skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"a tech stack they are already familiar with".

Like 16-bit assembly code?

PC-NFS?

How to diagnose a serial cable problem with a breakout box and an oscilloscope?

How to calibrate a CCD image sensor?

So how are today's iOS coders going to feed their hungry children when no one remembers what an iPhone even was anymore?

I quite commonly point out that I can debug anything. I'm also quite good at performance optimization as well as reverse engineering.

The API, programming language, platform or what have you - the tech stack - are all orthogonal to my being one of the very best in the business at debugging.

It's not like no one needs their code debugged, but they don't seem to recognize that until it's way too late.

What they ask for is "How many years of Python experience do you have?" If I say "Less than one" - which is what I actually have - I don't get an offer. Were I able to claim that I had five years experience, I'd have a job.

What I'd like to see, is an interview where someone handed me a buggy Python program, then asked me to fix it.

While that does happen, it is quite rare.
"you could accomplish the same thing by introducing a new language construct that explicitly noted that the order of two calls doesn't matter"

Effectively, this is what Golang's "go" construct does. Combined with channels you can construct an arbitrary dependency graph as well.
I'd think that if you stole a cell phone, the cell phone itself would be worth more than the €7.50 deposit...
>>>>> The line between teaching a truth and teaching a self-enforcing belief pattern has not been drawn, and I don't know if it ever will be. You can be an amazing teacher and not even know it (by making horrible mistakes that other people learn from by observation, comparison, abstraction, and analysis). Or you can be a really amazing teacher and never admit it.

Great points. Thanks.
I spent a good portion of my elementary school years pining for a Nintendo Entertainment System. My parents really couldn't afford one (or didn't want me to have one). My dad always had random computers around, so I did my best with things like the TI-99 or whatever archaic thing I could find.

One day I was randomly going through our shed - which was filled to the brim with total junk - and found a box that was the Magnavox Odyssey (can't recall the model). Like most people, I had no idea what this was, but still wondered why my dad didn't mention anything about this when I whined about not having a Nintendo.

So I bring it inside. It kind of looks like an Atari, pretty archaic by my young and inexperienced eyes. It has a few games. Wikipedia suggests they were multiple cartridges, but I don't remember that.

Upon firing it up (I remember it needed batteries), I was astonished at how ... capable it was. It wasn't an NES, but given I had never heard of it and it seemed better than the 2600 in several ways, this was a total surprise.

Within a year I had my NES, in a classic Christmas Story-esque "what's that over there" move my dad liked to pull. But I can't imagine too many other systems of the time tiding me over beyond the mysterious and shockingly decent Odyssey.
A Dismal Guide to Concurrency (2010)
Probably, but only if the target architecture is a 6 bit processor which doesn't exist.
Why the traditional wedding isn't as traditional as it seems
(Author writing): You're probably correct. Unfortunately ASAN isn't an option at my university because we use an older version of g++ (though they do seem to be updating it every now and again now). I've seen ASAN be put to great use in industry though.
On the web we also have the vast collection of Google Books (just because it's out of copyright doesn't mean it's uninteresting or useless), research papers from every academic area, high quality open source software to learn from, newspapers from around the world, etc. - which you won't find in most local libraries. Yes, lots of what's on the web is shit, but there's a lot of good stuff too.
Don't be too sure of those long-distance travel routes.

Air travel is reliant on cheap and abundant petroleum. And in the U.S., peak aviation fuel has come and gone. Departures and total passenger miles are both above that level, as more efficient aircraft and higher load factors are rolled out, but peak aviation fuel was reached in 2000 -- that's nearly 15 years ago. The 2000 FAA RITA estimate for 2012 fuel use was 52% higher than actual consumption.

http://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/aerospace_forecast...

Petroleum supplies past 2020 are going to be increasingly volatile (US EIA projects fracked oil extraction to peak by then). The airline industry is scared, and doesn't seem to have a good plan going forward (Boeing's "biggest breakthrough there is" is quite disapointing).

Rail travel can be electrified, which liberates it from dependence on any specific fuel source.

At 120 mph average speed (allowing for station stops), the 2,000 mile trip from Chicago to the West Coast would be 16 hours 40 minutes. A 4pm departure would have you arriving at about 7am the next morning for east-west travel, 11 am for west-east. Higher speeds are possible, though stops and dwell tend to reduce this. I see high-speed long-distance rail as viable.

The question is how long the present energy/fuel economy can sustain itself.

http://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/1wo2hl/boeings_...
The comments on HN are actually more provoking than this article.

For instance, the author states:

> George Orwell said, “Within certain limits, the less money you have the less you worry.” He was wrong.

by taking out of context the quote and trying to turn it towards his own argument.

