skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't think so, because then you'd get an overconservative iterator invalidation checker. For example:

struct Foo {
a: Vec<int>,
b: Vec<int>,
}

let foo = Rc::new(RefCell::new(Foo::new(...)));
for x in foo.borrow_mut().a.mut_iter() {
for y in foo.borrow_mut().b.mut_iter() {
// ^^^ FAILURE: a is already borrowed mutably
}
}

The failure happens because the RefCell is checking to make sure there are no two `&mut` references at the same time to `Foo`, to prevent iterator invalidation. But this is silly, because it only needs to prevent access to `a` while you're iterating over it, not both `a` and `b`. Changing the definition of `Foo` to this fixes the problem:

struct Foo {
a: RefCell<Vec<int>>,
b: RefCell<Vec<int>>,
}
The right is contingent on a duty to leave the land in a comparable state to what you found it. If you were to vandalise or litter, you could not be charged with trespass but you could most certainly be prosecuted for vandalism and littering and a land owner taking action would certainly be the one to get the sympathy.

I think the freedom to roam in general has a substantial impact on reducing this problem - we're taught about these rights in primary school, but also taught about the corresponding duty to leave campsites etc. as we found them, and to be considerate about how we exercise these rights.

Of course, there's always some assholes.
>implemented by antisocial 20-something engineers working weird hours.

I feel like this is a myth we should actively work to squash. The vast majority of engineers and coders are 30/40-somethings with normal social lives, families, and working 9-5 weekdays.
Do you plan to implement tweeter card format for the post ?
"Harbinger of failure" seems to be a misnomer, given that the article does show any way to pragmatically identify these users - the only way seems to be with the benefit of hindsight. A 'harbinger' requires predictive value, not post-mortem value.

Edit: To be a bit clearer, they do mention a sort of weeding out of users, but this requires deciding beforehand what 'mainstream' is and then (effectively) looking for confirmation bias.
For those interested, the opening arguments are taking place tomorrow in Redwood City for the Surfrider case:

Late yesterday, Surfrider's case was assigned to a judge and room.
Here's the scoop:
Hall of Justice & Records

What:
Opening arguments in
Surfrider Foundation v. Martins Beach I, LLC and Martins Beach II, LLC

When:
2pm on Wednesday, May 7

Where:
San Mateo County Superior Court, 400 County Center, Redwood City
Department 22, Courtroom 8A

Photo credit Rob Caughlan

Superior Court Judge Barbara J. Mallach presiding

It is likely that at some point there will be a court sanctioned site visit to Martin's Beach. At present, the date and time of such visit is unknown.

If you attend, please show your support by wearing blue! Thanks!!

http://martinsbeach.blogspot.com/
> Why are we suddenly calling a text editor an "IDE"?

I suspect because lots of developers actually use those text editors as their main development environment. So they have the D and the E parts of that equation covered.

Also since these editors tend to be highly configurable, with a bit tweaking the user can make the editor do a lot of the I as well.
> I think the "don't mix persistence with bizlogic" idea came largely from the Rails world

I'm pretty sure I encountered that particular example of things that shouldn't be coupled in OO design before Rails existed.
Being a USA citizen, I find it difficult to look at the world from outside my own life/fishbowl, even though I have traveled to about 20 other countries.

My understanding is that most of the world basically likes Americans but is fed up with our hegemony. Perhaps other world powers like Russia and China get away with stuff because they are perceived as not being as bad as we are?

I know this is not going to happen but I think we would be better off taking the huge hit on our economy right now (by ceasing to be a military empire, and dealing with then losing the US$ as the reserve currency and all the benefits that entails) and really focus on both internal infrastructure and also developing strong friendships with other countries. Oh, and stop having fiat currency and go back to something partially backed by gold or other real resources. (I don't think we need to be on 100% gold backed currency - perhaps 20% or so would be enough).

edit: fixed a typo
The site seems very unreliable. It has shown multiple sites available, but clicking through shows they are not.

For example: Will.me, Cl.io
They did something, and a bunch of people noticed it.
You're their victory.
For now, we really don't have any restriction on attachment size. We accpect whatever you are allowed to send for your email account.

But definitely we have alerts and closely monitor to prevent something bad happens.
An experienced negotiator would see the offer of $10m as a positive buying signal and counter with $34m cash, on the table now. Then they blink and so it goes on. A good operator would most likely get a couple of million more. Not bad for a couple of hours of bargaining.

BTW at 5%, the startup would need to generate in excess of $200m in dividends for the founder and that implies revenues in excess of $1b - how long is that going to take? And this analysis ignores discounted cashflow which only ups the target numbers.
There's a light side to a neurodegenerative disease? I think you're treading on thin ice here.
A cloned Chromium repo is 11GB, last I checked. Not a particularly relevant metric.
This is fantastic news for Uber. In my city Uber is only just starting to roll out properly, but when I recently visited San Francisco everyone in the tech space travels around using Uber, so I gave it a go and it was fantastic.

