skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Nice looking components and library. I wanted to applaud your use of Typer.js[0] in combination with the iPhone 'mockup' in the top section. Usually Typer is just used for fancy replacement of words in a headline, but in this case the transitions perfectly match the UI. I'm not sure if others have used this to demonstrate 'live coding', but well done!

[0] - http://cosmos.layervault.com/typer-js.html
> How can we possibly prove that AI is not some kind of magical emergent property, "one simple algorithm away"? We can't.

I hope you aren't a researcher, because this is a ludicrous statement. We haven't studied it enough to know whether we can or not.
Because like the (vast) majority of very successful people he started from a position of financial independence and social connections that absolutely are far beyond the norm.

Becoming very financially successful is very much more about what family you were born into and fortune than it is about skill or talent, although the latter certainly still matter.
This may look like a novelty product, but a Swedish entrepreneur has raised a lot of money for a similiar idea (although not as focussed as texting your mum). http://www.theappguy.co/the-app-guy-podcast/2014/11/24/tagp1...
No code review...
Self-driving Vagabonds
You know it wasn't fixed wing. You know it wasn't a helicopter. These are both absurd misdirections to try to justify the nonsensical demands for specificity.

Reading this article, I can't really be sure if that "mysterious drone" was any of the above, or if someone just strapped few LEDs to a pidgeon.

99.9% of readers read the article and knew it was quadcoptors. The 0.1% knew it was quadcopters, but want to engage in a ridiculous bit of nonsense on HN, playing to the crowd.

much in the same way as calling a tank "a car"

Hardly, and that analogy is absurd. More like if a bomb went off in a cafe you would be declaring that "IS IT A NUCLEAR BOMB? WAS IT A PLASTIC BOMB? A TNT BOMB? A BLACK POWDER BOMB? A REPURPOSED ARTILLERY SHELL WARHEAD? A...."

It's just noise. Noisy bullshit that is ruining HN.
Ask HN: Open source security projects seeking for contribution
I am looking for open source projects with focus on security to contribute to. I am no security person but I wanted to learn about security and from times to times I want to give back some of what I took from open source community. I would prefer to contribute to security because it seems to be one of major and most problematic parts of software world. I also like to start with simple bite-size bugs/issues/features.

tl;dr Are there any open source security projects with bite-size issues to fix?
Google's AI can learn to play video games
Well you can't just dangle that out there and then not actually describe your idea!
Because you want to, and not because you have to tread all the time to stay fed and sheltered.
Livestream nature sounds while coding
Youngsters are notorious for thinking history began when they got involved. See also, sex, drugs, music, dance...

Anyway I am sad to report that PDP8s and Decmates were widely available (if you had friends in the right places, surplus, repaired scrap, etc) but DEC insanely wanted to charge $3000 or whatever for the OS8 license. I think even Fortran and basic were separately licensed and billed products. It was nuts. You could get an old -8 for free, more or less, (back then, now they sell for thousands on ebay) but legal software was insanely priced. Microsoft disrupted the market at a mere $300. That's what made them interesting right from the start, the dinosaurs of the industry didn't understand the imploding ratios of hardware cost to software cost. Sure the hardware is dropping in price so something that cost a corporate buyer $10K in '63 might only cost $1K in '73 but its not like software was getting even on dollar cheaper so if legacy corp buyers will pay $3K per seat for OS-8 I guess we'll keep right on charging $3K till they go away or we go away. Well guess how that turned out?

The above is based on my Dad's experiences although I was a kid watching watching it all unfold at that time.
Airlines spend a absolute fortune on complex pricing for a reason... they wouldn't survive (in the absence of protectionism or a natural monopoly on niche routes) without it. The optimum "one size fits all" price doesn't exist.
This reminded me of the AngularJS team deciding to go with (optional) runtime type checking over compile-time checking (which is what TypeScript has done to JavaScript). Their reasoning was that you can use runtime checking for REST responses, which can be argued to somewhat reduce the need for writing tests.
ThingFairy: Magic for your stuff
I'm trying out seeing how nature sounds improve my flow while programming. This one has some pretty impressive-looking hardware and good sound quality.

I like the idea of being able to listen to live, natural sounds. I have a suspicion that the open soundscape might lend itself to thinking clearly.

