skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's funny, because I have completely the opposite view: stop telling people stuff is difficult! If people think what they're about to learn is supposed to be "hard", they're going to give up faster and be intellectually lazy. "Oh, I just can't figure it out because it's hard."

I've found this to be particularly important with things that are fundamentally simple but very abstract. You can teach people quite a bit of advanced mathematics if you don't tell them it's supposed to be difficult; but if you start out by mentioning that it's graduate-level algebra or something, they just shut down and don't even try.

I think this is a big part of the "monad problem", coincidentally. People don't understand monads because everyone says they're impossible to understand. When I came at them, I expected something complex and obscure. I couldn't see their actual simplicity—they have a tiny definition, after all—because of my expectations. On the other hand, when I went to learn about arrows, which are a similarly abstract concept, I didn't have nearly the same difficulties because I wasn't expecting anything and could take the definition as it is. I had a decent understanding of arrows before a decent understanding of monads, which is a shame because I don't really like arrows!

Now, I suppose that this doesn't mean you should call everything "easy", but you should definitely not perpetuate the idea that things are difficult! (Unless, I suppose, you want to intimidate people rather than teach them.)
I was hoping for a cheaper board.

Even if the Raspberry Pi foundation were to just take the old model A and drop the analog I/O ports and LED lights - with their economies of scale and the natural decrease in chip prices, I'm guessing they could ship a ~20$ board.
I like teaching subjects that are intentionally advanced for the age of the learners presented with problems that require a lot of mental stretching and effort for the learners. I have a FAQ document about how people feel when they take on tough learning challenges that explains what to do when the lesson is anything but easy.[1]

AFTER EDIT: I simultaneously posted with two other participants here who both made good points. Let learners know that something that feels not easy at first can become easy after practice, and let learners know that sometimes topics may be reasonably easy for them even if other people have said that the topic is hard. I have to emphasize these points to in my classroom teaching.

[1] http://www.epsiloncamp.org/CourageandStupidity.php
Wait until the Flame is available. It will be the reference device.
It's pretty trivial. 1. Upgrade JVM on server (i.e. change 1 line of puppet config) 2. Build with Java 8 (i.e. change target option in your build file) 3. Deploy.

I mean sure, you have to install the new JVM, but if you don't have a system in place for making changes to your servers then you've got bigger problems than which language you're using. And honestly I think the JVM with its classpath approach solves the library problem better than most platforms; upgrading the JVM binary occasionally is no great hardship, and aside from that everything is just jars, dynamic but not getting in the way of each other unless you want them to. What happens when security holes are found in Go libraries, do you have to recompile anything that depends on them?
Worked on a .NET app with lets of C# and C++ interop and we were seeing what looked like a rare race condition. The bug was hard to repro and never seemed to happen in our dev environment (like all great bugs!). The native code would just trigger access violations and we couldn't figure out what triggered it. We ended up getting extremely lucky and getting to a point where the bug started happening on my dev machine while I was running the app under a specific profiling tool.

It turned out we were racing the .NET garbage collector when passing a reference off to some native code. The variable being used by the native code would be collected by .NET as it determined that we no longer needed the variable when we were still actually using it. A classic .NET interop mistake that was fixed by wrapping the use in a 'using' clause. The reason we didn't see it while developing was that .NET garbage collection is different between Debug and Release builds (Debug builds extend the lifetimes of all variables so that they live for the entire length of the function they are used in; Release builds optimize for the shortest variable lifetime).

Another time, had a crash that seemed to occur after a consistent time period. The crash was in third-party code that we didn't have the source for. It 'kind of' behaved like a memory leak, except that everything was telling us the app's memory usage was normal.

After several weeks almost tearing my hair out over it, I ended up setting a breakpoint in the third-party lib using WinDbg and using PageHeap on the app while it was working in order to see who owned the memory that the third-party library was trying to write to. That lead us to a line of code that was performing a malloc() without checking the result; then sending that off to the third party library for use later. The malloc failed, neither us nor the third-party library checked for the NULL and the third-party lib wouldn't try to use the memory until later.

We eventually determined that we were seeing heap fragmentation causing the malloc to fail; we found that under certain conditions we'd leak small objects. Again WinDbg and other tools came in handy; they DID report high address space fragmentation, but it took us a long time to put the two things together. WHen we fixed the small object leak, the crash in the third-party library went away.

So classic bugs in hindsight, but they certainly taught us how awesome WinDbg can be (along with the other excellent debugging facilities provided by Windows). In the end, well worth the time investment in learning.
Although you might want to work for a small, young company, that might be making it difficult to find a job. It tends to be the large, rich companies like google that hire people with Stanford (and similar) expensive educations. A small company might just not be able to afford you (or at least, they might think that).

