skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If you actually need to maintain well-used JavaScript projects, tools like Gulp are extremely important and time-saving.

Here is what the build process looks like for the faker.js project:

return gulp.src('../index.js')

.pipe(browserified)

.pipe(rename('faker.js'))

.pipe(gulp.dest('build/'))

.pipe(gulp.dest('../examples/browser/js'))

.pipe(rename({ extname: ".min.js" }))

.pipe(uglify())

.pipe(gulp.dest('build/'))

.pipe(gulp.dest('../examples/browser/js'))

.pipe(rename('../examples/browser/js/faker.min.js'));

});

https://github.com/Marak/faker.js/blob/master/build/gulpfile...

If you ask me, Gulp provides a pretty elegant syntax. Before using Gulp we had a custom script to build the project. Using Gulp has been much better.

His comments about the Gulp ecosystem not fully supporting streaming is true. The onus of implementing streaming correctly in plugins is on the plugin author. Unfortunately, there are a few plugin developers who are making bad plugins. You have to understand which libraries you are installing before blinding running npm install.

Something which is very interesting about Gulp is it's underlaying Virtual File System (Vinyl) https://github.com/wearefractal/vinyl The entire ecosystem is now improving as more Gulp plugins are being decoupled into vinyl virtual file system adapters ( think sftp / http / ftp / webdav )
http://www.transparentcorp.com/research/

Lots of peer-reviewed literature here. They are definelty not placebo, I have personally seen their effect through EEG.
It's not at all an implementation of a one time pad. Though I'm not getting what extra level of plausible deniability this is supposed to add over the absurd "I can decrypt anything to anything with a one time pad, so nothing is copyright infringement" argument.

Edit: IIUC, it works like this. Let's say plaintext1[1] == 'a', and plaintext2[1] =='b'. Then ciphertext[1] = i, with i chosen such that key1[i] == 'a' and key2[i] == 'b'. Of course this means that you'll be repeatedly using the same key material which is very much not how an OTP works, and will most likely be blowing up the data by a factor of 4 on encryption (each byte becomes a word).
Feinstein has chaired the Senate Intelligence Committee since 2009. Her job over the past 5 years in this role was supposed to be oversight of these intelligence agencies.

Fact is until this release she has been a staunch defender of the existing intelligence programs and the status quo among NSA, White House, and CIA. She's exactly the type of person you do not want chairing this committee. Unfortunately when Edward Snowden stepped up and did her job for her (without the privilege of legislative immunity), she called it "an act of treason."[1]

In my opinion if the CIA hadn't been caught spying on her committee's computers she wouldn't have released this report at all. It's an act of retribution in my cynical opinion.

That said, props to her for releasing the executive summary[2] of the report.

[1]: http://thehill.com/policy/defense/304573-sen-feinstein-snowd...
[2]: https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/12/02/x-things-keep-...
FYI one source for free HQ downloads: https://images.nga.gov/en/search/do_quick_search.html?q=mone...
Managing systems is complex.

Its gotten better since the days I was mucking about with hpux ignite to make sure all the systems were running the same software/libraries.

But there are still a lot of complex inter-dependencies of the base OS and the Apps running on top of it. It would be great to decouple the two, but I'm a little skeptical that these updates still won't require some testing of software running on them before deploying.

Or are the linux libraries stable enough that these migrations are easier now?
Understanding Volumes in Docker
So the problems this article brings up about the Google Mercator projection have been solved? Do you have any links to more readings about the issues?

>"We have reviewed the coordinate reference system used by Microsoft, Google, etc. and believe that it is technically flawed. We will not devalue the EPSG dataset by including such inappropriate geodesy and cartography."
I just miss the concept of Soup storage on the Newton ;)
Yes, completely biased. It takes "having to see implementors or senders in the whole system" as if it where some kind of a problem. Same for looking a hierarchy or debugging.

Author sounds like talking of OO tools frozen in the 60's, really poorly investigated or just sharing his/her own rationalising and enthusiasm about using functional programming instead.
Is this really what I think it is?

