skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Speaking from past experience only, and just going off what you described, personally I would go with the first one. It sounds like they are more focused and have a specific plan with their business. The second choice seems to be all over the place, not sure what their business plan is, and are just throwing ideas around until one sticks.

Another piece to consider is the people in general. Hopefully you have met both teams and have an idea of what they are like. Go with your gut on who you think is the better team and group you would like to work with.

Finally, as it is an internship, if at all possible take the pay piece out of the equation. If you can afford to live without the pay for the period of the internship then this should be a low priority for selecting. Experience and connections can be worth more than any dollar amount down the road.
I built reasonably thick client projects with jQuery and a home grown system before moving to Angular and it's been a godsend. I've not done anything significant in the other major frameworks and it looks like there's some genuine innovation in React for people that don't mind the IP issue. But... I just don't know where guys like the author are coming from.

Angular ain't perfect, but it's still pretty damn good.

"The very fact that an article exists which prescribes that you should be mindful of the order in which you write your HTML attributes in Angular to optimize performance and other quirks is staggering."

No, the article linked to in support of this statement is talking about readability. Angular directives have a priority attribute that determines the order they're evaluated in.

Hating on Angular is just a trendy thing right now.
>Human beings can't even agree on a definition of "treat each other right", let alone actually implement it.

If you ask 1000 humans to draw a picture or write down a description of things that are Good and Right, they will all draw/write more-or-less the same thing. You could say that, effectively, you would be getting 1000 samples from something like one, or maybe two or three, distributions. Once you'd pinpointed the underlying psychology, learning the model(s) from the data would be easy.

Of course, when you start asking those same 1000 humans about the meta-level theory that they believe underlies their picture/description, they will all give ridiculously divergent answers. This is because the overwhelming majority of them are assuming that some kind of elaborate metaphysical theory is required to what basic moral psychology already does, and they also assume that, even if they've been shown the moral psychology, that can't be the real answer (ie: they believe the fact-value distinction is metaphysical).

Luckily, a well-built artificial agent doesn't give half a damn about bloody metaphysics!

Or I can just pick something I happen to like, and tell the rest of the human race to go jump in a lake.
Authors claim that a technical explanation is forthcoming.
We use Angular over at zenginehq.com. Not only did we build an entire business process management platform on top of it; we even exposed a JS plugin architecture that allows developers to create Angular plugins on top of the platform. Really cool stuff.

Sure, Angular has its flaws & quirks, just like any framework. But it gets so many things right that it's worth sticking with it, IMHO.
I guess I am the middle schooler here
because I'm going to point out that "you started it".

I won't even dwell on the hypocrisy of you trying to call me out for my rudeness right before you post this middle school nonsense.

If you don't think stack frames and addresses are far more complex a learning tool for this than references and pointers, that's your opinion. I disagree, and I think many would, but there's no factual claim here for you to refute, no matter how much you are grasping for one in this thread.

Go ahead and explain it your way to folks. See if it finally sinks in for those who didn't get it from the JLS or from the article. I'd be happy to watch the attempt. I don't think it'll work. Prove me wrong.
This is actually a tricky one... =) I guess the answer is relative to each person but my best reply would be: "to help species thrive and reach cosmological harmony in an universal context".

But then for a different person could be: "for making me earn moar bucks". So it really depends on your values/morals...
What happened to the laptop computer? (1985)
Totally unrelated, but I don't think XP still used because customers don't want to spend money on upgrade. More likely because some part of their business tied to technology which tied with some XP components.
I can imagine how this could happen, even though, as others have pointed out, there's no concrete evidence presented here.

I was somewhat obsessed with programming competitions as a teenager, and the first time I made it to a national-level competition I was shocked to discover that most of the people at that level were more "math people" than "coding people". Most of them had no interest in building real software. (This is not to slight them; they were also way smarter than I was.)

One of the reasons I stopped doing competitions is that I realized that, once you have your bag of tricks (especially things like dynamic programming, network flow, and the usual set of algorithms), programming competitions in the style of the IOI have nothing to do with programming.

However, I bet winners of contests like the IOCCC or the ICFP programming contest would be strong programmers with good on-the-job performance, though. (Or even winners of voluntary programming "contests" like Ludum Dare.)
This guy says he is thinking of using Aurelia instead. Aurelia mentions using web components. If I can use web components now the why do I need Aurelia?
Another one of those articles :-) The author feels the pulse of a javascript framework's culture. Watches versions, core developers and his own feelings about it all. Career opportunities and sunk learning costs are at stake.

