skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think a lot of developer don't really understand OOP, and as a result they mess it up. In many ways functional programming is more straight forward, easier to get your head around it, but you can still mess it up just as much.

I feel your statement above is a little naive. You should read some Martin Fowler. Be less reactive and more informed. Find balance.

Software systems, regardless of methodology, need good experienced designers There is no silver bullet.
HP Launches EliteBook Folio 1020 World's Thinnest and Lightest Business Laptops
H1Bs need to be allowed to bounce around because this is the core of the problem! Everyone seems to love to skirt around the real issue. The real issue is that people are brought here and they can't go anywhere regardless of how bad the system sucks except back home. In most cases the places they are coming from are in an even worst state so we stay here instead. At least other things aren't so bad. I came to the united states on an H1B and yes I was paid significantly less than what I thought I was worth and also well below what US citizens and GC holders were paid for a number of years. It was a tough time for me and I had 2 choices then, either go back home to a non-existent economy and get paid even less doing some menial job or wait it out with my crappy paycheck until I get a green card. If I moved to any other company my green card process would restart so guess what I was stuck. If H1Bs were allowed to move around, body shops would disappear overnight. Bigger companies that I worked at paid through their teeth for H1Bs but they were usually hired as consultants. I work at a really big company now (won't say the name) and there is no way we will hire someone full-time who can't pass our interview loop regardless of how much we are saving. It's too costly in other areas and almost impossible to fire them for non-performance. But we'll take a chance on hiring an H1B contractor that a body shop supplies. We pay the body shop exorbitant sums of money, body shop pays employees a pittance.
A Python Internals Adventure
If it is no better, then the person who thinks it is better benefits from it.

If it is better, then the person who thinks it is better benefits from it.

If it is no better, then the person who thinks it is no better doesn't benefit from it.

If it is better, then the person who thinks it is no better doesn't benefit from it.

If the objective is subjective benefit, then placebo is a benefit; assuming your bank account is large enough and you don't care to give your money to someone who really needs it.

Edit: An answer to this is the Carl Sagan quote at the end of the article:

"For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."

Of course, it isn't really possible to not 'persist in delusion'. One can try, but he won't know if by trying he is perpetuating a grander delusion.
Quizlet’s Mobile API: How to sync data to millions of students
Please don't submit articles which are behind paywalls.

I'm pretty sure if that's what the moderators wanted, they could just block wsj.com and ft.com directly. Personally I would rather see more payed content because I think it tends to be of higher quality, especially when it comes to business/finance journalism.
People also try to hire the best because the value of a team in an acquihire scenario is basically the sum of their "ranking scores"—if you're the #1 most-wanted developer in the whole talent pool, the acquirer will pay exponentially more than they will for the #2 most-wanted, and so forth.

If you want to succeed as a startup, recruit by setting a bar and hiring anyone who passes it, not by comparing people to other people. "Good in an absolute sense" is much more useful knowledge than "better than X."
And find that they traded mostly with India after 1600?
Well, large corporations that are failing usually (but not always) get purchased, and subsumed by more successful corporations, or bailed out before they go bankrupt. Some examples of this would be RCA, Lockheed, Delta Airlines, Chrysler (twice), Enron, General Motors.[1][2][3][4][5][6]

I even found this convenient little slideshow.[7]

Here is a challenge: find more equivalently-sized government departments shut down for their failures. Examples of such failures would be the two dozen financial market regulators (as well as Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae) who failed to anticipate or mitigate the housing problems of 2006-2007, the various police agencies which regularly shoot innocent civilians (such as the LAPD), the department of Veteran's Affairs which caused untold suffering, or the education departments which have greatly increased spending without any improvement in outcomes.

Apologies for not addressing the second sentence, I wrote this reply before you had added that.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RCA

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

[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_Air_Lines

[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chrysler

[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron

[6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors

[7] http://www.thestreet.com/gallery/tsc-bankruptcy2-decade/0/ph...
If this is so relevant and obvious, why not put up two files: one 192/24 and one 48/16 and allow people to run their own double-blind test as he notes in the article? If you could produce a repeatable test where some number of people can tell that one is better, that would be a powerful argument.

He's argued that people have done this test over and over, and nobody can ever tell the difference.
I agree with the silliness of 192kHz, but not 24-bits. Here is why:

In typical PCM recordings, like CDs, mid-range frequencies (e.g. 1kHz to 4kHz) are recorded with lower amplitudes because our ears are more sensitive to them.

Sampling theory is correct and 16-bits can reproduce any waveform with ~100dB of range, however, in a complex waveform consisting of low, mid and high frequencies, the mid- and hi-range frequencies quite simply get shortchanged.

