skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
How much of that was due to the fact that a much larger proportion of women are in the labor force now than in '67? My guess would be that almost all of it is.
Yes; back in 2005/2006 I used Motion to implement a system using four cameras on a 1GHz Intel P3; it worked nicely.
Grunt task to find console.log statements
How do you expect them to benefit from timing (assuming that's what is meant by the cryptic comment)?

The major problems faced in doing what they propose are fundamental issues with computer networking and real-world limitations in the latency of sending lots of state across the wires.

And the internet infrastructurally (in the US anyway) isn't significantly better today than it was in years past. Arguably it has gotten worse in a lot of ways when it comes to latency, particularly on the last hop to the user/player over consumer ISPs.
Nvidia  Shield tablet review: a solid slate with a gaming addiction
Criticism of study detecting ripples from big Bang continues to expand
Yeah, I've got The Conet Project 4CD box set.

A guy at Aquarius Records in San Francisco convinced me to "just have a listen" back in '98 or '99, and I bought them _immediately_
The lack of documented software that used them to enable useful (to me) functionality.

I was using some of them, such as kvm for my virtualization and lvm for disk management. But systemd still had a substantial 'oh, wow, Linux lets process management be this easy and powerful?' factor, showing me something new that I hadn't seen in my use of any other system (FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Windows, a touch of Mac).
In Defense of Competition
Optimal angle to let go of a rope swing to maximize distance
>Sure, relatively modern (RFC5424) syslog protocol has structured data too, but in my experience most software had never bothered to use it. So, forcing a switch through introducing another protocol that has structured data baked-in isn't a too terrible idea.

I agree. There is a strong need for common interface(s), and that's a strong part of the motivation behind Fluentd/Kafka/etc. www.fluentd.org/blog/unified-logging-layer
Looking to start a partnership with a programmer
I have a really good idea for an app that I have been playing around with for awhile. I am just in search of a programmer who would like to take on a project for 50/50 ownership in the company. Please email me if you are interested for more information.
nathan.k.mccutcheon@gmail.com

Thanks!
> I don't want to say that one is better than the other but the latter is for most folks far easier to debug and modify than the first.

Generally bad form to make claims on behalf of "most folks" since you are in fact a single person. It's totally a valid argument if you say this on your own behalf.

And yes, bugs happen. But fixing the C code, is in my experience, much easier than tracking them down in `bash -x`. Especially when dealing with race conditions between services/triggers/device initialization.
Here's a gem

>@ID_AA_Carmack Lots of people think 640x480 16 color is real mode. TempleOS is long mode. God said 640x480 was a covenant like circumcision.

I do wonder though, some of the stuff he says not only has high comedic value, but is incredibly stereotypical of both angry disenfranchised nerds and right wing nuts, and has me wondering if it's just an epic troll job...
It's Randian because they say it is: Objectivism is a shared mythology, and like all mythologies it comes to bits rather badly when forced into contact with reality.

In my experience, most self-declared libertarians aren't very good business-people, and a surprising number work in institutionally-coddled enterprises like real estate, medicine and law. As such, it's no surprise that they're ill-equipped to deal with scam artists.

The Free State Project in the US (which aims at what amounts to a democratic coup in New Hampshire: https://freestateproject.org/) is the only scheme of this kind that seems remotely plausible, but that's in part because their ambitions are relatively modest. They want to get enough like-minded people together in one American state that they can have a significant influence on the local government. They are aiming at a state that already has notable libertarian leanings. And they aren't aiming for an anarcho-capitalist utopia, although some of them are anarcho-capitalists. It's a great democratic experiment, and while my money is on failure it has at least a modest chance of success, and either way it should be fascinating to watch.
Well, journald has syslog compatibility layer and can talk syslog, so supporting any existing software is not an issue. It doesn't speak syslog by itself, so it probably can't forward logs to another networked syslog server, but I don't see anything that prevents implementing this, if necessary.

The point is, journald also introduces a new protocol that's oriented at logging structured data. This way it not just provides a feature, but forces developers to think about structuring their log output in a machine-readable manner. I think that's the excuse that I believe is the journald's raison d'être and that I personally accept.

Just my opinion, though.
I actually like the idea of having to pick a random routine in a large codebase and then explaining it on the fly. Terry does a pretty good job at this, he's done similar things in other videos.
They literally are not the same.
The police are not courts.
The judiciary owns interpretation of the constitution and enforcement of the laws.

The police asking you is literally not the same as a court asking you to.
> If people from all walks of life can come together to build a monument that stands for 4000 years, then academics from different disciplines can come together to study them.

Something tells me the laborers who built the pyramids weren't working voluntarily...
> They have an inherent vulnerability in FD passing where you can cause the peer to lock up.

