skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The trouble with that suggestion is that it's fairly common for people to omit the colon. I think we'll just deal with such cases manually; that's what we did with the one you mention—we put "Ask HN: " at the beginning of the title.
It was all organic, and it seems to have settled down, as expected.
You may have spelled xoria256 wrong there.
I don't think the default Xubuntu theme has ever changed. Which is kind of a shame, but also kind of good. It's very consistent and makes some users who don't care about eye candy and hate change happy, but it scares off some newer users who have a strong association with old-looking meaning poor-functioning.

Given how many awesome XFCE themes there are out there, I'm surprised Xubuntu hasn't moved to something nicer looking.
"It's ultra scalable!"

lol, I'm just joking. Well, half joking. But this kind of thing does looks very scalable for mass building.

I wonder what kind of problem is it aiming to solve? Does it solves the homeless problem by way of mass building? Does it solves urbanization problem by allowing buildings to continuously add more floors? If so, can these blocks scale to support hundreds of floors above it?
> Being good at school is not a sure sign of high intelligence - school is an artificial environment that values short-term memorizing of facts, over critical analysis and independent decision-making.

This is a common but mislead read of the situation. "Intelligence" (per IQ) as typically defined is abstraction/calculation ability. This is very useful in highly rational environments where being correct matters, such as academic ones.

OTOH, in "life", it's _far_ more important to succeed in social environments where being analytically correct is largely irrelevant and thus those abilities have limited direct value. For example, it doesn't necessarily "make sense" on the surface to simply support a direct manager regardless their arguments' quality; yet that may be the socially optimal course of action. IOW, it should come as no surprise there's limited correlation when using an orthogonal metric. Some have even introduce separate metrics ("EQ") to account for such discrepancies.

The societal problem here is that we often expect those well-training and successful mostly in the former environment to thrive in the latter. Whether the issues is in preparing them for the wrong place or society doesn't live up to what we believe how students will live is another discussion.

> Can't we agree "intelligent" is the skill of setting good goals, achieving them, and making good decisions in light of limited facts, limited time...

The reality is that traditionally intelligent people are good at these things, esp when their talents are specifically applied. For example, they can be good at figuring out their shortcomings at overemphasizing risk when it's explained.

However it's unrealistic to assume those prepped all their life only for one enviro will adapt autodidactically.

Also, I don't think just redefining words like what success/intelligence means is an adequate resolution.
Focus follows mouse is buggy in 14.04 Xubuntu. There's no fast user switch (you can lock the screen and switch as a good-enough workaround). Suspend and restart causes the screen to not restore on occasions. Thunar doesn't have split mode (nautilus's F3). As you say the default theme is not great, I didn't like that focused and unfocused windows looked pretty much the same.

I don't know if it is better than gnome2 was but it pisses all over anything gnome3. The xfce panel is better and easier to tweak than the gnome equivalent (e.g adding a new item does not require finding a gap on the panel to right click), the places panel shortcut is really handy, xfce-terminal seems faster and less resource hungry when scrolling text than gnome-terminal, and I like the whisker menu. I just wish they had gone with the solid Xfce 4.10 for the LTS instead of the beta 4.11.
> Instead developers can and do cross compile into a single APK.

So you lose the Web's ability to be retargeted to arbitrary architectures. You can only be retargeted to architectures that you compiled for. It's the exact same situation as in native code (because it is native code), and has very little in common with the Web's model (which can be retargeted to any architecture, even ones that Web authors didn't "cross-compile to").

By way of example, Nintendo could ship a Wii Browser (PowerPC), because JavaScript is platform independent. But Nintendo couldn't ship a Wii Android app runner and have it play games, because nobody compiles games for PowerPC.
Xtranormal Inc.'s assets have been acquired
The beating of web programmers with new languages will continue until morale improves :-)
I mean, until somebody figures out that the HTML/CSS/DOM etc make the task nearly impossible, no matter what language.
"Soon enough, almost all human activity and the Internet will be inextricable. My heartbeat, connected to a cloud-based health monitor...".

Maybe. Then again, maybe not.
Don't mistake predictions and supposition for fact.
Sure, but that is more than a hundred years ago. Back then the sport was not nearly as competitive.
Nope. Fingers are always on the fingerprint icons. Just keeps flipping into the resume screen.
Startup = Growth[1]. If you can't find growth, pivot or quit it.

[1] http://www.paulgraham.com/growth.html
Same here. But I think this is not just a coincidence taking into count how popular ARM is today.
There's a bit about it on the linked page (look for the description of "dynamic" blocks), plus a tutorial on their blog: http://ceylon-lang.org/blog/2013/02/26/ceylon-in-the-browser...
Kotlin language – M8 is out
Since you mentioned it, I wanted to highlight the Discover Meteor book as well. I went through it when they had the free access weekend a while back and found it extremely informative and helpful to the point I purchased it afterwards.

