skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is a good idea.

Myself, I noticed that almost all my websockets projects could easily share one single code base, and finally I just made a Websockets boilerplate repo that I can pull from for any given project. This is what node.js really excels at, and it's an execution model fundamentally different from websocketd: being a message broker between the client and the request-based web server.

Some people don't like the separation between web server and websockets server, but when you think about it they don't belong quite on the same level of abstraction. Plus, it's usually orders of magnitude easier to reason about single requests than to reason about a complex persistent application server's state.
Steps:

0) Have a Macbook Air running OS X Yosemite

1) Install Firefox

2) Install Adobe Flash

3) Install Nightly

4) Install Shumway

5) Attempt to open http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/shumway

6) Watch Firefox complain that the tab crashed

7) Try to reload the tab

8) GOTO 6

Disabling Flash (via the Addons screen in Firefox/Nightly) seems to fix the issue.
Wow you are my new favorite person. What I was going to say was that the GP was correct in that it just took a bit more work on the maintainers part to keep the history clean, but even that is unnecessary apparently :-)
> it's very difficult as a user to figure out which version I should be using for my code to run correctly.

I've rarely had trouble with assuming master (or ideally a tagged release) on the original repo (not a fork) is the one I should be using. Assume all forks are forks.

In any cases where this hasn't been true, it's been clear to me the blame is due to poor release management (or poor communication of release management, which is the same thing), rather than somehow the fault of github's PR or forking system. Although you can hypothetically argue that certain UI's encourage poor release management and others support it, I personally have not seen this to be an issue in github's UI.
If you said "GitHub pull requests don't fit our culture" or "The GitHub pull request UI is insufficient for our needs" then it'd accept that. Both are perfectly valid reasons for preferring Gerrit. But placing this blanket statement about the whole "pull request culture" is just wrong.
That's certainly not what went on here, from the description. Your assertion is truthy, in that, yes, the /practice/ of fractional reserve banking increases the money supply.

However, to do the equivalent in the way the example described would have required mocking up a loan (asset) which would be offset by a liability (deposit account balance), and a reserve amount (loss allowance and bank capital) behind it. In that manner you create 10,000 in an account which may be withdrawn where the "real" money in the bank is only 1,000. This happens every day, but not by hackers, just by run of the mill self-dealers and fraudsters. At the end of the day the 9,000 comes out of the capital of the bank (or the deposit insurance if things get dire), but it can take months or years ... See the s&l crisis for more.

But hackers don't give a shit about the books seeming to balance for years to snooker regulators. They just want to withdraw the $9,000. The books obviously won't reconcile end of day, but who cares?

So yeah, fractional reserve banking is interesting to know about and not without its hazards, but this exploit could have happened against a full reserve depository institution just as well. The fractional reserve thing is spurious.
Really ? I thought it is because they say this; "If you work with Ubuntu, the following commands should resolve all necessary build dependencies:" Also use apt-get Thanks for the down votes for honest mistake lol
Isn't EME supposed to address that? Or is that not adaptable to non-HTML5 video (even though this is, technically, HTML5+Javascript that happens to be able to play Flash animations)?
I really enjoyed his shows on Radio 1. The following article gives a little more information, mentioning rumours about Apple's plans to start a music streaming service in competition to Spotify...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/zane-lowe-quits-rad...
I second your idea about "bonding with people who are already bonded with the idea".

For the longest time, one of the things on my bucket list was to learn/make a game (with no prior experience before). During the last three years, I've started/restarted on my own but to no avail.

Two months ago, I joined an incubator for new game-makers and just being around so many supportive mentors (and other newbies who were creating games) pushed me to actually focus in on an engine, focus in on one idea and actually make significant progress in making my first game. I'm now about 80% complete with my game.

Guess I just needed a little push, a little encouragement and some accountability to finish something I've started so many times before!
Am I Being Tracked
Great great (old school) DJ, single-handedly can break an artist and has an impeccable taste in music. Really interesting to see what he's going to do at Apple, I assume it's iTunes Radio/rebooted Beats
I have often wondered what Jordi's[1] vision would really be like.. Maybe this is a peek into his world.

Imagine all these things, wifi, FM/AM Radio, iBeacons, cell towers etc.. It must be so noisy in the radio spectrum..

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geordi_La_Forge
Not an uncommon view: https://twitter.com/kellabyte/status/564531804837654528

(That's not me, to be clear.)

We all like Go. Just wish we could discuss these matters without unduly raising temperatures. "It's just code".
Your comment really resonated with me. It's like that person who attempts to beat procrastination in order to get things done by... reading books about procrastination.

