skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Well, the point here is reproducibility, which requires reading and understanding the code, right?
We need to separate the technical vs. legal issues here.

"Cars should have no anti-tamper mechanisms" != "Owners should be legally able to modify their car."

Even changing the mileage is not a crime, the crime occurs if you sell it and commit fraud by lying to the buyer.
Does that even follow, though? HN's community has traditionally (thankfully!) flatly rejected the "safe space" PC game whenever it's attempted to be played here, either in the comments or the submissions.

Remember that the guideline is against "gratuitous negativity", not "negativity" in general. HN will still be a place where actual crap gets called crap, but hopefully this means that we'll see less middlebrow criticism and more actually substantive comments.
Ask HN: Does anyone else have a hard time coming up with ideas for projects?
I work on boring enterprise software for my day job, and in my free time I try really hard to come up with project ideas that are manageable, completable, inspiring, and entertaining if not useful. But no matter how hard I try, I always end up brainstorming a bunch of ideas, then having to toss them out because of infeasibility, or because the idea already exists in some form and thus wouldn't be interesting to make, or because the idea flat out isn't interesting enough to work on.

Here are some examples of my ideas and justifications for tossing them out:

* Something for managing my bookmarks - nah, Chrome's built-in Bookmark Manager is fine for my purposes

* Trello allows people to make lists of lists. What other data structure could I draw from as inspiration for a web app? - nah, can't think of anything

* Make some software that makes chiptunes - nah, this exists already, and all the Michael Jackson chiptunes I want to make already exist (heh)

* Make a tiny dog food firing catapult - maybe, but I'd have to spend some time reading about Arduino or something

* Make an app that visualizes acne outbreaks over time - maybe, but the result isn't worth the effort. I don't want to look at my face anyway.

* Do some OCR - sounds boring

* Make a better DataTables - don't need it

* Write a GLSL parser and evaluate things in JavaScript for debugging purposes - would be cool, but don't really need it

* Make a web app to send yourself an email in the future - Google Calendar does this

* Write a program to control your laptop's fan speed - sounds boring

* What's this React nonsense - ehhh don't care, won't need it if I'm not making a single page app

And there's always game projects and procedural generation-ish stuff and graphics, but that's kinda it's own category of project and doesn't fit my criteria of being something useful.

Does anyone else have this problem? How do you go about getting ideas for projects? Please discuss.
Lucid tried it with C++/Energize. Sank the company.

Nope, it turned out the "business" person/people who arranged the contracts for OEM sales of Lucid's Lisp did them as essentially loans, against the OEM's actual sales as I recall, and when they came due Lucid's investors felt that the success of Energize was sufficiently iffy the extra investment was not worth it. Details can be found on Richard Gabriel's web site: http://dreamsongs.com/

In general my take on what happened is somewhat different. It starts from the observation that when the Lisp Machine was developed, there was a great deal to be said for a custom TTL processor laser focused on Lisp. It was a good way to squeeze a lot of performance out of the available technology, pretty much the only way unless you were crazy enough to try to do it in ECL. And people could see the utility of what became the engineering workstation from the success of Xerox's Alto (which added graphics to NLS).

As it became practical to put enough gates on a single chip for a Lisp Machine, it would have taken a great deal of adroitness to make the transition, and that wasn't in the cards. LMI didn't have the capital to do so, in fact, TI bailed them out and invested in them just to keep the company alive so they could do their own gate array Lisp Machine, the TI Explorer. Don't know what happened with TI, but LMI was eventually killed by Canadian politics. Symbolics was very badly managed by then, and continued to make a number of very bad decisions.

And then, going back to Gabriel, there's the whole worse is better thesis. Worse is better seems to have fantastically greater survival characteristics, in fact, nowadays the only wildly successful The Right Thing software ecosystem is Java.... If there's such a strong ... force, if you will, against the approach of Lisp and therefore Lisp Machines, then it's hard to see how they could have survived.
Then I'd like to bring to your attention that you can have the @ come from a variable too, which means you can have conditionally silent files too. That always seemed to me like the perfect middle ground between silent compiles and knowing what's going on if things do fail.
Hashpipe – Pipe iff the hash matches
> Negativity isn't the problem--gratuitous negativity is.

Is it just regular negative of me to say statements like that one are horrible, or it is gratuitously negative? Am I being a critical thinker when I say that, whenever I hear people make statement like that one, they are usually weaseling into some businessey doublespeak that roughly translates into "people like me can be negative, people like you cannot, but I refuse to say that outright." Or is that shallow cynicism?

