skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
giant, hideous, obtrusive diamonds inserted into the text to denote a hyperlink

I hadn't even noticed that they're hyperlinks, I thought something had went wrong with the text formatting or character set!

I've literally never run across a situation where I needed my code to edit itself.

Needed to is too strong a statement. I've never needed to write a macro (and in Clojure, its somewhat frowned upon to write macros when normal functions will do), but sometimes it saves you from a lot of working around limitations (and every language has limitations). It also allows things to be added to the language as libraries that otherwise would have to be built in - the majority of programmers won't need to do this, but if you do, its awesome knowing that its possible. Clojure's core.async is an excellent example (Go-style goroutine's, as a library).

I've never run across a situation where the lack of an everything-is-an-expression-is-a-list feature prevented me from doing what I wanted to do.

Of course not, but you can also do everything you want in assembly. What everything-is-an-expression-is-a-list gives you is 1) uniformity - everything works the same way, so it lowers the cognitive load; 2) simpler code - if you need a statement in an expression, you can do so, and other languages don't prevent you from getting the same result - they just take more code, or the code is more complex, or you use less-than-ideal constructs, or...

So you never need these things, but they make life more pleasant to have them.

I just don't really feel the need to get repetitive strain injuries in my pinky from reaching for the parentheses all the time.

I program in Clojure fulltime and I don't find that it has any more parentheses than a language like C++ or Java does. On top of that, anyone who programs in a Lisp for a while will use some form of paredit, which makes working with parentheses a breeze to the point where I find I type less than I do in other languages because jumping between parentheses, splicing parentheses-enclosed lists, wrapping things in parentheses and such tasks are a single keypress that just isn't possible in other less-parentheses-focused languages.

In short, just like significant whitespace in Python, parentheses are a non-issue in practice (after a short adjustment period).

But at the end of the day, to each his own. If Lisp doesn't do it for you, then that's fair enough - you don't have to use it :-)
THIS.

I know many people who do stuff for ages now, but they aren't someone you would ask for advice, because they're so bad at it.

I know two photographs, one is mediocre and does this stuff for over 6 years now (professionally for money) and one is superb and does it for 2 years (for fun).

Most people who get involved with a specific thing never get to the practice part. They just read a bunch of stuff, do a bit of it and think they know everything...
Racket has probably the best macro system out of all existing lisps available to date. Plus it has concept of extensible languages via #lang. If you care about lisp-style macros and meta-programming that's probably the main reason why I would recommend Racket.

Clojure macros in comparison are very ascetic. You can get stuff done in them but it's not a strong feature of the language in my opinion.
9 new versions in less than 8 years - would be great if you didn't have to pay an upgrade fee each time.
Great idea but sadly I cant try it out :( Using Firefox on Android and the stock Browser I was finally able to login using g+ but I can't edit the code. I can add something but I can't delete anything that was already there. E.g. I can't change return a to return b. Using chrome I can't even login. Authenticate using g+ sometimes directly shows authorization failed and sometimes opens a new tab to codefights.com/_oauth/google?state=xyz&code=xyz that seems to do nothing. If I close it, I get authorization failed as before.
Everything I currently do is done on Android 4.4.4 because I just have a smartphone (N5) available ATM.
How would you define deliberate practice, then? I would agree that deliberate practice may be hard to define across all skills, but it could be defined for a specific skill.

For example in programing, I would consider problem sets and side projects with functions and goals that are aligned but still outside of one's normal scope of work to be deliberate practice. Working on Project Euler problem sets could be considered deliberate practice. They are problems that can be done in most any programming language, are known to be great for learning a new one, but generally fall outside the usual work of handling data, transforming content, etc.

I would consider Project Euler to be akin to practicing scales on a musical instrument: playing scales is not necessarily music in a "having popular appeal" sense, but it does enable new skills and depth of knowledge of the instrument.
Browser bookmarks?

