you become comfortable with meditation, you become very aware of what your consciousness is doing. You gain a palpable sense for the present moment. Once you have that, it makes a lot of these kinds of questions unnecessary (or at least the questions become very different in nature). If you don't have this taste for the present, then asking/answering questions like this is like trying to explain colors to a blind person. It just doesn't work because most of the questions are about things that don't really have anything to do with consciousness.
Very nice set of technical books. I own at least 60% (some are about 20 years old).

My 2014 goal is 10K pages read not including technical or maths. This year I will keep accurate records and keep a burn down chart to make sure I reach my goal. Last year I had quickly fallen behind and keep poor records (a read stack pushed around by a young child.)
I find it myself quite confusing. I wonder if someone can recommend a good book on the subject too.
This isn't intended for people interested in other languages; if you like CoffeeScript, certainly use it. I really like ClojureScript myself. But there's a lot of reasons you already need a build step for JS anyway (especially for client-side), and this gives you a lot of power without having to completely switch languages.

It's worth noting that sweet.js is a robust macro system grounded in academic research (the core of it from the Honu paper). That CoffeeScript system is a bit of a hack and its flaws would show it the whole community started using it (I don't have time to go into this right now, but things like hygiene, etc are really difficult).
Microsoft beats Apple for king of the fanbois
I actually wrote a bitset implementation using math/big: https://github.com/kisielk/bigset
I would suspect those environments to be much too noisy for that to work.
Not even an estimated time schedule. Not like it's gonna suddenly drop 47% employment next year. It would be a slow process of replacing laborious jobs to intelligent jobs. Adapt and survive, isn't that how it suppose to be?
You can't apply normal functions to monads? Since when? Or what is a 'normal' function?
A Giant e-Ink Digital Clock Powered By a Tiny Watch Battery
>I suspect (and would like to see the stats) that the USA has a higher mortality rate below age 40 than other western countries but that it levels out after that

The USA has a lower than average life expectancy at age 65, and the life expectancy has also grown less than average for that group, according to the OECD[1]

EDIT:
>But is life expectancy the end all and be all
I agree there. The same document includes a "healthy life years at age 65" (only for European countries though), but it is arguably a much less objective measurement and hence less useful.

[1] http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/8111101ec066...
I have to say, if we're the things rendering this universe, it would be a helluva lot easier to code something similar up over coding up string theory.
Just installed and tried all the necessary packages, but for some reason it simply doesn't work. Here's a screenshot: http://cl.ly/image/180b0k3X332g

I'm using a retina macbook pro 15 inches
The Lisps in which this concept has its heritage call that step "macro expansion". Granted that that won't happen properly if you use script tags to load a file of Javascript with macros -- but consider, for example, the possibilities inherent in making macro expansion an integral part of the loading process carried out by a library like Require.js. Macro expansion tends to be a lot lighter-weight than compilation does, because it's a simpler transformation; there's no obvious reason why integrating it into Require, or a similar library, should be particularly difficult to accomplish.
Mercurial is the new FreeBSD.
Is technology the problem, or public policy?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/25/technol...
Of course, nobody wants to be a corporate drone. But the "hatred" is also based on scientific evidence. Programming and other creative jobs make it necessary, that the level of distraction is low. There might be differences in different people, some like music, others could also hear radio or the like. But everybody should be able to decide himself, how much distraction is acceptable for his task or his level of concentration. Open Offices or cubicles take the decision away from people, because there is no door you can leave open or close. And the evidence is, that any extra distraction leads into decreased productivity altogether.

And of course: "Corporate drones" are less creative -- think by yourself!
Yes, it costs radically more not to be homeless in 2014.
Is there a difference between machines designed to perform a narrow set of very specialized tasks and machines designed to perform a broad set of very generalized tasks?

If it's not different this time, it will eventually be. That's the goal.
I don't know. But I could imagine a theoretical computer scientist that didn't really know how to program, or 'use a computer' (I don't necessarily think that that is likely, but I think it might be possible). I had a TA in an algorithm course who claimed, when asked about which data structure was most appropriate for a certain algorithm, that he didn't really know anything about data structures (his background was pure math).

