skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The medium for exchange grows in value as a side effect of productivity increases and increased faith in its continued stability.

Government fiat money counteracts this mechanism of value growth through inflation. Some argue that this leads to a net benefit to the economy, but if Bitcoin is the currency of the world in the future, then it will gain value as the whole production of mankind grows. And unlike gold, it cannot be synthesized with very large amounts of energy.
The power draw of my laptop under load versus typing this comment is almost 2:1. Under-utilized computers are not a waste of power, they're saving power. I'm especially not OK with unknowingly donating my battery capacity and limited cell data so CrowdProcess can sell it to someone while I read an article. This is just bad business for everyone involved (and the environment).
I highly recommend investing in a decent pair of earphones or headphones. These will knock out a very high percentage of the ambient noise and let you concentrate almost as well as a quiet office.
It's quite interesting, I saw an advert in a local newspaper for a streetview driver today. I don't think that google will have a monopoly for much longer in this sphere.
Please, please, can people stop posting "XXX is down" when their favorite service goes down for 30 seconds? If we care, we'll notice for ourselves. If we don't care, it's just noise.

A technical post-mortem is interesting and potentially useful. Calling "The sky is falling" every 10 minutes[0] is not.

[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole
Toyota Describes Combustion Engine That Generates Electricity Directly
Software at the Supreme Court: A Guide to the [Alice Corp] Patent Case
The original url [1] pointed to this one, so we changed it.

Submitters: Please double-check the articles you post for links to more original sources. When one article is lifted from another, HN strongly prefers the original.

1. http://www.news.com.au/technology/science/science-has-found-...
For talking to (or teaching) non-native English speakers in English, using the Norman-derived verbs can often be useful for avoiding 2-word phrasal verbs (and 3-word prepositional verbs). Many learners of English understand "put" but don't understand "put off", "put up", and "put up with", so saying "postpone", "accommodate", and "tolerate" can help with communication where the objective of the conversation (or lesson) is something else.
I've worked on large state machines in the past, which were rock solid and easy to work with. As the code was built using state transition tables, state machines were automatic. I would hate to think of how to juggle these systems using co-routines.
What's your low-level prog lang experience? When you say search-engine, do you mean the actual indexing will be written in python, or will you be integrating w/ something else?

Finally, is your current project a school project, a hobby project, or a work project?
Right, I agree. I was merely responding to the parent's assertion that people just go ahead and eat as much meat as they do now but make it higher quality.
> Different gears are for "go faster" and "go slower", and the clutch is for "change gear".

Sorry, that's exactly what I meant by "the different gears work in general". You need to understand that underlying model before you can make it work, even if it's only intuitive, and not cerebral.

> the clutch is for "change gear"

That, and it's also "don't stall when I stop".

I think most people understand that it disconnects the engine. I don't think that's as crazy a leap as "understanding the details of how a gearbox works" (which I don't even know, since I've never looked in one).

Anyway, I maintain that my analogy is apt.
While in principle I understand the economics for that, Fog Creek doesn't use interns as gophers. They actually mentor them and, even rarer, expect them to ship meaningful software before their term is up. In addition to compensating them like they're doing meaningful work, Fog Creek does a large portion of new hires from previous interns. (Incidentally: it's all-around a great place to work.)
A comment I posted a few days ago about the game got some interest, so I thought I would share it with the community.

The project started with a group of strangers meeting at a global gamejam event in 2012. The first prototype was super buggy, but our idea about sacrificing your character to solve puzzles and make progress was well received, so the four of us decided to keep working on the project as an evenings and weekends thing.

Sharing early prototypes with online communities provided a lot of feedback and encouragement. As the project progressed, more of the group started to focus on the game full time, working up to the release this month. The Steam page for the game is here:
http://store.steampowered.com/app/250050/

If anyone has any questions about the process, or the game, I'd be happy to answer them.
You make a bold statement in a thread that is based on a news report passing information on a new World Health Organization report. This thread includes a link to the full report,[1] and the report is a document with a good table of contents and is a searchable .PDF document besides. So you and everyone here can check my work when I say that your statement

In America, the number one thing you can do is stop eating factory farmed meat. That is a huge contributor to antibiotics resistance.

goes beyond the available evidence. But props to you for saying "In America," in that statement, because it is plain that in some other parts of the world, where the problem of antibiotic-resistant bacteria is most severe, the main cause of the problem is misuse of antibiotics in human medicine rather than meat production. (India especially is an example of that kind of problem.) More details of course can be found in the report. Methinks the statement is based just a bit too much on propaganda by vegan activists. I encourage everyone in our community of thoughtful discussion here to check the fine article and the linked references before radically altering their personal diets.

