skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Another source that disagrees...

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/economists-arent-as-nonp...

It is very hard to not introduce bias into social sciences. This is also why psychology and software engineering studies are hard to trust. It is more pervasive in economics when there are rewards to be linked to a given worldview. (You can make a lot of side money as an expert witness if you have written a lot of papers either solidly pro or against anti-trust legislation)
yup ...I'm always on the lookout for TP
Thank you. That makes sense (I had no luck with online searches).
> Something about this article rubs me the wrong way

Indeed. While I agree about the importance of discipline and safety in the cockpit, this article is slimy. This journalist gives off a mega sleazeball vibe.
That's why near year 2000 the saying
went, "Never be between a VC and
the door when the lock up period is over."
Your second question answers the rest. There is no way to accurately give numerical values in real world applications, so 40 and 70 are chossen as mental model approximations. The fallacy of drawing the line is making no choice or distinction because there is no method to determine the correct one.
Wait, what are these unusable surfaces? I have a $25 logitech wireless mouse and keyboard that I use roughly 8ft from the usb receiver. Besides the screen of my monitor, I actually cannot find a surface in my direct vicinity that my mouse doesn't track extremely well upon. This includes jeans, shirt, skin, paper towel, microfiber, drywall, carpet, rug, whiteboard, a glass coffee table (surprisingly), and books.

How can the capabilities of something as cheap, commoditized, and refined as a computer mouse vary so much that some people's mice are only usable on a small and inconvenient set of surfaces, while other mice have completely mastered the process to the point that nearly every surface imaginable works flawlessly?
This article doesn't explain what fuzzing is/means.
Does it only run on Mac or it could run on windows.
For the moment I am content having pointed out the flaw in your argument.
Undoubtedly. But a handset will only operate where a cell signal is available; Iridium will operate anywhere on the planet, so long as you have line-of-sight to the sky.
What do you think the most important programming language is?
> This is cute

Well that's the whole point, right? This is clearly written for fun, it's not production code, it's not supposed to pass a code review. It's just supposed to be cool and interesting, and a challenge for the author.
I think he meant iridium handset but I could be wrong.
Being an Iridium investor in the late 1990s was quite an experience. This was the dotcom boom, and Iridium looked like the next step in communications-- imagine being able to make a call or send data from anywhere in the world? Without the expense and cost of building out the cell network!

Shares in the company built in value with each launch as each launch put another major chunk of infrastructure in orbit.

This was totally different than those dotcom trifles like "Flooz" who you knew would just never amount to anything.

I still have my Iridium share certificate.

Alas, there was a bankruptcy, common holders were wiped out, and while it wasn't the total scam that GlobalStar and Global Crossing (The latter I consider to be a deliberate fraud much worse than Enron) it sure felt kinda shady.

I can say we're not in a stock bubble now in part because things like this are not going on the way they were.

Iridium was an expensive lesson for me. If only I'd put that money into Apple-- and the kicker-- I thought about it seriously.

That said, over the years, I've made a lot more from stock picking than I ever have from any index fund. It's not as hard as people make out, or as impossible... but you do learn lessons. And iridium was a lesson.

On some level, I'm glad it's still operational, though I think it's sad that so many years have passed and the network hasn't advanced significantly enough to give terrestrial carriers a run for their money.
DSLs and Towers of Abstraction with Gershom Bazerman
I have mixed feelings about this. Obviously taking pictures at flight-levels is a non-issue. However taking pictures on final doesn't sound right to me even for a 2 persons crew. Personally I have my own limit that I don't take pictures below 1000 feet AGL.
The scientific method lays out series of steps. The inspiration that leads to creating a hypothesis often involves connecting concepts and expanding awareness.

Mysticism seems like a process of wonder & appreciation of Existence. The unified whole where some parts are explained and some unexplained. A journey, not a destination. The phenomena beyond the reach of current understanding. The process of expanding consciousness.

