skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Why not build this on top of luajit?

I also toy with the idea of build a language, and my main contender is luajit (perhaps with terra). In the other hand, julia have be done on the LLVM...
Fundamentally as a leader of an organisation your personal public activity is related to your job.

When the CEO of GoDaddy shot an elephant for fun or when the Chairman of the Co-Op was caught buying meth, these were personal activities but they nevertheless influenced how people perceived the companies they ran.

A CEO needs to command the respect of those they lead, they need to attract the best talent and they need to build relationships. In all of these they will get judged based on their character which covers both their personal and professional behaviour.

When the Mozilla CEO wants to meet a politician, they will take into account his personal political activity. When conferences (both tech but also political like the World Economic Forum) decide who to invite they'll consider the overall reputation of speakers, etc.

It would be perfectly legitimate for Mozilla to decide that it's willing to accept the consequences of Eich's personal activity, it was crazy for them to think it wouldn't have any consequences though.
Hmm, I didn't think about that, good point. To me, they have just always been the group of people that are making a pretty nice browser alternative to IE and adding a key piece to the whole "competition is good for innovation" mantra.
There are two kinds of paranoia here:

1) Paranoid that you will lose your data.

2) Paranoid that your data will fall into the wrong hands.

It seems to me that Tarsnap values preventing #2 over preventing #1.

To follow on your example, what if the authorities who arrested you want to get their mitts on the data in your tarsnap account? Won't you be happy that your data is irrevocably deleted?
Clearly it is a rhetorical question - Prop 8 was discrimination - how many people need to be discriminated against in order for a defense to be mounted? The minimum answer is 1. The larger the answer the larger the defense.

If the law had not been overturned, the answer would, by definition of the law, be far greater than 0. If you propose that the actual answer was 0 before the law was overturned, I don't believe that - how many partners were refused next-of-kin, hospital visitation rights and some taxation benefits? More than 0 I would estimate. Is Eich in jail? Was his marriage broken up? Did anyone physically attack him? No. He lost the privilege of being a CEO.
Shorter article: "We have no idea how to operate the machine we're dumping cash into! Clearly this is the fault of the manufacturer!"
GameStop's "Sale" For CoD:Ghosts Not Really Much of a Sale
I got to spend a few days once visiting St. Catherine's Monastery in the Sinai, one of the oldest monasteries in the world, which is famous for having never been sacked. The Codex Sinaiticus was found there, one of the two oldest complete manuscripts of the Bible. It also has some of the only surviving iconography in the world from before the iconoclast period.

Their librarian is American from Boston, and he has been digitizing their library for several years now. My traveling companion was also a Boston librarian, and we had an amazing tour of the library. It was very strange to see, surrounded by ancient stone walls and crumbling manuscripts, top-of-the-line Macs, shelves of USB drives, and a giant digital camera in a room-size metal frame, with a cradle for resting books on.

I'm delighted to hear more such works are being preserved!
I disagree. Rationality is the process of deducing new knowledge from existing knowledge and axioms. Axioms generally aren't rational in this sense. "Irrational premises" were meant specifically to evoke the idea of religion, not necessarily as the opposite of "rational" used in the preceding sentence.
If by "angry mob" you mean "the broad moral view of society," yep, that is what I'm saying. If your morality disagrees with society's to a great enough degree, it is right, for the purposes of this discussion, that you be removed from power.

(Caveat: as a moral descriptivist I should point out that I believe there is not really any such thing as "right" or "wrong," just what people like and don't like. But, as shorthand, I use the same words other people use.)
The Stasi was run by the government.

With the Red Scare (which started decades before the Cold War), the government was involved early on, and at a high level. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Red_Scare for some of the details of what happened in the 1920s. Senator McCarthy of course used the bully pulpit to push anti-communist policies. The House Un-American Activities Committee played a key role in starting the Hollywood blacklist.

Of course there were certainly non-government pressures as well. People were anti-bolshevik and worried that the US would be overthrown just like Russia was. Others saw anti-Communism as a way to frighten people, and use that freight as a way to gain power. But without the government we wouldn't have had laws like the Taft–Hartley Act, which for 18 years prohibited union leaders from being members of the Communist Party. The Communist Control Act of 1954 is still on the books.

With Eich there's absolutely no government involvement, and the opposition is based on the right of association. Some Mozilla employees, some volunteers, some citizens, and some organizations don't want to associate themselves with Mozilla.

With East Germany, the police wanted to be involved in the actions of dissenters, and had the power to do so. With the Red Scares, the US government also used their power to force others to not associate with Communists. But with Eich .. what power do the dissenters have other than their right of free association?

