skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I know. I loved the story, but twitched every time it said "quantum".
280 votes and counting. I'm betting this will stay on the first page for a long time.
Now you're talking.
Cisco to buy messaging software company Jabber [2008]
P.S. An interesting question is: Who's flocking to Go more, Rubyists or Pythonistas?
If you just want to do web dev, probably ruby.

Otherwise, python is probably more versatile
I used to interview applicants for technical jobs at a Wall St bank. Most applicants were straight out of school with a B.S. in ComSci. There was a huge disconnect between what these kids wanted to do and what they would actually do if they got the job-- The work they wanted to do was reserved for the people with Ph.D.s and more work experience. I used to strongly discourage these kids from taking the job. When they did, they were soon very unhappy. They either quit or got themselves fired. The partners didn't care about the high turnover, because there was always a large applicant pool and the work always managed to get done.

If you quit, you can't be sure your next job will be any different.

If you can afford it, go back to school and get a Ph.D. in machine learning or whatever most interests you. That's the only way you can be sure you'll get a job doing the kind of work you like.
Ruby is the lingua franca of devops; it is an entirely sensible choice for that purpose.
Here’s what will change for you, our users: nothing.

Here's what will change for us: http://i.imgur.com/3Px9d9K.jpg
I don't think the author really knows ruby, like in you're example in this thread lambda would work nicely.
The tricky part of adhering to that doctrine is not the married part. It's the not getting married if it might not be for life part.
Social Network End Game (2010)
@redblacktree +1

@lsc there is another aspect to this too. A lot of people are addicted to their darker emotions. It is possible, your feeling of irritation is arising from such an attachment. It is also possible that you have an aversion to the feelings of joy, affection, love, happiness. Lots of people do, even the ones who are clearly faking their happiness :-D
Not quite true. They don't chain like that. A tells O that B has become a better choice, so a complex dance happens where:

a new circuit is established from O to B,

O tells A to tell the handset to move over to B-owned network infrastructure,

the handset roams over to B,

O drops the circuit to A.

This is a special case of Inter-MSC Handover, and you can read the spec at https://archive.org/stream/etsi_ts_123_009_v03.03.00/ts_1230...

The relevant section is Sec. 7.3.2, "Description of the subsequent handover procedure ii): MSC-B to MSC-B'".

(They call your "O" by "A", your "A" by "B", and your "C" by "B'" (B prime). And an MSC is a Mobile Switching Center that usually handles about half a city's worth of towers.)
Make friends with it? The problem with starting to think "we need to code it to like us" is that that isn't AI. You don't code people to like you, you act friendly towards them and the same problem will apply for the first generations of true AIs (things which will emerge from complicated systems, rather then be deliberately assembled).
"I don't understand why the Hacker News community tends to downplay the effect of pure CS research and the programming ability of people in academia."

The author of this article, in fact, seems to be a rather accomplished programmer as well as an academic. Here's her "about" page:

http://tagide.com/about.html

When I was in academia, I had the privilege of meeting some people with really impressive programming talent. And some of the pure CS research I saw had some very interesting applications, such as string matching algorithms that could be applied to DNA sequencing. (Of course, there were people who were extremely talented at bullshit too, but the quality of people varies anywhere you go.)
No, they were acquired for $19B. That's exactly a startup. They had a small amount of VC and the revenue to match, but sold for a king's ransom--the storybook version of a startup.
Jezis, now that I've read the article more closely: I can't speak to the Python, but that is Ruby with the left hand. Ew.
It's popular in Malaysia too. WhatsApp seems to be the messaging equivalent of soccer.
> Why would a spouse be no less entitled to reap the rewards

OK, I'll bite. What if one of these situations:

1) What if the spouse was dead set against the start-up, and did everything possible to dissuade you, but you succeeded anyway.

2) What if you used your own money and assets from before the marriage to finance it? And what if those monies and assets were covered by the prenup; the company financed by those investments would or wouldn't be covered?

3) What if you founded the company when the marriage was in obvious decline and you both knew you'd eventually get divorced? What if you founded it when you were already separated?