Imagine a recording of a bass sinusoid and a mid-range sinusoid of equal volume. It might use e.g. 10 bits to store the bass and only 6 to store the high frequencies. (2^10sin(200wt)+2^6sin(4000wt)). That means the resolution of the high frequencies is less than the lower frequencies. When the volume of those frequencies changes dynamically, the high frequencies' amplitudes are more quantized. That is quite simply why 16-bits are not enough.

This is similar to the problem with storing waveforms unprecompensated on vinyl. The precompensation makes up for the non-uniformity of the medium. It could be done with 16-bit digital as well. Or alternatively, larger sample sizes like 24 can be used.

I haven't A/B tested this. The A/B test in the article compares CD with SACD. SACD isn't PCM, so its artifacts are going to be totally different from 24-bit PCM.
Wow I haven't seen that character record sheet in 30 years. So mewhere I have a 10th level elf fighter with 18's for every trait (17 for charisma just to break it up.)

Translation for non-D&Ders - I was so nerdy I made my own characters for my own games I was DM for with completely invented characteristics rather than rolling dice for traits like the rules say
You're making a false equivalence here. Yes, the game industry is moving away from inheritance and for the reasons you note and others.

That doesn't at all mean the game industry is moving away from OOP. Classes and methods still abound and work perfectly fine. Even if you go whole-hog towards ECS, the stuff you're passing around is usually still an instance of some class and not a bare public struct.

Encapsulating data and providing higher-level methods to operate on it works really well. Polymorphism is also powerful and useful in many places. Even subclassing is a good fit for some things. But just realizing that you need to dial back on subclassing doesn't imply that the first one or two things on my list are broken.
Aerofs -- and they've raised $5.7mm btw [1] -- is hiring engineers at an average of $98k [2]. System software engineers, presumably with more experience, get an average of $108k. In Palo Alto. Gee, I wonder why he has problems hiring?

[1] https://angel.co/aerofs

[2] http://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/AeroFS-Salaries-E656975.htm
Flaunting your wealth in ways that other Russians think crass now that is impressive :-)
If you got the politics out of NASA they could do just about anything. I've worked at a couple different places in NASA and the talent varies from place to place. It's the politics that ruin everything.
Holidays Deals for Chat, Web Conferencing, Email and Marketing Campaigns
Seoul City government vows crackdown on Uber with fines, jail term
Releasing Stout, our Static Website Deploy Tool
Yes, it's now in the standard (someone in the thread I linked pointed to TC3 draft, §6.5.2.3, footnote 82) but apparently there are issues with the way GCC implements in its default dialect that make it unsafe. More Mike Stump:

>>> So what about using a union?
>>
>> Most people screw it up, the rules for it working are slightly odd.
>> Those rules are not standard[1], rather they are gcc specific, so in very
>
>Ouch, so what you are saying is that this is one of those (according to
>Nick M) barely defined areas of the language?

What I am saying is that it is defined to not work in the language
standard gcc implements by default. There is no barely, there is no
defined. As an extension to the language standard, gcc implements
(defines) a few things so that users can make some non-standard things
always work. I say slightly odd, as the rules are just a tad harder
than trivial.

I prefer the union approach to memcpy() because I can more easily reason about its behaviour, but veiled warnings from GCC maintainers scare me away from it. But perhaps I misunderstand the warning.

For that matter, I prefer simple casts to unions, and while I agree the spec makes it undefined, I don't yet see why all common implementations couldn't simply make it work in all reasonable cases. I'm currently trying to get used to using memcpy() for type annotation, but it still feels unnatural to write a function I don't want executed (yes, I have trouble with setters/getters too).

What I'd like is to have a way to specify to the compiler that I want it to compile the code I give it as written as best as it can, rather than optimizing it out as undefined. As it is, I often resort to inline assembly if I actually want an operation to happen. It seems like there should be an intermediate approach, a hypothetical '#pragma "dwim"' that could avoid this.
The reason is because it's typically ignorant xenophobic racists who complain the loudest about x or y group not assimilating.

Now I don't think this is you, but that's just the way the argument smells.

Let's step back a minute: what is the big deal with people attempting to preserve their culture when they come to the US? Isn't it a free country? And materially I don't see how it harms anything because the American culture, derided thought it may be by some, is actually extremely alluring and powerful, so even if the parents are nostalgic for the old country the kids are going to gravitate towards assimilation. Where is the harm?
Jeff Bezos Disses Google's Famous Perks
You could seduce and marry an American.
Ask HN: What Happened to GitHub Education Pack?
I am still waiting for my pack (more than a month passed), and i am wondering why? Github sent few template e-mails, thats all.

Is this about DigitalOcean? why don't they give the rest of the pack and send the do coupon in future?
Well, it depends on how you define "consciousness", and that's far from a settled issue as I understand it. But taking my own (naive) idea of what it means to be "conscious", and what I (think) I know about AI, I don't see any reason to think we won't achieve artificial consciousness. In fact, I wouldn't reject the notion out of hand, that some machine somewhere already is conscious, and we just don't know it.
> The main difference is that private enterprises may fail if they do not deliver their product or the service to customers at a cost acceptable to the latter; government projects and departments do not have this check.

