skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'd prefer it if these libraries were split into a non-graphical and a graphical part. Basic functions such as computing a layout from scratch, or computing an updated layout (rerouting or adding an edge), etc., belong in the first library. And UI stuff belongs in the second library. This way, users can decide if they like the user-interaction, and write their own if necessary.
These tactics are everywhere money is involved. These are used against me dozens of times a day, in advertisements, marketing, and just going about my business.

I think that everyone has a duty to render themselves immune to these and other tactics. It's idealistic, for sure, but a lot of today's societal woes make sense in the context of people mindlessly acting out others' persuasions beyond the scope of their own rational self-interest. It's especially sickening just how many of these people see only the emotional content of the arguments presented to them and nothing else....
> in general you can not look at your Angular code and figure out where all the calls are going to the backend

Why? Can't imagine why you can't look at code of your services and figure out where is URL.
That's why you need to multiple people who are good at negotiation to compete with each other for your bid.
Because I'm stretched thin by my 5 other courses and other projects.

The point I'm trying to make is that at least for me, I'd be much better off devoting myself to one topic for 3 weeks than spread over 18. That may just be me personally.
'and neither should you' is a pretty big blanket statement.
2.0 is very valid. They let it loose and a few devs, including myself have put off fully investing in Angular 1.0. I was investing in Angular 1.0 until this happen.

While working professionally, my team lead chosen Ember.JS.

Anyway, in general Angular have a very different way to do thing and you basically create html element and the js will defined the html behavior.

In general, I think the announcement of Angular 2 have slowed down the momentum of 1.0 very much. Angular 2 from what people have been saying is totally completely different from 1 and it could be name something else and noone could tell it's an angular framework from 1.

With all the js front end framework out there, I think it's too wild west and I rather let this area mature much more before choosing one. Unless you can afford to rewrite frontend code every few years... I'd stick with backend rendering web pages, plus it's SEO friendly.
There is already a standard for doing exactly that: passing through ATA commands wrapped in SCSI. This can come in handy when a SATA drive sits behind some bridge that speaks SCSI.
Readable, and intuitive. The syntax is like a standard class (constructor, methods, getters, setters) you'd see in C or PHP.
I used Angular for the first time recently building a little example demo based off a template that used Angular. It was so horrible to use in basically every way, however some of the concepts (as noted in this article) intrigued me. I would never use it again, but I do data-bindings are conceptually correct, in that the DOM should have dynamic properties. Right now you do that in jQuery or common JS by adding a class or ID and then binding manipulations to that class/id or element, but that's obviously a hack.

The problem is Angular is ALSO obviously a hack and makes a lot of things harder than they need to be. Oh well!
If this works, then people are very gullible. It starts with fakery, as the email can't be plain that it is the start of a standard recruitment process, but says "...to tell you more about what we're up to" in a mock-casual way. But of course they'd never tell you something that isn't ready for public announcement because at that stage no you do not have a special relationship with the company and might even have a stronger relationship with a competitor.

Every company making cold calls to candidates pulls these sorts of tricks. If you want to make yourself stand out enormously, and seem incredibly different from every other company approaching candidates over email, LinkedIn, StackOverflow, etc, then something you could do is look into the candidate's public material enough that you can start by telling them the offer you want to make ($xxx,xxx), assuming there is a cultural fit.

For a lot of engineers there is a bucket load of the stuff out there. Tech talks on YouTube, even from the smallest local meetups these days. More code on github than you could get them to do in a thousand technical interviews. If they did a PhD, or even an honours dissertations, it is probably on the web and will tell you in great detail what they're interested in and how they went about solving a tough problem.

If your email started with the fact that you're interested in hiring them, here's the things you've already looked through, and so this is the offer you'd like to make if there's a cultural fit, that will make a candidate feel like you really have done your homework.
It's hard to keep adding new instructions to MLRISC!

Could you expand on this? Based on the problem statement page, this seems to be the exact problem MLRISC tried to address. Is there something that keeps it from working well in practice?
> When the first European explorers looked at North America, they thought they were seeing a pristine wilderness, looking more or less as it always had. But they were really seeing wildly out of balance ecologies still reeling from the recent loss of most of their large animals.

Any sources on this? I'd like to read up on this stuff.
For the downvote mafia: running out of oil is way more dangerous for the civilization.
Both have a place. If a project is fixed in scope before the job starts, value based pricing seems to be the best to maximise profit. But what if a job is undefined? I sometimes offer a hybrid model where I do fixed pricing + and hourly spillover rate. This way things are upfront if you have a client asking endless changes or other non-agreed tasks. And it's really important to scope what is included so this is agreed upfront. If the clients whim changes its easy to point out this isn't in the scope and will go to agreed hourly rates without discussions about what is expected happening half way through a project.
Not a great example of a wrong prediction, IMHO. People did never end up taking laptops fishing. Tablets, ebooks, and cell phones are fundamentally different things that address the key problems noted in the article (screens and keyboards).

