skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Your comment sounds good but that's it. It's flawed. You don't hire 10x just people who make other people 10x? Then that person you just hired is 10x.

The person is clearly a liability, it's still possible he's an asset. In simple business terms you have a guy who'll get you sued for 1 million but will make you 10 million. That person while a douche is still a valuable asset. Chances of that ever being the case or anyone ever choosing to keep a known douche about is another thing.
If Apple went with a smaller bezel, they couldn't have a full-size keyboard.
I think you're missing the real motive for Congress ordering hardware that the military doesn't want.

It's what their constituents want.

They are (by and large) not doing that sort of thing out of some scheming to enrich themselves. They want to be reelected to their next term, and delivering some federal cash and contracts to your district is the perfect way to do that.
office -> cube -> open floor plan -> next? what can be even worse than the open floor? Transparent floors? No walls at all? I'm sure in a few years we'll know.
I guess it depends on how busy they are. The one time I've recently set foot in an Apple store, it was swarming with employees (probably 2:1 employee:customer ratio). This was a small mall location, though—it felt claustrophobic to begin with.
Distributed Code Jam
Yes, logically, it's a query builder. But it's one that doesn't force any extra dependencies in my project and is very easy to troubleshoot.

Seriously, how is this different from "just use SQL". SQL was never really intended to be used by itself (except for manually typing queries into a console). Yes, what I wrote is code that writes code, but it's far different from a larger ORM or querying framework.
I'm pretty sure you just wrote their elevator pitch.
Making Finfisher Malware Undetectable
I would venture to guess that powered ellipticals might be a better solution here. Much less erratic, impactful structural loading.
Yes, it's the correct approach. Always tell them when you can't deliver and why. Communication is key when working in a team. If they understand and address the issues, count your blessings and consider yourself lucky. If they get mad and unreasonable, leave and find a new job. It's better for you, both now and in the future.
Interesting article, did you consider any of the newer NoSQL solutions that offer a data model more similar to MongoDB but more, often configurable, consistency guarantees (like ArangoDB or RethinkDB)? I could imagine that the effort of a migration would have been considerably smaller...
Also worth seeing is Google's Location History. For me it has come in handy a number of times when I'm trying to figure out the exact time I left or arrived somewhere.

https://maps.google.com/locationhistory/b/0
Following on from this, a good lesson I have learned is to try to work for profitable companies. You want the $ profit per employee to be as high as possible. I have worked for companies that struggled to make a profit, and guess what they underhire and underpay. I have worked for companies that make good profits and they hire just right and pay nice salary or bonuses.

The follow-on from this is to try to work for companies with good recurring revenue models that are efficiently run. Warning signs are companies that rely too much on one off big sales instead of a broad base of customers. Also another problem is consultancies who are hiring out your time and need you to be 100% billable.

The other warning sign is very small companies that are bootstrapping with tight owners who want to have lots of potential upside in the future by exploiting employees to make them do the work of many people in the early days while giving no little or no equity. Read up on HN and blogs about peoples experience with this, there is a lot written about it.
Ask HN: What should I do if I feel depressed in my job?
I work at one of the world's largest software companies. I feel like I am a code monkey with no future of promotion or compensation. Just churning code in and out. I have a family and the job pays the bills. Wife doesn't quite work yet. I can't quite quit or switch companies, as I am on an L1 visa.

I feel I am spinning wheels and feel low most days.
Antisocial attitudes and physical strength may have the same underlying cause
Netflix on an NES
In practice, I'd reduce this to a query building function in my own code, so the readability would be much better. The benefit is that you don't need to include another library for it to work. Well, that and it is a strategy that works for all languages, not just Ruby.
I still prefer to just stay home when I have to actually get stuff done. Offices are weird.

