skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The Singapore MRT and Bus System was one of the primary reasons inspiring me to relocate to Singapore. I used to live at Lake Merrit in Oakland on 17th, from 1996-1997, used the Bart almost every day - I don't recall ever using the public washrooms - don't recall how available they were.

I've used them several times in Singapore, and 90% of the time they've been excellent - the other 10% of the time they were just heavily trafficked, but not "Dirty" - just puddles of water near the sinks, lots of paper towels in the garbage.

I do recall reading a front page story in the Straits Times about how the MRT had been hiring cleaning consultants to improve their already ridiculous (by my estimate) high levels of cleanliness.

I would love someone to do an analysis of all the horrible failures in San Francisco/Transit and compare them to Singapore, so we can understand why the heck one is doing so well, and the other one is so abysmal.
Airplane Seat Swapping, Once a Gentle Sport, Turns Rough-And-Tumble
No it's not, in most of the world.
If I had more sources which had done it well, I'd never had learned in the first place! :)

For some of the safe arithmetic, this page has good tricks:

http://graphics.stanford.edu/~seander/bithacks.html#CopyInte...

(note that Hacker's Delight is also handy!)

The Half-Life 1 SDK has some interesting examples of macro usage, though it's in C++. In general, a common place for people to use macros is defining state machines for game AI.

The Flipcode archives also have some old tutorials and articles which are handy: http://www.flipcode.com/archives/

Go read through the Quake 3 source code to learn about how to structure a large codebase in C for realtime apps (look especially at how the game engine is separated and traps the syscalls made by the game logic: https://github.com/id-Software/Quake-III-Arena

The Linux kernel has some expert-level macro usage and organization as well.

~

I've cited a lot of game code here, because that's what's probably most accessible, and is where I cut my teeth doing stupid things and learning. There are doubtless better places (especially for best practices), but I think that open game code is a good starting point.

EDIT:

Dr. Dobb's had a good writeup on the unit testing stuff:

http://www.drdobbs.com/testing/unit-testing-in-c-tools-and-c...

That's a bit different from how we've solved it in the past, but still good!
The mirror question would be: is there a limit to how bad sexism is? Is it worse than murder? Theft? Speeding? Passing gas in public?

Finding an exact ranking is of course an academic question. But the take-no-prisoners, root-it-out-at-any-cost ("Why are you defending sexism?" without nuance[0]) attitude communicates that feminism is an unreasonable (in the sense that it cannot be reasoned with) entity. If name-and-shame on an industrial scale ("Men in tech") continues despite widespread efforts and initiatives to correct problematic behavior, than a cost-benefit analysis leads to the conclusion that there is nothing to be gained by said efforts and initiatives[1].

I am fully aware that "feminism" is not a coherent organization and actions of individuals aren't necessarily representative of the wider movement, but I submit that that's a strategic problem for the movement.

Here is what my intuition tells me: a)there is more sexism in the financial sector, and b) the financial sector is more resistant to change. A large feminist organization might have the resources, vision, and endurance to make an impact on the financial sector, but an army of individuals will collectively flock to the low-hanging fruit of technology. This is completely understandable at the activist level, but leads to credibility problems for the movement as a whole when the truth-tellers fail to speak truth where it is most needed.

[0]Recommended: http://squid314.livejournal.com/329561.html

[1]The crazy thing about cost-benefit analyses is that no one ever has to actually do them to react to them; society is a giant genetic algorithm selecting for individuals and organizations that act as if they had done them. Antibiotics, mismanaged, may give us superbugs; if feminism is done wrong, will it give us super-sexists?
But self-signed certificates are more secure than CA-signed certificates, because they don't involve a third party. My various servers only use self-signed certificates among themselves because it drastically reduces the amount of initial trust required.

The huge problem there is key distribution (easy since I run all the servers), but in terms of just "security" that's much more secure than involving a third party CA.
Is he going to spend more time with his family?
Probably not, or at least not us.

If technology was going to give us a paradise of universal coverage of basic needs and free time self enrichment for all, that would have happened on the late 19th or early 20th centuries. Instead, we got 2 world wars and a big economic depression in between.

The problem is we are social primates, and the alpha ape cannot afford to let all the beta apes to live in peace singing kumbaya; otherwise, he would not have remained an alpha for much longer. So, even if technology/machines were providing more and more of our needs, bigger and improved ways to enforce artificial scarcity over the low status levels of society were put in practice.

And where straightforward coercion failed, artificial needs and wants rose to the task, creating a prison of the mind.
Yep, I found a number of them, but I promptly forgot them in excitement when I found the one I actually wanted. If you want to check them out yourself, they appear to congregate in the kernel tree at net/sched/sch_* [1].

The only other qdisc I have much experience with is sch_netem, which emulates behaviors of a WAN (delay, loss, etc). I used it in this post [2] to conduct adversarial testing of MySQL replication (search 'tc qdisc').