[1] http://www.who.int/drugresistance/documents/surveillancerepo...
I interned at Google and had to share my office with 2 others, although it's probably different for interns.
I realize you're half joking but as a former six time intern, the quickest way to make me not want to join your company fulltime would be to use me as your assistant. Of course, that might be alright with you if you're not looking to hire your intern afterwards.
TDD and XP are not the same thing, either. I don't have my copy of "Test-Driven Development by Example" handy, so I'll just have to point you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test-driven_development , which doesn't use unit tests in its definition.

Now, it's not that there's no connection at all: unit tests are _incredibly_ helpful when doing TDD, because you want your tests to run quickly. But it's "Test-first," not "Unit-test first." When you're doing TDD, you don't write acceptance tests second, you write both your acceptance and unit tests first.
While it make look to be that simple, the greater benefit of having these discussions out in the open amongst the various developer communities should not be overlooked. There are a lot of developers out there that will take what DHH says for "the golden rule" without critically thinking about the content of his assertions. (Of course this is true for a lot of vocal developers, including Gary). When we have folks like Uncle Bob and Gary Bernhardt challenging those assertions, all of us can benefit. And for those people who are not used to, or don't have the experience in the community of speaking up and challenging ideas, they can learn that it's not OK just to take someone's opinion on software development as the truth. If you don't like the conversations, ignore them and read something else.
Yep depends on the building. I had a single office at Microsoft, so did many others. Some shared in pods of 4-8 engineers. I don't recall any spaces with an open plan (except in the UK), but I also didn't visit every single building Microsoft had.
I had my own office at Microsoft and so did most people on my team.
Circle CI seems like an awesome company. A few unrelated questions.

What percentage of your codebase is in Clojure? What have your experiences with it been? (I've really enjoyed using Clojure thus far.)

Do you expect to have a need for a machine learning engineer in the next 0-24 months?
I don't seem to get the point of this post? Seems rather basic and trivial to rewrite google maps code to fit in with another library like leaflet or mapbox. What is something new or innovative done here? Also it seems like you guys jacked a lot of what transloc does http://duke.transloc.com/

If anything this seems like a weak attempt to garner some attention for doublemap. I mean look at the link, its to github.io sure, but is there any actual code. No. Then why not link to doublemap's blog? Why create this false sense of open community (by linking to a github page) and sharing if you're not really sharing anything. You're basically detailing what you did in text, but in no way do you share your code.
I think in this case, it's the quality of meat that's the issue. But there's another very important issue with meat: it's one of the most inefficient forms of sustenance. Animal agriculture is the single largest source of greenhouse gases - larger than the entire transport industry, including planes. It takes 11 times more fossil fuels to create 1 calorie from animal sources than from plant sources.

I'm sorry for linking to a PETA page (especially since it's a very buzzfeed-y one), but [this page][1] has links to a lot of good sources.

[1]: http://www.peta.org/features/meat-climate-change/
I'm not talking about DAS, I'm talking about watching him code live.
Gary,

I've been hoping that you would write an intelligent response to DHH's latest articles and talk ever since I saw them, thank you for doing it.

I suspect that his claims of TDD isolation damaging the integrity of designs are mostly red-herrings too. I know they are for me personally -- in fact, the opposite is true. I'd love to see you address this issue as well. In particular, your thoughts as they relate the technique of moving logic completely out of controllers (as you do in raptor). This technique seems to infuriate DHH in the context of rails, while to me it seems a far superior design.
> ah yes this emerging threat currently kills fewer people in a single year than an entire genocidal campaign did over the course of six.

That's not what I said. You can multiply the yearly number by 100 (antibiotics were discovered less than 100 years ago) and still not touch the number of lives lost to overly powerful states.

as a side note: thanks for the link on bacteriophages. very cool

> by the way, the phage therapy described in the comment you linked was largely developed by the soviets. lol

Definitely lol! From the link:
"While d’Herelle is said to have been initially enamored with communism, he was soon soured on it when Eliava was suddenly kidnapped, murdered, and denounced by Beria (it likely had as much to do with Beria demonstrating that even Heroes of Soviet Science were not immune to his power..."

Its no surprise that scientists still tried to save lives despite the state - not because of it.
Well, like I say in the post, mocks didn't exist back then, so they couldn't have been mocking in the sense that we are now. I wasn't there, but I believe it's true that in some cases they were doing what we'd now consider "fakes", which are simplified replacements for production dependencies that have minimal working implementations. (An in-memory database is an example.)