If the concept of mysticism motivates people to explore Existence, then it sounds like it would have a positive impact, no?

Please note the differences between esoteric mysticism (spirituality) vs exoteric religion. One involves the process of inner exploration and the other involves the process of social coercion.
A lawyer can find a legal issue in pretty much anything you intend to do. I've seen teams getting railroaded by this. It usually starts with someone higher up wanting some legal advice and the lawyer seizes the opportunity and scares the hell out of execs. Sometime company had been burned by lawsuit already so they double down on even a remotely possible legal threats. Suddenly everything is required to go through the legal team who let you know that all your possible actions might cause getting sued. Before you know company needs a large legal team to review and craft complicated stupid agreements even with janitors.

The fact is that there are fairly easy workarounds for this kind of legal threats. The "I Agree" is quite powerful button. Most consumer protection legal threats are actually fairly difficult to execute - thanks to severely weakened consumer protection laws in most states. Even if they do get executed in few rare cases or even become class action, settlements are fairly easy to achieve with often tiny impact on balance sheets. I understand that risks in automotive industry is higher when safety is compromised that case cause billions of dollars in recall in extreme cases (for example, Toyota and Firestone cases) but this is like wearing bullet proof vest all the time because you fear you will get in to some physco's shooting spree. These lawyer driven companies don't get wake up call until competition starts doing all these supposidly legally risky things and grabs all market share. Companies that win usually are fire firstt, ask forgiveness later kind. This is also the reason why enterprisy companies like Ford will never come out first with self driving car even if they had tech.
We try to be pretty transparent in most things at Fogbeam. We actually consider our small size a selling point, and it dovetails with our strategy vis-a-vis The Discipline of Market Leaders[1], which is to focus on customer intimacy.

When I talk to prospects, I emphasize that, since we're small, we will be very responsive to their needs, and that they get access to the highest levels of the company in a way they never would with, say, IBM or Oracle.

"With us, you'll have the CEO's personal cellphone number, and you can call and wake me up at 2:00am if you need to. I hope you don't need to, but you'll have that option if need be. And you won't get that from Oracle, IBM, Microsoft, etc."

As far as burn rate and financial data... we don't actively disclose that to the world, because there doesn't appear (at first blush) to be an value in it. But we do disclose a lot of stuff (sales leads, prospects, product roadmap details, etc.) to our advisory board members, and a group of 20-30 or so people (investors, potential partners, etc.) who have expressed at least some interest in knowing what we're up to.

[1]: http://www.amazon.com/The-Discipline-Market-Leaders-Customer...
I didn't say a business model was property. I said that intellectual property is plausibly property or something that people could have a right to. In fact, since copyright as intellectual property is a virtually infinite, highly-dimensional landscape, it should arguably have more absolutist protection than physical property, because monopolizing a unit of intellectual property won't prevent other people from getting their own.

And real property ownership interferes with freedom to travel the same way that copyright property interferes with freedom to send arbitrary bit sequences, only moreso. All of that was claimed and defended by violence too, so if you're going to make an argument along those lines you're going to have to find something that distinguishes copyright property from real property. From what I can see copyright seems like a much more benign form of ownership.

> But I'll say that it's hard to have any morality without some concept of human rights, whether that term is used or not.

No it isn't. You could just go pure utilitarian, or you could say people have no intrinsic rights but we should be nice to them anyways.
>There is no such thing as human rights. They are just wishful ideals humanity invented.

So... there are no such things as wishful ideals that humanity invented? Are "human rights" any less real than other idealised human concepts, for example "justice"? Or are you saying that they are unachievable, and thus not worth striving towards?
I suppose. "If it isn't helping, it's hurting..." something like that.
Look ma, that's me! Free of a soul crushing corporate job, back to doing a "startup", I may not have the cash rolling in, but at least I'm in control of my destiny. Hey Ma, I'm moving in!

