skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
'So, library code and critical infrastructure would fall outside of the "vast majority of cases".'

Arguably, though the limited sandboxes in wide deployment are sufficiently full of holes that most code provides some access to something that might be considered critical infrastructure.

'And again, the question there is "Did Heartbleed keep people from getting value out of OpenSSL?". The answer is no, even if the value provided wasn't as advertised. It was more useful to have something--anything!--than nothing.'

Possibly. Belief that you're secure when you aren't can quite definitely be much worse than no belief that you're secure, but I'm significantly less sure that Heartbleed moved many people from "sufficiently secure" to "insufficiently secure" in many individual cases (the possibility exists, I just lack the data to make any determination).

Also, for many use cases, there exist (and existed then, of course) alternatives that are probably more secure. If "nothing" meant using those instead it was quite a bit better to have "nothing".
Any job or work can eventually become frustrating. That's why its called a "job" or something your "work" for. Even if you work for the greatest company in the work with the best engineering driven "culture", there will be something that will hinder you due to business.

The only place I knew which didn't have any business pressure was the old Bell Labs. That's because of the AT&T was a monopoly and was allow a profit of 7%. That meant any expense can instantly be justified because no matter what AT&T would earn 7%.

End of the day, engineering is about compromises and tradeoffs. It's applied science. It's about being practical and sometimes that means we need to compromise on "quality". That's what makes good engineering culture. A product that ships and makes money is infinitely better than a product that doesn't ship. So, I don't think it's right to assume that the corporate approach is incorrect. In fact, it is better simply because once you get business involved, a lot of the decisions become impersonal.
The point is not having to open the door to the child's room, as this might keep them from falling back to sleep.
In almost all dangerous situations, the child's safety is conditional on the parent's safety because the child is helpless without the parent. This is why, when the oxygen masks drop in an airplane, you put your mask on before helping you child.
Any plans to increase the depth of the prototype beyond simple wireframe linking? (e.g., a drawn camera icon pops open the devices camera, editable fields, etc.)
SAP OPENUI5 (SAPUI5) – In Warehouse Self-Maintenance – Mockups Development
Only if you trust the host machine 100%. But you can never trust the host machine 100%.
We've had huge buy-in from Ruby as it's pretty difficult to set up and deploy a Ruby stack. Where as with PHP it's basically supported out of the box by pretty much everyone.

It's hard to sell Heroku which is why we have the free trial dynos. I find most people either love us see us as a huge value add, or don't understand why anyone would use us.

We're not simply a small abstraction layer, instead we support deployment at the application layer. Which again basically sounds like meaningless fluff unless you've already bought into the product. If I had to sum it up, i would say we're a company that provides a collection of small, sharp, extremely well integrated tools that seek to make your production development experience more pleasant.

For Ruby you get the app setup which is huge, but then you also get process monitoring out of the box so if your app goes down due to hardware failure we get paged at 3am instead of you. It's extremely easy to do things like have multiple staging servers, and I really like our CLI.

Instead of trying Heroku, I would recommend starting off trying out Heroku Postgres and using it through whatever server you deploy to right now. Get the credentials from the CLI.

On a production DB you get forks, and followers. We also have point in time recovery which is pretty fancy. Hacker destroy your DB? Forgot to schedule a backup? Rollback to 1 second before the deletions, and done. If you like Heroku Postgres, then I would recommend trying the dynos, and if not: agree to disagree.

For PHP the sell is management, stability, and consistency. If you're on a shared host your performance is very inconsistent
as well as your uptime. If you're on a VPS you have pretty decent performance but now you have to manage everything manually, and even then there's that uptime thing we're not 5 nine's but hopefully above most: https://status.heroku.com/uptime.

I honestly don't think we're right for every application, every developer, and every scenario. When we are though I hope to provide the best experience possible.
I feel like Mercurial still has a chance to become a real force if it can provably solve some of the real issues with git. It won't do to just have a nicer CLI since most people are used to git by now.