The thing about predictions that gets ignored in retrospect is that there are always implicit qualifiers, because it's not very interesting to hypothesize about the totally unconstrained future.
> 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.

That is precisely my point. We're still doing it and we will be doing it for the foreseeable.

For example:

> It doesn't mean DirectX 6.1 is a great 3D game platform [...]

If your opinion is DX6.1 didn't work, I think what you really mean is "isn't the best option under ideal circumstances today." I would agree with that assessment for mono, but "cross-platform" is not something anyone puts next to "ideal circumstances" when it comes to the work involved in making it happen.

> It feels like we're debating whether the Mono bullshit was waist deep or merely knee deep.

There is certainly bullshit to contend with in mono, but there's bullshit in Microsoft's too. And every other platform throughout the ages as you helpfully illustrated. A topical example is porting a game in C++ vs. writing working code for mono. C++ is uncontested as a working technology, but I would pick Unity on mono in a heartbeat for that task. So where is the line, really? In development all you can do is keep above it and all the better if you can keep your socks dry.

I get the impression you are very unimpressed with mono's failings and have written it off and want to complain about it. That's fine but it doesn't mean the hyperbole you've chosen to express yourself is accurate.
Don't forget the author (Erik Sandberg-Diment) of that piece's FIRST comically wrong prediction about the imminent failure of Microsoft Windows (and general non-command line interfaces): http://www.nytimes.com/1984/12/25/science/value-of-windowing...

Before there was Paul Krugman writing "the internet is a fad" in the NYT, there was Erik Sandberg-Diment.
I don't know about libxml, but normally you'd not need to do any I/O once you've gotten hold of the raw HTML - so there should be no need for callbacks. E.g. with cheerio you can parse HTML synchronously.
Bugspots – Bug Prediction Heuristic
I recommend using vcsh[1] to sync your dotfiles between different frequently used machines. This script seems to copy all the files every time you login which can slow down your login (as noted in the doc). It can however be useful to login in rarely used machines for which you don't want to go through the hassle of setting up vcsh (or a similar solution).

[1]: https://github.com/RichiH/vcsh
There are a lot of ways to make arguments nicer in Go. The simple on is to just use a configuration struct (or anon struct) at that has nice names. But, for complex stuff, functional options as laid out by Dave Cheney: http://dave.cheney.net/2014/10/17/functional-options-for-fri... (video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24lFtGHWxAQ)
Thanks for the heads up. I will have to check out dagre-d3. In the past we have used visjs. That being said, we have never really had much success with it as the networks, above a trivial size, never seem to settle in. i.e. the nodes keep bouncing around (and at visually sub-optimal edge lengths).

http://visjs.org/network_examples.html

Outside the network module, I have no feedback on visjs.
Intelligence SHOULD have mattered when that HR guy was hired.

Perhaps he means it in the Carol Dweck sense, that how we view our failures is what determines our success. IQ tests only measure what we've learned already, not our attitude towards learning.
Chat free with robot
You know, interestingly and according to my own personal anecdote, I feel significantly more efficient and productive in programming after I started weightlifting every day and using a standing desk at work. I'd guess between 15% and 25% more effective as a programmer. What I can figure is that I began to challenge more of the world around me (by lifting every day and running 10k or more on the weekend), and the same determination I use to motivate this activity has "bled over" into my programming. This is all 100% anecdote and purely unscientific, but it's how I feel after at least a couple of on-again-off-again exercise periods in my life, culminating finally in what seems to be a more permanent pattern of physical fitness. I really believe all humans should engage in weightlifting (and not simply a bit of cardio).
The second half of the article sounds like a sales pitch.

It would have been nice to see some thoughtful analysis based on the deltas of the languages from those rankings over 2014. All of those rankings are biased in their own ways, hence all of them being wildly different, but I think looking at how languages change across them paints an interesting picture.
Does the Digital Service do work for the Judicial Branch? I assumed it only does projects for the Executive Branch.

Certainly every branch could use a Digital Service.
I haven't used any of these, but curious if this compares to emacs':

SwankJs https://github.com/swank-js/swank-js

JsSlime https://github.com/segv/jss

skewer-mode https://github.com/skeeto/skewer-mode
No web framework is perfect. I do dislike parts of Angular, for example silently ignoring unrecognized directives.

I love doing web development, but parts of web programming suck. Therefore, there's going to be parts in every web framework that suck.