I think there are a lot of people out there like me. I have some money coming from side projects, several opportunities to grow that, and several opportunities for new side projects.

And quite a long personal runway before I have to "get a job" again.

If I can get to personal ramen profitability, that would be great.

And if my cofounders and I get a real startup off the ground that can pay us salaries.... well, then I can start showing up in statistics as employed again.

But either way, it's not as big a deal to me as it would be to men of my age 20 years ago.

And that's a huge shift-- in opportunity towards the individual.
>"We have good security, our people don't kill each other". The latter is usually more directly helpful to more people, but the former has somehow become seen as superior.

Surely there is a level of authoritarianism which you wouldn't support? How far is too far in the name of safety? I suspect different cultures have different answers.

You also can't just look at the murder rate. Let's use China as an example, sure they have less murders than the U.S. (maybe partly because they are more authoritarian), but there are fewer labor protections. You may be less likely to be shot in China, but you are more likely to be killed on the job.

>I'd much rather be here than in America where I won't be arrested for complaining about the government but I'm likely to be robbed or threatened with a gun if I walk down the wrong street at night.

I'm not sure were you're from, but being threatened with a gun is not a common occurrence in America, it's certainly not likely--even if you are walking down the wrong street.

The US has a higher homicide rate than Western Europe, but if you remove gang members and drug related homicides, the numbers go way down.

The high murder rate is definitely a problem, but most of the Europeans I've talked to think it is something that middle class Americans deal with on a day to day basis. This is simply not true.
Many of these quotes have to do with theories of consciousness. Describing consciousness is still a philosophical problem. I wouldn't call this "mysticism," just scientists trying to grapple with the mind-body problem.
Takes guts to post a project on HN and expose yourself to all sort of criticism. Here's a hopefully constructive critic I hope you can use:

* Routing of requests is done in the context of network IO, perhaps disk IO and likely database accesses. The 500 nanoseconds you shave off your request time are likely not worth the trouble you went through, given that a HTTP request sending the bytes of the header will usually amount to a few hundred microseconds, milliseconds with some body. I'd suggest you attack the problem of performance by profiling bottlenecks, to identify parts of your code that have the greatest impact on the request time.

* The benchmark you wrote is not testing your claim (of fast routing/multiplexing), since the benchmark works against a router with no registered routes. When benchmarketing, I'd suggest creating a realistic scenario, a scenario your users are likely to end up with. In your case, this would likely mean a dozen resources, each with about 5 routes, using all verbs.

This blog post is very useful to begin with optimization work in Go: http://blog.golang.org/profiling-go-programs
Maybe mystic beliefs are over-represented among scientists. But all these quotes show is that some scientists have these beliefs and find their beliefs to be intimately connected with their scientific views.

They are not "scientific quotes" they are "quotes by some scientists". From a Christian scientist we have
I have found there is a wonderful harmony in the complementary truths of science and faith. The God of the Bible is also the God of the genome. God can be found in the cathedral or in the laboratory. By investigating God's majestic and awesome creation, science can actually be a means of worship.
-- Francis Collins
Important in what sense? Some candidates would seem to be:

historical significance

most currently running code

most significant currently running code

most new development

most significant new development

most likely representative of future directions in programming languages
Yeah, that benchmark isn't testing anything realistic. He needs to test against a set of realistic url's each with id tags etc.
1- if you are short on time and have no need practical need for C, then learn some simplified assembler (eg. MIIX, or a subset of a real processor). Write one real little program in assembler.

2- if you have time, learn the assembler of a real processor (my favorite is 680x0 but nowadays that would rather be x86-64 or ARM), and write an application in assembler.

3- if you are short on time or have a practical need for it, like a C job, or you want to maintain some C software (eg. the Linux kernel, Xorg X11 server or something like that), then go ahead learning C.

Otherwise, learning assembler (and never again writing another assembler program) would be a better learning experience thant learning C. I've known numerous programmers having learned C who were still confused, but never an assembler programmer being still confused.
Different people, different definitions. There's also some overlap between abstractions like Philosophy & "Mysticism".