I'll follow your advice.
We've spoken to GitHub about this. They're not happy with how PRs work, either. I stand by my statements.
I'm wondering the same. I have a PowerBook G4 running OpenBSD 5.6 that I suppose I could test with, though Firefox has traditionally been pretty slow on that particular machine.
thanks ;-)

It is already available as a package on various Linux distros: Gentoo, Arch, Fedora, ... as well as all BSD variants.
Mm, I'm not sure. These are slides, presumably designed to go alongside a talk, which could have fleshed out the points better. If you consider them as being summaries of what a speaker's saying, it makes much more sense.

Fwiw, of the six bullets, I see three which are clearly subjective, one which is a clear advantage of gerrit, and two which I don't really know enough about to refute.

When it comes down to build systems, I think it's very easy to spend a lot of time moving sideways or backwards - and if the tool you're moving to has deficiencies compared with what you had before, it can be very frustrating. Certainly, if the tool people want you to move to offers few advantages over your current infrastructure, a quick dismissal is reasonable.

Getting set up with their current contribution system might seem a little clunky, but I don't think it's particularly hard to do, and definitely seems like a 'run-once' thing. Once it's set up, it seems to integrate into a workflow well.

Their contributors will have their current workflows set up nicely - and unless github's issues system has compelling advantages, it's definitely not worth them switching due to the temporary loss in productivity.
There's a couple million phone calls reported, but there's less than a million telephone number pages for Google to index. There's 63 thousand numbers with more than 1 comment, 195 thousand with at least 1. If the problem is that the caller ID name with date of call is not rich enough data for Google, then I can limit the sitemap to only pages with textual comments. But Google is not saying that, or that they will reinclude it if I do that. They're not saying anything except that the site is using illicit practices.

Prior to Google removing whocalled.us, it accounted for 68% of traffic. 15% was direct, 6% Yahoo, 4.6% Bing. The fact that it is an extension of search, and not primarily a website people want to return to does not in any way demote its value to people. I do not visit Wikipedia directly, but I still want it in my search results.

If the time of this kind of site is over, then great, remove them all. Why pick on whocalled.us?
I Also Suffer from Information Paralysis
First thing I noticed. Amazon has them: http://smile.amazon.com/Weyland-Yutani-Corporation-Building-...
I'm very much a fan of that POV. I think OO has a lot of mythology, but the technology is relatively similar to something like OCaml or Haskell. Classes are essentially just functions which return "structures".

Inheritance and open-recursion/dynamic binding are usually what remain. I'm not terribly sure I miss them.
My guess? Because you were first. I wouldn't be surprised if the others are gone soon.

Side note, searching on your site pulls up a slightly different domain for me. Is that on purpose?
He means you have to climb the IO Monad learning curve.
You seem to be confusing client and server. When people say I/O-bound or CPU-bound they usually refer to servers.

And most clients aren't network-bound either. They are server-bound (i.e. they spend more time waiting for the server to create a response than for the network to transfer it).
Neat hack but aren't there free tools to do this with a laptop and its wifi adapter? http://www.ekahau.com/wifidesign/ekahau-heatmapper
Plenty of CPUs out there with cache sizes smaller than that, or other things running on the machine that would also like to use the cache.
I'm biased but as far as SMTP is concerned, you can hardly find something simpler than OpenSMTPD: pretty much any configuration can be described in less than 10 lines of config.

Here's my configuration on this desktop:

listen on all

accept from any for domain debug.poolp.org deliver to maildir

accept from local for any relay
> I'm a bit puzzled as to why you would need to draft comments inside the PR interface, especially in light of the fact that they can be edited.

This scenario happens often: I read through a change, making comments as I go. Then I reach some part of the change and realise "Oh, that explains why they did that in that other file!" So I go back and delete or alter my comments.

In Gerrit or Rietveld, the reviewee never sees those earlier comments.

On GitHub, the reviewee has already received the comment notifications and started responding before I have a chance to make the changes. The reviewee wastes time responding to questions to which I already know the answer. It's clunky, inefficient, and unnecessary.

It seems like you haven't used a tool like Gerrit or Rietveld. You should check them out.
I mean, Go is (or was) in the loop whenever YouTube hit its MySQL clusters (vitess) and on on the server providing downloads of Chrome and so forth (dl.google.com). CloudFlare has it sitting in the middle of every request for some sites (in the form of Railgun, their delta compression for pages). I'm not exactly a perf ninja and got some Go code packing Wikipedia history dumps at >100 MB/s. Dropbox uses Go for, their words, "our performance-critical backends" (https://blogs.dropbox.com/tech/2014/07/open-sourcing-our-go-...). So folks manage to heavy lifting with it.

