skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Emacs's structured editing, in the style of paredit[1], sounds very similar to a text-based version of syntax-directed editing (SDE). Designed for Lisp and S-expressions, it's a system that lets you edit and navigate around nested expressions at a syntactic rather than textual language. As you type, the correct level of nesting is maintained and there are commands for moving and editing code in terms of s-expressions rather than characters.

In practice, it's very easy to start using and very powerful... but requires using Lisp. It'll seem odd if you're not regularly a Lisp user.

Happily, this idea can generalize well enough to distinctly non-Lisp languages. Structured Haskell mode[2] does this for Haskell, which has a less regular and sparser syntax than s-expressions. The documentation has a bunch of handy animations showing the various features, giving you an idea of how it works without having to install it yourself.

This doesn't address the meat of the blog post—composing languages and grammars by taking advantage of structured editing—but it shows that the necessary foundation is possible with a perfectly normal text editor. It would be interesting to see if some of the ideas from Eco could be added to structured editing modes like this without requiring you to use an external, self-contained editor.

[1]: http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/ParEdit

[2]: https://github.com/chrisdone/structured-haskell-mode

Also, here's a great video of Paredit in action:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6h5dFyyUX0
The description is further down the page. The top-middle sector of the tank activates the jump button for example. If both fish are in that sector, then the two characters will do nothing but jump on the spot until either fish moves elsewhere.
Well there are four hard problems in computer science:

1. Naming things
2. Cache coherence
3. Off-by-one errors.
Actually if you want to not handle an error, you have to do either _ = err or just go data, _ = doStuff(), both of which are very visible. You can basically scan your codebase for _'s and find all the unhanded exceptions. If you don't do something with a variable, eg I do myInt := 1 but I don't use myInt go simply refuses to compile.
Writing a blank check. You are the future my friend.
I don't think it's that far-fetched.

If you accept the proposition that it's possible for a microbe to secrete a protein or something into the bloodstream that causes you to prefer a certain type of food (and keep in mind that we already have evidence of biologically-driven food cravings, e.g. in pregnant women), then there's a good argument that evolutionary pressure would eventually cause gut flora that could help deliver its own preferred food source to predominate in human digestive systems.
Seeing this intelligent if pessimistic post downvoted without comment makes me sad for Hacker's News.
Yeah, you have people giving a 5 for anything from a 2 to a 5 experience. Then you have people giving a 4 for anything but the most amazing ride they have ever been on.
Your local library. Your university library may also let alumni use their subscriptions as well, mine does.
Design predefined packages based on your experience and charge fixed amounts per project, and sell additional hours for a known cost too. However, I've seen some well established consultation companies use freelancers platforms to market their services and get paid, so it might be worth trying.
Title is a tad on the sensationalist side. The upshot is that the things you say, think and do affect and even define who you are; this article falls into the 'do' category. Interestingly, the effect of what 'say, think, do' has on who you are as a person has been known for millennia. As humans though, we need constant reminding of this.
Pics.io unveils public beta of Google Drive-connected photo management app
In general I agree with your "don't blame the programmer" point, but I would seriously hesitate to criticize fork(). Yes, in 2014, that behavior seems uncommon and it seems like very poor design to lump such destructive behavior into an otherwise meaningless "-1"...

but remember that fork was not written in 2014. It was written forty-five years ago. I'm not saying it was a great API design decision back then, but I'm willing to bet that it seemed a lot less "wrong" at the time.
I disagree.

I don't see where blockfinder is actually reaching out and pinging servers to see what's up where. blockfinder seems to be downloading well known data sources as to where IPs are. The project the government is being accused of doing is essentially running a distributed nmap along with geo information.
It's a little pricey and I've never used it, but I think DeepDyve is what you're looking for.
Sometimes these threads are just serendipity!

I just recently finished a multithreaded program where I found obtaining the pid [on linux: getpid()] of child processes spawn was only effective by utilizing a common pipe that was non-blocking [fcntl(pipefd[1], F_SETFL, O_NONBLOCK) ].

In other, more humorous words, as a "parent," it's great to know what your "child," is doing (or in this sense), who your child is (the actual pid), instead of just kill SIGTERM them.
You might be aware of this but FreeBSD has all of those features that you mention. The objections that you have against Solaris might still apply though.
The solution seems pretty clear: set a high bar before giving a one-star review, but be ruthless about giving it for behavior that's beyond the pale, like in your story.

Another way to phrase the heuristic might be: be lenient toward incompetence (including the bad turn in OP), but strict toward malice or unethical behavior.

Yet another phrasing: if the guy was CEO of a large company, say mozilla, should his behavior get him fired? If so, give him a one-star review. I find such thought experiments changing relative status to be quite useful.
> Even for moving mass the density was enough to make a black hole.

