skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Microsoft did not seal it because sometimes you might want to create a class that has a friendlier name

I expect multiple-language support may have been a stumbling block here but compromising your API (instead of sealing the class, document it as "you shouldn't subclass this") for something that could be done with type aliasing seems like a really bad trade-off. Is the C# using keyword a johnny come lately, or would it not support this functionality?
That sounds like a definition of "pseudonymous" to me. Particularly since moot has claimed for a while that part of what makes 4chan works is that you can't maintain an identity.
When he killed himself, though, that got him
to the top of HN a few times. But you could have
looked him up a week before

How would I know?
>Who said I'm not?

Want to compare notes, then? What've you got? Email me.
To me exercise in the gym is wasted time, not productive time, and that's why my logic isn't flawed. If I have a better use of my time, but hit the gym for some expected benefit, then it's not the best use of my time. Some people may need exercise to feel good while others (like me), don't. If you rely on exercise for your mood (thanks to the endorphins release), then you're becoming dependent on it and it becomes an addiction. I personally fall asleep in less than 2 minutes. I forgot to mention that team sports is a different thing. I always enjoy playing soccer with my friends and children.

Regarding "exercise", if you ask Dr. Weil, walking 20-30 minutes or doing garden work is the best exercise - that's what the Okinawans or the Sardinians do. I think a walk is good enough to stabilize your blood sugar after a meal (even just 10 minutes of walk do miracles) and allow you lymph to flow.

Exercise also increases IGF-1, which is without much doubt negative for longevity: http://blog.wellnessfx.com/2013/09/04/igf-1-trade-performanc...

Also, higher muscle mass means increased basal metabolic rate, which affects the lifespan potential negatively.
s/Service Provider/Identity Provider (IdP)/

Service Provider is usually a synonym for Relying Party (RP), which is the service that's relying on your authenticated identity, typically a web server.

The rest, all good points.
Another article that reads like Cosmo for entrepreneurs (e.g. 10 secret tips that will boost your productivity today!)
Finally hit a score of 10 and got a medal. The strategy I came up with is mentally computing all solutions as DOWN or NOT DOWN at each pipe using heuristics. Makes it easier to focus on flapping.

I think the difficulty is just fine as it is right now. I am pretty sure I can reach a score of 100+ if I played for more than the 30 minutes I just gave the game.

Edit: Reloaded and got the new Easy mode version. Got 26 on my first try, now it is too easy. Bring back Hard mode!
You know what's worse? Just try to use the option in firefox to "Allow pages to use own fonts" because, you know, you would like to read all pages with the freaking same font and font size you define in the browser options, and then just go to some random page like github and see all the broken stuff around without any icons.

I'm sorry that I have to say this and people will feel hurt and use their reasons, but don't use fonts to put images / icons on websites. Those are IMAGES, use that, please. Fonts are for text. Stop the madness.
[n.b: I'm used to duck typed languages, where you can get away with far more shenanigans.]

> "Can I guarantee every function that expects T to behave exactly the same way when I pass P (where P is a subclass of T)". Almost always the answer is NO, that's why you subclassed it to begin with! So you shouldn't do it.

The entire point of subclassing is to be able to answer that question "no". By your logic, we should never subclass anything, because it will behave differently!

It seems to me you're not really trying to argue against subclassing here, but rather against making specific container types subclasses of generic containers types with extra logic (that breaks the container's documented guarantees) added, instead of containing the logic and the container as class attributes.

I'm reminded of the basic inheritance examples that show up all over, where Dog inherits from Animal: this makes sense because a Dog is a type of Animal. A Team is neither a type of List<T> nor a type of Set<T>, so it should not inherit from them. A team can, however, contain a roster represented by a List or Set alongside its other data.
A) Goedel sentences involve some form of mathematical self-reference/recursion within the proof system.

B) Empirical/physical science doesn't deal with conclusive proof from axioms, anyway: it deals mainly in probability and evidential falsification.

