skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Most package managers allow you to specify a dependency on Python 3, so you shouldn't even need to tell your customers. Otherwise, you can always use virtualenv and ship Python with your code.

And yes, if you're targeting Debian or Debian-like systems, make a deb. It's really not that hard, especially with newer tools like fpm.
Google's stance on patents would have prevented Google from ever having existed
If texts and lists were easy to use, nobody would have invented structures, objects and the other thousands of abstractions available on modern languages.

An ORM will give you a description of the database you can use by reflection, and an abstraction layer that avoids using hard to use lists and tables. The first one is way more usefull than the later, but both are good things.

Also, application servers are normaly much more numerous than database servers, and much easier to scale up. Thus, anything that offloads work from the database to the application will simplify your environment when you grow.
I'd agree, but I suspect that anybody who cares about PHP-performance has probably already moved to FPM.
You're looking at it from the point of a customer. Sure, if you want to buy a book you could use a different retailer, they probably have the book too.

From the point of the producer, if you're not on amazon, you're not reaching 80% of your audience. You don't have a choice.
I have been racking my brain on how to remove all of the externs from the Python 2.7 VM, I think it just needs a big refactor to have a context object like Lua.
I think the fundamental problem with HTTP/2.0 is that it is a inadequate rush job for no good reason.

If you really want to gain performance for instance, the way to go is to get rid of the enormous overhead of cookies, to replace the verbose but almost content-free User-Agent header and so on.

Likewise, wrapping all the small blue 'f' icons and their associated tracking icons in TLS/SSL does not improve privacy on the net in any meaningful way.

But the entire focus has been to rush out a gold-plated version of SPDY, rather than to actually solve these "deep" problems in HTTP.

Similarly: Rather than accept that getting firewalls fixed will take a bit of time, everything gets tunneled through port 80/443, with all the interop trouble that will cause.

And instead working with the SCTP people on getting a better transport protocol than TCP ? Stick it all into the HTTP protocol.

Nobody seems to have heard the expression "Festina Lente" in this WG.
Netcraft Site Report for http://creatishabitat.com
I apologize friends, I wasn't expecting this much traffic and had just stepped out. Working on getting this back up now.

Edit: It's back up. Sorry for the inconvenience!
I used to call these type of things, short-lived fads really: User Interface (UI) element of the week. Fortunately, UI isn't changing that often anymore. However, Javascript and the "mobile" platform are bringing "User Interface element of the week" back.

I am seeing lots of weird scrolly things these days. And, pages that blink out and then reappear, as they get rendered and rerendered and rerendered again by Javascript. Lots of other annoying Web 2.0 thingies that do little more than annoy. If I was a better writer, I could probably write a weekly WTF about "User Interface element of the week."

Yes, "fixed bars" are annoying. We've had "fixed bars" on non-mobile for as long as I remember: Main Menu Bar, Title Bar, ooh and now a "Tab Bar" which is just the modern version of Windows MDI, maybe Windows MDI, Navigation bar(s) which sometimes takes up a quarter of the screen height I kid you not, the Bookmarks Bar which gets hidden the first time I open the browser and all corporate links get deleted what a pain.

Including your "bar" in the contents and letting it scroll away might be easiest, and the author noted medium's clever idea.
Fun pattern, but is it more useful? I think its hyperbolic to call losing 160px of reading space on top of a desktop browser a "nightmare". Something a user can see all the time has greater affordances than something that is hidden. Especially if that something is as essential as navigation. Honestly, I think this is more style than usability.
I'm too lazy for interval and interval only works if you have someone else doing the timing. I've tried doing it on my own but it doesn't work well because of fiddling with the timer.

I started with this: http://imgur.com/gallery/v49W4

Now I just continue with the same -> 100 pushups (4 different types), 130 situps, 200 crunches (4 different types), then either 100 side-to-side, 70 leg-lifts, or an alphabet (spelling out the alphabet with extended legs), 2 minute plank (2 different types), and 60 squats.

