skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It depends on what you are making I think. If you are making a website, a site like Youtube lets say, where the goal is to have as many people use it as possible it would make sense for you to have it work with a variety of limitations that users might have. If you are creating a very specific SAAS then you are probably able to convince many users to run javascript if they get something good back for it. In the end, if you are willing to pay $50/month for something, you might also be willing to enable JS, while if you are visiting a random website that doesn't work without JS you might think 'never mind, I don't need this'.
About setting clear and accurate deadlines- Try setting smaller goals by allocating time in mins our hours. Have a shared spreadsheet where you can list down your names and the things you'll are working on. update it with reasons as to why it didn't take as much time or less. Do this once every day. This will help you get smaller things done quickly and be accountable to one another.

about your product--> talk to your customers and understand their reasons for using your product. Focus on what are the key features that are important and how you can add additional value by leveraging your core strengths
Are we really supposed to cater to the
sub 2% that chooses not to use javascript?

To put this into proper perspective, IE 6 still has 4.2% of the browser market, and I doubt the vast majority of us still support that (https://www.modern.ie/en-us/ie6countdown)

So, to put it simply, no.
New dark mode is avaliable in Mac OS X Yosemite DP3
I don't disable JS in the browser preferences. I use FF with No Script to enable it selectively for only the sites and the functionality I need.

Example 1: HN needs JS only for voting so I don't enable it here unless I want to vote a post or a comment. However HN's JS is trivial and can be easily inspected so I might want to enable it permanently as well.

Example 2: YouTube requires JS from 6 domains but I can keep four of them disabled and still be able to view videos. I really don't need googlesyndication.com, plus.googleapis.com and googletagservices.com (among the other things I'm missing comments but who cares). Some of them are probably just spyware. I also don't need google.com but Google Maps don't work without it so I probably already enabled it before going to YouTube.

Example 3: TechCrunch is a nightmare of nested JS requires. However I can read it without enabling any JS and it's also much faster to load.

If your site is (example) an Angular single page application I'll probably enable enough JS to make it move and check it out. If there are so many JS dependencies that I can't find the right combination and I see JS coming from well known spyware domains I might decide to skip that site completely. There are sites like that. If I'm really interested I fire up Chrome and give them a try in there. Actually, I might install the new Opera only for using it as a honeypot for that kind of sites.
" but that doesn't equate to being "anti-design"

I agree fully. I feel that the shift has come about because there has been an unconscious recognition that restricting your tools to one particular problem domain is a valid constraint to make on a design. Enterprise scale, "architecture astronauts" and the like were trying to build tools with which you could build anything, for anyone. And it's clear from the results that this is just a vector for complexity to creep in. Focused tools, from libs to frameworks unashamedly limit themselves to one particular problem domain, or at least used to.

I've certainly noticed a shift in that these hard learnt lessons are being ignored in order to add features to frameworks etc; which increase their applicable scope, with the increase in complexity that arises. The primary driver of which appears to be the younger generations desire to use the same tools for different purposes rather than learn a new set of applicable tools for a different problem domain. A good example is the shift from v1 Zend Framework to Zend Framework 2 which just appears to be so heavily "Java/Enterprise" influenced I simply refuse to use it; its far far too complex a framework for what is essentially a framework for building web sites. Building web sites is simple. These modern frameworks make it massively more complex than it needs to be.
There are SPV clients with HD wallets so that's not a problem inherent to all of them.
cost me 165 mouse clicks. worth it.
This has got to be the stupidest claim in here. What the fuck. But maybe I'm wrong. So ok, so you've made a claim. Do tell how I can reproduce climate change ? I do not have a spare planet to fuck around with.