Ergo, Goedel's Theorem doesn't really tell us there's some great, unlearnable Fact About The Universe we can never figure out, since science isn't a proof system subject to the Theorem in the first place. We can probably put very good probability bounds (so to speak) on anything about real life that we actually need to know.
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-howard-gss-browserid
https://github.com/PADL/libbrowserid
I completely agree with the author and I would like to add my opinion to it as well.

As a computer science graduate, I had formal training (as in courses) at all essential levels of dealing with computer, from hardware to assembly language to high-level languages. and even the theory of computation.

After years of having formal training and hands on experience, I finally stopped doing any programming for fun and just stick to my day job and hate every minute of it. BTW, I have to work with worst programming language ever made by mankind: C++ (that is a statement, not a challenge dear professor Strostrup).

Why? because making anything useful takes toooooo much time even for an expert. For example, I had SQLite database full of text and wanted to format it as PDF. I was expecting to do it in like 10-20 lines of script, and it took me almost a week to do it. Every simple idea that I have ends up being hundreds of lines of code with complicated logic. It is just not worth the time. I ended up using Microsoft Word to generate my PDFs instead of writing a script, although I have to convert every document manually by clicking through MS Word.

One of the main issue is that programming is stuck in the 80s, especially for Mac and Open Source developers. Everything has to be done through the terminal. We have to look at walls of code for simple things. And every programmer have to start in terminal. When I started programming in 1997, I used QBASIC IDE in the terminal. One of the first things I learned was stepping through my code and examining variables.

The second main issue is that because the programming is stuck in the 80s and the times of POSIX standard, all systems have diverged to the point that very little functionality is provided by the system to the developer.

The third issue is the programming language itself. It does not have to be ASCII based. It can be visual. There are thousands of experiments with it and yet, still the mainstream programming is still ASCII based and the hot topic of debate in programming languages is whether to be indent-based or use curly braces.

Almost all of the main stream languages on top of the charts today are created before 2000. We need more languages suited to today's software patterns.
If your class users need all the methods and properties List has, you should derive your class from it. If they don't need them, enclose the List and make wrappers for methods your class users actually need.

This is a strict rule, if you write a public API, or any other code that will be used by many people. You may ignore this rule if you have a tiny app and no more than 2 developers. This will save you some time.

For tiny apps, you may also consider choosing another, less strict language. Ruby, JavaScript - anything that allows you to write less code.
The Regulation of Ant Colony Foraging Activity without Spatial Information
I find it interesting to apply the same logic to other sites. Imagine for a minute if Amazon needed to feature product prices from Newegg on each Amazon search. It starts to sound a little bit ridiculous when you apply it that way. I know some will say "wait, Google is so big" but isn't Amazon too? I use Amazon in my examples but there are other good examples. Phooey..
> If you start with GPL stuff (and in my experience most of the really good open source software is GPL)

Much as I prefer the GPL to BSD licences, that sounds odd to me, unless you mean for pretty small values of most. Some best-in-class Free software more or less off the top of my head, that isn't GPL:

apache (most everything, but lets stick with
httpd and solr)
nginx
openssh
freebsd
openbsd
openssl
ghc
go (golang)
plan9
PostgreSQL
redis
riak
elasticsearch
clang/llvm
v8/chrome

If you add inn LGPL the list grows, perhaps notably to include erlang and to a certain extent haproxy (I didn't realize licensing had changed, the rationale may be interesting in this context[1]).

I guess there are a couple of ways to productize GPL software -- one is the RedHat/Canonical approach: use (rather large) resources on testing and creating a coherent whole, including branding (arguably RedHat does more work here than Canonical -- but Canonical certainly aren't the first to try to value-add on top of Debian). The other way is to sell an appliance of some kind. You could say the kindle and even Android fall under this category (as does haproxy, I guess).