I see "I couldn't possibly use X for performance reasons" here a lot, as an almost immediate response about a wide range of different tools, and two things come up in my mind: 1) you can always set the standard arbitrarily high. If you're doing AAA shoot-'em-up games or something, yes, use something else. 2) you're often not as good at tools that're new or different. It's possible you could go further with just a few more tricks about profiling or using free pools or whatever, or a little more info about how your code executes or what the runtime does. FWIW, if you hit a specific wall that's a problem for your app, folks on golang-nuts (or StackOverflow, where I've hung out sometimes) are often happy to try and help.

Hope this is more helpful than fussy. Mostly just don't want folks to be discouraged into thinking certain things are impossible when in some cases they're really being done in production out there.
I much prefer merge commits as opposed to fast forwarded commits

That's cool, but it's still constraining a flexible system away from someone else's preferences. I prefer "--no-ff" myself too, but think that's irrelevant.
Providing the source would be a step to improve transparency and reproducibility (the text does not provide sufficient detail for even someone working in the field to reproduce what they did so that he would arrive at the same results); however, the more crucial thing is the data. Switchboard, Fisher, and WSJ are available (provided you have a few grand to spend), but they say they collected 5000 h of read speech from 9600 speakers.. That's a huge effort!
Learning is fun! And Haskell's IO functionality is pretty easy. They teach it in the very first programming course at Chalmers in Gothenburg. It's covered in any introductory Haskell book.
Really cool, but I wonder how much his big metal testing rig is interfering with the signal.
> this can be fixed.

I believe this and am counting on it. Go2.0 and beyond should be a solid choice.

You should also note that it is entirely understood that more mature tech e.g. JVM have had the benefit of multibillion Dollar investment by SUN, IBM, Oracle, etc.

I feel it is regrettable that (imo valid and reasonable) criticism of what is currently not up to par with this tech always seemingly requires a disclaimer that "I love Go". I have been using this language since the day it was released. I know it fairly well. I like it. But excessive hype and sensitivity around it is frankly somewhat irritating.

peace out and happy v. day Go <3
Awesome. I'm not sure how to make this argument precise, but I think you could sample the intensity function only every 12.5cm (wavelength at 2.4 Ghz), since waves of a given wavelength are restricted to resonate and interfere at small multiples of it's wavelength.

For reconstruction there should be some ideal interpolation, maybe a 3d sync filter?

Another random interesting fact: if you capture not only the intensity but also phase of only a 2D slice, and have some environmental information (i.e. know how the signal propagates in your room), you can reconstruct the full 3D intensity.
Half your post is saying we should just use different tools, but we are. We're using Gerrit, that lets us work the way we want.

On the contributor instructions: note that if you just want to use plain git (and not our git-codereview tool) then you can stop at "Register with Gerrit."

We created the tool to provide a more familiar review process for the people that used our previous system.

If we took your advice and used offline diff tools, etc, we would need a similar page explaining how to do all of that. None of this convenience comes without an up front cost.
> Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface.

I always hated that part of UNIX. It would be so much better if programs could handle data-structure streams instead. Having text streams causes every single program to implement ad-hoc parsers and serializers.

I now use the command-line only for trivial one-time actions. For everything else I'll use a scripting language and forget about reading and writing text streams altogether.
> "Revisions that never existed" do exist

"Revision that were never built nor tested" is probably closer to the truth. Do you rewind through all your history and rebuild and retest every commit in a branch every time you rebase? Sure, they're similar, and you probably didn't mess up the merges. There's likely no subtle lingering bugs that QA's only going to catch weeks down the line. Probably.

> then you may end up in a mess, but it's your fault. Code review is a thing that is done for a reason.

Sure. But I've missed so many things in code reviews, had so many things in my own code missed in code reviews, and generally make mistakes and messes.

I do agree that simpler branch topology tend to be easier to reason about. But branches do have their advantages... and I've also found that preserving the original branch topology has helped me untangle merge mistakes that were missed, committed, and then only discovered a year or more later.
Indeed classes are great for these kinds of encodings. It is one of the use cases for which classes are the nicest approach in OCaml.