Just so we're clear what will not be accepted as an answer : here is an experiment as to how the greenhouse effect behaves in a gas volume. You see a greenhouse effect starting at zero concentration. 90% of the effect is visiable at 300ppm. 95% of the effect is visible at 350ppm. (co2 forcing is exponentially decreasing, and levels off at around 350ppm to eventually converge (at 100%, or 1000000ppm) to about 6% higher than it is at 350ppm) [1]

And yet athmosphere temperature is not behaving like this at all. Warming is accelerating, not slowing down (350ppm was reached in 1990, currently at 415-420). Yet warming is accelerating. Given that this is pretty much the only experiment you can do without a spare planet, and it obviously is very different from observed behavior, this will not be accepted.

So do tell : how to reproduce climate change ?

Alternatively: what is the conclusion if "steps leading to said truth" cannot, in fact, be reproduced ?

[1] IPCC AR3, Chapter 6: Radiative Forcing of Climate Change. (section 6.3.4) Total Well-Mixed Greenhouse Gas Forcing Estimate
Scroll down.

It gets so weird you'll soon forget that first thumbnail.
Tesla shareholder suit claims Elon Musk lied about car safety
JavaScript allows you to use WebGL, which is essential for high-performance 3D interactive content in the browser.

Granted, not many websites need WebGL, but the ones that do need JavaScript.
IMO, it depends on the nature of application that you are building. If it's going to be used by an audience that includes people stuck with ancient browsers, then ignoring that 2% could be a loss. But in most general cases, it's obviously better to cater to those ~17% people with reading disabilities (I read this figure somewhere).
Browsing the web must be a pretty painful experience for you
Wow. I see from comments, such an enormous many people disabling javascript!
I agree, there's no reason to downvote you for that. However, php only comes with "everything" if you assume it is already installed with a web server. As far as I know, you can't use the php (dev) webserver to serve php scripts without additional configuration.

Contrast[1] with python:

mkdir cgi-bin
cat <<'eof' > cgi-bin/hello.py
#!/usr/bin/env python3
print("Content-type: text/plain")
print()
print("Hello, world")
eof

#try to run:
./cgi-bin/hello.py
bash: ./cgi-bin/hello.py: Permission denied
#fix error:
chmod u+x ./cgi-bin/hello.py
#test in console:
./cgi-bin/hello.py
Content-type: text/plain

Hello, world
#Ok, does it work on the web?
python3.4 -m http.server --cgi 8000 --bind 127.0.0.1

#open localhost:8000/cgi-bin/hello.py

So, how can I claim that this convoluted mess is "simpler" than php? Because everything is right there, and everything can be explained conciesly (contrast with apache configs, getting the www-user right etc). You could build on what the students know of print() and string interpolation/concatenation to output html/use templates etc.

Is this how I would start teaching web programming in python? Probably not -- but it might be useful as one approach, assuming we've started with doing some stdin/stdout stuff, and showing how we can do the same on the web. Crucially showing how if you know how to read a csv file with values, do some aggreation and format it as a text table, you can output it as html, as text over the web, or even as json paired with javascript. That again generalises to database access ... etc etc. It's python (and "invisible" c) all the way down.

[1] Comparing using a fully wrapped up install of webserver+php (either mod-php or fcgi or what not) would a) not be fair, because if you really learn python, you have all the tools to examine the whole stack (well down to the OS level anyway), and b) fair comparision wouldn't be to
python but rather with something like web2py, that also bundles a lot of infrastructure.

YMMV and all that, my only point was that there isn't really anything "simple" about web development -- it's distributed development with not very clearly defined security, state or even messaging semantics -- it's
a mess. A useful mess, but a mess.

[edit: formatting, spelling. Aslo I agree flask is probably a much nice place to start, if one isn't building on an introduction involving text/console i/o]
http://freerice.com/content-group/itv-watch-germany-vs-brazi...
I think this type of tedious work won't disappear until technologies like Web Components become mainstream (which may take a few years). Even with something like Bootstrap or Foundation you will spend quite some time sticking together huge amounts of markup.
How to create grid-based layout tutorial
Is this viral like the gpl? Does the use of the inbox backend, hosted by me, require release of the full source to the entire app that uses the inbox backend? My brief reading of the agpl seems to say yes. Which makes this an interesting toy but nothing more...
If the purpose is to present static information, such as what you get with a newspaper Javascript shouldn't be necessary. It is just plain lazy design.