I'll have to try that.

"The world's best Mike dating service."
To all the people saying this isn't a problem: it really is. Even if advertisers bake a fraud premium into their buys, blindly letting money flow to bad actors creates an incentive to be a bad actor, and bad actors in this space do bad things that hurt everyone: waste massive amounts of bandwidth, spam the web and app ecosystems with worthless content, and worst of all exploit users to build and run botnets.

We've spent a lot of effort over the last few years fighting this stuff, and we're really happy to see the industry as a whole starting to agree that it's a problem. If you'd like to help make the web better by working to remove these incentives, we're hiring engineers; contact info in my profile.
Heh...we're using SOAP and WSDL for this current project...
Are Jim Mitchell & Bruce Jessen and their company "Mitchell Jessen & Associates" those redacted but mentioned in the Torture Report?

http://ow.ly/FClBo
Someone should make a demonstration video out of this, showing the various techniques used. I think that would illustrate just how insane it is.
The Internet of Anything: A Social Network for the World’s Online Sensors
Tomahawk didn't work for me and a friend (was very buggy about 5-6 months ago).
People will say anything to get torture to stop. The interrogators will get the information they want, but they will get so much more bad information made up on the spot to stop the suffering, it's impossible to distinguish between actual intel and the subject telling the interrogator what they want to hear.

It gets even worse when the subject doesn't actually know anything useful. Waterboard most people and they will confess to anything they think will make it stop.
I think SOAP has lost in a sense that it's no longer very popular around many web developers.

But has it really lost? I still see it used a lot in large corporate and high tech environments.

I was never a big fan of SOAP myself, but that's also partly because when I started, the tooling wasn't great and I got mostly a negative user-experience. But this is many years ago.

My understand is that these days it's quite good, and it has a pretty good user-experience. Furthermore, everything is backed by xml schemas, which makes it easier to create and require strictly valid xml being sent back and forward.

While some equivalents exist in REST-ish API's, it's arguably not very common and with SOAP it's a pretty much a free and built-in feature that everybody uses.

Modern web API design is great for getting things up and running fast, but it's not amazing for rigorously robust design.

I don't really like the "SOAP is bloated and over-engineered" narrative. It is uninteresting now, and was uninteresting 10 years ago.

I think it's much more interesting to learn about the things that SOAP did get right, and see how we can apply some of these learnings in our API's.
I don't have too much of a problem with this actually, because a lot of the "nonsense" images actually bear strong resemblance to the objects. The gorilla images clearly look like a gorilla, the windsor tie images clearly show a collar and a tie. The image coloring is way off of course, but the gradients seem about right.
Uber vs. Portland: City sues rideshare startup
And the example isn't about allowed or forbidden, it's if a legal construction holds up in court that implies a further meaning than what it literally in the books.

Something that you'll have mixed results with, no matter the jurisdiction. Just that, broadly speaking, absent a clear rule, civil law courts try to derive the intent of the closest law, while common law courts create new law through their decision.
Another woman had complained to Uber about 'rapist' driver just 9 days before
But when you really want to guarantee that, you just make the instVar immutable and you're good.
Per capita relative to population size it was much larger.
Sure, SOAP's complexity is a problem, but the issue with "RESTful" APIs is that they're so loosely defined, almost all the way to the other extreme. Being able to generate code and have a type-checked API, which is as easy to use as any other local API was a very nice feature we've now lost. I wish there were a better compromise.
‘Enhanced’ is factual here? How about ‘Damaging interrogation technique’? That’s certainly more factual than ‘enhanced’.
English version: http://www.ovh.com/us/news/cp1662.to-accelerate-its-internat...
Just remember folks - this is the agency Amazon chooses to provide its services to. Vote with your wallet.
Do customer need to hand over their UPS/FedEx authentication and account details to the audit service, i.e. is the audit service acting as an agent? Why don't the shipping companies block such services from their API, e.g. eBay blocked many 3rd-party companies when the auction industry was starting.
Looks like a lot of overlap between this and Nix[0] and GNU Guix[1], which are purely functional package managers.