This might be a useless point in the context of something like an undergraduate degree in computer science, though. I guess it is a matter of how theoretical the program is.
Those "ratings" mean the sound will be distortion-free +/- 3dB over that range. You can still make some noise higher or lower than that, it will just be more distorted. I know iPhones support audio formats with at least 96 kHz sample rate, so you should be able to play half that or 48 kHz sounds without too much trouble. It might have some kind of band-pass filter built in, but the ratings won't tell you.
I guess it feels like there were other manual labor jobs to move to back in that day and age.

But if nearly every manual labor and semi-skilled labor job is going to be automated, I don't know what those people will do. The people who dig ditches or drive trucks today are not going to be happy or excel in office jobs.
The GPL is restrictive. It protects certain freedoms at the expense of others.
I think it's less about correctness of implementation and more about abuse of the interface. Not that I agree, but I think it's a completely valid criticism, in the same way that you could argue against operator overloading in OOP languages.
Fox article - So what if rich people have more money than poor people in 2014?
Money has a natural tendency to get more and more concentrated in fewer and fewer hands. We need to start keeping an eye on this.
You need to go to the next level. People automate things not to eliminate jobs (that's not the whole point), but to save money. So now the product is cheaper.

So the buyers of the product have extra money to spend - which opens whole new fields of products and services for them, which will (at first) be run by humans and have jobs.

It's a cycle that repeated many many times in history. It's just happening faster now. So if you want to always be employable (and you are not particularly skilled) be flexible - don't get stuck in a single field, but be willing to constantly learn new ones. (This is hard for some people, but some extra funding for adult vocational school should help.)
It doesn't matter what the assembly looks like, if the definition of language is well-defined. With macros this is not true, different 'macro' definitions probaly work in a lot of different ways.

It's true that different compilers and interpreters sometimes do slightly different things, but atleast there's a standard which should improve over time. I don't see that happening with macros.

Not sure how modularity is achieved with macros either.
Funny how this is the latest research findings. It seems so obvious. I guess we all are so distracted, numb and unconscious we don't even know ourselves anymore.

EDIT: I'm pointing the finger at myself as well.
News: no more a gateway drug to knowledge than I am to Ryan Gosling
So many people advise wearing headphones to signal being busy, but that doesn't seem like a good cue. I'm still going to stop and ask a question even if my colleague is listening to music.
> Dollars to doughnuts the most senior person that doesn't have an office has claimed it as their personal domain.

Haha, I remember reading when you said this before and laughing at my cube because that is exactly what happens.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6776833
If open plan offices actually worked, all academic facilities would install dozens of TVs each showing a different cable TV channel and volume turned up to distracting level in each study tank. Oh wait, places where people have to actually think are pin-drop silent? Really? You mean most calculus homework isn't done at frat keggers?

The root of the problem is a management primate dominance fad; the mere grunt laborers beneath me don't think; I'm of a superior social class who can think; therefore who cares if the losers can't think. If they were the cool kids like us, they'd have offices with doors where they can think, like me. Besides I don't want my underlings thinking, then one of them might end up outmaneuvering me and taking over. Gotta keep them down.
Nice how he took Dweck's research and summarily dismissed one of its core results: that it's praising intelligence that's counterproductive, and that praising effort works. It's even in the quote, but apparently he didn't notice the word "intelligence".

Edit: coincidentally, this was just posted: http://womeninastronomy.blogspot.com/2014/01/why-so-few-grow...!
Physical property also has the saying "possession is nine tenths of the law". That is, the legal power to exclude others tends to be based on an underlying reality.
In college, I had a friend who always studied with his music on. He was having a really hard time with chemistry -- or was it bio? -- and was worried that he was not going to make the cut for pre-med.

I suggested he try studying without music.

After his next test, he sought me out and thanked me. His last score was at least a grade level higher than he had been achieving.

He'd always studied to music. He didn't know the difference, until he experienced it.

Admittedly, individual reactions vary.

However, I also worked with some people who were very aggressive multi-taskers and rather proud of their ability to juggle numerous assignments and responsibilities.