> In such a scenario, any business that needed an off-the-shelf 3D editor or image editor but also developed in-house software (for example, Pixar) would find it in their interest to patch bugs and generally improve the software that they use, even though they don't sell it.

Absolutely. I think having a base on which to build is crucial for it to be even interesting to release certain software. The effort of releasing a usable version, needs to be as low as possible. Already having an open framework that one can simply "patch into" helps with that, I think. As does having a framework for contributing, and a community/project that will help with testing/merging etc.

[1] http://haproxy.1wt.eu/download/1.3/doc/LICENSE
A Hacking Game Where You Hijack the US Government
Type Rich Style for C++11
Also a best known practice:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_over_inheritance
I never said I was proud that I could tell your comment was self-aggrandizing. I only said it was obvious.
Let me guess. You put in 3 times the effort but did not get 3 times the salary and at the end of it all you didn't even get a bonus to compensate you fairly for the health issues that were created.

Nowadays, if anybody finds themselves in this position, take Aspirin every evening as a prophylactic (talk to your doctor) and cut out all junk food. Eat lots of vegetables, and a bit of meat but avoid sweet things and carbs (you are not a runner). If you are into it, try something like a paleo diet. Get exercise sessions spaced through the day (and night) even if only 5 minutes of intensive aerobics at a time.

And look after your fellow workers because you only win this type of thing as a team.
Would be interesting to hear what would be the functional stand on this.

In a way a team may not need the players. Maybe teams are just identifiers, as are players, and we have a list of event relating players to teams. Then a function can get these events and compute the current list of players in a given team.
> The entire point of subclassing is to be able to answer that question "no". By your logic, we should never subclass anything, because it will behave differently!

100% Correct, that is indeed my argument: the very purpose of subclassing is contradictory. Subclassing exists solely to mask the mutation of existing behavior, that is the only feature it adds to composition.

Composition is perfectly capable of ADDING and SUBTRACTING behavior, but to modify behavior it must do so transparently. You can't for example change the behavior of Add, you must call another method that internally calls Add on a child object and makes it explicit to the user code that the behavior is thus different.

There is no point in having a type system if the types become meaningless through subclass manipulation. I make a class T that has method M with postcondition P. People write functions that accept T with these expectations. When you create a subclass of T that modifies the behavior of M, the existing functions can no longer be trusted to behave correctly -- this is just a fact.

It's not at all just about "container classes". We see this broken behavior all the time in UI classes like UITableView extending UIView. UIView theoretically has a publicly mutable subviews array, but it stops being so by certain subclasses. So all of a sudden you have a UIView subclass that can't be passed in as an argument to functions with UIView parameters. This may be obvious to people familiar with the framework, but to novices, it now becomes meaningless to see the parameter UIView. Maybe it will do the right thing, maybe it won't, depends on the subclass. Now you have to go read the documentation (hopefully its documented).

The reason inheritance is taught with ridiculous examples like Dog and Animal (or even worse, Triangle and Shape) is precisely because it is so hard to find legitimate examples. You always end up just overriding things like Speak() (which does nothing in Animal and prints "woof" in Dog). "Good" (re: concrete) examples are usually really convoluted and hard to understand (or end up being basically just interfaces like NSResponder which is 99% empty methods).

Duck typing environments are saner in my opinion because they are really just interfaces. You are not making the strong statement "I am an X" (and thus creating the expectation of static behavior), but instead "I have loose behaviors A,B, and C" (in the same way as interfaces).
I think this could be boiled down as: List<T> is a data structure. Anything that inherits from List<T> should be a data structure too. So LinkedList<T> could reasonably extend List<T>, but Team should not.
Wohnungsräumung
Wohnungsräumung , Wohnungsräumung wien
Wohnungsräumung , Wohnungsräumung wien
Wohnungsräumung , Wohnungsräumung wien
Wohnungsräumung , Wohnungsräumung wien
Wohnungsräumung , Wohnungsräumung wien
> Empirical/physical science doesn't deal with conclusive proof from axioms, anyway: it deals mainly in probability and evidential falsification.