To those saying this is a move by Google to test the waters for a ride sharing service of their own, Google Ventures invested $258,000,000 into Uber, it would be cheaper for them to just have a large amount of equity in Uber like they probably already do or just by Uber out if it gains massive momentum.

You have to understand when you get to the size Google has it becomes more economical and cheaper for a company to just buy out any competing service or take a massive chunk of equity. Large companies rarely innovate, they purchase and absorb already established and researched companies & niches.

I can honestly see sometime in the future Google and Uber teaming up together to create driver-less Uber vehicles. Uber have already removed the payment on the spot step with credit card/Paypal integration, why not eliminate the driver as well?
I suspect he has lawyers to deal with that sort of thing. Do you really think he spent nearly $40 million based on what the seller told him about a treaty without checking with a lawyer?
I would want all that information as closure, since I wouldn't be able to walk again. Whether or not the program is functioning correctly, I want to know exactly how things went down--something that is finally possible if you automate driving.

Holding the companies responsible is nice (and might as well be done), but until all cars are autonomous (and even then) there will be many cases where the initial conditions of an accident preclude anything but a harmful outcome. For example, a robot car doing the right thing could be boxed in by two malicious drivers and "forced" into hurting a bystander.
I think the original script it was based on didn't even have login per se. You just occasionally stuck in an admin password hard coded in the PHP to do a one time post delete or whatnot. It's mostly an anonymous forum after all. As more moderation functions grew a real login was needed and grafted on. Users still didn't have a login for a long time and instead had a special part of their username that was hashed when displayed to prove identity.
Latest Esri JavaScript API tips: debugging your application
This blog post is the first in a series of debugging tips and tricks to help you on your way with using Esri's JavaScript API.
I don't understand what's so hard about "You can roll with us as long as you treat our rented infrastructure with respect." That sort of agreement exists in many industries. I get kicked out of my apartment if I trash it, even though I paid for it. I don't ask my landlord to split the costs of an upgrade to hardwood floors because I fucked up the linoleum (because "I ended up with more pets than I expected" or something), much less pay for it himself. I pay for it or I'm booted. If he did anything else, such as let destructive renters stay on his property or paid for their damage they were responsible for, what would be the point of renting the property? That's a terrible business model. Same thing here... Comcast is damaging Level3's customer relationships on purpose and refusing to pay reasonable level-of-service costs to rectify the problem and should be thrown off the network.
Quite true--and yet, look at the companies making the news.

Hell, in many cases your motion-planning is being done by people who were graduate students, and even then the stereotype...well, it fits, you know?
Email has been compared to the "keys to the kingdom", since almost all other services passwords can be reset if you have access to someone's email. Some other posters have expressed doubt or concern about granting access to email for this service; I would express the concern in the opposite direction:

As developers, we should not be asking people for access to their email (or similar levels of access).

It sets a bad precedent, like banks sending out emails with clickable links; we're encouraging people to engage in very risky behavior and ultimately making it more likely they (the users) will fall for a scam in the future.

This should one of those "IT will never ask for your password" kind of things that gets hammered into people. "Legitimate services will never ask for access to your email/harddrive/etc". I'm not saying this service is not legitimate: I'm saying, as a presumably legitimate service, it should not set a bad example.
I didn't read the whole post since it starts by stating that bug fixes, performance tweaks and refactoring may be changes - which whilst true is being deliberately pedantic, and if an article starts out fussing about such pedantics for more than a paragraph without then owning up to this being a deliberate extreme case example for illustrative purposes causes me to devalue the whole article and thus not invest more time reading it.

A change, in the context of SRP is a change of responsibility / functional purpose.

Regarding the granularity to which you should go to with SRP, the idea is that it's not fixed; you change this as feels best for your code base. If you write code without much logic (e.g. a basic CRUD application with minimal validation) it's fine for the classes representing your tables' records to also hold their logic, since at this stage the single responsibility is, say, Employee. Once you start to get something more complex the separation of concerns becomes more important, so you need to break this apart into Employee Record and Employee Validation; perhaps more layers. That may seem contradictory as there are now two classes with two responsibilities where before there was only one class with one and a bit responsibilities - but the key is to be pragmatic. Don't write thousands of lines of code and multiple classes if that introduces complexity with no pay off. However, if you have one class that does too much it'll become hard to maintain; and being aware of the SRP principle will help you work out a sensible way to break that class down into more comfortably manageable chunks.
http://www.foodnetwork.com/videos/drying-herbs-96752.html

Whew, that was easy. Next time, try some of the 100 million people living on the east coast.
Start with that YouTube video at 1.5x

Then look at this http://qz.com/206283/all-the-western-companies-youd-have-to-...
> a sophisticated enough compiler should have enough knowledge from analyzing the source code to "automatically" know the type of memory management classification for any variables. The programmer shouldn't have to manually annotate them.