I have a pile of "to do" "to read" "business idea" tags that I never get around to looking at ...
Their goal for some time now[1] is to keep cash flowing through the military-industrial-complex. They obviously don't have any kind of focus on actual intelligence work, or they wouldn't be so bad at basic practices like compartmentalization[2]. Even the ways they could abuse their surveillance capabilities seem to be more of a "bonus". They could be much worse, but that would distract form their business of piping cash to their "contractor" friends.

Interestingly, the recent mess the EFF has been reporting on (Jewel v NSA) where they tried to retcon the public court record has - in the public court record - the DOJ lawyers delivering[3] and incredible Freuidan-slip. While arguing that basically nobody can ever have standing to challenge their Section 215 based activities, they mention this: (caps in original, emphasis mine)

ALL THESE TERRIBLE DISCLOSURES THAT OCCURRED OVER THE PAST YEAR -- IN FACT,
THIS IS THE ONE YEAR ANNIVERSARY -- DISCLOSURES THAT WE ARE CONVINCED THAT
HAVE SERIOUSLY HARMED THE NATIONAL SECURITY OF THIS *COMPANY*, WE HAVE CONTINUED
TO PROTECT THE IDENTITY OF PARTICULAR TELECOMMUNICATION CARRIERS THAT ARE
ALLEGED TO HAVE ASSISTED THE NSA,

"national security of this company". wow.

[1] According to William Binny and others. This recent interview mentions it, as to many others.

http://www.dw.de/binney-the-nsas-main-motives-power-and-mone...

[2] For example, how the hell did Snowden even have access to that many sensitive docs? Even as a sysadmin, he didn't "need to know" a lot of that. They use to take that kind of practice deadly seriously.

[3] https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140813/23203228207/unsea...
I tried, I'm not a coder, submitted 2 of 3 solutions but just got "game over" back. Would be nice to see a solution, even better with explanation.

Definitely felt like I was being secretly profiled for a job. Also considered the possibility that if you're good they drop in some segments of code found automatically to have bugs and have you fix them for free ;0)
4.5M Patient Records Accessed in CHS Hack
IIRC there's actually a known answer to this: practise causes improvement when it's only just a bit too difficult.
If you enjoy something, I would still suggest trying to put 10.000+ hours into it.
Presumably it's sort of a "if you need it badly enough to pay for it, you'd jump at a solution as soon as it showed itself" kind of thing.
>It's like saying: you know, there's all these fat people that are constantly abused and get run-around by pretty girls. They are suffering so bad, it's not hard to understand their level of outrage when one of them raped a woman.

That you think this is a sensible comparison says much more about you than anything to do with the case at hand.
Jasper – Control anything with your voice
You could argue that he missed out on a lot of the amazing things about modern life, you could argue that we are missing out on many of the things of a solitary life in the forest. Either way, I'm glad that he didn't miss out on one of the most important things about modern life: Pokémon.
Alright, the 7-38-55 rule was created in the 1960s and is not given any credit by modern psychologists. Studies since have shown that while tone of voice and body language convey a lot of meaning and in many cases more meaning than the semantic meaning of words, the ratio itself is an artifact of the artificiality of the setting in the original experiments.

The cone of learning was created in the early part of this century by a scholar of education (not a psychologist) and was never tested psychologically.

Are you really going to criticize a whole field by cherry-picking junk scientific claims made 50-100 years ago in some cases by non-psychologists?
> Hubble seemingly ignored the outliers and drew a straight line through his data to create his eponymous "constant".

That's a perfectly reasonable use of statistics in reducing observations. The same method was used extensively in the recent hunt for the Higgs Boson, until the uncertainties in the process fell below 5 sigma, at which point a discovery was announced.

> Making a mark to work from isn't really unscientific it's just loose hypothesising ...

If it's not either derived from empirical observation or a reasonable extrapolation from established theory, it's ipso facto unscientific.

> Surely the fact that this meta-analysis has falsified the former claim [hypothesis] shows that it was scientific ...

