skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You know, I tried to rewatch Threads a couple of years ago just to see if I'd been desensitised to graphic violence. I hadn't been! I don't watch horror movies and graphic violence on the telly, they genuinely scare and disturb me. So that's my excuse for not making it through the first 45 minutes of Threads as an adult!

I think one of the scariest things for me was that it was set in the north of England where I'm from. Normally disaster movies are all about London and the south-east corner of the UK if they are set in the UK at all. I'm from the North West, and it was the sheer ordinariness of the people that they managed to capture so perfectly that made themselves empathetic to me. It actually felt as though I might have known some of these people. I think it was that deep empathy that made it much easier to place oneself in their position, fucking terrible position though it was.

You know, I was thinking about what you said about fearing nuclear annihilation and I think I'm more worried about it now. At least in the good old days there were only two likely candidates to start lobbing nukes about the place, these days who knows who's going to be the first to set one off.
Just wait for confirmation of the relocation, because those things get cancelled / delayed often. When its confirmed then look for jobs and give standard notice as per law. Explain you immediate superior the personal reason once the resignation is sent, so he hears it from you.

These things happen all the time, so just the standard notice in your country is sufficient. Remember that to lay you off they would not give more than the legal notice either.

Your feeling of torn loyalty is normal and experienced by everybody thinking of quitting a job. It sucks its true, but try to focus on work even more to leave a professional impression of someone they would recommend and hire back.

By talking too early you risk having to cancel the resignation if the relocation gets cancelled, or be there a very long time in 'exit' mode, which would be even more awkward.

This is one of the reasons why changing jobs sucks, but 15 days on the new job and you wont give it a second thought.
Nitpick: relativity can explain magnetism, not cause magnetism.
And the significance being, this compiler can handle code complex enough to create a compiler.
Why are there so many stupid ads on the internet? Because idiots keep clicking on them.

Why are there so many "scamsultants". Because idiots keep hiring them.

Nice piece, Jacques. In my younger days, I would have wholeheartedly agreed with you. (And I still agree with your major point: Don't do this!)

By now in my jaded older days, when I see so much clashing between the ideal and what's really happening, I'm not so sure.

I've spent a career cleaning up the messes of scamsultants. And you know what happens to them? They move on and make bigger messes. And more money for themselves. Sometimes, a lot more.

In just the past 5 years:

- My accountant fired his IT guy for fraud. When he told a half dozen of his associates, every single one of them asked for the IT guy's number because they couldn't find anyone. They didn't care about the fraud.

- A scamsultant for one of my customers ripped them off for over $2 million. They decided not to sue him because of the bad publicity (and embarassment). He now has a new company name, a new website, and one of his testimonials (fake, of course) is from the company he just ripped off.

- Another scamsultant convinced one of my enterprise customers to hire 80 more people into their IT department because "lack of resources" was their biggest constraint. 2 years later, they fired most of those people (who came from the scamsultant's own agency and couldn't do the job). The scamsultant is now doing the same thing to 2 other enterprises in other parts of the country.

- A scamsultant tried to split the commission with my co-founder on her side hardware business. She told the customer who immediately fired the scamsultant. I just saw him driving a new Mercedes SUV into another local customer's parking lot.

- A scamsultant set up the software to (believe it or not!) funnel every 5th customer credit into his own bank account. It took the auditors 2 years to unravel this. He was promptly fired, but never prosecuted (embarassment, I presume). Now he's selling new e-commerce software to new suckers.

- Another customer hired 20 .net programmers through a scamsultancy. After 2 years, they had produced nothing. They were all fired. I stayed in touched with quite a few of them. They are all still working.

As long as people value money over ethics, this shit will always happen.

Don't do this, but don't be surprised when others do and get away with it.
I think the point is that it special-cases the first object, at least in the syntax. You _could_ write it that way, but since the method is chosen based on all the object types, it doesn't make much sense to do so.
Why are there so many stupid ads on the internet? Because idiots keep clicking on them.

Why are there so many "scamsultants". Because idiots keep hiring them.

Nice piece, Jacques. In my younger days, I would have wholeheartedly agree with you. (And I still agree with your major point: Don't do this!)

By now in my jaded older days, when I see so much clashing between the ideal and what's really happening, I'm not so sure anymore.

I've spent a career cleaning up the messes of scamsultants. And you know what happens to them? They move on and make bigger messes. And more money for themselves. Sometimes, a lot more.

In just the past 5 years:

- My accountant fired his IT guy for fraud. When he told a half dozen of his associates, every single one of them asked for the IT guy's number because they couldn't find anyone. They didn't care about the fraud.

- A scamsultant for one of my customers ripped them off for over $2 million. They decided not to sue him because of the bad publicity (and embarassment). He now has a new company name, a new website, and one of his testimonials (fake, of course) is from the company he just ripped off.

