skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Wietse obviously wants to benefit people who use Postfix, which is why he releases tarballs, Makefiles, and documentation, so people who want to use Postfix can get it, compile it, and learn how to use it. VCS does not further those goals, but instead benefits would-be developers (and an insignificant minority of users who aren't worth optimizing for).
I'm currently porting a Numpy project into haskell as a self-improvement project, and it's been 69% great. But then I find some library that I have to implement from scratch when I just had it in python. That's a pretty big problem, and I'm willing to put up with it, but most people aren't.
"Your job is to solve problems" - This statement may be useful as a reminder, but most of the case - it is too obvious to gain something from it. What on earth are the jobs without solving problems? Of course understanding the problem is important, but still our primary goal is to code efficiently.
Maybe the money he makes off of their stock is used for more good than the harm that comes from his investment in them.
Taleb talks about books/movies/etc becoming successes with little to no predictability. Games fall into this category. Hard to tell which games will become runaway successes, especially from small studios. But you know, it's cool, you can just be a dick about it instead.
There is a difference between the European and American comics.

US comics are more intricate and harder to follow, but it's potentionally more rewarding. This, in turn, creates more passionate and more religiously following fans.

On one hand, you can have a lot of customers; on the other hand, you can have smaller, but more loyal customers.

US comics have chosen the second path, in approximately 1980s. And I, as a European fan of US "Big 2" comics, don't really mind.
> And unfortunately ruby isn't powerful enough to do what Apple needs

I'd say on the power spectrum of programming languages, ruby is MORE powerful than swift.

There are so many things you can do in ruby that you can't do in swift, especially along the lines of reflection. The only stuff swift has that ruby doesn't comes in way of restrictions eg. typing.
"You shouldn't be making FOSS if all you want is to get paid for your work."
Not sure how this would help. The server will only see IP address. The Comcast will know that a given set of users had the session open on the hotspot. But unless the hotspot sends detailed information about every packet to Comcast with session/user mapping, there is no way to map a particular request to a session/user.
The Case Against Sharing: On access, scarcity, and trust
What is its Weisman Score? :D
Tim Cook, Making Apple His Own
If you want to familiarize yourself more with my `mvc` and `foldl` library, you can find the blog posts describing them here:

http://www.haskellforall.com/2014/04/model-view-controller-h...

http://www.haskellforall.com/2013/08/composable-streaming-fo...

It might seem like too much abstraction until you realize that the alternative would be the following obtuse type:

data Updatable a = forall x y . Updatable (forall r . ((x, x -> y -> x, x -> a, STM (Maybe y)) -> IO r) -> IO r))

That's what you get if you completely expand out the implementation of `Updatable`. This is why I build up these abstractions from smaller composable pieces (i.e. `Fold` and `Managed` and `Controller`), each of which is intrinsically useful in isolation.

However, I think if you are trying to understand how `Managed` and `Controller` and `Fold` work all in one go, you're going about it the wrong way. Haskell lends itself really well to abstracting over the implementation by specifying mathematical equations inspired by category theory that the implementation obeys. This is not the fake kind of abstraction that other languages promise but never actually deliver (i.e. abstractions that leak and forces you to read source code, often times several layers deep). Rather, everything you need to know about the abstraction layer immediately underneath you is completely summarized by a succinct set of equations that you can then use to prove a new set of equations for the immediately following layer. This post gives an example of this layered proof process:

http://www.haskellforall.com/2013/12/equational-reasoning.ht...

By composing these small, correct-by-construction layers of equations you can grow to arbitrary complexity while always preserving correctness. More importantly, you never need to reason about more than a single layer at a time since you've decoupled each layer's correctness proofs from each other. Contrast this with other languages where you often have to reason simultaneously over many layers of abstractions to debug difficult issues or prove correctness.

To answer the meat of your question, all you really need to know to understand how `Updatable` works is that:

* `Fold e` is an `Applicative`, for all `e`

* `Managed (Controller e)` is a `Monoid`, for all `e`

* `onLeft` and `onRight` are `Applicative` homomorphisms (this detail is noted in the library source code but I omitted it from the blog post)

Those four properties concisely summarize everything you need to know about every abstraction underneath `Updatable`. If you approach this correctly, there is no need to dig into their source code further to understand how they work. Truthfully, I would love if you were to dig into their source code to learn how they work, but if you really want to level up as a programmer then you need to start thinking more abstractly, layer-by-layer, instead of trying to fit the entire programming stack into your head all at once.
Often the owner of an access point is liable for illegal traffic on it.
The US government doesn't want you to know the cops are tracking you
It certainly seems like he hasn't heard of a barrel shifter. That alone would make this pretty damn easy to implement in an ASIC.