No, it only shows that one unscientific claim (based on no theory and no evidence) can appear to unseat another. And it's not a "falsification", because the original claim is unfalsifiable on the ground that it's not based on a testable theory.

Group A says, "It takes 10,000 hours ..." without any basis. Group B says, "Utter nonsense." This happens in astrology all the time. Does that mean astrology is science? The difference between astrology and science is that scientists won't make a prediction without an empirical basis and a theory about why it's so.
It must be close to 5.2
Haha! Brings back memories of typing in reams and reams and reams of Hexadecimal into my Sinclair ZX81, back in the day.

That fisking ZX81 - it was fun, but with the bulky 16K RAM Pack slotted in behind it, made using it a precarious pastime.

One little knock, and 99% of the time the Ram Pack edge connector momentarilly lost a contact on one of the lines and the ZX81 would crash hard - and there went 2 hours of carefully typed in (on a membrane keyboard :D ) hexadecimal code, and much grinding and gnashing of teeth a moment later after a stunned, blank stare ;)
Prepare for 'The Simpsons' Marathon
C++14 auto tutorial
Yeah, it looks like I somehow missed the bit that cataloged his possessions.
More bad advice from this guy.

STOP POLLUTING THE GLOBAL CSS NAMESPACE.
yesware, getsignals, toutapp, marketo… the list goes on - fairly crowded space, but pretty sad they haven’t been able to sell it well.

I would offer an alternative solution - go back to those companies where the employees made the sale and hire a few of those people. Hire a CMO who is in charge of marketing/sales and create a coordinated attack which primes the funnel and holds both sides of the same coin accountable. Frankly getsignals/toutapp/marketo - all have killer blogs which I can’t remember reading a Yesware blog.
1) The DSM is controlled by psychiatry not psychology

2) One of the biggest criticisms the NIMH levied was that the DSM 5 failed to incorporate the scientific findings collected in the last 20 years by psychologists.

3) The practice of clinical psychology != psychology. Most psychologists do research. Clinicians practice. Unfortunately the two disciplines are both quite demanding, and it's generally not possible to do both at the same time.
10K hours is about 3 years of training.
A few weeks ago, the You Are Not So Smart podcast talked about this. I really recommend it to anyone interested in this 10K hour thing

http://youarenotsosmart.com/2014/08/14/yanss-podcast-030-how...
Integer[] and int[] memory difference in Java
This is just an article linking to an article[1], which itself links to a Google translation of an article written in French[2].

[1]http://www.virtuallyghetto.com/2013/09/vmware-nested-easter-...

[2]http://www.hypervisor.fr/?p=4063
Anecdotally, this is exactly what we did at parties when I was in college.
How about the Defcon reading list, https://www.defcon.org/html/links/book-list.html?
Also, you claim that you designed Tag Heuer's website to be mobile first. This is a complete fabrication plus their site is terrible on a mobile.
It should show you the correct answer if you get it wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_time_hypothesis#Argumen...
AFAIK it's kind of uncommon to print pinyin with tones. Especially since, when Pinyin is used as an input method, you would write hua4 for huà.
Are you aware that psychology and psychiatry are not the same thing?

Are you aware that the practice of psychology and psychological research are likewise not the same thing and that "practicing" psychologists and "research" psychologists are two very different professions?

The primary claim levelled by the NIMH was that the DSM 5 failed to incorporate the mountain of psychological research that has been conducted in the last 20 years. This was done for a variety of reasons, none of which had anything to do with a lack of scientific research or evidence on the various conditions elucidated in the DSM (reasons like: "preserving continuity", "insurance concerns" and "ease of use"). The modern DSM is absolutely a problem, but it's not a problem because the science is crap. It's a problem, because the people in charge of the DSM (and yes there were a few psychologists there) didn't prioritize sound science.
Psychology is considerably broader than psychiatry, but really, you need to temper your frothing hate a bit. A year after a cutting edge change, and professionals haven't rearranged their lives around it? Welcome to the real world. Even in the fast-paced world of IT, new things are rarely put into production that fast.