You are making an assumption here that is debatable.
We understand very little of the physics close to the Big Bang. Those scales in energy, time and space are so extreme that quantum effects are expected to be dominant.
However, all theory about black holes uses general relativity, which does not account for such scales.
It is still an open problem to unite quantum physics and general relativity (i.e. this is basically what string theory hopes to achieve).

> And I'm sorry, but this explains NOTHING.

I think the point is that the assumption made to derive the theory about black holes from general relativity are just not met. The Schwarzschild radius is not defined for non-static spacetime, so it does not apply here.

It is true that it explains nothing, but it also means that you cannot use the Schwarzschild radius in your argumentation.
Deregulated Wall Street Banks --> Products like CDOs --> Real Estate bubble --> average Joe's Retirement Funds investing in said bubble (via Wall Street Banks) --> Bubble burst (as always) --> Retirement Funds lose huge amount of money --> average Joe's golden years are now made of lead (Pb) --> Bad for average Joe, his wife Jane and his kids and grandkids (go on, think how).

Deregulation, throughout history (explore the pre-1930's, pre-GreatDepression US economy), has always left average Joe in a badly disadvantaged state, for the long term.
There are a bunch of them in Australia for tradespeople that are a bit iffy as well, though they can work.

But think of it from the punters' perspective where you can visit one place, describe your task once and then hear back. Rather than Googling or calling around.
There has to be room in any rating system for the lowest rating, for those who deliver the worst possible service - obviously.

The problem I see is that the perception of what warrants a given rating varies pretty widely, and most sites do a terrible job of trying to help their users calibrate their ratings. I monitor Yelp regularly for my girlfriend, who owns a wine bar. Her ratings are generally excellent - over 4 star avg., with most ratings at 5 for the past two years. However, every once in a while we see an anomalous rating - for instance:

- one current 3-star says "I have to be honest, I didn't have anything to drink, I was with friends waiting for the midnight showing at the theatre next door. However, it was packed and happening and EVERYBODY was having a good time."

So this person, who wasn't a patron, but who had nothing but positive impressions, still left what ultimately will be considered a sub-standard rating. This is actually most common for us with 3-stars - they are generally very positive reviews, with nothing negative at all, but with what most Yelpers would consider a sub-standard rating.

Mostly when I look at Yelp ratings, it follows the same pattern - 80% of the ratings seem to correlate closely with the reviews and the typical Yelp ratings standards. 10% seem to be using a different rating standard. And 10% are just weird.
"The right to travel is a part of the 'liberty' of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. If that "liberty" is to be regulated, it must be pursuant to the law-making functions of the Congress. . . . . Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, . . . may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values." - Justice William O. Douglas

Like everything there is a balancing act between the interests of the individual, group, and state. One can argue that commercial air travel is so important to modern travel and movement of people (are you going to take a boat to Hawaii?) that going through needlessly invasive screening without any suspicion or probable cause as a prerequisite might be an undue limit on freedom of movement.
Any data set will have outliers that need to be filtered out, and I'd hope that those interpreting the data would know that. In particular, there's the selection bias that people who are pissed off are much more likely to actually give a review in the first place.

Firing someone for a single one-star review is asinine.
Out of "-1 as failure return value", and "-1 to signal all possible processes", at least one is a bad idea.
> On the other hand, I feel like it'd be harder to convince higher-ups that hiring Autistics in other roles is at all worthwhile if they can't get through a neurotypical (unaccommodating) hiring process.

May not matter what higher-ups think in that regard (at least in the U.S.), as to be compliant with the ADA these companies would have to allow reasonable accomodations if necessary for the disability in question, even for the job interview process.

If the job to be hired into doesn't require any further accomodation because it so precisely matches the skillset of the person involved, so much the better.
Ok, we put (2011) in the title.
what do you mean by "some well established consultation companies use freelancers platforms to market their services and get paid" ? how they use freelancer platforms?
This is one hell of an impediment to the success of these services. Failing at quality control is going to drive away most of their current client base. Forget luxury services... Give me an old school car service any day.
It's actually not that at all.

This image tells it all: https://d262ilb51hltx0.cloudfront.net/max/953/1*QXypiHUwjJZr...

What he was saying is, if there was just 1 gram per cubic cm less mass in the original universe, then it would expand too quickly to form any complex structures and the universe as we know it would not exist. And if it was just a few grams per cubic cm more massive, then it would collapse immediately as in the original question.

The reason our universe did not immediately collapse is not a mystery. It was a tiny amount less massive than would be required for such a collapse.

The reason it was perfectly on the line is no mystery whatsoever: if it were one gram over, it would collapse, and we would not exist, and thus we would not be asking the question. Same if it were one gram less; the universe would be too sparse for life to organize.

This is not a miracle or a mystery, it's simply fact. Billions or trillions of universes might have sprung into existence over billions or trillions or perhaps even infinite aeons of time, each with different masses and parameters of physics.