Here are some of git's real problems:

* Performance issues with multi-GB git repos
* Handling of large binary files
* Submodules - Mercurial has subrepos, but I don't know how they compare
I haven't received physical mail where I live in 15 years. I have all my paper bills sent to paytrust, who scans them, and then pays them per automated rules (or allows me to manually approve.) Physical Mail just goes to 650 Castro Street in Mountain View, where I get a re-mail once a month wherever I am in the world.

I lived in an apartment for about 18 months, but never asked for a key to my mailbox as there really was no reason for me to open it.

The only packages I ever need to receive at my place of residence are via FedEx/UPS.
Brilliant insights -- both you and GP.

The USPS is the original ad-supported service where you are the customer. Mind blown.
FAQ 1.4: "we ask the applicant to design the test".

FAQ questions to Randi: "The hardest part has always been to get the claimant to state clearly what he or she thinks they can do, under what conditions, and with what accuracy. Most are very vague about these aspects, and very few have any notion of how a proper test should be conducted. We at JREF sometimes take months getting those matters settled"

FAQ 5.2: "All tests are videotaped and stored. You will be asked to state, on camera, that the protocol is fair prior to the test. You will be asked to state it again afterward. If you do not feel that the protocol is fair beforehand, you are not obligated to continue the test."

The videotaping particularly, and videotaping compating against a mutually agreed specific plan that the applicant designed, leaves little room for outright ignoring what happened.
Can't mention Omega without linking to:

Meta Math!

http://arxiv.org/abs/math/0404335
Why not just directly get an approximation of the golden ratio by taking fib(n) / fib(n-1)?

If you use an iterative / tail-recursive version you can actually do this directly, without even the overhead of having to calculate it twice.

(I.e. define fib to return a tuple / struct / etc consisting of (fib(n), fib(n-1)).)
Curl will still pipe partials: http://blog.existentialize.com/dont-pipe-to-your-shell.html
Binary distributions are only available for Microsoft Windows 32bit. Last updated in 2005. This is more of a historical curiosity than a potential tool.
I can see the humourous side of it, but mostly I found it very frightening.

I have trouble picking which is more frightening, a flesh and blood intruder or a disembodied voice spying on you.
"Heather picked up her mobile phone and accessed the camera to check on her 10-month-old daughter Emma’s room."

There's a man's voice coming from my 10 month-old daughter's room ... should I check my phone or get out of bed and RUN over to make sure she's not being kidnapped, molested, etc? This mother's reaction makes me think she'll be texting her (soon to be) teen-age daughter at the dinner table instead of making conversation.
I'm thinking checking your phone while you are at dinner is probably a little faster than walking back to the house. And having a window up an running while you are in another room working is also probably faster. The baby is supposed to be sleeping, you don't need to walk into the room every 5 minutes to check.
I'm also going to guess the use case is NOT for people without children.
> by walking around

The first thing that came to mind for me was "Management By Walking Around", but I think that could easily be misapplied: http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1993-01-16/
Aren't they unique in using DRAM for the lowest level of onboard cache, and therefore have a lot of it since those are just tiny cells that store a charge for a while?

Yeah, starting with the POWER7. POWER8 has 96 MiB of eDRAM (e for embedded).

The Centaur memory controllers also have 16 MiB of eDRAM, max them out at 8 and you get 128 total at L4.

Compared to Intel's current offerings, the L1 data cache and L2 unified cache are twice as big. Don't know about timings, though.

The biggest Intel Ivy Bridge Xeon server CPUs have slightly more transistors (100 million), but on a much smaller die, 31% less area. Look at the ones with 12 and 15 native cores: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_Bridge_(microarchitecture)... they list at $2336 to $6841.
Only proof can verify a program is correct, and that is so cumbersome and expensive is done on rare critical operations.

Tests give you the ability to know how a certain code behaves in specific circumstances.