This might be possible, but there are a few big problems with it:

1. We'd be throwing separate compilation out the window. What makes separate compilation work is that the types are fully deducible for each function without knowledge of the functions that call it. In our system, this requires some amount of manual annotation.

2. Systems programmers often need to know whether allocation is happening; they don't want a compiler doing it behind their back. For example, in interrupt or async signal handling context, you can't allocate. A language that implicitly allocates is not usable for such contexts.

3. When you get an error relating to memory management—for example, a borrow check error—it's important that the programmer be able to diagnose what happened and fix it. Without explicit annotation, it's notoriously harder to report type errors—the programmer has to try to reconstruct what the compiler was trying to do.
Check out https://tent.io and https://cupcake.io. There's not much going on at the moment because everybody is waiting for the next version of the Tent protocol (0.4), which will be released in a few months.

I am also excited by http://maidsafe.net in the long term, because it replaces the web altogether.
Bruce Lee (with numchucks--look it up on youtube, it's freaking amazing)
Case in point, a client of mine (one of the top 2 or 3 US corporations you might think of off the top of your head outside of tech) wanted to start publishing a daily email digest of content aggregated from all their content outlets. I tell them OK, send me all your feeds, I'll whip it up in no time, and there it was, delivered early and under budget. They publish on Wordpress, Tumblr, etc, sites that give you RSS feeds without work.

It's much easier to go to /rss and get the content than have to coordinate with however many teams and organizations it took to create all those sites.
I wanted sailbo.at so badly I cout taste the salt in the air.
I guess I wasn't clear enough. Certainly the idea predated Rails, but I think the heavy insistence you see pretty much everywhere on segregating them probably came from Rails.
I think one of the most remote-work-friendly things a Java developer can do is develop Android apps. If you don't know Android it might be worth a look.
It's strange how that blog post doesn't seem to link to Atom.

https://atom.io/
Sounds like it is for already created products, so is for a different audience than kickstarter. Although, honestly, if I were a maker I'd just pick the one with more traffic and customize or V2 to qualify for kickstarter if I had to since it gets a lot more eyeballs and eyeballs are where the money is.
Thanks for the explanation. What is not clear to me is if Atom editor is just an app that runs on top of Atom shell.
> The editor I use now (Epsilon) was last significantly

FWIW the Zeus editor has an Epsilon keyboard mapping offer up by a Zeus user many years ago.

But as I'm a Brief keyboard user myself, I'll have to be honest and say I don't know how accurate it is :(

Also Zeus is shareware and is native to Windows, but several users have reported it does run on Linux using Wine.

Jussi Jumppanen

Author: Zeus IDE
Also, just swear of ever committing secrets to a repo to begin with. It's a bad idea, period.
Asking for access to your entire email history? No deal.
JuliaCon's been in the works for a while now. I'm helping organize it, feel free to leave any questions here and I'll try to give you a prompt response.
Thanks! Our goal is to keep it simple. It's just like many things in life, it's always harder to decide what not to do than deciding what to do.
I think this problem is nonexistent to an autonomous car. A situation where the car has a choice to hit something would never happen. The only times humans have that choice is if we don't look far ahead enough or our field of view is impaired.

Sure, autonomous cars may eventually hit something. But if they do it will be totally out of their control, by design. We can make them see further, stay focused, and be cautious. Humans can't always do that, and that's why we have to constantly choose our lesser evils.
that is not pg.
Microsoft files for smartwatch patent
only worry about intra-object complexity

That reminds me of this, not sure if it's satirical or not: http://www.antiifcampaign.com/

Basically it's advocating removing if/switch statements and replacing them with polymorphic method calls. I understand that polymorphism has its value, but think that it's only valuable when, for lack of a better phrase, the thing that's being polymorphosed is "big and varied" enough that it makes sense to impose this extra level of indirection. I think that it being hard to explain when something is worth it, is enough justification that principles shouldn't be arbitrarily decided based on that.
Spacebars Secrets: Exploring Meteor Templates
>even if compiler can somehow semi-magically deduce that, it can be still be not what the author really intended.

Right, but to entertain what I think ExpiredLink is proposing... you have to reframe it as "there's no intention for ownership/lifetime for the programmer to even express" therefore, there can't be a disconnect between what the compiler did and what the programmer thinks it did.

To use the x86 register analogy again, we don't explictly notation our intentions of which registers to use and therefore we don't type a bunch of extra verbage to annotate it. The compiler figures it out and it's opaque to us. There is never a conversation about how the compiler didn't match our intentions because we're not working "at that abstraction level" at all.