- Another scamsultant convinced one of my enterprise customers to hire 80 more people into their IT department because "lack of resources" was their biggest constraint. 2 years later, they fired most of those people (who came from the scamsultant's own agency and couldn't do the job). The scamsultant is now doing the same thing to 2 other enterprises in other parts of the country.

- A scamsultant tried to split the commission with my co-founder on her side hardware business. She told the customer who immediately fired the scamsultant. I just saw him driving a new Mercedes SUV into another local customer's parking lot.

- A scamsultant set up the software to (believe it or not!) funnel every 5th customer credit into his own bank account. It took the auditors 2 years to unravel this. He was promptly fired, but never prosecuted (embarassment, I presume). Now he's selling new e-commerce software to new suckers.

- Another customer hired 20 .net programmers through a scamsultancy. After 2 years, they had produced nothing. They were all fired. I stayed in touched with quite a few of them. They are all still working.

As long as people value money over ethics, this shit will always happen.

Don't do this, but don't be surprised when others do and get away with it.
That all those official denials and assurances at the time were BS and lies, serves as a good reminder for how to treat similar assurances in the present.
While the page loaded it showed me a bunch of text. Then once it loaded it just showed me some large dark image of people behind computers with the text "Web solutions and Design" overlaid on it, forcing me to scroll in order to find out anything at all about your site.

I realize this is a design trend lately, but the loading threw me off and I personally think it wastes a ton of screen real estate.

There's also http://i.imgur.com/4E6DVOe.png
He probably lost the names when he lost the count...
Who said anything about "based on a real story"? Did you read TFA?

Dr. Strangelove's plot is not based on a real story either.

It's about getting the details right, not about being based on any particular real life story or persons.
Yes, it's just about readability.
Haven't used (and first heard) of any of these tools, but from reading the description it sounds like that you can apply each of these tools in any order.
This is laughable, you act like you have found a RCE in said company. It's just a XSS, not that serious dumbass. I will confirm your statement of being a 100% amateur.
Shy people make more online gaming friends
We have restored access to the Django Project servers. We do not have any reason to believe any user data was compromised. We'll continue to post updates as we have more information.
I am an former Est Germany. I am older than 35. I can assure you, the Reagan speech did noting.

There where only one or two important speeches, may be 3 if you count Kennedy in.

One of the most important was, when Willy Brand had its visit in East Germany. The only important visit by a western politician in East Germany. The other one, which was not really a speech, but very important, was the one by Genscher for the release of the people into West Germany after occupying the West German embassy in Praha, CZ.
I tried CLOS, not a fan to be honest. OOP (or functional) isn't a very well-defined concept... I like what languages such as Ceylon, C# or Julia (to an extent) are doing - solid support for both OOP and functional styles. Because you typically need both, some problems are more readable and natural in OOP, others in FP.
I think there's also the rare case of "bad things happen to good people". I've been lucky as a consultant, that I have had a handful of long-term clients. We've learned how one another work, and how to communicate our expectations.

Alot of web-development consultancies however, as far as I can tell (primarily the culprits I think), are run by business-minded people who are great at marketing and advertising and networking, but don't understand how to get the right kind of talent in the door. They get the lucrative deals, but have no idea that they don't have the talent on board to make it happen. I've "cleaned up" on a few of these in the past.

Also, there's people like me who start their consultancies without as much business-sense as tech-knowledge, and so you learn quickly what your limits are and to not over promise and under-deliver. An iterative approach helps ensure your mistakes are minimal and generally not impactful in a negative way on the overall project.

Finally there are (yes they are rare, but they do exist) overbearing clients who manage their people and their consultants like it's a sweatshop. Generally speaking I find that it's hard to extract a perfect set of requirements out of a client when in the early stages. I find that an iterative approach is best suited for clients, thus the full picture is not completely understood when the project begins. Most of the time the client appreciates this lean / scrum-like approach, and so it helps me extract requirements throughout the life of the project. The overbearing client, however, sees this as a window of opportunity to take advantage by increasing scope, or changing directions completely, and in some magical way think they'll be able to squeeze you for your time and expertise to get a bargain basement deal. I have an at-will clause in my contracts for exactly this type of client.
If you want non subscribers to be able to read the article you should link like this: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&c...
From my viewpoint in the US, a bit off.

E.g. he resumed food exports to the USSR; I can't find the quote, but I remember something like "we don't use food as a weapon".