Of course it does. Modern physics requires rigorous mathematics, the latter certainly are influenced by the incompleteness theorems.

If I shape a theory about the universe in modern physics, if my theory doesn't have a mathematical form it won't be taken seriously for very good reasons. Therefore modern physics, the most scientific of sciences, requires a very high level of mathematical reasoning. Therefore the incompleteness theorems need to be taken into account.

Even something as trivial as the Turing halting problem is known to be insoluble because of its connection to the incompleteness theorems.

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halting_problem

Quote: "The concepts raised by Gödel's incompleteness theorems are very similar to those raised by the halting problem, and the proofs are quite similar. In fact, a weaker form of the First Incompleteness Theorem is an easy consequence of the undecidability of the halting problem."

This is just one of many examples in which the incompleteness theorems affect the outcome of a pedestrian scientific issue.

> ... since science isn't a proof system subject to the Theorem in the first place.

This is false. Beyond the examples given above, many aspects of present scientific theories are influenced, directly or indirectly, by the incompleteness theorems.
>I would say it probably doesn't take a lot of computational mass to simulate a person. We're each doing it right now with a glob of meat the size of a grapefruit, and that's just what evolution was able to come up with.

And in this case, evolution was exceptionally clever, since it managed to design the world's most powerful, most parallel computation devices in maybe a couple kilograms of meat.

Consider that the computational power necessary to emulate a human brain accurately is conjectured to be measured in petaflops.

I mean, sure, you could invoke some kind of high-level computational heuristics, like we did to emulate the Nintendo 64 back in the day, but when dealing with living things I wouldn't call that a very good idea.
It doesn't matter whether robots or humans are teaching your kids, if the whole approach to education is wrong:

Current model of education: Multidisciplinary, value-free, with an emphasis on standardized tests.

Compare this to:

Alfred North Whitehead's reform model: Transdisciplinary, values-laden, with an emphasis on the importance of imagination. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_North_Whitehead#Views_on...

Note that multidisciplinary means teaching small parts of a large number of disconnected subjects, whereas transdisciplinarity means teaching a few important ideas that organically link many different subjects and that apply to real life.
Life of a Chromium Developer
Is there any way to delete a video once I upload it?
This reminds me (vaguely) of the AI I made for a worm-in-tunnel game long ago.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/8554242/available-for-2-...

(It's there in the background of the main menu.)
Ah, Java8. What Java5 should have been, but for Sun being too busy dying and taking Java with it.

Java: 20th Century technology... TODAY
Yea good point. They would probably be more likely to get their money back actually, but it won't be a massive payout.
I've collected some more fairy tales for you.

http://www.thedaily.sk/protest-at-british-embassy-over-snatc...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9545361/Foreign-governmen...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherboo...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherboo...

http://victims-unite.net/tag/christopher-booker/
You've just demonstrated that you're a study in hypocrisy and have no grasp of how you sound. Under the circumstances, what's my incentive to continue?
I don't even want to click on this.
haha, I'm still messing around with the difficulty. Guess I've made it too easy now! Glad you enjoyed the game anyway.
MIT to New Jersey: Back off our students
Java Lists evolve in time.
Susan Hockfield and her administration were terrible, and the reason I haven't donated to MIT for a long time. Aaron was but one example in a long string: Star Simpson, the mbta card hack, the faculty club hackers, etc. They were very unsupportive of students in general.

I respect Rafael immensely from when I knew him as a student, and really hoped he could turn it around. He clearly has.

It isn't hypocrisy. It's a new regime.

I'll be donating this year for the first time since graduation.
Java just might become the Fortran of the 21st century -- embarrassingly out of date, but due to vast amounts of legacy code, impossible to get rid of.
You embrace the evolutionary biological imperative. Mate, have kids, and make them your life.
You can expect whatever you want, but the norm in industry is for that sort of information to end up in a silo inside the company, and external exposure to it is permitted only under NDA or equivalent guarantees (e.g. sharing with law enforcement).