I get your general message, Sam. And while I don't agree with it, I see how enforcing some unwritten "gratuitous negativity" code could improve HN discussions (I just don't think it would). But I do not know of any place on the internet where I find better discussions on daily news; so my opinion: when it's this great already, why do some vague micro-morality-management thing like this to try to change it?
Disqus' mission is to make it easy for people to get into discussions about the things they love -- or are just curious about. We're building out the advertising side of our business, and we're actively hiring the following roles, many of which will focus on our growing ads space, for our downtown San Francisco office:

DevOps Engineer: http://grnh.se/blk8cr
Disqus is found on millions of sites and receives over a billion pageviews a month. Our 3-person DevOps team builds the foundation for everything we do, and we're looking for a 4th person to join. You have 5+ years of experience with Linux and server hardware, and can also work with our development engineers because you know Python and Javascript (or are interested in learning).

Sr. Infrastructure Engineer, Advertising: http://grnh.se/1m56i3
Infrastructure Engineer, Advertising: http://grnh.se/ug402s
We're looking for two people to build the backend infrastructure for our growing suite of ads products. You have 2-5 years of prior experience building infrastructure (or 5-10, for our senior role) -- bonus if any of that prior experience was with advertising infrastructure.

UI Engineer, Advertising: http://grnh.se/eivf80
This role will focus on implementing designs for our Advertising product development team. You have a solid grasp of HTML and CSS, a good eye for design, and a desire to learn and grow within a comprehensive code review culture.

Data Analyst, Advertising: http://grnh.se/jkenh5
We're looking for someone with 2-5 years of prior experience to join our 2-person Data Analytics team. This role is great for someone who likes talking with data, since you won't just pull reports on behalf of other teams -- you'll evangelize the stories behind your data at all levels of the company.
AndroidWear tutorial: Miscellaneous (part 6)
You know what, I think this is a good idea. I definitely get into "I'm the world's biggest asshole today" mode too frequently. Maybe if I get called out on it more it'll help make me a better person. I know the rest of the civil discourse rules here on HN have helped me become more thoughtful in other modes of interaction.
Not to mention there are whole classes of games where the latency is less of an issue (RTS, board/card games, etc).
That may be survivor's bias, though. How many software products end up not making it, at all? If you look at all software projects, everywhere, combined, and split them up: functional vs non-functional. The latter group would several orders of magnitude larger than the former.

Now what percentage of the non-functional ones ends up becoming successful enough for you to hear about them and know what they were built with? Apply that percentage to the functional projects, you might just be left with naught.

I have a feeling that if there's one thing more rare than functional programs, it's highly successful ones.
Dismissing things that don't make sense probably isn't a good idea. Some of the most interesting things I've learned have been from working hard to discuss and understand something that didn't make sense to me at the time.

Also, there are often cases when someone has an idea or thought that isn't necessarily framed with the right wording. That doesn't make the idea invalid and it is often worth exploring to understand what they were trying to express.

These things is a 'waste of time', in my opinion. In fact, it is often the direct opposite: A wonderful use of time.
I generally agree with the EFF, I'd even say I'm a fan, but I disagree on this one.

TL;DR == "tough"

Regulations can be bad, they can stifle innovation, enforce inequality, maintain awful power structures, etc. But, they can also save lives. In America there are a million things you can't do because they infringe on the safety of others.

At an abstract level, an automobile is 3,000 lbs. of metal holding 10 gallons of gasoline that carries human beings through public spaces at up to ~70mph. It travels through neighborhoods where children live and play at up to 25mph. It's a mixture of chemical, mechanical, computing and electrical systems that an engineer needs about 10 years of study to be able to handle after they get to engineering school. Even then they'll specialize.

Car enthusiasts simply don't have the skills to merit carte blanche access to mess around with cars that drive on public roads. In general, they probably don't even have the skills necessary to evaluate their skills which is what makes this so dangerous.

Tinkering with a mechanical system like your brakes is very different from tinkering with a computing system that through an electrical system is controlling the mechanical system that is your brakes. That's orders of magnitude of new complexity. Do you really think the average car-guy will understand the bugfix, written in optimized C or assembly, that accounts for how a certain transistor behaves above 200 degrees Fahrenheit?

To be clear, these laws aren't to protect anybody from their own stupidity, they protect the rest of us. If you do have the skills to tinker at this level then you're free to use them in race cars that aren't street-legal.
Wow this was really nice.

Although, as a non-webdev, the amount of code needed for this surprises me. I guess that's all abstracted with JS and CSS frameworks, but still.
It is part of life lesson to distinguish bull shits from constructive criticism.

If you haven't learned it elsewhere, HN is good place to start.
The suffering of the people of Greece will be so great that no one will follow their path. In fact, it will be the basis of European fiscal union, since it will be so clear that there must be a mechanism to prevent further such tragedies.
The parent poster is perfectly entitled to their viewpoint, but calling a community "the hivemind" is terribly insulting and needlessly inflammatory.
> I've seen several accounts that have posted daily for years completely unaware nobody is seeing anything they post.

