skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>This is a big hit to the credibility of Bitcoin in the near to midterm future.

It sure seems that way, doesn't it? If I had significant amounts of bitcoin, it would freak me out. But, I think we're seeing selection bias here. The fact that I believe that the government will eventually shut the operation down, as they did e-gold, is a big part of why I don't have any bitcoin.

But the thing is, the current bitcoin price, something like $970 as of now (Monday, 11:54 AM PST) would indicate that "the market" (that is, the people who own and are thus in a position to sell bitcoin) doesn't think this is such a huge deal.

This might be one of those places where the difficulty of shorting bitcoin is propping up the price. I don't know if I would /short/ bitcoin right now, but if it were possible, I would probably blow a couple grand on put options if I could do so in a reasonable way.
What about tools like Typemock? How does that fit in?
Macklemore is a pretty popular rapper these days, too.

Doesn't make 'em any good, though.
So how do you refactor a method signature to swap argument order in Lua? Please don't answer "manually".
really nice!. PS you have a typo in the title, dashboad instead of dashboard :)
This is pretty cool. But the problems I see are infrastructural scaling issues. To get a 2min throughput, you'd need at least 15 batteries stored below. That may sound reasonable, but then you realize it's only Tesla. And probably only compatible with one model of Tesla. Not very future-proof. I don't have audio at the moment, so maybe he discussed that.

Charger stations seem the better option. But I still think there could be bottleneck issues if electric cars really took off. You could reach some midpoint somewhere, say, Primm, NV, and be stuck there circling lots for hours waiting for a charger station to free up (assuming one could circle a lot for extend periods of time on a dead battery). The gas station there is pretty much hell on earth already.
> This all suggests you're generating some revenue but you don't mention how.

AB is a card/board game hybrid. You can collect cards and experiment with different decks. You get additional cards for regular logins and of course for playing.

AB offers both a subscription and the possibility to buy different amounts of gems. Subscribers get additional cards for every login, win or loss. Gems can be used to buy additional cards.
The wheel paradox that stumped Aristotle and Galileo
Amazing :)
An auto turner and a timmer would be nice.
Code base is incorrect metric. (Good) Dynamic languages enable smaller code bases.

And you really, really should try harder to make small isolated components (services, daemons, sites, commands, whatever) and avoid large codebases.
This seems cool, as far as I can tell it's more for one's personal education, rather than producing something for others to use?

So I'm curious... is there any kind of "open-source incubator" out there? Like, a site with 500 developers signed up, they all vote on new project ideas, start a new project each month, kind of like a great big collaborative hackathon, in order to put out some really impressive piece of software, that then hopefully lives on?

E.g., an open-source iTunes integrated with bittorrent, complete with iPhone app. A font-design program for amateurs. A keyframed animation tool that outputs to HTML5 canvas. A dynamic texture generator program. A user-friendly neural net trainer. A new lossy image compression format and encoder/decoder designed for resolution independence instead of a fixed pixel grid. I don't know, just cool projects that get people really excited.

I mean, the logistics of organizing such a thing would be a little crazy, since not every type of project is amenable to a large number of developers working in parallel, and you'd need a kind of domain expert and lead architect on each one. But it would be so, so cool...
I vote to keep Yeoman there ;-)
What is your list?
That's like asking "how is buying a TV illegal?" When you knew the TV was stolen.
(Copied from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7132790)

If you're using Android, I'd highly recommend using a combination of XPrivacy [1] and Android Firewall [2] (iptables frontend).

To make your life easier, disallow everything from accessing the net in Android Firewall. Then, for those apps which you've allowed net access, further tweak what they're allowed to access in XPrivacy. As a rule, turn off account info, clipboard, location, contacts, and storage.

Not perfect, but a decent solution.

[1] https://github.com/M66B/XPrivacy

[2] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.jtschohl.a...
It's also pretty easy and useful to step out of the HM, inferable fragment using any number of popular language extensions. I'm not arguing that it's a problem, but it's disingenuous to suggest that anything resembling all code can be type-inferred.
I have tried many times to do TDD. I find it extraordinarily hard to let tests drive the design, because I already see the design in my head before I start coding. All the details might not be filled in, and there are surely things I overlook from the high-up view, but for the most part I already envision the solution.

It's difficult to ignore the solution that is staring my brain in the face and pretend to let it happen organically. I know that I will end up with a worse design too, because I'm a novice at TDD and it doesn't come naturally to me. (I'd argue that I'm a novice at everything and always will be, but I'm even more green when it comes to TDD)

I have no problem writing unit tests, I love mocking dependencies, and I love designing small units of code with little or no internal state. But I cannot figure out how to let go of all that and try to get there via tests instead.

