skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
For Cassandra see http://www.datastax.com/docs/0.8/ddl/index

An analytic column store like say Vertica has a schema like a regular SQL database. I don't know what their flexible schema story is right now.

Instead of storing the columns of a row together an analytic column store will store columns from many rows together in sorted runs. When you go to do a scan your disk will only read the columns you have selected. The format for column storage is optimized for specific types and uses type specific compression so 10-50x is something that is claimed. This further improves the IO situation. They can also zero in on relevant ranges of data for each column because they are indexed and this further reduces the IO requirements.

Where other databases are bound on seeks or sequential throughput an analytic column store will be bound on CPU, especially CPU for the non-parallel portions of every query.

Obviously a column store will have a hard time selecting individual rows because the data is not stored together so it will be expensive to materialize. They also have trouble with updates/deletes to already inserted data, in some cases requiring the data be reloaded because updates have dragged everything down.
It almost has to be a vector based language given its speed shortcomings, because that's the easiest way to package the canned C routines in manageable chunks to speed things up. Which C routines are just loops that manipulate scalars, btw.

Unfortunately "vector" operations typically cause a lot of temporary intermediate vectors that you never see, which is why a "scalar" language like Julia or C can provide such performance improvements when they handle the whole algorithm without the unnecessary intermediates having to be allocated and filled.

I think the vector operations do provide a certain brevity though. Whether this is an advantage or not is very subjective. For myself, I prefer having anonymous functions and operations like "map" for transforming collections (including matrices and vectors) element wise, instead of having all operations that make sense on numbers automatically also operate element wise on vectors and matrices. (Because there are operations on vectors and matrices as a whole, sometimes with the same name as a scalar function, which can lead to confusion - exp being one example and multiplication being another). But I can understand opinions differ in that regard and a lot depends on how "general purpose" the surrounding programming context needs to be.
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

You do NOT have the right to judge anyone based on "race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty"

You violated Brendan Eich's human rights, it's that simple. Bigot.
It was a ballot initiative in 2008. We have a constitution to prevent the will of the majority violating the rights of a minority. Its too bad it was up to voters. But he still has a right to take a side without fear of economic retribution.
Hah! I had to reread twice to spot the mistake. That's too awesome; I'm going to leave it as-is.
What's driving that change of opinion among the youth, though? These attitudes persisted for generations, and suddenly they're changing. I wouldn't even begin to think about assigning cause versus effect here, but I think it's worth considering that the opinion of the youth is changing because of this sort of action.
I've posted a response on your blog.
People who think this is unjust, think about this. If Eich had instead donated to a Neo-Nazi party, a group that supports re-legalizing slavery, or an organization taking away women's right to vote, would your opinion be any different? For those who say 'no, my opinion would be the same. Free speech is free speech and political affiliation is political affiliation' would you be comfortable working at Mozilla? I think this is the much more important practical concern. Eich's ability to continue as CEO was _compromised_ - could he hire and retain talent? Would Mozilla have seen a mass quit? Could they continue to get volunteers to work on the code?

The social justice warrior lynch mob can be an ugly, fickle beast, and its actions can be a double-edged sword, there's no question about it. In this case, they may have saved Mozilla (and Eich) from themselves.

edit: being the public face of a company is different in kind than being another kind of worker. Its "distance" from CTO may not be large, but the "king is the king" as it were.

edit 2: a couple of bigger questions here that will/should be asked. Should CEOs remain apolitical, or at least take great pains to hide their affiliations - particularly in industries with many much more liberal-minded workers? Will they after this?

Interesting stat: latest Pew has 61% of Republicans under 30 supporting gay marriage. Take that as you may, but I'd go with 'excellent bellwether for society at large'.
Nice start, but the real power is in the open platform, not the language IMHO. This becomes less of an issue as things move to the cloud and paas, but we're not there yet. Yes, there's mono, but its still the red headed step child.
Well, this is silly of them.

They were being naive if they took the approach they took, while thinking that the only form of success (or intended result) would be Eich saying the things they wanted. Eich stepping down was just as likely.

... especially given the fact that they explicitly suggested he step down in another post. They are being very confusing here.

The main thing this latest post is missing is introspection.
King's Assembly is now wireless – a keyboard, mouse, and joystick in one
> Opinions are one thing, concrete actions are another.

Where's the line? Donating $100,000? Donating $1,000? Donating $5? Voting? Discussing your opinion? Setting your facebook profile? Telling someone when they ask? Not answering when they ask?
The project also doesn't give gay marriage benefits, so what's the difference? If the gay marriage ever is recognized by California or on federal level, the benefits would be automatically equalized. I'm not sure if it's possible to do that before the law is set in this regard (may be some accounting/tax issues with just giving benefits to people that the law considers strangers).

