skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I do not agree. "Worse is better" emphasizes on simplicity - and as example, the emphasis on separation of concerns by building components that do one thing and do it well. It's actually easier to design monolithic systems, than it is to build independent components that are interconnected. Unix itself suffered because at places it made compromises to its philosophy - it's a good thing that Plan9 exists, with some of the concepts ending in Unix anyway (e.g. the procfs comes from Plan9). And again, simplicity is not the same thing as easiness.

> Haskell is clearly a superior language to Java in many respects, writing code properly in Haskell is much harder than doing so in Java

I do not agree on your assessment. Haskell is harder to write because ALL the concepts involved are extremely unfamiliar to everybody. Java is learned in school. Java is everywhere. Developers are exposed to Java or Java-like languages.

OOP and class-based design, including all the design patterns in the gang of four, seem easy to you or to most people, because we've been exposed to them ever since we started to learn programming.

Haskell is also great, but it is not clearly superior to Java. That's another point I disagree on, the jury is still out on that one - as language choice is important, but it's less important than everything else combined (libraries, tools, ecosystem and so on).
I am in the boat of having a smartphone only because it was required of me for work. I am required now to be in contact via email at all times. I certainly would never buy a smart phone if not simply because the contract costs for them are so obnoxious. Really, seventy five to a hundred a month, for a phone?!?!?!

The features and abilities provided aren't worth a thousand a year to me, the loss of freedom certainly isn't.
And what if not? What if people get rich not due to being lucky?

Said that, I agree that there is little value in the article.
There is no one solution fits all. Especially if the problem is imaginary.
The thing I like about Gulp is that all it needs is NPM to install all its stuff. Make you have to worry about different system libraries, etc. Also, with gulp I can leverage other node based libraries, so for one project, I can get frontend guys set up using a dev server which automatically both proxies API requests to a backend server, and also watches and livereloads files (as they like), with three damn commands - npm install && bower install && gulp dev. Bam. Working dev server running on port 8000 that does all that they need it to.
#2 - Yes. Jumping into an Isolation Tank (sensory deprivation) is a great hack to kickstart an immersive off-line mode.. You need to truly go offline for this work. A walk might not always yield this. Hence I recommend the use of hacks like an Isolation Tank or just plain Meditation. For those interested in Isolation Tanks I wrote a piece here: http://www.theroadtosiliconvalley.com/local-california/float... - a truly hackers hack!
اخبار مصر فى الصحافة المصرية اليوم الثلاثاء 25 مارس | مجلة استراحة
I think you have a bit of a misunderstanding as to what this quote is saying. It does not support your argument, and actually supports mine (which would be the same as Adam Smith's in this case).

SUPPLY SIDE: "send him to study [x], it as at least twenty to one if he ever makes such proficiency as will enable him to live by the business." He is making is quite clear that the supply of qualified [x] is low (and giving a reason as to why it is low, but as Adam Smith himself would surely admit, the laws of supply and demand do not [directly] care about the 'why').

DEMAND SIDE: There is no explicit mention of the demand for these services, but as educated readers, we are able to deduce that during the time of Adam Smith, the demand for certain [x] heavily outweighed the supply.

*[x] blocked out because its specific value is not germane to the underlying logic of the argument.
InVision Announces Dropbox Support
GSN’s $165M Bash Gaming Acquisition Nets 100X Return For Investors
I've been programming in java for years and I still cannot make a program that compiles on the first try, unless I 'cheat' using an IDE or peeking at the API.

I couldn't even do the 'read-from-input write-to-output' thing mentioned in the example.

It's true it's because of the language: I've believe Java is more 'Enterprise' and sophisticated.

But I KNOW that because of this I tend to write better code (at least more standardized and better structured) in Java than in other languages I've had the same practice with, such as C, C++ or PHP, even though I don't need any IDE or manual of any kind to write such a simple program on those. And, no matter the language, it takes me the same time to do it right.

My conclusion is: If you like to 'hack together' a tool Java is probably not the best choice of language; If you want to build some big project on a team and keep it robust and maintainable using efficient libraries, it is.
>(though I'd think the JIT would eventually get around to eliminating most of that overhead you see)

150000000 iterations of a loop would warm the coldest JIT. JIT speeds up bytecode execution - but if you trace the execution of this code you'll see we often end up crossing between JVM land and native land via JNI to push output to write(2) or pull input from read(2). Crossing the JNI boundary is not free and cannot be optimized with JIT (there's lots of data copying back and forth - maybe some memory pinning etc). Using explicit buffers, you pay this overhead less often. Increasing the buffer size reduces the overhead - but of course with diminishing returns. Using read()/write(int) you pay this penalty more frequently. In general it's almost always a bad idea to use single element methods when the interface also exposes bulk methods and you want to do bulk work.

