skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What I meant was that it was a collection of different, but related objects. I had nothing to do with creating the structure and content of the payload, so I was stuck using it. The XSLT had grown organically over several years to solve each immediate problem and didn't seem to be designed. This wasn't a problem for XPath because it could walk backwards on the RTF and index based on keys contained elsewhere in the payload. I'm sure it didn't perform as well as some alternatives, but it is still a powerful and unambiguous language in that respect.

Another subtlety was their use of attributes in the XML payload that were simply interned as any other property in the JSON representation. I did some hand waving earlier by suggesting the original system was configured to emit JSON. That would eventually be the case, but for the POC it was transformed by an intermediate process that did a straight transliteration. This made the JSON a little less friendly because I had arrays of objects where they would have been better described as a dictionary, but I had to be more generic in that approach.

Once I was in the transformer portion of JS code, I converted the arrays into something more usable. This still meant nesting multiple loops as I iterated over the collections and built usable objects.

There was some attempt by the original programmer to use XSLT best practices. The transformation was broken up into multiple templates that were then applied, but there was too much reliance on conditional variables for my taste.

Arguably had the JSON payload been rewritten and structured better, the JS approach would have worked. But this was building a plane in mid-flight. I didn't have that luxury. I had to ingest JSONified XML and emit a text document.

To make the template easier to read in the source I defined it using Moustache. This was probably the biggest issue with the existing system. With all of the conditionals, it was next to impossible to know what the final transformation would look like. This is why the client was looking for other options, because the existing system was becoming too costly to maintain.

I think this is what I was trying to get at in my original comment. XSLT worked better as a data transformer. XPath made it easier to describe these transformations than I could do in JS alone. On the other hand, the JS was easier to maintain and if from your background you only know procedural languages, it was easier to read and write. The problem in this case was that the data they were using to drive the process was already in an XML format and XSLT was a known working solution.

I still think the best solution for this case would be rewriting the backend, but that wasn't an option. The next best solution would be to use XSLT to transform the data into something more manageable in JS, but the client wanted to eliminate XSLT entirely. My POC was the end result, for better or for worse. It was still an interesting project.
Actually I think it will likely be denied. The claims are overly broad.
from
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/10/world/asia/malaysia-airlin...

"Malaysia Airlines confirmed that the missing aircraft had been involved in a collision with another plane in 2012 at the Shanghai airport that resulted in damage to the Malaysian aircraft’s wingtip. But the airline said the wing was repaired by Boeing and declared safe to fly."
If this is your goal you better teach the student about how to define addition and multiplication using the the formalization from the Peano axioms, i. e.

+(0, y) = y for all y in N
+(S(x), y) = S(+(x, y)) for all x, y in N
*(0, y) = 0 for all y in N
*(S(x), y) = +(y, *(x, y)) for all x, y in N

I know no way that states more clearly how addition and multiplication are related. Division is than simply stated as: for given a, b in N find x such that

*(b, x) = a.

This states clearly how multiplication (obvious) and addition (by definition of multiplication) is related to division.
Ejection systems are pretty advanced. A secondary black-box or just transponder that ejects in the event of rapid acceleration or altitude loss could be helpful, although the engineering of getting it into an airliner might be a bit tough.
Short version: http://criticker.com sells access to their API for apps. Any API account can retrieve a list of all users it registered on the site, then retrieve the cleartext password for each user it created.

There are so many WTFs in this whole situation that it's a wonder criticker has managed to keep the website online. Which is a shame, as it looks like a really useful website.
I hope that the author notified Criticker about these issues before putting them out there on the internet. Not doing so would be extremely irresponsible and is sort of screwing over the users of Cricketer.
<RequestProcessingTime>-0.036264</RequestProcessingTime>

Wait, did their API return a negative processing time?
Ah thanks. Poster of this HN post here. I posted it on pastebin because the original content could be removed later and I thought saving in a cache like pastebin was a good idea, so I didn't check whether original link has been posted or not.
That is definition of a bad math teacher.
In the case of AF447 the flight control system knew something was wrong. In a situation like that increasing the rate of messaging automatically might be a good idea, and could probably be implemented entirely in software. It probably wouldn't help in the case of catastrophic air frame failure out altitude however.
can you provide any sources to how they make so little money in India?

as far as I know, India is one of the countries where google dominates in search. Which is not the case in China, google is not a major search engine in China. I just can't imagine they pulling out of India.

They just recently had heart warming google advertisements in TV which is very rare for google to do.
The only difference between this method and 'traditional' long division is the use of a fixed product of the divisor with each iteration instead of trying to find the largest possible number to subtract. If anything, this just shifts the emphasis away from multiplication to subtraction, which I think is strange.

