skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
the video on the homepage is pretty bad. I dont want to look at some guy making sketches of the design, i want to see the phone. Also, isnt software a big sell for this Cynagen? I've never installed the Mod before -- can the video show me how the insides of the phone are supposed to look like? pretty please?
Yah, we didn't want to rush it and end up stuck with a subpar package in the standard library.

If you are at GopherCon, I'll be giving a lightning talk on Saturday 11:40am on things I've learned by contributing to fsnotify and other open source projects. Happy to chat more about fsnotify afterwards.
Really? What did you think was an argument against TDD?

> Test-first units leads to an overly complex web of intermediary objects and indirection in order to avoid doing anything that's "slow".

This is an argument against unit testing (and is a good example of the conflation). Personally I do TDD with slow, system tests, that mainly are testing business requirements.

He makes a couple of points that some TDD people are rabid, but that is just an argument that some people are jerks. It's not an argument against TDD. (And exactly the same is true of Unit Testing).
The portrait of the “Mobile addict”
awesome. I loved RMQ. I can't imagine the level of detail in your cell stylesheets though :) looks fantastic.
I've heard good things about TAP.
Building for the suckage market
ZenQuery: Enterprise Backend as a Service
Now TV (www.nowtv.com) does have Game of Thrones with a subscription model.

(UK only, but that shouldn't stop you!)
Since the T1000 is from the future, that's cheating. In the near future Chrome will be version 10^100 at least.
> NVIDIA Display Control Panel Version 335.23
On the one hand this reinforces that cordcutting will continue to be a second-class citizen in terms of first-run/same-season content, but on the other hand, making it easier for people to discover Six Feet Under is a great thing.
- The fact that most friendships are shallow, not deep.

- The fact that people lose touch with their friends at predictable points in their lives.

- The fact that married people have trouble finding friends.
Frustrating article to read. Take the freaking call already. The act of taking a call does not commit you to anything, and gives you options on all the potential opportunities they want to discuss.

If they're contacting you, the onus is on them to explain what they want, and you simply have to listen. If at any point you think "Holy crap - this contract could quadruple my sales", that's an option on a great opportunity, and all you had to do was sit there and listen.

Alternatively, if you decide "This seems like a waste of time" either in the first, second or any number of calls in, you can politely excuse yourself from the conversation.

The attitude of "I'm a programmer who cannot process bullshit sales talk such as phone calls" is also destructive to all of the potential relationships you could have formed throughout the life of your business.

If you're allergic to any kind of phone call, you're going to lose a huge amount of sales and opportunities. That's how people communicate in business contexts - especially people who don't know each other.
Pitchweight – rate, tag, and listen to any song
> Technologists are phone averse because at their core they are socially uncomfortable.

I'd imagine that's true in some cases, but it's not valid to assume that all technologists dislike the phone because they're socially uncomfortable.

I dislike the phone in most cases because of scheduling issues. With a written communication, I can read and respond when I have a moment free. With the phone, either people call you out of the blue and interrupt you, or you have to schedule a mutually agreeable time. When that time rolls around, you have to drop what you're doing, get out of the flow, and take the call. Inevitably, the phone call eats up a ton of time--far more, in my experience, than a written conversation would.
Not really. I might not know the author, but I rarely read completely random books. Most of the times I read things recommended by other people. The context is not in the book, it's in the way I found out about it.
Haskell is a more complex case. (++) is the list concatenation operator, eg: [1,2,3,4] = [1,2} ++ [3,4]. While the default String type is nothing more than a linked list of Unicode codepoints, it's notoriously inefficient. The preferred way of representing strings is usually Data.Text, which being a monoid, supports <> for concatenation. However, if you only kept the addition operation for number, you could perfectly well do 1 <> 2 and obtain 3 (you can actually do that with Sum 1 <> Sum 2, obtaining Sum 3 as a result - wrapping with Sum is necessary due to the fact that numbers are also a monoid under multiplication). What would save you from a runtime error is the fact that the monoid concatenation operator expects its two parameters to have the same datatype.
I'm also trying out rubymotion. :) I'm trying out promotion. I gave RMQ a try but I think promotion will get me up and running faster which is really important to me. And if you guys wanna help a fellow rubymotion noob out, take a look at http://stackoverflow.com/questions/23233485/add-uiimage-from... :)

PS. I'll download the app and take a look. Did you see that the top paid app in the app store right now is a rubymotion app??!
Everyone has a right to be heard, but I confess that I was searching around on the site wondering "who is this person?"

