skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think that this assumption might leave behind students that have not yet been exposed to any programming (that stuck).

Let me provide some anecdotal counter-evidence: during my last year of high school, I was in a university class where they taught us programming using Haskell (this was in 2000). I observed a fairly consistent pattern - those who had prior experience with imperative programming (me included), had far more difficulty picking up Haskell than those who hadn't.

The girl I worked with (who had no prior experience) was surprised, since "it's just like maths" :).
Bethesda have compromised forum accounts, customer email addresses
Calxeda postmortem: Low power WON'T bag ARM the server crown.
Although it isn't exactly off-base to say that this (article/comic?) is an attack on the current state of society, it IS off-base to equate the attack to the "oft-repeated wail that capitalism ... thrill seekers."

I would just like to remind everyone that BNW (the examples you chose seem to be parallels to BNW rather than 1984) doesn't have much to say about "capitalism." There seems to be a conflation here of capitalism with "consumerism" - consumerism being one of the pillars of the dystopia that the novel imagines, capitalism notwithstanding. You have to be careful where you draw the parallels. For example, the hedonistic thrill seekers in Brave New World were quite literally engineered to be that way - they were born in test-tubes and raised in a finely tuned environment. If anything, BNW is an argument against a utopia, not against a free market and the opportunities it provides. Actually, "opportunity" is unnecessary in BNW, because everyone is already mired in consumption and ecstasy. Nobody wants or needs it.

Whether capitalism is leading to that type of dystopia is another argument entirely, and one not addressed by the book... or even the article/comic.
Show HN: Dashboard for monitoring cryptocurrency mining
If you're happy with the HDMI port driving your 4K monitor (which means you're running at 30Hz), it seems that a GTX 660 or better will work. (AMD cards have similar port layouts)

DP: 4K @ 60Hz

HDMI: 4K @ 30Hz

2xDVI: use dual-link DVI->HDMI adapters (which are expensive, granted)

If your monitor supports being driven by 2 HDMI cables, you can use 2 of the HDMI ports to drive one of the monitors at 60Hz.

Of course, I haven't actually tried this.
I use Forrester, Gartner, IDC quite regularly (unfortunately); you have to read what they report with a grain of salt. First check who commissioned the study...
Opera Max is meant to be something like that — a generic VPN that compresses all non-encrypted transfers (which are, of course, increasingly infrequent).
I find Intellij Idea with decompiler great for this. It searches/downloads source code from internet if exists. Otherwise it decompiles binaries.

You can debug/fix code in libraries without even realizing it.
Around the same time, my alma mater was switching from Scheme to Java for their introductory courses.

Last time I went back to homecoming, it seemed that most the professors were feeling pretty dissatisfied about the decision. One of the big reasons mentioned was that Java's just too big and hairy of a language. They end up spending all their time teaching API quirks and software engineering principles (such as pretty much the entire subject of OOP), leaving little time to focus on much more important basic skills such as breaking a problem into smaller pieces and attacking a problem in an organized manner. Or even simple stuff, like the difference between a value and a variable. They also lamented the loss of a REPL, which is an invaluable tool for enabling (and encouraging) students to experiment and get a better understanding of how a programming language actually works.

For my own part, I wonder if the current cultural unfashionability of OOP isn't somehow a result of the vogue for switching CS programs over to Java around the turn of the century. I find myself thinking that what a lot of newcomers to FP seem to think of as problems inherent to object-oriented programming are really just problems inherent to not having worked your way through SICP during your formative years.
To be fair to reddit, "this" comments get downvoted to oblivion there too.
What do you think about Julia? I think it would be an almost perfect choice for this project. (And I actually believe that Julia is better in almost every way than Go if you ignore libs and maturity.)
This is a pet peeve of mine. When someone talks about having their idea stolen, it really bothers me. It especially bothers me if they tell me "now don't steal my idea, but..."

I don't want your idea. I have too many of my own. Here, take some of mine. Most likely, I'll think your idea is shit anyway, because almost all ideas are shit when they are just an idea. For an idea to have value it needs to be backed by something tangible. As the article says, ideas are a dime a dozen. Execution is where the [value] lies.
Says "under $350" http://www.flir.com/flirone/press/assets/Discover/FLIR%20ONE...
Yes I would like Dr to be able to easily extract as much information so they can more accurately treat me. Most of time I'm just not good at describing what's wrong with me.
How I taught a kid to code using poop
Also Scheme. :-)
Downvoted because OOP is not necessarily more difficult than C for a beginning programmer, and Haskell is not a "purely academic" language.
Orwell is right. Humans can learn to "survive" in a free information age, but can't live freely in a observed environment.
My old university has a big partnership with MIT, and the first programming course is, I believe, similar to MIT's.