If I am pressed for time I can squeeze that into some 13 minutes. If I don't stop chatting on whatsapp/skype/fb it takes about 20 to 25.
Last time I was looking less than 5% of my users which was two months ago (up from 3% two years ago or so) used Python 3 at least going by download stats. But Python 3 support takes way more than 50% of my time :-/
Not exactly sure under what specific scenarios "every e-commerce site" will be running, but if HTTP/2 == SPDY, it's not looking good on mobile: http://conferences.sigcomm.org/co-next/2013/program/p303.pdf <== TLDR: current SPDY implementation has negative impact on Mobile performance. SPDY sucks on mobile is sort of a known fact, but this paper shows solid evidence that it's true.
Great! Mailchimp had it on their website but they removed it (dunno why).
I like the way the menu doesn't show if you scroll up slowly(!)
I can't tell if this is a poor attempt at sarcasm, but if not:

Do you have evidence to back up the claim that Ruby isn't being used for new projects? Even assuming HN is a skewed environment, I see enough Ruby projects popping up here to make that seem unlikely.
Why surprised? Daimler only makes luxury models.
Why would amazon pay authors 70% if there's no other publisher around? They do it for now to undermine the traditional publishing model. If that's gone, expect it to go down.
I wish we'd stop confusing what we can prove with what is.

Chances are not only all people are conscious and introspective, but most animals are to some degree (it's not an on/off switch, it's an emergent property, the sum of all your reasoning skills).

As for bicameralism, it's just a demonstration of the lengths at which our wrong assumptions can reach when the subject we're creating conjecture about (ancient people) are no longer around, or otherwise unable to explain themselves.

There are plenty of people in the modern day, which claim to have heard the voice of god (or the devil, or aliens, or what have you), which might be a mental disturbance, or quite often is a simple confusion (a dream taken for reality, and so on).

It's just how the mind works to this present day. Sometimes we misinterpret input and make up reasons.

Heck, the theory of bicameralism seems like an example of making up reasons.
The sole reason is branding. Websites don't want you just reading content; they want you reading content on their site. The most obvious way to remind you that you're reading it on their site, and thus convince you to come back, is a fixed header bar.
Of 357 ebooks currently on my Kindle, 280 are less than 1 megabyte in size.
Python 2 has unicode literals and utf-8 available if you declare them at the top of your file. You don't need Python 3 for that.
This says more about the Auto Industry than it does about Tesla, a luxury brand.
Saying something is "just two files!" which are concatenated, un-tabbed compilations of many other files, does not count.

The code is unreadable. I do not trust it enough to run it.
> That's capitalism; don't hate the player, hate the game

Well, yes, the point is that the game is broken.
What are these "extremely onerous terms"?

There aren't any. They will pay you 70% of retail, on time, every month.

"Note that if your Digital Book is eligible for the 70% royalty option, your Digital Book will earn 70% on each sale of the Digital Book at a Promotional List Price set under the Kindle MatchBook program regardless of whether the Promotional List Price is within the maximum and minimum list price requirements for the 70% royalty option."

What does that mean? It means that Amazon can set any price they like for your book, right down to $0.00 and as the author you get to eat it - your sole remedy is to withdraw the book from sale with a 5 day delay. Amazon makes an error and misprices your book, resulting in half your expected sales being made at $1 instead of $10? Tough - you get to eat it (and yes, this has happening to authors in the past).
You indeed cannot please everyone.
But not addressing complexity, simply adding more..
Not solving the cookies issue, it's not sufficient.

Protocols are more then a spec, they express the norms&values of an ecosystem. Is privacy really appropriately valued?
Find the index of the smallest element in a JavaScript array
> you don't create something as long-lasting as internet-scale architecture based on hacks around incompetence

The right half of your brain is wired to the left half of your body (and vice versa). That's just the standard, go-to, basically harmless example of stupidity in the design of long-lasting systems.