The attacks on the USSR were, rhetoric aside, a lot more subtle: bleed it in Afghanistan, deny it hard currency by keeping the price of oil down with the help of the Saudis, and resist and sabotage the export of gas to Western Europe. Further their military bankruptcy, $$$ and capabilities (already in bad shape due to supplying the equipment for 3 complete armored armies to North Vietnam), by continuing Carter's late in the game rearmament program, and make their Strategic Rocket Forces potentially obsolete with SDI (even a partly effective strategic defense negates a counterforce first strike capability). Countering the Soviet's theater nuclear SS-23 deployment. And of course support those in Eastern Europe resisting the occupation.

Or even seemingly small things: ending the Brezhnev Doctrine by taking back the tiny island of Grenada. I've read from many behind the Iron Curtain that that sent shockwaves across it, for it was the first time the US used main force to take back a Communist country. It signaled something important, like Reagan's firm rhetoric.

Diehard Cold Warrior, yes, but a lot more subtle than would "rather start dropping the nukes". He wanted to free those trapped behind the Iron Curtain, not kill them.
Didn't know those details about the New Dealers, interesting.
I guess that sort of fusion tends to happen in many such scenarios. I know there's some of it in India, in a different field of work.
The point was that object.method() is sometimes more readable. For example I find web_socket_manager.reconnect_if_needed() more readable than reconnect_if_needed(web_socket_manager).
anyone know where I can get a juliabox.org invite code?
Nucleus was good for a while but these days Pied Piper can pull off an insane 5.2 Weissman Score. Hooli is going to have to come up with something better because a 2.89 just doesn't cut it today.
The linked talk actually does a pretty good job describing how Java 8's Lambda is both backwards compatible and forward thinking.

1. The idea of @FunctionalInterface leveraged practices that were already in use--interfaces with a single method--for Comparator, Runnable, Callable, and external libraries. This meant that users could use lambdas to implement such interfaces immediately, with no changes to existing libraries.

2. The actual implementation of a lambda in bytecode is a single invokedynamic call. They went that route to avoid tying the bytecode representation to their initial implementation.

A future change could add true function types, and have them automatically instantiate a target functional interface (provided that they have the same "shape"). That would require a language change (adding function types), but not a bytecode change.

That would have the nice result that all the code that people are writing now could work with new function types, and new code could be written to accept the function types instead of functional interfaces. My library would become unnecessary at that point, and I would be pretty happy about that.

That is, Java 8's lambda implementation does not preclude fully-backwards-compatible "real" lambdas in the future.

Personally, I think the Lambda project was a well-reasoned, intelligent step forward. The video is really worth watching, because I wasn't aware of how flexible their future directions are until I watched it.
All of our arguments so far have been completely generic. Both of us would love for someone with quantitative historical perspective to shed some light on these issues, but it isn't going to be me. I don't have that kind of knowledge -- all I've got is Cunningham's law and the vague notion that other engineering disciplines pay slightly over ~1/2 as much as software engineering at comparable skill levels, presumably due to having had more time for supply/demand equilibration. A solid route for counter-argument would attack my notion of "comparable skill levels," and while I'd love to hear that I was twice as skilled (comparatively speaking) as my buddies in different engineering sectors I sincerely doubt that that's the case.

Economics is not a zero sum game, but there are a few significant zero-sum games within economics that suffice to undermine the "rising tide lifts all boats" argument: land ownership, profit ownership, power ownership. A significant chunk of the value behind a certain amount of wealth is relative to everyone else. Resenting someone else for earning twice as much would not make sense in a world where prices were fixed, but that's not the world we live in. The 2x guy is absolutely capable of bidding up prices on houses, investment instruments, and political influence, which all hurts the 1x guy. The guy with a skilled job absolutely makes it harder for other people with similar skills to find work. The guy building automated burger dispensers absolutely makes it harder for those at the bottom of the totem pole to secure gainful employment.

I do not debate that the current situation is that there are too few programmers. My claim is that once supply and demand equilibrate (and unless demand experiences exponential growth forever this will certainly happen) then we'll be in the same boat as everyone else. And it isn't a pretty boat.

I would love to be wrong about this, but I just don't think that there's a certain level of education that will creates a sustainably large middle class. It can certainly help in places where there are deficiencies, but it stops being effective at the asymptote. Look at the US, look at Japan. More and more education every decade but at the end of the day the supply of jobs for educated people didn't magically expand to meet the demand. The "magic" I'm referring to is the same magic as the "it's not a zero-sum game" argument refers to. It didn't work: we massively increased education and the middle class crumbled anyway.
Your Java example seriously undermine your point -- you have set up a world where you have an opinion, and thus your opinion is the "truth", and people who believe otherwise are being fooled by liars.
I still find Perl is better for some tasks (over Python - I don't know Ruby). It has loads of syntactic sugar such as globbing files, backticks for executing system calls.
No, they are short and stick.
"(OMG! Did I just say that?!?!)"
"Of course not. The Matriarchy would eat me alive. "

Anon got a point there. These studies do exist, but we don't talk about them because Everyone Knows that only Bad People believe things like that. And once you are a Bad Person there is no shortage of people who will go to great lengths to silence you, lest you spread your Doubleplusungood Crimethink.
"The Dead Hand" combined with "Command and Control" (http://www.amazon.com/Command-Control-Damascus-Accident-Illu...) makes for very sobering reading. Put the two together, and it's a genuine miracle that nothing bad happened. Of course, we're not out of the woods...