I don't think that I'm a master craftsman, nor do I think my designs are perfect. I get excited at the idea of learning that the way I do everything is garbage and there's a better way. If I ever learn that I'm a master at software development, I'll probably get depressed. But I don't think my inability to get to a better design via TDD is dunning-kruger, either.

I want to see the light.
Correct, dynamic languages are very good for scripting and as a glue between components.
Part of that now might be that we went from dirtier diesel than Europe to cleaner (at least, lower sulfur, but I think otherwise cleaner) in the past few years, and have more strict emissions standards. But that shouldn't necessarily hurt the 2.0 diesel.
Grandpa’s iPad
Slightly off topic, but I wanted to chime in to say that I enjoy Atomic Brawl very much. I like both the game and the technical execution. If you haven't already, give it a shot!
The US military is semi-enlightened with regard to traffic safety in that they often insist on extra training even for domestically stationed personnel. For example some branches and some bases require all enlisted personnel to undertake basic motorcycle safety training before they are permitted to ride motorcycles, even though most states do not require such training. There are also branches and/or bases where servicemen returning from overseas deployments are required to take refresher driving courses before they are permitted to drive their cars again. On any installation the local regulations are up to the post commander; some of them are more strict than others.

It is amusing that the US military is in some ways the most highly regulated and the most European-like in their regulations, due to the fact that commanders have broad authority and the services provide universal health care and housing for enlisted men and their families. They have good incentives to establish standards of vehicle safety.
(Unit)-tests are mostly procedural while types are declarative (describe intentions) so good IDE can speculate about those intentions and enable better refactoring.
Please tell us why. Drugs make up an extremely large part of the income of most criminal organizations, some completely funded by it.
I can't stand sitting rear-facing without feeling nauseous, I'm surprised it's even a selling point.
I predicted how they would take down bitcoin a while ago. Anyone transmitting bitcoin to another party through anything but a KYC compliant licensed money transmitter will be considered a de-facto money launderer.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6680062
Code completion and jump to definition isn't unique to VS

of course not. But that is not the point, instead the point is those tools in VS are better than anything else out there. Having used a bunch of them I tend to agree. Definitely usability-wise the debugging experience just beats everything else.
I think this is a great explanation of a lot of the obvious pitfalls with "basic" TDD, and why so many people end up putting in a lot of effort with TDD without getting much return.

I personally have kind of moved away from TDD over the years, because of some of these reasons: namely, that if the tests match the structure of the code too closely, changes to the organization of that code are incredibly painful because of the work to be done in fixing the tests. I think the author's solution is a good one, though it still doesn't really solve the problem around what you do if you realize you got something wrong and need to refactor things.

Over the years I personally have moved to writing some of the integration tests first, basically defining the API and the contracts that I feel like are the least likely to change, then breaking things down into the pieces that I think are necessary, but only really filling in unit tests once I'm pretty confident that the structure is basically correct and won't require major refactorings in the near future (and often only for those pieces whose behavior is complicated enough that the integration tests are unlikely to catch all the potential bugs).

I think there sometimes needs to be a bit more honest discussion about things like:
* When TDD isn't a good idea (say, when prototyping things, or when you don't yet know how you want to structure the system)
* Which tests are the most valuable, and how to identify them
* The different ways in which tests can provide value (in ensuring the system is designed for testability, in identifying bugs during early implementation, in providing a place to hang future regression tests, in enabling debugging of the system, in preventing regressions, etc.), what kinds of tests provide what value, and how to identify when they're no longer providing enough value to justify their continued maintenance
* What to do when you have to do a major refactoring that kills hundreds of tests (i.e. how much is it worth it to rewrite those unit tests?)
* That investment in testing is an ROI equation (as with everything), and how to evaluate the true value the tests are giving you against the true costs of writing and maintaining them
* All the different failure modes of TDD (e.g. the unit tests work but the system as a whole is broken, mock hell, expensive refactorings, too many tiny pieces that make it hard to follow anything) and how to avoid them or minimize their cost

Sometimes it seems like the high level goals, i.e. shipping high-quality software that solves a user's problems, get lost in the dogma around how to meet those goals.
Anistock.com – Video Backgrounds and Stock Footage
What you're saying is that the government should have control of any money transaction, because otherwise criminals can use it. I can only notice two things here:

1. The argument can apply to absolutely any other aspect of life - if it's useful, criminals can use it, so the government should have tight control on it. For example, criminal enterprises are much easier to conduct if you can move around on the roads freely. We can not have that, ergo we have to institute regular routine checkpoints where you have to routinely prove to the law enforcement officers you are going around on legitimate business and they should keep the database of all your movements and require all road operators to report all your movement to the government movement tracking center, in case you later prove to be a criminal. Etc., etc.