One point that did stick out was mothers being prompted to play with their children in ways that help develop and enhance verbal skills. It would be more beneficial to read studies done that show what kind of actions parents can take to help their children go farther than they have; how to break the cycle, as it were.
Well, what?

The massless ropes that do not stretch and massless pulleys and cogs are great approximation for the real world in nearly everything available at home.

If kids can not relate to those, it's because they don't look into the machines they have around them, not because the model isn't realistic.
It is not that it is impossible to do it in another language. It is just that it is relatively simple in PHP. Single file does not necessarily mean simple.

Bad habits can be induced by a language, but if you are still at the point where you're learning the concept of variables, you're way before the point where you'll begin to pick up bad habits.
It's a whole lot easier to get started if you apply for jobs where you'd right in-house apps, for tech support or for system or network administration.

I did all three.

Actually the vast majority of computer software is never released to the public. For example I wrote image processing software for an aerial photography firm. Our "product" was hardcopies of our photos, as well as expert interpretations of what our customers should do, based on what our experts found in the photos.

So my own "customers" were those experts.
I deserve that.
I think you're describing project governance rather than something about open source code.

Me, I'm in a third group. I write commercial open source. Only people who pay for my software get access to it, under the MIT license. Is it sharing if it costs money? ;)
Holy enormous serendipity thread moment. This won't make any sense to you, but I'm saving a link to it, and mark my words, it'll make sense in a couple months.
Pure functions can very much be algorithms. Functional programming is just that and can include algorithms. Monads are not intrinsically related in any way to impurity, they are an instrument of control/data flow. They can be used to apparently cause side effects but do not actually introduce impurity.
The math for working out the transform is actually the same (not an inverse!) since you are still just trying to map 4 points to 4 points.

I had a demo for the 'inverse' transform also:
http://codepen.io/fta/pen/LHonf

Here is the same thing except using the video from this post: http://codepen.io/fta/pen/JoGybG
Computers are themselves abstractions upon abstractions. How many levels of cache does a modern computer have? How many memory protection layers exist between your code and the machine? Hardware keeps getting more complex and it becomes obsolete quickly.

It's hard to teach this stuff to beginners because it will probably be useless by the time the get good enough at programming to do anything. Add to that the fact that there are probably 15,000 different platforms all doing the same things in subtly different ways .

PS: 'subtly' is a horrible word.
Here is how it would work in OpenCV:

https://gist.github.com/stschake/445aea35a3c9846573ad

I'm getting 50fps with the imshow, 100 without on an ooold Q6600. That said, remap is basically memory-bandwidth limited.
I thought this was going to be about exposing trotskyist fronts (lots of trotskyists in Montreal student politics). Bit disappointed.

It does remind me of what 1970s maoists write about their experience.
Top 70 Programming Quotes of All Time
Is it ironic that this guy bought a domain name specifically for this? or does he just know his audience.
[RentResident] Would you use our product/service and if so, why?
"A URL is not a mark of quality. It's not proof of honesty or approval from the FDA."
Despite not being a ruby programmer, this is why I've loved _why's shoes framework (http://shoesrb.com/) You're not going to use it on an enterprise project, but in terms of just getting shit done with a little friction as possible it's great — and that is precisely what a beginner needs.
You may also want to try interpreting the magazines as raw PCM audio and running them through a few demodulation schemes.
>There's no right or wrong way to cook. It's all about what you personally have a taste for.

Only if you're cooking for yourself.

Additionally, I've developed a near vomitous reflex whenever I read "there is no right or wrong way to..." If there is no wrong way to cook, there is no reason to have cooking schools or to pay people to do it.

Of course there is a wrong way to cook. Pretending that you can't fail at something is pretty much guaranteed to ensure failure.
Is it me or the text is really hard to read?
It may be related to the fuel being factored into the thermal design (as coolant) as well as used as a store of energy. If so it sounds like the F-35's design is less forgiving than the other aircraft they have at that base.
Or alternatively, you're like a Microsoft devtools user circa 2000, wondering what crazies would use something besides windows/asp.net for their web stack, since in the "real world", no one cares about that crappy free software stuff, they just want stuff to work, and don't care about theoretical lock-in to a slow-moving company, don't care about being unable to modify/improve/adapt their own tools, etc.

You don't care about "free software purity", but we're not talking about "impure" open-source software. The EME module is completely closed source, trade secret, subject to opaque negotiations between large private companies. It is in fact quite pragmatic to have a problem with it. If you want to put a browser on a sufficiently different platform, it won't be able to play most of the videos on the web, if EME becomes popular. Or, if there's enough resistance to it, and DRM on video eventually goes the way of DRM on audio (i.e. goes away), you'll have put a bunch of effort and contracts and such into something that only holds you back from offering the best experience (whether you make websites or client platforms).