The one that produced an observer was observed. That's us, and that's it. No miracle, no mystery.

It's like someone winning a lottery. The chances of a specific individual winning are next to nothing, but the chances of anyone winning are 100%. If a news crew then goes and finds the winner, they will surely find an astounded, surprised, and very lucky feeling person. But the news crew will not be surprised, since their observation is entirely expected and even guaranteed.

Humanity is both the winner and the news crew in this situation, by the simple property of our ability to observe our own existence.

This is called the anthropic principle. It also applies with zero modification to the question of why Earth appears to be such a perfect planet to support human life, especially as we begin to discover that there are literally trillions of planets in our universe. We should not be surprised that we observe the one that happened to have the conditions conducive to the evolution of a sentient observer. But you could be forgiven for feeling very lucky that you're one of them.
I wish I would be ble to do that. In the mean time I'm enrolled in his artistworks classes, which are excellent. It's taking quite a bit of re-learning to do things his way, but I'm willing to admit his way is better than mine was.

Yeah, he's my favorite guitar player ever also. Not sure anything tops Fuzz Universe in my mind. But most of his songs are great.
The author of this article seems to be a woman, not a man.

Also, it's a lot easier to just use 'they' instead of he/she most of the time anyways, food for thought.
It is just how their bureaucratic apparatus evolved within its rules and constraints.

At some point a 3 letter agency got a large sum of money and was told "here, gather intelligence". So they did. Hired people, poured money into projects, training, equipment, contractors, promotions. All this wrapped in secrecy and hidden in its own world. Joe Schmo head of department X heading cellphone baseband radio firmware hacks will make sure to lobby for his department and tell everyone how there are all these terrorists everywhere running around discussing dirty bomb plans over cell phone conversation, and only his department can save the world. Does he care about the world? No, but he cares about getting more recognition, more money, a larger budget, more people under him and so on.

Every time something like a terrorist attack, war, defections, leaks happened the tendency is not to evaluate, scale down and reconsider where they are headed. But to ask for more budget, more equipment, more projects. Basically double down.

So it is not that there is a cabal conspiring to hold us down that meets in a dark basement some place. But rather the constraints and rules present, if not actively thought against will lead to this.

Another element in this is that those that might disagree with how things are run, don't get to rise high enough to the top to make a difference. Here we had Binney, Snowden and a few anonymous leakers. But it is not like they could have reason to the top in the administration to make a change from within so to speak. To steer the agency on a Constitutional path. So the top if full of those who believe in doing things the same way they are already being done.
A History of the Now, Found in Politically Charged Objects
This reminds me of the time I was telnet'd (since SSH wasn't a thing at the time) into a remote SunOS/Solaris server. At the time my only Unix experience was with Linux.

"killall -9 httpd" gave an unhelpful error message. "killall httpd" also gave an unhelpful error message. "killall", which would give you usage instructions in Linux, killed all processes on the system. Reading this article makes me figure that killall was likely a frontend to kill(-1, ...).

That day I learned a valuable lesson about reading man pages and understanding that not all unixes are the same.
re: Turris Router

Freescale P2020, 2GB Ram, 16MB NOR Flash (the stuff the CPU can directly execute from, ty), 256 MB NAND Flash (the stuff the CPU has to copy to RAM before executing), 4xGigabit LAN, Wifi N w/ 3x3 MIMO... All driven by OpenWRT. Awesome!

But what's their wifi chip? They don't mention it in their spec page, and I can't identify it in the schematics. I suppose it's a miniPCIe card?
Aspie only ever applied to a subset of autistics though. It does roll off the tongue better, I'll admit.
A World of Creatures That Hide in the Open
Ah, do you remember what it said?
An "n/n" review for me means basically "I can't possibly imagine this service having been any better." That's a pretty hard standard to meet, and hence I almost never give them. An n/2 rating means "adequate, no specific complaints, no specific praise". If you don't calibrate the rating like that, you lack dynamic range on either side.

But I've gathered that I'm the exception...
I think they don't care if it's illegal. They believe their actions are justified. The primary problem with that assumption is that they are the ones that justify it.
Nitpick: std::optional<T> does not exist in C++11, nor in the recently-approved C++14. It is, nevertheless, in the process of getting into the standard, and is already present in GCC 4.9's libstdc++ as std::experimental::optional.
Linux (Android) has made good progress on mobile SOCs. Desktop motherboards continue to shrink as more functions move onto the "CPU". The reduction in PC hardware diversity is bad for desktop hardware innovation, but it cuts the cost of Linux testing and reduces the historical advantage of Windows.

New AMD x86 CPUs include an ARM coprocessor and blur the memory boundary between CPU and GPU. Nvidia's K1 processor is transcoding ARM instructions to the hardware ISA, but is theoretically capable of transcoding x86.