It's also assuming that the constants don't matter for the security of the hash function. They do.
Can you explain the att.com and comcast angle? Are you saying that att.com lists Comcast wifi hotspots?
You're confused. You are the loser. I am the winner. The winner dictates terms.

http://www.templeos.org/Wb/Doc/Demands.html
I guess I'm the only one so far who kinda agrees with the author.

One thing not explicitly spelled out in the article: you should avoid doing coding that is not actually solving anyone's problem.

I've seen a lot of engineers, and worse yet managers, who fall into the trap of "more typing = more productivity".
Interesting, as objdump has long been an indispensable tool... [Is there any other way with the standard GNU toolset to conveniently disassemble a random object/binary?
Gdb can of course, but isn't very convenient for doing whole-program disassembly...]
Likewise, if someone is paying you to reach a destination, it is natural they'd care more that you reach the destination & on time, not so much about various aspects of walking style, quality of walking, how your walking gives you meaning in life, etc.
hah first thing that came to my mind as well
A forked programming language is no longer the same language.
This is Postfix, which is older than some of you here on HN. Possibly the OP studied it when he was at college. Bearing that in mind, the tone of that email shows a total lack of respect. Write the email, fine, but word it in a manner that gives the Postfix devs the benefit of the doubt.
It's not that we're not agreeing, but think about it.

You can react to an article in three primary ways: agree, disagree, or learn.

It's easy to write articles everyone agrees or disagrees with. But that's like empty calories. Instant disagreement typically means the author is clueless. Instant agreement means the author is preaching to the choir. It's harder to write articles people learn from. And I don't think there's much to learn from that one.
I think Oculus technology would allow people to do all of this virtually with the physical portion being merely props. This would be a lot cheaper than doing everything for real.
> Mac users, sending a zip file which also contains another zip file increases your chances of file corruption. We recommend that you de-compress all files first and create only one zip file.

what the fuck?
That @auto_closure annotation seems to work exactly like D's `lazy` keyword, transparently wrapping the passed-in value in a closure. Pretty cool that more languages are getting built-in support for laziness.
Brotli.. I wonder where the name comes from. It sounds almost like the Swiss German word 'Brötli' (= small loaf of bread) - but I can't find any relationship to Switzerland.
Ah I see what happened. We somehow managed to talk past each other and go out of sync and ended up responding to something that was not on the others mind.

If you thought I am not in agreement with this comment of yours, then let me assure you that I am (with certain differences).

My point remains that your Ariane example is irrelevant, it shows that statically typed systems can still fail if there are failure modes outside of the purview of the typechecker. That is obvious and was never in contest. What was in contest, however, was the relative safeties of statically typed vs dynamically typed. Your example has no bearing in clearing that question. I am claiming superiority of the static paradigm because no one has been forthcoming in putting their money and lives in control of a dynamically typed controller. You are just refusing to concede this because it affects your view in some way, and I dont expect to see any change in that behavior.

Let me put forward my main claim (and ignore the silly hypothetical ones): dynamically typed/checked languages are unsuitable and dangerous for cases where runtime errors are egregiously costly because they cannot prove that such eventualities cannot happen before they actually happen. Because of these risks involved such systems are sensibly not implemented in dynamically typed/checked languages. Statically typed languages cannot immunizes against all possible failures, yet they are better than dynamically typed languages in this scenario because they can eliminate a large class of these runtime errors that dynamically typed languages just cannot (if they can they are statically typed by definition), whereas testing applies equally to both.

BTW a dynamically typed language with exhaustive static analysis is a statically typechecked language.
I am a paying customer of Lumosity. I am not sure if it's useful.
Presentation announcing the format, and discussing advantages/disadvantages compared to existing formats:

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1aigINmRR7fw_ml8rz0rJ...
Code is for humans. The machines only understand pulses of electrons. Your job is not to code, your job is to make machines do things. Code is just your means of communication with the machines. It's the tool, not the job itself.
I'm 23 years old, and I'm a decent developer. Not the best by far, and have so much more to learn... but I command a very respectable salary for my experience, age, and location. I can do that because prior (and parallel) to being a software developer, I was a very very good salesperson (#1 for a company across their 250 stores, selling mobile phone contracts, retail not telesales). I'm super thankful for having done that (although the reasons I ended up doing that instead of development was not so nice), and I find it helps me every single day as a developer; dealing with clients, working with project managers, heck even negotiating my salary: all of these were made easier by my learning how to sell. I highly recommend learning it, sure it's not glamorous, but it is intellectually stimulating, albeit in a very different way to software engineering. That's my $0.02AUD anyway
She lives in Amsterdam with her husband and children.

