skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It is a pity that there is so much propaganda on both sides of this conflict. I do not like Putin and will open a champaign bottle once he will be replaced by a better successor. But this article hides some of the facts.

A more critical view: http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/the-ukraine-crisis-through-the-...
Cultural technology and the making of K-Pop
I think it'd be impossible to know which tests haven't failed. What if they failed on a developer machine because he introduced a regression, but it was fixed prior to checkin?

Your CI build thinks the test hasn't failed, but instead it was performing an important job.

Those tests probably are a good place to start if you think you have useless tests, but it's simply a heuristic.
Note that what you seem to be referring to is an urban legend [1]. Initially both NASA and the Russians used pencils, but they were quickly deemed potentially hazardous because they shed graphite flakes that in microgravity may end up in places where you don't want them - being electrically conductive they may even cause short-circuits. Simple ball-point pens work fine in microgravity because they rely on the capillary effect, not gravity, to work.

[1] http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp
Do you know which BitCoin it is? This is a collectors piece and you can probably trace its lineage!
Braintree Ignition - The $50k boost for your business
Yes, mocking too much is a problem. Perhaps the greatest benefit of unit tests is that they force you to write code that can be tested in isolation. In other words, your code becomes modular. When you mock the whole world around your objects, there is nothing that forces you to separate the parts. You end up with code where you can’t create anything in isolation – it is all tangled together. From a recent tweet by Bill Wake: ”It’s ironic – the more powerful the mocking framework, the less pressure you feel to improve your design.” (from http://henrikwarne.com/2014/02/19/5-unit-testing-mistakes/)
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2036.2000....

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-4362.2000....

http://www.data-yard.net/10v2/parkinson.htm

http://www.data-yard.net/30/asthma.htm

http://www.data-yard.net/10c/nicotine.htm

http://www.data-yard.net/10b/cm.htm

http://www.forces.org/evidence/files/brea.htm

http://www.data-yard.net/13/tlj.htm

http://rheumatology.oxfordjournals.org/content/32/5/366.abst...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3613836?dopt=Abstract

http://jap.physiology.org/content/63/1/152.abstract?ijkey=3e...

http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/80/16/1329.abstract

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1447-0594.2006....

http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/13/9/1444.full
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailV...
How to debug CoffeeScript? Do it easily with the new Node Inspector debugger
This is why we need trustless exchanges:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1zgbza/i_am_buildin...
Here's a comment left on a forum by this Dorian person: https://www.national-preservation.com/threads/preserved-bars...

Satoshi's punctuation style with the double-space after the dot is a distinctive feature of his writing, used in both the official Bitcoin publication and on forum posts.

Looking at the HTML source of that review, you can notice this exact punctuation style.
James Coglan recently pointed out that all of Python's falsy values are the additive identity of some type. Midnight fits the mold.

This results in some weird results from an intuitive perspective, but is very principled and elegant in other ways.

My one objection was that I don't know how None fits in.
GnuTLS: Big internal bugs, few real-world problems
Comixology Important Security Notice E-Mail
Dear Comics Reader,

In the course of a recent review and upgrade of our security infrastructure, we determined that an unauthorized individual accessed a database of ours that contained usernames, email addresses, and cryptographically protected passwords.

Payment account information is not stored on our servers.

Even though we store our passwords in protected form, as a precautionary measure we are requiring all users to change their passwords on the comiXology platform and recommend that you promptly change your password on any other website where you use the same or a similar password. You can reset your comiXology.com password here.

We have taken additional steps to strengthen our security procedures and systems, and we will continue to implement improvements on an ongoing basis.

Please note that we will never ask you for personal or account information in an e-mail, so exercise caution if you receive emails that ask for personal information or direct you to a site where you are asked to provide personal information.

We apologize for the inconvenience. If you have any questions, please contact us by sending an email to support@comixology.com

Sincerely,

ComiXology
Could you explain how you think this right works, and to what extent it protects people aiming to effect the world from scrutiny by that world?

The US does have a right to privacy, but invoking to suggest nobody should have asked about Nakamoto suggests you are talking about something entirely different.
I don't see the point of asserting that getHour has been called in your (admittedly contrived) example. Mocking (or rather stubbing) a datetime library is usually just useful to get a predictable result. Making assertions on what methods get called and how many times seems useless in that case.