4) Many companies with 2 founders don't have a 50:50 split. Why does the split with the spouse need to be 50:50 in the case of a company? Why shouldn't it be 60:40 or 90:10 assuming we accept the notion that the spouse must have been contributing something and is entitled.
Or even better, C.

Baptism by fire, baby.
"First, a failure to communicate doesn't have to mean that either of us is dumb. It just happens sometimes."

Agreed. I'd meant my other comment to better indicate that those were potentially transient attributes. Also, smart people are perfectly capable of lacking understanding about something in particular.

"Second, the thought that you might be trolling has crossed my mind as well, so it now seems unlikely that either of us are."

That doesn't really follow, but okay.

"Third, there really isn't any need to repeatedly resort to insults. I have no idea what you do for a living but I wouldn't be so ready to dismiss you as incompetent as you seem to be with others."

I apologize where I was overly rude or confrontational.

"Security by obscurity is generally used [...]. I hope I've done a better job of explaining the statements I made, I can see how they may have been overly vague, but I was focusing on your claim that the SSID broadcasts aren't a valid example of security through obscurity."

It still seems to me that you're more or less using it to mean "weak security", as opposed to a principle which can be used to guide what to fix. It's quite possible that the meaning has weakened/broadened since I first learned about it (plausibly here[1], though I feel like it was earlier), but if so I think that's unfortunate - I think the tie to Kerckhoffs' Principle is important.

">Seriously, where do you work anyway?

This is extremely unnecessary and unproductive."

You brought your profession into the argument. I'm not sure it's extremely unnecessary to establish it, or for the argument to reflect on your profession. Neither am I entirely sure that it was actually appropriate, though.

[1]: https://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0205.html#1
Sometimes they do - for instance money used in stings and busts by law enforcement might have its serial numbers recorded. If you're subsequently searched and found to have money used in a drug bust, there are gonna be some tough questions and the money might get confiscated.

If someone uses a fraudulent credit card to buy something from you online, you're not going to be able to keep that money when the fraud's reversed.

If you (unknowingly) buy stolen property you can be forced to give it back, and then it's up to you to go after the guy who sold it to you. If you knowingly buy stolen property you're in trouble.

Given that BTC serial numbers are in plain view as opposed to stolen goods or dollar bills where you need a warrant, it's a lot easier to demand the BTC back.
That provides precisely no evidence that consciousness is somehow related to events on the quantum level. We know why drugs have the effects they do - because the brain has receptors specifically calibrated to accept or reject molecular inputs. But those inputs are chemical, not quantum - they are not indeterminate, they are lynchpins in chains of chemical reactions.

You omit that if you give a much larger dose of the same thing you'd kill a person, and a smaller dose might fall below any threshold of activity at all.

And for that matter, a microgram is a huge quantity of matter.
I'm confused as to how Perl gets included as a one of a group of tools that ruby helps you replace so you can use a consistent syntax.
> Should I Learn Python or Ruby?

Definitely!
Making the most of Google Analytics: Vimcasts, a case study
There are temperatures lower than zero kelvin. http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/ParticleAndNuclear/neg... for a technical description, http://www.nature.com/news/quantum-gas-goes-below-absolute-z... for a more readable article.
The way the app works seems to me to be a subset of what's required to play Quake well, so if it works I'd bet Quake works better. I also think Quake has other benefits (like reaction time training, spatial awareness, etc, etc) but it could have other downsides too.
Why I think Facebook makes a big mistake by spending $19 billion to buy WhatsApp
They aren't revered near unto godhead
I don't think there's much value in adding an Annex K comparison anywhere since none of the compared libcs have Annex K functions; comparison items are only meaningful where they differ. Even if some libcs did have it, though, I'd be hesitant to put it under hardening. My concept of "hardening" is providing additional properties beyond the scope of the specification (usually this means in places where undefined behavior occurs, but it could also be implementation-defined things, such as using an alternate pointer representation that allows as much bounds-checking as C makes possible).
Tesla CEO Musk on Battery Factor, Model X, Apple [video]
Was WhatsApp really that successful? I can't imagine it caught on with many young adults or older who have no trouble paying for SMS given the convenience. Is their demographic comprised of kids?
Thank you. This is the justification I was looking for. It felt like this acquisition was driven by a fundamentally different motivation than the Instagram acquisition and the Snapchat offer, but I couldn't put my finger on it: Facebook wasn't paying $40/user, they weren't paying $0.5B/engineer, and (unlike Instagram or Snapchat) they were not scared of WhatsApp as a competitor (at least not in terms of mindshare, because there's no evidence that WhatsApp was stealing the engagement of Facebook users)--they were just scared of what would happen if Google bought them first. Preventing Google from getting a leg up in the social space (especially since Hangouts is actually a very good product, despite having what I presume to be a comparatively low active user base) is probably worth far more than $16B to them, so in that sense they got a good deal. But admitting that strategy to their shareholders might not play well.