But even in the rest of medicine, it takes a long time. There are heaps of doctors out there that are practising decades-old medicine. I remember seeing Patch Adams speak about 15 years ago - he mentioned that when he did his medical degree, there was a total of one hour spent on preventative medicine, and that the curriculum hadn't changed to date, despite the immense amounts of research and cultural shift around it.

Anyway, you'll find the same thing in plenty of fields - people doing practical science are usually a ways behind people doing theoretical science.
I didn't mind but note that he wrote http://practicaltypography.com.

As for not missing stuff from Lisps, I think opportunities start appearing once you start using it more. But I agree, it doesn't prevent you from getting things done.. I don't see any Lisp in the Go space (native compilation, great networking features), so I find Go more pragmatic at this time.
I'd always understood it as figurative for "a whole lot of time." I think it works as both an encouragement and a warning: if you think you can become a master in a few weeks, think again. But if you've been practicing for a year and you feel like you're never going to get there, keep at it! You're making real progress even if it doesn't seem like it.
Relevant: http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/39200/what-ar...
"Wave was supposed to be a collaborative replacement for email"

Is this the real purpose of Wave or is this the purpose that came out because it was misunderstood?
I haven't seen this in action. Do you know of a write up describing this?
Possibly linked to luck, but I would add another important element: inate ability.

No amount of practice - 10,000 hours, 20,000 hours, or every waking moment for the rest of my life, is going to give me Michael Phelps' shoulder size or ability to process lactic acid.
This hits home in so many ways. I'm scandinavian, working in SF. For the first 4 months, I hardly got a single word in in our meetings, and when I did I was immediately talked over.

This was really frustrating until I learned it was just the conversation style and I just had to adopt it. I still find it very exhausting, since I essentially have to force myself to be what to me feels unreasonably aggressive.
It will be impossible to deliver a worthwhile UX if the details of the product are obfuscated from the design team. Find a reputable product design professional willing to execute an NDA.

Figure out a compensation scheme that makes the both of you comfortable - but make sure his skin is in the game and he's not just burning hours. It doesn't have to be equity - maybe a big payout once you hit a certain critical mass of users.

I'd be glad to put you in contact with some folks that may be interested. I'm at tom [a] thegrif [dot] net. Good luck :-)
/endof
issue but i guess their servers are lagging atm and their api's and they didnt wanna have JS stopping the timer cause its exploitable.
Why is that the conclusion? As much as I am skeptical of meta-analyses and the scientific soundness of most psychological research, the paper really does suggest that dedication has relatively little to do with performance. Patience and dedication toward something one isn't talented in may well not pay.

Anecdotally, when I was an undergrad, I also figure skated very diligently, far more so than studying, and spent thousands of hours diligently and efficiently practicing with excellent coaches, which was probably significantly more time than I spent studying. I graduated with accolades and admission to an excellent university for my graduate work, while unable to reliably do even a single axel.
If you loathe psychology so much, why do you hang around on a site where (until fairly recently) about a third of articles were about psychology in some form? A/B testing, effective advertising, staff morale, avoiding burnout... all these sorts of things are psychology, and plenty of them have metrics.
A programmer who bothers to put in an Easter egg to me has pride in what they are creating and also gives them more ownership.

So I see it as both an indicator of good work and a positive thing.

Yes, other's believe that Easter eggs are bad I assume you're referring to the famous http://blogs.msdn.com/b/larryosterman/archive/2005/10/21/483...

It has good points but I believe it to be wrong in conclusion, there's lots of real issues to care about before this one.
It's not a blog engine, but NYT's Emphasis library does implement deep linking & highlighting of specific sentences.

https://github.com/NYTimes/Emphasis
On Linux, nice is not an absolute priority system.

In the old days, the Amiga operating system did use static absolute priorities for its multi-tasking. This meant that if a task with a priority of 1 wanted to use as much CPU as it wanted, then all tasks with a priority of 0 or below would be completely starved. This meant that you could boost a certain process (like, say, a CD writer) and get close to real-time behaviour. I was certainly writing coaster-free CDs on a much less powerful Amiga than a Linux box that constantly made coasters from buffer under-runs.