While it sounds harsh, it sounds like their claim to fame is being one of the 3 billion or so females on the planet.
Yes, you are a terrible business guy. You're letting your mindset (business guys = BS) and personal preferences (anti-phone) cloud your judgement. I'm a developer foremost but I've overcome my fear of the phone and understand that success requires meeting people around you halfway, on your terms.

Nothing in this exchange was BS. All they were trying to do was get you on the phone, and then you immediately jumped to aggression ("You already told me that."). Perhaps that's not your preferred medium, but it is theirs. And, for the record, there might be very legitimate reasons for them wanting to keep this initial conversation on the phone (ex. they're thinking of ditching a contract).

Of course, it's generally a bad idea to take a meeting without any agenda at all. But it's important to emphasize your cooperativeness something like this: "If you can send me a brief outline of the agenda, I'd be happy to take your call." It lets you get a better sense of what's going on without pushing them away.

Also, by irrationally acting out ("No, you didn't even fucking tell me what you want to talk about.") you're likely losing significant opportunities. If someone wanted to, say, acquire your company the first step would be a phone call exactly like this one to make sure you're not insane.
Note that they are called Now TV, not Sky Now, thought they are a Sky service. (No Sky subscription needed.)
I started doing TDD in 2000, so I'm pretty comfortable with it, and I totally agree with you on the threshold of complexity. For me, TDD is a way to get a better outcome for a project. It has big benefits, but it also has costs. If the costs are above the benefits, I won't do it.

The obvious case is a single-use command-line shell script. Small code, single author, minimal duration, no reuse: automated testing isn't worth it. But if I'm building a large, multi-programmer, long-lasting project, with lots of changes along the way, I'll do a lot of automated testing.

The tricky thing is that many projects start out small and then unexpectedly grow. You start out saying, "This doesn't need a test." And then it becomes, "Well now testing this is kinda hard and I don't have the time." And gradually you end up with an untestable legacy system that is a nightmare to work on.

So the deal I make now is that I'm happy to do quick and dirty things as long as I get to throw away the code or clean it up properly when I decide the time is right. Basically, I'm willing to take on technical debt as long as I know I can declare bankruptcy when that's the right choice.
Volleyballs generally have 3 parallel panels, while the older style footballs have 2.
Still not an adequate replacement for unit tests. The compiler can prove that your code is correct but not that your logic is.
Well, that was a pretty effective move, since now it seems worth it to get a streaming device that does Amazon Prime, where yesterday I didn't care.
I wanted to point out out that the source of the data is pretty limited. There must be a better way to do this -- eg. looking at sybway traffic, internet searches? I dunno, something that would pick up signals from more people and do so on a global scale rather than the national scale. Surely we think the global variation is more interesting than the national one.
Your entire rant completely forgets that Apple runs, on average ~70% profit margin ($700 phone costs about $200 to make). Samsung's profit margins aren't AS high, but still are massive which help drive profit.

Your analysis pretends that Apple and Samsung are selling very custom hardware at a margin, and so one cannot beat the margin AND beat the custom hardware.

But there is a LOT of wiggle room to experiment with price when the incumbents are running 70% profit margins.
Investing in the next BIG cryptocurrency
Just in time for the world cup!
The code is identical on GitHub and Google Code right now. The difference is that we may make breaking changes under go.exp while leaving the howeyc/fsnotify API as is.

