skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
From what I can tell the writer is arguing that abstractions and encapsulations are wasteful of resources. The author claims that this is an inherent problem of abstractions and a lack of understanding of their implementations. The justification for this is that time and mental energy are resources as well and although we are being wasteful of other resources we use up less time and mental energy. The author states "However, during recent years, I have become increasingly convinced that the portion of true tradeoff is quite marginal" however doesn't seem to give anything quantifiable to illustrate this marginality. Much of the argument is based on anecdote and personal ideas on general human nature.

I am inclined to think that the author has come to this conclusion because time and mental energy are less valuable to them than other resources and that's not an unreasonable stance to take. However I don't think this view is widely shared and that thought most people agree that premature optimisation is the root of all evil.
meteor and espresso.js are nice. react is cool.
Look at the profit per employee at firms such as Google, Apple, Facebook, and Microsoft. There are a whole lot of people being paid less than the value they create. (Remember, this is profit after expenses and salaries and such)

http://www.buzzfeed.com/peterlauria/what-18-of-the-biggest-t...
Will this be the end of trading pits at CME?
Supreme Court Weighing Limits of Internet Free Speech
Polarsea 360
The company is Astek Sud-Est. And yes, contractors are paid between contracts in normal contracting companies. In Sophia-Antipolis, where I was situated it was a common practice to put a clause in the contract that you won't be paid, even though by law should be paying you. In the end, when you are a foreigner and you barely speak the language it's rather difficult to seek your rights.
When I read these stories, it always amazes me how the ordinary terms we use everyday are simply the names of the people who discovered them. That and how difficult it was to make discoveries back then when even the math wasn't fully formed. Today we just ask Google for anything we don't know.
As ussual, patio11's "charge more" advice applies. You should bill at a rate proportionate to the value provided, not the effort required from you to deliver it. Your client knows what value they expect to get out of the training, but they most likely have no idea of how hard you have to work to deliver it to them (and even if they are inclined to guess, they will underestimate it). Listen to Patrick, use a ROI argument and negotiate on scope.

With that out of the way, I'm going to throw some caveats at you. The idea is not to discourage you, just to make sure you realize the effort that will go into preparing for those 40 hour of training you will deliver and price yourself accordingly.

As a first timer on professional training, be aware that 20+ people to train is a large number. You won't be able to achieve much personal interaction with each student, and you might find a great deal of variance in their backgrounds and skill levels at the start of the course. Be prepared for outliers, at both ends of the spectrum, they can chew through time that would be better spent on topics for the bulk of the class.

You will also find that large firms can be notoriously bad at gauging the needs of their teams, you could deliver exactly what is asked of you by the management without meeting the dev team's needs. Take a moment at the start to gauge the team's expectations, explicitly ask them what they want to get out of the training and try to work some of that into the lessons.

You will have to take some time to learn about the team you will be training: Are they distributed? Do they all work together? Are they already working with the thing you will train them on? Are they building line of business software? Are they being rented out to third partys? All of this will influence what the team and what management expect to get out of you, and therefore what you whould deliver. Be ready to manage expectations from both ends.

Does it sound like a lot of work yet? This is just the start.

TL;DR be prepared for pathology on your first engagement. Charge more.
What does being young or female have to do with it?
Thanks! Interesting. I'll try to dig out the recent papers. Although I have a feeling that most of this is not that new. LLVM is just a very basic SSA, which is early 90s. Agda builds on similar grounds as things like Coq, Minlog, even ACL2 and Isabelle, which are very old. There've been a lot of buzz in the concurrent code verification ever since the early pi-calculus papers by R. Milner.

But the liquid type inference seems to be a genuinely new thing, and apparently I totally missed it somehow. It even seems like I unknowingly reinvented something similar, by using arbitrary Prolog code as type attributes on top of a basic Hindley-Milner.
Upvoted because what you said was true and relevant, but the downvotes you got from other people suggest it might be an idea to work on your delivery; occasions like the current tragedy tend to be occasions when people don't appreciate comments that come across as snarky.
But how easily can someone drop your React component that utilizes jQuery Calendar into their own application?
I am using Backbone.Marionette. I like it because it is simple. Marionette helps you to write consistent codes and avoid javascript chaos even when your project gets bigger. You probably have to write more codes than Angular to archive the same thing, but the effort will pay when your project becomes big because you know what you are doing. No magic exist.
Random Data Generators and Builders
Launch Snowdrift.coop (fund-drive)
Crowdsourced journey planner for India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, and more
Because Apple is not close to having a monopoly like Google?
from my layman physics knowledge

* how did he survive inside a black hole

possible for supermassive black holes up to a certain distance from the singularity. To my knowledge there's still the possibility of ring shaped singularities that could be passed through and we don't really know yet what would happen there. Unified quantum gravity theory needed first, so remains in the artistic freedom of the director.