>>> Being pro-diversity does not mean being morally obligated to accept racism or hate-induced views

It does not mean that, of course. But it also does not mean you should try to ruin the life of everybody who disagrees with you.
As others have pointed out - if he was against interracial marriage, would you consider that as constituting racism?
Not really. "intolerance of intolerance" isn't quite the same thing as "intolerance".
I think this helps clarify the distinction between him being CEO and a blatant racist being CEO (a comparison that seems to be common in this thread).

Should a person be allowed in a position of power if they are able to separate their personal beliefs and lead the organization properly, without improper bias against anyone? I suspect this has happened many times before.

I don't see how the LGBT community has benefited much from this. It seems to me that giving him credit for clearly not letting his personal beliefs affect his work relationships and taking a wait-and-see stance would've resulted in a more productive outcome. Would this not have been an opportunity to educate someone who is otherwise seemingly capable of reasoned and rational thought?
Bruno was also executed for, among other things, denying the divinity of Jesus and the virginity of Mary, not any of his pseudo-science. (This a bad blemish on the current run of Cosmos; he should be remembered as a whacko philosopher rather than one who contributed to our current scientific corpus.)
I think the phrase you were looking for is "to persuade others to share his views". Nobody put a gun to anybody's head.
If you want different threads to see the same data structure then I think you would also need a mechanism to prevent multiple threads modifying the same node and clobbering each other's changes.
Is one of those higher standards political compliance with what's hip in the Valley right now? What about voting for a certain president?

You know what? Let's amend the right to free speech so it excludes Mozilla CEOs, just to be on the safe side. Oh, and the next CEO better be a peruvian-aleutian lesbian just to show that the company doesn't discriminate (any more).
Oh, I thought you were implying that our own promontional stuff on Reddit was over the line.
> If you are someone who believes gay people should be allowed to form civil unions, but are offended [emphasis added] by the idea that those unions be called marriages

... then you still see gay people as fundamentally different from and less than straight people.

There's no way out of this.

EDITED to add: Also, what's happening to Eich isn't happening just because he made that donation.

As furious as I was about Prop. 8, I could understand someone supporting it in 2008 just because gay marriage was a new and strange issue to them at that time. What I have more of a problem with is someone who has spent the intervening 5+ years working shoulder-to-shoulder with gay people in an atmosphere in which acceptance of them was espoused and apparently practiced, and in a world in which gay marriage was being debated vigorously and often, and yet has not reconsidered his beliefs. That, I think, really says something about who they are.

All that said, I don't really feel I have standing to object to his being CEO of Mozilla. I think what this comes down to is that many Mozilla employees felt they couldn't work for him.
Thanks for responding. I do try to assume that people are not intentionally being trivializing when using words with racist origins. I just think it's especially important to be aware of it in a discussion where people are weighing the speech/actions of privileged people versus their effects on oppressed groups.
Wait, what? This is the fault of the "evil homosexual lobby" and "reactionary liberals?"

The guy's a bigot. (Unless he's made a statement disavowing his contribution in some way.) Being against equal rights for gay folks is being a bigot. Sorry.

If you don't want to catch shit for being a bigot when you're placed in a position of public power and trust, don't act like a bigot. Or give money to bigoted causes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudden_wealth_syndrome
Five Reasons Eich Should Step Down
On Neil Young, there were a bunch of FLAC-compatible portable music players on the market 2 years ago: http://www.cnet.com/news/best-mp3-players-with-flac/

* Free Lossless Audio Codec

The super-high sample rate stuff is totally bogus, and I say that as an audio professional of many years' standing. Neil Young is a nice guy, but Pono is basically a branding exercise, not a technical innovation.
Excellent! Thankyou!
My opinion is not all that far from your opinion. When that thread fell very low in rank, I lightened its penalty for that reason. There's no fine-grained control over rank, so it's a bit hard to calibrate.

Nobody's going to stop discussion from happening, but discussion that repeatedly, predictably violates HN values can't be handled the same way as isolated comments. If I try to respond everywhere that the HN guidelines are violated in those threads... well, it's impossible. I actually tried in one place, and someone immediately asked "why here?"... which was such a good point that I just deleted it. (Edit: oh yeah, it was this very thread!)
Who has won, and in what way? Are you suggesting gay people have "won" in some way other than a few isolated and contested areas where their relationships have, after decades of protest and activism, been acknowledged as legally equivalent to straight people's relationships?
Those criteria... :P
I'm not that surprised that the mind warped enough to create something like Javascript is also warped enough to have some weird backwoods Christian fundamentalist fear of homosexuals.

