skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Free speech.

In a democracy, if I have a political opinion, I must be allowed to express it. It follows that I must be allowed to pay a spokesperson to express it on my behalf, and it follows from that that I must be allowed to fund an organization with the mandate of expressing it.

That's all SCOTUS' Citizens United ruling was about; there does not seem to be a reasonable way to limit political spending across the board without at some point allowing an unconstitutional restriction on political speech, and that's anathema to our society. (And as CU has demonstrated, the distinction between that and unregulated campaign donations is academic in practice.)

That's not to say that there's no way to draw a line, but so far the anti-finance crowd has been largely unwilling to engage with this argument, and none has been readily forthcoming.
ah so why do the Rothschilds put a good chunk of family money in an active fund aka RIT Capital partners.

index funds are fine for some one with only a couple of grand spare - with the sort of money that comes from a good ipo you need to be a bit more sophisticated than that.
For those that have a hard time seeing why this matters, it can be thought of as a matter of sampled versus not.

Games are essentially sampled screenshots. With virtually no hints as to what happened between samples. Just, in one frame an item is in coordinate X. In the next, it is in Y.

Movies, on the other hand, were not discrete samples of time. If between frame A and B, an item moved between point X and Y, then it will leave a blur between them.

That is, the information is distorted, but it is there. Unlike the discrete sampling where the information is just lost.
I only invest in large caps, ones everyone knows, based on two criteria:

1) They are are fairly or somewhat undervalued given the conventional market view and metrics.

2) They are likely to be significant beneficiaries of large-scale technological trends that the market is oblivious to and has not priced into the stock.

Then I wait a few years for the trend to become more obvious and for the market to adjust the stock price accordingly for the new upside. My portfolio is essentially a ladder of different technology trends that take 3-4 years to mature. Occasionally one does not pan out but, while I may not make much money, I never lose much money because "good large-cap tech stock".

The only "small caps" I invest in are tech startups. But that is a different portfolio than what I am talking about here.

Since I spend my days thinking about trends in technology anyway, this whole exercise takes little additional effort. I might add or remove something from that list of stocks once a year. When I save money from my paycheck, I semi-randomly put it in a stock on that list so no thinking required.

Yes, I could do some kind of sophisticated portfolio analysis but that would defeat the goal of spending as little time on it as possible. I only check against the S&P 500 as a sanity check. My lifetime annualized return (decades) is about +2 over the S&P 500 but the last five years has been more like +4, so I can't complain. The annual return relative to the S&P 500 has actually been surprisingly steady over time, so no undue volatility.
Echohack’s Mental Tools for Programmers
A 17th-Century Argument for the Virtues of Coffee, Chocolate, and Tea
> It would be so great if mankind is able to cooperate in the colonization of our solar system.

We already collaborate for the exploration of the solar system, via robotic probes and giant telescopes. That's good enough. Colonization is an all different matter, and a weird one if you ask me. Earth is the largest place with a solid ground in the Solar system, and it's by far the most hospitable. Settling on an other planet like mars would cost an insane amount of money[1] and would at best double the available real estate for our species. It's not so sure it would be worth it, especially considering that a lot of people would end up having contributed for something that other people will benefit from.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YDnGHaXdxw
I once had a VP of Engineering quote me the "value" of my options using that calculation. I declined the offer. Ironically, it was a Lisp startup, and Lispers "know the value of everything and the cost of nothing."
AFAIK neither California or Alaska are countries.
Indeed, bass reflex is something else, it's tuned to a specific frequency and with bass reflex the whole box is the sound source.
> Why would I want to write a class/object when all i need is print "Hello World".

There is a huge gap between what OO could/was meant to be and how it is seen nowadays. I prefer thinking of OO as it's implemented in Smalltalk or Io instead of in C++ or Java.

To be more specific, in Smalltalk your hello world would look like this:

Transcript show: 'Hello world'

and in Io:

"Hello world" println

No class/object declaration in sight, right?