We're still figuring out what os/fsnotify will look like.
I don't think people have a great consensus on what "TDD" really means, so there's a lot of "Do you do TDD? You should do TDD!", people taking mixed approaches that they sort of make up or copy from a quick blog post, then deciding that TDD sucks or rules.

For example, this article seems to think TDD is mostly about unit tests (and I've definitely seen the same opinion elsewhere). But somewhere else, specifically GOOS[0], the TDD cycle always starts with an end to end test, with an inner unit test/development cycle to get the test passing. I think this is really important, because if you don't have end to end tests, it's a lot harder to refactor your code in significant ways, and can leave you with extra work maintaining all of your unit tests.

Another thing is "fast tests" as resulting in "a dense jungle" of objects. At least in GOOS, the assertion is that a larger network of small objects is better than a smaller network of large objects. I'm not going to argue the benefits of one way or another, but what I mean to point out is that (at least some) people use TDD because they think it will help them write a more maintainable code base, and aren't just writing code to make their tests fast for the sake of fast tests.

[0]http://www.growing-object-oriented-software.com/
In my experience, Amazon does not care for high quality streaming. As a Prime member for a while, I gave their streaming a shot. Laughable. Might as well have been watching the video on a 56k USRobotics modem with a very high latency connection. Low resolution, fuzzy picture, stops and starts. I simply do not trust Amazon to do it right.
+1 for the old school ball
Statigram is now Iconosquare
>first time

At one point "Arli$$" (a HBO show from the 90s) used to be on Netflix streaming.
The money is in the back catalog, as Ted Turner showed when he kept the MGM film library and sold the rest of the company.
Yeah you're correct.
I keep getting it confused with Sky Go.
Second vote for Knockout.Js. We use it as a base for building up out own framwork/patterns. It's got a couple of benefits, too:
1) It's easier for non OO-devs to understand, especially when coming from a JQuery-only background. Because it's mostly dealing with two-way data-binding, and separating your DOM from yoru code via a ViewModel.

2) it's a lot easier to make custom bindingHandlers than it is Angular's Directives. (And you'd be surprised - or not - at how many web devs even stuggle with KOs simple bindingHandlers syntax)

3) it's easier to work with straight JQuery widgets without a lot of re-wrapping kung-fu, so when you find a component you want to use, you can get it into your project in a straightforward way. (In a pinch you can write some functions on you KO ViewModels that access JQuery directly)

4) You might/might not be creating a SPA app that requires the routing API

5) You're free to build your own service layer for interacting with your crazy service (we have legacy Soap-based WSDL that we manipulated into JSON)

All of this could be build in Angular, too, and that would have some potential benefits, mostly potentially around testability, but won't only have integration tests, so...
I think this will be a especially fun for the World Cup. Good stuff!
Cubietruck -- dual core, quite fast, fairly open, supports hardware virtualization. It has a true SATA port (note that many ARM systems have faked SATA via USB which can be slow).
You Can Write the Future of Education
I see this often, but I am starting to think this is a fallacy. A company can be further along down the wrong path, making it harder to undo the bad things it had done up to that point. A company can be based on an unsustainable idea and no amount of work put into it will ever make it viable. I have a feeling that real-world data is much more interesting than this. I imagine the risk curves are not strictly decreasing with progress from idea to product with users, and I bet YC could shed some light on this by showing when companies actually close down vs when they start at YC.
Clear and easy. Beautiful!
Still trying to figure out how to add a piechart/barchart into the logo...
The standard for communication for new business relationships is ideally face to face, and if that's not possible, then a phone call.

Good sales people also do not waste their time in endless meetings that result in nothing.
I got nothing from the project description, but here's the patent: https://www.google.com/patents/US6516866

It sounds like a mashup of injection molding and lost wax casting (what they call "lost core molding").
New York is all the way to the east of its timezone, which may explain why it starts "late". There are two effects at play here.
1)the official time, which affects hours of operations for businesses
2)the mean solar time, which affects sleeping cycles

What you'd want is to predict starting time as a function of the difference between these variables and then rank the cities by their residuals.
Gimp requires QT installed? I don't see how that can be the case, wouldn't it just get the dlls if it was deployed as a shared library
The pyramid works rather well in my experience.

