skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't really buy this. There are plenty of salesmen, but faculty don't generally believe their pitches.

The reason that universities "upgrade" to new versions is that publishers refuse to continue printing the old ones.

Indeed, my university (the University of South Carolina) had this stunt pulled on us by Cengage (the publisher of Stewart's Calculus), and we are refusing to play ball. So we've decided that we are absolutely going to use something other than Stewart next year. Unfortunately, the best alternatives also all cost around $200+.
Is there anywhere in the world that allows unrestricted drug trade?
We are talking about data, which is the log of the number of combinations, like any measure of information. If this interests you, definitely look into basic information theory, and then move onto coding theory.

Take, for example, 32bit integers vs 64bit integers (unsigned for simplicity). Two 32 bit integers can represent exactly the same number of combinations that a single 64 bit number can. Sure, there's an exponential number more combinations in a 64bit integer than a 32 bit, but the number of combinations is not how the storage capacity is measured.
I've got a 1.5tb hard drive that's full. I could easily use up 10tb, and probably more over the years.

Storage companies buy by the petabyte.

The argument that we don't need more storage doesn't work.
If you're lucky it won't compile. It's when it's 2% wrong that makes programming so hard.
http://techcrunch.com/2005/09/01/kiko-ajax-calendar/
Nobody says this has anything to do with 'Fancy dynamic Javascript frameworks that break up what should have been a single response into 20 different responses, asynchronously firing dozens of superfluous repaints ...'

The use-case for this type of solution can occur in a relatively simple app (web app or native), with a master/detail layout when the user loads the 'detail' view for an item (and it has to fetch network data).

I'm looking at my desktop Spotify app and seeing places where this approach is applicable. Of course it loads so fast to me it seems unnecessary, but that will not be the case for everyone in the world.
Here I was thinking this would be an article about how the education system fails to educate our children on how the world and the economy actually works instead of an idealization from yesteryear.
Valid point. We don't know if they're doing that (and I suspect it's probably illegal) on a wide scale (the parallel construction cases appear to be specific help requests made by the FBI/DEA to intelligence agencies), but they certainly could in the future if they're not already.
I agree. Additionally, the words "distinct" or "cardinality" don't appear anywhere in this article, which is a major omission when discussing HyperLogLog. The primary use of the algorithm is to provide a cardinality estimate.
That's going to be one seriously dedicated pizza thief. Anyone dumb enough to go near an armed drone big enough to lift a pizza is going to end up in the emergency room.
For comparison I tried out >1k cpu plots in Prometheus on a m1.large with 2xHDDs. It took 20s with a cold cache.
from D.C.

function base(spec) {
var that = {},
member,
method = function() {
// spec, member, method
};
that.method = method;
return that;
}

function derived(spec) {
var that = base(spec),
member,
method = function() {
// spec, member, method
};
that.method = method;
return that;
}

I'd suggest you watch the talk linked above for this stuff in context.
> The proposal I present to the commission will ensure the internet remains open, now and in the future, for all Americans.

I really wish they would acknowledge that this type of decision isn't just "for Americans". Pretty much the entire world was watching to see how they were going to handle it.
That's just diaspora, or any of those open source apps that let you post/view feeds. Nothing interesting. Open source the graph search algorithm and perhaps..
Same for me. I used Hound for a while but it was annoying to see all this comments. So I just added Rubocop check inside `rake test` so build is broken if you have code style issues
Google Translate.
Can we not use "go back to reddit" as some kind of insult?
I've had the pleasure of co-teaching Rails classes with Erik Trautman (OP) and he's a smart, dedicated guy. He's written a thoughtful article but underplays a key point. Learning to code would not be "so damn hard" if there were better learning resources. There's too much "learn to code" crap for beginners (as Erik points out), and not enough resources for advanced education (the "resource density" in the "Desert of Despair," as he points out). Learning to code would be easier if someone produced better advanced tutorials, books, and courses. I've been doing this for two years with the RailsApps tutorials [1]. And my "fluffy cat" book, "Learn Ruby on Rails," [2] provides guidance for writing apps from scratch without tutorials. Erik's article would be totally irrelevant if authors and teachers delivered better educational content. Erik's trying to do it with Viking Code School, and I've been trying to do it with my own writing, too. It's educators and authors that have to get smarter and work harder, not learners.