And then this:

> The root problem seems to be trying to do eveything the OO way when all you need is a function

is a wrong question altogether - there is nothing stopping you from writing a function in OO (other than broken and dumbed down implementations in major languages, that is). In Smalltalk:

my_func := [ 'Look, I'm a function!' ].
"There's this slightly unusual way of calling the function though:"
my_func value. "returns 'Look, I'm a function!'"

similarly in Io:

my_func := block( "Look, I'm a function!" )
my_func call # same as above

So, to make my point clear: there is NOTHING in OOP itself which REQUIRES verbosity and over-abstraction. On the contrary: going "full OO" makes it easier to write short, readable, to-the-point code. It also makes it easy to use FP patterns should you want it.

What you're arguing against are the currently popular implementations of OO, which are just bad. And before I forget: Erlang (and I program in it quite a bit) is one of the best Object Oriented languages I worked with.
Ya know... at the end of the book "War and Piece", they really get into this stuff for quite a few pages. http://books.google.com/books?id=5ftPAQAAIAAJ&printsec=front...

Page 330, Search for the sentence "What is the force that moves a people?" and read from there to be taken on some kinda existential journey.
Make a DIY bass cabinet and you learn a lot along the way.
But, a series of pattern matching expressions can compile down to a bunch of sealed/final classes that descend from a common base class. In that case, it would still end up using a vtable[1]. I think this is how it works in F# and Scala.

[1] I think that the JITs for the CLR and JVM can do better than vtables in the cases of sealed/final classes.
Err... OOP isn't better/worse than any other approach, but there are some criticisms that I can't disagree with... but I like having objects when work requires some book-keeping

Programming is like kung-fu. You gotta pick and choose the best of each style, when they are relevant.
Cooperating with the future
Very cool! Shannon's paper was, to be honest, a little out of my comfort zone when I first read it (this isn't really my field academically), and I got a little lost on the first read of this, but someone below posted your full thesis which I will definitely read when I have the time.
That's a bit of a gimmick. Management still pays themselves from the % of invested funds, not fund performance. Same issue as with a nonprofit -- the corporate profit structure is only one source of moral hazard.
If only Visual Studio/C++ used AST! At least in Visual Studio 2012/C++, context sensitive search doesn't often work at all. Try to get context for something common like ".create". You get a lot of non-context hits, even thousands. Maybe I'm doing something wrong? Maybe this doesn't happen in VS2013? In most other IDEs context sensitivity is better, but I still fall back to command line in Linux. It's just so much faster (for me). I get what I want in about 0.1 to 3 seconds and can easily search near (grep -A and -B switches) these context hits with '/' in "less".

Git grep is great too.

Regardless, if it works for you, great. We should all use what works and disregard needless debate and politics.
> For a brief, wonderful time, I thought all academic papers were of a similar caliber

I had the exact same thought in college when I started reading a handful of well-written papers like this myself. This really set a standard that for 60+ years now academia hasn't always maintained.
Assuming such tools exist for a specific OS, and not only UNIX flavours.
The thing that I learned from SICP isn't that functional is greater than OO, but that functional and OO are both design strategies that can assist you in designing a solution to a problem.
Different math is also hard in different ways.

I knew physics students who found calculus infinitely easier than doing trigonometry proofs. But there's others for whom the very idea of calculus is horrifying, and statistics and calculus were literally different tracks entirely when I was in school because it was pretty common for people to utterly fail to get one even if they could ace the other.
You could live quite well off only a £million or so in the UK so 2 mill in the USA will give you a nice life style - baring any catastrophic health issues
There have been tests using a Valeo electric supercharger to augment the existing traditional exhaust-driven turbocharger on a Ford Focus. The firm Ricardo was able to increase gas mileage from 39 to 59mpg in European test cycles.