As everyone is learning, no project is really "typical" and so much is up to personal taste, chances are we won't see a case study of a project in various stages. Ideally the author of such a study would describe clearly just when the framework clicked for him, and when it became a burden. Just what code is so cumbersome it's never fun to work with? What feature was rejected due to performance concerns?

All we can do is read those articles and, going meta, keep track of the frequency and sigificance of these articles and get an idea where the hype train is going...
The pain I've felt with Angular has been less about Angular itself and more about the way it integrates with the backend frameworks I've seen it used with. If the backend has a clean RESTful API, then Angular is not so painful. If the backend has a complicated structure, then I find myself wasting epic amounts of time trying to find templates, paths, etc.

Angular will make a lot of calls to the backend, but in general you can not look at your Angular code and figure out where all the calls are going to the backend. Complex URLs are often assembled from diverse variables that are stored in varied locations. You can not grep for an URL because it does not exist as a string. There is no equivalent to the "rake routes" command -- no way to find out what routes Angular might use. I found myself opening the dev console on FireFox and watching what Ajax commands were issued while the pages loaded and operated -- which is a fine way to track down a call that is working, but if a call isn't working, then it won't show up in the dev console, and you are left trying to track it down.

There might be some structure or conventions that would allow us to find the problem when facing a bug in our Angular code, but so far we have not found it.
You've got the right idea. bytes.Buffer is great (I even use it under the hood) but this repo is intended to give you more control over how your buffer behaves as the amount of data stored in it changes.
The First Auction for Algorithms Is Attracting $1,000 Bids
I'm not sure what your point is here. Talented programmers have been releasing stuff that works great on shitty platforms forever. If the money is there, you work around the nonsense, warts and all.

It doesn't mean DirectX 6.1 is a great 3D game platform, nor AmigaDOS an awesome place to make a video editor, nor Mono under Unity the bees knees for an iOS game.

It feels like we're debating whether the Mono bullshit was waist deep or merely knee deep. Which doesn't matter because Xamarin and Microsoft just pulled out a giant firehose and washed everything clean.
The Long Tail of Apps
PCIe 3.0 uses 128b/130b line encoding, not 8b/10b.
Does anybody happen to have a copy of the spreadsheet from the top photo?
As someone who has worked extensively with Ember and Angular in large projects, I'd say that I prefer Angular even though I know the current version will be deprecated.

I've found that ensuring functionality is locked into tiny angular modules and proper project structuring makes working with the framework a complete breeze. The testing framework that is inbuilt is mega handy too.

That said, the ending conclusion that we should be wary to jump on the Angular bandwagon is not unfounded. I'm a bit wary, however, of Ampersand since it looks a LOT like Ember, and well... I'd just use Ember if I wanted that.

Aurelia looks quite promising. There's not a lot of info out there about it, so I doubt a lot of people will start jumping the Angular ship just yet, but it's something interesting to keep an eye on.
1) Sure, pair symbols are a bit rare. But they aren't as rare as you set them to be. Symbols like / | or \ can act as substitute for bracket like syntax.

> If we look at languages which did away with
this made-up difference we see that pretty much no
person is missing it.

Eh, not sure what languages are these and how you think they relate to Rust. Keep in mind Rust goal almost from the start was something that is familiar to a people that worked with Gecko engine. With that in mind, I can't think of a similar family language that did this.

You know what happens when you call Index/IndexMut. To say it isn't so, is outright fallacious.

Also Rust takes the probably best road of allowing limited operator overload, which IMO so far proved better than allowing no operator overload or allowing custom operator overload - which is subject to weird rules and/or leads to heavily overloaded code.

Also [] always does same thing. For given Index value it returns value found at that index. & is not an address. AFAIK address are never allowed unless you drop into unsafe. It's a borrow reference to Output value. Index returns immutable version, while IndexMut takes mutable version and returns mutable output value.

2) No we don't. I think having user and built-in defined types is perfectly ok. In any non-Lispy langugage there are special literals, which can't be handled by user defined ways, unless you allow for some funky grammar.

4) Related yes, same no. In same way i32 and u32 are related but not the same. As I said in previous question having some subset of language be unable to modify is IMHO a good thing.

6/7) They can't. You can tell by mutability of array which one will be called and which one will be returned. You CAN'T EVER change type of mutability of result.

9) Whenever I see macros/operator overload/syntax being given too much freedom, it always ends up with incomprehensible DSL-s that you can't disentangle from regular code.

10) Subjective opinion. And it could be trivially solved with better type aliases.