But as I mentioned before, I believe that memory lifetime/ownership is a totally different class of automated analysis (on behalf of the programmer) than register allocation.

I think the only way to raise the level of discourse on why annotation is unavoidable is to show a short source code example that proves that ExpiredLink's premise is impossible for any compiler analysis to fulfill.
Amusing. I think driving would be a terrible activity to practice this with. Ping pong works because it's generally a neutral activity in life like any sport. Ping pong does not present imminent, potentially-fatal dangers or anything even close. Also, most people do not have strong preexisting opinions about it. On the other hand, driving is an intense activity where the consequences are life or death and any driver will have strong preexisting opinions about it. Would it be fair to say I'm an aggressive person who can't keep their cool if I yell profanities at the person who almost killed me a moment ago? That's ridiculous. The activities are definitely not interchangeable. Finally, what would they make of my skill rating of one both before and after the game? Would it be interpreted as a lack of confidence or will my failure to score be redeeming (Yes, I suck that much)?
(I work on Kifi)

Hear you loud and clear. We're working on a strategy so that it's not needed. Right now, that information is used only to determine if you or a friend has kept a page, or if you have previous conversations on the page.
Actually, hipster has been with us for longer, so one would expect it to be even more tired than yuppie, since hipster has been well used since the 50's, while yuppie only recently joined us in the 80's. However, it turns out that hipster is actually being used more often, while yuppie is trending down, which by definition means that hipster is most definitely not more tired than yuppie. [1]

I don't find hipster to be tired at all. It communicates to me a certain type of person in a very clear manner.

[1] https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=yuppie%2Chipst...
Meet Netflix's stealthy new logo
>I understand that people have been using that road for years and it was never a problem with the previous owner. But there is a new owner. He does have a problem with people using the road on his land. That sucks for those people but it is not their land and it never was. The beach is still public... just hard to get to. Once you get there, he can't do anything about it (up to the high water mark).

Not sure how it works in the US, but English Law has something to say about this. If your property is blocked by the property of another you get to have a right of passage through his land.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easement
> It's a shame there are no billion dollar companies based around the GPL... /s

There is and it is called Google. It's a champion for Open Source and seems to use Open Source software almost exclusively across their entire organisation.
That might explain that they're not really novelty seekers but it doesn't negate the point that they're just early adopters. The article goes to some lengths to make these customers look bad but do they also buy products that later succeed? The article doesn't clearly say.

Moreover, How do you distinguish an early adopter from a harbinger? I'd argue that there's very little in this article (as presented) that helps with that.
I spent 10-15 hours (mostly in Ledger) figuring out what my Bitcoin tax liability was. Not (mostly) Ledger's fault that it took so long. Now that I know what I'm doing, I should be able to do this year in just a few hours.
What would you write in the same circumstances?
This just in: most billionaires are assholes.
At 2MB that is hardly a large file.
Unjustified banned AdSense accounts, and Google keeping the money... they kept around $9,000 that I had earned.

Here's my story, and my thoughts and considerations:
http://pastebin.com/WHUis32f
I don't get this part of the article:

"Nancy Cave and her staff want to keep Martins Beach open to the public. Khosla will need permits from the Commission if he wants to do almost anything on the property."

Are they inferring that they will screw with his permits in order to force him into giving access?
I think another way to look at it is: if all cars were on auto-pilot, you would have a much smaller chance of being injured or killed on your bicycle.

So if it happens a hundred thousand times more with human drivers, but there's a person you can point your finger at afterwards, does that make anyone more comfortable?
I sometimes have success on those IRC channels by asking the regulars what other resource or how-to would they use to solve my problem. This is an easy answer for them to give, and doesn't require them getting personally involved in my problem. A page full of search results might all look relevant to a newbie, but an experienced user's recommendation is more likely to hit the mark.
Pretty sure that's not what he's saying; nice strawman, though.
Great - just what the world needs.

Uninsured, automated gypsy cabs. No danger there.
Last time this came up on KQED, I think that Khosla's lawyers were saying something about being amenable to an eminent domain argument, under which CA would need to compensate Khosla for the access. Evidently, the argument that the Coastal Commission approach has made does not require compensation.
I'm all for light-hearted snark, but this doesn't call for it. They were honest about their failure, promised to keep their service going for people that still value it and then graciously moved on.
JumpChat: a secure video conferencing and more witho accounts using WebRTC
Because the majority of readers on the internet skim pages and whether subconsciously or not, they are picking up on keywords, headlines, links and the like. If you take the approach to simply "make the text #000 and the page #fff", you are simply making matters worse.
> This whole thing seems ludacris.

Ludacris --> rapper.

Ludicrous --> unreasonable.