That's why these cases are very different.
There's a difference between tolerating the viewpoint and tolerating the person. While a person may have archaic and bigoted views, forcing them to change only makes them more steadfast in their opinions. The reason there's been such a shift public perception of LGBT people these past few years is because more people are coming out and proving they're decent, normal people. Pressuring conservatives to quit their job for one political view only reinforces their opinion of X group trying to destroy Y tradition, and if this turns into a trend, I can imagine more organizations similar to Westboro Baptist Church sprouting up.

In situations like this, "killing them with kindness" really is the answer.
Facebook Events Suck
Sorry I wasn't aware it was taking it away. In that case it should be "Taking away marriage privileges from same-sex couples"
Well, they just cost a man his job--that's fairly quantifiable.

So, yeah, I don't think it's unreasonable that, in exchange, we be able to show both columns in the ledger.
Short sighted? You think that being pro-gay marriage is being on the wrong side of history?
free speech

Which includes the right of others to criticize your speech.

If I get up on a soapbox and preach something you don't agree with, so you get up on a soapbox of your own and preach your disagreement, I am not being persecuted or denied my freedom. Nor am I being persecuted or denied my freedom if your arguments convince a majority of people to disagree with or choose not to associate with me.

This is, ironically, a fundamentally conservative position, that maximizing individual rights to speak up is what produces the best results, by causing the best ideas/most persuasive arguments to prevail.
This is also a fallacy - it's certainly possible for some government entity to be more efficient than some business.
What a crass comparison.

"He said that his beliefs would not change the way he managed the company or how employees were treated at Mozilla. “I’m supporting all of the same benefits we’ve always supported across L.G.B.T. equality,” he said."

The episode is sickening.
It is disingenuous to equate a reluctance to change society's ancient definition of marriage with "intolerance and hate".
The One Thing I Remind Myself of All Day
Oh for fucks sake. Whether or not every Christian is pro-life doesn't change what I said, but thanks for the tangent. Every Internet argument can use more pedantic tangents!
He might have thought that it was strategically better for him personally to step down instead of actually being fire, but no one believes that this was just his personal decision. He was forced out under duress.
I was comparing Shepard's murder to the persecution of Eich.
"But these two scenarios are not quite alike, are they, considering in one case the person is doing something I believe is wrong [...]"

Double standards for tactics is the subject of this rather long article by someone more articulate about it than I am:

http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/02/23/in-favor-of-niceness-co...
That is not a fair or reasonable way to interpret what I said. The personal pronouns I used are obvious stand-ins for large swathes of society whose view agree with mine.
Censor thyself!

For your expression of opinion may some day be used to provoke the wrath of an angry mob...

Anonymity helps somewhat. If instead of donating $1000 and putting his name on a public list he'd wait a few years and donate 1000 BTC to the same cause from an undisclosed address, Mozilla would have been forced to find something else to use against him in order to remove him from that position. Maybe just ask nicely instead of pulling these shenanigans.

Censor thyself. This is the world we're living in. It's just sound advice to help keep you safe. Not just from a state or a church, but from the everyday he and she, they and them.
Right. Bigots will have to stay in the closet now. Sounds terrible.
How are the collecting personal information, and how are the ads inappropriate?
What a joke for GameStop to even call this a sale when other retailers have had it at this price for a while now.
For some reason I can't quite articulate, I find just about all "how to hire" advice is mostly a mix of platitudes, anecdotal evidence, weighed down heavily by personal opinion. In short I don't find much if it useful in actual practice.

I suppose this is true of most entrepreneurial advice.
What's wrong to believe in something? Isn't a human right to have your own beliefs and opinions?
It looks like you just gave an example of a trader buying all the liquidity of MSFT on every market with a single market order.
It is my understanding that the AWS solution only works when using Route53 with other AWS services like ELB and S3.
We had a problem similar in the past and the solution was not pretty. I think they have solved the problem in a fashion that makes it easier for everyone to implement.
I wish that were true. I'm sure it depends on the field, but in my experience (more physics/natural science), MATLAB still leads for interactive scientific programming. I think Python is at this point recognized as a legitimate alternative, rather than the lingua franca.
> You don't go to war with your major trading partners, it would be economic suicide.

I suggest you go read up on WWI.
Fine art photography made a transition from all chemical to 90% digital, yet the manipulated RAW image is treated identically to a negative.

I find that remarkable. The other thing that's remarkable is how accepting people are of highly compressed and decimated jpg images on uncalibrated monitors for viewing the work of professional photographers (while wearing $400 headphones, listening to highly compressed mp3s).

It is also remarkable that Neil Young is among the first to try to fix the fidelity issue, for music anyway. I hope someone sees that photography and images of other fine art need something analogous.
I have no idea. What I'm saying is that it doesn't, in practice, actually matter for those companies, but it does matter for Mozilla. Let's say, hypothetically, the CEO of Apple|Microsoft|Oracle had donated to Proposition 8; that doesn't affect their ability to do their job, because their job has nothing to do with protecting the civil liberties of others. Those companies purpose is to turn a profit for their owners. That is outside of the realm of ethics; it is outside of the realm of what one perceives to be good or bad.

