skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I agree with you to some degree. It's incredibly easy to write insecure software if it ever touches a shell.
Why Robots Could Be Awesome Whistleblowers
Yes, provided you're willing to give up all the complex ideas that make git more useful than Dropbox for some things.
I used pretty much all the resources already mentioned (Big Nerd Ranch, Raywenderlich, Stanford course), but I'd like to add a few more to the mix - check out http://objc.io , http://nshipster.com and http://nsscreencast.com

Note - I have no affiliation to any of the links above, I just think they're good resources. Good luck!
The link above seems to 404, but this is the same story as far as I can tell:

http://www.businessinsider.com/tyrel-oates-letter-to-wells-f...

I will be very interested to see how this turns out. I hope they decide to actually move forward with giving everybody a raise.
1. Are graduate computer science students starting their research, not taking classes) really "beginners"?

2. Would Gou consider learning Python to be "intellectually stimulating" or "bullishit", considering that his stated goal is to "produce publications in an applied computer science field".
I get that error, but libnss3 was already up-to-date.

So I'm still out of luck.

Edit: D'oh! Chrome vs chromium. And different error code.
Yes, by no means consider my post a defense of every quirky detail of history. My point is more that one must start by correctly identifying the problems before one could hope to solve the problems, and "lack of power" is definitely not it.
I think one could take a position in between between treating invited speakers disrespectfully and endorsing their work. (It seems like that's maybe actually the position you're taking.) It would be great to find a way to articulate and strengthen anti-DRM norms in more parts of the technical community, so that people don't keep thinking of DRM as natural or inevitable (and so other people can see that there's actually resistance to it in the tech world!).
And once you get started, the marginal cost is almost nothing but time if you can do the full thing.

I am a hobby iOS developer, and it is the appearance that suffers the most on my low-end products. If you can do your own artwork then you can get by for about $0+your time.
http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html

It's not a fake story, though, and no one in the press got "played". It's a real story, with the usual lazy sourcing and lazy reporting.
I do take pride in my work, and every piece of software I write handles every use case I need it for explicitly. I take offense that you would imply otherwise knowing absolutely nothing of me and my craft. This isn't about UTF-8, it's about an illogical premise where some very shortsighted individuals would rather have only fully fleshed, fully baked products in open source. This is highly illogical, and would bury ideas potentially unexposed for others to coach and assist with. You aren't the judge of what others find difficult, but that doesn't mean that those that struggle with a concept cannot add tremendous value in other areas.

By the way, it's not utf-8, it's UTF-8. Whatever happened to taking pride in your writing and making it the best it can be?

Everyone has their own criteria for quality, and you can't hope to satisfy everyone. Everyone with even a mildly successful project in open source knows this. Scratch your own itch, make it work, accept any request that meets with your vision, and keep a permissive licence so those that don't can fork. Otherwise, the arrogance being asserted, that you can somehow determine if my contribution is worth of existing, is baffling.
I absolutely live at the command line, and when I'm forced into a walled garden I blame the tool for not properly exposing its functionality to the rest of the system so I can easily automate it the way I want it automated.

Edited to add:

Note that this isn't a claim that anyone else (in particular) is Doing It Wrong - it's what works for me, I'm sure there are other points in the space that work as well or better for others. That, itself, should not be taken as a claim that every point in the space is equivalent - that's not true either. What I do strongly refute is any notion that the command line is "under powered" in general.
That post speaks the truth. Kudos to Mr. Welsh for understanding and clearly communicating the core of the issue - I'll have to read more from him.
(iii) sounds on the mark, and perhaps what the guy really wants to say is that there is a market to help profs do that prebuilt setup???
It makes it sound like Canonical made some sort of concerted effort, didn't they just package Chrome (or do the Chrome people do that)?

Packaging and uploading to the repos is work of course but I imagine most of that is automated, the feeling here is that Canonical strived in some way to get this result. I'd be interested to know what Canonical did out of the ordinary to get to this result?
I think the point of the article was the opposite. The first two times they applied, they were focused on YC. The third time (the time they got in), he says:

"Nothing else mattered, including YC. Application time came around and we thought about not applying. It seems a bit silly to say now (to us), but it is true."

They'd become focused on the business and product, and that was the key.
Show HN: Erlang ODBC Tips
What is so great about the Nobel peace prize if even a war criminal extraordinaire like Churchill can get it?

Besides the death of thousands of German civilians:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repatriation_of_Cossacks_after_...

http://www.thebirdman.org/Index/Others/Others-Doc-History/+D...

The only odd thing about this picture is: One guy is missing:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d2/Yalta_sum...
> The only thing really prompting this announcement is that Netflix is no longer blocking Linux user-agents.

And, presumably, that they didn't announce it a month ago.

