skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Well, Erlang has kind of a cumbersome syntax, and it is hard to learn for someone who has never seen a functional programming language.

Ok, the syntax is weird (and sometimes infuriatingly so), but I didn't find it that hard to learn, and I had never seen a functional language (I came from mostly PHP, with some perl, and a small amount of C and/or C with a C++ compiler, and a little bit of Javascript). Single assignment is new and different, but really the only thing that really causes problems with is something like a for loop; and you learn the two or three ways to do a for loop differently pretty quickly. C, Perl, PHP and Java all have function pointers too, you just don't use them as often.

The important thing is starting to learn Erlang on a project that has a lot of concurrency, so you're making that part of the project easier in exchange for having to learn to think a little differently.
There are many, many other selling points to Elixir/Erlang over Ruby, if you already like Ruby (and its syntax, some of its conventions, etc.)

1) Immutable data throughout- prevents certain classes of bugs

2) 10x faster- obvious benefit

3) Actual macros- the ultimate metaprogramming: http://elixir-lang.org/getting-started/meta/macros.html

4) Functional paradigm- encourages decoupling of code by forcing state to be passed around explicitly as arguments, this also aids unit testing, it also reduces bugs further

5) Instant "forking" without having to worry about thread safety, and good semantics around it

6) Potential 99.999999999% uptime reliability (thanks to Erlang's OTP)

7) Hot-swappable code upgrades with no downtime

8) Pattern-matching reduces the amount of "switch logic" code greatly. In Ruby code I often saw complex logic branches with no test coverage- it's easier to cover those in Elixir when every "branch" is a different pattern-matched function

9) A bunch of neato things such as build-your-own-sigils, which felt even more "Ruby-like" than Ruby's own capability (or lack thereof) here: http://elixir-lang.org/getting-started/sigils.html

10) Trendy Actor model built-in from the get-go ;)
You can also use curl --negotiate -u : for kerberos (provided curl is built with it and spengo). curl supports quite a few less used auth methods, but OP mentioned custom headers, not basic auth per se, (thats why I used Authentication instead of WWW-Authenticate or Authorization as an example)
> I was intentionally shaming him.

So the rules of the site don't apply to you? I get that you are frustrated, but your tone makes people not care about the content of your message.
Waterloo Co-op: A Blessing and a Curse
What font is this?
Use named functions to avoid closures!

for (var i = 0; i < 3; ++i) {
namedFunction(i);
}

function namedFunction(id) {
fs.readdir('.', function () {
var end = process.hrtime(start);
console.log(util.format('readdir %d finished in %ds', id, end[0] + end[1] / 1e9));
});
};
Watch a Time-Lapse Video of the Calbuco Volcano Erupting in Chile
Agreed (and upvoted). After skimming through the article, I immediately came back and flagged it.

Go ahead and downvote as much as you want, but this belongs on some humanities blog, not on HN.
I wouldn't expect anything except inconsistency.

Apple does not move quickly, or consistently, or sanely. The continued presence of the official Pebble app on the store is completely consistent with a new Apple policy of prohibiting apps that talk about Pebble. Apple often starts by simply rejecting updates, and the Pebble app hasn't been updated since February. When Apple does start going after existing app versions, it often takes weeks or months. For example, there were several stories from the past fall about apps that came up with novel uses for the new Today screen in iOS 8, submitted, got accepted, were in the store for a month or two, then were suddenly given the choice of removing the feature or being yanked because it turns out that they were going against the arbitrary rules about what you're allowed to do in a Today widget.
Haha, no. In fact there is plenty of room for both. On the bright side you can go to just about any city in the country and find a job in either Java or C#/.NET development. Both are very widely used.
This is pretty amazing...its almost as if the Roslyn devs are all fans of F#. Even though I'll probably still end up using F# the majority of the time, better interop with C# sounds like a really good deal.
GCC 5.1 Released
Best one:

DO YOU LOVE?
You like to love. Lovely does too.
Well, you are ruining the analogy by carrying over the word "operating" from one context to another, where it has different nuances. That is a form of equivocation over word semantics.

Hit-and-run drivers are forbidden from driving, but not from using as passengers. Passengers also "operate" vehicles through that use, but we don't use the word that way; when it refers to vehicles, it serves as a synonym for being behind the wheel, used in puffy legal language. For instance, a taxi arrives because the user made a telephone call. The user isn't involved in the details, but is commanding the situation. Just like the user of Firefox requests a URL, but isn't involved in putting fields into a TCP/IP packet header, or writing any code.

