skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I am not a member of the Go team, just a contributor. I represent only my own opinions, please don't put words into my mouth.
That's the answer for everything in the Go community. More ad-hoc tools to replace the type system. Have concurrency bugs? Use a tool that detects some types of data races. Have problems with errors? Have a tool that detects not checking for errors.

How is approaching every single problem with a different tool more simple than using the type system as the one tool for static checking? The Go ecosystem is creating a ad-hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of the type checker of Haskell.
This article seems to equate windowing with multitasking (in the computing sense, not the workflow sense).
It's not an argument from first principles about what weed "should" cost. It's about what people will accept. People are used to weed costing relatively infinite money (i.e. it can cost you your freedom and no amount of money can replace that). Therefore, even expensive weed seems cheap by comparison and feels like a win for consumers.

Likewise, expressways are massively expensive to build and maintain, but we're used to driving on them for free, so charging even a small toll that doesn't fully recover the costs feels expensive and is widely resisted.
> I disagree with your implicit claim that C's position as the most popular systems programming language is not due the language's intrinsic qualities.

I am old enough to remember when knowing C was only required for anyone lucky enough to work in one of those shiny UNIX workstations. The language had barely any use outside of the UNIX workstation world and those compilers supported mostly dialects, not the full language.

Only after business started to get UNIX deployed in bigger scale, C knowledge started to matter on the CV.

> Stop the hyperbole.

It is not an hyperbole. Mesa, Cedar, Algol variants, Pascal variants and Modula-2 offered much higher features while allowing for systems programming.

> The language is quite a bit more than that. For one, it's structured.

So what that C is structured. Any PC and Amiga macro assembler had powerful macro languages that allow to write structured assembly code.

The end result is barely any different than using K&R C or C89, except that C wins on the portability side.

EDIT: some extra clarification and formatting
> get paid real market rates
vs
> Now, 3 years later, I make more than double what I made then, in the same town, because now I can actually negotiate without a sword over my head

Yea I think you are contradicting yourself here.
> yet another reason that the tech community should take a more proactive approach ensuring data privacy.

Or maybe yet another reason for people to get their shit together.

Seriously, this is not an issue of privacy - it's an issue of society potentially overreacting to things. So Jane Doe watches porn. Big deal. John Doe watches it too. Like 80% of country's population. It's an open secret, like going to shrink used to be. It only holds power over you if you expect people around you to behave like apes (which they often do - see being gay 30 years ago, or being not pro-gay now).

I know very well that it's easier to influence tech than society; hell, it's even easier to influence biological factors than social ones. But ultimately, we can't blame it on tech when it's lack of civility that's the problem. Maybe it's the very expectation of privacy that makes people such bigots?

Either way, it's another data point for "privacy vs. progress of mankind, pick one".
I suspect you still need to get in "at the ground floor". Unless things have changed, cannabis businesses are still relegated to the "under the mattress" banking method, so I can't imagine there are any cannabis derivatives floating around the open market. Unless you want to invest in related industries- glassware. Frito-Lay. Pizza Hut.
Go is an open source project, Canonical sponsor Go in part by paying my salary. Canonical have been building products in Go for three years.
Elimination can be enhanced by using a combination strategy, such as DECS [1]. Using a combiner approach should also work on a queue structure, though interestingly enough there is a paper on elimination-based fifo queues. I wrote an elimination stack in Java [2], but I haven't gotten around to adding combining to the arena yet. The performance is pretty good compared to other shared concurrent structures.

[1] http://www.cs.bgu.ac.il/~hendlerd/papers/DECS.pdf
[2] https://github.com/ben-manes/caffeine
> The theory goes: the simpler answer is more likely to be true because it is impossible for a series of events to be more likely.

If that were true then we would never have been able to do chemistry in the first place and get anything done by synthesis. The same applies to manufacturing. It's by careful planning and science that you overcome the probabilities and make it possible to conduct a series of events with perfection.
I had a Gilbert Erector Set, a competitor to Lego. I confess I always thought the erector sets were better, and looked down on Lego. Metal held together with nuts and bolts! vs plastic bricks. It was no contest. But who has heard of erector sets these days? Gilbert lost the marketing war.
Most of my classmates were, in fact, looking for jobs in academia. And there is the commonly held fear (due to lack of role models) that if you leave academia, you may as well be eaten by wolves.