I learned programming with Scheme, in that course, in 2004. I used, without noticing, many techniques I would later have relearn due to a "prolongued exposure to imperative programming". In my semester I used closures, functions as first class objects and lots of recursion.

The following three semesters I forgot all that, for I had to use C, C++ and Java. When, in the fourth semester, I had my AI course in Lisp, I used "let"s and loops for everything. In the middle of the semester, I remembered recursion, and how it made everything better (in Lisp). Later, by myself, I relearned closures, functions as first-class-objects and other stuff.

Having Scheme as an introductory language is good because it put students that came from a IT-technical high-school education equal to general high-school education students (that have never seen programming before). With the "real world" so drowned in imperative programming languages, there are few courses that can justify using a functional programming language. The things I know about FP, I know because I thought myself.

I'm not saying FP is better than imperative programming, is just that both should be (well) taught. (As some other paradigms too, I believe).

Some years ago my old uni, like MIT, changed from Scheme to Python. Python is my favourite programming language. But I'm still not happy with the decision.
> "The industry by far still don't use functional languages."
What industry are you talking about? I note a few programming languages trying to introduce functional programming features into their languages
Check out this 30c3 video for more strange facts about US and space ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTVgPw7TR_k
To me there seems to be something wrong with using as the first language something that depends on a very, very complicated runtime and execution model to run on the hardware we currently are using. This way people end up viewing programming languages as some God-given black box and not just something another computer program written by another person provides for you.

I think CS students should instead start by learning basics of computer architecture at a high level and programming on a level close to the computer architecture that so far has turned out to be practical, the Von Neumann machine. This way they can understand the whole field better, if you never face the challenges of organizing computations in a computer without many existing layers of abstractions designed by other people, you will never understand the development of the field and how the disciplines of algorithms, operating systems, computer architecture, etc came to be the way they are, too many things are taken for granted by people who have only seen very high level languages.

People should know what the stack is, how function calls works, what is an assembler, what linked lists, binary trees, hash maps, ... are and why those had to be invented etc. I think something at the level of Go or C is best for that. Then I think a good moment comes for a course like SICP where people can learn how to take those pieces and build abstraction layers out of them.
That's not really a bad thing. First, no beginner is going to be learning about coding OSes so teaching the basics isn't a problem. Secondly, Java OSes are far more common than you'd think, although this was more true of 5 years ago when many phones/smartcards/etc used Java in their OS internals. A lot of the topics in OS concepts would probably be useful if you wanted to hack on OSS Android too. So I don't think there is anything wrong with that book which sounds more like an example and reference book on using Java in OS internals (received mention a shotgun approach).

I don't see any problem with teaching CS concepts in Java. The concepts of message passing or a heap are the same everywhere. I was referring more to the basics of programming where you should either teach at a very low level (pascal is great), or at a very high level (python can work). I think people taught originally in something low level like pascal or C often have the best understanding of memory management and what their instructions are doing.

If I was teaching someone coding, I'd probably start with Pascal (incl inline ASM), then any language based on lambda calculus to get a good understanding of recursion, and then Java in a large team environment so they could understand why encapsulation, delegation and code quality are important. It's a shame more classes don't actually just have all 100 students work together on a single code base - it would be incredibly beneficial. The code would likely be terrible with 100 newbies to Java all hacking in their own required feature to the detriment of everyone else. That would drive the lesson home quick!
Patients are, across the board, pretty rubbish at giving histories. They overlook things because they don't think it relevant or don't want to tell their doctors for some reason (even though itis relevant). This is especially true of drug and alcohol abusers.
I don't know about postgres but joining CTEs in Sql Server is a recipe for blowing up your tempdb or at the very least waiting for ages for a trivial query to finish.
Alright, makes sense :) Thanks for responding.
My IDE must have only single feature: it must be Idea :-).
Anyone else find it strange that they tested 3G (UMTS) instead of LTE?
The problem is plenty of boxes (esp. consumer-grade NAT stuff!) drops any IP packet that is not TCP or UDP, hence introducing anything at that layer is as hard as introducing IPv6 (i.e., it might happen, eventually, maybe). This is why Google's QUIC is layered on top of UDP — as UDP is a thin enough layer (on top of IP) it doesn't add too much bloat.
With Stylish:

@namespace url(http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml);

@-moz-document domain("www.nytimes.com") {
#masthead {
position: relative !important;
}

}
Except that Scala already is ;). Haskell pretty much sticks to functional programming and resisted adopting other paradigms (e.g. OO via O'Haskell). Scala, on the other hand seems to adopt as many paradigms as C++.
Self-Tweeting Tweets: The Quine Tweet Challenge
American men’s hidden crisis: They need more friends 
“Men are pressed — from the time they’re very young — to disassociate from everything feminine. Paradoxically, it makes men feel good because of a social agreement that masculine things are better than feminine things, but it’s not the same thing as freedom. It’s restrictive and dehumanizing. It’s oppression all dressed up as awesomeness.”
Wait, I thought doctors were supposed to break into their patients' houses without permission in order to search for clues as to how they got sick!