Whenever I touched something they had worked on, inevitably I immediately ran into numerous and significant errors, including quite often apparently a very superficial approach and lack of insight into deeper implications as well as relationships to a broader context.

I've rarely encountered a noise, or music, embracing person nor a heavy multi-tasker, who actually performed well.

Many of the best developers I worked with at Big Co, after our "cubification" (or "veal-ification", as it were), spent numerous hours in the evening actually getting the meat of their design and programming work done, at home. There they would be, on IM.

And as a virtual presence became increasingly tolerated, they signed up for as many days out of the "farm" as policy would allow and they could manage without getting into political issues.
Sure, I would always like to have the option of both myself.

I was talking of the hatred of cubicles in general, not just for programmers or similarly creative professions.
Personally, I'm actually pretty hostile to the "widely used languages" camp. I think that position is founded on an implicit assumption about the students' abilities that is both unkind and unuseful: That they won't come out of the program with solid enough skills and knowledge that they can quickly learn any industry language they need. It also implies that the program has lost sight of its reason for existing. Universities have a responsibility to give their students the kind of academically demanding college-level computer science curriculum they're shelling out those huge heaps of money for. There's nothing inherently wrong with putting together a curriculum that just focuses on ticking off the things that show well on a resume, but if you're going to just be offering that level of education then you should do the honest thing by presenting it as a vocational program and pricing it accordingly.

I think the aforementioned assumption about students's ability to learn a lot of different languages a self-fulfilling prophecy, too. Anecdotally, the fresh-outs I've worked with who are least able to pick up new technologies tend to be the ones who came through programs that focus on widely used languages like Python or Java. They tend to have only acquired a superficial understanding of the tools they were taught in, and have very limited understanding of the underlying principles that they're built on and share with other technologies.

Which isn't to say that students shouldn't be exposed to those languages. For more advanced courses, switching to widely-used languages is an absolute must because those are the ones that tend to have the kind of library support that's necessary if you want to be able to focus on the subject at hand. For example, you're not going to get anywhere in a machine learning class if you're hobbled with a language that doesn't have a really good vectorized math library available. And even without that, schools do still have a responsibility to put a marketable language on their students' resume before graduation day.
I'd like for my work to be automated as long as I can keep my salary. But it's not going to work because I won't be the owner of the "machine" replacing me.
At least TypeScript brings to the table something very valuable: optional type checking.
That's why I used the word collective. Computers are not conscious. But let's go a step further. What is being conscious? Sensory input, electrical signals working on memories and imagination pushing the unknown. I don't think there's any magic in being conscious. Having said that, I do accept my knowledge and understanding of this subject is limited. But I am not going to fall to 'if it can't be explained it must be divine' trap.
This operates within that range at 19K, which is well above what most adult humans can hear:
https://github.com/Katee/quietnet/blob/master/options.py#L2

That's not to say it would work on an iPhone.
I did the original study at Google on SPDY over mobile networks, which was a small-scale lab study. Since then, we have collected data from millions of Chrome Mobile users which shows that SPDY does tend to outperform HTTP on cellular, but of course there are many factors involved - the content of the site, the network conditions, etc. I haven't had a chance to get this data into a form that can be shared, which I really need to do. Still, the authors of this CoNext paper did a really nice study. I hope we have more to share on this in the future.
We are at least somewhere close to the point where we can choose how we want it to be without paying any mind to how it is supposed to be.
Of course! These aren't C "macros"; they're Lisp macros, which is a wholly different, and far more valuable and reliable, proposition.

Granted, I'm not sure how much I like the idea of a macro system which finds macro instances by string-matching the source it's given. But in a non-homoiconic language, I'm not sure anything else is feasible, and I can easily see how something like this could improve Angular.js's dependency injection, for example.
Without labels on the X Axis these are worthless. Did someone shave their mustache off a few days ago which caused the sharp drop in the middle of the chart?

The bottom of the article mentions 1905 in relation to the beards chart, but which decline are they referencing?
The 'booth babes' of CES
Google could be hoping to diversify away from "everything free but ad supported" as they are with things like App Engine.

They could plan to license the technology to car manufacturers for a per-car fee or subscription; along with the detailed road condition data gathered by streetview cars and android phones.