Linux, however, has virtual memory and "nice", which complicates matters. A process with a niceness of 19 will still take a small amount of CPU in the presence of another process with a niceness of -20. In the presence of a fork bomb, you may have a very large number of processes. If they all (by some miracle) have a niceness of 19, you still have very little CPU time left for a process with a normal or negative niceness. Infinity multiplied by a small number is still infinity. Real-time priorities are the only thing that will save you here.

You also have the problem of being able to actually change the processes' nicenesses. That requires CPU time, which you no longer have. You would be better off sending a kill signal. You also have a race condition - you obtain (from the OS) a list of processes that are running that you want to renice or kill. By the time you have iterated through each one renicing or killing them, new processes have appeared.
That would be 9 hours per day, every single day of those three years. How many people have even had just one day where they spent nine hours on the same thing? That's not including breaks, and periods where you mind wanders or you're not focused.
Hey Daniel, very sorry about that, HN rush hit our unprepared servers :) Just added several new servers so please try again.
> Are you really going to criticize a whole field by cherry-picking junk scientific claims made 50-100 years ago in some cases by non-psychologists?

No, I would rather criticize an entire field based on what they're doing right now.

The psychological professional societies abandoned Asperger Syndrome a year ago and removed it from the diagnostic manual, but this has had no effect on psychiatrists and psychologists, who continue to hand out Asperger Syndrome diagnoses -- now, today.

The NIMH has decided to abandon the entire DSM, as a basis for scientific research proposals (it will remain as a diagnostic guide) for the simple reason that it has no scientific content, but this has had no effect on the activities of those who look on it as the field's scientific guiding light -- now, today.

ADHD is now listed as the top misdiagnosed condition among children. It's estimated that a million U.S. children are misdiagnosed with ADHD, with all the attendant consequences (loss of self-esteem, a belief that one is defective or afflicted), because no one knows what ADHD is, and because the diagnoses are handed out based on the opinions of psychologists and the outcome of a questionnaire, on self-reporting -- not any kind of objective laboratory test -- now, today.

Recovered Memory Therapy resulted in hundreds of bogus prosecutions and destroyed families in the 1990s -- not "50-100 years ago" as in your claim -- including such spectacular stories as Beth Rutherford, who claimed to have been raped by her father and forced to abort using a coat-hanger, a story that was swallowed whole by mental health professionals, until someone with a bit more common sense discovered she was a virgin.

Therapists are free to offer recovered memory therapy if their clients want it, there's no professional or legal sanction for those who do so -- now, today. Example:

http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pag...

How can this happen? How is it that so many practices can be offered with no scientific basis? Easily answered -- psychology is not a science.

http://arachnoid.com/building_science
Except that most people that I know are running away from soundcloud because of this.
Also on that page:
"Jus­ti­fi­ca­tion is a mat­ter of per­son­al pref­er­ence. It is not a sig­ni­fi­er of pro­fes­sion­al ty­pog­ra­phy. "
I'm skeptical about a specific number of 10,000 hours claimed to be valid across multitude of skills and domains, but I think the spirit of the rule makes a lot of sense.

I think the value of innate talents compared to training and exercise is highly overstated given that almost all skills (hunting and archery possibly being exceptions) are so new in evolutionary time scale that there could not possibly have been any selection for them and so they must lack any specific support in our hardware.

Somehow, nobody doubts the importance of exercise in physical fitness. Not sure why mental fitness should be different.
My FF also crashes. Firefox 24.7 ESR on Windows 7. Intel Graphics.
But he didn't say "I'd like to link to the source", he said "I'd like to avoid going to Product Hunt whenever possible".
If it's useful and the copy is meant to appeal to its target demographic, what's wrong with that? Clearly a lot of potential buyers seem to be appreciating the humor...