skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> You should use www because today you have a small web site, and tomorrow you want a big web site. Really big.

nope, sorry. i have no desire for my sites to be big. i prefer rememberable to a few, over big. next. can someone tell me why these people are actually pushing www use? So far the reasons they state make no sense. It sound's like a bunch of grammar addicts getting into the technologist scene.

> Twitter, for instance, which does not use www, had to buy new domain names just for static content.

and, who cares? If you become a really "big" website I guess you can afford another domain name.

> You may not run into any of these issues today, but as your web site grows, you eventually will.

What I learned from this. When my site get's so big that I can sniff coke off of male escorts I should hire someone to deal with purchasing more domains for our cookie content issue. thanks, solved.
I was more struck by the idea that high paid software engineers have the opposite of 'abstract' thinking. I mean programming is all about abstraction piled upon abstraction. Maybe they really they meant something else like 'tolerance for ambiguity.'
That is a fair point. Perhaps I got too carried away by analyzing the raw performance that I forgot what kinds of things need to happen behind the scenes. However, I imagine that the type checking has to be done by reduce as well as within a loop.

Reduce is probably faster because the underlying native C function can iterate over a vector faster than the bytecode-compiled for loop, and since you're passing a builtin to it, it doesn't ever need to leave the native realm until it returns from reduce.

If the for loop wasn't JIT'ed, I'd understand why this is slower. What about PyPy? How about trying the code on that? Maybe it will be smart enough to compile the for loop into native code that is equivalent to the reduce builtin.

I'm really curious about what happens under the hood here...
I agree with your non sequitur, but I think there is something there nonetheless.

I think Yossi Kreinin's main objection is not the absence of garbage collection in C++, but the fact that so many projects that could use garbage collection, don't.

Like "I need performance!" No you don't. "I really need performance!" My GC is just as fast as your malloc/free. "I don't use malloc/free, I have my own custom allocators, you ignorant Java programmer!" I just use manually managed arrays for that, and enjoy garbage collection for the rest of my data. "My environment can't afford me any GC pause!" My GC hardly pause, and it collects gigabytes of data. "But I know things about my data your GC don't!" OK, now you may have a point.

The performance difference between C++ and a well implemented native language with garbage collection (OCaml, Haskell, Lisp, Go…) is not large. Definitely less than an order of magnitude. Your constraints must be real tight to force you to give up garbage collection.

In the vast majority of projects, not using garbage collection is a problem. If not with the language, at least with the community.

---

I think Yossi Kreinin don't object the knife itself. He objects the fact that people actually try to eat soup with that damn knife, spilling soup and cutting their tongue in the process. Sometimes, we do need sharp edges (for cutting meat). But for much eating activities, sharp edges are just a hindrance.
This comment and a couple of others in the thread seem destined to provoke a religious flamewar. That would be off topic.
This article is so laughably boneheaded that anybody convinced by it is probably best steered away from any kind of engineering study.
It'm not sure its the business model, but that it is attached to an enourmous pile of assets/cash. That might be parsing your comment a bit, but the distinction is both relevant and important if you are trying to replicate it.
How Denver Is Becoming the Most Advanced Transit City in the West
Or possibly the Japanese manufacturers/distributors could send the whole batch to some low(er)-cost locale for P&P. It's hard to say whether they'd be more or less amenable to exporting their wares.
I read some article a while ago explaining that a lot of these costs are inflated by the drug cartels, er, I mean big pharma. And that a lot of regulations are there to create artificial barriers to entry and are promoted by big pharma for this reason. It comes all of one piece: patents encourage lazy encumbancy which encourages regulation, which encourages patents.
I wonder how long until this actually arrives in my inbox?
JSON vs. XML is largely irrelevant IMO. What is needed is something with as little extra crap as possible so that it is possible for a developer and/or diff tool figure out what is going on with the file.
>I like Go. I use it for a number of things (including this blog)

and yet it goes down once it is posted on HN. I have had some articles of mine end up on HN and I never went down, even when my blog was still WordPress hosted on a machine of mine.

This is probably more of a shortcoming of the various cloud providers than of the language/environment itself I guess.
A blade of grass in my yard has an upward trend too.
Without having read the book or arguing for one side or the other, I have to point out that you aren't attempting to meet with the argument or even attack the premises. Instead, you're looking at the conclusion and declaring that, in effect, it is immoral to even argue for that position. This is dogmatism; this is wrong; this is antithetical to sound and rational behavior (to be clear, "this" is your argument, not his!). In short, you /might/ even say that what you've just done is... evil.
This was a good read. Can anyone comment on whether they find the problems outlined in the article to really be painful in day-to-day go development?