What you urgently want is a cultural change on behalf of industry. This guy is part of the change you want. Biting his fingers is not the optimal path to accomplishing your goals, even if it is viscerally satisfying.
"Keyword in description tag". I stopped reading there.
Right now it looks like $10 or $25 a month for a stop watch app. If I was a customer this one would have scared me away. I'm on my phone if that makes a difference.
Good work, look forward to improvements. Reminds me of playing Number Munchers as a kid.
Why are you asking me?

Goodnight.
Apprehensive, Many Doctors Shift to Jobs With Salaries
it's a wiki
Do activities like "at hockey" consume the majority of American kids, or just a few rich kids?
Work smart. Work hard.
Yes. Those infills are usually just a 2d image which is drawn in the hollo part of the model for each layer.
This wasn't done in a vacuum. There was a petition circulating to get this done prior to the announcement:

https://lists.csail.mit.edu/pipermail/csail-related/2014-Feb...
This story mentions Fermat's theorem that every prime congruent to 1 modulo 4 is a sum of two squares. Fermat provided no proof of this theorem. There are at least four different proofs, attributable to Euler, Lagrange, Dedekind and Zagier. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proofs_of_Fermat's_theorem_on_s...
I wouldn't have cared if it was just CC info that had been leaked as I could've easily remedy that. My personal info + password hashes are what pushed me over to this decision. I've personally given them over thousands of dollars of business and was helping others launch their projects on there.
I can do 8 hours of light-weight development easily enough, things like minor bugfixes, minor tweaks, etc. and carry that on for months if needed. But for stuff like coding from scratch, aside from brief bursts, I usually find that 4 hours is a good general guide. Obviously when nearing release, the long stretches of 8-10 hours of coding is going to be much lighter. Most of the tweaks are going to be minor, you hope, and so you can throw the rules out the window for a bit.

If you are working 60-80 hours a week, hopefully you aren't just doing one thing. It's one thing to put in 20 hours a week on software development, 20 hours a week on sales and marketing, 20 hours a week on fundraising, and 20 hours a week on business administration. It is far worse to put in 40 hours a week on software development, IMO.
I seem to recall a statement to the effect that the number of people that actually understand how a modern Intel cpu works can be counted on one (slightly mutilated) hand.

Don't you want to know how your cpu works? What happens when you're having an issue and wonder why your code doesn't work as expected?

Depth of knowledge is good, but I think the rational choice is to know the most about the domain you're working in -- because the entire domain is already too big for any one person to fully grasp.
Twitter Bootstrap Expo
Qtiyapa – 200,000 subscribers, 18 million views, 40 videos, in 18 months
Arch? I had it installed on a secondary computer, and after a week I was convinced to switch my main computer over. I haven't looked back since.
Yawn. There are very few scientific laws compared to the body of scientific knowledge. Most scientific concepts are relegated to theory rather than law as they are are amenable only to inductive proof. The only scientific ideas that have the status of law are those that are amenable to deductive proof.

You are very long winded, and you present as if you think your understanding is better than it actually is.
Yep:

using MyList = List<MyThing>;

The only limitation is that you can't alias generic types, just fully instantiated ones.
Your reversing of the relationship between the Halting Problem and the Incompleteness theorem (based on the quote you provided) makes me doubt the rest of your conclusions.

It's not that the Incompleteness Theorem tells us about the Halting Problem, but rather, that the Halting Problem tells us about the Incompleteness theorem.

Also, we have no reason to think that the universe satisfies some of the requirements of the Incompleteness Theorem (or even things like the Halting Problem).

Both require some kind of unbounded or self-referential behavior, which we might not have in the universe.
How A 1% Change Could Make or Break Your Startup
The author is right but I think he misses an impotant point. The bigest problem is that people think there work is there identity.