It should only be necessary with interactive pages, or web apps.

The 2% who choose not to use Javascript are mostly the tech savvy ones who know the kind of malware vector Javascript is. Some of them may be your employers, so be careful when you use bonkers to describe their preferences.
If your website is security or cryptography related, then you'll need to cater to your demographic. These are the overly cautious types who use NoScript and disable javascript everywhere.

Otherwise, I wouldn't worry about it.
This is more "how" than "why"...
???

Japan's unemployment rate is only 3.9%. EU's rate is 10.9% and US' is 6.1%.

And Japan's social welfare means mostly pension and national health insurance. There's unemployment insurance, but you have to pay into it. Very few working-age, able-bodied people receive "free" welfare benefits.
Yes you are supposed to cater to the 2%. Wolfram Alpha says 2% of the US population is 6.39 million people. That's how many potential people from just one country you are treating badly. And as for screen reading users, that's just another 2% isn't it (or another "tiny" number). Why do you care about them? Well, it is the law, but, it's also just sensible.

Also, people browse with poor Internet connections, and even if they have JS enabled, the JS might time-out before it downloads, and so they'll just have to see your content without it.

I browse without JS on most sites (and I need a good reason to enable it) for at least the following reasons:

1. It's safer for me.

2. I've lived and will live in places with really shit Internet connections.

3. It also conveniently gets rid of a bunch of crap (flashing stuff, ads, flashing ads, etc.) without me having to do anything specifically.

4. It blocks some tracking across the Internet (I also use RequestPolicy to really drive that message home).

Other reasons as well. Edit: including it's too often used for unnecessary fan-inducing overly-CPU using shit.

So you don't want me as a potential visitor? A tech-savey person? I'm not your target audience? That's OK, there's loads of other sites on the web, and I'm sure that yours is crap anyway. After all, if it wasn't crap, you'd have made it work without JS.

Edit:
And if you are stupid enough to not be able to make your site work without JS, then at least put a noscript message explaining why your site is special enough to require JS, and why I shouldn't just close the tab and go to the next site. If you explain that it is necessary to make the froggles boggle, I'll think about it more than if you just say "you need to enable JavaScript or upgrade your browser". No, fuck you, I don't need to enable JS, you need to make your site work without it. Displaying text and images in no way requires JS, unless you're a real thicko who shouldn't be allowed to have any commit privileges.
We had an intro to programming course at our college (NIT, Srinagar) which was based on C. Seemed perfectly alright, after some thought, because most of my batch mates had never programmed before (and there was a significant population who had no access to computers prior to college)

Since I'd been programming since I was 11, it seemed a little arduous to sit thought classes explaining what a variable was, etc..but in the end, I understood they had to do what was best for the whole lot, and obviously couldn't teach something more advanced to an underprepared set of people.
The best reason I've heard, is around redundancy/robustness.

HTML recovers from invalid syntax and missing resources, it'll still function as a page displaying content with functioning links to other pages and such.

Same can't be said of JS, one missing resource or syntax issue and it can break, which depending on how much you rely on it can leave the page unusable and a user stuck.
Agree that local people should be well prepared for a full Internet access, otherwise culture and values are lost.
It really depends on your requirements. What is it that you need? Like any software SP is a tool, just like home improvement you don't go out buy a tool and than try to use it for what ever task is in front of you (you might end up with a screw driver while you really needed a hammer). So I could make a list of Document Management, Content Management, Intranet, etc software but the correct answer depends on your needs since there are lots of choose and all (some) have there own strong and weak points.