That said, I don't have a big problem with this as a method for learning division. I think my reaction is related more to the memory of 'show your work!' and the thought that this would mean more work to show.
The way I interpret it, they're aiming (rightly) to dismount programming from its local maxima in expressivity that is plaintext

Where do you get this idea, out of curiosity? Every demonstration of Wolfram Language I've seen has been plain text. And what makes you think they'll get farther than everyone else?
Wait, just to be clear - so anyone who downloads this app can trivially retrieve the username and password for all 2000+ users of the app? Did I misunderstand the article?
For the reasons you said, I don't think that this is a general algorithm they are teaching. May be it is a stepping stone to get to understanding of what division means first and then they'll teach them long division. Clearly this is an inefficient method for larger numbers, so I don't see how this can be expected to be useful as a go-to algorithm for calculating division.
Really feeling the CPU caps ( per package ) even at Digital Ocean now, even though the actual packages can scale cores. Would be nice to add/remove resources a la carte. Looks like it'll be at least another 6-18mo before the industry shifts to more concurrent friendly virtual machines.

At Digital Ocean: No ability to add IP addresses, change the RAM, cores ( as I said ) or any other resource without moving up to the next virtual machine. Seems like Linode and DO are not so different after all, but two of a kind.
I was thinking about the added weight of a black box though. My possibly naive assumption is that they're heavy because they're so robust, so would need serious buoyancy. I can't find a weight for them though so I might be wrong.
I work with over 30 schools in Bay Area, Chicago and New York as well, and have been working with teachers, districts etc on common core for the past two years. The entire point of CCSS is to make sure that WHAT is taught in a grade level does not vary. HOW varies so much from district to district, as each school/classroom contains so much demographic variability. My point was that it does not direct you "how" to teach kids division. Rather it provides guidelines that they should be taught division. Please go read the entire standards list and tell me if they contain anything more than suggestion on how to teach any mathematical curriculum.
I agree teachers hate it, but its mostly because:
1. They are being forced to adapt to something without adequate amount of training
2. They have children with a whole range of skill sets which do not map to the common core for the grade levels they teach. So some children might be ahead and some might be behind for the particular grade level, so its hard to make sure that everyone in a grade level is mapping on the standards
I agree, but look at the grief Microsoft got when they tried it with Vista's UAC prompts... more permission popups is clearly not what the majority of users want.

I think one solution is having the prompts integrate with the sort of crowdsourcing algorithm that XPrivacy has (e.g., if >90% of users have granted the app permissions on the address book, then don't show the prompt.)

Another important feature is that the app should not know if the user has granted it the permissions it asked for. If the user doesn't want to, the system should just feed the app bogus data and let the user continue interacting with other parts of the app (as we see today, most apps don't really need the data they collect in order to work.)
On the other hand, I find myself unable to plateau in Haskell, it seems that there is always new abstractions behind the corner. Want to thread exceptions through your monad transformers? Learn MonadState. Want accessors which do not suck? Learn Lens. And then you have free monads, comonads, Operational, Kleisli arrows, Pipes/Conduits/IO Streams/Iteratees...

It may be an issue with the language: make a powerful language, and many things which ought to be part of the core system are going to be in a library. And as Haskell's syntax unfortunately allows library designers to go wild with ASCII symbols, you can easily end up with really hard-to-grok code (especially with the right amount of point-free style). Bonus if you use one-character variables. Unfortunately, in the real world code is read more than it is written, and the prevalent cleverness doesn't really help with that.
> I find the Facebook comments interesting - lot's of "I can't figure this out". I suspect, strongly, that a lot of people learned the traditional manipulation but never understood why they were doing it.

If you really want students to understand why they are doing it, I see no other way than teaching methods for proving the correctness of algorithms, i. e. Hoare logic: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoare_logic
I don't know how they plan to handle it. In a similar game I've worked on (unpublished) gravity is handled like our universe, but with a bias toward the three orthogonal axis. This leaves you feeling like a 2d world on the faces, but as you approach to edges you begin to lean into them until you are "standing on the peak of the roof" at the edge, continuing brings you upright on the next face. A coefficient governs the strength of the bias, which I adjusted to trade off the width of the "funny" zones and the gravity direction gradient.

At the center of the planets, there is a singularity (which if you screw up the math can catapult you into space, game debugging has lots of fun to it) but is actually a non-issue because the strength of the gravity approaches zero, so the fact that it flips around in directions doesn't really matter, after you debug it.
_I don't even bother clicking links like "X ways to..." or "Y reasons to" or "Z people who"_

Have you seen the other blog posts ?