> …I regard consciousness as fundamental

> Science cannot solve the ultimate mystery of nature. And that is because, in the last analysis, we ourselves are part of nature and therefore part of the mystery that we are trying to solve.

> Deep down the consciousness of mankind is one.

> The notion that all these fragments are separately existent is evidently an illusion, and this illusion cannot do other than lead to endless conflict and confusion.

Reading these quotes, it seems like they are all in an abstract, or mind, domain.
Proper routers use things like radix trees.
Why?

Guile-emacs is an user facing change, actually bring something new to the table emacs mode authors.

What would rewriting the core of probably one of the most mature OSS software projects bring other than risk?
There's a "Compilers" Stack Exchange site proposal on Area 51. If it makes it to live status, it might be useful to you.

http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/66925/compilers
Objective-C can be compiled and run on Windows, Linux, *BSD (ie. FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD), Solaris and Mac OS X.

You can run it on iOS Devices. You can't build it but must cross-compile on Mac OS X.

There are two compilers - GCC and clang/llvm. Apple's Xcode comes with clang/llvm, for the others one uses gcc.

There are three main things you need: the compiler, the runtime and the libraries.
What was the reason for bankruptcy? was it because it was not able to compete with Cellular operators?
Being of mixed-handedness (write left, use mouse an throw right etcetera) I always feel left out of these kind of stats...

Seriously though, I may be a minority, but it's not all that unusual to not strongly fall into either category, left-handedness is very much a spectrum. These kind or studies and articles making left and right handedness a black and white thing feel kind of outdated.
Oops, that was my fault, I accidentally deleted the [pdf] when I edited the title to better reflect the paper's title.
There's a quote, maybe fictional, by some great physicist (Bohr?). Someone was visiting his home, and noticed that there was a horseshoe hanging above the main door, which is traditionally done for good luck. He asked Bohr, surely you don't believe in that nonsense. To which Bohr replied, it's supposed to work regardless of whether you believe in it or not.
Rebooting does not solve the problem. Artwork doesn't change every hour. I can get it to choose new Artwork sometimes by killing and restarting the App.

"This appears to be a OSX/Yosemite bug"... I have to wonder. If you didn't test your OSX app on the latest version of OSX... Did you even test it at all?
"Also bone is always gonna be supported and updated."

Sorry but how can you really make that claim?
Is learning how to create a hash table necessary for a software engineer?
Thanks for the post - I've never had information from someone that it actually happened to.

So, did you actually have to pay lots of money for the crap the thief bought on your credit? or did you just wind up with a crappy credit rating but no debt?

And are you saying the extent of it is you wind up with bad credit for a really long time and that is what makes it so bad/scary/life altering?

In all honesty, why are people's lives tied so heavily to some credit score?
try "criticism of EU patent law"

I can't find the original article. It was pretty silly, around 2008 or 2009, the court ruled something basically opposite to the written intent.

I think it had to do with a really low barrier to prior-art-baseed-invalidation, but that might have been another weakness
This reminds me of the trouble musicians have in creating that 2nd album after their debut was such a big hit.

It's not anybody's fault but somehow whatever the musician subsequently does, it never sounds as pure as that first album.
You make several false assumptions or gross misunderstandings of how language changes.

The reason irregular verbs originally existed is because English is a Germanic language, meaning, that a thousand years ago, what we now call irregular verbs were actually regular verbs. There was a logical ordering and well understood way to modify the stem of a verb in order to agree with the subject and tense. At the time, irregular verbs changed their stem, but in a predictable and universal manner.

This all changed with the conquest of the Norman French. After the slow introduction of French and Latin into English, the verb forms we are now familiar with entered the language. In time, all verbs of Germanic origin were used the same way they had been used in Old English, while verbs brought in by the French used the forms we are familiar with today.