> A test which the original code, and your initial review, failed on multiple fronts (failed to handle character encoding issues and failed to flush the output stream before exiting).

Mea culpa - OP & I had similar idea and a quick scan of the code seemed generally correct. If I was interviewing him / her I would spend more than a second reading the provided code.

> I honestly find it hard to believe that Java devs would have their skills sets be terribly different regardless of platform they run on, and I really would think people would learn the basics of working with streams regardless of the platform they work with, but I grok the gist of what you are saying.

I'd still argue that stdin/stdout/stderr are instances of IO streams. I'd hope all programmers are relatively confident with manipulating IO streams. But these particular instances are really familiar to people working in Unix and uncommon to Windows people. I'd rather have the candidate thinking about streams and not fumbling in the back of their mind kind of remembering what stdout is.

> FizzBuzz doesn't really test for knowledge of the language's libraries though.

Granted - but I think this thread illustrates that there are a ton of other aspects besides standard library knowledge in play when you dig into this question. If you want to know if the person sitting in front of you can program, FizzBuzz. If you want to know if they grasp the language's standard libraries - ask them a question that requires using collections. If you want to see if they understand the platform their running on do something with File IO.... and so on.
I believe that this is the paper (or at least on earlier version) referenced.

Developmental differences in causal learning
When children are better (or at least more open-minded) learners than adults: Developmental differences in learning the forms of causal relationships

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...
Quora app gets presidential push
Obama becomes Quora’s first verified user to answer your Healthcare questions.
cool. thnx for making this
Why the capacity sometimes goes higher on the graph as the battery ages? Can anyone explain, or is this just a marketing crap?
Ubuntu removes CACert from default trusted CAs in 20130906ubuntu0.13.10.1
Technically, no. However, there _are_ requirements before you can take the bar exam. Unlike other states, California doesn't require that you attended an ABA-approved law school. However, instead you have to do 'Four years of study, with a minimum of 864 hours of preparation and study per year, at an unaccredited distance-learning or correspondence law school registered with the Committee;'.

So, you _do_ need to 'attend' law school, even if it's over the internet. (Unless you "study in a law office or judge’s chambers", which I guess is a type of apprenticeship.)
Infrared doesn't work underwater, water covers most of the earth surface and it's where the hardest to find crashes are located.
Well, writing in sed has essentially the "heh, look what I did in sed!" value. Elisp would be a far more simple place to build it (we already have tetris there, there's even a very old simple version of Elite in emacs lisp!)
Fully decentralized means everyone has their own autonomous device to act as server and client of the transactions and has a usable decentralized (probably mesh) network. P2P over the standard net is NOT fully decentralized.
Developer runs program that automatically tweets anything he copies
>>[Perl is not readable]

>>after having been in a position to maintain some Perl code before.

Sigh... You "supported some code" and know how modern Perl looks like?! :-)

Could you carefully explain e.g. the problems with Moose and the latest [syntax] extensions you find on CPAN?

To start with.

Making wild claims like that without support makes you seem like a language war troll or a complete asshat. To be taken seriously, show that you know what you make such big claims about.

Edit: And since you have nothing to say about the subject matter -- what is it in the Python culture that brews such fanatic language war trolls? (I assume you're a Python guy?)
Why Every Snowflake is Not Unique
This very idea of "blaming" either the device or the person is bafflingly uninteresting, improductive, and useless.

Forgive the analogy, you're pretty much the guy telling someone with alcohol problems that "I drink a couple of microbrews now and then, it's very tasty. You don't have to drink every day. Don't blame the beer, blame yourself!"
> It is funny to see the construction of Europe, which is arguably the first time in human history that different groups of people willingly tend towards a common political entity without external threat and blood spilled all over

you must have missed the news. because that is exactly the rhetoric the eu politicians keep using. [1] "if the euro fails there will be war". for the nitpickers amongst you with the choice of the mirror was the quickest google link. sarkozy has used the same rhetoric. i've watched merkel say that in the bundestag. if you know german watch that instead.

edit 2: can't find the whole speech, but here's parts of it [2]

a lot of greeks have seen the europe as the fourth german reich. so far any attempt at self determination of the population has had threats of economic sanctions in return. you may call that whatever you like, but if you risk starving your population, that's economic warfare.