This one looks great as well from a first glance so I'm excited to check it out.
Tons of drugs & physical therapies have unknown MOAs!

It's "tDCS". You've mixed up the letters in the acronym, and incorrectly capitalized the first letter.

It's thought that it works via the depolarization of the resting membrane potential.
Probably right. One of the Rust developers suggested something similar (but more nuanced, because Rust is a highly nuantial language):

http://smallcultfollowing.com/babysteps/blog/2014/05/13/focu...

"Put another way, it’s become clear to me over time that the problems with data races and memory safety arise when you have both aliasing and mutability. The functional approach to solving this problem is to remove mutability. Rust’s approach would be to remove aliasing."

Local variables themselves are naturally non-aliased, although the objects they point to might be.

PS apologies to anyone who's seen it before for trotting that link out yet again!
You are clearly a moron. Not just wrong but an out and out moron.

Posting a link to a story from the Daily Mail is the argumentative equivalent of shooting yourself in the face.

Widely regarded as the worst newspaper in the United Kingdom. Please don't respond. You are seriously embarrassing yourself.
There is more to quick and dirty programming than refactoring. I would say refactoring even doesn't play much if a roll here. What is key is the ability to be in a broken state for long periods of time while still being able to test and executed pieces of the system. This doesn't work in Haskell since Haskell is not just statically typed, it is Statically Typed! Type inference and code generation are slaves to types, and don't handle errors very well. That could be fixed, but it doesn't seem to be a priority (generate code Forman incorrect program seems to be taboo).

More crucially, Haskell programmers tend live in their compiler and not their debugger. The adage "well typed programs don't go wrong" means you spend a lot of time just getting the code to compile, fitting types together, and not much time seeing how things work together. Much of this is because the community emphasizes the compiler, and in fact good graphical debuggers for Haskell aren't there yet (and even difficult to design given lazy evaluation). Bret victor didn't do his inventing in principle talk with Haskell for good reason!

Python and ruby. programmers live in the REPL and debugger, they don't get to observe type errors early like Haskell programmers do, but they immediately get to see real interactions. I can then see why going between Haskell and ruby would be a disaster.
Thought about it. I've heard a lot about Scala's learning curve, but I don't think it'd be a huge problem in my case since I already know Haskell. I am a little worried about finding Scala programmers, but there's a decent-sized community around the language. And it can use Java libraries fine, and you can write native Scala code for Apache Spark.

The deciding factor against it, for me, is that Java/anything interop on the JVM is quite easy, but Scala/anything interop is hard. That makes it relatively easy to create a mixed-language Java/Jython system or Java/Clojure system, or even Java/Jython/Clojure, but very hard to do a Scala/Jython system. And even with its advanced features, I doubt that Scala beats Python for quick & dirty prototyping. I've got a bunch of past experience in multi-language scripting + compiled core systems, and I know the benefits of doing a system at scale like that. The value proposition of Scala (and to some extent Go and Haskell) is that you get one language that is both fast and concise, but in my experience you want to separate that out into scripting and core languages, because the styles of programming themselves are very different.
To add to your list of languages with square-bracket array/list/vector initializers (see also [0]): Aikido, Coffeescript, E, F# (sorta, uses pipes too), Groovy, Haskell, Matlab, Nimrod, Postscript, Vimscript.

[0]: http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Arrays
The "suggestions for projects" section of the manual (section 15) mentions this as a possible future extension:

> Other backends, say, asm.js or LLVM. This can be quite a challenge, as these languages do not support jumps to arbitrary locations.
But historians do acknowledge that Lincoln and Darwin were racist in certain ways. They certainly are admirable people in many respects, but were far from saints.
Well, "gut" is far from obsolete, but not everything requires "gut".

The article claims the program performs better when compared to data from manual management. It'll be saving them $800k/year alone. Also since the program will be evolving over time, you can assume there are still people monitoring its performance and feeding that back into the loop.

Similar scheduling algorithms are already in use all over the world. If you're a student, chances are your program is made by a computer "boss" too. Scheduling is not the kind of chore humans are best at.

We don't have to be cynical and suspect ulterior motives. After all, we created computers to be our assistants, and here we go, they are. And it's good. Every win for computers is a win for people.
Larry Page and Sergey Brin with Vinod Khosla [video]
How does my Python code look?
The article assumes this is because of a greater sense of security in the labor market, but they ignore the other possibility - nastier jobs that promise less for the future.
In the same space there is Haxe http://haxe.org/ . It's also an Algol-like language that targets both JavaScript and Java (and flash, c++, .net, php).
Perhaps a video or gif would help show off your work. Currently the set of people who will see it is: {saw this post} ∩ {own a mac} ∩ {familiar with xcode} ∩ {willing to clone the repo}.