(It's kind of unfair but I could not resist):
Just like dbus today? http://www.ubuntu.com/usn/usn-2352-1/
What If Counterfactuals Never Existed?
I think the maintainer has said that God forbids networking. This seemed irrational to everyone, and then the NSA scandal happened, so I'm inclined to side with Terry on this one.
Can anyone comment on whether it's worth using Motion or ZoneMinder or similar today? I was thinking about using ZoneMinder for a simple 4-camera setup, but it seems like there are kits (with proprietary software) which are cheaper and easier to set up.
Save Wolf Family from Shooters
Setting up and running services like the OS does, but as non-root user, is kind of a big deal for my use case.

Perhaps I'm ignorant and this was always possible.
Have a coupon code: THERESACODEONMYSHIRT

:)
I felt Bioshock had the wrong atmosphere. Too many bullets and dark areas to make it feel like an adventure instead of a shooter.
Exactly (since userspace DBus has to use sockets, kdbus uses memfd). Imagine if you had to fix that in every program that ever wanted to do IPC instead of just one place. Sounds like a security and maintenance nightmare.
Heh - I can see this turning out just like the auto repair insurance rorting industry. I fully expect if Troll Defense Insurance becomes "a thing", the first question a patent lawyer will ask you before indicating a price will be "Insurance job? Or private?"...
Simple scripts? Have you looked at the shit in /etc/init.d in a modern linux distribution?

$ wc -l * | sort -n | tail
274 exim4
286 apache2
290 dnsmasq
298 nfs-common
350 clamav-freshclam
364 udev
386 checkroot.sh
420 clamav-daemon
465 clamav-milter
9893 total

If you look into these, you'll find tons of near-duplicate code between scripts, and frequently every script reinvents the wheel in one way or another.
Another common example is the light bulb behind a typical doorbell button. For example, the one on my parent's house is a 12V bulb, with the voltage turned down so it only produces a glimmer of light, enough to locate the button at night. It also runs continuously. So far it's clocked up 40 years and will probably outlast the structure of the brick wall it is attached to.
It's this kind of crap that scares me away from systemd. I have no problems working with current init structures, so I gain nothing from systemd. It basically just removes options from me, and gives me nothing in return that I actually want.

What we ultimately lose with systemd is modularity. If we cannot upgrade systemd without also upgrading the kernel, then systemd might as well be considered part of the kernel.
That was a great blog post, thank you for sharing that with me. I'm going to start learning how to build my own prototype.
If nothing else, this guy's got staying power.
Tianeptine might help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tianeptine
This init process debate has brought out one of the worst elements of people in the FOSS community: treating some FOSS technology as an extension of their identity.

Let's keep some perspective here. We are literally just talking about an init system. There are many others you can use. systemd is not taking away your freedom in any meaningful sense of the word "freedom". Debates should be about the technical merits of system not baseless accusations that they are making a power grab.
Yes. Shell scripts are it's own unique kind of hell. I'm really speaking on my behalf here. I can read shell good enough to follow and debug issues in it. However digging into internals of systemd and its interactions with dbus and other binaries is opaque for me.

Maybe it's just a different perspective - as a developer systemd likely eases a lot of pains and makes otherwise problematic and error-prone problems easy but as an sysadmin that mostly deals with servers it feels sometimes like forced unnecessary complexity that can introduce difficult to debug issues.
The social function of hedge funds is to provide the expected returns for their given investor (examples: uncorrelated returns to the S&P500, downside protection, returns generated by non-stock/bond investments, et al) - the same as any investment vehicle. Those returns should then be accrued to the investors in a given fund, thereby enabling things like pensions as well as non-retirement gains.

Now, I don't believe this is what they provide, but I'm trying to answer your question.
To be fair, Upstart was pretty awful in the early goings. It seems to be a lot more reliable and predictable now, but that's a fairly recent development for us (when we upgraded to Ubuntu 14.04 LTS).
Well, the problem is, you only changed the problem. Now instead of depending of a specific init system, you're depending of a specific implementation of daemon() function (which I imagine is not really standard, since if it was glibc would implement it correctly). Maybe you could create daemon_correctly() function that was guarantee to implement daemon as it should, but you would incur the risk of having the case of strlcpy() again (glibc didn't added this function since the maintainer said it was messy and bloated, so almost no software used it).

And anyway, correctly daemonizing is only part of what systemd got right. I think the fact that you don't need to track services with random programs anymore (since systemd knows each and every process parent thanks to cgroups) is something much more interesting than just getting daemon() right.
And on my Debian testing system with systemd, the longest service definition is 46 lines! (/lib/systemd/system/getty@.service)
> some archaeologist figured out that such a fit could be obtained in about 30 minutes by banging and rubbing the two rocks together

Remind me how much the rocks weighed?
This reads really interestingly to me. Things like:

Then I’d show the sales reps a long list of initiatives they needed to look for in companies

Once the sales and marketing teams have uncovered these initiatives (as well as the critical capabilities that need to be in place for the initiative to be successful), they can begin to define the unique value proposition.