I had no idea.
The problem he overlooks is that we do not want our tools to be "as modern as Word". We want modern tools, but not modern as Word defines it.

There are excellent solutions for his problem. Distributing a pre-configured VM is a good one. Instead, he wants students to have the experience of bootstrapping, but he also wants it to be painless and magical.

But instead of looking at his actual problem, he's wound up railing against all the critical freedom that makes the field something other than a glorified exercise in painting by numbers.

EDIT: For the record, turning milk into mozzarella is actually really easy and quite suitable for a novice. I've done it. Takes about an hour, end to end.
Why does it matter if your ev gets a 250 vs 500 range? The only time this is relevant is for long road trips, and in that case you have superchargers. For most people the distinction is irrelevant.

The 200 mile range or so seems to be the sweet spot where you can plug the car in every night and never think about it; on any given day you are not going to drive 200 miles other than the rare days you have preplanned road trips. The key point to remember is the car is recharged every night.

On the contrary, I think the reality of tens of thousands of people owning teslas and never complaining about the range (in terms of practical effects) is evidence that the technology is there.
That seems like a list of languages you have seen rather than ones you know.
The point, in a single line, is: The tube's mission is not to make money and it doesn't need profits for anything.
Speed up the page navigation with Instaclick
If only that were a good comparison. Measurement is so much better than say autoconf.
It goes to 4Chan. That's my prediction.
That day, no one will pay you to do what you do.
A linguistics professor I was speaking with once put it (paraphrasing from memory): "With a shell, you have all the expressibility of a language. With pointy-clicky, you're reduced to pointing at things and grunting."
The put in a tremendous amount of effort and it paid off in the end.

However reading this I was thinking "what if they put the same dedication and effort into doing a more traditional business endeavor. Kind of in the same way when you see a "successful" criminal you might think "wow they are smart, crafty and energetic they could make a good legitimate living".
I will only work at companies where I am peers with everyone, from the bottom to the top. Everyone makes good decisions and everyone makes bad decisions. If you're hiring someone you don't trust to make decisions or question yours then it's probably a bad sign.
I'm a little confused about what the author is really trying to say. In this article, it sounds to me like he is saying that all of this interaction with the command line is arcane, stupid and just needs to go away.

But then I read the other article he wrote which he referenced in this article ("The Two Cultures of Computing" -- http://pgbovine.net/two-cultures-of-computing.htm). In that article he discusses how there are two groups of people -- the "User" group that just wants to do everything with a GUI interface, and the "Programmer" group that likes the intricacies of the command line. There he discusses the difficulty he had with explaining to students the justification for learning the command line tools (which included the fact that they provided more flexibility than the GUI tools alone could achieve).

He concludes the "Two Cultures" article by encouraging folks in the "Programmer" group to bridge the gap between the two cultures:

"You need to gently introduce students to why these tools will eventually make them more productive in the long run, even though there is a steep learning curve at the outset"

Although I dislike the notion that the command line is "bad" or "arcane" just because it has been around for a long time (which the "Two Cultures" article seemed to harp on a lot), I do agree that bridging the cultures is an excellent idea.

And then I go back to the article referenced in this post, which seems to be saying that all this interaction with the command line is just boring, stupid, and has no value. So again, I'm not sure what the author is ultimately trying to say.

Personally, I appreciate both. I love a good GUI that makes common tasks fast as lightning to rip through. But I will always prefer to also have the ability to get down to a lower level, where I can make the tools do even greater things that the author of the GUI did not think of or did not have the time or motiviation to implement.

Also, I think it is a bad idea to discourage students (especially Computer Science students) from learning the nuts and bolts of how computers work. We have enough of a shortage of people with that kind of knowledge already. IMHO we need as many people with those kinds of skills as we can get.
If this got approved, no chance to reduce the price of the broadband.
I was shocked for the internet price when I moved to bay area last year, ~$70 for 16M/3M ( I use comcast business, residential may around $40~$50), but in my hometown, a mid-sized city near the east China coast, my father use a 300RMB ($50) / year service for 10M internet.

In my hometown, each apt may at least have two providers with similar bandwidth, but here we have few choices because comcast may hold most of the infrastructure and just no one can compete.

If this merge got approved, over half of US's residential internet infrastructure may under its control, I cannot imagine what will happen. The most expensive internet in the world? maybe.
I've made this point before on HN. The standard does not require browser vendors to include any DRM scheme to be fully compliant. Netflix however can require a specific DRM component in order to play their content.
Good idea, I'd love to enable online learning for this type of material. In the meantime, I'm putting handouts for the first unit ("UNIX") online, and the second unit ("Python") will use iPython notebooks. There may be Coursera (etc.) offerings that cover similar material, but I haven't looked into it yet.
Firefox is the default browser for Ubuntu. A lot of users wouldn't probably be bothered to install Chrome earlier - now they will. This is bad news.
Arse-Sum! (truly)
the standard writing tool in mathematics and computer science is the pencil. Or pen, if you are feeling cocky.

http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/
That will be the most common failure mode for computer-driven cars: how easy they are to bring to a stop. (And, yes, that's probably criminal behavior.)