What a god damned cop out. She doesn't even live in New York. Way to contribute back to the economy that nurtered her so well, yeah?

How about she puts her money where her mouth is?
It's absolutely useful and it's telling that you think it is not.
The authors work at Google Zurich.
I just read a thread about a bunch of grumpy software traditionalists who are probably close to my age, but the similarity stops there.

I have been working with software for over 20 years and I still think git is the coolest thing to hit development teams since dynamic languages.
Sometimes it's very hard to justify why a project needs to be done especially if it involves back-end refactoring. Additionally, there are many ways to implement a project; the fastest ways usually involves a lot of un-maintanable hacks. However, your project stakeholders won't care how terrible your code is as long as the project works

If it was up to business, they would have developers crank out features non-stop without time to go back and clean up technical debt.

The root cause is management not understanding how software development works.
I just installed a new modem to provide "higher speeds". Speed hasn't changed, but we have a new wifi network (xfintywifi).

We do have the old equipment, but it's not that bad honestly.
Cable modems can be configured to support multiple service flows with different classes of service. The users of the public hotspot network have a unique IP and separate service flows provisioning additional bandwidth to the modem. Presumably Comcast is also tracking an authenticated user's IP address while on public hotspots for DMCA enforcement purposes.
Having worked with CVS, Perforce, subversion, bzr, mercurial, and git, in distributed teams, as a sole developer and in large local teams for over 20 years, I can't think of a single plausible situation in which git is not superior in every way to all the other version control systems.

Git is a tool, and it's certainly not going to be a 'flip a switch and everything is better'. It does require that you define how you're going to use it in your particular context, but the only tradeoff I can see with git is learning it. It's interface and naming is an absolute horror show of usability, but its no worse that something like regular expressions or vim/emacs. But once it's in place, you have change management calculus, and everything else was algebra at best.

I understand the frustration of people who are used to having the benefits of open history in addition to open source. And who don't want to step back 10 years and learn dead end technologies, and who aren't used to being confronted with ivory towerism or gatekeeperism.

Otoh, I also understand why a maintainer would want to keep their codebases close to their chest, when they've achieved expert level finesse in a project/codebase, and the noob hordes with their ill-conceived ideas demand responses to their pull requests because they spent their free time writing some crap, and demand you spend your free time educating them on why their patch is a tub full of fail.
http://jsdelivr.com lets anyone upload their library and serves it through their CDN, free of cost, regardless of popularity of the library.
Open source, closed VCS.

That was never appropriate.
It's amazing how fast the US expanded. In 60 years, within one life time, the US changed from a small new England colony to an empire larger than the size of Europe.

However, the growth of the British Empire was probably faster during this time period.
> a file that compresses to itself

Could this be used as DoS against anti-virus such as the one that GMail uses?
William A. Edelstein, 1944 – 2014
That leads to confirmation bias, which is a bad thing. You want both positive and negative results.
> Pitch shamelessly

And link-bait shamelessly as well.
Now that I have used git for a while, SVN makes me want to throw things. It's a turd. Whether you use git for dvcs or simple local versioning, it is all-around better. Unless you're just done learning new things. I understand that some people are done learning new things.
Note that I'm not disagreeing with you, but I can't see where using a DVCS like Git could be a negative?
It looks like the job of this article's writer is to create lots of bullshit.
Part of what they're trying to say that by understanding your customer's business, you can help build them better software.

Rather than blindly implementing features you don't understand, you find out the underlying reason for the request. If there is a cheaper or more effective way to accomplish that goal you can suggest it to your customer.
Exactly.

For center of population, as for center of mass, position matters. The farther you are from the center of population, the greater your weight. One Floridian might contribute the same southward pull as ten Virginians.

The bottom line is that America was still an agricultural nation in 1850. The population of the northern states was biased towards the south, where farming was more productive. Meanwhile, the Deep South had a large slave population, because that was where the cotton grew.

Thus, Texas and Louisiana had far more people than Minnesota Territory. Mississippi had more people than Wisconsin. Alabama had more people than Michigan. And Georgia had more people than ... well, Ontario is not part of the United States.

Oh sure, there were a lot of people in Illinois, Ohio, Indiana, and Pennsylvania. But these states were just too far south to exert much of a northward pull.
Is there something like Postfix, except it has useful features that work out of the box without a lot of extra configuration that is hard to figure out? So I could actually send/receive encrypted email that would pass big provider's filters consistently without needing to use a mail API?

There must be some similar projects to Postfix that are written in modern programming languages and do use source control etc.
Just out of curiosity, what libraries were these?
Why did Y Combinator adopt DMCA for Hacker News?
The UK is a bad place for solar power. Spain or Egypt would have much higher, and more reliable, output, that could be more easily predicted and buffered. I have heard figures like 4x between spain and the UK.