I still practice TDD though. When I started working on a binary tree space-partitioning algorithm a while ago for my talk at Pycon 2014 I started just writing code and spent a precious couple of nights banging my head against the wall because it was always off and would come up with intermittent errors. I had figured that I knew the data-structure and algorithm well enough and this is one-off code so who cares? So when I was desperate I had told a couple of good friends about my problem and they reminded me: I hadn't written the tests figuring that I'd save myself the time.

TDD has just been a part of my process for years now that I don't think I can even write good code without it. Even in statically type-checked languages. The practice forces me to specify the contracts and behaviors of each piece of my code before I write a single line to implement it. That loop of test, write, pass/fail offloads a tonne of complexity from my mind. It also helps me to discover where my assumptions were wrong in the design process when I notice some tests require too many mocks/stubs/assumptions about state or are simply brittle. Along with a keeping a rigorous development journal it's one of the most powerful tools in my arsenal.
You don't need to have fame to have feeling and worth.
No OpenBSD support, closed source graphics, blob ridden.

The performance/price is awesome and I guess it's cool if you can get it to work for whatever you have in mind. But I prefer supporting a platform that contributes upstream and promotes a proper open work ethic.

Beaglebone Black for me although the performance is nowhere near this.
Technology/Computer Science Scholarship Recipients: HelloWorld
I agree with you when it comes to clients. Clients want to hire you to do a specific piece of work, and in that case vague, open-ended agreements are indeed poison. When it comes to partnerships, however, the mutually beneficial agreement might not be immediately obvious. It's entirely possible that a "get to know you" sort of conversation will be necessary, will turn out to be very fruitful, and would be impossible to have over email. Also keep in mind, they're vetting you as much as you're vetting them. They want to get a feel for you as a potential partner, and if you behave like the author from the get-go, it's likely not in their best interests to not work with you.

To my second point, if you say you're in charge of product development, it's your job to dive into these sorts of conversations on the off chance they might develop into meaningful partnerships. I can be annoying and frustrating, and it certainly can seem wasteful to someone with an engineer's mindset, but that's why it's a job and not a hobby. Expecting people to come to you with perfectly-fitting opportunities gift wrapped in exactly the communication style you use will keep you from ever achieving anything.
Everyone is busy. It might take one hour and 1,000 words to compose an email that will accurately cover the proposal and obvious concerns and objections. This could be handled a lot faster (for both parties) on a phone call, because conversations can branch rapidly.

So if someone is talking about a mutually beneficial relationship (partnership or customer), it's not really fair to expect them to draft a giant customized pitch email. And let's be honest, does anyone really want to read a giant pitch email??

Well why not just send a short email? Because many good ideas sound bad at first mention--or at least, have obvious potential objections. Paul Graham has written about this extensively. A conversation is the fastest and most effective way to explore an idea quickly to see if it has merit.

If you're a programmer, it's not worth it. But if you're a programmer running a business, it might be. If nothing else it may be a data point to help evaluate product to market fit.
4D printing obviously. I want this in my hand: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xN4DxdiFrs
A ninja in modern war, would be like a punch-card coder working on a windows app..
And the converse of that is that when someone spends a lot of time deliberately not learning a thing (as the author of the article seems to have done), it's understandable for them to be defensive about the utility of those things.

The author makes one fundamental error, which is the assumption that any of those things are necessary. You don't need to "create a hello world service to create the hello world factory to create the hello world sercice so you can print hello world on the screen". You can just print hello world to the screen. You can do it in the template, in the console, wherever.

You don't need layers of abstraction for simple tasks like "printing hello world", but when you have things that do need those layers of abstraction, they're there, and they're appropriate. The alternative is to write uglier code, which it seems the author prefers.