FWIW, I'm glad I left academia.
Lets make it clear. I'm not vindicating his theory

I'm saying it's equally ignorant to not consider a theory because it just seems improbable.
How one developer got the Internet to watch people code
From your history slides, I thought of Mill OoBC http://millcomputing.com/docs/; they share the DSP roots, do you know them or their work ? they don't design many-core cpus though.

ps: Also, I don't think there was mention of your previous work on the Kickstarter page or boards, was it on purpose (NDA,...) ? Past projects like these really give trust to future clients.
How to Get Treated from a Good Urologist?
see, now I'm in this for pure entertainment purposes. it's been over a week, and you're still trying to play the "last word" game.

not only is it sour grapes, but you're still making baseless accusations. I was correct about you in the first thread, and your continued participation in this one keeps proving I was correct.
I agree. It's so much easier not to worry about this stuff. It's normal.
Some Vanguard index funds have a $1000 minimum and you don't have to risk your money with a (frankly) sketchy investment like this.
WHAT? No! Have you forgotten the fact that identical twins actually look...well, identical? Face features clearly have a very very very very high heritability.
In my opinion, this all comes down to smart people— who are not computer scientists— believing Ray Kurzweil's absolutely batty ideas about the singularity, which he is deeply emotionally over-invested in because he doesn't want to die: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/1...
Of course it's deniable, just say the person is clearly trying to blackmail you, or that you watched that one but not that truly terrible one. Also who cares. Now if they could hack into your camera while you watch and you happen to be a person in the public eye, that could turn into a short lived manufactured controversy that gossip sites and cable news live on.
let's repeat css expression!
Felix Hausdorff committed suicide in 1942, after having put in quite some effort to escape Nazi Germany.
Sure, but that's not specific to any language. Is it Go's fault that package writers work a certain way?
previous discussion:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9096449
That is not a simplicity issue.

"Something that is simple may take longer to write and might be more verbose" -- from the article.

In a simple language, there should not be functions that do exactly what you want to do; that would be a sign of the language being complex and featureful, which are enemies of simple.

(and yes, this is a bit tongue-in-cheek)
A theory being improbable is probably the best reason not to give it credit.

A theory should be accepted only when the null hypothesis is more improbable.
It's amazing how some people think governments can be so precise.

This is like "9/11 inside job" level of thinking.

We can't even get special forces to do their jobs without publishing books about it, what makes you think more than a handful of people can keep a secret about anything?
Auto finance without credit history
I think a large portion of the conspiracy theorist population probably has a mental illness that makes them susceptible to delusional thinking. Delusional people can lead very normal fully functioning lives, but mix a certain topic that offers patterns which make their brain go down a certain path, and they suddenly become very adamant about believing something that is illogical and irrational.

There is probably little someone can do to really stop conspiracy theories. People certainly shouldn't censor themselves.
What do you use on the front end ?
Huffman coding is a gateway drug for data science. Once you see raw input as data, you see as much benefit from optimizing as you do from analyzing.
He is not putting words in your mouth, he's stating his own interpretation.

No sane person would read "I read this as" and assume that this is in fact exactly what the speaker said, nor should any speaker assume "I read this as" is meant as a defamation or misquote.

In addition, you being a contributor not a core team member does not change what you said in the least. A language's design, even if it seems like there's a tight core, is ultimately decided in part by all contributors and the community around it as well.
This is what is supposed to be true in Europe: software "as such" can not be patented. The issue we have is that corrupted patent organizations such as the EPO twisted the "as such" so much that they managed to reverse the original meaning (ie. you can not patent a software "as such", but patenting its use inside of a computer is legit - I love lawyers)
I don't know Tcl much. But when I learned about Tk in Ruby I kind of expanded my knowledge of Tcl since Tk was the GUI toolkit of Tcl that was borrowed by many other scripting languages.

Tcl/Tk had features like distribution of a deployment binary. It could create an .exe file for Windows deployment for example.

Tk included a Domain Specific Language for layout/GUI controls which was useful, without requiring an additional form designer as in other languages.

Others have mentioned Expect above, it was a good reminder, imagine creating a GUI application to control a command-line tool, Expect allowed for that very easily, as it could keep open the output/input of the tool it was adding a GUI to.

Since it included so much by default, the community could easily contribute with some other tools that you could reuse in your solution. Before "RubyGems" even existed, people were already reusing libraries in Tcl/Tk. :-)

The problem of other languages is that they come with more abstractions than people needed. We can fight against "state" in modern programming languages, but it doesn't change the fact that the more complex we make it, the harder it is for people to just get something up and running quickly. That's why systems like Tcl/Tk cannot be retired.
I think there is another reason, besides Magic being scripted in Tcl. Back in the days when some EDA companies decided on Tcl there were only a few languages which could be embedded. Tcl was the only one with some popularity, documentation about embedding including sample code and a commercially viable license.
For Perl for instance the embedding feature was largely undocumented at the time (early 90s I think) and Perl is GPL which is a no-go for commercial software. Ruby did not exist yet and Python maybe just was not visible enough.
Exactly, I was referring to the singleton stores and dispatcher
I haven't added marital status, place of birth or birth name in my Lebenslauf, ever.