- Contagious: 6 Reasons Things Catch On
- 5 Short Reads to Expand Your Mind

The article is so ridiculous that you know the guy did it on purpose.
It is possible that MtGox lost its money by dipping into deposits and pending cash withdrawals for its own use. Then, maybe some bad investments snowballed and they couldn't recover.

This seems more likely than someone hacking them and ripping off hundreds of millions of dollars worth of bitcoins without them noticing.

There is regulation that prevents this (most of the time) in banks, but in an unregulated exchange it would be easy (and stupid) to start gambling with customer deposits and pending withdrawals.

A few months ago I set up a MtGox account, and noticed the MtGox policy of taking weeks or months to wire the proceeds from a bitcoin sale. That seemed like a red flag, and made me wonder what they're doing with the cash between the bitcoin sale and the wire transfer. I'm glad I opted out of MtGox.
Wizmouse – Scroll Better
The Making Of: 1980's Rogue (2009)
http://goo.gl/lhN4kG

There, solved it for you. [yes, I'm implying that nobody types in long URLs, and if they do, they're in a negligible minority]
I find this indicative of poor teaching in general, not what standards they are trying to teach. Common core doesn't hurt or help with this issue. Being rigid with methods and not aiming for understanding is the problem.
He claims to have notified Criticker in 2010, and links to a post on their forum (username teario):

http://www.criticker.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=2063#p188...
But that's the problem, "common sense" IS applied to the problem. Thing is, "common sense" is just a bullshit phrase we like to apply out of laziness and lack of empathy for how hard it is to establish and maintain a solid foundation of knowledge in any field, let alone tech where "common sense" can change year to year. (although I'm sure it has a legal definition with lots of precedent in the two centuries before the internet)

The patent office is over worked and most patent examiners have no idea what "common sense" is in most tech fields, each of which requires a familiarity that few of us here on HN can claim, let alone a bureaucrat with terrible guidance from legislators. All it takes is a single small gap, like what a crypto currency is, or a misunderstanding of how currency exchanges operate, or even outright semantic manipulation by legal counsel, and the poor patent examiner has no choice but to approve the patent. This is why we have appeals and the legislature, the former to fix the failings of "common sense" and the latter to be bought to manipulate it.
I like the 16bit ascii art impressionism with a modern rendering feel. Finally.
Same thing everybody is doing in this case is long division. Everybody gotta get the result when faced with long division exercise.

If some administrators in schools or school district decided that there is only one way to do long division, then it is on them.
I suspect a lot of industries build up a corporate mythology around how it is 'special' to motivate intelligent people to get to do their best work for them. I don't see the CIA as very different from every startup entrepreneur with a pitch on how they're changing the world.
When you trade security for speed, amazing things can happen!
IP address and GeoIP is pretty handy from a support perspective, plus anything such as ISP that can be inferred from IP address. The whatismybrowser.com has IP address but not the GeoIP.

More generally an embeddable 'contact us' form for people to use might be useful if it solves problems of having to setup captcha, email and so on that is hard to do correctly. On the back of the contact us form there could be all the useful support gubbins so that whomever is in support dealing with the 'complaint' sent on on the contact us does not have to ask the customer to go to some third party site to find out the browser/IP/screen size and so on.
Deidre Austen responded [0] to the original post that the standard being assessed is "find whole number quotients of whole numbers with up to 4-digit dividends and 2-digit divisors using strategies based on place value, the properties of operations, and/or the relationship between multiplication and division. Illustrate and explain the calculation by using equations, rectangular arrays, and/or area models."

Considering that this school has has chosen a reform (or non-standard) division approach to achieve this standard, instead of using regular long division, shows to me that curriculum managers do have options for ways to achieve the standards.

(Hopefully, this Facebook link works correctly)

[0] https://www.facebook.com/dan.bongino/photos/a.51705718172038...
Real time telemetry via satellite could definitely be useful in some situations. The Air France crash could have been prevented if somebody on the ground had taken a look at the data from the plane, realised that the junior pilot has been pulling up the whole time, and made the crew aware of it. That was one of the worst crashes in history and there was never even a problem with the plane. All they needed to save the flight was for somebody to point out that the plane was stalling due to a bad control input by one of the pilots.

There are certainly cases where the telemetry link would fail as the aircraft ran into trouble, rendering it useless, but there are undeniably cases where it could save hundreds of lives
It is? It reads like a mix of truth and sophistry. If somebody frames you for murder, you may well blame the prosecution for being incompetent, but the main guilty party is certainly the one who planted the evidence in the first place.
Substantially all problems were solved by someone else first. That doesn't meaningfully inhibit you from solving them, too. Reasons why this could redound to your advantage include superior marketing, positioning, ability to attack different niches, lower cost structure, or the ability to survive off the crumbs the big guys don't care about.