That said, I don't mean to discount preference in this debate, which many seems to have done. If it isn't to the author's taste, then cool. If he'd rather write small, pluggable modules, that's cool too. Those small, pluggable modules have their limitations though, and the author either hasn't run into them, or refuses to acknowledge that, at least for some use cases, small, pluggable modules aren't actually the best choice.
CodeFront.io at Austria, Smashing Magazine Discount Tickets on Sale
Physicists Say Consciousness Might Be a State of Matter
went up to |64|2| and got a |4| on the way... £$£%!!!
and when I got to 128 I somehow managed to right click.. £$£%!!!
I think you're off base. Roku is a very mature product. Amazon might be able to beat it with marketing, but one could argue that Chromecast, Apple TV and Amazon have to catch up with Roku.
Thanks for digging up the patents.
geckoboard may be able to do all this for you
That is the value for the spin speed. Quoting from the paper, 4 paragraphs after the 2km/s you referenced:

> Probably the most signi cant feature of the flow in the concept reactor is that it involves a compressible liquid. With flow velocities exceeding 2 km/s and pressures reaching 400 GPa, compressibility is unavoidable.

"Flow" refers to the spin speed, not the collapse.

Like I said earlier, I used the equation for a liquid mirror telescope -- h = 1/(2g) * (omega * r) ^ 2 -- for my '"back of the envelope" thing.' See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_mirror_telescope for the full derivation.

Using h = 2.7 m, g = 9.8m/s, and r = 0.20m gives 40 Hz (or 2,400 rpm). Note though that this gives 20 cm at the top, and 0cm at the bottom. It's a paraboloid, so the center is probably 14-15 cm across. Thus, 40 Hz is a lower bound.

Using 40 Hz in (2 * pi * 1.5m) * 40/s implies a minimum equatorial speed of 380m/s, which is Mach 1. The equatorial pumps of course must be providing fluid at an even higher speed. The g-forces at the equator, 1.5 meters away, are even larger than the g-forces at the surface 20 cm away. a = r * omega^2 = 1.5m * 1600/s/s = 2500 G.

To get a more uniform evacuated center requires higher speeds still, but the formula I used (first discovered by Newton, btw), no longer holds. It will likely need to be several times faster. Flow speeds of 2km/s require only 6 times faster than the minimum possible speed, which sounds reasonable. Even if 2km/s doesn't sound reasonable.

I don't think General Fusion has done the engineering testing to show that they can actually construct one of these, much less use it to provide power.

Feel free to correct my calculations.
This whole situation is really sketchy for me.

Horvath brought some pretty serious allegations, but never actually sued GitHub. Instead, she wrote about it on Twitter and social media sites, because that's what you do these days when you feel you've been discriminated against and harassed, right? More people jumped into the fray and stated Horvath was acting weird and starting nasty rumors about the founder's wife and their new baby.

GitHub didn't help its cause very much when the owner's wife was banned from the office and the founder stepped down, which seemed to give Horvath's supporters some more fuel to tweet about, even though it was probably more damage control than admitting any wrong doing.

I'm still not sure where I sit on this one. Everybody is accountable, and to some degree it feels like Horvath is milking this for all its worth, for better or worse. In some of the environments I've worked in, women who have "alpha" traits are not looked upon favorably and detested by their male counterparts. It seems like Horvath has some of these traits and was probably part of the problem at GitHub.

I'm in the Midwest, but is this situation pretty rare and we're blowing it out of proportion, or do these situations occur more frequently than I read about?
any in canada?
Exactly the point. Go is a VERY opinionated language. You see the term "idiomatic Go" used very regularly. The Go team and community push hard for everyone to follow a set way of doing things. This means all Go code must be formatted a certain way, handle errors in a certain way, etc. People even put pre-commit hooks into their VCS system that will reject .go commits unless they are properly formatted before commit.
Have you used the latest Roku (Roku 3)? The interface is extremely non-tech-consumer friendly.