Fakes get you around the question of database integration, but not the question of integration in general. You'd have to create a fake of every class in the system for that, in which case you probably just re-invented mocks and/or stubs.

I probably could've more explicitly called out the fact that DHH is obsessing over database integration when it's just a special case of what isolated testers are actually worried about, which is integration in general. It was already a long post, though.
Don't be so simple minded. It can succeed as a remittance mechanism without succeeding as a currency. If it does nothing more than eliminate Western Union for international wire transfers it'll be massively successful.
That's the whole point of OTP as an imaginary construction!

It's a way to take any block cipher and turn it into a stream cipher with the power of XOR.

(I'm only going to ask this nicely once: cease and desist stalking and harassment.)
I went vegan for a few months and abandoned it because everyone else was unable to have a conversation with me about anything other than meat. Everyone felt an unprovoked need to justify their eating habits to me. Social groups were uncomfortable picking a restaurant without asking if I was okay with it even though I would much prefer to just not eat and hang out with people. Without any comment from me, my eating habits became a constant source of discussion and concern.

There just isn't any way to be politely vegan. Everyone else automatically assumes that you care why they aren't.
Quick thoughts: The super-thin iPhone 6
Sort of attached to the name, though. Any suggestions?
email is such an abused tool, i have backlogs of email each morning in the 200+ range, of which i have to actually respond to 50-70.

shameless plug, but i've been working on this app to help reduce the clutter https://getsdone.io
Every piece of news coming out about Docker convinces me it's "the future". This is in the same way Java was the future in 1995, which may not seem like a glowing comparison, but considering how that worked out in terms of useful impact (if not great for the parent company) it's a compliment.

Very good to see them take this stuff seriously early on, and even though sticking to some of those principles sounds difficult they're making all the right noises.
The Photography (And programming) Teacher Nobody Wants.
Stanford University acquires source code for Multi-User Dungeon
Thanks! We had a lot of fun with the idea, and seeing what we could do with it.

We are also on the Humble Store at the moment. (http://humblebundle.com/store/p/lifegoeson_storefront)

We reached out to Gog, and would love to be on their store, but we haven't been able to convince them so far.
Somewhat surprised there's no discussion of security going on here - even at a design level, there are some useful considerations.
On the one hand this article does at least provide citations for some of the timelines involved. On the other hand it makes me throw my hands up when I see some of the examples provided. 100 lines of code to test 50 lines of code, which implement a catalog is pretty par for the course it seems in TDD advocacy. This could honestly be me venting my current frustrations, but I get tired of this type of advocacy, also often seen in the functional world, of proving how great something is by using the most trivial possible example, in a domain squarely in your technique's wheelhouse. 100 lines of code runs in 0.24s? What is this, I don't even. Your functional algorithm is incredibly elegant at implementing the fibonacci sequence? Awesome.

But are these things honestly the bulk of what people do? Is testing that you can put objects in a catalog, access them, and remove them most of what people do and need assurances on? Am I the only person who has spent most of their career working on software with codebases measured in the millions of lines, with significant user interfaces as well as significant technical domain knowledge embedded in them? I know that TDD says if our objects have many collaborators we are "doing it wrong" but honestly how far do you break down something without it blowing up into a million classes and a ton of code? How do you get around the fact that a button press can set off a numerical simulation (actually these are super testable and I support that), several trips to the database, multiple changes to the user interface, all in the face of dozens of constraints at all levels of the program to ultimately end up with the graphical representation of chemical pressure that the user wants? Especially when every moving piece in that calculation is supposed to be tested apparently in independent units?

I would estimate that the bulk of code that I have experienced in my career relied on multiple other objects to be effective. Do I just mock these out and pay the price of keeping those mocks in sync with the classes they are imitating? Do I then have my test be tightly coupled to the internals of the function being tested, making sure this mock is called in this way, this many times? Do I rewrite things such that every function takes its collaborators as arguments and returns the results I am looking for? What happens when each of those collaborators is itself a giant series of other stateful objects or at least provides access to a highly complex piece of state which is a pain in the ass to setup?

I ask these questions seriously, because on the one hand TDD advocates keep telling me I am not professional if I don't follow their practices, but on the other the details of how to do so in the face of real-world constraints (not 50 line data-containers) are always somehow left out of the discussion. I want to believe, I do, it just gets hard to sometimes.
When you say naively formed, what does that mean exactly? A lot of your post was dedicated to correcting DHH's TDD history. I appreciate the hard work and attention to detail but I don't actually think when the idea of ultra-fast tests originated has much to do with DHH's complaints.