(that said, as I write this, there's clearly a plane flying over the unit streaming.)
Maybe I'm too conservative, but just looking at it from a "cool thing to work on perspective" I would have turned it down as well. I mean, seriously, you tell me a story about how a company offers you a job reinventing a wheel from a previous job, and that company later turns out to be the one in a million that made it on dumb luck and marketing, and you expect the takeaway to be "work for a technologically backwards company for low pay because, hey, they might be successful someday!"? It sounds like you did exactly what excites you: you passed up repeating work from a previous job.
As long as that realization is tempered with this one:

"The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."
I'm only seeing 1.3 in the changelog. =(
Oh for pete's sake. This is why I swore off commenting on this issue on HN. You can only lose; you certainly can't win. Unless you stick to parroting some feminist line (and good luck picking WHICH line).
It's certainly fine to never be interested in risking everything you have to take a chance and build a company. I get tired of those that chant that mantra as though that's the only way to have happiness in life. At the same time it seems insulting to boil Bill Gates down to "Well yeah he had a big nest egg so he could take chances" Anybody who builds something real and lasting stares down devastating financial and emotional defeat once if not multiple times during that time but perseveres.
It's important to not take it too personally. There may be many reasons why you were not accepted.

Either way, keep working hard, keep programming and stay humble and positive. Eventually, you'll land something.

Rejection is only a door to a different opportunity.
What? I've got 10 CV's sitting on my desk in front of me right now and none of them have photos or any of the things you've mentioned above, except citizenship.
You can't predict the future, the standards process is messy, and Apple hasn't actively taken a public position, so at this time your comment is disingenuous.
> “I’ve heard it speculated that even the Madden team themselves don’t really know what’s going on,” Bailey said. “Because they’ve got years upon years of systems and code just layered on top of one another, where it’s not always entirely clear how they’re interacting.

It's been several years since I worked on Madden, but that was certainly true at the time. It was like an archeology site with layers of new code plastered on top of older stuff with at on top of older stuff. Tons of dead code, tons of undocumented code where the original author had moved on and no one knew how it worked or what it did.

Having a 9-month dev cycle and an upper management structure that doesn't know much about software does that. Every cycle it was, "we've got less than a year to get a list of bullet points on the back of the box implemented". Anything like architecture or refactoring was the first to get cut.

There was certainly good code in there too, but, man, it really needed cleaning up.
It's totally separate from the topic of efficiency gains or code reviews, but the idea of 100% pairing would take most of the enjoyment out of programming for me. Working in isolation (for the most part) to solve a hard problem and drive it to completion is incredibly satisfying. A lot of that goes away when you're working side by side.

You're never in "the zone" if you're pair programming.
Looks like blackberry balance was ahead of the curve on this one
It's interesting for me to look at your boss's "Good ideas" circle, because for me, Amazon was an obviously bad idea, Uber is still a bad idea, and I thought DropBox was a good idea but when I look at their initial Show HN a good number of other people did not.

I think the problem we all suffer from is that we all have a very limited perspective. Things that we think are bad ideas - because we don't have an immediate need for them, or because we don't understand them - may be an obvious good idea for someone sitting somewhere else. And the trick to picking good startups is to get out of that personal bubble, and understand what is it about the users of that startup that differs from us, and whether that characteristic is going to be shared by more people in the future.
So their main argument seems to be that pair programming somehow has less overhead than PRs? I personally don't see how that is possible. Or if it really is, how much less overhead can it be?

I like pair programming, but it's still only two people. Committing straight to master without anyone other than those two people seeing the code is crazy to me.

To me the point behind PR driven workflow is more so visibility than reviews. Just being able to see code and catch it before it's committed to master is the biggest gain.
Even if being fluent in Perl becomes as lucrative as being able to maintain rotting COBOL code bases at some point, it doesn't make Perl a better language or something one should decide to learn when facing career choices for the next 40 years or so. It is dated and should not be used for new projects. The IT community as a whole will thank you if you learn to code in a more maintainable language, too.

(Disclaimer: I built my startup on Perl and sold it recently after 15 years. Would use something else today, learnt my lession.)
With JS, all I got was a blank page with a logo and a spinning animation. Why do sites feel they have to reinvent their own loading screen? (And why have one anyway? It's a static page, it should load fast enough to not need any kind of 'loading' message)
(Ozgun from Citus Data)

In the blog post, I used the + operator and sum() aggregate function interchangeably to be brief. Actually, those two operations are related, but have different representations in distributed relational algebra. I updated the first footnote in the post to reflect that.

For your comment, we have in fact two questions. First, is the ExtendedOp commutative with the Collect operator? Second, if it isn't, what properties do our transformations need to respect so that we can pull up the Collect? (equivalence property and associativity)

It's hard to be comprehensive about distributed relational algebra in a blog post. For example, the given logical tree doesn't have enough operator primitives to express large table joins. If you'd like, I'd be happy to get together and chat more about the details.
Nah, single-task switches and servers are more like electronic plants/fungi than electronic animals.