> criticised from inside and outside by the likes of Soros, who will never understand that finance is a tool and not an end. I hope Merkel and other Eurocrats will firmly continue to not listen to his "well-intentioned free advices".

don't worry. merkel and the other eurocrats have proven to be immune to any kind of criticism or facts. merkels favorite answer to any of that sort is:

"the euro is alternative less".

to me the whole euro is a smart backdoor from the us. everything that the european population has protested against in the past is now getting written into law through laws that you can't even read (yeah, there's actually some opinions that they share). well you can, but usually either after the fact or because someone leaked the draft to the public.

my prediction is that for another 10-20 maybe even more years, people will become more and more miserable, giving even more rise to the extreme right, and at some point the whole thing will just blow up. but boy i can tell you i don't want to be here when it does.

conflict is the natural law of things. if you keep suppressing it for too long, the backlash will get even bigger. yes, i do mean that. suppressing conflicts until they're too big is imho what caused the first world war, and countless other unfinished/ongoing civil wars that became way more bloody than they should have been.

it's also what causes this ongoing discomfort in bigger organization structures where people know exactly that there's something wrong, but the company structure does not allow for open conflict. it's also precisely what made so many open source projects, and their forks successful.

that said the euro is still way more stable than that fiat usd. and soros probably went on shorting right after his interview, why people up vote that douche talking is beyond me.

[1] http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/europe-could-be-plunged...

[2] http://www.welt.de/finanzen/article10943242/Fuer-Merkel-best...
Why I like it when people are overconfident pompous noobs on the internet
The voice recorder only records the last 120 minutes.

The data recorder will cover the entire flight.
Math and physics seem to be much more fun when discussed in military context. I suppose it's because, unlike pretty much anything else in life, military problems have at the same time both importance (if you fail, people die / equipment gets destroyed) and a time limit (you need to make your decision fast, otherwise you fail).
Easy Checks for Web Accessibility
Depends on the model (and how much you pay for it). Honeywell's SSVCR[0] is available in 30 minutes and 120 minutes.

[0] http://www.sea-avionics.com/lc/cart.php?target=productDetail...
Pre-ordering hardware that makes promises of substantial improvements over the status-quo that will only be testable by the buyer a few years down the line is a recipe for disaster.

Do yourself a favour and hold on to your money until there are actual units that have been tested rigorously (as in, in an independent lab unaffiliated with the company) to see if the promises are delivered on.
Well, actually, one that he describes ‘journalists sharing secrets’ can be as big as the drug trade, if you read ‘journalist’ as ‘black hat hacker’ and ‘secrets’ as ‘exploits’. Silk Road couldn’t really do that, because of possible meddling from the central host, but without that risk…
I think Worse is Better can be used by either side. You seem to be on the "Worse" side, ie. the UNIX/C/Java side, and claim the moral of WIB to be that perfect is the enemy of good. That's a perfectly fair argument.

However, on the "Better" side, ie. the LISP/Haskell side, the moral of WIB is that time-to-market is hugely important. It's not that the "Better" side was bogged-down in philosophical nuance and was chasing an unattainable perfectionism; it's that their solutions took a bit longer to implement. For example, according to Wikipedia C came out in '72 and Scheme came out in '75. Scheme is clearly influenced by philosophy and perfectionism, but it's also a solid language with clear goals.

The problem is that Scheme and C were both trying to solve the 'decent high-level language' problem, but since C came out first, fewer people cared about Scheme when it eventually came out. In the mean time they'd moved on to tackling the 'null pointer dereference in C problem', the 'buffer overflow in C' problem, the 'unterminated strings in C' problem, and so on. Even though Scheme doesn't have these problems, it also doesn't solve them "in C", so it was too difficult to switch to.

Of course, this is a massive simplification and there have been many other high level languages before and since, but it illustrates the other side of the argument: if your system solves a problem, people will work around far more crappiness than you might think.

More modern examples are Web apps (especially in the early days), Flash, Silverlight, etc. and possibly the Web itself.
I think they might want to reconsidert using bitmessage for communications, because it has some serious security failures as it stands. At least according to https://bitmessage.org/forum/index.php?topic=1666.0
In Python there simply doesn't seem to be a DI/IoC container available.

Sure there are. There's even a version of Spring for Python. It's just that nobody uses them. You're free to guess why.
Completely flawed logic, but not uncommon from an employee standpoint. Pay should be commensurate to value an employee provides to a company. This is why CEOs make 100x+ entry level positions.

From the company's perspective, whatever an individual put into their experience is almost completely inconsequential if they are doing their job. In a healthy, functional market, pay isn't about "fairness", it's about bottom-line results, and programmers and engineers make the products and services these companies use to generate revenue which in turn creates demand and subsequently the available funds for legal counsel!
Programming is dead (long live computer science)
But I know how to write a GOTO in 15 different machine code dialects, all of those other solutions work differently! If I can solve with a GOTO, I should probably just use a GOTO and move on to bigger problems, rather than remind myself exactly how loops work in $LANGUAGE.
I thought this would be a (common) business oriented (language) presentation, so I was quite surprised (relieved).