Sometimes it can be useful to make this kind of assertions on a mock though. Say you're mocking a web service, you can use this kind of assertion to ensure you're calling the web service properly. In this case it's useful because it's verifying behavior at a boundary between your program and the outside world. That's what I think tests are for. The outside world is not made only of users. Communication with external resources is also important and can be verified with mocks. In other words, this kind of mock assertions is interesting to verify the indirect outputs of the program: http://xunitpatterns.com/indirect%20output.html
I have had to do some major refactorings in projects I've worked on. They would have taken a lot longer to get right without the moderate-to-decent coverage of the test suites. Unit tests are a tool, like anything else in software development, but they're invaluable if used intelligently.
I think a lot of people seem to be confusing Libertarianism with Anarchism. Libertarians typically do see roles for SOME government, and those roles are typically the military, judges, roads, police, and the like.

Not other things though, so no Social Security, no Obamacare, no National Endowment for the Arts, and no space program (other than for space weapons, so get rid of NASA and establish some sort of "US Star Force.")

So with that world view, working at a defense contractor isn't a conflict at all, instead, it is the one "true and legitimate" reason for government in their eyes.
Yes there is. It is an older industry. One that existed when Common Law was being formed hundreds of years ago.
Thanks for letting us know! We'll fix it up.
On the plus side, Boolean Value: Midnight would make a great CS-themed action movie title.
Github Cloud
I'm pretty sure there's been more than three exchange heists.
default values is a special case (and one which I consider to be a bug in python, frankly, since it bites everyone who didn't read up on default arguments before the wrote some code - everyone uses [] as a default argument at some point and then spends an amount of time proportional to the complexity of their program debugging the insane behaviour before noticing. My program was quite long and complex, and I am still bitter.)

I didn't argue, and certainly didn't mean to imply, that it is always better, but in the sort of case we're considering in this example, i.e. we expect a valid time value or None, It really is madness to imply a time value of midnight is "empty".
I've been working on Educator News, a clone of HN for the education community.

http://www.educatornews.net

It's been tried before and was well-received initially, but the people behind the project were not developers. They tried to build it on a framework that wasn't really designed for building web apps, and the project disappeared pretty quickly.

I need to optimize some of the queries before the project gets too large, but the most basic functionality is there. It's pretty satisfying to have a project that I'm confident will fit a pretty significant need.
I think it's more nuanced than that, maybe not always - but usually.

A person can dislike some things an organization does while finding value in others, government systems are complex. You can ignore the government and work outside of it or you can work within it to try and push things in a certain direction.
Exactly. In high school I took a typing class, and there, two spaces after the period was the rule. I switched to one space later on, probably because early word processing and desktop publishing tech produced over-spaced results if you used two spaces.
I liked the part about turning unit tests into assertions. Too bad most of us (including me) are programming in Java, rather than something like Eiffel.

I really liked the "design by contract" stuff built into Eiffel when I read about it years ago (before there was such a thing as Java).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eiffel_(programming_language)#D...

Contrast the notion of a class invariant with the notion of a Java Bean, which is constructed as a useless empty piece of crap, and is eventually mutated enough to represent something useful. Of course, this rant takes us into immutability in general...
It looks like an exchange.
Given it was designed as a tank killer, but it has done an amazing job of supporting our ground troops in a way the F-35 is never going to fulfill. The amount of time and continued fire support it can give has not been matched.
I've had two experiences with unit testing recently that have made me a believer.

One of them was that I was working on a team where a programmer quit and I had to get a very complex codebase ready for production. The last programmer was terrible, the kind of guy who had trouble making primary keys that were unique, where any code that could possibly have a race condition did, and so forth. The code had unit tests, however, and that made it salvagable, and eventually I got the system to a place where it worked correctly and the customers loved it.

In nine months of effort on this, I ran into one refactoring where it felt the unit tests were a burden, and that involved about a day of work rewriting the tests. Unit tests are more likely to be a problem, however, when they add to the time of the build process. For instance, I wrote something in JUnit that hammered part of the system for race conditions, and this was key to fixing races in that part of the system. It fired off a thousand threads and took two minutes to run, and adding two minutes to your build is a BIG PROBLEM, particularly if anybody who wants to add two minutes to your build can do so and if anybody who wants to remove two minutes from the build is called "a complainer" and "not a team player". Overall the CPU time it takes to run is more likely to be a problem than the developer time it takes to maintain them.

As for Mockito I have found it is a great help for writing Map/Reduce jobs. As I don't own a big cluster and as I sometimes like to code on the run with my laptop, an integration test typically takes ten minutes with Amazon Elastic Map/Reduce. It takes some time to code up tests, but I get it all back with dividends because often I get jobs running with two or three integration test cycles instead of ten or twenty. When I find problems in the integration tests, usually I can reproduce them in the unit tests and solve them there.