To be serious: insofar as these robots reorder their subgoals to avoid "pain", PETA might really care one day, at least as much as they care about, say, jellyfish or coral, which are by all measures less sensate. But even under that kind of expanded criterion, an HTTP daemon that just goes on executing to send you a webpage whether its CPU is at 0% or 100% load doesn't qualify.

(On the other hand, one might consider such units as "cells" in a greater being; if that greater being is a system architecture with health-checks and load-balancers and so forth, then it could express goal-orientation, pain avoidance, etc., even though its subcomponents do not.)
I'm glad that this article includes the downsides of pair programming. Not that I think pair programming is bad, I'm just old enough now to know that there is no one "true" way to program as every situation and person is different.

My group switched to it for about 6 months and then aborted it and went back to a code review work flow.

For us the downsides of pair programming were:

- slowed down the velocity of the team. Alot fewer new features got implemented, with no perceivable gain in code quality, and as the person who lead the pair programming band wagon, I tried my best to show pair programming lead to better code. But in our case it didn't give us better code by any quantitative metric.

- frustration for senior people when paired with juniors, ie too much sitting around and explaining instead of actual implementation. We found it better to let new people page in knowledge as needed on their own speed rather than making senior people wait while junior programmers got up to speed

To be honest we found the best bang for the buck was to have teams of 3-4 people who are working on a subsystem sit together in a big room, they'll do a very informal form of pairing when needed, which can happen for a couple of hours a day and then they'll go back to working on their own when they need to.

I think the biggest tell about how effective pair programming can be in the long run, is that it was introduced around 2000 with the extreme programming movement. In the past 15 years, how many software companies can you name that mandate pair programming for a period of say 3 or more years.

I'm sure there are some, but if the most successful companies don't mandate it then its worth examining why it isn't mandated.

Perhaps pair programming's sweet spot is the last month before a big software release, where quality is paramount, communication is even more important and the team is in full on polish and bug fixing mode?
This is pretty clearly spam, right? These aren't examples from exemplary professionals, these are examples of one particular CV tool in action.

And they don't even look very good, they're all very "try hard" resumes. I'm assuming real top-paid professionals have conservative resumes clearly stating their accomplishments, without the unnecessary flash & pizzazz.

Not sure how this made it to the front page of HN....
Looking forward to trying out Keybase, thank you for opening it up to HN members.
Oh man I thought I'd read everything James Mickens had written! Awesome!
"What Microsoft is this the Altair Basic of?"

... then figure out, 'Which IBM will let itself be duped?'. If MS hadn't made the DOS deal with IBM PC, would the Microsoft we know now, have happened? This is of course counter-factual, because MS was a raging success.

It's a great question to ask though.
These people are fucking snakes. American universities are becoming part of the problem. If my tax dollars touch even the paper some research is printed on, it better be IMPOSSIBLE for that shit to sit behind a paywall or otherwise allow someone to restrict my ability to access or use it. THIS GOES FOR CORPORATE RESEARCH AS WELL which uses public funds (or taxpayer-funded subsidies) which is something nobody ever wants to talk about. I'd also like to see an explicit line item on a university budget where the money brought in through patents on research derived from NSF funds is piped back into the research program. It almost assuredly never is.
There's also bttn, posted here a couple of months ago https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8263007
I'm not seeing a 1.4 entry in the changelog. What's the deal?

Edit: They force pushed to master to remove the release due to issues on OSX

https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/932#issuecomment-760480...
100% pairing might sound good in the short-term, but you're going to fry your developers. You'll also limit the productivity of your developers, who may be inclined to take more risks when working solo than when working as a team.

By eliminating code reviews, you've also limited the audience for some of the new discoveries, successes, and failures that developers will make.

I remember vividly the push for 100% pairing in 2000. It's a great idea for the short-term on well-defined, low-risk projects, but for anything spanning a longer period of time, it's a productivity-limitiing strategy that can burn out your devs, especially the more introverted ones.

All things in moderation, including pairing and code reviews.
Actually, innovation through forced workarounds of patents has long been one of the reasons for patent systems. Though not originally stated explicitly, many jurists and economists over time have espoused this line of thought in support for patents.
I consider Safari to be the worst browser out there, especially when you include "Mobile Safari" in that assessment of Safari.
Or do it with Latex :)

Here's mine:

https://github.com/cies/resume

And over at ShareLatex you can modify it into your own without ever installing it!
I would literally change careers before I worked at a place that pair programs.
Any advice on how to improve my application (for the future)? Up until now I've been making sure to be active on Github and contribute to open source projects thinking that it would be impressive. But maybe not?
90% out of work, but wealth (in terms of resources and services) increased.