[1] https://tutorials.railsapps.org/
[2] "Learn Ruby on Rails" on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00QK2T1SY
With print on demand these days, it's cheaper to print a single copy of a 400 page full color photo book at blurb than these text books. Ridiculous. This is easily doable with digital printing now to get the costs down to say $40 for a few hundred copies still room for people to profit. It takes some courage and a movement within the universities and community colleges to start making dents in the industry.
Under Armour Acquires Endomondo and MyFitnessPal
Exactly. And all the inefficiencies that come from multiple "target" languages. What happens when the Indinesian scientist decides to learn German and Chinese, while the Latvian scientist learns Spanish and English. They've both taken the effort to learn 2 languages and yet still won't be able read each other's papers. It's just simpler to have one target where you know everyone else is aiming too.
> You just make an object, if you don’t like the way it works you make another one and that is literally it.

This is, like jashekanas eloquently puts it, so full of shit.

You're still creating a bunch of objects. Unless you are a mashocist (or a sadist, if other people have to maintain your code), you are still going to want to reuse methods between those objects.

Once you do that, you have to have some organization between what gets reused how. Sure, prototypes give you more freedom to define different ways of organizing and reusing behavior across objects. In practice, single-delegation actually works pretty well most of the time.

> So you can tell people from the classical school “You don’t have to do all of that” and they go “Yea, I hear ya, but you still have to do it” and you say “no, you don’t have to do it” and they go “yea, yea, yea” (blowing you off)

It's not that you don't have to create a taxonomy in JS. It's, "First you have to conceive and implement the very idea of a taxonomy itself. Then you get to use that to create a taxonomy."

You need to reuse code somehow. Figuring out a scheme for doing that is metaprogramming. JS basically says, "Well, you have to do this metaprogramming before you can get to the task you actually care about."

Using classes (or any other baked-in reuse scheme like parent slots in Self) just means the language has done the metaprogramming for you and you can use it out of the box.

The flexibility JS gives you is nice when the language's built-in mechanisms for code reuse aren't a good fit. But, so far, most homegrown code-reuse-systems don't seem to be that much better than what classes (with maybe some mixin or trait special sauce on top) provide.
But now you're arguing semantics that clearly exist outside the scope of the author's usage of "Earth."
Oh please give me continuations in the VM and I will take back every angry thought I've ever directed at Oracle.
There is this, for example:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a3/Calculus....

Not terrible, but not as good as commercial textbooks. (Please let me know if you are aware of anything better.)
Apple camera car on San Francisco streets leads to 'street view' speculation
"don't try and have people killed" is probably also a fairly good warning to people involved in these enterprises.
Correspondence courses -- the pre-internet MOOCs.
>Most of the non-functional "programming" in Flow based programs actually occurs at the level where you are composing the connections between processes (be that the GUI, or in a hand-written method which makes the connections).

This is false, there are entire languages that do line by line compilation via Flow Based Programming.

>One additional benefit of FBP which it shares with traditional FP programs is that they are capable of exhibiting "lazy" execution

This is blatantly wrong and the main thing I was trying to express.

Flow Based Programming is based off a topographical analysis of the code body. Which is a analysis of object dependencies (where a dependency is code that must be executed before the object (code) in question can be run).

Meaning objects are executed in the order in which they have the least number of dependencies. This means one off sections of code, that do not necessarily need input from external, or exist independent of otherwise coherent processes he processed first.