Clarity makes it easy to understand the general case.

So if the clarity of the general case is a little worse to be able to test the outlier cases as well, the TDD philosophy would welcome that trade. Or at least, thats how I understood it.

A brute and unpolished example of clarity vs testability:

A)

def complicated_algorithm(input)
mod_input = Math.root(input)
mod_input = input / mod_input
...
end

def division_in_complicated_algorithm_test
input = 1
input.should_receive(:/).and_raise(ZeroDivisonError)
Math.root.should_receive(input).and_return(0)
complicated_algorithm(1)
end

-----------------

B)

def complicated_algorithm_testable_version(input)
mod_input = Math.root(input)
mod_input = divide(input, mod_input)
...
end

def divide(a,b)
a/b
end

def divide_test
assert_exception ZeroDivisionError, divide(1,0)
end

Overall, the point of doing tests first is that you dont hack them together doing complex dependency injections, because naturally to save work you do the easy test..at some expense of the final code.

In the above example, the top example is less verbose, having one full less method, but the test is more complex and fickle, because it was done to verify the above code.

Its not a fantastic example, we could argue that the tests try different things, and that division is too silly to put into a different method. The point is that the above happens when you write code first , test later, and the bottom one happens the other way around. TDD advocates for testability over clarity.
I'm such a big fan of his. He shows levity, humor, and makes sure to keep his eye on the ball - systemic racism. He's also got great advice for youngsters http://www.esquire.com/blogs/news/kareem-how-to-become-a-man
Google Takes Aim at the iPhone with Android “Silver” Program
If everyone feels it's fair then by definition it's "right", however such an approach wouldn't feel fair to me because I have different preferences and usage habits that aren't getting factored in here. The tool linked in the OP is very simple to use, and importantly it will capture all revealed preferences (provided who the roommates are is accepted as a given).
That's interesting. Research has shown that alcohol increases creativity while caffeine increases efficiency. Alcohol is better for reducing inhibitions and thinking outside the box whereas caffeine temporarily increases blood flow thereby allowing you to more quickly breeze through permutations around decision making.
They're MIT students; just because they aren't STEM majors doesn't mean they are idiots. These are concepts that should be within their grasp, even if it is too complex for the general public.

Hell, throw a brief rundown into whatever their equivalent of "University 101" is if it really does prove to be a problem.
you guys may be interested in an issue i opened a bit ago, some interesting perf jsfiddles in there to ponder.

https://github.com/julianshapiro/velocity/issues/6

also, plz contribute to the discussion there if you feel inclined.
There's been quite a bit of hyperbole thrown around about React lately (both positive and negative) but one thing that can't be overstated is the fact that the virtual DOM + React's diffing algorithm and the performance and architectural elegance it brings to frontend development is pretty amazing.

I see parallels in the transition from c, to a Ruby/Python/C# development experience (where a lot of low level and error prone details are abstracted away, giving a developer a lot more expressive power in a higher level language)
As far as I'm concerned, Foscam cameras (the type in the story) are not securable. The firmware is complete trash. I have one and it is loaded with bugs. At least twice now I've gotten an urgent email telling me to update my firmware because of an exploit. I blocked mine on my router from accessing the Internet.

To give you notifications, it wants you to put in your email password, instant messenger password, ftp password, basically almost a dozen things. that could destroy your life if hacked. And this buggy, remotely exploitable camera wants you to trust it with all of them.
"Android Silver" May Be Google's Attempt To Provide A Premium Android Experience
GitHub updated Services UI
"Thinking on your feet" allows you to not only be creative but also to be spontaneous so you can also apply new ideas in context. I'd be curious to know the optimal amount of walking needed/the inflection point at which there are marginal returns.
Paranoia about the Koch brothers secretly controlling everything behind the scenes - or even their being particularly relevant and central to whatever specific political debate position you don't like - does seem like a direct modern descendant of the old "right-wing conspiracy" meme. Doesn't it? Hilary doesn't own a copyright on the phrase.