What about tidal power? That should work well in the UK.
I'm a little disturbed that

onclick="javascript:

was common enough in their corpus to end up in the dictionary.

Readable version: https://gist.github.com/anonymous/f66f6206afe40bea1f06
I'm not so sure. I'm certainly not an expert, but I have a private theory that the very sweetness of artificial sweeteners influences insulin release via some mechanism. Whether by "crying wolf" and promoting insulin resistance, or by some other means, I suspect there's some kind of message at play - "lots of sugar coming, blood, get ready!" - which then has a deleterious effect even when there's no actual sugar involved.

Well, it's not very scientific, but I've arrived at this theory by a couple of observations. One in myself - I used to be a huge diet coke junkie, up to 10 cans a day sometimes, and I found it impossible to lose weight, plus I noticed that I got that "after sugar" feeling somehow from the drink. When I cut it out, plus everything else artificially sweet (I was barely consuming any sugar), my weight loss issues disappeared and I just felt .. much better.

The other side of my anecdotal data comes from observing the same thing in friends. I know a few people who have gone pretty heavily low carb to lose weight, and I note a seeming correlation between success and cutting out sweet foods/drinks, no matter if they have sugar or not. OK, it's not exactly a double blind large-scale test, but nonetheless.

I'm not the only one I know who thinks this either. A couple of the PTs at my gym have noticed the same thing, and advise their clients to cut everything sweet from their diet, fake sugar or not. And Tim Ferriss advises a maximum of one diet drink a day.

So yeah, if you ask me (or the people above) - stay away from diet soft drinks and anything else sweet. I can't point to any large-scale studies, but over the years I've become pretty convinced there's something there.
Quick jump between files in GitHub
So, now, we can press t and type name of a file in a repo and jump to it from any place. Try it.
s/congested/administratively disabled

Remember, Comcast is part of the cable company fuckery that is pushing for a "fast lane"
What do you mean "adopt"? The DMCA is the law in the US. Any US site that allows users to post content needs a page like this explaining its DMCA policy and giving the address to which notices should be sent.
IMHO, for a single commiter use-case DVCS add an un-necessary level of complexity. I use Git for my personal projects simply because I am lazy to switch between different tools. And even for multiple contributors, Git is not ideal. For example, the "single" source tree version doesn't allow parallel check-ins in different parts of the code. I've seen a 50+ developers project with an active trunk where Git was a blocker because it was hard to push your code because of other people pushes. For example, SVN is much better in this regard and allows commits as long as it is not in the same files. Yes, one can split the big project into sub-projects, etc. but sometimes it is not really possible.
The article mentioned that there was a ton of noise and the researchers had to use customer filters to remove them.

I wonder how well this technology would work in the real world. There will be a lot more interference and random, unexpected obstacles than in a lab environment.
I've replied to another comment - there are scenarios when Git is not the best choice (imho) :)

Said that I am using Git for pretty much everything right now simply because it is "good enough" and I am lazy to switch between tools.
It doesnt get you out of paying for internet: you still have to pay for the other end of the DNS tunnel.
Seems like a fantastic way to indemnify yourself against any charges of piracy that are leveled at you and your Internet connection.
"PS Please excuse my not mailing this — but I don’t know your new address."

I like that.
Would you rather give your money to Amazon or to Comcast?
The 4 mile trip in the article would be about 12 minutes by bicycle (once you get fit). It would be less than an hour simply walking briskly.

It's difficult to understand why people drive such tiny distances. I ride close to 20 miles each way to work and it's still much faster than driving and slightly faster than the train. I also get less sweaty than people using the trains due to sensible clothing. It also means I don't need to use the gym and can eat what I want (I burn about 3500 kcal/day)
It says "Ouch, you just hit one of the brand new noise generators! These generators are available to contributing visitors first, then become public after a while."

I say, "Ouch, I've never heard of your site before and just followed a link here. I'll probably never come back. Bye."
SSDs are complicated beasts. We don't use them on anything other than disposable workstations. Every problem with SSDs is down to software rather then hardware.

Your M4s I wouldn't touch. There's nothing wrong with the hardware at all but the firmware sucks.

As far as you can go with SSDs is buy the ones with the least shit firmware, which is Samsung 840 Pro.

If your kit is mission critical, SAS is still the right choice.

Crucial/Micron RAM has no firmware!

As an ex EE this sort if crap is why I trust the hardware guys more than the software ones in life. We still haven't figured out software engineering yet.
If anything it seems as if this option will allow a better defense against that, assuming the other connected user (culprit) is identifiable.
Ask HN: What game has the best RPG party interface?
Games need great UX design too!