You also spend time in your post talking about how much you value the tight feedback loop between your tests and your code and how your tests being ultra fast helps that. That's great! That isn't really a response to DHH though, that's explaining why your method works for you. Which is a valuable contribution to the discussion, but not really a critique. You also bring up DHH's lack of theoretical computer science knowledge. I don't have the slightest idea what that has to do with the value of TDD, can you explain that?

I guess what I'm trying to get at here is that you didn't really propose a counter argument to DHH here, you said his historical knowledge is wrong, he doesn't know computer science and you get a lot of value from fast tests. The core of DHH's argument is that the metrics that are being touted to measure test suites are not metrics that actually help us write good code or code that is reliably well tested. It would be great to hear your direct responses to those arguments.
No, you have your terminology thoroughly confused. An OTP is an information-theoretically secure cipher where the key is as long as the plaintext. The only relationship between a one-time pad and CTR is the XOR operation. Furthermore, the article you're responding to explains what's wrong with simple stream ciphers for disk sector encryption.
The problem is that once you have a resistance gene against a given treatment in the bacterial population, it is very unlikely to be completely eliminated, even after you stop the treatment. Unless the gene is actively harmful to the bacteria (some resistance genes are, some are not), there is little selective pressure to get rid of it [1]. It'll be hanging around in plasmids in a tiny fraction of the bacteria, but as soon as you cycle back to that treatment again, the resistant strain will quickly emerge again because they don't have to re-evolve the gene.

You can do the math to calculate, based on the population size, rate of reproduction, rate of mutation, etc., the chance that a gene will still exist in the population after X years when there is negligible selection on it. I don't know how it works out for bacterial pathogens.

[1] Of course there is always the slight selective pressure against anything that enlarges the genome but has no function, since it takes energy to replicate that DNA and/or synthesize that useless protein. But that alone is unlikely to purge the gene from the entire population.
I'm not sure you're answering my question, though. You made a claim that state machines are easy to debug and coroutines are not. What makes you think they are not? I'm really just curious.

FWIW I've done significanly more work with state machines in the past, and I find them reasonable to debug, though not as easy as straight line code because in the latter the full state history (execution stack) is always known, while in state machines you usually need to do extra work to trace how the machine got to some state.
Industry standard bodies of knowledge arise from people doing, then talking about what they did, then doing some more, then talking some more. At no point did a God of Electrical Engineering hand down tablets.
I'll take option 3: encourage smaller families and lower fertility rates.
Including a screenshot in the readme would be nice btw.
Promises aren't really imperative - they're just not suited to handling streams of events, only single values.

Also, isn't suggesting FRP in place of promises like suggesting streams instead of callbacks, or arrays of values instead of values?
The BBC doesn't have an author metatag for some reason. I can search for a 'byline' span as a fallback. Thanks for noticing this.
Software is eating Rutgers
Interesting. Is this essentially an anarchic worldview? I can't see how a government could function without privileging certain individuals.
I wrote a state machine abstraction for Firebase [1], then implemented cross tree transactions on top, which was the formally verified to be exploit free. I think co-routines are a bit too general to make formal verification straight forward.

[1] http://tomlarkworthy.github.io/
Are the developer positions in-office only, or is full-time remote (in the US) an option?
Of course creating mocks or circumventing the database may create more bugs (or hide more) than just wait the couple of minutes for the real thing

Adding another failure point is exactly what the name says: another possibility of error or bug

Sure, we can talk about the "one true way" of doing tests, how to make hundreds of tests run in a short time, etc (the fact that TDD insists in creating one test for each tiny thing goes against it, btw) but yeah, I prefer spending more time solving the problem, and not testing around it.
The backend is 100% clojure. The frontend is currently a one-page-JS app in Coffeescript, less and haml. We are experimenting with converting it to ClojureScript/om, and I expect that we will do that soon. So then we'll be 100% clojure!

We have tended towards hiring generalists (both in the sense of what they can work on, and what they _want_ to work on). I don't know when that will change, but I don't expect to have a pure-ML position soon.
The requested URL /web/fundamentals/resources/samples/getting-started/your-first-multi-screen-site/addvideo was not found on this server.
Yes I think that's probably right, although I think eviction is a bit harsh. I will say that if there is no property damage the landlord has little incentive to fix it if the Airbnber is paying rent on time, even though quality of life for neighbors can go down.
Honestly, I don't want to rely on app developers implementing this. I would rather have just the one button, and when I get to the Facebook app, then have a big black "log in anonymously" button.
question: how does Amazon's glacier relate to this?
http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1251214