Working at a large company would also be good experience. You don't need to stay there forever - just a year or two, and then you could move on to something else.

Also, if you can post your CV somewhere, we can maybe give you some honest feedback. There might be some obvious glaring problem that you just can't see yourself.
That's not a bad idea. Wish there was more time to give it the love it needs.
Baby’s First Profanity
Finnish girl talks backwards
It works really well with Coffeescript too. In fact it was written with Coffeescript and internally it uses Coffeescript's `Class` syntax.

It was originally inspired by this gist: https://gist.github.com/elado/8138516
http://www.hdrtool.com/ - you can view HDR images (High Dynamic Range - brightness is not clamped into 0-255, but can be any Float32 number) in HDR format and export them into some "clamped" format (png, jpg, webp).
BADNESS 10000
...why couldn't something like this also disrupt eBay or Craigslist?

I don't use eBay much, but is Craigslist really something that invites disruption? It's dependable, there are no arbitrary stupid limitations, everyone uses it, and it's free. The only tactic that could beat that combination would be an overwhelming onslaught of marketing.
PyPy uses a tracing JIT, so it observes the general matching algorithm for a few iterations and then emits code that implements what the general algorithm actually did, i.e. the specific matching steps for that specific regex.

JITting a regex isn't really the same thing as your Rust native regexes; for example, if somebody wrote a regex library with a JIT and linked it to a C program, I woudln't count it. However, in PyPy's case regexes are exactly as native as the rest of the codebase rather than being a nested VM, so in that sense they're 'native'.
That doesn't answer the question.

When I hear the term data scientist, I assume that the person has extensive training and background in statistics and mathematical modeling. I work with large data sets all the time as a scientist and can run all the standard statistical tests but I would hardly consider myself a data scientist.
Angular's dependency injection is still a matter of discussion and a lot of people are not completely happen with it. It'll also be made into something different for angular 2.0.

Still, besides that: DRY is IMO not about these 2 lines that you've refactored away here. It's about whole functions/classes that have similar functionality where you're repeating yourself.

Therefore, this would be a micro-optimisation with negative results on impact on performance most likely (since there's more overhead)
I once attended one of his lectures about MMIX. After he was introduced he fired up Emacs and I remember distinctly that a ripple of voices ran through the audience. I think it was because most of us expected some form of slides or something.

Then he hacked along for an hour or so never leaving Emacs. On every seat of the room there was a little leaflet with the MMIX instruction set which was very helpful. Donald Knuth showed us all kind of stuff you could do with MMIX and it was one of the most down to earth lectures I've ever heard.
It's not like django-cms or various PHP-based CMS (Conrete5 comes to mind) where a template defines "slots" into which an administrator can drop different type of content widgets. In spirit, it's much more like Mezzanine, where each Page has a particular type and an associated template. Your page is just a Django model, so if you want three areas for text, an image, and a caption, you'll have a model which has three TextFields, a CharField, and an ImageField.

(Having said that, the rich text editor is in Wagtail really is rich and can support inserting images from the image library and links to documents in the document library, as well as oEmbed stuff, so it has some wriggle room).

The two schools of thought ("each page is designed ahead of time with structured content in mind" vs "each page is a collection of content objects") have their adherents. Personally I prefer the Wagtail and Mezzanine approach, but the right answer depends on what the client needs and the nature of your relationship with them.
> I think the problem in the end is the narrowing definition of normal behavior.

Not exactly. The problem is that anything outside that narrow definition is seen as "illness".

If you instead see it as a different, but equally valid, way of perceiving the world then the fact that so many people seem to have ASD, ADD or other "D"s makes much more sense.

This is not a matter of politically correct terms - I'm talking about a genuine difference in attitude. ASD is a very broad spectrum. Some people on it really do have an "illness" in the sense that they cannot function independently. Others are just a bit "different" and you may never even know they're not normal unless you happen to see them at their worst. Is it still worth diagnosing those? Generally, yes, because it allows them to get the help they need when they need it or, at least, understand themselves better, so they can help themselves.
Curious, how is this different than trading Forex with a non-dealing desk broker? Or something like Nadex, where you trade directly on the exchange and each trade between you and a market maker is essentially in escrow until the outcome is realized?
> (e.g. in London my experience is that you'll get a positive response from pretty much any random stranger on the street unless you come across as representing a charity; in England there's a word for people collecting for charities on the street: chugger - a contraction of "charity" and "mugger").

More generally, I think people just dislike being engaged in conversation by people with obvious ulterior motives.