Recently had a great idea regarding binary search trees, which came to me while felling a (real) tree, odd.
Ditto. Had the exact same experience. Half my team were a lot older (50s and 2 x 40s) than me and the other half younger. We ran leaner and meaner then the other engineering teams in the company. Also learnt a lot from them myself and age never even creeped up as a barrier. Matter of fact I can't even recall thinking differently of them apart from how awesome & reliable they were.
Unfortunately as the USA is a common law based system employees are seen as "servants"
Scott’s suicide reveals tragic side of city’s glitzy scene
> Many newer or more fashionable languages enable some very elegant programming styles, but this comes with a concern about the elegance of one's code, which can easily result in the programmer spending more time thinking about elegance than about functionality.

This isn't a bad tradeoff though. Elegance means generally gains in maintainability, possibly with lesser costs in the actual development. And thinking about elegance in code is the first step to writing better, more maintainable code.

> For example... should I use map or reduce here, or maybe an iterator, or... oh fuck it, I'll use a for loop. It turns out that the old-school for loop works just as well despite earning you precisely zero style points.

I usually stick with for loops because they are clear. Remember:

elegance is about simplicity and clarity. If you sacrifice either of these, you are reducing the elegance of your code.
Surely if it's a protocol, there exists the possibility to provide an abstraction over all the different native libraries?
Free *nix distribution that provides network services with an Web interface
The problem for me was that it felt like the people were dehumanized and reduced to their culture in a situation which is so incredibly unique and must be so difficult to bear.
This being said, maybe the issue is only that of timing and your question would be more pertinent later in time, after all the emotion has settled down.
A lawyer dies and goes to heaven. He complains: "I'm too young to die; I'm only 45!"

The response: 'Not according to your billable hours.'
Do you not have electronic bus stop signs in chicago?
Drivers are rarely punished more than trivially for their fallibility; even gross negligence gets quite a big pass.

The model case is probably the ongoing Toyota "unintended acceleration" case, in which it appears that poor software engineering really did contribute to fatal accidents. It's likely to cost Toyota a lot but not reach through to the design team.
I want about your site
Of course, StringUtils is not in the core API; the first idiom "foo".equals(bar) works in Java everywhere, StringUtils.equals("foo", bar) will only work in projects that pull in org.apache.commons.
Personally I prefer using facilities in the core API over third party APIs, even if the third party API is included anyway for some essential function.
Exactly, I find it ridiculous that someone or other adds these titles somewhere and no-one disputes them even when the papers have very little to do with the title whatsoever.
WIRED asked me who I think are the 10 Hottest startups in France
Thanks for posting that, although a bus ride to my local University library to consult Phys Rev Letters seems attractive in a nostalgic kind of way.

No direct bearing on the suggestion in the title, but...

http://journals.aps.org/pr/pdf/10.1103/PhysRev.47.777

Original EPR paper. I return to this paper each decade and work through it. About due for another bash now. No references!

http://philoscience.unibe.ch/documents/TexteHS10/bell1964epr...

John Bell's paper on EPR.
Brainstorming is a way to explore ideas, not create them.
Tumblr two-factor authentication makes the blogging platform more secure
Having a shower is almost as good - lots of white noise and shower water is the touch equivalent of white noise. Close your eyes and with only the smell and taste of warm water you are in a el cheapo isolation tank.
I know that, and I use the term only because the author did. I agree that it's the fault of library designers not on the core language, but it is still a legitimate issue to raise.
Your average mom and pop a shop probably uses shared hosting though. You can't really extort them you'd have to extort godaddy or whomever.
> Seriously Clever for A 10 year old book on perl basics is probably pushing it.

Why is the age of this book relevant? It's not an overview of the basics. it's a 500+ page exploration of Perl's functional programming features, a topic rarely (if ever) covered in this depth.
Velositey: Website Layout Builder for Photoshop
Most software we use is either proprietary and uses ads/licenses/etc to make money. Successful open source software (as in what non-technical people use) seems to be at the core of something that generates revenue (Linux for instance). No ?
This is interesting; but as a netizen taken part in international transactions outside of ebay/amazon I'm wondering how one can make the whole transaction safe/trusted in the face of complete anonymity for both seller and buyer.

Escrows are mentioned; but I can't shake the feeling that malicious individuals can game the whole system by creating a lot of sockpuppets and pulling up a smokescreen of trust, ultimately ripping somebody off in a high-value transaction, either as a seller or buyer.

It was/is possible on the platforms mentioned above; I don't imagine it more difficult in a anonymous market.

Looking forward to their results and insights to this.
I would say a combination of people with delicate sensibilities. Bring it up with in conversation with friends(not just the boys but the girls too, your mother and female relitives as well). Also by forcing facebook they are at minimum mildly annoying your averedge spammers(not the expert spammers).

I agree about the college age girl. The upcoming generation might be called the "voyeur" generation posting everything with out shame but the curve of women steeply drops off as you get older.