For example, see this section of Real World OCaml:

https://realworldocaml.org/v1/en/html/classes.html#open-recu...
Their supply chain and channel inventory turnover management is second to none, which was Dell's old claim to fame. Foxconn assembles, Apple designs, sources, coordinates, markets, packages, and troubleshoots - which is where most of the value in a product is.
Write a paper!
The register is popular because of its sarcastic wit and tries to position itself as s ring through the fog. This is just a writer confusing sarcasm and ridiculing apple fans as analysis and opinion. The fact he calls people discussing how much they love the packaging "sickening" tells everything we need to know.
More value than I think? I'm pretty sure that I know exactly their value. I'll maintain that stack-allocated structs are a nice-to-have on top of the sort of stack-allocated primitives that Java provides; I'd like to have those structs as a convenience when I write Java, which is why I alluded to terseness in my prior post. But there's very little (or should be, I suppose, depending on implementation) performance difference to speak of between a struct and parallel declaration of the same values.
Apart from big finance / trading corporations there are quite a few smaller companies building SaaS software in finance. Also, multiplayer games with trading.

Personally, I like Economics problems too but chose to focus on software development a long time ago. The alternative to me at the time was finance with VBA / MS Access coding sprinkled in. No thanks.
I have yet to come across a level that requires guessing. They definitely exist in theory though(uncertain whether the level generation algorithm is smart enough to eliminate them).

There are no multiple solutions due to an unstated constraint that resolves ambiguities. I believe it is that a blue cannot be surrounded completely by reds.
> "In general, pull request culture is not about code review."

Companies/organizations have different requirements for code reviews. Yes you can review code in pull requests, but in my opinion, it was not built for code reviews. In my previous company, we had a very rigorous code review process, which includes pre and post commit code reviews. We used Collaborator[1] and ReviewBoard[2] for code reviews and I totally understand why the Go team would use Gerrit over pull requests for code review.

[1] http://smartbear.com/product/collaborator/overview/
[2] https://www.reviewboard.org/
Rust has all the hipster functional programming aspects that this high-level language hipster wants...
What is this measuring? RSSI, MCS level, observed throughput?
There was a Next Gen episode, I think, where Jordi's visor was displayed on the main viewer on the bridge of the Enterprise with Picard commenting.
Deadlines (self-imposed, even) make a huge difference for me. Being the lazy, unmotivated, dissolute individual that I am, I can confidently say that some of the most productive, sustained learning efforts I undertook these past few years were Coursera classes with weekly problem set (e.g. coding) deadlines.

Take this with the caveat that advice is what worked for the advisor, not necessarily the advisee. But if you really have this problem of focus, I ask you to consider doing this: go to Coursera, choose an upcoming course that fits your "highly technical subjects" the closest and looks the most appealing in terms of subject matter, and make the commitment to see that course through. If/when you complete it, in the future when you need to focus again you'll at least have that experience to encourage you, reminding you that in fact you can see something complex through to completion.
Why I think iBeacons will flop
I can't recall any advertisement regarding Apples new iBeacon technology (in short: a bluetooth device that can be traced). If you think about it, it kind of makes sense that there has been little or no advertisement at all: The iBeacon is not a consumer product. It's a product for businesses, to track its customers.

For a consumer to actually want to use an iBeacon it would have to offer something of value. As I currently see it: It does not. I doubt that targeted ads is a good enough selling point to make people want to use them. Hopefully it has the completely opposite effect.

However, a handful of startups has newly arised that claim to utilize this technology in a way that will revolutionize the way offline and online presence works. Still unsure of what this exactly entales, I would argue its another step in the direction of less control of privacy.

My point is that iBeacons will most likely flop. Simply because it's not something people want. It's something businesses want. In a way it can be compared to what PG would describe as a "sitcom startup idea". It sounds clever, but the execution of this concept will fail due to the lack of actual demand for the consumers.

I am sharing what I think, I'd love for anyone to pitch in on what they think.
I hope they are going to do something about it and someday see all the Go development happening on GitHub :)
Comments moved to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9050793.
You said:

> I considered stack-allocated structs in Go, but honestly that doesn't strike me as a particularly major thing;

But for me they're one of the major ways in which I control memory use in Go programs. So, yeah, I think you underestimate them. No condescension implied. Apologies if it came across that way.

I think we probably agree more than we disagree.
That is slick. The wavelength of 2.4Ghz radio being 125 mm and 5Ghz being 62.5mm it looks like he is imaging standing waves in the 5Ghz spectrum. (if the cube is 360mm x 360mm it would have ~6 waves of 5Ghz and ~3 waves of 2.4Ghz RF energy. There is an experiment to see the standing waves in a microwave using chocolate - http://morningcoffeephysics.com/measuring-the-speed-of-light... which demonstrates the same sort of thing, but frankly I think this is much cooler.
A lot of people commenting here probably haven't had the experience of working with mature pre-submit code review tools. It's funny how much of an opinion people seem to have about things they don't know about.

I'm shocked at how bad Githubs PR review UI is given how much funding they have had for so many years. Even abandoned side projects like Rietveld have vastly better review UIs and workflows for larger patch sets.