It devalues the whole exchange when you know it's only being conducted because the other person wants to relieve you of your money.
Its a meta problem. Both math and physics have their own little language which is only vaguely inspired by standard English, and its a popular meme to complain they're just similar enough to cause emotional anguish.

For example a pathological problem doesn't mean you'll get a nasty MRSA infection from working on that problem. At least not directly...
I didn't realize they charged their fees before you get paid at all, that just seems unfair. Have you looked at Guru.com? They only charge their percent when you actually get paid.
I guess the Haskellers noticed this HN thread. One moment my comments were at 2 points, the next they are at zero. It seems to be the same for other non-anti-Javascript comments.

If you're trying to solve the perception of being snooty and unpleasant (as mentioned in this thread), downvoting everything isn't going to get you far.
We would all benefit from more frequency bands for wifi. Interferences can be solved with channel hopping:

http://boingboing.net/2003/01/19/open-spectrum-faq.html
It was sequential but bank-addressed. The AGC had it's own assembly language[1] and was a pretty recognizable general purpose computer[2] for it's time.

1: http://authors.library.caltech.edu/5456/1/hrst.mit.edu/hrs/a...

2: http://authors.library.caltech.edu/5456/1/hrst.mit.edu/hrs/a...
http://instantserver.io

Provisions you an ubuntu vm instantly for free with web terminal access.

It got some love here at one point [0]. Fraud, business model, and personal availability problems all struck at once, so I had to turn it off. I'm confident they could all be fixed.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5861749
Fairly recent, but Nate Blecharczyk of airbnb at Startup School 2013.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ya0I6oz7q9U

Great to learn the early days of airbnb and how (great) entrepreneurs persevere through the challenges.
Much of the majority follows the lead of that vocal minority. This is part of how Google gained supremacy in search.
This is also a problem in academia too. Very often I read papers that say that proofs are trivial, that we can easily get from one equation to another through algebra or that solving an equation is easy. It's something I try to avoid, instead I use "straight forward", which I think implies to the reader that this road has been travelled before but that it's still ok to ask questions because they haven't travelled it themselves.
Your comment suffers from the affliction that "if it doesn't completely eradicate -foo-, then there's no point at all". If there was a magic food that cut your chance of getting any sort of cancer by a factor of 1000, your statement of 'you could still get heart attack/cancer in your 50s' would still be true.

The main article does this a little as well; there's something of a tone that says 'healthy food has all these other benefits, but since it doesn't stop cancer, it's probably not worth it'. It's weird, because I've never heard of anyone specifically choosing foods because of their reduction in cancer rates - people tend to choose foods that affect their current wellbeing, not future 'maybes'.
TuneFind -- http://www.tunefind.com/

Trailing Month, Google Analytics:

1.9 MM sessions, 1.2 MM users, 8.3 MM pageviews

Age - 9 years.

Database of ~60k song appearances in TV and movies.

Great SEO -- Google search for "<show_name> music"
I think this is the flip side of "business guy seeks technical co-founder". I would love to see a site that partnered up developers with marketers. I can't be the only developer that realizes that they suck at marketing.
> Low prices = more demand.

But low prices = less supply. And prices that the people actually getting the health care can't see = even more mismatch between demand and supply.

It's not just that people want more health care if the prices are lower; they want more health care that they shouldn't be getting, because they're not balancing the benefit to them against the actual cost; they're only balancing the benefit to them against the cost that they see. If they saw the full cost, they would not demand as much because they would realize that the resources they are demanding are not cheap.

In other words, the artificially low price of health care makes people think it's more abundant than it actually is, so they use up resources for minor problems that are then not available to address major ones; so many people are going to the doctor for colds and hangnails that people with serious illnesses aren't getting the care they need. The longer wait times are a symptom of that.

Also, since the prices are artificially controlled, there's less incentive for people to become doctors, nurses, and other health care workers; so there are fewer of them to go around, but more demand. Which further exacerbates the above problems. The longer wait times are a symptom of that too.
I think you might in fact be in agreence on the deeper point, 'easy' and 'hard' are relative terms, what is 'easy' for you may be hard for me and vis-versa. I would agree that in teaching it's best to avoid or greatly use both words in lazy everyday speech.
5 years is not the timeframe to think about - how about 5 minutes? Approximately every 5 minutes someone dies from cancer. We might at some point cure cancer - if so, accelerating that point by 5 minutes is equivalent to saving a life, and if your actions cause that point to be delayed by 5 minutes, than that's essentially murder.

Think about it. Most people don't have any effect on that whatsoever, but there are many publicly visible people in medicine, politics, tech, research and finance that do have a much larger impact on it than 5 minutes.