Just seems to be a challenge about sharing to me.

4 year olds solve it regularly, I think we can. Interestingly it will make a liberal arts education the hottest, most interesting thing going!
Soylent 1.4 begins shipping today
Not really unfortunate. Unlike with money, inflation of version numbers doesn't cause that much trouble. It just takes some getting used to. I've gotten used to the high version numbers in Chrome and Firefox, and I'm sure I'll get used to them in projects that use semver the right way as well.
I never said that. I think karpathy (also an AI researcher) summed up my feelings, particular the Ryan Adams quote: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9109140

edit: apologies about the 'no background' part
US based recruiter. Wow.. they realy covered all kind of templates, but some of these are just bad imo. ~10 bullet points for one role, just titles and an about me section, centering format for sections (just find it irritating, personal thing).

Overall feel for the site, meh. It's just templates, but doesn't really teach you what makes an effective resume. I would look up Ramit Sethi and his advise about making every bullet point count.

A resume is a medium, it represents you and helps you get that initial call. Realistically, networking is much more effective to get your information in front of people.
Many times the product being sold is so closely related to the actual open source software that they're indistinguishable. For instance, buying RedHat (support). Other times, you're buying the software, under a commercial license. And maybe the most common is, buying the software as a hosted service. In all these cases it's hard to undercut (and offer more value) than the company who has the most expertise and generally copy rights.

However, your example is hardware and I don't know enough to comment on that.
Read this:

* Bill Gates's memoir/vision book, The Road Ahead (1995)

* Paul Allen's memoir book, Idea Man: A Memoir by the Cofounder of Microsoft (2011)

Watch this:

* Pirates of Silicon Valley TV movie (funny but accurate, based on Triumph of the Nerds interviews)

* Triumph of the Nerds (TV docu, 1996, by R. Cringely)

* Nerds 2.0.1 (TV docu, 1998, by R. Cringely)
Not that I know - and if you look at the "european standard" cv format [1, 2], that's all but stylish :)

[1] https://europass.cedefop.europa.eu/en/documents/curriculum-v...

[2] https://europass.cedefop.europa.eu/en/documents/curriculum-v...
I would think it's very uncommon for people living in apartment buildings to go to a sauna 4-7 times a week (I believe that's often not even possible due to various rules). When you add in that there's some correlation between lack of wealth and living in apartment buildings I don't think you can rule out income level that easily.
Yes there was a short regression with libuv on macs, here https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/932#issuecomment-760226...
How is this going to be rolled out? Minor version update for Android 5.0+?
> There is no single binary produced by a single compiler performing whole-program checks of consistency. Even tools like protobufs don't help when code bases drift, or someone introduces a foreign tool, or someone upgrades versions and introduces a subtle mismatch, or some doesn't know you call their service and shuts it down ...

Static typing is not a panacea, but large codebase plus dynamic typing everywhere sounds like a recipe for disaster. No matter the amount of testing.

> Turns out that driving from tests, and starting those tests from the outermost consumer, is a fairly well-proved way of coping with such conditions.

You need tests no matter what. However, static typing means a much greater confidence in your codebase.
> How can we say that by the time we have such wondrous machines that we as a species will not have found ways to move ourselves forward to a place on equal footing with whatever we create?

How can we find ways to move ourselves forward if we don't talk about and actively explore how to do so?
Broken means it doesn't do what it claims, is assumed, or is known to do. I think the general consensus is that Tor is supposed to enable a person to browse the internet anonymously.
> the wiser choice is to take the risk and follow the more exciting path...

@AceJohnny2 started to touch on this, but them seemed to retreat(?), but:

I can't find "wisdom" anywhere in that scenario -- some seem to think that making a mistake is -- making a mistake -- which is hilarious because people cheer for articles or philosophies of plowing through the business landscape making mistakes and pivoting until something "sticks".

With the information you had, you made the best decision you could. The lesson is "sometimes people are wrong", or "I had a near-miss w/ success/failure", or "there's no way anybody could have predicted X, and I witnessed part of it." Your experience (I don't mean to diminish anything) is an anecdote.
I think the article more useful to VCs than to founders.

Good VCs worry about being pitched on the next Apple/Microsoft/Facebook/Google and passing on it because of their own prejudices or lack of vision. I see the article as an effort to consciously counter those prejudices.

But VCs have the luxury of being able to invest in a lot of companies. When you have that luxury, you can afford to say "let's let a few lame ideas in because they could grow huge".

You're right that potential founders don't have that luxury. Sinking 5-10 years of your life into a lame idea is overwhelmingly likely to have little payoff for the founder.