From http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Unintelligent_Design :

> Unintelligent Design is the theory that the world was designed by some higher power, but this higher power did a piss poor job at it. There are many theories as to how the universe could have been so stupidly and half-heartedly spilt into existence.

Or from the slightly more serious http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintelligent_design :

Your optic nerve originates at the front of your retina and pierces through it, instead of more sensibly originating at the back:

> The retina sends electrical signals to the brain through the optic nerve and people see images. The optic nerve, however, is connected to the retina on the side that receives light, essentially blocking a portion of the eye and giving humans a blind spot. A better structure for the eye would be to have the optic nerve connected to the side of the retina that does not receive the light, such as in cephalopods.

You stupidly breathe through the same tube you eat and drink with, causing a staggering number of unnecessary deaths:

> If the [pharynx and larynx] were not connected and did not share a portion of their travel paths, choking would not be an issue, as it isn’t for most other animals in the world.
Why can't it be both? You might have a question as to why Piketty gets so much credit, but the two are not mutually exclusive.
> I would never use it, though, because decompiling Python generator expressions just feels so unpythonic.

Agreed but it really left me thinking that it'd be extraordinarily useful if Python gained some supported path for doing this – a standard way to get the AST for a generator expression would be really useful and a relatively general tool. A few years back I would have loved a cleaner way for a JSON decoder to know I only needed a couple of fields to avoid creating objects for everything else and it seems like there could be some very interesting optimizations for something like numpy/scipy as well.

1. I briefly liked LINQ awhile back before Microsoft's usual baroque design and poor QA convinced me that ASP.Net wasn't actually a time-savings. The LINQ-REST support seemed nice, albeit complicated, until you hit bugs where a change in one view would break unrelated views and running in the debugger "fixed" it.
Amazon will never be a true monopoly, because shipping ebooks has no real barriers. There's no way that writers will be unable to sell their works elsewhere, and as Stross himself writes, novels are not commodities that can be undercut by another producer.

The only authors that have to fear that future are those that produce works uninteresting enough that people won't look for them outside of the Amazon store.
I read the whole article before commenting. He talks about publishing through Amazon. I'm saying he could cut Amazon out completely.

I think Amazon bring 4 things:

- Audience

- Bandwidth

- A platform for taking payments, refunds and so on

- DRM

Bandwidth is probably not a serious concern, unless he's going to sell upwards of millions of books. The payments can be handled by other platforms easily, eg. PayPal. DRM is likely unnecessary. So it's really audience, and I guess Stross has that already, although other writers probably don't.
The tradition on Windows is to download binaries and also not to maintain binary compatibility across compiler versions, so it can be a pain to get matching compiler versions of libraries.
Funny thing that they make a site that looks exactly the same as every other site, and then they discover that they have a branding problem.

I never have any problem remembering that I'm readding HN.
Apple readying new software platform for the ‘Smart Home’
I've had a lot of fun on Quora for these types of questions.

https://www.quora.com/What-free-hosted-continuous-integratio...
From the educators point of view, it might be helpful to know if a student is struggling because they are not doing nightly reading.
They don't have to be publishers. They just vote once in a while, pay their dues , and the union does the rest.
Schizophrenia is a clinical diagnosis. It is made on a scale and based on thresholds both for specificly exhibited behaviors and aggregate number of behaviors exceeding the threshold. In other words, a person could exhibit several behaviors consistent with schizophrenia but not meet the clinical definition.

E.g. clinical science does not pathologize people who claim to hear god during prayer and admit acting upon what they heard when the claims are in the context of organized religious practice and the behavior does not disturb the peace too much.
Except most of the more obscure libraries I find are either abandoned projects or were written to support the author's needs and don't fit the generic use case.

To note, that's not a Python-specific issue: it's the nature of any language ecosystem where modules can be made by anyone, and I'm not even sure it's a bad thing: I've learned a lot, even from libraries that I didn't end up using for whatever reason.