SP is a mesh up of several software suits slowly coming to getter, it is getting better every release. SP could also be the right choice depending in your needs. Mainly work group portals but those tend to fail (as in not being used) since most of the time there is no proper business case nor business processes in place to support the grand idea
There is an interesting article on lesswrong about how to allocate your resources between things that make you feel good and things that actually do good.

http://lesswrong.com/lw/6z/purchase_fuzzies_and_utilons_sepa...

The money that I gave to potato salad guy came from a very different budget than the money that I gave to, e.g., PATH

http://www.path.org

If you're trading off dollars between potato salad and charity, you're arguably doing it wrong. But most likely you are not diverting chariable dollars to potato salad, which is why the premise of this article is flawed.

Or as Max Temkin put it: "Crowdfunding/capitalism isn't zero sum. We can feed the hungry and back the potato salad project."

https://twitter.com/MaxTemkin/status/486319873207717888
It kills a lot of autoplay videos, popups -- the "in page" variety -- and other dark patterns I see on a lot of sites. The only regret I have is that ads get disabled too so if it's a place I really enjoy a lot and they have a means to donate, I give them something.

Besides this, it also gets rid of a lot of ad tracking without having to install any plugins specifically to block it. I'm a big fan of using existing features, both in software and hardware, to their fullest before extending them.

But the biggest reason is my computer is a bit slow too and I don't want to spend hundreds more just to consume text; something that hasn't changed since the dawn of the web and something I've been doing for years. It's wasteful to pollute my closet and a landfill in the future with e-waste because single-page apps and fancy transitions don't work properly.
>I don't know anyone who doesn't read the textbooks
>Not in STEM not anywhere else

I would almost never "read" (though I would occasionally reference, page by page) the textbooks in core STEM classes when I was in college. The most important thing was always the notes and making sure you could work through exercises. And this only became more true at advanced levels, when oftentimes there isn't any textbook available. At least in the physicsy/mathy realms I belonged to, the information density of your typical lecture was such that a semester should be easily compressible to a dozen pages of typed notes. But that isn't to say, I don't think, that it wasn't difficult!

>Man, I wish I went to uni in the US. Every time I hear anything about the US college experience it just sounds like a piece of cake.

There is some truth behind what you are hearing, but it is quite far from the whole truth. In contrast to many European university systems (at least the ones I am familiar with) there is a lot of time purposefully built in to take courses in different areas and build up "perspective". So if you want to take it easy you can take some bullshit classes and just coast. Or you can take interesting classes which might be challenging. The variation in student experience can be quite large. If you go to a top school, however, you can expect to be surrounded by a bunch of competitive types who are quite good at what they do, and making good in this environment would certainly not be a piece of cake.
> I'm unsure how OCaml counts as "functional". It doesn't even have typeclasses, let alone higher-kinded types.

Erm, what? Functional languages are those which implement as much as possible using functions, rather than adding language primitives (eg. if/then/else, looping, mutable state, etc.). If anything, typeclasses make a language less functional, since they're a language primitive which could be implemented with functions instead (by passing records explicitly).

Lambda Calculus doesn't have typeclasses or higher-kinded types, does that mean it doesn't count as "functional"? Hell, even Joy is a purely-functional language and it can't even call functions!

Type systems are a completely orthogonal concept to functional style; they're a way of embedding a formal logic into a programming language. It just-so-happens that many logics make heavy use of implication (a -> b), and that corresponds to functions. It's possible to give a rich type system to, for example, Prolog or assembly, but the logical operators would be quite unfamiliar.
Startting to loose faith in humanity when a campaign for a potato salad raises 34k https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/324283889/potato-salad and a campaign to break down gender stereotypes in children's books raises 2k https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/amielockwood/adventures...
There are many different reasons why Javascript should only be enhancement.

First of all, it always additional stuff to load, which takes time. Think, you are on your mobile with shitty cell reception. It happened for me just a few weeks ago in Nepal and Bhutan. If your site rely on Javascript, you cant even do a simple reload.