This undermines everything I learned about medicine from the TV show, House.
is there a way to run this on a local machine. from the root, I run "node index.js" and nothing happens. from /core/cb.server, I run "node main.js" and nothing happens.

I installed by cloning and cd into repo, ran npm install.

I did not do "npm install -g codebox" because I wanted all the files in a specific directory. Therefore, I'm not using the codebox command that is supplied in the readme. I wanted to start it by running 'node __somefile__'
People aren't used to staring each other in the face anymore.

Solution: Make an app for that.
#000000 on all the text is quite aggressive isn't it?
> in democracies like the US and UK -- where potential leaders seem to primarily be chosen solely on the basis of social class (when did you last see a genuinely lower class politico?) -- there is absolutely no reason to believe that the leader has cognitive abilities that are above those of the population.

The upper classes generally seem to have a lower time preference than "average joe", which is an encouraging factor for this kind of politician. (If anything I worry that the rise of a populist politics where lower-class leaders are electable will lower the stability of the country - to my mind the last genuinely lower class prime minister was a certain greengrocer's daughter)

> In reality, it results in USSR supermarkets stuffed with canned tomatoes because the ever-wise pater wasn't even able to predict people's most basic wants.

Sure, no-one would advocate a centrally planned economy. But I think there's a case for soft incentives - central government funding for museums, art galleries, and universities; taxation of drugs and perhaps of sports or similar popular entertainments. These things have a long history but are being undermined by a postmodern view that says that all art is equally valuable, that popular music is just as worthy of funding as experimental music, popular authors just as worthy as literary authors.

In recent years I've seen what feels like a dumbing down of e.g. the Proms - indeed, of the whole BBC - justified on the grounds that it should give the people what they want. And while that's an important consideration - there's no point in a public service channel that no one watches - it shouldn't be the only one. Even as imperfect humans, we should try and help people better themselves, rather than just leave them to what they want.
Live example: https://thawing-beyond-5538.herokuapp.com/
Terminology is important, and it shapes how people think about things. If you call someone a manager they'll think they're in charge, that they tell people what to do, that they are responsible for "their" workers, and so on.
The C of statically typed functional languages is OCaml.
Audi shows off laser headlamps
While reading the article you start thinking "What color is the sky on this guy's planet?" and then you come to...

> "Gordon G. Chang is the author of The Coming Collapse of China. Follow him on Twitter @GordonGChang."

...and it all makes sense.
It's part of the WebRTC part, which extends the HTML5 environment with UDP communication. Documented here: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jesup-rtcweb-data-protocol-...
Coinsetter Integrates With Bitstamp to Boost Its Bitcoin Trading Platform
I think there are 2 ways of teaching programming at the beginning, although I'm not sure which is best.

1. Teach structure and organisation of programming. - Python is a good for this as it's object oriented, but has very little boilerplate and syntax getting in the way of learning. A few universities have done well using Haskell for this instead, and I think that's quite a good option, particular as it introduces types.

2. Teach from the perspective of how a computer works - C is probably the best one for this as it helps students understand how computers work at a more basic level, being closer to assembly and machine code. It also allows for memory to be thought of as a much more basic resource of the machine that users must manage.

Java would be good for teaching data structures and algorithms, but I don't think that should come until after an introductory class using one of the above methods.
Your first paragraph seems to be entirely nonsense. Almost everyone was first introduced to a high level language. This did not prevent anyone from understanding that those languages are themselves software, written by people. In fact, you generally have to take a whole course on compilers.
I'm not sure most of those types of things would show up in a cursory search.
upvotes just to see HN counter-argument
It may be turning around now, but applicants for compsci at Cambridge were apparently getting pretty dire by 2006, and this formed a significant part of the motivation for the Raspberry Pi (http://www.raspberrypi.org/about)

> The idea behind a tiny and cheap computer for kids came in 2006, when Eben Upton, Rob Mullins, Jack Lang and Alan Mycroft, based at the University of Cambridge’s Computer Laboratory, became concerned about the year-on-year decline in the numbers and skills levels of the A Level students applying to read Computer Science. From a situation in the 1990s where most of the kids applying were coming to interview as experienced hobbyist programmers, the landscape in the 2000s was very different; a typical applicant might only have done a little web design.

I joined at about that time and found it noticeable that having experience with C++ and a few other languages marked me out as more advanced than many of the other students.