I think it's dangerous to imagine Python or any language as something where all the libraries you need always exist, and thus any time you have to write your own libraries it's a failure. Embrace the library ecosystem: you're going to eventually find something that isn't covered, which is when you write a library and participate.

Disclaimer: I know open sourcing code isn't always possible, and that time/project constraints can impact how much backend code a developer can write. But if we dismiss Python 3 just because some of the more obscure libraries aren't ported, I wonder how we ever picked up Python 2 originally.
A quotation by a great scientist is not evidence or proof of your hypothesis.
I'll take your word for it then ^_^
Mobile is one of them, although OP's arguments are valid as well. (http://conferences.sigcomm.org/co-next/2013/program/p303.pdf)
Also, among many other things: every thing over SSL. Single Connection.
Also, less of a technical problem, but as many already mentioned, too complicated as compared to plain text human readable HTTP 1.x
Looks like it!

http://www.space.com/20955-nasa-spy-satellite-telescopes-mis...
Thanks. We will let you know nearer the time via twitter: @domainey
I love what Tesla does in general, but ... is this really news?

BMW is Bavaria's biggest auto-industry employer. Microsoft is Redmond's biggest IT employer. It's because the headquarters are located in that particular area.

Edit: now that the title/URL has changed it seems slightly more relevant.
http://www.bookdepository.com is quite good. Might not be the cheapest though.
" Amazon demanding worldwide distribution rights at exchange rates set by them"

No, they don't. You can choose any or all of 245 territories, and set the price individually for each one.

I don't know where you're getting this information from.
The Binary Tree – Traversing
Is the additional knowledge worth scarifying the trust relationship ?
Sandstorm.io: Take control of your web
The car example doesn't hold up, since both the Porsche Panamera and the diamond provide: Status and Luxury Design, but the car also provides many tangible benefits:

* Transport

* Comfort

* Speed/Power/HP

And the diamond only provides features:

* Shining

* Weight/Karat
Is there a device where tapping the top of the screen doesn't immediately scroll to the top?

If anything, these bars are worse on devices that have poor scrolling behavior, as I've found they tend to interfere with scrolling.
The tricky thing about vim help, to me, is that it feels nearly impossible to navigate until you're already pretty comfortable with moving around in Vim. Making all of the most basic things so different from the WYSIWYG editors most people know generates a huge mental load at first, just trying to get the most basic things done.

When I started using Vim, I found for a while that I couldn't stand writing code with it for more than an hour or so, because it was too difficult to think about what the code is doing and how to use the Vim commands to actually edit the text at the same time. I think it took me several months of poking around and training myself in basic movement commands to get to where I could actually work in it effectively.
SaaS: How to Rock Your Beta
Ignoring the merits or not of the criticisms, I did find it interesting to compare how much effort the FT and Economist put into finding errors in this work and how much exposure they gave their findings, compared with the way they have largely ignored problems in other far more influential studies that were much more flawed.

For example Tol 2009, a flawed paper about the economic impacts of climate change which concluded that moderate warming would be economically beneficial[1]. That was cited (although not generally named) in numerous FT and Economist editorials and opinion pieces over the years yet as far as I'm aware they have not published anything about the recent correction. It was used as the basis for serious national and international policy and has contaminated many subsequent studies in the field. For years the author made regular appearances pushing the importance of the finding in western media. Yet even a fairly basic review of the paper would have spotted some of the errors (it was a meta-analysis and some of the values from other paper were copied incorrectly or had the sign reversed) i.e. even an FT intern could have spotted the mistakes. Updates to the paper indicate that the entire result was based on fitting a curve to a single outlier (a study by the same author) and additional studies since 2009 give a very different picture when included.

As far as I'm aware Piketty's work has had little to no real world impact as yet to government policy or widespread public opinion (I might be wrong of course). Any errors it contained, while worth correcting, don't seem like they would have an earth shattering impact worthy of front page exposure and double page spreads while retractions in more influential studies go unreported.