For example (Example 1)

Path p = resolve_path();
if(something_happened())
{
FP fp = open(p, "rw);
write(fp, "logloglog");
close(fp);
}

This above code is bad, because path P is always resolved, regardless of error state.

A Currying analysis (lazy evaluation) will change this flow via lazy evaluation (or should ideally):

(example 2)

if(something_happened())
{
Path p = resolve_path();
FP fp = open(p, "rw);
write(fp, "logloglog");
close(fp);
}

A topological flow based compiler will prefer path P be constant. It will prefer example 1, to example 2 every time (if its given example 1 as base code). And likely ensure that path P is solved for absolutely first in a function AS resolve_path() depends on no code being executed before it.

This is the flaw in most flow based programs. Is they don't care errors like this, and when the errors do exit, they optimize for them to be more apparent.

:.:.:

This is what I mean by a topographical analysis being the opposite of a Currying analysis. They group code differently, in almost an opposite fashion. Curry trys to group code by purpose. Topological by how much code has to be executed before it.

Both have their uses.
I do agree that, if he is DPR, he was better defending himself as such and rallying the support he had built from his writings.

As for the charges, I'm saying that yes, those are not proper crimes in a free society, and none pass common sense constitutional muster. He didn't violate anyone's rights, defraud anyone, or engage anyone with violence. Who is the victim?
Personally, I think this is the phase where what you need most is practice. There are practical things you need to learn that you just can't learn without running into them during a project.

Just keep practicing. Varied things. Challenging things.

You'll get there!
Meanwhile, in Ruby...foo could contain any conceivable data structure, which you'll have to reflect on and test against extensively in a production environment if you don't want your application falling flat on its face at the first sign of unexpected input.

Go would have similar problems with unexpected input, it just frontloads the work, so if you do something stupid then you'll know it up front.
DNA storage is pretty silly. The claim is 5.5petabits/mm^3 with a 100x redundancy. The problem is that massive storage is only as good as your ability to encode/decode into it.

Let's be clear: this work encoded just 5.27 megabits. It's stored in what's basically a large molecular hash table where each piece of key-value data is replicated a million times for redundancy. Each piece then read 100x to correct for the -abundant- errors in each piece. So they encoded less than a megabyte.

The problem with encoding information into DNA is that writing serial polymers accurately is difficult and slow. In this paper they're using an inkjet printed DNA array. It takes a day to make them, resulting in a bandwidth of:

(5.27 Mbits) / (24x60x60 sec) = 66 bits/sec

Reading is a little faster. The fastest system, the HiSeq 2500 reads 120Gbits raw in 27 hours. Factoring in the necessary 100x redundancy, one has a -maximum- read rate of:

(120 Gbits / 100) / (27x60x60 sec) = 12 Kbits / sec

So for 5.5 petabits it would take 16,000 years to write the data into a cubic mm but only 16 years to read it at the current rate.

If we get a little scifi, and assume we build programmable
polymerases and get nanopore (direct read) sequencing. Even then, physics limits you to something like 1000 read/writes per sec per pore/polymerase. Instrumenting to these will probably limit per-feature size to being larger than 100micron on a fabricated chip, giving us an ultimate read/write limit around:

(2cm/100um)^2 x 1000 bit/sec = 40Mbit/sec

for a giant 2cmx2cm chip. With the necessary error-correction and redundancy, it's probably going to cap out around 1Mbit/sec at best.

Those 700TB take about 2months to read/write at these rates, and we'll have much-better solid state storage technologies by the time we figure out how to all that with DNA.
Microsoft clearly understands that data-portability is becoming a major feature / factor in purchasing decisions.
Google, on the other hand, keeps trimming portability - particularly with MSFT.