A computer-driven car, though, wouldn't (shouldn't) just immediately slam on the brakes because of that signal. It would tighten seat belts and start slowing down, but it also would want to avoid getting rammed by the car behind it. It can make very accurate estimates about its stopping distance and use all of it.
So, after Churchill and Yasser Arafat, I see Robert Mugabe and Fidel Castro as serious contenders. Osama Bin Laden is out of the question since you have to be alive to receive the prize.
Oh the sadness. Please harass someone with a capable smartphone to attempt at least :)
Update on Khloe K’s Real Dad – OJ Simpson (video evidence of woman claim)
The notification email with the stats isn't the product, it's just a feature. Conspire's real product is their search engine that can find the best person for introducing you to a contact or organization.
Collection agencies are incredibly easy to sue. Unlike the story says, there is a lot of regulation, but it's up to you to enforce it. If you can find a rule that they're not following (and they never follow all the rules, way too expensive), you can take them to court and get $1,000 per statutory violation.

If ever a debt collector is fucking with you, google for collection agency lawsuits. :)
Because the problem is that the encryption is still happening within Chrome, not within linux itself (if I understand this correctly), and the latest build of Chrome for Linux now includes this drm. So the issue is either still 1) W3C caves to DRM or 2) Linux caves to Chrome, and #2 will not be nearly as popular a story because its both a slightly more complex issue (only slightly), but mostly because there are too many google fanboys on this website for it to gain much traction.
Well, we don't really know if it's exactly exponential, we also don't really know that a quantum computer is more powerfull than a classical one (and we don't know if P == NP, what's related).

That said, yes, the observed speedup on some [1] problems is exponential. It's easy to wave hands and say that when you place the qbits in a coherent state together, the operations you do on them apply to all of the values you they can possibly carry, and those grow exponentialy with the number of bits. But the long explanation makes things much more clear, and is worth reading if you want to really get it. Wikipedia is a good starting point [2][3].

[1] Not all by a wide margin. Quantum computers will be specialized machines for a long time, if not forever. But cryptography will take a huge hit.

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer

[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shor%27s_algorithm
I don't really see the analogy. MS bootstrapped fairly naturally (with the help of a great deal of luck along the way) from BASIC to progressively more sophisticated OSes, each of which closely followed well-established pre-existing models. AFAIK (I'm not an expert) there are no viable existing models out there for a big next step from the Boosted Board.

Even assuming infinite battery life, what's the form factor? A wheelchair won't cut it. A Segway-like thing won't cut it. A unicycle won't cut it. A conventional bicycle won't cut it. A recumbent bike or trike won't cut it. Roller-skates won't cut it. Exoskeletal legs won't cut it. Many of these things are of proven usefulness, but they've never been general-purpose substitutes or augmentors for pedestrianism. A version of some of the above which folds into something unprecedentedly small and light might begin to cut it, but how is that achievable within present-day engineering constraints?
Reminds me of a far superior project: Legacy https://github.com/EvanBurchard/legacy
Ride Sharing by the Numbers
> Have you got a way to get git to control your source without actually invoking git?

No, but git does involve ridiculous epithets. No quotes, because I'm dead serious. As an interface, Git command line is laughable, and doesn't deserve a passing grade. Yes, it's the only one we've got. Yes, many interfaces are even worse. Still, that's no excuse. We can do better. Hopefully someone will: http://tonsky.me/blog/reinventing-git-interface/

---

Let's take a simpler example:

$ tar -xzf foo.tar.gz

So, you have to learn the name "tar". The option "-x" for extract, the option "z" for gzip, and the option "-f" for file (by the way, the "f" must come last, or it won't work). What the fuck is this retarded interface?

First, why do I have to tell tar to extract the thing, since it's obviously a compressed archive? Why do I have to tell tar that it's in gzip format? It can decompress it, surely it can check the compression format? And why, why, WHY do I have to tell it I'm processing a file? It KNOWS it's a freaking file!!!

Surely there must be an alternative, like… like…

$ decompress foo.tar.gz

I personally don't know of such alternative, and don't use them, because I was retarded enough to learn the basic 'tar' incantations by heart. Now that I know them, I can't summon the courage to use a decent interface instead.

But you see my point. Even for a simple tool such as tar, the common use case involves a cryptic incantation that shouldn't be needed in the first place. I'm sure many other UNIX tools are like that, I just didn't think about critiquing their interfaces thoroughly. Yet.