What defines a "desktop"? Large monitor & keyboard? Or large local storage? ChromeOS has the first two and simplifies centralized management, but is dependent on public cloud. As mobile & PC hardware architectures converge, we need to decide if desktops are systems-of-record or local caches.
Nice work. Question: is there way to check the remaining capacity/storage available for your data? (Or check if you've run out of room)?

I imagine the amount of possible storage would vary widely based on the underlying store mechanism right?
I got it swapped around initially:

"while(1) {fork()}; is "better", as the version you mention will quit as soon as it is not able to fork a new process."

or something similar
$25 per resident per year is significant, $25M a year in a city of 1M. And how is this 'difficult'? It seems like it's a trivial software modification - certainly not $100,000 worth of work.

I agree that it's a bizarre and horrible way to raise revenue, but your calculations actually make it look quite straightforward to implement.
I don't think that's quite the right analogy.

The way I explain it to people regarding my son is that you have the brain, the brain's modules are all there, but all the interconnecting stuff that helps the different parts of the brain work together, self-regulate, etc., are all much weaker than in a typical brain.

Thus you get people who are very impulsive, or are great problem solvers but have trouble with language (which requires the cooperation of many different parts of the brain), or much prefer visual inputs, etc.

Even that is only an approximation of what must be going on, but certainly most of the gear works; it just doesn't work together concurrently as it should.
Lol this is a true war HAHA..
gdnsd looks awesome, I just found it a few days ago. We will probably need a combination of manually assigned geo areas + fallback on automatic assignment based on distance.

Anything to keep in mind when using it?
Back squat in general yeah.
Yeah, docker is god damn slow. The layer file system is a great idea, but its implementation sucks. When you push an image which its base image is already pushed, you will see tons of

Image already pushed, skipping
Image already pushed, skipping
Image already pushed, skipping
...

This is really stupid, it just cannot compare the list of layer image and push or pull the missing parts. And the pushing and pulling operations are slow like hell. It's really painful to use it in production. It slows down your whole deployment process, and it eventually becomes the bottleneck. It's really funny they pick go language which advertises for performance, but they failed to make very basic task works efficiently.
If you put it that way then the reviewer has selfishly endangered the next passenger's lives. Just so he/she doesn't feel guilty.
Is that because they're using the same scale as for grading school performance? So, three stars out of five is seen as 60% which is only barely passing, when in fact it should be for average service.

Weighting reviews based on the variance in the history of that reviewer seems like a great idea to me, because it gives preference to reviews that probably carry more information in them. A review of five stars from someone who always hands out five star reviews, is meaningless and doesn't inform anyone else of anything. Likewise for one star reviews. In fact, intuitively I think maybe even a five star review from someone who usually hands out one star reviews, or vice versa, isn't very informative either? Reason being that these people clearly don't put a lot of thought into their reviews in the first place.
The title and article are a little sensationalized. I grew up in Guatemala, and the entire Yucatan peninsula, along with Guatemala, Belize and Honduras, are covered in "undiscovered" cities. I'd regularly dig up pottery and carved stones in fields and garden beds.

The Calakmul area is especially dense in ruins. Most xateros (rubber tappers) know them all and can guide you to them for a couple bucks. Very few of them are surveyed or even mentioned in literature.
From Console to Chrome (2012)
Underpromising only works in environments where customers actually listen to your promises.
Show HN: TacoShell, my dead-simple iOS HTTP Client
Except that, also for XChat, there will be people providing these binaries for free because the software is open source and they are not violating the license by redistribution for free.
This hit front page on reddit today, much more interesting comments. Mostly noting that there are lots and lots of "undiscovered" cities because it's extremely expensive to unearth and preserve them. The yucatan largely is flat, not unlike Florida. Most hills in the jungle are sites. "Undiscovered" sites.

http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/2e2il8/maya_citie...
I like this sentence...

> The one that produced an observer was observed.

I wonder if it applies in other contexts, specifically, er, quantum decoherence?
this is just a thought.. perhaps you could visit computex and ask around..
Yep absolutely this!

Example:

https://www.youtab.me/music/_vAC1WCDa4n/band-of-horses/no-on...
Great site, awesome project, good stuff. However, I found some kind of a "bug": http://i.imgur.com/elpJSS8.png
At this point, you can't see what "kind" of F the first F is. They clearly are different, however I'm not a musician so I wouldn't know what it should be.
There'd be far fewer bugs if everyone knew exactly how everything else works.

This kind of mistake is godawful and should not be defended. (but it's correctly fixed through stronger typing, not through choosing -48585 as the code for killing everything).
You're correct there's a better term than "he-said, she-said" for accusing someone of a dirty tactic that you've used yourself.

It's called "hypocrisy". Lyft is being a hypocrite.
Using "this century" to describe the last fourteen years isn't incorrect, but sure feels a bit baitey.