* how did he pass through the Schwarzschild radius with his simple spaceship

Again the only question is whether the tidal forces would be too strong and a supermassive black hole does not have extremely strong forces at its event horizon.

* why was there no time dilation as he approached the black hole

I think there was. After returning from the closely orbiting planet they had a few decades such that he now was a bit younger than his daughter, after coming out of the black hole another 50-60 years have passed for the outside world. Granted though, as far as I understand GRT, actually entering a black hole takes literally forever from the point of view of the outside world (i.e. time breaks down completely), but again, we don't know what would happen with quantum gravity, so maybe the infinity would cancel out somehow if our theories were better.

* why did his spaceship break down inside the black hole but he was able to eject with his simple spacesuit and survive

Tidal forces act the stronger the more vertical distance from the gravitational center an object has in itself (i.e. the height of the object from the singularity's point of view). A spaceship is much larger than a human, so it will break down earlier.

* how did he realistically survive out in cold space (at the end, yes okay I know this is technically possible but still..)

You do have a few minutes in space - the coldness isn't actually a problem since nothing can transport heat in a vacuum. It's rather the pressure difference that will give you trouble, but there are some measures such as emptying your lungs that will give you more time.
you mean you currently have a static IPv4 IP?
You will still need a router at home, and it can still filter any packets coming in/going out, even if the connected devices have globally accesible addresses. So, there should not be a huge problem.
Put two dots above the (smallest increment of the) repeating part of the pattern. Work on getting those two dots to overlay (forming three dots with the one in the center bright and those on the outside lighter.)

Once you can do that it's as easy as moving your eyes down while maintaining your eye position (and if that really doesn't work you can try drawing two dark black lines down the image.)

Enjoy! Unless you can't get those dots to overlay in which case you at least then know why you were never able to do it :)
Well done, congratulations. Are there any plans to continue the Flask port of the framework?
Its not just a Britishism. Its identified in the master's thesis linked to in the article [1] as a form of "turning the table" which "seem[s] to place the onus of ending the conversation on the conversational partner." (pg 63)

[1] http://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=405...
C++ is unsafe thanks to its C compatibility, unless Modern C++ idioms are being used.

So it is natural in a world full of out of bounds exploits, hazardous pointers and use after free/delete, to complain about them.

As for Android, it comes even from the Google team, given the little support they give to the NDK.
Addressable != routable.

Think of a doorman for a luxury building or a gated community. The people living inside have publicly available addresses, but knowing the addreses doesn't mean that the doorman will automatically let you through to go visit.
Should Science Save Modern Art?
Lessons Learned: Never raise to high expectations
I think mobile ISPs are leading the charge here. I know my phone on T-Mobile is using IPv6.
Ask HN: Biometric USB flash for recent Mac OSX?
I am looking for usb flash memory that encrypts the data and authenticates with users' fingerprint. IronKey F200 is exactly what I want but only 10.8 is supported.

Anyone has ideas that works on OSX 10.9 or later?
I am actually just happy that they are making movies involving space exploration. We really need to bring back space exploration into the minds of the public so we can get support for awesome missions in the future.
No. You have an IPv4. Does not matter if dynamic or static. With DS-Lite you have neither. You're behind a carrier level NAT.
The state of patents in Europe (and 600 million reasons for you to care)
It shares more than just the name. The Angular rewrite was unavoidable if they had any hope of integrating seamlessly with web components. They also remove a lot of the concepts that people lambasted Angular 1.0 for and end up with a much more elegant framework. It seems they were damned whether or not they wrote Angular 2.0 - people would either bitch about the current framework for being convoluted in places or bitch about the new one for having breaking changes.
> I'd be very interested in knowing how these stats were calculated

Reasonably sure it's based off something similar to this: https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/73/slides/v6ops-4.pdf

And yes, it is basically 12% of US users are capable of connecting to google over ipv6, not that they necessarily did/have. A browser might, for a URL that resolves to both v4 and v6 addresses, always try the v4 address first; this'd give you users that _can_ connect over v6 but don't. FWIW I have a v6-capable connection and find on chrome I pretty much always connect to google and facebook over ipv6, but I have no idea how IE/FF/Safari behave.
I'm not sure at the moment, we'll see once the remaining bits of the kickstarter work (releases 3.1 and 3.2) are done and released.
We've decided to go with React + Flux. Using Flux and CommonJS (since react plays well with it) allowed us to split all our code into small npm modules that do one and only one thing. Never had easier time managing client-side app code and a bunch of collaborating developers.
Just to expand on that, with IP6, it would make sense to simply give every router, DSL "modem" etc a [ed: theoretically, publicly] routable ipv6 subnet. This makes (in theory) everything easier: the firewall can simply block/allow -- no need for long chains of NAT-rules. It might make networks marginally more transparent -- but it really means very little in terms of security. Nor really for privacy.
Possibly bad specific example, although they didn't survive even a year after their IPO. The point remains though. For every start-up success story, there are thousands of failures. Who's smart enough to pick the successes ahead of time AND get a job with one of them?
Yes, that's an entirely different thing. But I would rather compare a production software system to something bit more dynamic, like a nuclear plant or an airplane than a bridge.
Yes, but it is simplified by removing a whole class of exploits C and C++ allow for.
You might check the comments at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8679245 for alternatives (React, for example, seems to be gaining mindshare), but this may also be a good time to reflect on the broader implications (as many are doing there as well).
The solution to that would be to make the per-person overhead costs (taxes, administration, health plan, etc.) for a job as close to zero as possible. A basic income would help with that.