From my initial dabblings with the language, it feels like its constraints may not actually be a big deal in practice, and may even be more of a help than a hindrance in large projects. It would be nice to get some commentary from more experienced go users.
The One Square Meter House
The academic study of economics is no different. There is not a science of economics.
There are other business models that work (like MetaFilter -- very different model but still a business). HN is part of the Y Combinator business model in that you must have (last I checked) a Hacker News handle to fill out the application for Y Combinator. Every founder has to have their own handle. So it is a funnel and things you say here are kind of de facto part of the application. Thus, being a jackass here on a routine basis can hurt your chances of getting in. For other people, who have no plans to apply to Y Combinator, there is still, yes, a lot of money of the table for many people. Also, because it is part of their business model, they now have a full time paid moderator, something boards done out of the goodness' of someone's heart cannot afford. The difference in quality shows.
Can you elaborate on what is actually happening?
When your account is blocked for some reason (spamming report, automatic detection of nude pictures, invalid report of some abuse, etc), you have no recourse with either Microsoft or Google. A few people (connected journalists) have been able to make contact within Google and regain access within 7-14 days, though. For everyone else, consider all your stuff gone and your account no longer available.
It may not be activated on the battlefield but it's certainly activated as you sign up for the battlefield.

Back then it was to be called brave, death wasn't as scary as it is now. Now, we all want to lead long lives and so the things that scare us now are different from what scared them earlier.
At my job we can donate to others who have run out of time. Not everyone is nice, but enough are to help out each other when there are critical illnesses.
"As little as 49%?" Yes, you're right, I didn't account for dilution, but I also didn't account for the 20 other convertible notes they've taken.
It's possible that your instinctive sense of horror is exactly Bentham's point and the joke: something is not only bad because it's what the Bible says is bad. If we discover that we had all missread that part of the Bible, would forcible sodomy be OK now? It's absurd!
No Need to Choose: History from Above, History from Below
> and yet it goes down once it is posted on HN.

The "Retry for a live version" button is powered by Cloudflare, which also uses Go for many of its core services. So I'd be willing to bet it's the programming environment and/or the particular program, not the language.
Cached version - http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:gmYvtpF...
I'm exactly in the same boat than you. Worst, I do believe that, even if the API is nice, asyncio belongs to the old past way of doing concurrency, I want actor models and/or STM with feature like the ones found in clojure.

Python core devs really miss the point that if you want people to move from one solution to another with a cost (here: breaking backward compatibility) you have to provide an high value reason to move (see the network effect). Here we only got minor (but cool) improvements, moving to python3 is just not worth it. It's like having to do a plain old boring homework imposed by a teacher with the only reason "because I told you to" (and the situation is even worst if you have to do compatible code for libs).

I'm not at all against breaking backward compatibility, you have to have a good reason and to make it worth it and, of all the (minor) improvements I see, none of them was a justification for this. Tell me things like "oh, we break backward compatibility because we want to drop the GIL and implement the erlang actors model natively in python" and I'm with you the day it's released (even if you don't provide automatic CPU balancing at the beginning).
Go, Rust, Haskell, come from diffent ways of thinking about how to solve problems using programming languages..

Go aims to be more simple and concise, in the end you write less code to do the same thing, as you would in C++, Haskell or Rust.. because those 3 languages decided to "cover everything" and are worried about other things, creating more burden to the programmer, but with something else to gain

Go is more of a productivity language.. it remind us the we have better things to do in life, and not spend all the time coding, but enjoying that extra time with your family for instance..

Therefore Go is good.. its only MAYBE "not good" for the same thing that Rust, or Haskell are..

Besides.. this is the wrong way to market some technology or idea.. the best way would be "Why Rust or Haskell are Good"
instead of envy the success of others..

Its all about tradeoffs.. and i think this article misses the point.. and care only some things that will obviouslly make some languages more fit.. like, if you care more about memory control,type systems and safety.. its obvious that Rust and Haskell will look good and "correct"

But this is not all about it.. theres team working, productivity.. its a balance.. and always depends of the problem domains.. some language are more fit than others.. theres no need for bashing
Would someone who's familiar with chart.js do a quick comparison between other popular charting libraries? I've mostly used rickshaw and d3.
This isn't a bill about just Bitcoin, why is it singled-out in the title? Oh, because all the Bitcoin maniacs will keep echoing like there's no tomorrow!
Because they are physically in good shape, healthy, and easily manipulatable.