But then I never listened to teachers or any public employment agencies and their leaflets since I had HR people in family who knew more contemporary habits (eg. that handwritten long-form CVs mean pretty much immediate rejection, while they were sold in class as the best thing ever)

The photo requirement is still rather annoying though.
Nap like Salvador Dali: Get Creative Insights
I left reddit years ago due to being censored. HN today (at it's worst) is still light years better than reddit three years ago.
$52 million revenue for a state with $28500 million in expenditures is a drop in the bucket.

However it looks like they spent $770 million on corrections - probably with a sizable portion spent on drug enforcement. Or would drug related incarceration mostly be paid by the federal government?

https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/revenue/colorado-marijuana-...

http://ballotpedia.org/Colorado_state_budget
Epic Privacy Browser: a more secure and private chromium-based web browser
Go encourages working in that way, so yes, it is.

With other languages, you might do code generation through powerful macros (e.g. as rust has) or some other tooling which is not literally just "run a program in the user's path".
custom development should never be the first choice. $500 off the shelf software could save you from spending $50000 on custom software plus added benefit of support and future upgrades (at a cost of course). Not to mention it would have been tested better.

If you do not find a software that addresses your needs, than it is a different story. Even than, custom developed part should be kept at minimum at possible by using ready commercial and free open source components.
> now I'm strongly resisting the urge to order a couple hundred tongue depressors.

Give in: http://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B0033F7YQW/
My partner was keen and I was ambivalent, but without an especially strong feeling either way. There are obviously benefits in both courses through life. So I went with her on it and I have no regrets. It's a very magical experience that our bodies and brains are specialised to handle. Thinking about the changes and reactions I notice in my wife and myself are intriguing.

I had no nagging from anyone and we were together for 8-9 years before having our first. We both have very supportive, model parents. I imagine that new parents with great parents of their own are keen to continue that legacy. I wonder if some with less-ideal parents couldn't see their chance as an opportunity to do better than their own experience?

I think any short term costs (time, money, opportunities) are won back in all the treasured experiences, and then everything from there with independent children is like interest being repaid (IT support in 2050, moving my furniture to the retirement facility, booking cruises, etc). ;)
The problem with software patents is that they claim to own the destination and not the solution to a specific problem. If I am able to reproduce one click without looking at the corresponding patent, it should not be patentable.
I once had a couple of slides on Cantor->Turing->Gödel that finished of the AI101 lecture I held. One could create a narrative that their particular work lead to their unfortunate deaths and I'm pretty sure I actually read that somewhere but think it is far fetched (particularly for Turing) and didn't mention it.
Exactly.

It is frustrating to see girls taught that the reason women are under-represented in certain fields is always sexism. In athletics the reasons are patently obvious, but often left unsaid nevertheless.

Sure it is true sometimes. There are definitely more hurdles in front of girls to become programmers, for instance. At the same time, women as a group, in general, simply are not as interested in working quietly with numbers as men are. They tend to be more adept verbally, OTOH, and usually prefer careers that are more social. By far the majority of school teachers and social workers in the US are women.

Perceiving oneself as a victim is extraordinarily limiting. It is the last thing I wish for girls to be taught.
The jury is out on whether, for large time frames and for large communities, having a centralized type system is better than having a decentralized set of independent tools.

I'm not very excited by GHC's model of language extensions, https://downloads.haskell.org/~ghc/6.12.2/docs/html/users_gu.... And in spite of the large number of Haskell extensions, there are still pragmatic niches that aren't covered, see for example Rust's encoding of memory management in the type system.

In a sense, GHC contains a ad-hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of half of the type checker of Coq ;) Which is to say that there are many flavors of sophisticated type systems, and it's not clear which flavor is most conducive for writing good software on a tight time budget.
Here's a real issue. It's not the existence of porn, it's the nature of the porn. If you've decided you want to attack someone, and if they have even remotely unusual tastes, you can certainly attack based on those.

If it's really a low status taste (e.g., furry, femdom, cuckold), the attacks write themselves. If it's more mainstream, it isn't hard to twist it into something deeply revealing about their character (e.g., "omfg look at how he objectifies asians").

Here is a real life example of this, albeit not based on privacy leaks but on something I chose to reveal: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7945286
> I cannot count the amount of times I've read about scientists in the past getting ridiculed for some "crackpot" theory only to be vindicated later.

A famous example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis
" but there is still a massive risk that one of these countries might notice the plane on military or other radar"

And radar coverage is much bigger in the northern arc.

China/Russia/India/Pakistan, etc
When reading the headline I expected someone had done facerecognition over redtube, xvideos and the like and created a database with people in pornvideos, making it easy to lookup for future reference...