It doesn't really result in an increase in real-world performance, since it doesn't help the top end of the power curve, but gives a big jump to stop-and-go performance.

http://blog.caranddriver.com/blowing-your-way-to-savings-how...
Ah, the true Scotsman argument!
"Inherently harmful" is a bit vitriolic. If not a majority then a huge percentage of the world's systems are based around OOP and for the most part they function just fine. When people say these things I wonder what bubble they are living in where something is either the best thing ever or shit. The world doesn't work like that.

That said, I prefer a hybrid approach which is why I use Scala. It's not an either/or (or, if you prefer, an Option monad :-)
As an outsider, I am trying to learn the basics of computer science. I was recommended this book along with the ones listed below. Do I need to study them all or can I do one r two of them and move on?

Introduction to the Theory of Computation by Sipser.

Programming Language Pragmatics by Michael L Scott.

Compilers: Principles, Techniques, and Tools by Aho et al.

Concepts, Techniques, and Models of Computer Programming by Van Roy.

Intro to Computing Systems by Yale Patt & Sanjay Patel.

Computer Systems: A Programmer's Perspective by Randal Bryant & David O'Hallaron.
It's worth mentioning that there isn't actually anything special about "Github, Bitbucket, Google code" with relation to go get. Those sites are actually just serving up a web page with a meta tag of name "go-import" with info that go get uses to grab the repos. You can, and I have, put that meta tag on any page and get the same functionality
Explorer to Queen Izzabella (or whomever): "We'd like to sail west and find a shortcut to the Indies."

Queenie: "Sorry. We've got poverty and people who are hungry here, you'll have to wait."

(400 years later)

Descendant of that Explorer: "Can we go now?"

Queenie: "Sorry, still haven't solved that poverty stuff. Go do some farming or something."

----

A lot of the "poverty and hunger stuff" is caused by corruption and unworkable politics and ideologies. Another big factor is simple human nature. "The poor will be with us always." It's a wicked problem that will probably never go away. We shouldn't use it as an excuse. (I would be quite happy trading military and secret-police spending, which is basically out of control).

Oh, we can try to address poverty. But putting everything else on hold doesn't make sense. A rising tide floats all boats; more resources and better technology will help everyone, at least a little.

[I'm actually not a big fan of manned exploration any more; it's expensive, and robots can do way better than we can, for the foreseeable future. Oh, putting men on other planets has undeniable poetry and significance, but if you want to do science or mining or whatever, you're better off with metal than monkeys].
> You know the facts but are still willing to say wrong things?

What wrong things?

> "Yet most people don't know about how common viral STDs actually are".

Of course, there is a lot of missinformation, still, how does that contradict my statement?

> Not "you're going to get it" but "people have it already."

Well exactly, but my statement was the not promiscuous have almost cero possibility, not that they won't get it.

>That doesn't speak well of your commenting style

Neather of your comprehension abilities.
Containers are a particular case. almost nobody re implements a container. and you're talking and template, not OOP.

> How would you do this without some kind of "object orientation"?

Variables. Variables are not "objects". What is an "object" anyway ? It's a shallow abstract concept which is impractical.

> The moment you formulate an "object" in code with interactions on that object

No that's not what the article is trying to talk about.

What people argue against OOP is how it's applied to anything for any case. Creating new classes/type/abstract concept each time you want to realize something can often lead to code bloat. How many classes named "XXX_manager" can one encounter ?

> Sorry for shattering everyone's hopes and dreams of coding pure OOPless.

OOP tends to have state, which doesn't bode well will multithreading, which tend to favor functional programming. I don't know if the future is going to be massively multithreaded, but I just think that OOP is just another way to structure a program, nothing more. Processes and threads already are objects. Functions too. So why tell students to create new types all the time ?
I would suggest this too
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY
As you discovered, _stret/_fpret remain necessary.

objc_msgSend()'s type is not expressible in C; the only time it is correct to call objc_msgSend without a cast is when calling a method IMP with the literal vararg type of id (*method) (id self, SEL sel, ...);

In other words, essentially never.
Hi, this could be what you need :)
https://github.com/kripken/emscripten/wiki/Asyncify
"The sooner you start to code, the longer the program will take."