All that said, I suppose it is better that the DRM is relegated to the smallest possible piece, and delivery, decoding, and presentation are possibly open to improvement by the client platforms.
Good points, thanks. I think you missed my point about commercial use, though. Allowing a public, universal, nearly unique identifier (apparently SSN's aren't always unique) for every resident of the US might make it easier to compile, buy, and sell information about people. I guess these companies already use {name, date of birth} as an ID to attach addresses etc., but having a more robust UID would allow more accuracy when considering name changes or variants. Also, publicizing SSN's risks retroactively publicizing everything that was ever privately collected under them. I can't quite put my thumb on this, so maybe it's a bit irrational, but I would want somebody to thoroughly disprove things like this before I could support the idea.

If, e.g., Facebook is completely allowed to know my SSN, they can more easily make deals with anyone else to share information about my finances, medicine, voting, etc., which are already tied to my SSN. Considering the "shadow profiles" some social companies reportedly compile, they might even be able to do this without my ever creating an account. The current situation in this area would still probably make me uncomfortable if I knew it all (as your links suggest, Facebook might already be able to guess a lot of SSN's), but I at least hope that having one "secret" and legally "regulated" element slows down some data mining and exchanging.

If you have confidence that business interests or laws will prevent my worst fears from being realized, consider we're talking about this in a thread about supposedly private information being publicly released when a company got hacked. Then there's the trading and compiling these hackers could be doing outside of the public view.
Developers are a notoriously hard-to-monetize crowd, and more developers have adblockers installed than any other demographic. So I would avoid normal advertisements.

Here's what you need to do:

1) Collect email addresses

2) Sell things to the email addresses. Books come to mind.

e.g. "Want to hear my recommendations for programming books? Leave your email."

Or, as another commenter suggested, write a book yourself.

Also put some amazon affiliate links to books somewhere on the site.
That looks like it would get really hot with a bunch of computer equipment inside.
You can read this as "mainline Guile Emacs is never gonna happen".

Guile is very low quality software (that goes double, hell, triple, for "non free" platforms like OSX and Windows) and Emacs has a reputation for being rock solid on all platforms it runs on.

The Guile fanboys may wish for Guile to replace the current core in mainline but realistically speaking (Guile has what, 1/2 developers?) that's never going to happen.

If I had to guess, I'd say most Emacs users and developers couldn't care less about Scheme/Guile (if not actively hostile).
"(Github, App store..."

Quite commonly I am asked for my Github link, but then regarded as unqualified because I don't have one.

That's because you can download my source from my own website.

I have some pretty good reason to believe that many of those who want to know my Github, don't know what Github actually is. That is, not only do they not inspect anyone's Github source, if pressed, they could not explain the difference between a github and a hubcap.

Almost universally, one is required to have at least on App in the App Store or Google Play.

There's no specific requirement as to what the app actually does, whether it works well, whether it's source code makes sense to anyone, whether it gets good reviews - just that one just that that special magic ticket into a mobile development job.

Again, I have good reason to believe that few ever actually so much as look at the app store or google play pages, let alone download, install and run the app.

Have you ever heard someone say "I'd like to work with you so we can find a way that you can drive a brand new car right off the lot. How about I give you a thousand dollar trade-in on your totally thrashed beater?"

I actually had a Toyota saleswoman say just that to me. The reason I was shopping for a new car, is that my thousand dollar trade-in was so unreliable that I was to be fired if I didn't buy a new car Real Soon Now.

Now consider that many recruiters are really good at just that kind of sales.

It's not that they try to sell anything to the candidates. They sell their, uh, "service" to the hiring managers, by somehow convincing them that its worth paying them tens of thousand of dollars in commissions for placing just one coder.
After 14 years of java programming which was really the language I started with, I can say that quote applies to java and perhaps any language that's not assembly, C, C++.
I think every beginner should be strongly encouraged to start with C.
> Wikipedia and the internet in general has done a great job of making shallow information readily available

Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia. The word 'encyclopaedia' literally means a volume of shallow, broad-base, all-round knowledge.

> But for the vast majority of topics, it hasn't come close to providing the kind of information available in books

I disagree strongly. Writing a book is an incredibly time-consuming and difficult endeavour, and not all people who have knowledge worth sharing have the skill or time to do it. By praising books as a supreme medium you put authors on an intellectual pedestal while suffering from (or being blessed with) their editorial choices and interests. Some great things have come from people scribbling on napkins, exchanging letters, or scribbling in journals. The Internet means these sorts of mediums can proliferate. If you want depth on the Internet, go to discussion forums, go to IRC, send e-mail, read mailing lists, watch talks, go directly to the personal blogs of experts, post comments, download electronic journals... these are the alternatives the Internet provides to going to a library. Don't wait for someone to patch Wikipedia.