[1] http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/net/sched/

[2] http://engineeringblog.yelp.com/2014/03/mysql-replication-ne...
How do you define "the value they provide the company"?

It appears the people working at this company company are providing enough value for the company to be able to pay them this amount. If it can sustain revenues, who's to say it has to return its profit to the shareholders rather than to its employees.

[edit] removed duplicate word
Sure!

Mutations ARE side effects. Consider two situations with a function and a mutable variable:

First: Your function depends on a value that can mutate. Now you have a hidden parameter to your function. You have to test the function under all reasonable conditions by which the value can change. The function is not isolated from the rest of your program any more, and you have to check who has access to that value. That's a lot to keep track of.

Second: Your function mutates a value. Now you have to keep track of everyone who references that value, and everywhere your function is invoked.

In both situations, the number of scenarios you must test is greatly expanded compared to when you have a 'pure' function that does not operate on mutable memory.

Referential transparency means that for a fixed input value you can replace a function invocation with a static value. It's just a mapping that is always the same, whether it's computationally expensive or not. That means that you can always expect the same behavior when you compose that function. But even more important, you can assert that your function is equal to something else -- always, under all conditions.

This means that you can make a series of equational substitutions. And THAT means that you can use equational reasoning to prove things about your function.

And if your program is just a bunch of functions that are composed together, well then you can prove things about your program, too.

Programs are getting really complex. Really, really, really complex. Having the power to make more safe assertions about your programs is becoming more important. Being able to prove things about your programs using well known proving techniques, such as those borrowed from more formal maths like abstract algebra, is really useful.

You still need to test, but what you need to test becomes of much narrower scope and much less cumbersome. This is why functional programming is indeed becoming more popular.
Interestingly, I have seen only one place where there is a sewer drain in an elevator (this is quite near where I live, in an administration centre of modernist concrete design). Judging by the smell, it's very necessary.

Never thought how it works, but I presume the elevator needs to have a storage tank underneath the cage, and that needs to be emptied regularly.
As a point of order, the root of the problem is the laws under which they are prosecuted--without the existence of the definition of the crime, we could hardly identify somebody who perpetrated it as a criminal, now could we?

That's really the root of the issue: there are a large and arbitrary number of laws under which people may be deemed criminals, and that makes just rule difficult.
> Can you list some of the use cases where you can do something using HTTP that you can't using HTTPS?

Sure: host a web server anonymously. With HTTPS+PKI (and it's the PKI half of this that people are complaining about) I have to claim an identity.
> F# projects have fewer and smaller cycles than C# projects.

Sure, but maybe the reason is the people that choose to use F# and Caml like languages are a bit smarter that the regular coder. Or maybe F# projects have a different nature and people don't write "enterprise applications" in F#.
You're assuming there are other investors/directors that aren't Dan Price.

At their current size/growth over the past 10 years it seems like they're a lifestyle business (urgh, I hate that phrase) where the company has grown organically from a small level of investment.

If Dan wants to provide his employees a higher level of pay from what probably seems to be a very predictable business, then that's his prerogative.

Businesses only have to act as psychopathic entities when they're run by dispassionate third-parties who's only motivation is literally increasing the profitability/value for shareholders.
That doesn't sound like a quagmire, so much as a couple pages of typical regulatory detail.
PHPUnit Beginner Part 3: Test Double
True that, HN wasn't designed to be a forum, and there is virtually no point in having a karma system since this is as far as I know not a for profit site, and the quality of this site itself draws people so there is little point for providing karmas to keep people interested
Or any other language that has gendered nouns.
What about devices I access via IP address which have no DNS. Like my home router, or my printer, or my iPhone when I'm connecting to an admin web interface, or my NAS...?

Obviously I'm not going to setup a home domain, DNS, and SSL certs installed on all these devices just so they can use the latest HTTP/2.x features in their admin panels or user interfaces?
In all honesty I didn't really enjoy the series. I keep watching because it felt so alien. All the characters seamed very 1 dimensional, and the writing I felt like it was reaching and not really selling.

If you can, watch it, make up your own mind.
Based on your math, there is more than enough headroom to do this then, right?
You could do a web-app in C if you really wanted to, but you wouldn't be playing to the strengths of the language. But you could write a compiler or interpreter for a new language that is well suited to that... But then you would be just reliving history.
Bluntly, the refusal of a certain part of the security community to simply secure transport first and then worry about authentication on top of that is both frustrating and mind-boggling.

This sounds a lot like the thinking that brought us the TSA. Do something, anything!
Hiring experiments reveal 2:1 faculty preference for women on STEM tenure track
> What if the purpose of businesses wasn't to maximize profit/ROI?