It's not even about open or not. But I can only be really productive if I'm completely alone.
There is a point when super quiet environment with other people becomes uncomfortable. We often keep music on quietly even if there are just a couple people in the office.
Hi,

(1) the above thing is the correct one, simplifying the fpga has a flash memory inside to store the bitstream that configures the god given routing resources so the LUTs etc interconnect as in the netlist.

(3) I think you can do it with an actual fpga divided in two logical tiles, one reconfigures the other and vice-versa.
Overstating their success and awesomeness is just MongoDB's normal mantra. You get used to it.
I worked with a fellow who did CrossFit and did the same thing.

I had to lay down a protective force field of Lysol when he came back from the "box".
To extend that concept with her models, there isn't a weirdness economic market, its more like the numerous world financial markets.

Weird at gencon, weird at hope conference, weird at work, and weird in the bedroom either have nothing in common or possibly you're living a totally awesome life.
Women get harrased by men wearing suits and ties.
Pair programming.
It's just that if you have a sizable team (or worse over a long time with low overlap) working on a product, you intrinsically get an accumulation of duplicates, deprecated, or both "keys" in your schema-less schema.

With a DB that enforces a schema, the overhead of modifying the schema tends to moderate that nature.

I once worked in a lab (Ph.D. students are atrocious programmers BTW) where I introduced a schema-less store (cheesy K/V store) to handle some mundane metadata caching on some medical imaging. It was intended to store 4-5 attributes per PK, I never touched it after setting it up for what I needed but showed it to colleagues.

Fast forward 10 years and there were something like 3000 attributes defined. Several hundreds of which were serialized blobs. Huge amount of overlap between the different attributes.

Almost all that because people didn't know what was already in there so they just did their own thing.
Verizon drops the Weather Channel, claiming Internet killed the weatherman
Phone and Email search. Reinvented
Well, SSD's aren't nearly as fast as RAM, even today.

I think we are in agreement about the working data vs all data. I am saying that in most applications your working dataset is much smaller than your total data set. So why pay for hardware capable of holding your entire dataset in RAM when you don't need it?

I am surprised you are able to do this with Mongo. Last I checked, it simply did not handle this case, and started failing miserably if it was not able to fit all data into RAM.

Re: durability: I am not talking about the server going down, coming back up. I am talking about whether there is an fsync() when writing data. Set up a test case where you are writing data very rapidly to MongoDB, then pull the plug on the box it's running on. It'll come back up, but the data it told you it just wrote won't be there because it didn't checkpoint. Did you check that all your writes succeeded when you had node failures in your cluster? Most applications don't have the machinery to do this because generally the state necessary to check this is stored in the database, yet it's the database you are testing. The only way to test this is to also write logs (also atomically), and then verify DB data against logs. Or, just use a database that guarantees durability.

Re: consistency: MongoDB doesn't support transactions [1]. That's enough to exclude it from a large number of applications. Anything to do with money, for example, is out since you really don't want double spending to be a thing.

[1] http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/core/write-operations-atomici...
I find it more natural to think of software as different internal states of hardware or driving the state changes, at least.

For FPGAs, the "software" defines the hardware (in a sense) so there is a very tight integration between the two - to the extent that there really isn't any.
My aversion to NoSQLs is derived from the readiness with which uninformed people dive into them, integrate them with their products, and create a web of complexity around something that should ideally be boring and reliable: the database.

There are so many things that I've heard you "can't do in SQL" that are false, at least pertaining to Postgres. Semi-structured data, full-text search, "web scale" programming, geographical indexes... all of these things, people say "you can't do in a relational database" and that's not true. Postgres is fucking powerful and can do a lot, very well.

Arguably, PostgreSQL isn't always a "relational database". You can use it as a key-value store. It just happens that you often want relational logic in a multi-purpose, long-lived data store. The relational database seems to be an attractor; the requirements that accrue to a typical in-house "we can do it better"/NIH non-relational database often converge on it.