Then there are still practical disadvantages (more communication needed, etc.), but these may be outweighed by the advantages (more different people on the same job may mean more creativity, etc.)
Show HN: ComparedCare – Find the most affordable healthcare services near you
What prevents you do a "npm install" ?
Ridley Scott’s Explanation for Whitewashing His Exodus Movie Is Infuriating
The thing about their energy budget was not well done. Why did they need rockets back on earth when they can mount the gravity well of a black hole and multiple planets afterwards? About your point with the order of visits though: I could see them using Gargantua for a slinghot maneuver after the first planet, which should work given the right constellation. It wasn't shown this way though.
SPOILER ALERT

The science was basically non-existing: controlling a distant device with gravitational waves? Which can only be controlled whenever it is in a specific room? Which stores the information transmitted and repeats it endlessly (otherwise, how is the daughter able to gather all information transmitted)? How long does he spend inside the black hole transmitting what must be like lots of information in morse code, by slowly pulling gravitational waves? Looks to me like several hours / days? What is the time dilation of getting into a black hole if getting into a planet gives you a 1 hour to 7 years ratio? Getting inside / outside a black hole, unharmed? What part of this is current physics domain?

More strange facts: the device in the black hole was supposedly man-made ("we are they"), by the men of the future. But the men of the future can only exist if this particular crisis is overcome. And this crisis can only be overcome if this device is in the black-hole. Granted that the man of the future controls the five dimensions, and thus time, but we currently do not, so we can not in any way survive this crisis. Which means the men of the future will never be, so they can not build the device to survive the crisis.

Just the very simple facts are maybe according to the current scientific knowledge (time dilation, gravity effects, I can even accept a worm-hole), but most of the movie is just an exercise on futility with a very high dose of emotions. Boring, slow and not enjoyable at all. The fact that they are pretending that this is a science-based movie makes it insulting. If you want to do a Hobbit, do it and I'll have a good time, but do not pretend it is based on any established science.

Gravity was orders of magnitude better.
This works ok if you're a single developer working alone on a project. This becomes very difficult in a larger group where you have some turnover and everyone has different backgrounds. Having a framework that makes a lot of the decisions for you greases the wheels to productivity. Give engineers an inch to bike-shed, they'll take a mile when choosing the paint color.
Amazon actually has a competition [0] to design a robot that can do the picking. The difficult part ATM is being able to grab hold of a large variety of objects, from keychains to footlong dildos. I'm sure that they'll introduce picking robots for the more uniformly sized products like books soon enough, or introduce a container system to provide a generic framework for the picking robots to use.

Still leaves humans to assert the quality of the products though, although with fully automated systems I'd imagine that products get damaged less while in the warehouses.

[0] http://amazonpickingchallenge.org/
Here's how I (accidentally) learned to do it: hold up a forefinger from each hand, pointed at each other, with a very small gap in between. Now look at something in the distance through the gap: you should see a magic "hot dog finger" floating in the air between them.

Once you can see this, alternate between looking at your fingers and looking at the distance. Once you've got the mechanic down, you can start intentionally unfocusing without anything in the distance to look at, which is what it takes to see a magic eye.
"Mouse usage is obligatory. You cannot use the acme editor, for instance, without frequently taking your hand off the keyboard." - in my opinion this is a disadvantage and I wonder if this can be improved and if so, in which way.
I am a french speaker and I ended up going with a slight variation :

"Right|Okay, I have to leave you (now)+."

In french it implies something like "I wish I could go on but alas I am obliged to take care of something else right now".
> If you look at the shootout, Python and Ruby are comfortably ahead of Lisp in the expressiveness stakes.

The code in the 'shootout' is verbose, to make it fast. Much faster than Ruby or Python.

Generally small code in Ruby and Python can be more compact. For larger code this is then no longer the case, once the macro-advantage kicks in...
"... it's in the bucket of tools which - at least to me - should be treated as liable to be cut at any time and don't rely on it."