Mind-blowing concepts :-)
But the employees are creating more value than they are being paid. The company is a going concern and are still making a profit even while paying everyone at least $70k.

OTOH, take a startup that's paying everyone over $120k and is running in the red on VC money. Those employees aren't (yet) creating enough value to cover their salary.

It's just that it's become so ingrained that companies must maximize profit for their owners at the expense of the employees that we've lost sight of whether it's right or not. (I posit it's not.)
This is standard practice in wine making:

Oak is used in winemaking to vary the color, flavor, tannin profile and texture of wine. It can be introduced in the form of a barrel during the fermentation or aging periods, or as free-floating chips or staves added to wine fermented in a vessel like stainless steel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oak_%28wine%29
This should be treated as a legal problem, not a technological one.
Meaning the hostname is also sent in cleartext (which may be problematic for some use cases).

This is the wrong level to be talking about this anyways. IPSec is the "right" thing to do, but that ship sailed I guess.
Gotchas from Two Years with Node
If it's his company he can pay himself whatever salary he sees fit as long as the company doesn't tank, in which case it might be looked at as 'bad management'.

After all, it's mostly a taxation issue, if he pays himself a million in salary he'll pay one tax rate, but if he pays himself a lower salary and a chunk of the profits as dividends that's simply another tax rate.

So you can start your own company and pay yourself whatever you want as long as you stay liquid as long as you own the thing. As soon as you have other shareholders or co-founders you won't be able to do that any more.
Who said he was drawing $1m in 2004? That was 11 years ago. You're assuming that he's not the only shareholder.

Did they grow to be a billion dollar business in 11 years? No.

Has he created a successful business? I'm pretty sure you could argue a business with $23k/employee net profitability (after his changes in minimum salary) for a SME is pretty successful.
Yessiree, Bob, those are my cat pictures, and here's the 1024-bit key to prove it.
To be clear, I'm not implying that the current market rate wage is a fair one. It's entirely possible that, had real median wage kept its pace with economic and productivity growth, the market rate would be much higher.

But the $75k equals happiness is largely predicated on it being significantly higher than median wage.

If all other companies followed suit and pay the same amount, we'd have to move the yardstick much higher than $75k.
Imobile Anytrans Serial Key Plus Keygen Full Free Download
You can scale a rocket by mostly just making it bigger. I'm not at all convinced you can do this with intelligence. It sssumes many things: intelligence is one thing, no new problems of a fundamentally different order appear with scale, and there are no scaling laws that apply to intelligence.

Of those assumptions, the one that seems most common around here is that intelligence is one thing.
`when` and `bluebird` are both good libraries that supports both those features.
It's only going to increase the morale of the 70 employees receiving the wage increase. I suspect it will cause some degree of resentment in the rest of the company. It also removes the incentive to improve for the lower tiers, since they have further to move up the ladder before they see an increase in pay.

Personally, I think it's a noble but foolish move.
I don't think it is. The photo quality just sucks.

The top one indicates Street Sweeping.
I don't think the story is meant to convey truthiness, but kind of a silly story. Maybe something about leaky abstractions or the perils of black-box thinking?

I'm sure an FP nerd could extrapolate and use this to point out the importance of referential transparency
Considering the tax difference between paying employees and profits, it seems like it would be even less than you are calculating.
sigh downvoting my post is not going to turn humans into Bayesian creatures. And, if you think humans are inherently Bayesian, I am very interested to hear your reasoning, since it would be: 1. wonderful news and, 2. fly in the face of thousands of years of human history.
I think the fact that he's marketing this as a minimum wage thing to promote happiness will side-step most of the issues regarding job-loss fear.

It's not like these people were all hired at an above-market rate because they were trying to prove they were above-average employees.
Strategic thinking, categorization, and the recognition of complex environmental patterns are among the abilities that would be very valuable even for mutes without opposable thumbs.
The Role of WebRTC Technology in Online Security
No, you're not being paranoid. The internet started off as a de-centralized system and now we are seeing the emergence of more and more silos, cloudflare is another one of these (albeit a special one and run by people that I would trust more than those running some of the other silos).
You mean only if your employees can convince themselves and others that they're worth $70,000.
I wonder if they're considering becoming a B-Corporation.

It sounds like they're beginning to espouse the triple bottom line concept.

http://www.bcorporation.net/
I think your point 2 is overlooking what competition means. This, this very move is putting yourself ahead of competition and there is an overwhelming amount of research that suggests well paid (salary -- not to be confused with performance based "rewards") employees work better.
Woah, completely missed that. Then, "he's at it" captures slightly more of that meaning as well. Still incredibly hard to translate while trying to stay succinct.
Yes?

My math was very naive (no tax impacts positive or negative) but even if he phased in the change on day one (as opposed to the 3 years he is planning on), it would move his $2.2m profit (assuming that is before tax) to $1.6m.