I may be in the minority here, but I do not consider this a good result for anyone.
For better or worse, many "tech oriented" topics these days are politics.

Many people in the engineering and related fields often wish to ignore the political discussions and stay focused on the technology. This is an understandable desire. Technology is is often complicated leading to a general hatred of having to context switch into other topics. Experience teaches that it is a usually easier to achieve reliable results with technology you can logically prove or verify that with emotional, capricious, untrustworthy humans.

Unfortunately, technology brought us products such as "smart TV" that bring up serious questions about surveillance and evidence, cheap network clients that allow ubiquitous access to incredible amounts of knowledge that is certain to affect education and testing/grading, and self-driving cars that will require a serious refactoring of many aspects of society.

More importantly, I think it is important to remember that escaping the political side of anything simply cedes any disagreement to those that are addressing politics. I think JMS said it best in the closing lines of Babylon 5: "we had to create the future, or others will do it for us". Technology experts need to address these things, or important decisions will be left to those that are not qualified.

Now, that said, neither technology nor political discussions excuse rudeness, personal attacks, or generally disruptive behavior.
I don't think Beirut's politicians are the only political risk the city is exposed to. Anyone familiar with the recent history of Lebanon knows that it is the pawn in a bloody geopolitical game being played by the US, Israel, Syria and Iran, among others. All of those countries have the power to destabilize Lebanon and its capital in a variety of ways. Many local politicians are tied to one or more of those interests. Anyone who thinks Lebanon will be stable any time soon should read Robert Fisk's "Pity the Nation."
Standard deviation is the measure of typical amount of change. If you wanted to express it as a normalized z-score, that's your single number.

1% might be a .01 sigma move. It might be a 3 sigma move.

Please don't present your opinions on a matter like this as if they are facts, especially when you are ill-informed.
Here's a link to the nature article:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/natu...
P/E is not just a number. It's a measure of return on capital. It's the same thing as an interest rate on a bond or appreciation on the value of a house.

Sure, the return might not go directly into your bank account the way bank interest does but it does exist. It's either being reinvested into the business, or returned to the shareholders in the form of dividends or stock buybacks.

It is a huge error in thinking to believe that a piece of stock is a baseball card. It is not. It is, in a very real sense, actual ownership of an actual business and all that represents.
I sent this very link to an acquaintance who is looking to get started programming, to give him an idea of how much fun it is to do things interactively in a tight REPL-alike.

I think a lot of people who are just starting out get deterred when the only thing they end up with after a week of effort is some hard-to-see changes happening on the filesystem or in some file.
Revision demoparty live
It's really only relevant when specifying multiple targets, like 'make clean all', or the more common 'make all install'. It just seemed odd to me.
Interesting, what if in downvoting a comment you had to pick a reason? What are all the reasons one would downvote something?

"I do not agree"
"I do not believe this adds value"
"Inappropriate conduct"
"I think you are being mean / rude"
"Bad attempt at funny"
"Off topic to parent"
"Off topic to post"
"Difficult to understand/Noise"
I think reasonable people can disagree about what adds substance to a comment.
Also, OSX applies unicode normalization to the filenames, which can cause some interoperability problems with unix, e.g. you try to copy files forth and back between the systems and end up with two copies of a file, with identical-looking filenames that differ in their unicode normal form.
Well, given that there is already a lot of research in the area of collaborative filtering (see for example [1]), I would expect that there exist also some open source engines for this problem.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netflix_Prize
I certainly agree that when their algorithms fuck up they deserve no sympathy. They lost money, and that's that.

But that shouldn't be a reason to consider making operating on those algorithms illegal.
Sure:

http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/eric.budish/research/HFT-Fre...

Note that this doesn't deal with the distributed systems problems of multiple exchanges so would require a universal exchange monopoly (ie an impossible and unwanted condition).
I disagree. Feedback is usually necessary for anything to actually get better.

Negative feedback might be necessary for the commenter to feel better.
I've noticed the opposite. I browse with showdead on, and roughly half the time I'm left to wonder what on earth transgression the person committed to merit being silenced in that way after examining their comment history.
Old Hacker News Guideline: Avoidant (Kill Pain.)
New Hacker News Guideline: Avoid Trauma (Kill Pain. Be Nice!)

I (CC) @traumahack because I feel we are mistaking advanced emotional-intelligence with objectification eracing perfect forms.

The bitcism of pretending we can order people to make empathy.money by requring we read documentation to spell our own feelings and thoughts.

Amount of energy being distressed for distrust is enormously debilitating for a social enterprise that powers and issues social memory.

Voting taboo makes and takes time and space too variable a problem, yet we filter it as a memory equation for what and who stays alive to what degree, before power is even amount.