The reason it makes sense to see language regularization is because we have grown to expect the French form of verb agreement rather than the Germanic one. The Germanic system is more complex.

In short, the reason that "new verbs formed [are] never formed as irregular verbs ..." makes sense, is that the change from irregular Germanic verbs to regular French verbs is only about 800 years old.
Clustering OReilly Python books repertoire
Here's a collection of Go routers benchmarked against real API sets:

https://github.com/julienschmidt/go-http-routing-benchmark
I always think that if my IPO was priced such that it doubled or whatever on the first day, I should sue my bankers for the difference between what I got and what it was worth.

In the end, it's the coke machine theory - I should IPO at a price that sells all available shares but one.
CodeFights out of beta
Absolutely. The hash table is rich with algorithm design and analysis.
Exactly! Building cute but ultimately useless[0] programs is a lot of fun and makes for great brainteasers. It's also a great way to interact in a friendly but still technical way with your programmer peers. I recommend it to everyone!

[0] - http://lelandbatey.com/posts/2014/09/binary-tree-printer/
why? he waved his hands and said exponential growth will continue, citing the fact that it always has

that's not a valid argument when we're talking about running out of atoms to work with
(See http://pastebin.com/KypbginU)

// corrected overflow hget

for (int k2=k,o=0; t[k&(SIZE-1)] && **t[k&(SIZE-1)] != k2 && o<SIZE; ++k,++o);
return t+(k&(SIZE-1));

// hset now allows overwrite

for (int (**a)[2] = hget(t, k); a && (*a || (*a=malloc(sizeof(**t)))); (**a)[0]=k,(**a)[1]=v,a=0);
Wow, I worked on the Iridium website back in early 2002 (via an agency, not for Iridium themselves) - the woman who was my contact there was one of the nicest clients I ever had to deal with.
I hadn't seen the new cryptopals website for the Matasano Crypto Challenges. Looks very promising, and I'll probably be giving it a run very soon :)

Are you accepting contributions for any of the solutions? I'd be happy to try and contribute some in Golang.
I was pretty excited about this when they were putting them up but of course I was just a kid so I didn't lose any money investing in them. :-)

I am excited to see that the Iridium NEXT [1] constellation is on the SpaceX launch manifests [2] not too far down the list. There are seven iridium flights in line. Hopefully this time they can find a bigger market and drive down costs.

[1] https://www.iridium.com/About/IridiumNEXT.aspx

[2] http://www.spacex.com/missions
== San Diego, CA | Part-time, internship, full time | UI/X designer, iOS/Android/Web developer, Full-stack engineer ==

== About Whova (http://whova.com) ==

Whova is a fast-growing mobile and big data startup backed by National Science Foundation SBIR Program, Venture Capital and seasoned angel investors from Silicon Valley. Whova mobile app brings big data analytics to help event organizers build successful events and attendees network efficiently with each other.

To deliver the best product experience to users, we are looking for talented people who enjoy fast paced development and are passionate about entrepreneurship to join our exciting venture. If you are looking for a unique career opportunity to learn, grow, and have fun, consider joining Whova!

== Current available positions at Whova ==

- UI/UX designer - Android/iOS mobile developer - Software engineer - Marketing/Sales managers/directors

== Why joining us? ==
- We are a group of passionate startup veterans, inventors, technologists, and explorers

- We are well funded by leading silicon valley angel investors and VCs

- We have competitive equity and salary packages available

- Full health/dental/vision coverage

- A chance to be an early member of a fast-growing team - We are located in the America’s Finest City: San Diego, CA

== Contact ==

More details about the positions can be found in http://whova.com/jobs/. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to send us an email: jobs@whova.com.
Actually it's called somatic evolution. And there is no central orchestration. When cells start to mutate they no longer share the same genome and it's typically in the organism's interest to remove those cells because they can lead to mutation.
Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards
Poverty of language has a point, of matter between myst and sci-psy.