Both are excellent books, BTW, so I agree with the parent poster's recommendation.
To handle the overflow on the places where you want to handle them, modern processor doesn't have any problem with an additional jump instruction. Also, modern compilers could optimize the checks away if they aren't used. In effect, implementing overflow checks definitely won't turn your C speed (1s) code in a Python speed (40s) code. I estimate it wouldn't be even two times slower in most of the use cases. It's certainly not the problem of the CPU's.

It can be the problem of the certain compilers if they don't have the infrastructure to reason about overflow flags though. But it's not a hardware problem.
> If they're not, you don't need a darknet to get them.

False. Some things are restricted by abuse of power, not by law. For example, it's very hard to massprint antiputin agitation in Russia despite there is no law against it.
This very much depends on what you want to do with it and what your background is. Here are some things that might bother you.

* Julia's approach to OOP is via multimethods, not the usual class/inheritance model. This might be annoying for people who don't want to learn how to be an effective programmer in the other paradigm.

* Julia's garbage collector is not generational/incremental and in some corner cases, GC can take 10 times longer than the actual function you are running (typically it is between 5% and 50%). This would make Julia unsuitable for HFT, real-time games, web browsers of the future and other real-time applications. (Edit: see Viral's post in the same thread. Incremental GC is in the works. This is genuinely my experience of Julia to date. No sooner do you need something, and someone competent is already working on it, if they haven't already done it!)

* Julia sucks at predicate dispatch. It doesn't have it. Granted, neither does any other language except Gap and one other I forgot. So if you are used to that feature, you would find Julia a step down. (Edit: yes of course Julia does not need/want predicate dispatch. It's just an illustration of something that could bother you if you were really, really used to something. I just happen to have colleagues who really are used to this.)

* Julia is tied to LLVM, so if you want to be on the CLR/DLR or JVM, you are out of luck.

* Julia currently doesn't have static compilation (I hear it is being actively worked on). This makes it more difficult to deploy binaries.

* Julia does not have Haskell-like separation of effects from pure functions. This might not appeal to type purists.

* Julia functions can fail at runtime where statically typed/compiled languages would pick up the errors at compile time.

* As popular as it is, Julia is still not in the top 50 programming languages by measure of usership.

* Julia's support of mutable C-style structs allocated on the stack, as opposed to pointers to heap allocated objects is still somewhat lacking. This creates some challenges in efficient C FFI in corner cases, especially in combination with GC.

* Julia doesn't have inheritance of data types (it is really a dual to a data focused language, which is sensible -- you typically have far more functions than data types in a program -- but it's still hard for traditional OOP users to get used to).

* The Julia abstract type system is somewhat linear, which makes it a little less flexible as far as contracts/interfaces are concerned, if you choose to implement things that way.

Of course Julia has so many features that make it worthwhile, that it is worth investigating for many projects. It has multimethods, (static) dependent typing, very easy and efficient C interface (soon C++ interface), C-like performance is possible, garbage-collection, macros, runtime console (REPL), great numerical features, Jit compilation, a good selection of libraries/packages, a package manager, profiling, various development tools, a good (highly intelligent and helpful) community.
The one thing I really took away from this (and unfortunately not entirely relevant) is that American English also has it's own SPELLING of Aluminium, not just pronunciation.

It makes the difference in pronunciation make a lot more sense to me. Are there (m)any other cases of this, where both the spelling and pronunciation are different? Leisure, herbs, etc.? (Lift/Elevator doesn't count)
Incremental GC is in the works. Do see:

https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/8699
https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/5227
The Nitty Gritty of “Hello World” on OS X
The political obstacles are very real. Getting over them or overcoming inertia is valuable. Just not in the sense of directly making clients money.
Another example of why Google's amassing of personal information is dangerous for society.
Shoot me an email - viral@mayin.org
What I meant with "issue to fix" - add a section in the documentation that has some kind of words that outsiders connect with "error handling": Error, Exception etc

Perhaps I didn't search hard enough - but the next person will probably not search harder either. "Result" is not typically a word one would search for.
Erlang lets you write maintainable, robust code.

C++ lets you write fast code.

Haskell is interesting.

If you want maintainable AND fast, have a look at Rust.