Good riddance.
Someone whose ideology involves actively fighting against other people's personal freedom should not control Mozilla.

I'm a little confused by how people fail to see this. Mozilla represents freedom while Brendan represents oppression.

His technical abilities have nothing to do with this and he's probably a fine CTO. That's where he should have stayed.
I can relate, too. My mom was a single mom, and for much of my childhood, she worked as a lunch lady where she made about $375 a month after taxes and the extortionately priced (IMO) insurance plan we were offered. She's now 60 and still works 12 hour days in a factory and has no retirement to speak of really.

I do carry a lot of guilt that I easily make more in a week than she makes in a month, but at the same time, I know that's what she wanted for me when I was a kid. She was incredibly supportive of my hobby of programming and "computer stuff." She was super encouraging when it came to technology and learning more about it. I think she knew it would lead to a better life for me in the end, and for that, I'm incredibly grateful to her. And hey now that I'm doing well, I'm sure to return the favor whenever I'm able to (though she's rather proud so I usually have to slip it in around her birthday or Christmas ;)).

So while yeah I still carry a bit of conflict over it, I also see it's what she wanted all along and am sure to show my appreciation as much as humanly possible.
Are you saying we shouldn't be careful of the consequences of our words and deeds?

edit since i can't respond to myself: and here is an interesting definition of "fascism."
I am not a rubyist and I almost dismissed your book because of the title because I assumed it would lean heavily on concepts from ruby with which I would not be familiar and therefore be no more enlightening than the official rust tutorial. i.e. I assumed it would teach one foreign concept based on another foreign concept.
Git-like tool for large data-sets
You get $1M for a few months work because you work hard to put yourself in a position where you potentially could get $1M for a few months work, and then you get a little bit (okay, perhaps more than a little bit) lucky.

It's interesting how different people react differently with respect to wealth. My relatively modest personal success is by no means solely a product of hard work - yes, I put myself in a position where I could get lucky, but I still needed a hell of a lot of luck. I didn't always know what I was doing, and things could've just as easily gone south.

That said, I've never felt the slightest bit of guilt over anything related to money. The way I see it, undeservedly, disproportionately good things happen all the time in our society, and they have to happen to somebody. Why shouldn't that somebody be me?
Yeah it would make them a racist. Because its most likely hate or disgust for the other race which is causing a person to be against interracial marriage. But for same sex marriage, there are BS religious reasons to be against it, not just hatred or disgust of gays.
> Im not sure anti same sex marriage is the same as homophobia.

Then let me clarify: It's homophobia. To be afraid that gay marriage will somehow sully "traditional" marriage? Homo. Phobia.
It's more of a business than engineering question, but I wonder what factors led Artsy to work within the gallery/show business framework rather than attempting to disrupt that.
Bamboo Hair Products Favorable and  Critical Reviews
What better way to destroy the enterprise, as you put it, than taking their money.

And it's less about 'catering to the enterprise', and more about doing business on your own terms.

>>Yeah, I'm the guy who would rather go through the trouble of installing/maintaining my own GitLab server than paying a dime to Github/Bitbucket.

Then please note you're not really suited to participate in a discussion about optimally pricing SaaS to businesses. It will be painful for you, and the people involved.

>>it amazed me how it works only as a way to push Patrick's agenda, but none of Colin's.

Patrick and Colin are friends. Patrick wrote this post to help a friend. Patrick's agenda is Colin's success.

>>there is nothing Patrick has done to actively improve things

Patrick has spent hours thinking about and distilling his thinking into a blog post, designed to help Colin. Patrick is regularly paid Large Sums of Money for his experience and capability in this exact, specific area. What should Patrick have done? Fly from Japan to where Colin lives, push him aside, and implement all the work he suggested, against Colin's will?
I can't find your definition of lynching anywhere...?
It's not about "winning." It's about what kind of world we want to live in. Evidently enough people don't want to live in a world where a bigot is the CEO of an organization that ostensibly espouses freedom and equality.

I use the word bigot advisedly. Anything else is sugar-coating the motivations and rationale of the anti-gay-marriage crowd— there is no basis for it which does not rest on a religious argument, in theory or in practice. And you can't actively oppose deny someone else's civil rights and claim it's not personal, or whatever.
> let's confront the haters and explain in a clear, concise manner why their beliefs are invalid.