Unless you've paid for a guaranteed period of support, bug fixes and extensions of functionality, this how you should treat all code libraries surely? All libs come as is, and statements of future actions are always expressions of intent, not facts. If your company is utterly dependent on a single free 3rd party library then you should be prepared to take over ownership of it - or accept that your company's survival is at the whim of another. Personally, I would not be swayed by any brand name here - but who would you trust (enough to bet your company on) to provide long term support for a free OSS library?

Personally, I would consider the closing down of a very niche, free, consumer product based on a seemingly dying web technology as a very poor guide towards how Google will treat GWT, which is actually used by them for website development.
Not using client-side scripting
Where Does the Internet of Things Come From?
I here declare, that I disagree.

http://www.nickbostrom.com/fable/dragon.html
Remind me of the sentiment shared by Becker before his death when he wrote The Denial of Death.
> For the purposes of the parent poster, a ball-park number of distance is enough

Citation needed.

It's been said repeatedly that considering the strong rotation of the black hole is critical for the situation in the movie to be possible. "It's hard" is not an excuse to ignore a strong effect.
Exactly, the JS demos we're amazed with today were done 10 years ago in Flash. Flash as a technology was pretty good, but it was just misused.
iOS extension to mail notes to yourself from any app
It's a fun experience and the album covers are works of art. My 3-year-old daughter loves to go to her grandparent's house and help put the needle down on Yellow Submarine.
I would agree that carrier grade NAT is a downgrade
Can IPv6 become, ironically, the reason ipv4 never dies? Once a majority move to v6 wouldn't that mean a whole bunch of the ipv4 space is being free'd up.

This allows those who never update to actually never update.
"What if [HTTP] was a simpler, easier-to-parse format that was as extensible?"

Then it would become HTTP. It would take time but it would be inevitable.

HTTP didn't just happen. Using Fred Brooks' terminology, the real world is essentially complicated. We may pile accidental complexity on top of it at times, but the real world is essentially complicated.

While I agree that there is room for accidental complexity to occasionally be swept away and a new clean slate presented, I do not believe that a new protocol for HTTP could solve all the problems HTTP solves without being at least nearly as complex as HTTP. The set of problems that HTTP solves is a great deal larger than "request page -> get page". There's caching, proxies, security, encryption, policy enforcement, needs that schools have, needs that Facebook has... and that's still just the high-level table of contents of the table of contents of the world of HTTP. And if you think you can just ignore those cases and simplify... try it and you'll see how wrong you are.

Note I do think there is room for improvement in HTTP, and it probably isn't the direction of 2.0. But it's not like there's some sort of brilliantly simple protocol in there struggling to get out, buried under layers of cruft. It's a thorny hard problem and the result will be a thorny hard protocol. It often fails to work not because the protocol itself is broken but because people doing work in HTTP have truly failed to account for a fundamental use case properly, like caching or the use of proxies.

Also note that there's no guarantee that "simple protocol + time" will yield something any simpler than HTTP. Under HTTP is a fairly powerful idea, and there's a reason why so many Internet protocols look very similar to it. It would be easy to start with something "simpler" that turns out to grow much, much worse.
USBCondoms / SyncStop
Ruby had at least three:

https://www.bountysource.com/fundraisers/489-rvm-2-0

https://www.bountysource.com/teams/virtus/fundraiser

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1397300529/railsapp/pos...
Note that the weird direction is not final yet - Angular 2.0 is still a ways off, you don't actually have to use AtScript to build your applications (ES6, ES6 + Traceur annotations, CoffeeScript, Dart, AtScript should all work), and the funky HTML attribute syntax is still under debate because most browsers don't actually support .setAttribute() with bracketed attribute names.

Besides, 1.x works and will keep functioning fine for years to come. You won't be required to update or change your tech stack if 2.0 is ever released.

I'd defer looking around until 2.0 is actually released, 1.x will do until then.
I can't resist pointing out for a third time what colanderman and schoen have already said: JSON supports bigints exactly the same as small ints. Where did you get the idea that it didn't?
I am wondering why other dedicated stuff doesn't seem to have a future despite its own physical nature. E.g. Chumby shot down, there haven't been much demand for WikiReaders lately and I was actually worried for e-paper ebook readers until Amazon released a new generation this Fall.

I admire physical things like LPs, but they are not practival for my liking, I decided against them when buying my first Hi-Fi system back in 1999 and I still do now. I think my next Hi-Fi system will be a nice DAC for a computer (would be nice to find a good one that supports Blueetooth AND USB at the same time) plus a nice pair of monitor speakers. ADAM A5X's could have digital inputs, as they have digital amps already anyway, but they don't.

One thing I love about LPs, though, is that they have such huge space for gorgeous art.