Every government executive's job (including appointees' jobs and to a degree every program), relies on a public vote every 2-6 years.

Democracy isn't nearly perfect, but as we've seen, neither are the markets.
How Movies Trick Your Brain into Empathizing with Characters
I love the simplicity of this, especially if you're already using Cassandra.

Is anybody out there using a lease mechanism like this (i.e., atop Cassandra) in production? Are there any pitfalls or edge cases in taking this approach?
Many countries are lowering the wage requirement. My country (Ireland) is lowering it from ~30k to ~25k. I'm pretty sure the US is too?
I think this is mostly a pedantic point for a late stage private convertible preferred.

While private convertible preferreds typically have a dividend stream, conversion option (typically at spot) and liquidation preference (1x and presumably no participation feature in this case), they are theoretically more valuable than common. However, since there is no public market for the common, hedging that option wouldn't be efficient (if feasible at all) so I don't think the valuation really reflects that additional value (if at all). Investors develop a valuation view based on the metrics they would use for common (growth, fundamentals, perhaps some real option value, etc.) and invest based on that. All the preferred features are in the doc to provide some protection in the downside, which I don't think is much of a consideration in case of Stripe. You can see this pricing dynamic in S-1 filings of a few precedents (Twitter comes to mind) where founders were able to tender some of their common in the later rounds at the same valuation as preferred[1].

On the other hand, you are spot on when it comes to a public security (i.e. post-IPO convertible preferred, mostly capital/ratings instrument and quite uncommon in tech) - you would definitely bake-in the option value and dividend stream into the security valuation which would result in some conversion premium for the company and say 5-10 points in theoretical value above the par for investors. The difference is that primary buyers of the public convertible preferred security would be hedge funds who can short the common and effectively monetize the option value embedded in the security.

If anything, the way I would look at this is that any credible bid for Stripe would probably have to be in 4-5x of that valuation.

[1] See pgs. 139 (bottom, 2011 Third-Party Tender Offer) and II-3 (top) of Twitter S-1 (http://1.usa.gov/1cEqy0J) for difference of ~1%, likely due to fees, etc.
If you look up Shadows of the Mind by Roger Penrose you will find a significant bibliography of non-mystic thought on the subject.
dream on, dreamweapon ;)
What consequences?

Your argument could be made about doing anything. "You don't know what could go wrong!" is true about everything, and is therefore a worthless observation.
> I really don't understand all the absolute trust in SpaceX, in terms of human exploration they have proved nothing thus far. Sending cargo to the ISS is a different thing than sending humans. Once they pull that off we can start talking about great strides they are making in human space exploration.

I think the thing about SpaceX is it seems like they have no ulterior motives (no one honestly thought it was going to make money, until it did), and they seem to have some chance of success.

I also think your humans to the space station mark is entirely the wrong one, they could do that today if they were willing to accept a bit more risk, and will almost certainly be able to do it in the near future. But putting humans in space isn't solving any of the hard problems. Far more interesting will be if they manage to re-use a rocket (or even first-stage) with no or minor refurbishment... as re-use is the only way they will be able to achieve their goals (paraphrasing massively from what Elon has said on numerous occasions).
A little bit of a tangent, but my brother does a lot of bottlecap projects, like this:

https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1....

...and this:

https://scontent-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/106227...
How about "realize there is a whole big world outside of the Bay Area"?

I have no interest in founding my own company. I'm a software developer and a pretty good one. I want to continue to develop software (it is what I truly love to do), not manage a business.

I also have zero interest is moving to the Bay Area. Been there, done that (prior to the first dot com implosion), nice place to visit but won't ever live there again. I get pings fairly regularly from friends and/or ex-coworkers asking me if I'd like to work in the Bay Area (remote not an option). The answer is and always will be "no, not unless you open up an office in San Diego (or allow remote work, without expecting me to constantly be travelling to the Bay Area)".

Surely there are more than enough people like me in places that aren't the Bay Area to hire to start successful businesses -- San Diego, Austin, Portland, Boston, etc, these places exist and have tech talent!
Going off of what another poster said: I'd agree to that $125k salary if I could work remotely. I'm in the Chicago area, and it's significantly more difficult to find jobs that are willing to pay that much out here (most jobs that advertise their ranges are more in the $80-100k area), whereas it's trivial to get a job offer as low as $125k if I were to move to the west coast (I was interviewing for jobs advertising $140k+).

But I've been trying to stay in the Chicago area because that's where my social network and family are, and I actually want to consider buying a house someday, instead of it being a silly pipe dream out there.