Though if the parent post had included the word "Vast" you'd have more of a point. :-)
Do you have any tips on managing a nixpkgs clone vs using channels? How do you set it up to default to your clone for example?
I'd read that same SE thread a while back and concluded that write protect drive switches is a good solution I could trust!
This is trivially fixable by wrapping the body of the script in a function which is invoked at the end. Homebrew's install script doesn't do this, but it's written in Ruby and all of the side-effecting statements are within a single block, so the worst that could happen is it could fail to print the message telling you that it's installed at the end.
In an extremely perverse way, this is why smoking "feels" like it helps creativity. All of the same mechanisms and benefits apply as walking + a bit of stimulation via nicotine. Of course, the health hazards make this a crappy technique, and it would be healthier just to go out for a stroll. But this boost is definitely a part of the addiction (among other things), which makes the habit that much harder to kick once started among creative types (they feel like they are losing more than just the nicotine).
Is "login" a username, or an instance of logging in (i.e. "your last login was 2 days ago"), or both? To be honest, I don't see many times when "login" is necessary. You can click "Log in" to log in, and most form fields will use "username" or "email address" rather than "login."

What do you make of "log off" vs. "log out"? I feel like I used to hear the former (and its complement "log on") somewhat often, but everything seems to use "log in/out" now.
I feel like this is something that traditional watch designers have known about for a long time. A modern adventuring watch is packed with a slew of chrono/navigation features, yet they're all accessible through the bezel or buttons around the case.
Hackers guide to pitch decks
You seem to have missed the point.

You are saying rational numbers are countable
but irrational numbers are not countable (uncountably infinite)

This is true.

The parent is saying that algebraic numbers are countable
and transcendental numbers are not countable.

The parent's statement is a level deeper and more remarkable.
Another way to say this, is that "almost all" numbers are transcendental.

The parent was not suggesting that his short list of examples represented the extent of transcendental numbers: despite almost all numbers being transcendental, they are individually hard for us to define, since the set is normally defined by excluding sets of numbers that we can easily define.

To clarify: transcendental numbers are a subset/a type of irrational numbers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendental_number
If you take out transcendental numbers from the irrationals, those that remain are algebraic and therefore countable. You got it :)
Playing the "social butterfly" at work has been my cover, I swear. Still, I do two heart walks weather permitting each day spaced out while at work, these are quarter mile walks across the parking deck and back. Combine that with my visits which themselves spark my thoughts and I can see how just changing your surroundings wakes up parts of your mind.
This is definitely not the best approach. But when I am way out of my depth, the first place I look is at degree requirements for that area of expertise (from looking at a couple university websites) and then I find the textbooks used in those courses or searching online under those subject areas to get closer to the information I am actually looking for.

One of the biggest problems in learning something radically different is knowing what it is you don't know. A solid background will give you plenty of hints, and just looking at tables of contents can help you quickly get to the good stuff if you aren't looking for a solid background.
> But I'm just thinking out loud here. Probably a bad idea. :)

Still better than not thinking quietly ;).
I have a client that has a group of medical clinics that could be very interested in this app as the base to store a variety of different values along with prescription schedules - can you send me an email (see profile).

Thanks!
Also note that it provides error bars around the result -- in your case 578.13 minus those error bars was probably less than 562.50.
I am wondering how much this is related to oxygenating the brain better. I can't readily find a supporting link, but my understanding is you breathe best while walking (and I do a lot of walking these days -- I am supposed to have serious lung issues and mostly do not anymore).
The parent says, and I quote: "...then you get that the reals are uncountable only 'because' of transcendental numbers."

But this is untrue, is it not? Because even if you removed all of the real transcendentals, the real numbers would still be uncountable because of the irrationals.

(Edit: Or are the non-transcendental irrationals countable? I can see how that might be true?)
> This hints that they might be 'dual' notions, in a Mathematical sense. Maybe I should dub it "cocurrying"?