Probably a small number of people
I agree that Haskell forces the programmer to create structure, but I don't agree with your meta-problem hypothesis. I think the structure actually is a big part of the real problem, and Haskell just prevents you from implementing incomplete or incorrect solutions.

Those solutions might in another language require a hack or leaky abstractions to work, if they would be possible to get to work at all.

I've walked into problems like the OP has before with Haskell, and when there seems to be no nice way of defining a type structure to model the problem, it usually meant that the idea in my head had a fundamental problem. If I look at this tree I get the feeling that perhaps he just has two problems, and he's looking at it like he's got only one.

And once you do get your type structure neatly in place, often times the implementation will just flow out of your fingertips. And when it does, it will be powerful, flexible and robust.
I'm actually planning to start an ARM port next. Considering that I'm rather inexperienced with that architecture, it may take a while, though. Any help would of course be appreciated...
Surprise! :) The bar is (literally, not figuratively) set by the crash test regulations in a given market. In the US, this is the NHTSA.

In the incident outlined in the article, the driver struck a pole orientated (roughly) perpendicular to the direction of travel. The testing standard for this type of impact is currently 20 MPH[1]. Why 20 MPH? Because, as you suggested, research [2] indicates that most accidents involving fixed poles don't occur at high speeds. Roadside hardware present on highways are designed to crumple and absorb impact, or are situated such that they would deflect the car, rather than cause it to stop abruptly. Yes, you can find exceptions to this rule, but they are exceptions, and would be considered a deficiency to be resolved, not an engineering standard.

Tesla exceeded the required criteria for this test by a sizable margin, but you've got to look at the physics of kinetic energy to understand why anything above 55 MPH is still wildly outside of the range considered in the safety engineering of the car.

In a crash, the kinetic energy of the vehicle must be dissipated somehow. This energy is governed by the formula (1/2)mv^2. The important part of that formula is the velocity-squared portion. The velocity coefficient impacts the kinetic energy as a square. Just have a look at a graph of that function:

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=1%2F2%282100x%5E2%29+fr...

As much as I commend Tesla for their safety efforts, when you drive like this guy did, your only ally is dumb luck.

1: http://www.safercar.gov/Vehicle+Shoppers/5-Star+FAQ#fifteen

2: http://www.nhtsa.gov/CARS/rules/rulings/SideImpact/index.htm...
Wasn't Beavis and Butthead a KGB plot ?
Stop Brainstorming Product Ideas (you're missing the point)
> it can be seen and it can be used

In that case you can do a Show HN. The guidelines are only trying to prevent Show HNs for things that can't be used yet. If you want specific advice, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com. (That goes for anybody.)

We might need to relax this rule. Good work can get off the ground in many ways. Drew Houston got initial traction for Dropbox with a video rather than with working software. Our intention isn't to be overly strict—it's mostly to detach "Show HN" from vaporware landing pages and market tests that don't have serious work behind them.
Note that it's not just a "web" language. It runs on the JVM (as well as in the browser), and can be used as a more featureful Java replacement. To this end, it has very nice interop support with Java [1], helped by their similar syntax/structure.

[1] http://ceylon-lang.org/documentation/1.0/reference/interoper...
Strong with the Forth Yoda would be. YODA TALK-LIKE IF FORTH USE THEN
My guess is it lowers time and cost for pumping out subdivisions. You don't need bricklayers or framers if all you have to do is slot together blocks.
Show HN: An implementation of a Turing machine in Go
In my experience, people who are ideological about FP often claim that the vast majority of people do not just get FP, and their preferences are misguided and not natural.

Yet, sequential and direct control flow are common in human language, we know how to tell or be told to do something N times. Recursive formulations are harder to explain, and most people don't learn math as easily as they do language.
Depending on your concept of time, it very much is. If you choose the same abstraction of time for reasoning about the program state and the real world, the same "reference" might change its properties over time. The speed of a car is mutable over time. The question is if the way we reason about time when talking about the "real" world is appropriate for reasoning about time in programs.
I wonder if such studies are susceptible to bad stats of confirmation bias as many business studies are.

What I mean is whether they had proper controls to assess whether each average person is more likely to succeed than each "smart" person given the same scenario.

If they instead took a bunch of successful people, figured out that a lot of them weren't that "smart", then it could be the product of there being a lot more average than smart folk. In other words, "smart" doesn't guarantee business success such that all successful businesspeople are IQ gods, but we all knew that.
The Therac-25 case study is a tragic one, but fortunately it is not forgotten.