Glory of battle. Glory of startups. Glory of anything. Give me a 20 year old male and some cultural pressure, and I will make you a blind follower of anything.
It's not a U, it's not even a vowel, and if it's anything double, it's a double V. Half of it certainly does not look like a U.
No. In my 6 years of practice at a large international law firm, I've never encountered any "peer" firm or otherwise that uses WordPerfect.
Using an iBeacon to Unlock Apps
Yes. It's a conventional view now, but Bentham was so far ahead of his time on this that it makes him seem more interesting. That's what's significant about this article. It's remarkable in intellectual history for views so contrarian (and prescient) to be discovered in a major thinker 200 years later.

Unfortunately, the thread quickly went hopelessly off kilter. It's being heavily flagged and we're certainly not going to override that.
> I consider .NET to be an ecosystem including all tools, projects, platforms, organizations, and groups of developers.

Well, that explains the otherwise baffling statement "I left .Net because ... git is so much better than TFS"

That is an opinion that I also hold, but isn't relevant.

If the conclusion is that "but .Net comes with a mindset of using all and only the MS tools" then yeah, avoid narrow-minded people. Again, is that relevant?
There's little value in putting this information in the FAQ after I signup. You'll never even see my email if I can't have this level of confidence in your service. The site is pretty and flat and has decent copy, but this isn't a to do list app.
Ask HN: How do you start a website that requires user contribution?
How do you attract users to use your website, if the website requires users to create the content? When there is no content, there will be no users. When there are no users, there will be no content. What are the best practices to escape this loop and build up a user base that is most likely to visit repeatedly?

Do you know/Do you remember what StackExchange looked like in its early days? How about Quora, Wikipedia or any other website with similar experience?
Behind Optimus Prime (And Eeyore), One Man's Signature Voice
I'm aware that some people think they're relevant (and that fact is relevant), I'm just pointing out that the teachings themselves are not.
Every single thing listed in the article can be added to Go at any point, since it currently has a very minimal feature set. Once something like generics are added, they have to support it until the end of time or risk having an unstable API like Rust did for a while there.
I'm usually reluctant to share any numbers, but it's a few dollars per month per article (on average). It adds up over the years and has been very consistent, which is why I like the segment a lot. Unique views is not a useful number in my opinion, it's all about total revenue. I suppose it's the hyper-local aspect that drives up the ad bid prices on Adsense. The content is also a great example of "Evergreen Content", unlike, say, a review of a World Cup game from yesterday.

I really see it as publishing my thoughts and notes, and things I would have liked to have known in advance. Typical entrepreneurial thinking, "Solve a problem that I actually had", but at a micro scale. Sometimes I end up reading one of my own articles in a few years time because I've forgotten the precise details of the process when I have to go back again.

(This has been one of my highest-upvoted posts on HN so far)
Disagree with PUT. As stated above, this request is not idempotent (multiple requests result in multiple honks, not one), so it should be a POST (the only method intended for non-idempotent requests).
The original article seemed to me to be destined to provoke a religious (or possibly political) flamewar. That's probably why it's been flagged way down to the second page. I was honestly surprised that you were the one who posted it; I'd have thought you'd have foreseen it being problematic.

I did my best to keep this comment targeted at the "rape isn't funny" angle rather than the "here's how I do or don't agree with the Bible" angle -- that is, directed at the offensive concept rather than the religious source. If you have a suggestion as to how I could have better stated it, please let me know.
> By "sex-negative," do you mean "negative about gender" or "negative about sexuality" or even "negative about the act of intercourse?"

The latter two.

> "..intercourse, sexuality and gender don't affect our professional interactions...these things are not relevant to the part of our lives that intersect, not that we're negative about them."

You seem to be of the opinion that it is completely possible to separate the personal from the professional. Yet a lot of us absorbed in the tech/startup world spend the larger part of our awake time (~10 hours or more) interacting with people at work. In such an environment, I don't think it is realistic to totally separate the professional from the personal. Otherwise, you turn the meaning of "personal" on its head for the majority of your working week, if you have to behave "non-personally" for > 60% of the time.'