NoSQLs have their place at very large scale (100+ TB) and there are plenty of specialized reasons to use alternative databases-- I doubt that Postgres's full-text search is competitive with Elasticsearch-- but I feel like most of the anti-SQL sentiment is against the language. And sure, it's an ugly and outmoded language, but the database is one place where I'd rather have an ugly language and rock-solid tech than the other way around.

Finally, fuck ORMs.
Here's a sunglasses concept that extends your peripheral vision with just a lens, no electronics needed. http://objects.designapplause.com/2010/nike-hindsight-glasse...

And if you're going electronic, you might as well get the full 360-degree vertical too - just see everything all the time! Use this projection: http://www.pouet.net/prod.php?which=27000
Do you have showdead turned on? In these threads there are always people defending the man.

(I think you meant "condemned", not "condoned".)
I would really be interested in getting your feedback on this. Thank you!
There is. MyBatis, which is a minimal ORM that aims to keep you as close to SQL as possible, has support for dynamic SQL: https://mybatis.github.io/mybatis-3/dynamic-sql.html

Edit [responding to moe, below]: that's a matter of taste. I prefer to have my SQL _outside_ my code. If I have to write a little XML to make it happen, so be it. Additionally, unlike your example, a strict separation of SQL and data ensures SQL injection is not possible. That's also a worthy goal.
So, I've worked at what is essentially a F500 company, and am currently studying at University. My feelings:

- I really like collaborative spaces/pods except when I'm trying to really hammer on work, independently. I don't like being isolated. If I come into the office at 7-or-8am before everyone arrives, those two hours will outstrip the rest of my day (except after 6pm). Noise, mid-afternoon, is especially bad and distracting. Some people in my group have taken to occupying entire meeting rooms just so they can focus in quiet.

- I am most productive at University in quiet spaces. The library, mostly. BUT, in an environment where I'm working with other people, bouncing ideas, etc, it's not a productive environment because libraries demand QUIET. My second favorite place to work is in one of our "group study" rooms. They're small, private rooms with space for up to 6 people. Whiteboards and TVs, outlets, etc are provided.

I think separating people into these rooms would be my ideal configuration. I'm not sure that I'd necessarily partition people officially (except in cases where people want an office to e.g. store belongings), just give people a notebook and say sit where you want. I can therefore sit in whichever room I want, and multiple people who demand quiet working conditions are able to share a space. This combines the nicety of social interaction, being able to discuss with someone about work-or-non-work related things, with long stretches of quiet, uninterrupted worktime.

The ideal office (or at least one I'd like to try working in) would be where there are many offices small offices that represent these group study rooms. Natural light (with blinds), comfy chairs, TVs for presenting, whiteboards, climate control, etc. Take one room and copy/paste it. Add some open areas as well, for people who prefer to work in those spaces. Destress/common areas.
Yeah, those were big news then. I remember hearing about it. The goal is still definitely to be rat free, and they work hard to tray and keep it that way.
I wrote on HN about patenting a "reusable RFID wristband" and attempting to work something out with Disney in ~2007.[1] The response on HN was fairly predictable...I am a patent troll. Though I think this sheds light on the reality that it takes a lot of money to bring certain products to market and this is why, in certain instances, patents can be useful to the little guys who in some instances can not practically bring a product to market (I don't own my own theme park, ski resort, ect...).

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8838362

Edit: At the time of filing, the only existing patent was for a "single use RFID hospital bands" which was made to be disabled when removed and non-reusable (similar to existing non-RFID hospital bands).
I'm not a biologist, but that probably hits the nail on the head, though judging by your comment I think you meant k-selection, and it's actually r-selection that pertains to the "spray and pray" approach to offspring. [1]

There's also likely some luck involved that the initial two on that island happened to be viable colony starters.

[1] http://www.bio.miami.edu/tom/courses/bil160/bil160goods/16_r...
It's idiotic to assume an investor will invest in a company to buy coins, rather than coins directly.

Maybe if it was expensive art, exotic animals or something difficult and tricky to buy and store without having specialized knowledge, yes then you'd invest in a company to buy and manage these assets.