I work on medical devices (and have worked on radiotherapy devices previously) and the standards for quality systems and regulatory hurdles (which I occasionally see bemoaned here on HN) are there with good reason. In fact, Therac-25 is often cited when training new hires on quality (as required with any ISO-13485 compliant QMS).
iOS8 Thoughts?
Show HN: Find the best area to stay. My weekend project.
I will see what I can find out. It doesn't happen on iphone or ipod touch. Thanks for the bug report!
I wonder if it's significantly cheaper than using AAC[1] which also uses interlocking blocks (it uses thin-bed mortar, I couldn't find any details on the Kite Bricks site for what adhesive you use).

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoclaved_aerated_concrete
It's the exact same situation as in native code

Just to be clear, Android applications can be, and often are, 100% DEX (the vast majority of productivity, video, etc). Because, you hold, there are exception applications that break this model, the whole model is broken? It's saying that the web is broken because ActiveX is used somewhere.

That is horribly specious. It is a dead-end argument by exception.

But let's look at those uncommon apps that use some native code.

a) The majority of the code in most cases will still be in DEX. It will still benefit from device specific compilation.

b) The majority of the NDK code will or should have Java equivalents. When the native code can't be used, DEX code will be used. Again, this is idiomatic.

c) And when those two aren't true, on x86 for instance if you only include ARM, it simply transcodes the ARM native code to x86 native code. It obviously isn't optimized, but it's a pretty decent exception case.

In every case you benefit from the device specific compilation. So what doesn't hold again?
If you like active, professional women, you also have the phenomena of many women entering the "serious relationship" pool around age 30 because they spent their twenties traveling, or concentrating on their career, or getting advanced degrees, all of which take a significant amount of focus and often involve life changes which tend to end existing relationships.
Here's some first person accounts from HN'ers, including a couple alarming ones:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3525744

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5880599

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7872130
No, but the hypnotic fascination of meta made that title inevitable.
This only seems to happen when you install Yosemite by upgrading from the previous OS X. It's not there on a clean install.

I may be wrong though. When I first installed Yosemite by upgrading, this icon was there. This morning I did a clean install and it's not there. Maybe it's an update that fixed this? I don't know.
I've had a blast in the succeeding years - making a better income most years and getting to do things I enjoy

Are you saying that you co-founded a startup that went public, grew to a couple of hundred employees, and it wasn't a financial windfall for you? I'm honestly curious if you're willing to provide more details.
Pretty sure it's illegal in most countries. So it can only work for businesses that are themselves illegal.
Sounds more like a classic optimization model (operations research) than like an AI model. Great case study though. I wonder why they used a GA and custom stuff instead of off the shelf software from gurobi or IBM OPL etc.
Algorithm-Generated Articles Don't Foretell the End of Journalism - Joe Pinsker
You can't do tDCS with a frame, only TMS. You're confusing the technologies!

In trials they do shams by turning on the device for only a short period of time. That way there's still a tingle (from the pads) at the start of procedure.
> Thunar doesn't have split mode (nautilus's F3).

But there is no need to use Thunar, just install Nautilus and add a launch button for it into the panel.

...unless you're a heavy user of files on the desktop. But I think it's possible to configure an alternative file manager to manage those, too.
Java (and probably also C#) already has mature STM implementations. Here is one, but there are certainly others:

https://sites.google.com/site/deucestm/

As noted in the other comments, you don't need STM for parallelism in Java and C# because they have access to native threads. But the programming model may still be nicer to use than the standard threads-with-shared-memory programming model.
This is one of my weekend projects. I was going to wait until things were a little more polished, but decided just to throw it out there anyway. Any comments and feedback are welcome.
Indeed. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

On the other hand, if it is "broke", the long-term effects of tDCS are about as well-studied as the long-term effects of many of the psychoactive substances (legal and otherwise) that we regularly take. No one knows, e.g., what happens to brains 50 years after 5 years of chronically administering SSRIs. Nor do we really know how to characterize "the long-term effects" of nicotine intake (and it's not at all clear that the "long-term effects" of anything that changes one's brain -- apart from in obvious ways e.g. by shrinking it -- is even something that it would make sense to try to characterize).

In general, when it comes to psychoactive anything (and you might even include words, music, prolonged withdrawal from society, and sexy walking in this list) we don't have much more than a few interesting results here and there. When it comes to brains/minds/persons, we really don't know.

What we can surmise is that those things that mammalian brains have not been exposed to (LSD, tDCS, fluoxetine) are likely to have less predictable effects than things in the environment that are phylogenetically familiar (sleep, exercise, prolonged concentration, temporally extended effort, etc.).

In other words, if things are going poorly for you, try the boring approaches first. If those approaches don't work, though, there aren't really any compelling reasons to avoid techniques that are less familiar to your biology.
This is what I was thinking. Since there are only a countably infinite number of prisoners, you can't assign each one an equivalence class.
Piaget on Piaget - Genetic epistemology (1977) [video]