Mozilla, on the other hand, is an organization that is meant to protect people from oppression. For that reason, it is absolutely fundamental that a Mozilla leader have a provably clean civil rights record.

(and I'm pretty sure that Tim Cook doesn't oppose gay rights since he's openly gay.)
You are correct, I was mistaken. https://www.rabbitmq.com/amqp-0-9-1-reference.html#basic.del...

The spec has a SHOULD for aborting after a retry count, but it doesn't appear to be exposed to clients.
Supposedly there's something that causes threads with fierce/angry discussion to get penalized. But I imagine people were also flagging it.
I'm frankly surprised that more people don't share your point of view. I am personally for gay rights and gay marriage and the such but I a can also respect that people will have different views about the matter and that I don't assume that I am right and anyone with different views from mine is morally corrupt or evil, etc. That's intolerant.
Yes, the PC crowd won but do we have to pollute HN with endless stories about it?
If this seriously made you "disgusted by the thought of using Firefox", shouldn't you be disgusted by using anything Eich ever touched? Better disable Javascript in your browser -- no, compile it out! -- no, stop using any browser that ever implemented it!
Her site: http://www.kare.com

Tangentially related: does anybody know whether the icons from the icon garden (http://icongarden.jory.org) still exist?
Which studies? Seriously I'm interested, but also why would you just state this without referencing at least one?
It’s kind of amazing that some people here believe its modest price to be Tarsnap’s main value proposition.
Amazon and Google Start a Price War Over the Future of the Internet?
Our March Madness Machine Learning Model --Explained
Considering this whole discussion is over a law that the majority of California voters supported, the argument against Eich is even weaker, even though I disagree with his stance.
Maybe you couldn't see underscore.js because it was written as "Underscore"? Or maybe you didn't read the article…
Sorry, I thought that my questioning whether you were "suggesting that by focusing on wealth creation for ourselves, we improve their chances for wealth creation" clarified it. I was talking about improving the property of "ability to create wealth" for people who are under-served by the current system.

This can include a range of things, like better access to healthcare and improved nutrition, as well as schemes to help people start businesses. Things are still pretty dire for an upsettingly large number of people in the world.
U.S. states probing security breach at Experian unit
A company I know of and do business with produces software for firms in which a terabyte is considered a small installation. Many firms use this software.
This is like suggesting that, if Mozilla were a big supporter of child slavery, it would be fine, because that's not their market. Suggesting that anything an organization does or represents outside of their core market is irrelevant to their business is a laughable fallacy (and yes, I know that having Eich doesn't explicity give Mozilla an anti-equal-rights position, but the problem was that having him as a figurehead implicitly condoned his behavior, and does implicate them despite whatever statements they might make to the contrary).
You realize that most of HN readers are engineers, and like most engineers, they are perfectly normal human beings without "antisocial beliefs"?
I could Google JavaScript tools or libraries and turned up more results
I'll be honest, I didn't know that at all, and I might look to them less as an example of technology advancement. Why work on programming languages (Rust), running Unreal in the browser, or web standards, if it isn't your goal to advance technology?
This opinion is deeply disconcerting to me. I think our society needs to be very cautious in drawing the line between "acceptable" and "unacceptable" views. Plenty of people have views I disagree with, but which I still consider within the realm of "acceptability". If people don't have a right to reasonable private opinions, the political majority can wave around stories like this one as an incentive to prevent minorities from speaking up.

If Eich had actively spoken out hatefully against gay people, I would agree that his resignation would be warranted. But he has done nothing of the sort, and committed in a blog post to equality at Mozilla. I think Mozilla's actions smell like a hasty overreaction which sets a dangerous precedent.
Newsblur.

It does everything I need and has not let me down. I have renewed once after a year and have every intention of continuing to renew it.

I wouldn't just call it a 'blog reader' though. It's an RSS reader.
Yes, I don't even use binary or an operating system on my computer.
"Mozilla's mission has absolutely nothing to do with gay rights."

So it is not Mozilla's best interest to makes sure that all their employees are working in a comfortable work environment? If most of the people you are supposed to be leading feel uncomfortable with your views on human rights how is the company supposed to operate properly?

What if he said he opposed interracial marriage? Surely that's just a set of beliefs? Mozilla's mission has nothing to do with racial equality.

Your equating of economic policy beliefs and gay rights is quite telling.
Well, I'd like to see Visual Studio for Linux with support for Java, Scala, Clojure, Haskell and other non-Microsoft technologies. That's my wishlist in this bright new era of Microsoft openness.