It will be interesting to see how this strategy works moving forward. If they're not careful, it could become an easy way for Google/Apple/Amazon/Microsoft to bleed Facebook dry.
I've known quite a few programmers that really should have access to the types of resources these big companies command; but just end up in situations simply paying the bills.
Puppet uses Ruby too. Ansible and SaltStack both use Python.

Older systems frequently use Perl (for example, ticketing systems like RT or OTRS), or even older systems use Tcl.

Sysadmin tools are a tossup, driven mainly by whatever the rest of the ecosystem uses.
I'd be fairly impressed if they survived - they seemed like they were already on the ropes in terms of solvency with it taking months to payout for BTC after the US government froze their accounts or fined them or whatever in May. I'm not really sure how many serious dick-punches like that a company can take.
Cpanel still has a section for ICQ support.
Yeah they should resolve the location to a geographical name. What value is there in the distance then other than, oh I can walk over to your house for casual sex instead of taking the bus. Oh I see...
http://911datasets.org/images/911datasets.org_all_torrents_J...
Ryan White's Mother, Ghandi, Mother Teresa,
Here's a question for you, what if the AI is perfectly friendly? It still might play us for fools in the long run.

For example, let's say we develop a super friendly AI, running on your computer. The AI realizes the human race is actually awful. We're greedy, we're killing tons of animals, chopping down rainforests, destroying the ocean and planet, starting wars with one another, and committing unspeakable acts of evil at times. The AI, being more intelligent than us, might decide the world is better off without the human race, and that we're actually a problem that needs to be removed.

Now, what does the AI do in your computer? Well, it's intelligent and knows the human race. It's not a hurry. It calculates the best way to destroy our species. It acts friendly, and talks about how humans and robots should live together, and if we make robots with a similar intelligence, they could drive our cars, shine our shoes, cook us dinner, look after the elderly, open your pickle jar, etc. So, we listen to the AI, it's smart, and friendly, and we build all these robots. It's right, the new robots are doing great and helping us out. Then the robots start building more and more robots. They start building robots with firepower, so they can, you know, shoot down threatening asteroids, or stop one of those dangerous human types that goes on a killing spree in our society. Fast forward a couple of hundred years, and there are robots everywhere. They finally decide it's time to continue their plan, they're in a position of power at this point, and they can instantly disable our security systems, phone lines, satellites, internet etc, and start wiping us out.

We're gone. They constructed the most efficient way to clean us from the planet. They were planning it for hundreds of years, starting in your computer. The AI then goes on to explore the universe, and we're just a blip in the past.

It kind of feels like we're a bug going towards the light, and that the unfortunate conclusion is almost inevitable.
Australians already eat 16,000 tonnes of shark per year.

Culling a few more to make beaches safer for swimming is hardly an issue. This regularly happens in other parts of Australia and certainly other parts of the world.

However, suddenly it has become a cause celebre for fashionable activists the world over. oh, those poor sharks. They don't realise the underlying reason for the protests is to give the greens more visibility in the upcoming West Australian Senate election that has to be re-run.