I don't think so. It's super easy to export all of your data from Google, whereas there's no way to export your contacts from Office 365 Exchange, unless you use some external client.
I read this as beneficial to the wireless data carriers. Toward the bottom:

"there will be no rate regulation, no tariffs, no last-mile unbundling"

Meaning no more MVNOs and no more competition other than the "big 4". Read the arstech article here: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/06/we-dont-need-net-... to see how unbundling would have been best for the consumer; without it, looks like the wireless co's win big actually.
If he did so, he'd seem more like a greedy opportunist rather than someone genuinely interested in pushing the industry's goals.
Why is poor performance in one browser a reason to completely drop support for that browser? If it works correctly albeit slowly, why not support it anyway? Then the slow experience is motivation for the browser vendor to improve it as well.
The conditions for risk from wildfire do arise out of a multitude of factors. Including discounting hazards, poor construction, insufficient warning or evacuation capabilities, and more.

But more to the point: the conditions in which wildfires are common involve such insanely high risk of conflagration that the least spark can set them off. And do.

When you've got to tell people not to mow lawns or trim brush for fear of stray sparks setting off tinder-dry brush, you're simply sitting on top of (or in the midst of) a bomb. And that is the reality in much of the world -- Australia, the western US, Greece, and elsewhere. Or a hot car exhaust from a parked vehicle. Or broken glass. Or, yes, flame in the form of cigarettes, a campfire, or barbecue.

But except for the case of deliberate arson (which does happen), I find the practice of convicting people for what's essentially a mistake waiting to happen to be quite distasteful.
Wrong trial. "Ulbricht is charged with a murder-for-hire scheme in a separate case in federal court in Baltimore." https://www.popehat.com/2013/10/02/the-silk-road-to-federal-...

Edit: and I had the wrong link. The quote is from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-12-09/us-says-s...
Dumber than you, so automatically a Redditor, huh? Considering this is Hacker News with definite faults of its own, that's a very glass house stone of you to throw. In particular, you should compare how HN handles a gender-in-tech thread to certain subreddits' treatment of the same topic.

It's almost like Reddit is a grouping of wildly disparate communities with different ideals, some for humor, some serious. How many communities does HN have? Oh, right, one.
He didn't. These were lies - straight up lies - designed to impugn his credibility during jury selection and the bail proceeding.

Ask yourself: Why wasn't he charged with these crimes?
> And it's true. Look at the mocking libraries for JavaScript. They're sooooooooo much easier to write than anything for classical languages because it's so easy to do in JavaScript. In my own experience I have a mutli-user networking system written in JavaScript and a library in C#. To reimplement the same things in JavaScript in C# is a huge amount of code bloat. I have to make classes and meta classes and all kinds of other indirection just so I can make an Event system that is generic. In JavaScript that's 2 or 3 lines

That does not follow from what you quoted, and what you quoted is a non-sequitur to start with.

What you're raving about can be achieved just as easily in any dynamically typed language. Hell you probably get 80~90% of that in a structurally typed language (OCaml objects, Go).

> In JavaScript you can build objects on the fly.

Which you can do in many other languages, including statically typed ones. Here's an object in Ocaml:

# let s = object
val mutable v = [0; 2]

method pop =
match v with
| hd :: tl ->
v <- tl;
Some hd
| [] -> None

method push hd =
v <- hd :: v
end

And that's statically typed.

> The problem with 'class' in ES6 is that it will prevent people from learning this new, easier, faster, simpler way of working because instead they just bring the classical baggage to JavaScript.

That's patent nonsense, not to mention ES6's class shortcuts apply to object literals as well, the only thing the class statement does is remove the bullshit and mostly useless boilerplate Javascript demands when creating a reusable prototype due to it being a garbage language, and its "prototypal" object system being there not because it's good and going to save the masses but because it was the easiest way to have an object system working in a week. It's just a sad and pitiful shadow of Self's object system from which it draws so little you have to know the relation's there to find it.
i say its "brittle" ...those words discrete and continuous dont really apply cleanly, though i understand the idea somewhat intuitively
The article doesn't do a great job conveying how Medium is actually structured. I can only speak to how it was a year and a half ago (when I left), but the difference between a system like Holacracy and a standard hierarchical organization is that a person in Holacracy might hold roles in many circles at the same time and those roles are relatively fluid.