Also relevant to this discussion is that in the first term we learnt ML, a functional language. This was partially because of advantages in talking about algorithms in it, but also to put everyone on a level playing field and introduce something that even keener students won't have encountered before. We did Java later, which I found much less rewarding.
2005. Because I'd been exposed to HTML and some scripting, I was able to skip on ahead pretty quickly. I estimate that most of my class (about 100 CS students) hadn't had any prior exposure to programming. They dropped like flies for the first few months.

However, I went to a pretty poor University (ranked ~60th), I have no doubt that the numbers are very different in the top universities.
Bill Watterson: Some thoughts on the real world by one who glimpsed it and fled
FTFA: "Time will tell."
Wireless 2-channel 24-bit multimeter for smartphones
OK, we are not talking about the same thing. I was thinking along the lines of a compiler written in a native (non-jvm) language ala jikes but you are referring to a compiler that compiles to a native executable ala gcj.

I've experimented with gcj in the past. It still suffered from excessive overhead, still had it's own runtime requirements (although obviously not the same as the JVM) and had a lot of serious compatibility issues. Not something I would have based a serious production deployment off of personally. Maybe the state of the art has changed since then.
Having learned C and C++ before even touching Java, "public static void main(String [] args)" arbitrarily shoved inside a class is still an aspect of the Java that absolutely annoys the crap out of me. Before you even print "Hello world" to the screen, you're exposed to an obscene amount of opinionated design (classes! classes everywhere!). Given a competent instructor, students should learn to "break out of main()" as quickly as possible. However, the class where I actually learned Java formally had an adjunct professor who would put EVERYTHING into one class so that students wouldn't have to learn about code organization so early (IMO a huge mistake).

All of that aside, I find it amazingly stupid that a best practice for Java has you creating a specific class like MyCoolAppRunner with only one MAGIC function whose only job is to load ANOTHER class to handle the actual app. IMO C and C++ get it right by having main() exist in the ether by itself -- it indirectly abstracts the stack and heap in a way that makes MUCH more sense than the way Java handles things.
The complaint that "someone stole my idea" assumes that ideas are unique to the person who has them first. They're not - most ideas are a more or less obvious evolution of an existing product, and many people come up the same things completely independent of each other.

Most of the time the complaint is really "someone implemented the thing I wasn't ever going to get around to doing and now I'm jealous."
I think MSFT would be better off with a COO with a huge tech interest similar to Dick Costolo or Tim Cook.

Allows to think leaner within operations, without hindering the progress of innovation because it is such a core fundamental mindset in that COO's mind.
This song tells the tale of a late night and a broken web site, sung to the Twelve-bar blues. The drums and bass are courtesy of a Boss DR-3 drum machine. The guitar and vocals are real.
I'm not sure. I honestly think it's a culture thing. Many Lisp communities embrace continuations, but everyone else rightly shies away because they make your head hurt.

Ruby(!) supports them, so it might be possible for Rails to create something like the pattern I mentioned. In fact, Ruby people use continuations for a few things like the built-in Generator class and making "restartable exceptions" so the thrower can figure out how to deal with the problem rather than the catcher, which is sometimes quite useful: http://chneukirchen.org/blog/archive/2005/03/restartable-exc...

Properly implementing continuations is a huge implementiation burden though, which is another reason why the're uncommon. The language would have to make the stack frame itself slicable and serializable, and it's hard to get good performance when the call stack itself becomes a "first class" language construct. Consider a duplicate() function that saves the state of a program and then spawns ten threads that each reload that state! Have fun implementing continuations in a way that supports that, Guido! :)
With DO, is there anywhere in their GUI to see how much transfer your droplet has used in the current billing cycle?

I realize that you can do this on the user end, but I neglected to when I set up my droplet, and I feel like if they're willing to charge you for overages, they should provide some method of bandwidth monitoring.
So Bitcoin Has Reached North Korea
agreed, very premature - I hope it goes well but they may encounter the same problems OP had
SPDY is a significant net benefit for high latency / high bandwidth connections. Indeed, I would say that is its primary strength.

I'm starting to find it curious how virtually every "SPDY doesn't improve things" study implements the same two critical flaws, to the point that it starts to seem conspiratorial.

a) They compare SPDY, with mandatory TLS, with unencrypted HTTP. HTTP needs to go away, and the only valid comparison would be with HTTPS.

b) They implement their test via a non-caching proxy that then proxies request to "top sites". This is identical to the critical fault that the other primary SPDY critical paper makes, because it essentially invalidates the primary value of SPDY (the upstream site becomes the weak link, itself not using SPDY). This is a ridiculous way of demonstrating the strengths or weaknesses of SPDY (akin to declaring a sports car slow by demanding that it drive behind a transport truck), yet this same methodology keeps curiously recurring.