I don't like Microsoft but Visual Studio is the only IDE I've ever tried that is substantially better than gedit/jedit. The auto-completion (intellisense) is just delightful to use.
Apple took advantage of things that were already open source. How many innovative, profitable programs has it developed itself and then made open source?

The fact that the core OS is still open source doesn't actually mean much when there's a huge layer of proprietary code on top, does it?
IoT on tap at upcoming Embedded Linux Conference
That's a sadly negative victory. I believe we can and should be better. The tides of history won't stop just because we show mercy.
Super Secure Backup Pro XP -- Built on Tarsnap.
DealScoopr Launches Personalized Flight Deals Search To Save You Money
Probably the comment-to-upvote-ratio flamewar detector. I believe that once a story gets more comments than it has upvotes its ranking gets dropped.
> But ask yourself, would you consider it reasonable for Christians to target some arbitrary CEO who donated some money to planned parenthood several years ago

Well, the US still can't have an an openly atheist president. So, yeah, I can imagine.
Sure, but equal access to those privileges is a civil right.
The success of this campaign will certainly embolden others from both sides of the political spectrum to try to take scalps in this way. It is really a scary development.
Interesting, that's a domain I'm just getting into, can you point me towards projects and research at the intersection of political science and data science/programming?
When using a service like the AWS load balancer all you get back is an A record. You don't have a direct IP address to point to so you have to use a Cname
Yet Android, for instance, removes the number key row and does actually add a .com key. It's not as ridiculous as it appears.
Open-mindedness and tolerance are not core Progressive values. I don't say this cynically, it's just a fact.

So Progressives only preach them when it works in their favor.
Because there's a limited amount of ideologically motivated programmer man-hours available?
This is simply false. More and more people are buying both iPhones and iPads.

And as to sustainable business models - the iTunes Ecosystem alone is a large as half of Google's entire business and is growing faster.
It's pretty natural, we don't really have anything better that this stack, do we?. If you're writing JIT, why invent your own backend if LLVM is good enough? I mean, well, probably it's possible to write something better than LLVM, but it would be quite exceptional work. And what that section describes would be pretty typical for any duck-typed language passed to LLVM. Devil's in the details, anyway. Actually, at this level of detalization you can say that almost every cooking recipe sounds the same: "Chop products; put them in the cattle and put it on fire for some time; season it".
I am using R for a fairly large project (because I am working with other people who are using R) and I really agree with this.

R is easy to implement small things, but gluing them all together is awful. Additionally, the debugging features are not very good, especially if you created a package. Everything using Rcpp basically requires you to make a package and believe it or not the C/C++ is easier to debug than the R. I do believe that going the other way (Rinside) or using R in C++ is a much better solution in terms of efficiency, and getting the actual results you expect.

I am, however, impressed with the amount and, in general, quality of R packages.
I heard of someone in australia doing something similar
its called Newsmaven

but you seem to adding a dynamic conversion form too.

and props for having the balls to go all in. My argument is that all my savings and assets is not mine. I share it with my family. I can/should only risk my part of the savings/assets even though I have the right to act unilaterally.

Some of my problem is having a savings habit and not being a spendy type of guy. Its an asset as well as I need to learn to loosen up and spend on lot more needed stuff to make our carrotleads product a success.
The thing that makes civil rights a big deal is that it affects people.

If you are against gay marriage or interracial marriage, that's a statement about how you feel about people. Gun control is a lot less about how you feel about people.

I think for me, and many others, gay marriage seems like such an obvious thing that I really question the ethics of one who opposes it. There is probably no other major issue in the US that I think is as obvious -- not immigration, abortion, climate change, gun control, taxes, health care, Russia, torture, etc...
It's reasonable to assume at this point that Mozilla's next CEO will have their political opinions thoroughly vetted, overtly or covertly.

You say political, I say moral.

And you're talking as if this hasn't happened for a long time already. If a company discovered their CEO was racist they'd fire them immediately - if not for their own moral reasons then because they're opening themselves up to a volley of lawsuits. You can bet that CEOs of any decent sized company are vetted.
I'm talking about what Mandela did after his cause was won (just as the cause of marriage equality is won in California, and being won across the country).
I think that also usually only happens when people upload to hosts that are not supported by RES or are simply very slow to load.

I doubt most RES users would notice a picture being on a different host 99% of the time (I know I don't)
I am one that is considering joining politics, beside my startup.

But at the same time, I am very worried that if I do, I will get into more problems than anything.

In face since I joined a startup as tech-cofounder, I have been much more muted in stating my views, because I know lots of people won't understand them at all and will just be upset.
"Everybody who doesn't agree with me is a bigot and should be persecuted and ostracised." Who's the bigot?

I didn't expect I'd meet McCarthyism so close and personal.
"Civil Rights Organization" is a fairly well defined concept. I searched several lists of them and didn't find Mozilla on any. I did find EFF however.