The core principles of the command line are very good. The level of relatively easy automation it provide is nothing short of amazing. This technology for the 70's is arguably more capable than most graphical interfaces in current use. But it does have its fair share of incidental complexity and useless quirks. We can do better. Let's not forget that.
I'm not glad that others don't have it -- I'm just glad that it's non-trivial because it means that learning it is an accomplishment worthy of taking pride in.
As far as it being a barrier to entry is concerned, I think that having to learn something that is not-so-simple to become a professional separates the wheat from the chaff in the same way that someone like a professional exam or certification would. I have worked with newbs in the past who don't know how to use their tools correctly, and they're usually a net negative re: productivity on a project.
wouldn't $50 USD have more buying power in china than $70 USD in the US?
In the scenario "Now you can watch Netflix" (which entails implementation of DRM), who is being screwed?
Interesting definition of broken. It seems to work perfectly for me and the creator.
Down with the hate. Love wins!

note the files in the repo.
So this guy thinks that the people who build the tools that enable people to "be 10x or even 100x more productive" are bullshitters, while he, the almighty professor who produces a lot of useless "publications" and getting taxpayer money for it, is the nice and important guy on the field of "applied computer science".
It should be noted that it works on Fedora as well with Chrome 37 and 38.

On Chrome 37 you need a specific user-agent, at least that's how I got it working.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3, Win64, x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/38.0.2114.2 Safari/537.36
Thanks. I just subscribed to the first two of the 3 links that you shared.
> $ uncompress foo.tar.gz

Try unp, it's in the repo.
Tangent - but why does mobile app development require a huge IDE??? Aside from how bad the APIs are.

What if mobile app APIs had a simple interface to add layouts to views, and widgets with their callbacks (in one call) to the layouts? And what if all the widgets and layouts had so much of their behaviour standardized in the base classes that you almost never needed to look up, auto-complete or otherwise remember 100 distinct classes' use cases???
I think you missed the analogy. Hitting a nail with a hammer is directly contributing toward the task the builder is trying to accomplish. It is intrinsic, not incidental.
Maybe some people want both of these things:

* Have a linux HTC
* Watch netflix without some horrible hack

and are now happy that this is possible?
This was the point I was trying to say, but I think I didn't communicate it well.

I would like to know just how fast these cars can react. I'm betting they could be actually slowing the car before a human is even aware something is wrong, but I would like to have some numbers to cite.
Well, I'll be patiently waiting for the day when a sophist moves the ball for us and not for their scheme.
The Muse (YC W12) Is Hiring an Experienced Head of Audience Development
Isn't that simply one of the downsides of choosing to work on OSX?

Or maybe `brew install guile`?
Its very different as you mention. "Growth" in the sense that its talked about here only really applies to products with many feedback cycles where iteration is possible (not hardware). For products with longer sales cycles its generally based on more traditional sales metrics, measuring where people are in your sales funnel and conversion between sales funnel steps.
Yeah, I've definitely felt that pain as well.

In this case, I'd suggest using a VM driven by Vagrant, unless you really need to be running native under OS X. That provides an isolated and repeatable environment, but at the cost of learning whole other domains of experience. My suggestion also hugely reinforces Dr. Guo's point: we've perhaps solved a problem by adding piles of additional tooling layers: (vagrant CLI, Vagrantfile interface, VM domain knowledge, setting up a Linux host (even as a toy environment), setting up a Linux host as a build environment, etc.) Heck, if we're doing it right it'd be nice to use a provisioning tool to automate the VM and build environment setup. All of this stuff is awesomely powerful, but front-loading a student project with it is nuts unless there's a domain expert who's building this tooling for them and coaching the students through it. Again, that's not the sort of thing that's likely to happen for per-student research projects.
and how do you test a system with tens of components each runs in its own service with its own pace its own failures? for some reasons people treat testing just as unit test, i don't get how you test the whole big thing as a whole. in addition you never get the same hardware nor the same software, network management, same number of servers/services as you have in production. This is the real challenge, unit testing is piece of cake and I never skip it, how to test the whole system this is where I get confused (without getting test that run for hours which are unusable and overly complex).
A little confused -- what do those things have to do with gaming?
$50/year service in China
$70/month service in US

I don't think the buying power difference would be that large.
Hi Reynold! Do you have numbers / intuition for how previous versions of spark would have run? I'm upgrading (soon) from spark 0.8 to spark 1.1 and am curious to see the performance gains (especially w.r.t. shuffles)
This is beautiful stuff. Are you looking for contributors? I'd love to work on this with you.
I waste all my time talking to a God damn nigger who understands nothing.

Duh! What's a government random number site for?

"You hacked it. How am I supposed to know?"
I didn't see any argument about performance. I only saw an argument about correctness.
Wondering the same thing. Something rudimentary would need to be able to pull email and send HTTP requests.

A job for bash and cron?