But storing bitcoin is storing private keys... a password. Anyone can buy it and store it. Hell you can even buy it on registered exchanges, or as a security from SecondMarket's bitcoin fund.

No. These guys raised money to hire software and hardware engineers, they're looking to build a product.

Does that mean the investors aren't buying bitcoin? No, they do so, but outside the company. It's well known that there are a number of VCs (e.g. Chamath) who have bought a few million worth of bitcoins besides their investments in bitcoin companies.

I don't any evidence that many of the 'large rounds' have this business model. There are some companies that bought bitcoin, but that's for liquidity, not investments. Circle, Coinbase or exchanges all need bitcoin to sell as they're brokers/exchanges. But they didn't buy it as an investment, they could just buy bitcoin as individuals, as could investors.
Loving the calendar+tasks hybrid view. It even resizes as you interact with either so you can fully make use of the available the screen estate. One can say it's "Touch-Responsive Design".
I find the fundamental disconnect to be that people are pushing the lower-cost transactions as a bit motivation for Bitcoin. The less enthusiastic point out all of the good anti-fraud infrastructure credit cards have from a consumer perspective. Then the proponents point out you can build that on Bitcoin, which is true; but it doesn't come for free, thus I expect mostly negating the transaction cost advantages that Bitcoin is potentially offering.
Arctic Sea Ice Plunges to Record Low Extent for Late Winter
I'm afraid that you are right. I'd also love to hear from HN to how they feel about this... On one hand it's very interesting and what startup wouldn't want to know which of their users they should focus on on the other does this mean that non-whales don't matter and/or will we, unfairly, try and suck more out of whales.

I can see great benefits from being able to listen to whales (prioritise their bugs/issues/suggestions) it's a constant struggle when building a product to know what advice to follow but I worry that this means that people without money to blow will have their voices limited as a result which flies in the face of what I love about the internet which is: everyone is equal (now I know this doesn't work perfectly in practice but well enough IMHO).

At what point do we ignore users who are not whales or even kick them off our platform because they are a leach on our resources? This sets a dangerous precedent IMHO. I've wondered if one day they will be able to tag or detect people who never click on ads (and/or have "ad-blindness") and force them to pay to use resources supported by ads.
Disregarding my edit and how your query builder is irrelevant to my question anyway, if I change the requirement to allow the user to sort by multiple columns instead of one, that case statement is going to either combinatorially explode or you'll also have to add some ad-hoc SQL escaping to guard against SQL injection since you can't use bound parameters in ORDER BY clauses.

It's easy to see how libraries like Sequel get invented to help people do this, and I don't really see what the problem is when the DSL stays close to SQL semantics.
Open offices instantly "out" anyone who comes late, leaves early, takes a 2.5 hour lunch breaks, or surfs the web instead of working.

And that's really the whole point.

It's why they are popular in Japan, together with the fact that thanks to the open structure, transgressor can apologize in front of everyone at once.
Hopefully they can add high availability clusters in regions other than US East (which is the only region which has high availability clusters right now).
Doesn't it seem like they realized they also have another product to maintain? This version seems more of a 1.0 with just extra eye candy.

i am still waiting for the version that has innovation baked in ... e.g. something new and profound.
Can these kind of comments stop? Please?

This has been trumpeted pretty much constantly on HN, and even if it's true, does it matter? Is anyone seriously evaluating their database on the basis of marketing copy? I suppose if you do, you can't be surprised if you have a bad time.
Creating visual liquid gooey effects with SVG
For a number of reasons, for some banks doing a pilot in Eastern Europe, I prototyped a card-interoperable system that does something like this. From the user's point-of-view.

- You shop and check out

- You are presented a QR that you scan

- The "app" asks you to sign into your bank.

- The bank issues you a virtual card with your billing address details, but a one-time-PAN (credit card number), CVV and expiry.