I'm not sure from this article how Snappy actually works. Are they repackaging everything they need for Snappy?

[0] http://nixos.org/
[1] https://gnu.org/software/guix
Me too, but I'm going to immediately take that procedural program and embed it into its own class, refactoring it until the complexity is nicely tucked away.

The other case is dealt with by moving all the methods back into a main (giant) method. Then I'll refactor that. It's more fuss, but not that much more.
Just to play devils advocate, so please don't take this personally...

There are varying levels of culpability that we all share right. It's difficult to see that we are all part of the problem if we aren't engaged in trying to change it. Your statement suggests that the American government operate in a vacuum and certainly every day people aren't engaged it does seem more and more that they can do as they wish.

I'm going to go donate something to http://www.rootstrikers.org/ now.
This is great! Thanks for the resource.
Well, I am not worried about trivial questions which can be easy to google. The problem I see is two-fold:

First, the lack of tutorials/videos on relevant topics that are up to date. For example, the Django with PyCharm video didn't have any audio and, last time I looked has not been replaced. I find video presentations to be particularly efficient as a means to quickly communicate intended usage and workflow.

Second, support becomes invaluable when it comes to non-trivial situations. For example, I still don't have an answer for this:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8569766

I frankly didn't even try to reach out to support due to my prior experience. And that's the issue. I have no problem with paying for good product. And I want to stress that PyCharm is a damn good product. When I do there's an expectation of quality support.

So I find myself at a strange point. I would unequivocally recommend PyCharm to anyone considering it. It is a very good product. And I have to do this while not being thrilled about their support, which feels really weird.
I was under the impression that in the War of 1812, USA was the agressor. Wikipedia seems to also support this view. Is that not correct, or do americans just have their own differing viewpoint?
Agree 100% with "if you are doing something else while driving, stop it". I have always thought the conversation is the distracting part, not the act of holding a phone to your head. Research shows that it's less distracting to talk to a passenger than a phone conversation: http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/2007/01/24/want-to-dr... (link in article). Still, I prefer to remain focused on the driving conditions.

I'm not sure I agree that "driving is fairly safe" though. We have mitigated much of the risk associated with driving with vehicle impact standards and road design. I still really feel that most drivers don't understand the magnitude of what they are doing - they become accustomed to the relative safety and start doing other things. It seems the more safety we "build into the system" the more risks people are willing to take. I'm not suggesting we take safety out of the system though!
This was a terribly written piece. It is terribly long winded, when what it was trying to say could have been said much better in a few short paragraphs. I don't think it is possible to take seriously the words of anyone who thinks the "art of programming" is the art of debugging programs. That's like thinking the art of astronomy is about cleaning telescopes.
Why didn't you use Cassandra for storing time-series data? The technology is already out there and used by pretty much everyone once they outgrow RRD.
Start-up Launch Power: Product Hunt vs. Hacker News vs. TechCrunch
Get rid of the end vertical and make it launch you into a foam pit. I can see some "midnight" modifications for a 1.1 release.
I think we'll see more and more schema related projects for JSON-based API (like swagger). It will be interesting if they can compose in a way that keeps the complexity down, as opposed to what happened with SOAP.
My guess is that more and more people are coming to the realization that xml is great for fluid text and document formatting, but too ambiguous to serve as a data structure format.

XML nodes and children are just too slippery. I've actually argued with enterprise developers about why serving the following format was a terrible idea.

<user>
<id>123456</id>
<name>Joe</name>
<account>Account 1</account>
<account>Account 2</account>
</user>
Amusingly, "so much warmer then DDOS'd" could be used to describe what happened to this server.
> The saving grace is that we have a country that was able to admit that it did this.