[1] More about that here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2015/05/2... and http://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/2014/05/05/tols-co...
The FT is pretty open in it's questioning of the data - http://blogs.ft.com/money-supply/2014/05/23/data-problems-wi...

Rather than accuse them of dishonesty surely all Piketty has to do is explain where their analysis is wrong?
Did you read the article? The long tail is the critical collection of libraries and most of them will never be ported. People write new Python 2 libraries every day, actually--the list is getting longer, not shorter. That said, gevent is an extremely critical library for a lot of production Python 2 code. There doesn't even seem to be a roadmap to port it to Python 3.
I'm not sure if interchangeable is the right word.
'phởne' and 'phone' yield different result lists.

At least Google seems to have a way to detect visually similar letters.
As the saying goes, the best way to piss off everyone is to try to please everyone.

It seems like W3C are trying to please everyone. Hence the result.
Neither. They pass almost all of their surplus to customers. They're a model corporation as far as I'm concerned, the anti-Apple.

Amazon, as best I can tell, is a charitable organization being run by elements of the investment community for the benefit of consumers -- Matthew Yglesias

In this case they are a middleman replacing another middleman. That's just capitalism. Publishers had a good run.

Can Amazon turn evil? Sure. But it will be 20 years this year and they still haven't. If they do, you can replace them tomorrow.

You can even read a book bought anywhere else on your Kindle. EPUB converts to MOBI just like that

ebook-convert book.epub book.mobi

But that won't be necessary since another book store will happily give you .mobi files. That's some monopoly they have.

As to the point that somehow we will run out of books to read, there is not even the slightest chance that I will read the best 1% of the books published until today in my entire lifetime. That's assuming everyone stops writing now. And statistically I'm a heavy reader, I'm up to 2-3 not-strictly-technical books a month.
At one time you could practically not buy a computer without buying a Microsoft license. It's not as if you can't get internet without being forced to buy everything through Amazon. Anyone can still set up a website.
Yes, it has been that long. Seriously, most 19-20 year olds would have been toddlers (4yo) when the trial started. Even then almost everyone agreed that Internet Explorer was the best browser and the price was right, free.
The lesson I see is that you should always implement a compatibility layer for using the old libs.
Your website is awesome and the article was fantastic! I was just picking on you for the "Vim has the best documentation ever" line.
w.r.t. fishing, I remember reading about this and while that approach works in theory, in practice people are subject to careerist tendencies. The fact that they will not be around as long as the company will be incentivizes them to extract wealth as fast as possible.

I tried looking for the article that talked about this, but I couldn't find it. The conclusion of the article was that some form of regulation was necessary.

My gut feeling is that the monopolist strategy can work, but only if the company's board implements strong internal controls and the executives don't get them changed. I feel that this is a bit of a gamble though as you have two powerful diametrically opposed forces. Also, members of the board could be looking for a quick exit from time to time as well.

On another note, while I was looking for the article, I found this interesting article on the necessary characteristics for a Marine Protected Area to work: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v506/n7487/full/nature1...
The merge happened nearly a decade ago.
There was a link to a Microsoft person in the top right of your page. I mistook it for the author link. Edited post to remove that.

You are right that the same tools work for python 2. However, I mentioned tools there which allow python to do type checking, and type inference because they can be done now. See here on how to use them: http://renesd.blogspot.de/2014/05/statically-checking-python...

You're right in that case where you use several libraries that aren't ported. However, there's 4799 packages registered on pypi as supporting python 3, and most of the popular ones are ported. Considering that most libraries are ported, porting small scripts should be easy most of the time. I don't know if you actually ported any code, but it's often trivial.
Python (2) is heavily used in the finance industry, a industry that still uses cobol and fortran, they will never move on to python3
Kind of reminds me of the kids who would show up to an exam and then have to ask around to borrow a pencil because they didn't come prepared.