12) I don't think it's a big problem and a fix to Cargo that adds a special unique identifier should be trivial to implement, although not necessarily forward/backward compatible.
Being able to afford pension payments that will result in a worthwhile retirement. Being able to afford an average house with an average wage. Being able to go to university without crippling debt.
Writing Automated Tests with Mocha and Chai
Just to add to the other comments made here, the NewUnboundedBuffer is meant to be a convenience method. It's actually just a (hopefully useful) example of how to compose the other buffer types to create a more complicated buffer. Thanks for the comment, hope it helps clear that up.
Could it be because those who win are often those who game the competition the most, even preparing their apps beforehand?
From the writup on this page it seems Pee camera module works in RAW mode. This is weird and uncommon.
it's true, non-zero exit code is supposed to mean boolean FALSE

but I am a part of my team, and so my code is my team's code, and hence the program is self-referential

I think?

my brain hurts
> "Scope" crap everywhere that you have no idea where to find what you're looking for.

A framework can't stop people from writing bad code. With Angular (or any other framework) you need to build the object model independent from the controller and template. The dependency injection makes this really easy. Then you've got logic that can be tested in plain unit tests and only a couple objects assigned to the scope (the roots of larger object graphs).
Did anybody else initially read this as "Kanye West Declared..." and then get really confused when they got to "...in 1982"?
Re 1, 6 & 7, as we've discussed before: languages that do away with the () vs. [] distinction don't have the same restrictions as Rust, e.g. Scala doesn't have explicit addresses for objects, meaning `&x[i]` in Rust (get the address of the `i`th element) has no first-class equivalent in it. It isn't possible to implement this by just overloading `()` without introducing dramatic new language features.

On this note,

They overloaded their [] operator to do two completely different things,
depending on whether there is an & in front.

is entirely wrong: `x[i]` is literally equivalent to `x.index(i)` or `x.index_mut(i)` depending on mutability, so the `&x[i]` form is the same as `&x.index(i)`, and `&` is a no-op. There's no special magic other than a slightly subtle desugaring.

No Rust dev is proud that there's no overloading... that sentence doesn't even make sense, as every operator can be overloaded, including the () call syntax.

Now I agree that there's often room for improvement in designs, but hammering on a relatively minor syntactic point (especially one that follows many, many other languages) for months seemingly without understanding the current design and the reasons for it is quite tiresome.
The tone and content seems overly negative towards a service that the author admits he didn't fully use.

"Hollywood and Silicon Valley have had their share of
catastrophe and tragedy due to corner-cutting, but
they have something that startups and indies do not:
piles of money to properly create redundancies, properly
hire and manage employees, and purchase insurance to
protect the company from errors and omissions."

That's a weird conclusion. Other quotes and screenshots that the author shared reflect favorably on the company, not negatively. Waiting a few days to share findings from a detailed post-mortem shows maturity and transparency.

Why wouldn't writers keep a local copy of scripts?
Here are some shorter/alternative takes on the situation:

http://freelawproject.org/2015/03/20/what-is-the-pacer-probl...

http://qz.com/283772/why-pacer-should-and-should-not-be-like...

https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/sjs/making-excuses-for-fe...

There are many more if you take time to peruse the Re: PACER document and click through the citations.
Gpu docs wont, but videocore docs would, sadly Broadcom is hostile and will most likely never release low level stuff, same goes for mipi dsi LCD interface.

Pee2 uses same videocore, only difference is CPU IP.
I am asking as a poor JS developer - what are the benefits of this newer style?
ApplyAPI
I've been using Angular 1.x for a year in various projects. After that I came to conclusion that for my side project I will use React. Main reason is React is better than Angular 1.x and Angular 2.0 is not ready. Cons:

- I can chuck away my angular 1.x knowledge, since Angular 2.0 is going to be completely different than 1.x (like Django and Node)

- Directives are such a pain to write, test, maintain, compose and reuse

- Doesn't scale (writing and debugging very complex app)

and also

- I had to dig deep down into internals to get how something works

- Angular has very step learning curve

- Harder to write isomorphic app

Having said that, Angular is an enormous improvement comparing to jQuery. If you start a new project, evaluate all options and pick what works best for you.
Chelsea Manning is tweeting from prison
Agreed on this on all counts, as a current consumer of Ionic v1 and having used Angular intensely for the past 2 1/2 years. I'm also looking forward to using Ionic 2, I know you guys have been hard at work on it and I believe Drifty will come up with something far more awesome than Ionic 1 with the better API & design available in Angular 2.