I certainly benefit from regular reminders of this.
I have an Xubuntu box with older hardware (running a pentium D something or other) which frequently experiences something similar. I have no idea if it is the same issue as either of these and always chalked it up to faulty hardware
The information in your paragraph should be the first thing explained on dmarc.org in a FAQ item about who shouldn't bother publishing DMARC.

> We need a sensible way to take a message from Bob, validly signed by Bob, and wrap it so that I can send it on to you, perhaps with some added content at the beginning and end, or quoted, and additionally signed by me; so that you know the part claimed to be from Bob is really from Bob; and you know that I really forwarded it and wrapped it with my content. If we could solve the forwarding use-cases, I think that would remove the primary bottleneck to adoption.

Here is a system that blows away DMARC.

Let's have a DNS record, similar to DMARC's, which is keyed on the From: domain in the same way.

This DNS record provides a URL template. The verifier inserts an item taken from the e-mail into this template and performs a query on the URL. The URL responds with a 200 OK or an error.

What item is inserted into the URL template? A special token which is added to the e-mail by the originating domain in a special header.

This token is a 128 bit number (say). It can be completely random, or it can be a cookie of some kind. What it isn't: it's not a hash over the whole message. Basically what it means is up to the domain. It could contain a crypto hash over some selected headers. (The URL could include a few important headers as URL parameters, like From: and Date: to help the server: and the template language for the URL could be flexible so that the publisher can decide what headers they need in addition to the special token.)

To publish this protection mechanism, your just need this DNS record, a server for the URLs and your mail software to add the tokens to messages.

An example implementation of tokens would be: generate a
random 128 bit number, and store it in a cache that expires in one week. The server just checks whether the number is in that cache.

Numbers which are not validated in any way against headers and whatnot could be replayed by an attacker spoofing your domain. (The attacker receives a legitimate mail, and then uses the token to generate a fake one.)

Protection against this would be: 1) mix information about the additional headers into the token; don't just make it random, and then request these headers in the URL template and check. 2) expire the tokens in a timely way: don't certify stale tokens more than N days old for some reasonably small N. 3) detect abuses of a token, like too many lookups: your mail is not expected to go through 20 hops, so 20 hits on a token is suspicious, right?
Old IE support lifecycle (2003)
I think "time slowing" was the original inspiration for this subreddit (with no recent activity):

http://www.reddit.com/r/SomethingNew/top/?sort=top&t=all
And it's a shame, especially because Manhattan is likely one of the few U.S. localities with sufficient population density to make mixed-use areas thrive.

When I spend time in Asia, I find it remarkable how well cities like Tokyo [1] and Taipei function.

[1] http://urbankchoze.blogspot.tw/2014/04/japanese-zoning.html
I have been complaining about it since the MS-DOS days and many of us used Turbo Pascal, when Assembly wasn't required.

Somehow along the way UNIX spread into the enterprise and brought C along.
It saddens me that any opinion that doubts the grand federal EU is almost automatically downvoted, regardless of the nature of said opinion.
YapQ – The right UI for Wikipedia's places
> After waiting 20 minutes, I called the driver, who did not speak any version of English I am familiar with. He claimed to be relatively near my house but was unable to tell me how he was going to get there. I canceled and tried again. This time I got a young woman who also apparently didn’t speak English well.

As someone whose parents speak English with accents, it really makes me cringe when some Americans complain about non-native English speakers in service level jobs. I would hate to have one of my parents deemed less worthy of a job due to their accents. I understand that some jobs benefit greatly from employees that speak English fluently, but I don't think a driver is one of those positions and I doubt many would pay a premium to have a native speaker as a driver.

Maybe I'm overreacting but statements like the one quoted above always come off as slightly xenophobic. It almost makes me throw out the rest of the authors arguments as a rant.
I thought even the most die hard WMD/Iraq war defenders had given up by now. Apparently not.
It's a mix.