"The country" doesn't admit that "the country" did this. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence "admits" that the Central Intelligence Agency did this, while at the same time insulating everyone else -- even in the Executive Branch -- from involvement, based on "the CIA was lying to everyone, including the White House, who totally didn't mean for this to happen."

> For me, that's hope that we're still in a position to learn from our wrongs, and that the checks-and-balances are still somewhat in-tact.

Checks and balances aren't admitting after the fact that actions which meet the definition of torture and war crimes in both US domestic law and international law which the US has treaty-based obligations to uphold occurred (while, except for the "personal opinion" of the chair in the introduction, not actually admitting the legal conclusions demanded by those facts), checks-and-balances is actually imposing some accountability on the perpetrators of those crimes.

AFAICT, there are no "checks-and-balances" in evidence yet.
Duplicate: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8723435
This is so true. I was naive going into grad school and got an email over the summer from a professor who wanted to work with me. I thought "well that sounds interesting" and accepted his offer immediately.

I got VERY lucky. My advisor is absolutely amazing. He goes far out of his way to make sure I am taken care of. He finds conferences for me to attend, fellowships I can apply for, and research collaborations with other professors. He even takes the grad students in his group hiking.

But I realize this isn't typically the case. I feel bad for some other grad students in different departments that are essentially free labor, with advisors who aren't as great as mine. I'll reemphasize: I got lucky. But if you are considering getting your PhD, eliminate the dice-roll from the equation and find a kind, caring person to do research with, because it makes a world of a difference. I would argue it is the most important aspect of getting a PhD, and it can make or break your time in grad school.

Everyone told me grad school would be the most difficult, grueling time of my life. In fact, it's the exact opposite. I get to wake up every day, work wherever I like, and I no longer have classes so the only thing I have to do is research. I get to use the world's best supercomputers and neutron sources. I'm essentially getting paid to have fun. Plus, I have access to all my university's resources (health insurance, workout centers, library, a large student body to interact with) without any of the administrative overhead that professors have (grant writing, internal politics, teaching).
Show HN: 100 coffee shops to work from. 11 cities. Wi-Fi passwords included
OK. https://play.golang.org/p/Q94GFI02ru

I'm not sure what your point is in this argument? You're saying the above is worse than braindead C ASCII-only strings?
Venture Investing = Seed Investing
Digital retail – meet the customer assistant of tomorrow
Does Torture Work?
I think this is largely accurate, but one thing the article misses is that SOAP was never as interoperable as it was claimed to be. If you had a Microsoft client and a Microsoft server, things would work great, but as soon as you started mixing vendor implementations, you quickly ended up in configuration hell. For simple SOAP messaging you could usually get it to work with enough elbow grease, but for any of the WS-* protocols you might as well be doomed. I lost days, if not weeks, of work to failed interop of WS-Security across two different vendors (both Java, and both with the code under my control).
This is pretty much the gold standard, built by ONE guy...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gcoV3MkmY8

Took a lot longer than a week, I'm sure, but it's an actual proper coaster. He later went on to work for one of the coaster companies for awhile IIRC.
Apples,oranges and orangutans.

Doing transactions and data format evolution in REST is hard, in SOAP it is simple.
Oh but there was VMS and Lisp and others that are gone, with all the ideas. All replaced by the Unix way. The Unix way is gone, too. Linus should be given some credit for that as well.

BTW, Gnu's "Hello" is 709k.
Small things that I noticed hurt debugability a lot:

a.getB().getC().getD().e() - NullPointerException can have 4 causes

B b = a.getB();
C c = b.getC();
D d = c.getD();
d.e(); // NPE can have only 1 reason, you can inspect b,c,d at debug time without stepping inside

Another thing that hurts debugability are non-reversible transformations in code. If sth is non-reversible it means 1 effect can have many possible causes, so when debugging you need to consider many possibilities why we are here. When there are many non-reversible steps you get exponential increase of possibile causes.

The most common things that cause this in code are defaults - when you have defaults and need to debug you need to consider many possible reasons the end effect is what it is.