Now, it did take considerable investment to get to the point where unit testing worked so well for me. I used to have problems where "the tests worked" but the real application didn't because Hadoop reuses Writable objects so if you just pass a List of objects to the reducer, you might get different results in a test than you do in real life. Creating an Iterable object that behaves more like Hadoop does solved that problem.

Generally if you are feeling that "unit testing sucks" or "mockito sucks" it's often that case that you're not doing it the right way.
He did change his name from Satoshi to Dorian and maybe that's what the officer had.
Alternatively, it makes it sound like you are utterly incapable of just calling something what it is, you have to stick your trademarks all over it.

It's like when companies insist on calling common things by Special Names™ all over their documents instead of just writing like Normal People™ so they can have some Strange Monopoly™ over their terms.

"Oh, no no, you've got it wrong, this isn't a cloud database, it's a Data Knowledge System™ from Some Company™®©, which enables you to Do More™."

At least that's how I feel about it. And yes, I feel the same way about McEverything.
Widget Customizer Officially Merged Into Core for WordPress 3.9
So this is propaganda and not sure why the article is posted here, this isn't reddit. And most of these are up to interpretation. So BS.
My understanding is that the responder is saying that "That test does not mean what you are intending it to mean, it means something else that we've documented. We won't make it mean what you would like it to take make your incorrect code work, at the expense of breaking code that is using it in the documented way".

I started on the side of the original person but was persuaded round by the responder.

"if x:" means something completely different than "if x is not None", adn that needs to be understood. The fact that they might evaluate to the same result a lot of the time is luck, and is how people have got into this mess. Changing the boolean evaluation in this case is actually making the mess even worse.
When I saw this I really hoped they just made them support 23 parameters.
The original Badros and Borning paper on Constraint Cascading Style Sheets from 1999
explains pretty well why something like GSS is needed: http://www.cs.washington.edu/research/constraints/web/ccss-u...

iOS developers have the power of using constraints for their layouts. Why not give the same to web development?

As for fluidity, this is something GSS can provide very easily with the conditionals. Imagine being able to do media query-style rules, but not only for the screen size but also for sizes of other elements. "If the image is bigger than X, change the layout so-and-so".

A little example: open the toolbar layout demo (http://gridstylesheets.org/demos/apple/) in a browser window, and resize that around. See how the button that prefers to be in the center, but even more strongly doesn't want to overlap with the other buttons behaves.
Discourse with Docker on DigitalOcean
>First Meta isn't actually a Bitcoin exchange

From the website
Buy more of your preferred virtual currency at better rates
GIFs Show Cities Passing From Day to Night
Bigger question -- who knew there was an aviation Stack Exchange??!? I always went to quora to read kind of stuff.
People absolutely use Coq to generate code. I don't know what else is involved.

A few substantiating links from my search results for "coq generating code":

http://coq.inria.fr/V8.1/refman/Reference-Manual021.html

http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/akenn/coq/LOLA...

http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/nick/coqasm.pd...
We built Chime to keep us from having copious pinned tabs. Let me know if any of you find it useful. http://chimeapp.com
No, it doesn't just different mistakes.

If they wanted to make people write better code they would throw an error on coercion from time to bool so that everyone would have to fix the code.
JSConfUY unexpected schedules changes
How old is your kid? The hardest part I have with building a second career as a programmer is making time around my (fairly new) family's needs. My motivation to make meaningful projects is higher than it has ever been though, because I want to help make a better world for my son.

As he grows up, which is happening as fast as everyone says it does, I will have plenty of time again. I enjoy every day with my family now, but I also look forward to having enough time to polish some of the projects I have started.

I get an hour or two in the morning before I have to go to work, and maybe an hour at night if I'm not exhausted by then.
An App for Escaping Awkward Situations
Following these steps in putting together a discussion board for Coding for Interviews was truly painless. I've been very impressed with Docker and DigitalOcean.
Dogs attack Spider-Man
It does sound like they might have gone a bit far, but as someone who works in an industrial context, a tool that maintains backwards compatibility rigorously is of enormous benefit.