It's actually pretty easy. Any number of court opinions on the issue are readily available and generally easy to read. These represent the best-of arguments from both sides.

Once the issue was raised as a legal issue, it became subject to constitutional scrutiny and the U.S. Constitution simply doesn't allow for that kind of discrimination and the kinds of argument used in support of.
I'm saying that publicly rallying for the persecution of someone based on a prop donation shouldn't be encouraged or defended in any way. It's pure fascism.
I'm in Boston and getting no one so maybe just no one is using it. I like the N people nearest your idea though.
Yes, but not because of this guy.
The problem is that the state has granted privileges to married people.

If the state treated everyone equally without regard to marital status, then gays and straights could marry privately and it wouldn't become an issue. It's an issue because married gays want the same marriage privileges as straight couples.

We need to separate marriage and state. Except for enforcing contracts that the married parties sign themselves, the state should not get involved and grant special privileges to those who are married, such as tax deductions.

I'm for consensual gay marriage. I'm against state-approved or state-disapproved marriage, whether it bans consensual relationships or rewards or punishes marriage with privileges.

Even consensual polygamy should be none of the state's business.
> To be afraid that gay marriage will somehow sully "traditional" marriage?

How do you know thats why he's against it? Did he tell you that?
makes sense now. thanks.

but then, wouldn't the non-controlling shares be deemed worthless in the long run and it's price plummet in comparison to the controlling shares?

Any other big company did that before?
Trying to strip civil rights from people for no rational reason may, for some individuals, may not be motivated by hate. But if you're on the receiving end of it, I'm not sure it makes much of a difference.

It would be great if you could solve civil rights problems by patiently explaining obvious facts to people. But that's not how it works. If you think you can do better than current gay rights activists (who have many approaches besides the ones you acknowledge), you should demonstrate your solution.
These strawberries are backward, white flesh, red seeds
That discussion is just brewing hate, people can't seem to discuss their politics that same way they can discuss the best C# compilers.

I too have flagged it as after reading 100+ comments all I saw was a yelling match and anyone with a moderate view getting downvoted heavily (because both extremes hit her/him).

Note: as soon as I saw the news I ran here to see how this community felt, but all I'm seeing is a reddit ragefest and as such I don't think we should discuss it anymore.
Excuse me, it is an issue today, and has to do with basic civil rights.
The "BS" in "BS religious reasons" is the tell. There are huge swaths of the Bible the religious set is happy to set aside when it's convenient. Go read Leviticus for a start.

It says more about Christians than it does about gay people or even the Bible that they're fixated on homosexuality.
Is it impossible for an issue to be both political and human rights related? Did the political nature of the civil rights movement of the 1960s somehow make it less of a human rights issue?
> This piece works only to show that Patrick can tell people what they should do, but there is nothing Patrick has done to actively improve things.

I believe that's called consulting.
Not my area, but one starting place is http://www.andrewgelman.com
The argument was that these accidents don't happen because of an inability to see, but due to being "oblivious". Cost effectiveness doesn't enter into it. The question at hand is simply whether back up cameras save lives. NHTSA says they do. hyperion2010 says they don't.

I asked hyperion2010 why I should believe him over the NHTSA. You then replied with two completely nonsensical arguments:

1. That the NHTSA was wrong because their statement was loaded with emotion. This is silly, because emotion doesn't make a statement wrong any more than it makes a statement right. So let's move on to the meat:

2. That the NHTSA has no evidence for their claim.

And this is just plain wrong. The link I provided shows a reasonably thorough study which illustrates that having a camera does substantially reduce these types of accidents. It is not perfect, because some people really are oblivious. But neither is it useless, because some accidents are not due to simple obliviousness.

Your response to this was that it somehow doesn't count if it's not spelled out in their press release, which is just plain stupid.

If you want to discuss the cost/benefit tradeoff of this decision and whether the money would be better spent elsewhere, go for it. But that was not what we were discussing in this thread, so don't act like statements about cost effectiveness are somehow relevant.
It's an amazing magazine that collects a lot of articles about golang.
So if something horrible happened to you - arising out of social structures, rather than getting hit by lightning, if you see what I mean - would you accept it with similar equanimity?
The issue was his contribution in 2008, which is what led to him stepping down.
You would have to ask someone at Mozilla, but his handling of the situation got very poor results. They didn't anticipate it, didn't have a plan (AFIACT), and didn't manage it well once the crisis began.

It hurt Mozilla's image and created a distraction from Mozilla's mission among employees and the public. Everyone is discussing Eich and politics; few are discussing FirefoxOS and other initiatives.

Part of the CEO's job is to manage all that.