It's not a big deal, but it makes debuging one step harder (instead of "I know why we get there, let's go deeper" it's "We get there either because of X or Y, let's debug to decide, or go both ways").
tell me about it... I've been searching for a C++ library that will encode x86 instructions from syntax that looks moderately similar to assembler code. Not a disassembler, not a JIT toolkit, not a special cross-platform IR that gets compiled to real instructions. Just an instruction encoder with a moderately pretty syntax. No luck so far.
> Thank Linus we still have an alternative to Microsoft

Because BSD isn't a "thing?"
"How about a nice game of chess?"

I thought the computer went by Joshua, since that's what Dr, Falkan referred to it in the last scene of the movie:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s93KC4AGKnY
> Which is interesting since global complexity is the only one that scales.

What does this mean?
It depends, if you are going after investor dollars from the traditional SV VC bunch then yes, they all talk fairly openly how they favor multi-founder companies. At the same time, most of them have invested in solo founders as well if the plan is strong and the business already has traction.

What is your goal? Do you want investment from a SV VC? Do you need it? Do you have enough traction to even get on their radar? Any connections you can use to get introduced?

I personally think the co-founder thing is over blown, but don't underestimate that the many (if not most) investors prefer it. But frankly, if your business is solid, has traction and is growing an investor will still have interest. As a solo founder though, you will have more to prove and more to show that it is moving and you are capable of keeping up. And it doesn't meant that you may not meet someone along the way to bring into the venture.

Also, remember having a co-founder doesn't necessarily mean that the split is equal, in fact rarely is it ever equal from what I have personally seen.
You have my sympathy.
There are some interesting platforms that popped up over the last few years:

http://zillabyte.com/
http://databricks.com/
https://yhathq.com/products/scienceops

The thing I'm most excited about with these platforms is seeing distributed computing become accessible to more developers. Lowering the barrier to entry (not needing to know the Hadoop ecosystem or have a PhD to do data science) can help developers answer questions their companies have and be more productive. Just my two cents.
Not sure he'll find many dates but I'm guessing there is a few million in angel investments already lined up.
I would find this all hilariously self-involved if I weren't pretty sure it is in fact a joke.
Uber has a warchest in the billions. Local taxi companies sometimes have ~50% of their value invested in their 5 cars.

The "old taxi medallion system" is a prime example of Uber's sneaky PR: Just because the system might be broken in San Francisco or New York, or whatever is the poster-evil Uber claims to fight, doesn't mean that a) it's like that everywhere, b) Uber is any better.
This is just an emotional appeal. You can equally have "layers" of many dependant functions that have tedious flows of data obfuscating what's important to see.

That aside, I'm curious about your comment on "certain problems just don't map cleanly onto OOP"

FP and OOP are both Turing complete, which kind of problems you think "just don't map cleanly onto OOP"?
Torture is a loaded word that directly implies guilt, where as "enhanced interrogation" is a fairly neutral term. Despite the reports narrative of pointing out all the failures of the CIA in allowing these techniques to be performed, it can't just say "The CIA is a bunch of jackasses who tortured some folks". It needs to be objective to be taken seriously.
What about the overall risk on a motorcycle? I have two friends who were killed on motorcycles. Both were experienced, in neither case was it their fault, and I'm not sure if they could have avoided it. Seems unlikely. But what I do know is that if they were driving their cars, they would be alive today. I find people often correctly evaluate the risk of failure (low), but completely ignore the potential cost (your life) . I'm guessing they also have a different model for calculating reward, but it seems mostly an error in calculating risk and cost. BTW, these were IT guys in their 30s, not teenagers.
It is if you have more than one detainee.
I can't think of any good person that have ever argued that they are "tough on [x]".
I'm not disagreeing, but I guess I was comparing a relational schema to a JSON "schema".

I do agree a mapper is less intrusive than either. I think I have a bias right now because I've been working on an event sourced model that's using JSON as the serialization mechanism :).