Just finding out that someone watches porn at work is really uninteresting from my european point of view...
I don't think it counts as a disease if the majority of people, including most successful people "suffer" from it without any negative consequences for themselves. For example religion.
Html5, js, flow.js
The use of the opening phrase "We're not willing ... " implies that the OP interpreted my statements as a policy of the wider Go team.

I have no knowledge of any such policy and represent only myself on stage. You can think what you like about my statements, just don't generalise them to anyone else.
Ask Attorney General to prosecute Comcast for fraudulent billing practices
I see a lot of people saying, essentially, "I don't care that anybody knows I view porn; that's totally mainstream". And, yeah, I feel the same way.

But on reflecting on it, I find there's more nuance to it:

I don't care that anybody knows I view porn; that's totally mainstream. But to have people know the specifics of my tastes in porn? Suddenly, I would begin to feel embarrassment; I'd worry I'd be thought a weirdo for getting off to X which is considered a fetish instead of Y which is considered standard stuff, etc.
Compensation ranges from F to A+ as far as I'm aware.
Everyone commenting seems to be very blase about this. I guess they are forgetting that there countries where it is still illegal/dangerous to be openly gay. Besides that, probably useful in targetted blackmail/extortion plots but not a huge threat to the common man.
Only at the last election there were some presidential candidates that toyed with the idea of banning porn. That would mean all the sudden you could be criminalized for watching porn, just like you are now for playing poker online.
The key to AI is always context. The more it can know about you, the more it can predict about you. This helps it respond to what you intend to do, and draw the correct conclusion.

The constant risk is a question of bias. If a system is connected to Apple 24/7, there is always the likelihood of a "promoted tweet" or some statistical variation thereof slightly biases a result towards a profitable outcome for Apple.

It's fantastic that such progress has been made in AI, but without complete transparency we risk falling into the same traps as have happened with other forms of proprietary software.
Privacy is not secrecy. It's not a secret what I do when I go to the toilet. However, I do want my privacy when I'm in there. Understand the difference?
Understanding CVE-2015-0310 Flash vulnerability
How Will Smith Dealt with the Most Painful Failure of His Career
> Our attraction to naked bodies of the opposite (or same) sex is as old as walking upright

Surely much older than that.
Technology Bubble? Ask Waffle House
The simpler theory is our governments have lied repeatedly, are able to intercept our digital communications without warrant, and probably hide a whole bunch of other things from us, and will continue to do so.

No convoluted conspiracy theories necessary.
wow, that was super interesting.
I have followed Asian civil aviation for several years.

The problems they face are:

1. underfunded startup airlines (Indonesia, India)
2. energetic and not well-understood equatorial Pacific storms
3. uneven quality of candidates and training
4. Asian cultural issues in the cockpit, esp. S. Korea
5. demanding weather (monsoons) and terrain (low-viz)

The NTSB did a lot (well, everything) for the current safety of American airlines, but there's no comparable safety body in Asia.

So Asian airline safety should really be compared with Africa, not the West.
This is my own personal opinion on core dev's position and no one else's, but to me generics and dependency management have always been the pink elephant in the room.

I can wait for features; I'm patient. But the downright refusal of Go's core team to even begin to address this issue is not just a technical problem, but a communications one. This is clearly big for a lot of people, and I have yet to see any serious responses aside from either "you domain model's wrong if you need generics" or "deal with it".

In contrast (just picking this language for its community outreach, not because of any perceived technical competition), Rust's core devs have been forthcoming about practically every objection they've gotten. Their answers are clear, detailed, not demeaning, and constructive. When they don't know, they're honest about it, and when answers are hard, they take the time to explain. But I have never heard of anyone being belittled for not understanding lifetimes or the borrow checker.

Yet it seems that somehow if I have a bone to pick with Go not being able to dispatch functions by argument or arity, or with how its simplicity ends up with codebases a lot of people would consider much more verbose than necessary, it's just that I don't "get it". The problem isn't even in the accusation; I just don't even receive examples or reasonable explanations, something I'm used to in related language discussions.

I was willing to give the language a pass on these things when it was just getting started and a lot of the classical, early product criticisms were abound. But it's gotten tiring; the number of unanswered questions is remarkable by now.
"value for the economy as a whole"

You've shifted the goalposts there from "has value" to "value for the economy as a whole".

If I have money in a ponzi and can exit at that point in time, my stake has value. Later it might not, but at that point it does.
I think it actually takes more creativity to re-purpose the 'heavily customized' sets. Here's some of those ship pieces you mentioned: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5286/5377659338_18f315850a_z.j...

As a counter point, I loved all of those specialized sets as a kid -- Blacktron and M-Tron were especially awesome. Plain rectangular bricks can be boring and need some custom pieces to spice things up.