2. You can not have both money laundering laws and bitcoin (or any non-governmental money system) as it is now. If you keep the former, the government will either subjugate or shut down the latter. Either bitcoin loses virtually all its anonymity and distributed control features and allows the government to control it the same way it controls regular money, with same regulations and roadblocks, or mere touching bitcoin or related technologies will become a crime. You can see how it works with drugs - anything that can be classified as related to drugs or precursor to drugs or can be used in relation to anything to do with drugs is outlawed. Bitcoin will inevitably follow one of these roads - or maybe both.
If you are trying to wrangle some ideas for startups or profitable side projects, I think this approach is unlikely to be successful.

First of all, you cannot reliably determine what someone will pay for by asking them directly. People frequently do not know what they want until they see it, do not know what they will pay for until they open their wallet, and are poor forecasters of both.

Secondly, my experience indicates that the cross-section of people who post comments on HN is not well correlated with you average consumer or B2B market. Or with human beings in general, for that matter. ;)
I remember when I was a kid. The idea of dice, some rules and paper helping my mind escape the mundane realities around me and live epic adventures with my friends was fascinating to me.

Today we still meet up (after almost 20 years of roleplay) weekly and play. Its our pokernight :)

Currently working on a better character sheet for the pathfinder version of d&d : http://charsheets.herokuapp.com

Demo character (One I am going to be using next session)
http://charsheets.herokuapp.com/publiclink/27

If you decide to use it, be warned. It is still a work in procress. Very alpha. Such dev.
this is.. Awesome!
That's like the most amazing thing i've ever seen here on HN
It really would be. I was hoping that this "coding club" would do something like what you described, but it seems to be more of a pay-for-learning approach.
Only with a ROM and RAM upgrade (effectively making it a plus). It wasn't cheap, as these components were soldered to the motherboard.
Apps of how many LOCs have you migrated?

I have been migrating one and the same Rails app from version to version for around 5 years now, and we are currently at around 50k lines of code. When you are taking about "couple hours of work" and "painless" I can only laugh out loud. Every new minor or major Rails version migration takes several weeks with any larger app, only patch versions can be migrated reasonably smoothly. Migration from Rails 2.3 to Rails 3.0 was a particular catastrophe, it took me more than a month of intensive work, after the switch the application became twice as slow, which turned out to be a regression in the PostgreSQL driver that went unnoticed for a year since Rails 3.0 was first released. Just diagnosing this single issue took me a week of frustration, where I step by step peeled the onion of abstraction upon abstraction, having to profile Rails internals in the end.

We are now looking into the Rails 3 -> Rails 4 migration, and it's not much better, after just changing the gems the application won't start, the console won't start, and the tests run into an infinite recursion and explode the stack. I routinely spend a week even to get just those three basic things to start at all, and it was this way even when migrating 1.x to 2.x. After every upgrade of this kind, some gems turn out to be abandoned are not upgraded by the authors to support the newer Rails, and seldom they will work with them without changes. The ones that were updated, often require a separate upgrade procedure of their own, there goes another week. Just fixing all the deprecation warnings will take another one. It's not just strong parameters, a lot of the old routing code does not work, conditions on relations don't work anymore, config settings become obsolete and so on and so forth, 80% of the things that have to be changed are not even in the release notes, for example Rails 4.0 happened to introduce an internal Options class that is visible from every controller and shadows our global Options constant which is the object with application configuration.

It does not mean Rails "sucks" or anything like this, but keeping a very nice API while adapting a framework to requirements evolving over the years has the cost of sucking at compatibility, that's just a fact of software engineering. So please lets not pretend the Rails team top priority is ease of long term maintenance and lets put things as they are. If you are not systematically keeping up with newer Rails version, after half a year or 9 months since the last update you won't even receive bugfixes, because they often aren't backported even to the previous minor version. That the 37signals guys threw out their own biggest app and rewritten it from scratch is also telling about their attitude to things of this kind. So Rails is bad at compatibility, in exchange it keeps delivering a really nice API for a wider and wider scope of tasks.
Re. Russian media: I wonder, why their view (extremely biased, no doubt) could be of any concern to HN readers who are predominantly English-speaking and get much of their information from Internet sources?
The first sentence is a hint toward Haskell's wonderful derivation system which tells the compiler to write the "obvious" code for all kinds of common scaffolds. It's almost always all you need for equality, showing, ordering, hashing. There's also the GeneralizedNewtypeDeriving which allows you to inherit instantiation of types into all kinds of structurally equivalent types.