I find that being a fanboy for any framework is unhealthy. So is being a hater. It has good parts & bad parts. This article seems uninformed. There is a lack of Angular specific terminology. Most of the criticisms may in fact be valid, but are not backed up or explained. The author also recommends alternatives then goes on to imply he has not yet "taken these for a spin". I feel the author may be talking about stuff he doesn't have enough experience with.

I won't tell you Angular is the best framework, or that it is good or bad. I will advise you to ignore articles like this & try it out for yourself.
Sure, but I'm going to move myself into the line of fire by suggesting that some frameworks can encourage the development of bad habits and anti-patterns - especially those that prevent projects from being easily re-arrange-able in the future.

Sometimes the choices made presumes a specific application is built and then a junior developer over-commits to the current state of a dynamic application and thereby precludes the application from easy future repurposing to match the dynamics of the actual products intent.

What do I mean by that? You can call this "concreting the abstractions". The abstractions given by frameworks have to be implemented in a concrete manner in order to build the application - duh.

But then what you often get are ill-equipped abstractions layered on top (square peg in round hole syndrome) and then the concrete implementation on top of that.

Then the rug gets pulled out from underneath that.

The naivete of a Junior Anything is a lack of perception of the nuances of the craft - an ignorance of the consequences of actions - and the wisdom to have the right kind of deductive minimal execution to get from objective to actualization.

All too often, the frameworks give you a bag of hammers and say "alright, figure it out". With This approach, the limits of excellence are quite low.

This matters for the long term with the customers ... you want them ecstatic and to follow you in a near cult-like fashion --- not just merely shrugging their shoulders and cocking their head sideways as they abuse the product in a disenchanted ritual.

Anyone can do that. There's no beauty or value there - and it's not how you create a following. There is a meaning to art and mastery - when you do it right, everyone gets it.

It's the unquantifiable quality that Robert M Pirsig discusses in Zen and The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, or what Tim Leberecht talks about in the Business Romantic. These things matter - otherwise we are all soulless hacks.
No, really, REST API services in Angular usually have path to endpoint written in the most top part of code (especially in $resource). So I really wonder how it's possible to hide API endpoint URI there.
I thought that CGA only allowed for 4 colors, EGA for 16 colors and VGA for 256 colors... I went from monochrome monitor to CGA, EGA, VGA, SuperVGA etc... After watching this video I read on Wikipedia that yes, standard mode for CGA was 4 colors at 320x200, but there was a less known mode of 160x200 which allowed 16 simultaneous colors, now THAT is a hack!!
It's somewhat disorienting to read this, because it was increasingly wrong for such a long time and then in a strange way has bizarrely become almost right again in a limited sense. When connectivity and computers have become so ubiquitous, most people hardly find it necessary to lug a laptop onto the train to try to squeeze a few more minutes of keyboard-based work into their commute, and smartphones and tablets fill people's needs for general communication and entertainment so well. Even though travel is one situation where many people might find it necessary to bring a computer, it seems like laptop use on planes is way down, too.
This article popped up a few months ago too. The big problem at the time was price. PCs, including luggable ones, were pretty pricey by today's standards. The early laptops were even more do. You're probably talking $4K-$5K for a configured system in 1985 dollars.

Early LCD screens were also pretty bad. Darker grey or grey. Or Plasma screens that cost more and had to run off AC.

It's easy to make fun of predictions like these. More interesting to consider the reasons they were wrong.
I'm currently working on something that does that sort of thing. https://github.com/djherbis/fscache

It doesn't have the composability features yet, but it already handles 1 writer with many concurrent readers. Let me know if that helps!
It's unlikely that anyone has millions of data points on any individual. Thousands at most (possible exception: high resolution images, kind of like what human eyes process every day). Rather, ordinary data from across millions of people is combined to deliver better ads.

Again, not very different from what most sales people do.
That is, of course, a great idea if you can make it work.

However, for that to work, you need to have a well-delineated task; you need all your bidders to be bidding on the same thing.

Let us take the very simple case of real-estate. "Sell my house, you get 3% of the total selling price."

(well, traditionally, the seller pays 6%, but 3% goes to the buyer's agent, which to me makes it seem like the buyer's agent actually works for the seller, as, well, it's the seller doing the paying.)

But anyhow, let's focus on the seller's agent, as like I said, the buyer's agent has a interest in seeing to it that the deal goes down quickly, easily, and that there aren't legal issues later, but they don't have any interest in negotiating a lower price for the buyer, except to the extent that doing so could make the deal go through faster.

So say I want to sell my house. There are some agents that will sell my house for 2%, or even 1%. why haven't those agents dominated the market? do the agents who take 3% negotiate higher prices for the buyer?