After a little more thought I've realised that this is exactly uncurrying of return values.

When we uncurry, we take a bunch of arguments at once and supply them one-at-a-time to our function, for example "uncurry(foo)(a, b, c, d)" becomes "foo(a)(b)(c)(d)".

Note that this is identical to the calling convention of a curried function, hence the name uncurrying. In this way, it makes sense to uncurry the return value of curry:

// Pass 3 values to a curried function which just-so-happens to return
// other functions
curry(function(w, x) {
return function(y) {
return function(z) {
return w + x + y + z;
};
};
})(1, 2, 3, 4);

// Take the first 2 arguments to be w and x
(function(w, x) {
return function(y) {
return function(z) {
return w + x + y + z;
};
};
})(1, 2)(3, 4);

// Apply the first function
(function(y) {
return function(z) {
return 1 + 2 + y + z;
};
})(3, 4);

// The above version will ignore 4 and wait for another z.
// This is why we need to uncurry it.
uncurry(function(y) {
return function(z) {
return 1 + 2 + y + z;
};
})(3, 4);

// Now we can execute it properly
(function(y) {
return function(z) {
return 1 + 2 + y + z;
};
})(3)(4);

(function(z) {
return 1 + 2 + 3 + z;
})(4);

10;

Now, given our implementations of curry, we don't actually have to uncurry a function explicitly: we can call "foo(a, b, c, d)" even if "foo" is curried. Hence we can just pass all the arguments straight into the return value assuming that it is uncurried.

This will work for regular Javascript functions and those which we've curried. The only thing it won't work for is functions which have been hard-coded in a curried form; these will need to be sent through an uncurry function first (which we can do via composition).
Mine can go for weeks with more than 750 tabs open. Especially if I restart it. Do you have less than 4 gigs of RAM?
Nix has a number of nice things going for it.

You can have multiple different versions of packages installed and other packages can depend on the different versions. The management of the 'shared library hell' is done behind the scenes using symbolic links in a GNU Stow like manner.

You can create 'environments' that are collections of installed packages and switch between them so tools needed for one task don't pollute the namespace for other tasks. For example, I create an environment for working on Firefox. It uses specific GCC versions and libraries. Only that environment sees them. I then switch to another environment when working on another project which uses clang - that environment can't see the library versions from the firefox environment, etc.

You can build package from source or download from a binary cache. You can modify configure flags and other build settings and the correct packages will rebuild - or download from cache if they are built with the same flags.

It installs easily on top of other Linux distros.
I found myself in that exact situation recently, struggling with finer points of Capybara, trying to nail down critical behavior in my controllers . . . then I realized, why had all of this crap crept into my controller in the first place? I refactored a ton of things into the models where they really belonged and ended up with much tighter code and better reuse of functions. Now testing is way easier - the only thing my controllers are really doing now is routing after certain conditions and serving up error/success messages.

Sometimes I feel like Steve Martin when I'm getting more sophisticated with a framework . . . I've got a googlephonic stereo with a moonrock needle, but maybe the problem is the shocks in my car: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cjjsz14hL48
The world would be a better place with both better command line apps and beautiful graphical front ends. The former makes doing the latter easier, while the latter also allows you to work easily with the less wonderful command line apps.

> Traditionally, the main argument against CLIs is the lack of discoverability that GUIs afford, which is a very valid point. That being said, most CLIs don't make an effort to enhance discoverability, which makes the argument still valid, but a little unfair.

That's only one argument against command line apps. There's also ease of use, progressive disclosure, learning curve, the relative ease of recognizing and remembering versus memorizing, and so forth.
So does Mithril, which weights 8kB minified.

http://lhorie.github.io/mithril/
I don't know, I think the excitement around angular was because it made things easy, while the excitement around react is based on its simplicity of its model. It's a deeper thing than just being a shiny new thing imo.