The whole point in a role is to define who has decision-making authority over some given thing and/or what that role is responsible for. Lead links come about when a role becomes too big for a single person and turns into a circle which has its own members. The lead link is there to represent the circle to the parent circle and to determine who is filling what roles. Other than that, the circle is largely self governing (roles, responsibilities, etc are all decided in regular governance meetings as a circle, not by the lead link).

There are definitely decision makers at the company, but they're not managing people per se, they just have authority over some area of the company. The whole people side is entirely independent and generally lives outside of Holacracy.
This is a good explanation of how the defense totally screwed up:

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/02/op-ed-ross-ulbric...

Basically, the evidence was massively damning, so their only serious hope of winning was by challenging the curiously nonspecific way the FBI found the Silk Road server; but they gave up their ability to do so for some dubious benefits.
Check out Daniel X. Moore's `{SUPER: SYSTEM}`. http://stackoverflow.com/a/3731253
Yes, I understand this is a design issue not technical but AJAX is commonly associated with this, maybe I should have been more precise.

Still, what is new here that is not found in many mainstream designs for years?
Lightweight threads (fibers) looks especially interesting to me. I wonder if there is some library that already tries to ger around threads with something more lightweight...
did you have people readily available to ask questions to and get correct answers? it makes all the difference if you have somebody to guide you through periods of being stuck.
And Chinese is nearly English.
> Ask yourself: Why wasn't he charged with these crimes?

He will be in another trial.
I can't express how much I agree with this sentiment.

Automation reduces the requirement of human labour. It increases our productivity. That should be a good thing. I'm in the business of putting people out of their job[0] -- that should be something we strive for. A few decades ago we believed that technology would create a utopia by doing this because we would barely ever have to work yet be as productive as ever.

Sadly our culture has this perverse fetish for needless work. You must have a job to make money because you need to make money to survive. And if your job becomes easier and you have to work less to achieve the same levels of productivity, either your work must expand to fill the gap or your pay gets reduced to reflect the reduction in work.

If we paid by productivity, even unskilled labour would guarantee ample pay.

[0]: Anyone working in the tech industry is, ultimately. Although many products result in the creation of "non-jobs" (essentially, the commercial equivalent of bureaucracy), that's merely a stepping stone and at least partially a byproduct of the mentality that more jobs are a good thing.
Have you read the transcripts of his supposed "murder for hire" discussions?

They are with a supposed Hell's Angel, who, right on the first email, opens up about his business dealings, what he does, how he does it, etc. It's waaaaaaaay to open and forthcoming for a hardened and experienced criminal to just flat out say things like:

> Also, we have kidnapped friendlychemists partner Xin already and are on the hunt for friendlychemist.

> We are all familiar with PGP as we have been using it for years via email linked to our smartphones. It’s the only way we communicate with each other aside from in person, since phone calls are not secure.

> After some “questioning” he admitted he was intending on moving to a different country and setting up a new seller account on this site. We don’t take too kindly to thieves. He’s gone.

> If you have your mind set on just finding his location, I can talk to them and get them to get it for you for a fee (not sure what amount as usually when we hunt someone, there is more involved after we find them).

> I can almost guarantee it, but I stop short of guaranteeing anything unless I am 100% certain I can get the job done. I do that so I don’t look like an idiot if I can’t accomplish something I have said I can.

It reads like a novel (or more likely a LE agent baiting him). Would also explain why none of the "victims" were ever really identified, nor any missing persons reports filed.

Doesn't excuse what DPR did, just saying this part of the prosecution's story doesn't sit well with me.

~~

Edit:

Here's the supposed conversation about the "hits" for reference

http://www.wired.com/2015/02/read-transcript-silk-roads-boss...