And while it's valuable to talk about popular languages in terms of the kind of static typing people are likely to encounter... they also have really outdated static type systems. While you can argue that it's likely that you'll bump into Java/C/C++ when working with static types, it's pretty invalid to argue generally about static type systems using them as examples. Things have just come a really long way.
Upvoting for CSS Inliner. Saves minutes and hours of lives when you have to do a lot of HTML email templates.
Atari Hacker Simulator
> Unfortunately NATs don't handle SCTP

It's more than that; pretty much nothing in the wild handles SCTP, and they wanted to build something that can be gradually transitioned to (it will be a rough transition for sure, but it's still supposed to be HTTP).
> Sporty behavior not on a highway is still going to get better consumption than extremely high speed driving, because wind resistance rises as the square of the velocity.

It's a heavy car, and one built for highway, ramping up and slowing down all the time is extremely expensive.

> With a 70L tank at 250km/h you may well exhaust the tank in under an hour.

No. That would be a fuel consumption of above 28L/100, that's twice the worst case I've seen from any user of the car.

Hell, you can run long-haul trucks with a better efficiency than that: http://newsroom.scania.com/en-group/2011/05/27/scania-fuel-e...

> These are worst case numbers though

They're closer to lunacy than worst-case numbers (and the autobahn is not free-speed throughout). Although we'd need an actual 535d with an actual driver to know for sure.
One says yes, one says no, so therefore it is still up in the air. Until there is a definitive ruling on the matter you can't claim it is illegal...it is still a gray area until something like the Supreme Court definitively rules one way or another.
Yes, this content was scrapped. (Hi, I published the article originally)

While I did re-distribute the content to Medium, we very much practice these principles where the post was originally published on ConversionXL

While the studies referenced do pull from different areas, "beauty", "retention", "conversions" they are all used in order to back up that science supports simple, prototypical, sites performing better.

This means less visual clutter, everything being where it is "supposed to be" and presented in a way that isn't over stimulating to the senses.

As far as the photoreceptors in your eyes are concerned, that's the bridge between the real world and your brain.

You don't actually "see" anything, your brain just decodes the information.

Less information to decode (i.e visual complexity) the easier the actual message has to get to your brain.
That is exactly my point. Thank you for understanding.
Politics of foreign drone strikes (which I oppose, but don't equate to whole-sale domestic political repression) aside, this is a logical fallacy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque

In other words, it's not simply not a valid argument.
1. I'd pay money for software that mimicked Google+ / Facebook, but was open source and could be self-hosted. Bonus points if it ran on my Synology.

My requirements are actually quite simple. I want a place to share posts, and photos and have friends and family (predominantly family) would be able to comment on those photos and posts.

It needs to look good, minimal and easy to configure. I want to get my private stuff away from the NSA vacuum cleaner. I want to take back control.

2. I'd also pay money for a sudo apt-get a-completely-simple-fully-featured-email-server-that-is-bullet-proof-by-default-and-the-only-config-is-a-domain-name(s). Ideally with a web interface. I'm praying mailpile.is will be that.
Since most taxi drivers are technically independent contractors, do the taxi companies insure them or does each driver have their own insurance?
And this was untrue of World War 2 how?
Going 65 on a 75 highway is going to be a problem since your speed difference with most cars is what causes the problems in highway driving. Breaking flow of traffic is not a good idea.

I can assure you that doing 65mph on I-90 through South Dakota is a really, really bad idea. Its listed as 75mph and that would be the low-end for what people do. Nevermind the wind that is probably going to kill your range.
It's one thing to update your infrastructure and libraries. It's another to have to substantially rewrite everything in the process of doing so.

I wouldn't know about this; I've never had to do it, with Rails sites at least. If that's a description of an upgrade of Rails apps, I think it is overblown frankly, unless it involves new developers coming in blind to an app and trying to update - in that situation, whatever the framework, there is going to be pain - the pain of not knowing the app or dependencies added to any upgrade glitches can lead to a lot of trouble.

I do think the article made a mistake in mixing up security/infrastructure updates with framework and app updates. It comes off as vague, wooly and somewhat deceptive to the client.

It's quite another to maintain, rewrite, and retain compatibility with existing apps and infrastructure.

Done a fair bit of this (though less of the rewriting). Frankly, Rails is much like any other framework in this respect - things mostly change gradually, and they make a good effort at backwards compatibility, but it's not always perfect; it's not much worse than other frameworks, though I'm sure some others do a better job (with other tradeoffs). The move from 2-3 was the biggest, but even that wasn't particularly troubling for me - it could be harder with very large, complex apps, but those apps usually have a team looking after them and money to spend on upgrades/maintenance.

The worst place to be in is coming in to a new app which is broken and out of date, or just badly structured, and trying to fix it - this pain occurs in any language that I'm familiar with, and I suspect that's the reason for a lot of rewriting. I have been guilty of this once or twice myself on other platforms, but sometimes (rarely) it is the right choice.
I would imagine the primary fuel source for a Tesla owner would be their home charging station.