As the only (majority?) shareholder, wouldn't that be sufficient to live comfortably off… assuming stagnant growth?

[edit: sorry, my above comment was meant to originally be posted to the parent, rather than the comment I posted this too… if only I could reassign it!]
A program that's harder to prove correct is not necessarily incorrect.

I'd actually argue that most of the software that runs our lives today is impossible to prove correct and yet seems to be doing quite alright overall.

You're setting up a similar false dichotomy as people who say that programs that ship without automated tests are worthless and broken.
> * Golang does away with inheritance and exceptions.

Meh,regarding exceptions you still have errors that you bubble up by returning them. It's hardly different from exceptions.

On the other hand, Go went way too minimal with its type system so much that, you can opt out with inteface{} because it's not expressive enough. I would prefer no interface {} , no reflection ,but to allow types as parameters and value.Which they are not in go.

finally, go has GOTO ... I would have gotten rid of that at first place.
Unfunny April Fool's Joke from the Magic Lantern Developers
I wish I had the time to write a book on it. It's a deeply esoteric subject though, and I am too insanely busy right now.

Better yet, I really wish someone far more up to date than I am who is actually working today in the field would take up the cause of airing out some of this silliness. I considered it harmless up to the point I started reading actual calls to regulate or even ban basic CS research. If I see any more of that stuff there is one person I know that I might email and try to convince to do it. The last thing we need is to shut down one of our most productive areas of innovation with baseless fear mongering built on towers of wobbly assumptions and cheesy sci fi scenarios.
I had the same experience, anathem took me 4 tries, but eventually I got through the first 200 pages and then thoroughly enjoyed it.
> I suspect it will cause some degree of resentment in the rest of the company.

Why is that? While some people might be that petty, it's very possible that Gravity never hired those kinds of people in the first place.

> It also removes the incentive to improve for the lower tiers, since they have further to move up the ladder before they see an increase in pay.

Why is that? I don't think the idea here is to raise everybody's wage and then institute some kind of 30 year wage freeze. It's to establish a baseline living wage so that none of your employees need to be hustling for other opportunities just to pay their living expenses. They can focus on their work and their lives. Rewarding exceptional behavior is a small cost once that's out of that way, and I don't see why we shouldn't expect to see it here.
I badly need this info! Thanks
An honest reply could be, say, "it's true that, if I use a prostitute, there is no way of knowing whether she is consenting or if she is financially coerced and it is therefore forced, but is the same not true of clothes? How do I know the shirt I'm wearing didn't have slave labor involved in its creation?"

To which one may respond by, for example, pointing out that clothes are general necessary for human life, while having sex is completely optional.

But such acknowledgements (that use of prostitutes without the possibility of rape is impossible, that sex is optional) would betray the sex-positivity line and the rewards that come with sticking to it.
exactly what i was thinking.

seems like some NIH thinking in crockford land
Maybe a dumb question but... is this legal?
Can we change the link to http://www.netflix.com/WiMovie/70302182?trkid=13752289 so people can read the show information or add it to their queues before deciding whether they want to watch it?
It's worse than that. About half of people spend more than they make at least a few months each year. While they may still be net positive for the year, there are times they are likely paycheck to paycheck in there. And about half have no plan for building savings either, so they're unlikely to change the situation.

Ref: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/17/americans-spending-...?

Further, I forgot about another aspect.. many tax deductions start phasing out at $50k and are completely gone by $80k (iirc), so at $70k they're not only in a higher tax bracket, they also have less deductions so their overall tax burden will go up.
Looking at the commit log [1], this code started in May 2013. That might explain why you might be thinking - why not async|bluebird|Promises? It looks like bluebird didn't start until Sept 2013 [2].

[1] https://github.com/douglascrockford/RQ/commits/master
[2] https://github.com/petkaantonov/bluebird/commits/master?page...
This is really interesting because it juxtaposes two fundamental issues: (1) The business need to make sensible, sustainable decisions that increase the ability of the company to prosper, and (2) the human need to address the day-to-day realities of getting by on a sub-$50k salary.

Notably, the article focuses almost entirely on #2, but doesn't really try to claim that this is a strong business move.

I have really mixed feelings on this. Too many businesses are all about profits and have forgotten the critical human need for compassion.

But what are the consequences of one business offering way above market salary for a given position? What happens if a better man for the job shows up? At such a market premium, the business could reasonably hire the slightly better person and terminate the other person, but then this is hardly "compassionate."

And will employees remain with the company even if they're no longer in love with their job because the salary is substantially higher than a comparable position elsewhere? Does this serve or hurt the company?

I'm not really criticizing or supporting this move. I'm just really curious how it will play out.
One way of interpreting that is that they think the disclosure would cause discontent that would lead to their labor expenses rising.
The Realtime API: In memory mode, debug tools, and more