It's totally worth it for me to have the CEO and head of product development talk to your office manager for 30 minutes then custom code an import script, to get you onboarded at $200 to $500 a month. The 800 LB Gorilla basically doesn't care about you below $1k a month.
Looks nice, but please sanitize your input:

http://www.whatsmybrowser.org/b/STOW3UD

Also the site completely breaks if I add rare unicodes at the end of the user agent:

🐧
Yes. It took two years and multiple teams (including submarine) until Titanic team came and found the blackbox and the remains of the aircraft deep on the seabed.
"isn't saying "divide these 30 oranges to 6 boxes" enough? "

So your plan is to teach division by telling someone to 'divide'?
Thanks for that, I skipped over that paragraph.
It's not a straw man, because I'm not using "no law" and "no property rights" as the basis of comparison. Non-Anglo countries still had law and property rights. What Anglo countries had, and have, are very sophisticated legal systems and legalistic societies that leverage the legal system for more purposes. It's one thing for a farmer to be able to sue someone who takes his land. It's another for farmers to be able to hedge against bad harvests by entering into contracts and having the contracts traded as property rights on derivatives exchanges. The complexity and sophistication of Anglo legal systems readily support the complex and sophisticated corporate, financial, and insurance transactions that underly modern economies. It's not a coincidence that the world's three largest financial centers, New York, London, and Hong Kong, are all common law jurisdictions based on English common law.

And complaining that legal contracts are written in "bizarre, arcane language" seems to me to be like a high level manager complaining about programs being written in C++ or Javascript, instead of plain spoken English. After all, why do you need so many lines of this "code" when he just explained precisely everything the program should do in 15 minutes?
If you read the link, you'll see he did....

in 2010! It remains unchanged.

*Beat to the point by pille
Mmminimal is for sale, no reserve
The problem here is not the method the students are learning. The problem here is that they are learning long division at all. Does ANYBODY care the method by which children learn to divide large numbers?

I would be willing to bet that behind the vast majority of those outraged comments is an adult that hasn't used long division in decades.
That is a very long line, though -- 34 hours. 6 hours behind schedule is a lot in absolute terms, but it's only about 17%. I've often had 6 hour trips turn into 7 hour trips, in all modes of transportation.

What it comes down to is that 34 hour trips are not something we are ready to put up with anymore, unless we somehow make the trip itself part of the goal, whether it's an "Amtrak Residency" or a long range road trip with the sights and the hotels.

Having 3-5 shorts lines service the 34h/1400mi overall length makes more sense really. Maybe 5 7h lines during the day, and 3 11h overnighters. 7 to 8 hours is about as long as I'm willing to spend in a daytime train, and my previous experiences with 10 to 12 hour sleeper wagon trips have been pretty great, too. Any trips longer than that you can either spend a night in Sacramento or you have to take a plane or you just don't go and vote that the rail network gets improved beyond a pathetic 40 mph average.
Worthless to you at this moment. Number 3 is differential calculus. That's a big one.
ASICs are not the solution to the Bitcoin energy problem. If you can devote 1kW to CPU mining, you have every reason to devote 1kW to ASIC mining. Future technology is irrelevant -- every reduction in the power required per hash will result in an equivalent increase in the hash rate.

Note that the current monetary system has a very different incentive structure. If VISA needs to devote 1GW of power to process all its transactions today, and tomorrow a new technology comes along that allows VISA to process the same number of transactions with 100MW, VISA has every reason to reduce its power consumption to 100MW. For mainstream payment systems, power use always reduces profits -- so the incentive is always to use the minimum power necessary for processing transactions and detecting fraud.
I think the problem is that the parents were taught how to do things, not how to think about things.

Nowadays, you don't learn long division so you can divide two numbers given a large amount of time and a big sheet of paper. Your computer will do that for you. You learn it as a precursor to algebra and number theory and as a way to apply an algorithm practically. That's what the Facebook comments don't understand.

(I don't really see the benefit in this case, but I'm tired of the knee-jerk reactions about everything new.)
Urban – An Xcode Theme for Xcode 3, 4 and 5
If you were using this method, it would be more typical to give the remainder as a fraction.

Student probably hasn't studied decimal numbers to an extent that this would be relevant at this stage.
Interesting question raised and an interesting answer from you. Both made me think and have made my day better by making me smarter than before.

If I may add _one_ suggestion to both, it is to say "Elizabeth" or "Spiegel" instead of "the woman from the article" or something like that. It makes the reference more human.
Read the GP's link. You'll see that the COMMON core (despite its name) does not quite do that. It is up to the states and I think even local districts to decide how to implement it. The idea is that a common core is to set up ideas that every student should learn (that's the COMMON part), not _how_ they should learn it.