This data is almost never public, so it couldn't be found by just doing your standard research on a company from the outside. The only way you get this kind of stuff is with an access agent.

What this article basically says, without saying it, is that your sales team needs to be Human Intelligence officers out there recruiting individuals from large organizations to be champions for your product.

Nothing new here[1][2]certainly as this is a fantastically useful way to do business, but you had better know how to do it right or you look like an idiot. It also means you really need to hire top notch sales people.

[1]http://www.amazon.com/Work-Like-Spy-Business-Officer/dp/1591...
[2}http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:W6r6dsv...
Yes, exactly, like so:

http://www.blosc.org/images/shuffle.png
We need a word to describe the feeling of seeing the most popular, agreed-upon explanation somewhere, and knowing it's wrong.
As a sysadmin, I'll take systemd units over SysV init scripts any day. They tend to be shorter, more simple to read, and I don't have to worry about the race conditions or services not restarting correctly due to varying daemonization techniques.
https://github.com/Blosc/
It's off the charts...
Depends on the data.
My machine with systemd (FC20) doesn't boot up at all unless systemd loglevel is set to debug on the command line. Even with it it takes about 5 minutes to boot. Luckily I don't need to reboot often, but every single time there's a small fear that some upgrade has made systemd crap up even worse, and the system won't boot at all.

How do you debug a complete black box, where turning on debugging partly fixes the problem. You really don't. This is literally the worst debugging experience I've had in 20 years of using and maintaining Linux systems -- and that includes trying to do these things with much less knowledge and only limited internet access back in the early days.

I love the ideas behind systemd. It's too bad, even if not surprising, that the implementation is a flaming pile of garbage.
I was thinking about the cost to brute force a long private key.

http://security.stackexchange.com/a/25392/36414
It's not an issue of whether someone should get carried interest - it's an issue of the rate at which that carried interest is taxed.

Funds are essentially providing a service for a given investor but getting taxed as though it was all their own money in the fund - which is not the case in most funds.

Instead, what the funds are doing is essentially providing investment advice - for which the fees should be taxed at normal rates rather than at the carried rate as though it is all their own money.

So I have no issue with the manager getting carried interest or being taxed at lower rates on their own money - but when they take money from outside investors, they should be taxed at normal rates.
Afflictions
50/50 never works.
The Best Questions for a First Date (data Analysis)
SSRI use during pregnancy linked to autism and developmental delays in boys
I like Anchor, same as I did Duet (actually bought a copy of it a few months back). The two major issues I have with both is:

a) the lack of support (this applies more to Duet then to Anchor obviously
b) the lack of multi currency invoicing. Having the need to invoice customers in 4 different currencies means I can't use either Duet or Anchor :(

Other then that, I personally love self-hosted alternatives to expensive SaaS software!
Steam Discovery Update
I hope medical science can one day find a way to help our friends like Terry find their way home. Until then all we can do is let him know that he is loved and respected by his peers, Terry you are one of us.
Explicit infrastructure is that which is completely specified and instantiated and ahead of use. This would include resource allocation and security policy for computational, storage and networking infrastructure. Building infrastructure in the pre-cloud/pre-virt era generally necessitated this approach.

Implicit infrastructure is constructed reactively, over time, in response to evolving stimuli but also based upon dependencies or requirements specified or assumed. For instance, today this occurs in automated scale-out on some cloud systems. The author describes a conceptually similar (from the infrastructure specification and management standpoint) mode of operation here by suggesting the creation of new nodes in response to socket opens (networking events) on individual containers.

Ultimately, in the latter case you are giving up some degree of control and known state in favour of flexibility. This makes sense for some scenarios, but greatly complicates things in others. Both are valid but the viable domain of the latter is more limited.
goto fail;

goto fail;

...or are we past that joke now?
Downvotes are not an explanation.
F# is pretty hipster.
I think the % of the process that is spent on pricing is highly dependent on the situation and players. In this particular case, I've had some where it was very quick and clear cut, and some where it was very clear they were trying to jerk me around on it to see how much they could get out of me and it took waaay too much time to get to the bottom of that.

I likewise will also agree that there are valid reasons for not publishing the price as a way of better qualifying leads before first sales contact.