I disagree with many of this article's points. I was once a junior developer, and what Angular did was bring a lot of better practices to my code and exposed me to a lot of things that I would not likely to have been exposed to in such an easy manner, such as unit testing, easy to grasp high level structures. From what I have seen, it also has introduced a lot of better practices to a lot of companies, whose developers previously wrote awful code that was hard to reason about - Angular 1 does not cure this completely, but it helps give a foundation that does ease life some when working with flawed architecture, since it discourages even worse stuff strongly by design and by communication.

Angular 2 is already shaping up to be absolutely awesome so far, excepting how it handles dynamic components currently, but I believe this will be fixed before it reaches beta status - it is moving extremely fast currently. It feels very similar to using React, except with more standards-based tooling & browser technology support (Web Components, ES6 usage built into its design, etc.), no JSX, and less clunkiness (the getters/setters for component states in React get clunky quickly, as well as the various other checks).
It's more than a little sad that Steve appears to have been largely ignored.
Big Investor Involvement Could Boost Bitcoin
Looks like it's still part of the SML/NJ tree. The last commit was in 2013: http://smlnj-gforge.cs.uchicago.edu/scm/viewvc.php/MLRISC/tr...
Before building your own porn site, woudn't it be smarter to join as an affiliate of an existing paysite and learn the basics?

Content creation, layout, traffic,...You're going to be spending quite a bit of money, before you're even launching your own site and these days it certainly ain't easy to make a profit with online piracy.

If you do insist on creating your own site, then I suggest taking a look at your competitors first. Check the porn list of http://theporndude.com/. They list the best porn sites online.

Good luck.
What is the framework you hate the most? The one I am using right now! AngularJS has been a love and hate, feature and bug library in my stack. Many times I tried to run away.. I tried Rivets (easy but a pain to do binding), React, looks promising but needs some serious investment, Ractive, cant even remember what I didnt like.. oh well..
Scraping in Node.js is just not worth it. IMHO the asynchronicity really gets in the way of building a scraper.
This is what I've run into on every Angular project I've been thrusted into. It goes from a somewhat decent separation to absolute chaos incredibly quickly. While that's the developer's fault I don't feel like Angular lends itself to extending and revising existing applications very easily.
What if I told you I have been using it as a store of value all these years? Seems to work too.
A good follow-up book, which is more general in its scope but mentions similar behaviors, is "The Social Animal" by Elliot Aronson.
They are very obvious and not hidden to me.
I just started using ngReact https://github.com/davidchang/ngReact.
I replaced the main ng repeaters in the app with react jsx lists and the performance improvements are noticeable even on lists that are not long (15 items) with lots of ng binds. This needs to be built into angular by default period and the integration could be improved significantly. Also filters are horribly slow and need to be fixed or not used in views at all.
Yegge was one of the best tech bloggers but sadly I don't think he's done any public writing since this leak.
Same reason you might use Polymer instead of raw web components: Polymer adds nice polyfills, binders and observers and overall nice helpers to make handling web components much easier than the raw standard.

I tried using straight web components with the polyfills; it gets kinda messy compared to something more polished as Polymer. I assume it's the same deal with Aurelia.
See, it's not even clear where patio11 is going with his recurrent rants about Bitcoin. Looks a lot like irrational hate.
Agree with what he said about Amazon's recruitment. Amazon's recruiting process is flawed and highly uncertain. Seems like recruiters are not in sync even with each other.
All the guessing about where AGI/ASI will lead reminds me of nuclear weapons and MAD. There were those who guessed tactical nuclear weapons could be used against military targets without necessitating total war.

We may be guessing for a long time because no one needs to run the experiment on Earth. We can destroy military targets just fine without nukes. Nuclear powers fight small proxy wars against each but so far no war made the other side desperate enough to consider nukes.

We may be guessing with ASI hundreds of years after we have the computing power to make one. No one in their right mind would try an experiment beyond a certain magnitude and duration, just as we do with nukes. And ordinary people won't have unchecked access to computing power that could make one, even if we could easily provide it.
That's one problem that named arguments solve pretty nicely. Unfortunately, I don't think Go supports them.
Ask HN: Is value based pricing always better than hourly billing?
It seems to be a common consensus that value based pricing is better than hourly billing.

I agree that pricing projects based on value is a better way to leverage your personal value to make more money and create an amazing product for your clients.

However, at what point is someone able to offer value based pricing? For newer freelancers or business owners, is there a "pay your dues" period where hourly billing makes sense until you're more established? Should someone get a really solid handle on their hourly rate before they start pushing into highly profitable pricing strategies?

I'd be curious to hear perspectives from newer freelancers being told they should perform value based pricing. I'd also be interested to hear about the path more experienced freelancers have taken from early freelancing days to very profitable pricing techniques today.