And actually I think this is part of what I mean to say. The attitude of, "Sex is not relevant in the workplace. Let's be professional about this." Why not, exactly? Why are professionalism and sexuality mutually exclusive? Maybe if we at least explore the possible reasons why people's sexual motivations may cause them to interact in specific ways at work, we can make progress towards making those interactions somewhat positive and frictionless.
> Why do we develop this way? Why aren't we considering the behavior of the application more than how it's stored? All of my projects now utilize a JSON-based key/value store.

What a self-centered statement. "MY projects don't need ACID or relational enforcement. Therefore, SQL is useless."
I think a good thing to hope for in starting the proposed community would be that enough researchers and graduate students pay attention that being a jackass could affect your academic career in similar ways (less likely to get a postdoc or grant, etc., if someone on the committee knows your reputation).
In the beginning, before there were non-students, Facebook was about solving that issue, wasn't it? I'd also heartly appreciate such a platform. Most stuff I find really interesting won't be interesting at all for HN, thus I end up sharing less.

It's not a social network scientists need, but a kind of organized knowedge-rating, sharing and curation site.
The std. lib's html/template still uses reflection.
> Go aims to be more simple and concise, in the end you write less code to do the same thing, as you would in C++, Haskell or Rust..

I sincerely doubt that Go is more concise than Haskell. I won't say whether concise is good or bad, but I very much doubt that Go is the most concise.
Not really. When your build files are designed to be serialized IDE state no matter what the format you have limited your build system to what your IDE creators decided to express. This is not always what you need and that mismatch will only get more and more out of sync the longer your project lasts.
> or risk having an unstable API like Rust did for a while there.

Every language, including all the languages described in this article, goes through a period of instability while it figures out what works and what doesn't.
I hear you loud and clear, will get site updated!

Thank you for your clear and concise feedback, very much appreciated!
Not a great metric. My blog once got unexpectedly slash dotted (ended up on Reddit and HN front pages for a day; silly enough the post was the one I put the least work into by far and the idea was not even mine). I was at the time running WordPress with WP Supercache using only right PHP workers. The site never had a hiccup. Ergo PHP is the best language out there? :)

In reality, do use something like WP Supercache. It will save your hide.
So, this isn't Jinja2? I thought Django was using Jinja2, but I guess I was wrong.
I haven't read any of that, but isn't the pope commenting on sexuality a bit like a bedouin commenting on marine biology?
It's my understanding that this bill was largely driven by Bitcoin supporters even though it is written in a general sense.
It would be great if you could share some other curated resources (HN is curated) that are more efficient and publicly available. What do you like?
Not really. It says that having garbage collection is a design choice. What it presents as defective are the implementation of operator overloading and exceptions, and says that having garbage collection would have been a good way to avoid these being defective.
Dang it! I wasn't intending this to hit HN so soon. I was planning beefing up my VPS before I shared this one on HN. Sorry. I'll try to keep it up.

If you just let it hang, the Cloudflare cached page should kick in.
Excerpt:

Bentham was the first major English philosopher of sexual liberty, and it's about time we celebrated that. "If there be one idea more ridiculous than another," he once wrote about the sexual prohibitions of his day, it was that "of a legislator who, when a man and a woman are agreed about a business of this sort, thrusts himself in between them, examining situations, regulating times, and prescribing modes and postures". Today we are all the heirs of this once revolutionary way of thinking.
Well, it wouldn't be too hard to imagine a scenario where someone needs to SSH into the company WWW server on port 22, which is of course a different machine than the FTP server that they also sometimes need to SSH into on port 22, etc... Naming groups of machines under a subdomain that describes the function they perform is an easy way to reconcile the fact that we sometimes have multiple instances of the same service running on different machines in our network (and need to access them individually).

It makes life easier if I know I can access my web servers at www.whatever.com and my FTP servers at ftp.whatever.com, rather than trying to remember that morpheus.whatever.com runs web services because it has port 80 open, or needing to worry about the FTP server also running an HTTP server on port 80 for its stats dashboard, etc.
IMO your data is actually worth much less than $10 because most of what advertisers are paying for is eyeballs / your attention, not your data. Data is a small value add. Facebook ads are not worth more (I think it's actually less) than traditional ads where no data is sold.
> The original article seemed to me to be destined to provoke a religious flamewar.

This strikes me as utterly odd. The article is about a major new finding in intellectual history. If Bentham used Biblical language, it is only because everyone did.

That said, your theory of the article fits the data of the thread better than mine does.

That in turn said, a "rape isn't funny" flamewar is every bit as off-topic if not more so.