That said, that still doesn't justify why pricing can't be transparent and clear cut once the lead is qualified and they are in the sales process. Simply knowing that the initial pricing presented is not final and needs to be negotiated is a giant PITA and still a waste of time. If you claim pricing is such a small piece of it, why then do companies bother with the negotiation piece if the actual amounts might be trivial compared to whether or not they close the deal? Does the psychological benefit of conceding to a lower price (from an already padded initial price) really make that big a difference in close rates?

I agree pricing discussions should not take longer than 30 minutes, but unfortunately, many sales people I've dealt with prefer to play car salesman style games.

Do you have any suggestions on how to approach such conversations to get the best/fair price with a minimum of back-and-forth headaches that can cut through some of what I've described? I've tried a few different approaches with varying success and am always open to others to test out.
I'm curious:

Why is the init daemon what a local process should communicate with?

A daemon that managaes other daemons doesn't need to be PID 1, even to reap zombies.

Secondly, daemons shouldn't care what process is managing them, a principled approach to communication between the daemon manager and a daemon would probably include handing off sockets/ports/fds, but probably not much else.
Hey Nate, welcome to Hacker News!

Ideas are a lot of fun to think about, but it's work to bring them to fruition.

When it comes to a partnership, people want to know about you, and what you bring to the table.

Add a comment about your personal background, or your idea. Everyone here is working on their own idea, so your idea is safe :)

You'll find that people are more likely to ignore you, than steal your idea.
Disclaimer: I develop uselessd, probably have a warped mindset from being a Luddite who values transparency, and evil stuff like that.

The author of this piece makes the classic mistake of equating the init system as the process manager and process supervisor. These are, in fact, all separate stages. The init system runs as PID 1 and strictly speaking, the sole responsibility is to daemonize, reap its children, set the session and process group IDs, and optionally exec the process manager. The process manager then defines a basic framework for stopping, starting, restarting and checking status for services, at a minimum. The process supervisor then applies resource limits (or even has those as separate tools, like perp does with its runtools), process monitoring (whether through ptrace(2), cgroups, PID files, jails or whatnot), autorestart, inotify(7)/kqueue handlers, system load diagnostics and so forth. The shutdown stage is another separate part, often handled either in the initd or the process manager. Often, it just hooks to the argv[0] of standard tools like halt, reboot, poweroff, shutdown to execute killall routines, detach mount points, etc.

To stuff everything in the init system, I'd argue, is bad design. One must delegate, whether to auxiliary daemons, shell scripts, configuration syntax (in turn read and processed by daemons) or what have you.

sysvinit is certainly inadequate. The inittab is cryptic and clunky, and runlevels are a needlessly restrictive concept to express what is essentially a named service group that can be isolated/overlayed.

Of course, to start services on socket connections, you either use (x)inetd, or you reimplement a subset or (partial or otherwise) superset of it. There's no way around this, it's choosing to handle more on your own rather than delegate. In systemd's case, they do this to support socket families like AF_NETLINK.

As for systemd being documented, I'd say it's quote mediocre. The manpages proved to be inconsistent and incomplete, and for anyone but an end user or a minimally invested sysadmin, of little use whatsoever. Quantity is nice, but the quality department is lacking.

sysvinit's baroque and arduous shell scripts are not the fault of using shell scripts as a service medium, but have to deal with sysvinit's aforementioned cruft (inittab and runlevels) and the historical lack of any standard modules. BSD init has the latter in the form of /etc/rc.subr, which implements essential functions like rc_cmd and wait_for_pids. Exact functions vary from BSD to BSD, but more often than not, BSD init services are even shorter than systemd services: averaging 3-4 lines of code.

A unified logging sink is nothing novel, it's just that systemd is the first of its kind that gained momentum, but with its own unique set of issues. syslogd and kmsg were still passable, and the former also seamlessly integrated itself with databases.

Once again, changing the execution environment is a separate stage and has multiple ways of being done. Init-agnostic tools that wrap around syscalls are probably my favorite, but YMMV.

As for containers, it's about time Linux caught up to Solaris and FreeBSD.
Thank you Mike for taking the time to share this. I appreciate the seconds you spent!
Until I saw your link, I thought everyone was referring to Skitch, the much more limited graphic editor. I was surprised that it was seen as competition.

https://evernote.com/skitch/
Yes. I don't intended to argue about that. For that systemd is perfect and I like using it too. I mean such problems as a hanging boot in an lxc-container where I've once got only a (not a lot on google about that at this time) red error message that something went wrong. How to go from there? It's sure possible but it's a lot of work.

I don't say that's the norm and I don't say this happens often but if you build custom stuff and do "strange" things it's easier to know what's going on if you grasp the complete system. This is more difficult with systemd.

I believe it's a valid criticism and I realize 95% of users never need to care about this. However it's still a valid point if you build complex systems that are not "off the shelf".