When you're playing the stock market, going for single stock picks is a really bad idea. Diversification -- even modest diversification of a few companies, but preferably in different markets, hugely reduces your volatility risk. Tech is highly volatile -- investing in Microsoft, Google, Apple, Cisco, and Oracle would be nominally diversified (and there were a couple of huge winners there over the past 10-15 years), but you also incorporate a large sector risk.

When you're working for a start-up, the key is that you're moving beyond simple punch-the-clock (or per-month) income. You're not just earning a wage or salary, but there's some upside potential in the company itself. Of course, that is a tremendous risk, and the odds are good that any given company won't pay off. There are also multiple ways in which that bet is rigged, including options vesting and the fact that your employer can effectively claw back your earnings by firing you (for any or no reason, at any time) before your options vest. You've also got to have the cash to actually buy out your options.

There are other ways of building equity, one of which is to invest in your own business, venture, real estate, etc., outside of your employer. Buying investment rental property, for example.

The key though is that you want to move beyond just "I'm a wage / salary owner" status.
Why does an enterprise app have to be implemented in Java (or any other language with similar semantics)? Just because you can doesn't necessarily mean that it's the best way.
Making Emacs Work for Me
I've been working on leaving OO recently.
This is my current API. No deep nested hierarchies of classes anymore!

self.player.addComponent(Controller())
self.player.addComponent(Shooter())
self.player.addComponent(Jumper())
self.player.addComponent(Life())
self.player.addComponent(CharacterPhysics())

People who generally code applications could learn a lot from game developers and game engines. I took inspiration from Stencil and HaXe (but using Swift and SpriteKit)
http://www.stencyl.com
Yes! Orbit is very cool too even though it's not updated often. I'm really glad to see such a variety of projects in Lua community!
So has anyone besides Dave Jones managed to reproduce the issue? The article doesn't mention.

This doesn't look like front page news until it is confirmed to be a widespread problem.
I'm not sure. I think, for many users, SQLite is sufficient, which is why I'll be using it for prototype work in the future. Trying to add things like arrays seems like a lot of work, since you also need to add things like HQL's EXPLODE at the same time.
Honest question: what guarantees that if the bug reproduced 10 minutes after a snapshot, it will reproduce again if you resume running nondeterminstically after that snapshot ?
>There's no command to get a player's location

You can see it on the debug overlay. One of the F keys.

Also, I'd recommend running the server inside screen so you can get back to it from ssh
Just because some crazy people created very offensive posters, we shouldn't assume that the general swiss population is so anti-immigration (and racist).
That's the point of the presentation. Try reading it.
This law was not backed by the party that usually campaigns for harsher immigration laws. The reason is that this party just recently managed to pass an immigration law so harsh it's incompatible with Switzerland's treaties with the EU. All through the campaign they said if the law would pass then we would just renegotiate the treaties. Nine months later no one knows yet how to convince the EU of accepting to change the treaties, or how to interpret that law in way the EU won't mind. And there seems to be a wide agreement that people want to keep the treaties. So we have this huge unsolved problem and on top of that we have to vote on an insanely restrictive immigration law that goes much further than the last one, and doesn't even really pretend it won't harm the economy.

When you vote you get a little brochure with the recommendations of the different parties. Here in Geneva every single party, even the most rabid racists, recommended to vote no. I think it's the first time in my life I saw this unanimity.
> Polymorphic dispatch (is that the term?) to replace if blocks.

It looks like you're talking about Predicate Dispatch. http://c2.com/cgi-bin/wiki?PredicateDispatching
Sweet, Liked the design.
I've noticed that in downtown Seattle, the GPS has some difficulties maintaining a tight fix on your location. Couple that with how close together some of the roads are and you may find yourself teleporting from one avenue to the other as you move toward your destination.

It works great in suburbia, as expected.
Are they? Personally, I'm wary of a federal EU as well, but I still find that a poorly argued post. You shouldn't assume you know the reasons for the downvotes.

(Not that I downvoted it, mind you)