Javascript also adds an additional layer. It takes time to execute. You could argue, that device are fast enough, but for me that is only the argument for the lazy people who don't want think. Like, what about I can't afford a faster device or I don't want. Like, my mom still has a PPC Mac Mini and she don't want a newer computer, because she is very fine with it. My dads PC is even older running an version of Windows XP using some version of Opera.

In general your thinking should be not about how many people I am excluding, but instead how many people I am including.

Like e.g. I am using DataTables myself to make it nice and pretty. I could include the data via JSON instead of including an HTML table beforehand. But why? If I include the HTML table, then I can assure the 100% of the HTML browser, whatever type, can display it.

It is always about inclusion, inclusion of every people who has some sort of disabilities or dislikes. This should be very first priority. Then the second priority should be about making it nice, pretty and shiny.
The IQ Halo Effect
From my experience with NoScript, quite the opposite: no annoying video popups (yes, yes, technically it's a full-page DIV nowadays), no animated nonsense.

And in cases where JS is required for the page to work, I enable it with two clicks.
I'd suggest that you've not really answered the question.

yes webGL is a nice feature, but is it required?

For example, a menu is required for navigation, however it doesn't need animations to work. Sadly there has been a trend for things that actively slowdown or hamper speedy navigation (the breaking of the back button, animated transitions etc.)

Thats not to say JS is inherently bad. but when a website sucks 90% cpu to essentially display text, there is something drastically wrong.
The price is so high, because they don't import enough food. They have ridiculous tariffs.
Maybe some people care about their privacy? A lot of ignorant webmasters load Facebook, Google analytics, twitter buttons and other privacy violating JavaScript. The only way to guarantee some level protection is by disabling JavaScript, plugins and cookies.
Simon Peyton Jones and Bryan O'Sullivan join Haskell eXchange speaker line-up
Did you report the issues?
well, I'm not sure if it would fit here but I use http://humongous.io to filter down and visualize my data (average ecommerce mongodb). Hope it helps.
Using Retrofit and RxJava to interact with web services (Sample Android app)
The problem is usually interacting with other agencies; those don't have well-defined data formats for data interchange, instead they often work with forms in Word documents, and require the document to be edited with a very specific version of MS Word. Of course that makes interaction harder.

The technical lead of the LiMux project told a story once about a German federal agency that required documents to be submitted in a very specific, unusual font that basically everybody had to buy first.
GE Device Measures the Calories on Your Plate
Nice work. Sure, there are other options available, but I like the simplicity and ease of use of yours (judging by the video). Don't let the fact that there are other options available discourage you.

Why are you giving this away for free vs a SaaS model?
Hi, I'm afraid it's (b). I have no web development experience.. It all started last year when I had an app idea, I started developing it with some computer science students but I realised that if I'm the creator of the idea and I cannot build it, I can only be like the commercial guy in charge of making money out of the programs those students make! And that wasn't the purpose! So now I've just got into web development from cero (fortran 90) to be able to create a kind of prototype of the product, so it's exactly as I imagine it.

I've started with the ruby course on codecademy, it seems it's just like a fun introduction to the ruby syntax. When I finish the codecademy course I'm thinking about going into "onemonth.com" for learning rails, and codeschool after that..

Thank you! I'll get started with those languages as well :) I'm focusing on web apps, but I'll have to use JS to take the idea to phone app (using Titan from appcelerator)

By the way! Thanks for the invite to the course! I'll contact you as soon as I find out how to send a PM haha
HAGMWP – TIANYA
It depends heavily on your place of living. In my country $445 is about or over the monthly salary for vast majority of people.
The giant problem American health care ignores
Yahoo Shuts Down A Bunch Of Products
I have a similar set up with NoScript. On most sites if I don't see anything I enable it for the main domain and a CDN one if I can see it. If it still doesn't load and especially if it requests JS from more than four or five domains I often leave the site at that point.

The number of sites pulling Javascript from 10+ domains (and therefore letting all those track me, inject code into the site etc.) is pretty high and at least with NoScript I know who is doing stuff to me.