- There is a sub-account created that is the amount you are about to auth with the merchant. The merchant about to be doing the authorization is linked.

- The "app" presents the merchant "POS" with the virtual card details

- The merchant "POS" authorizes it using any gateway they happen to be using. Which in turn does the Brand-Net auth dance with the issuer.

- On positive auth, the sub-account balance is transferred to the merchant (thanks, VisaNet!), and the OTP (one-time PAN) is tossed in the recycle bin.

In any case, they don't have to deal with 6,000 banks like we have in the US. That said, the US could probably do this easily enough in cooperation with FDC or Total Systems or both.

If the merchant doesn't have the QR-code thing, you can still manually key-enter your one-time PAN virtual card details like you do today, knowing that you don't care about the number past its use right now.

There are a lot of weird details about how it all works if some party or another isn't an active full cooperating member of the system, but the idea is to:

1) Limit card number exposure

2) Get a user's explicit pre-auth for a specific merchant, amount and date

3) Get the usability factor you are talking about

4) Leverage the existing bank card consumer protection rules already in place

Which is not to say that Bitcoin isn't cool. But I'm not sure that it is useful enough for consumers to replace the thin-veneers like this that the existing payment infrastructure players will inevitably roll out.

There may be (and probably are) lots of uses for the blockchain. Consumer payments may not ultimately be one of the big ones.

*EDIT: I apparently am an idiot that can not figure out how to convince the system to let me wrap "bullets".
The Key to Digital Transformation: Machine Learning
I do that whether or not I have a boss that cares. It's easy to feel judged by people walking behind you glancing at your screen. A little privacy is amazing.
The title should be changed to reflect the purpose of the link, rather than a clickbait-y reference to your site/Zed's article.

Also, Zed's article "Programmers Need To Learn Statistics Or I Will Kill Them All" has been posted seven times already to HN.
Do you know what'll make the task of maintaining maps much easier? Self driving cars.

Yes, they can't merge on the freeway now. People keep not understanding the behaviour of exponential growth, and keep getting surprized once only in a single doubling things grow from "only half there" to "completely done".

(And I'll be among the first to call the end of Moore's law. But altough our electronics are not in exponential growth anymore, it's still growing increasingly fast.)
I remember when you could run Doom over a lan. You'd set one monitor to be your forward view, and then set two more monitors to be your left and right views.

http://doom.wikia.com/wiki/Doom_networking_component

> The higher level d_net.c file contains the system-independent portion of the networking code. The code has separate concepts of node and player: a node is simply a computer connected to the game. Each player has a corresponding node, but a node does not necessarily have a player. This was used to implement the "three monitor" system which existed in early versions of Doom: the "left" and "right" screens were nodes but not players.

I only played that way a couple of times but it was fun.
3D is the open-plan future. Glass partitions at every multiple of 7 feet, going up to 35. (Those anachronistic things called floors will be ripped out, of course. You just need strong glass that can support the weight.) If you're female, don't wear a skirt to work unless you're seated on the bottom level.
Zana 7 Day Customer Discovery Intensive – Find, retain base and monetize product
So are the British plugs. Perhaps pulling the cord out should be called an extreme failure mode?

(It was probably more useful 20 or more years ago, before moulded plugs were common.)
Thomas, as you are well aware, the Internet of 1994 was an extremely different and much smaller world. I completely agree with this:

> It already needs the best security it can possibly get.

It's just that I believe that DNSSEC should be part of the mix.

For instance here's an example of some research out of CERT-CC back in September 2014 where hijacking of MX records is redirecting email to someone:

http://www.internetsociety.org/deploy360/blog/2014/09/email-...

As far as I can see, deploying DNSSEC validation on the networks of the affected mail servers - and receiving DNSSEC-signed MX records - would prevent them from delivering mail to servers in the middle.

It's things like this that I want to prevent.

I want a more secure Internet - and in my view DNSSEC helps.
SQLAlchemy 0.9.9 Released