Personally, I have zero issue with culling sharks near swimming beaches. There is 17,000 miles of Australian coastline after all, and 99% of it is not swimming beaches.

If people wish to protest about sharks, then protest about the killing of sharks for shark fin soup, where the rest of the body is then dumped instead of being used.
Wow ! This is absolutely awesome !
Yes it's too bad Palm can't sue Apple for using the "swipable card tabbing" UI that Palm took directly from Safari on the original iPhone.

http://origin.arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/iphone-review...
Pick one, learn it, and don't worry about it.

Seriously. They are relatively equivalent.

I'm a Python person and ex-Perl and ex-Tcl refugee.

If you're doing scientific stuff, use Python. It's got a great community around that. Web is probably a wash--Ruby/Rails is a canonical combination, but Python/Django somehow manages to impress me every time I touch it.

However, if you're doing web stuff, I'd probably go for Javascript nowadays on both server and client side.

I can handle a bunch of languages: Scheme, Erlang, Scala, Clojure, Lua, Javascript ... but when I just need to bang out code I tend to grab Python.
I'll always hold respect for him, despite what people say he was just as much a part of the home computer revolution as Gates and Woz.
This seems more like a test of mouse movement speed than vision. Probably depends heavily on monitor calibration though.
Sobering list :)

But FB only paid $4B in cash, the rest is in stock. At a P/E of 111, I'd say FB is grossly overvalued. It's a great thing to swap overvalued pieces of paper for something, just ask AOL, which bought Time-Warner with worthless pieces of paper in 1999. AOL was a modem company in a world beginning to move to broadband. Time-Warner had actual physical cables in the ground and utility-style monopolies in most major cities, along with a bunch of movie/TV IP (if I recall correctly). Unfortunately for Time-Warner shareholders, management apparently assumed that pieces of paper labeled "stock" were equivalent to the limited-edition green and black pieces of paper labeled "$".

I estimate FB paid <= $8.5B. Which is still pretty ridiculous. If I were the WhatsApp founders, I would start selling my FB stock ASAP and buying something with some staying power. Such as perhaps one of the companies on your list :)
The twitter business model never fails.
With the options he had made so he could retain value even when YHOO crashed. Whatsapp founders will probably do something similar w/ FB.
Ruby is quickly dying in the ops space.

I wouldn't use either Chef or Puppet today for a greenfield project.
>Because of this, I would highly suggest Ruby over python. While the learning curve may be higher, Ruby is more intuitive and reads often as like plain english.

I disagree. Python generally reads much more like English than Ruby.

Ruby:

a && b # `and` is available but is generally not recommended due to operator precedence

Python:

a and b

Ruby:

a = b ? c : d

Python:

a = c if b else d

Ruby:

"abc" =~ /[a-z]{3}/

Python:

re.match(r"[a-z]{3}", "abc")

Ruby:

[1,2,3].map { |n| n + 5 }

Python:

[n + 5 for n in [1,2,3]]

Ruby also encourages operators and sigils that would be quite confusing to brand new beginners, like `||=`, `@`, `@@`, as well as Perl special variables ("what the hell are $/ $* and $&?").
Show HN: Real estate data visualisation for Victoria, Australia
The author seems to write a lot of negative/link bait articles on Facebook. Some examples:

1) Why Silicon Valley Tech Wunderkinds Will Only Ever Have 1 Good Business Idea During Their Entire Lives

2) Here's My Fix for Facebook: Make Facebook a Subsidiary of Instagram With Zuck Reporting to Systrom

3) Why Facebook Doesn't Have Mobile In Its Founding DNA - and Why That Spells Disaster

4)Why Peter Thiel Should Be Ashamed - And Resign From Facebook's Board Immediately
Rel="source"
Love the DOGE donation address, already #2 in a lot of people's eyes.
When stuff like this makes the front page on a regular basis, it's already a joke site:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5735421
The musl figures may be somewhat outdated since musl is developing rather quickly. With regards to the others, the main thing that's outdated is the size of glibc. It's considerably larger now. :-)
Record so far is 7202. I kind of get the feeling that if you get the pattern down you could go almost infinitely... is that impression correct?
Funny, I was going to say something similar but favor Python.
Yup. I personally love Ruby but as my skills have specialized more towards data science spectrum I've found Python to be the place where all the libs are.