And cancer is just one tiny part of it all. I believe that at some point in future we might reach an event where we eliminate almost all death as such; or an event where we destroy ourselves completely. A somewhat cynical implication of this could be, playing the devils advocate, that there are exactly two kinds of actions (and people?) - those that change some +/- epsilon to one of these two events, and those that are irrelevant.
http://www.immomapper.ch/ - It's a meta search engine for rental property in Switzerland. Real time filtering, price comparison to rentals in the neighborhood, etc

Switzerland is a tiny market, have been thinking about expanding to other countries...
what do you run it on?
> It's perfectly fine to say "excuse me but I really need to get back to my work in this computer".

That only works if what you're doing is (at least plausibly) something you need to be doing, though.
Exactly. If I ever say this, what I mean to be saying is something more positive. More like: "Good news! This is something that's actually simple to fix/do. Even if you find it difficult at first (I sure did), someday you'll look back on this and think it's really easy."

Because although programming is something I enjoy, it hasn't necessarily always come easily to me. I'm not a natural. I learned to be good(ish) at it by slogging away doggedly.

So to me, it's a long -- and never-ending -- journey of things that are difficult... until they become easy. Being confused about something is a constant fact of life, for me. But so is a growing list of things that, in hindsight, now seem easy.

I wish I knew some pithy, quick way to say that to people, so that it's the positive message I mean.
There's an old joke that goes something like this.

A math professor was giving a lecture and then remarked that something was trivial. Somebody raises an objection and asks why. The professor stops and thinks hard for the rest of the lecture, then finally remarks: "Yes, I'm right, it is obvious."
For those more technical than I, is there actually any benefit in having the 1000Mbps NIC on a board with still a relatively slow processor?

I fear the processor can't handle anywhere near that amount of throughout that NIC could support, so to me it looks like a feature for the sake of being different to the Pi.
If it does work this way, this is a breach of the Facebook developer terms of service. Data may be cached for specific amounts of time, but long term storage is not allowed. When this app gets big enough to notice, Facebook will shut it down
This really isn't device-to-device communication -- both the iOS and Android devices have to be on the same WiFi network for Spaceteam to work.
Yep. Ctrl+F "compact"

> Not found

Modern calculus doesn't depend on infinitesimals. The concept of "compactness" is the technical solution that lets you formulate calculus without them -- it's typically only taught to math majors because infinitesimals are less awkward to do algebra with: we can now prove that the shortcut works, so why bother with the long way unless you have good reason? They allude to this fact:

> Today, mathematicians have found ways to answer that question so that modern calculus is rigorous and reliable.

but they bury this scant acknowledgement behind the linkbaity overstated conclusion it contradicts:

> Modern science, modern technology, and everything from your cell phone to this radio station to airplanes and cars and trains — it is all fundamentally dependent on this technique of infinitesimals

Besides, many of the big-name ancient Greek philosophers used inconsistent definitions of infinity or assumed properties of infinity to arrive at ridiculous paradoxes and conclusions. They look utterly silly to someone with the slightest bit of modern mathematical training in the notion of infinity, not unlike Newton and his alchemy look to a modern chemist. The Jesuits' misgivings about infinitesimals were entirely understandable in the context of wanting to avoid the same fate (not to mention wasting their time).
http://blog.baugues.com/devs-and-depression
There are a lot of articles by teachers at all levels (and often by teachers having just resigned) published in newspapers, that confirm Gatto's views.
Should Gurbaksh Chahal have been fired?
They are statements in an embedded language modeled by the monad. The distinction isn't great. Monad allows the implementer to capture linear action if they like. That makes them at least powerful enough to embed Algol.
> Dynamic typing tends to only increase one's ability to do wrong.

Apparently you place no value on programmer time. Why should I have to waste time with type declarations that add no benefit to my program? Why should I have to construct an artificial type hierarchy just so I can write common code to deal with two different kinds of objects that are duck-type compatible but don't happen to share a common base type that the type system recognizes?

I agree that there are certain kinds of applications where static typing can be a benefit that is worth spending the extra programmer time; but the claim you are making is much stronger than that.
Who said to apply EMET to "a lot of stuff"?

It is meant to plug holes in apps that handle untrusted data. For a vast majority of people that would be a browser, a mail client and various document viewers. IE, Firefox, Chrome, Flash player, Outlook, Thunderbird and Acrobat Reader all run A-Ok under EMET and most of them are on its default list.

Remeber the RTF zeroday from a couple weeks ago? It too was mitigated with EMET. That's two zerodays in two weeks.

The Bromium labs bypass was addressed in EMET 5.0, not few weeks after their announcement.

The bottom line is that it the most effective zeroday protection available at the moment. Is it perfect? No. Does it work? Yes.