Voting taboo takes time, space, and variables, yet we filter it as a memory equation for what and who stays alive to what degree, before power is even amount.
However, rust would be relatively well-suited for a "dirty quick scripting task". You could make a more traditional wrapper for the operations you like to use that assumes these rare edge cases don't happen, and panic otherwise.

This is sort of rust's philosophy; being explicit. Rust has no problem with failing, it just has a problem with failing without you telling it to. If you write a wrapper that implies you are willing to fail on these cases, then you're being explicit by choosing to use these functions instead :)
Someone writes a detailed technical blog post and submits it.

A few comments are about the content of the post.

And then someone makes a comment about the blog CSS or the framework or javascript, wothout mentioning any content of the blog.

I get the impression that HN doesn't want those type of comments here.
The issue is really with speed of judgement. It's all too easy to become close minded after judging something, especially when judging something negatively. The key is remaining open minded as long as possible to take in more information, then you're in a better place to judge. Disagreement in a respectful manner is a reflection of how you've balanced the positive and negative, if you prejudge Internet commenters you'll have made it much harder on yourself to find that balance.
I think that you and cbsmith significantly underestimate the sophistication of these algorithms. If you are so certain that they are dumb and arriving at incorrect prices (but quickly) it should be easy for you to go trade against them and make a lot of money.
Our Bank Balance Now and Income and Spending Projections for 2015
I see. So any time a community displays well-known herding behaviors in a destructive manner, we can not discuss this behavior because that would be insulting and inflammatory.

(No shit it'd be insulting and inflammatory. Sometimes that's what the community deserves, and to believe otherwise is to believe in human perfection!)
Someone quickly give this man a raise or a job.
While reading this article, I was genuinely frightened by how strongly government policy is affected by intellectual fashions, and how everyone just assumes that it's okay. Try putting yourself in their shoes for a moment:

"I want to influence the policy for preventing nuclear war and saving human civilization, because I have a new theory that Russian national character is determined by the swaddling of infants. To tell the truth, I haven't actually spoken to any Russians. But I really want a Washington career!"

I wish I was exaggerating, but as far as I can tell, that's the actual thinking process behind some of the events in the OP. How is that not insane? And if leading intellectuals fail such a basic test of sanity, what hope is there for the rest of us?
I agree with the avoiding negativity, but can you elaborate on an example of avoiding "emotional developments to feel positively correct"
Show HN: Angular Material with ngRoute
> There's no widely used successful system written in Haskell. Yes, there's GHC, Agda, Idris and other research tools but they are marginal.

Google's Ganeti?

Microsoft's Bond?

> It's untrue that mutable state is the main reason of problems with code.

Its certainly one of the biggest, if not the single biggest (the only thing I can think of that gets cited nearly as much is multithreading/parallelism, and the main source of problems in that domain is also managing mutable state in that context.)

> You can manage state in Java and C# in any other language.

Sure, Turing equivalence means there is very little difference in what languages can do, just in how suitable the abstractions they present are to enabling humans to do it effectively.

> Haskell programmers are usually smarter than Java programmers, but they often don't want to work on tasks which they aren't very interested in, which are almost non existent, or have little business meaning.

So, take Java programmers (particularly smart ones) and teach them Haskell. Bang, you've got Haskell programmers without worrying about the interest distribution among pre-existing Haskell programmers. Learning PLs, for skilled programmers, isn't a huge deal -- the good Java programmers won't have much problem becoming good Haskell programmers.
> But where are all the successful large scale projects built with Haskell (or Clojure or whatever)?

How about Erlang. Let's try it, just from the top of my head:

* AXD 301 Switch -- Classic. Powers and control phone switch networks of whole countries. Claims 99.9999999% reliability.

* Basho Riak -- popular NoSQL database, highly scalable nodes are peers

* RabbitMQ -- popular message queue used by enterprises

* WhatsApp -- messaging application, processes billions of messages a day. Built and maintained by only a few engineers. Sold for billions of dollars.

* Klarna -- European payment processing

* Bet365 -- Sports bets

* Stock trading -- Allegedly Goldman Sachs uses it.

* Erlyvideo.org -- Video streaming service

* eNodeB -- Ericsson cell to internet gateway. There is a 50% if you want to look at cat pictures from your smartphone and Erlang breaks, you won't see your cat pictures.

* Wings3D -- A subdivision 3D modeler. I guess you can build your 3D cat and then send it over WhatsApp via a eNodeB to your friend.

Those are just I know of. So there you go. Maybe you should learn Erlang ;-)
Maybe literate programming (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literate_programming) goes some way towards that? Or at least could be extended to do that?
Even when it's for technical stuff, it's getting condescending pretty quickly. You'll feel bad for being wrong.