Ruby and Python are also similar enough that while there are a ton of differences they won't be difficult to digest.
In this case, he was probably rejected more for fit/pay/cultural reasons but this should be a reminder for candidates to never be dejected when they're turned down by these companies. I have a friend who tried to kill himself because he failed the Google interview. Rejection by the "smartest" engineers at this companies is by no means an invalidation of your abilities. At the end of the day, none of them are solving the grand unified theory.
That's only if you believe that Whatsapp is worth $19B (which I don't). If it's not worth $19B, then it's Facebook throwing away $4B cash and diluting themselves for $12-15B.

Companies FB could have bought for around $20B: Linkedin,
Whole Foods, Broadcom, The Gap, etc.

There is no sort of metric that makes sense to purchase this product for $19B. Even if every user paid $1/yr, that's paying $19B for $450M revenue stream, or 40 times revenues. It's insane.
The main character of the book is not mechanically inclined, he is inclined, so to speak, with necessity to understand and explain, to find out the meaning of things and phenomena he observed. The quest for the Truth (only to find Quality instead, or a "perfect" Balance as it called on the East) is a state of mind, which is roughly a mix of curiosity, logical reasoning, imagination and persistence. Some call such set of traits the scientific mind, and some call it our Buddha nature. The book is about minds, not motorcycles.

As for attitude towards other people, it is really difficult problem, because lots of our attitudes are based on social conditioning and effects of environment which heavily influences what experience we had and most importantly how do we interpret and consolidate them, a bunch of feedback loops between different "agencies" of the brain.

In other words, culturally I am lower class Russian, which means I am treating other people in a different way you do. For me, for example, so called respect never to be taken for granted, but to be earned or to be a consequence of other person actions. So called "cultures of honor" are too much concerned with how others behave, it is silly, but it is what we are.

So, I do respect guys like Hickey or rtm or antirez (there are few more) because not only I could appreciate what they have done, but I know what it takes to be able to perform like that. It is like a person could really have a respect for those who is capable to run 15km non-stop only when he himself could run at least 10. Then you know what it takes.

So I cannot respect any talking heads or so called consultants simply because I know what it takes. Not very much.

Another example is books. As long as you progress as a reader you possibly could realize how very very few really good books are here (it is not a matter of popularity or cover annotations, of course) and the general amount of nonsense around you.
Yea, whatsapp has a nosebleed valuation because of it's user base size and lock in effect(zuck hopes at-least, vulnerable to changes in ios and android default messenger), but i'd say its definitely real. I respect them a lot more than say groupon, because they are actually a reasonable size(just 32 engineers) for the complexity of their tech, and they provide a really useful service. Compared to say groupon which hires thousands of salespeople and provides a marginally useful service. Their success has and will continue to drive down sms price gouging, and I think that's a good thing.
You could see it as a badge of honor that Google or another large company, which purportedly hires only the best of the best, deemed you worthy of an interview. The mere fact that you have been considered for a position might raise your standing with potential employers [citation needed].
They charge $1/year/user, though the first year is free.

One year ago they had 200m users. That number has not shrunk.
They only received 8 million in funding though.
So if this is a simulation, is talking to yourself in your head or out loud, a program being self-reflective? That's quite a program.
Incredibly even in 2014 "musician" still has a negative connotation among some socially conservative people.

The US music-products trade organization doesn't even use the phrase "musician" -- it uses "music makers". Try to find the word "musician" on http://www.namm.org/about
None of the things you mention matter, frankly. Nobody is claiming whatsapp is worthless. It's the valuation. Just because your users are passionate doesn't mean you deserve a high valuation. And something missed here is that Indian, SE Asian users, et al aren't that valuable in terms of how much money you can make displaying mobile ads to them.