The point here is that professional negotiators have set up systems where it's hard for you to send out requests for bids on standardized tasks, because such a system would lower their compensation. I used the real-estate market as an example, because there is a very standard compensation system, but it is largely divorced from (and in fact opposed to, from the buyer's side) the "hey you, here's some money, get me the best price." task that I would like to pay them for.

note, I'm not saying that it's impossible to hire a negotiator... I'm just saying that it's a hell of a lot harder than it sounds. Hiring a negotiator is dramatically more difficult than hiring someone who performs a well-defined task.

Now, I'm with you, though, in that when you can reduce that negotiation task down to something standard you can put out bids on, you are going to do very well. I'm just saying that reducing that negotiation task down to something like that can quite often be a difficult task in and of itself.
My experiences attempting to launch a cryptocurrency payment processor in Jersey
My personal experience with the ICFP programming competition suggests that you can do quite well with a fairly limited amount of time dedicated to it. My 2-man team managed to get 2nd place in the lightning round and 8th in the main round last year, despite using my side project programming language with its half-baked implementation. We generally do not do much preparation outside of having participated in the contest for a number of years. I did a bit of library work and my partner did a bit of a refresher on the language since he doesn't use it outside of the contest, but that was about it. Prior years were similar.

Granted, ICFP is a fair bit different than something like Google Code Jam. There are far fewer entries (typically around 200 or so for the main round), the task is larger, you have more time (3 days for the main round compared to 2.5 hours for a round of Code Jam) and you can compete as a team rather than an individual. I haven't really tried Code Jam yet so I can't say how much of that makes a difference.
First major blog post, naturally I welcome any feedback, positive or negative.
> Angular 2.0 [...] doesn't fix any of today's problems

Directly followed by:

> Views and data-binding are a mess, and seriously degrade performance

Want to have your cake and eat it, too?

Angular 2.x does simplify things quite a bit and it also offers much better performance.
“We would be willing to set up a $2,500 bounty to implement scrollbar styling”
Well he's not completely wrong. Displaying multiple windows is still possible today, but most people would prefer to interact with their computer using a tab-like model.
Well judging by how many countries battle with "zero hour contracts" sorry but just no, i would say what most people want to do is to have the "right" for a steady and assured employment and benefits.

While it might be nice to be able to "freelance", work from home, and have all the time you want for yourself and only work when you want/need too if this trend continues you won't enjoy the consequences since rather quickly they'll come and bit you in the ass.

So sorry I'm not that excited about some nifty tool that will allow even more companies to dump full time workers in favor of part time, loosely contracted remote or local workers. And while it's true that in some cases and in some countries you might make more money freelance work it's circumstantial at best, since you forgo even basic benefits such as employee insurance not to mention healthcare, pension, 401K (and similar savings) etc.

While 5 years ago i might have salivated at the prospect of earning 100's of dollars and hour working from my bed or from the nearest coffee shop, at almost 30 i seem to care more about my employers pension contribution and insurance plans than about how many days a month i can work from home.
And seeing more and more jobs being listed as part time, remote, etc, with almost no benefits makes me dread at the prospects of employment at 40 or 45 not to mention what kinds of Orwellian job contracts might we leave to the future generations.
You should try out https://github.com/wesleycho/angular-react (disclaimer: I built it) - it cleanly integrates the ability to use React with Angular
As I mentioned in another post, I don't think it's that Google sees programming competition success and says "oh boy, we gotta get this one!", but that the experience of those competitions helps the candidates perform better in interviews.

It is very hard to account for that in interviewing. Probably the only effective method would be to ding people with competition experience. Of course, that would be obvious conscious bias and would never happen.
Search? Pretty much all content provided beyond the individual level (and even some of that)?
Using the DOM to keep state seems like a very smart trick to me. I liked that about Angular when I first started learning JS MV* frameworks. I didn't like the whole Angular way but I did copy that trick to my Backbone apps. I like to use what I find smart and mix it on my solutions. Next up on my list is virtual DOM.
Sorry to hear that. Was it the same error as the parent had?
Prototyping, for one. Thought process. Creative thinking. Knowledge of relevant material.

It may not do these better than other tests, but basically any "solve this in x minutes" questions are going to reveal behavior in a person.
I really don't get what people mean when they say they're against frameworks. Your app that you're making with no framework...how are things structured? Do you just repeat yourself everywhere? Or do you really have a pseudo-framework that's implicit in the conventions that you use?

What I'd like more than anything else is examples of substantial web apps written without a framework.
Since none of the founders seems to be Jewish, or Hebrew speakers most likely they searched for "work" in various languages (since that's seems to be a trend with some startups today) and picked that one since it's sounded just right to them.
Have you heard of https://18f.gsa.gov ?
The answer to your problems is really boring and obvious (but far from easy to implementate):

Focus in the right things.

You do this and the world is yours.
Explain to me how to do diff/patch then.