In all honesty, there are only two valuable aspects I have ever found and love in a library: geographically local reference material, like newspaper archives etc, and a nice quiet place to study, away from distraction.
I have never liked the streaming services like Spotify for this reason - the royalties seem incredibly small (the DRM is also not great).

I feel like Bandcamp (and iTunes) have a much better profit model. Offer full length samples so you know exactly what you are getting, and then charge 25-50 cents per track with 90% of it going to the creator. Despite the higher prices to the consumer, the cost feels a lot more justifiable in my mind. I've spent over $50 a month on Bandcamp before, whereas I can't see myself purchasing a music streaming service for anywhere near that cost.
Seriously? That's very cool
Damn near the very best computer programmer I have ever met, never even applied to college, let alone attended one.

He used to write storage drivers for HP-UX. Now he's doing embedded systems development for the Keck Telescope on Mauna Kea.

I asked him once how he learned to do all that. He just said that when he was a kid, he liked to tinker with gadgets.
> "YouTube has it down to a science"

Yes, but arguably, NASA has rocket science down to a science too. My point still stands: it's still a pretty complex and difficult thing to pull off with a high rate of consistency.
Wow, impressive, I think I now more about ffmpeg now. And I fixed the (50,415), thanks.
I just don't understand the culture of free. On one hand, everything digital is expected for free (or close to it). Even app prices have gone so low, that the majority of app developers would never be able to earn a living.

On the other, lots of hate for big corporations and further complaining when jobs go away (one of the direct results of the free culture). The ability to make a living online makes it so you don't ever have to work for a large corporation. The ultimate freedom.

I know plenty of independent artists that can't really make a living with music anymore because albums are now essentially worthless. Many of these people are now forced to sell out to big corporate record labels (and then, the same people that created this environment call them "sellouts").
Thanks for saving me from reading through that entire article. I spend too much time gleaning lessons from articles and too little time actually making mistakes!
It's tough being smart and influential: your [Dijkstra's] successes and mistakes end up going through the same megaphone.
"Fiction is self-perpetuating."

I've found really interesting ways that this manifests itself.

I'm a film-camera lover. Well, my Fuji GW690 mk3 is fantastic, except that when I trip the shutter, there's an awful "ping" sound that it makes. I read forum after forum and watched youtube videos that all said the same thing: "Remove the counter assembly and it will remove the ping."

Getting a hair up my derrier, I decided to do this and found, after much work, that the ping sound was in the shutter assembly and could not be mitigated.

Check the work here.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1447...

Anyway, just one internet myth amongst millions I'm sure. I was just so surprised that people would parrot other peoples lies like that. If that's the case with something so minor, I can only imagine the amount of misinformation out there (where people have something to gain).
Yep. See issue 0x03 for advice.
You would think that would be a solution, but sometimes learning to use a tool is about as hard as writing the tool yourself. (And in a few special cases, it's even more difficult!)

Not that this applies here, but it is something to consider.
Ok thanks for filling in the blank.
Luke has been a F-16 base for some time.
He still talks to dead people if that helps! His brother in the show, Peter Krause went on to star in Parenthood. Parenthood grows on you, I originally started watching it for Lauren Graham but it's become one of my favourites.
I feel like you're conflating "purity" with algorithms.

Just to clarify, in Haskell there is no issue with algorithms being contained inside functions.

Here's a naive implementation of quicksort:

qsort [] = []
qsort (x:xs) = qsort smaller ++ [x] ++ qsort larger
where
smaller = [a | a <- xs, a <= x]
larger = [b | b <- xs, b > x]

Nothing about this algorithm requires side-effects, it doesn't mutate any state, it doesn't make use of counters. You can implement it anywhere inside of a Haskell program.

People may charitably point out that this is a pretty bad naive implementation, because it doesn't just mutate values in the list up and down, which is inefficient. People uncharitably will take issue with even calling it quicksort, as some people believe that the property of just mutating values in the list is an integral part of it being quicksort. I'm not smart enough to have an opinion about whether or not it's a "true" quicksort.

But the point is that you can absolutely have algorithms in Haskell that are not restricted to only run in a Monad.

Monads exist in Haskell as a way to reason about side-effects. Whether or not an algorithm (or any function) needs to be executed inside a monad is a function of its use of side-effects, it's not fundamental.
The vast majority of those deaths are from famine (and if you're seriously going to add an extra 150 million from pre-1949, how many are you going to put on the ledger of the Nationalist government or the Japanese?)

Here's a couple posts (from an unexpected source) that go into depth on these kind of numbers, and the things that come up when you take seriously the assumptions that went into generating them and seeing where that leads.

http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/mustachianism-around-the-we...

http://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/mustachianism-around-the-we...
Show HN: Cnnected – (Paid) Projects for Designers and Developers
Someone is useing a DOS attack to get opponents to fold on an online poker site