The case you might have to make to upgrade the version of the tool you are using has to take into account the risks, and something that is maintaining a high level of backwards compatibility has a much lower level of risk.
True, it shines in the case of tmux/screen-type programs because they require resuming versus the restarting that is done with for most daemons after an upgrade. If you keep your system up to date, Arch in my case, it's very easy to upgrade tmux to a version with a different protocol while a very large session is running, so it's pretty much a lifesaver.
Can you identify the transaction? We are fairly certain which bitcoins belong to the real Satoshi Nakamoto.
Would you be able to give us the Transaction ID for this? :)
Must be nice to have your providers competing with each other. Everyone knows Bezos loves a good ole race to the bottom better than anyone. I suspect we'll see even steeper AWS price cuts this year in response.
It varies from project to project, but my flow nowadays is something like this:

1. Describe the behavior of the function in a readme with a code example.

2. Create a test that is mostly just a copy/paste from the readme code.

3. Write the actual function until it passes the first test.

4. Write a few more tests for any edge cases I can think of.

5. Get the function to pass again.

6. Encounter another edge case, goto 4.

It seems to work pretty well for me anyway. I think a lot of the debate really centers around unit tests vs integration tests (no one serious I know of is arguing for no testing, or all manual testing).

In my experience, you get the most bang for your buck with mostly unit tests in library code, and mostly integration tests in applications. Despite the difference in use cases, I think both sides talk past each other most of the time.

Unit tests all over the place in an application code tends to be a waste, because the tendency is to test the libraries your application is using. Integration tests in library code is often terrible, because they are usually slower and tightly coupled to external libs.
EBay view on mobile web
Disagree. I would argue content should fit the layout, and its just frontend ideology that puts a premium on using css as the main way to do it.

Constraint solvers are used in typical (do we still call them fat clients?) gui toolkits, the web is just finally catching up after a decade or so of little to half-baked solutions.

I'm excited that projects like this are finally getting visibility.
Time is a dimension
I wouldn't refuse to listen her but I'd question her morality if she continues to knowingly put the lives of people in danger just for her pay cheque.
> I'm going to take you at your word that you're actually curious.

I actually do find it curious, but frustrating. I have a great many friends, who I quite like in normal face-to-face interaction, who I've FB friended, and found I had to unfollow their feeds because in private they turn into rabid ideologues...from every part of the political spectrum. In this case I'm isolating conservative/libertarian folks, but I see similar kinds of things from people in various liberal parts of the spectrum as well...endless huffington post, MSNBC and planned parenthood links or whatever.

> People who are in favor of a certain outcome have no obligation to act as if that outcome has already come to pass.

Yeah that's true in theory. But it can get out of control. It's like attending a rally about having too many strip clubs in your neighborhood, then chilling out after the rally in your local neighborhood strip club.

It's not like there isn't a large, thriving, private, non-government sector in the U.S. that they could be employing their skills at.

> all things being equal it's better to have some conservative/libertarian people working there to keep things from getting out of control

What would concern me is people who fundamentally don't believe their job should exist because it's a waste of resources, simply not doing a good job.
Whatever the case shit keeps getting real in the Bitcoin world lately.
Isn't this independent of the concurrency primitive? It is a fundamental characteristic of making a distributed call to a resource that the application in question needs to act on the response or the failure of in a timely manner (i.e. not fire-and-forget).

Even if you are using actors or the reactor pattern at some point they need the equivalent of a circuit breaker in them. It just pushes it to a lower layer.

Unless you're just advocating avoiding distributed calls which require a timely response whenever you can, which I agree with as much as is feasible, but obviously can't always be avoided.
You're the author of that!? I love that book, and even though I stick to it's practices less than I probably should, it was incredibly helpful
Please read my sibling comment. The appropriate response to this study is:

The people who designed the study used absolute garbage for inputs. They should be heavily mentored or fired for ever proposing it, much less for releasing misleading information to a gullible public.

This has nothing to do with preconceived notions. This has everything to doing credible statistical work.
Slightly off topic...

The village where I grew up in Scotland is on a headland on the coast and was near a couple of RAF bases - it seemed a popular route point so my childhood had a lot of very low flying military aircraft about so I guess we were all used to the noise.

Then came the day when there was a Vulcan bomber doing apparently doing aerobatics at a fairly low level over the village - it's probably close to 40 years but I don't think I will ever forget that utterly glorious sound....

[Edit: the sight of a Vulcan being thrown around the sky isn't something I'll forget either!]
Looks like a neat linkbait. Unlikely the owner never noticed this..
If someone is going to get paid it might as well be me. People that support positions only because they personally benefit or who can't change their minds because it would cost them, are far more worrying. As another comment pointed out, those people have a personal stake in the issue. Accepting they are wrong has an actual cost to them.
Reading code is a purposeful activity, though; namely, to understand what the code does. The speed with which that can be done is relevant in the margins from a productivity standpoint, but to build an argument for code structure around it strikes me as missing the point of the "axiom" you quote.