I'm sure I'm not the only person like this. Hiring managers don't immediately have to go "hey there's no one local, let's go overseas!". If you're willing to open yourself up to having employees that work remotely (and programming jobs require people to be left alone by themselves 90% of the time anyway), then you may find it easier to find candidates.
An O-1 requires "extraordinary ability by sustained national or international acclaim and must be coming temporarily to the United States to continue work in the area of extraordinary ability."

How many engineers have "international acclaim"?
2013 infographic: The past, present and future of the database
Sure, but they're including a healthy margin by not caring about frequencies above 20KHz.
HBC & EIC didn't make money by gathering useful things for sale in Europe. They did it by taking advantage of the people living there, and paying them significantly less for things that were of high value in Europe. There are no local natives to take advantage of to gather items to be sold at a handsome profit in space.
Same goes for roads and the fire department, amirite?
the flaw starts that there 535 people who can tell NASA what do to, mostly indirectly but some are able to do it directly. None work at NASA.

This is of course the problem with the DOD as well, when the people tasked to do a job have to take into account the whims of politicians just how do we honestly expect it to be a job done well.

Of course this does happen in private industry as well, there is much ado about not rocking the boat, going with the flow etc, usually masked as some faddish project management system; only a moron wouldn't do proper project management, right?
No, Postgres has supported those for a long time. For example:

SELECT *
FROM employees e
WHERE EXISTS (SELECT 1
FROM employee_projects ep
WHERE ep.employee_id = e.id
AND ep.project_id = 5)
;

This new feature is a lot like correlated subqueries except you can put that nested SELECT into the FROM clause and still access the employees table.
Some related comments: https://xiphmont.livejournal.com/63490.html
The thing is however that any cryptosystem can be trivially compromised by making its PRNG predictable.

This cannot be caught by observing the network traffic and it is really hard to catch by reversing or tracing the binary. Especially if the compromise is not an outright srand(0), but an algorithmic weakness. Then, even if it is found, then it's virtually impossible to determine whether it was benign or deliberate. Now further consider the implications if an app uses a 3rd party PRNG such as those supplied by the operating system or the hardware or if it gets its PRNG seed data from an inherently untrusted sources (such as the OS).

I mean ... the source code being open is obviously irrelevant to the security of a pre-built binary and the adherence to the open specs is not much of an assurance either, because of the PRNG angle. In practical terms it really means that you have to have trust in a product vendor. Period. Because there is always a way for them to screw you over and to get away with it.
Interestingly, if we limit ourselves to pure functions, a ZST corresponds to category-theoretic concept of the terminal object. The latter is defined as such an object (think "type") T that for any other object (think "another type") X there is precisely one arrow (think "function") from X to T [1]. Indeed, if T is a ZST like the empty tuple () then for any type of argument there is precisely one function to T: namely, the one returning T's sole value, ().

Also, Result<T, E> is an example of a variant type corresponding neatly to co-products [2].

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initial_and_terminal_objects

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coproduct
> It keeps trying and trying as objects are allocated

Worse. GC gets triggered just by assigning references, allocation isn't even needed.
government offices get all-new furniture at the end of every fiscal year, because if they manage to come in under budget, their budget gets cut in the next year, so they make sure to come out over-budget. This is not the behavior of an organization trying to "reduce cost or improve quality".

The organisation includes the bit setting the budget, so if they are willing to cut it next year if this year's isn't spent, that looks a lot like the behaviour of an organisation seeking to reduce costs.

Besides, end of financial year budget spends in divisions of large multinationals also look like that.
Emacs, Word, whatever...the first draft is the task at hand, not typesetting. Writing does not require software: Paper and pen are enough to start. Searching for the optimal software feels like work and is attractive because it is easier than producing a manuscript.
The syntax for this is pretty horrible, however. And if you want to return more than one column from the subquery, you would have to duplicate the subquery definition for each column, right? Then you'd have to have faith that the optimizer can work out what you meant and reconstruct just a single subquery.
FYI this is also the guy that made Elon Musk fear strong AI. Elon Musk invested in DeepMind in the early days just to see where AI is going.
Elaborate?

Because I don't see any model in which an AI could be shown to not be via the halting problem, that doesn't also show that we are not intelligent by the same argument. (Or, in other words, why are you saying that the halting problem applies to an AI, but not to a human?)
What, you mean treat developers as managers? What a ridiculous suggestion! How about a nice Google-style office instead?
It's basically the same algorithm, or at least very similar. The main difference is they use huge neural networks running on GPUs, and they feed it raw video data, rather than the game board state directly.

It's not any less impressive though, to my knowledge no one had done anything like that before. That is, beating video games with raw video data and reinforcement learning.
Let's do the math. If I didn't screw it up (and I probably did), an 8k iphone 6 would be around 1600 dpi.
Wooden bike for true hipsters