It is nonsensical to forbid a convicted cracker from consumer activities such as looking up today's weather, or searching for a used lawn mower on Craigslist. The concern that these will cause an intrusion is like worrying that someone taking a taxi might order the driver to run someone over. Or something like that.

You're not going to break into the Pentagon out of your Netflix remote. For that matter, if you knew of a way how, you could easily get your wife to push the buttons. (And she will do it, too, because you had her at "tits or GTFO".)
Turing Phone
Thank you for this link; I've been meaning to watch this debate a long time but have never got around to it. I heard a rumor about how Foucault was paid years ago and didn't believe it, but according to at least one biography [1] it's apparently true! "Unbeknownst to Chomsky, Foucault had received, in partial payment for his appearance, a large chunk of hashish, which for months afterwards, Foucault and his Parisian friends would jokingly refer to as the 'Chomsky hash.'"

[1] https://books.google.com/books?id=BODdpZCvvrQC&lpg=PA201&ots...
Yeah, but when you don't think you're actually breaking the rules, "you never did anything about that guy" is good support.

This is not a case of somebody breaking the rules and trying to say that the rules do not apply. This is a case of the rules suddenly being reinterpreted to mean something completely different from what they used to mean.

Imagine if you stepped on a worm and then got arrested for murder. Would it not be a reasonable thing to say, "uh, there's another guy stepping on worms right over there and you're not arresting him, so what gives?"
The EU announced antitrust charges against Google a couple of weeks ago [1]. tl;dr - '[T]he company has given an unfair advantage to its own comparison shopping service ...'

[1] http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/apr/14/european-c...
As much as I am sure the availability of this translation is interesting for english speaking Foucault scholars, I am not sure I buy the 'demolish the caricatures' angle. There was enough material to demolish those caricatures before this was available and, even if there was no published transcript of those lectures, there was no mystery about them and their content was known at least to those who attended those lectures.
The idea that programming languages are "worlds apart" and "vastly different" is hyperbole that would make Turing frown or maybe giggle. Have you considered that Ruby is written in C [0], and that you can do plenty of things with a general purpose programming language and some good ideas?

Edit: Would you care to substantively explain the downvote(s)? The parent is so preoccupied with frameworks he's overlooking the basics.

[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_%28programming_language%29
I don't get the joke, what did they do with the fish? Did they just migrate away?
uh, yeah, that's his entire point. the individual feels trapped - he can't just abandon his family.

that's what a trap is - you can't escape.
Sorry but that's doesn't seem like a compelling argument. We're not talking about editors... You don't choose the language based on the ubiquity of the language on UNIX/Windows servers, otherwise everything would be running on Perl probably.

I guess most people, like me, choose the language they know/like and then setup the server accordingly.
>How are they defining human nature in the context of their debate?

That's what Foucault wants to know.

https://youtu.be/3wfNl2L0Gf8?t=9m48s

And from my little understanding, because they don't believe there's such thing as a human nature, since society, and other things from our surrounding affect us, and the "nature" could change in a different context, which would imply it isn't some kind of force behind us.
Its popularity increasing doesn't make it a new language. If you spend seconds on a web search you'll see that two is pathetic compared to elsewhere - I'm commenting on London there, not Go, or Elixir, both of which I would love to use, hence my grumbling.
I don't think it's gratuitous negativity. I think the response is gratuitous sensitivity. My comment communicated that (1) it doesn't work on Firefox, (2) this is an increasingly common problem, and (3) it frustrates me.

Review the rules. I don't think my comment violated them and I think the response to my comment is an indicator that people have thinner skins every day.
For an example of something similar: when one of these rejection snafus ends up making a public spectacle to the point where Apple wants to work directly with the app developer, they will do so exclusively over the phone rather than in a more sane fashion like e-mail, so that the details can't be so easily recorded and spread around.
There's a lot of different ways to tackle this problem, obviously, so I'll just point you in one of many directions. You'd have to consult the specific thinker's works to get their exact takes.

Okay, so the concept of 'human nature' in general needs some more definition, like you've said. Here's maybe a better phrasing of the problem: "Do humans have some sort of _innate_ properties that are shared amongst all humans?" This phrasing calls back to an old debate in philosophy: essentialism. This is a question of ontology, in other words, what kinds of things are there in the world, and how do we categorize them?

An essentialist takes the position that we can form categories of things by defining some set of properties, and then any entity which has those properties is one of those things. In other words, let's say something like "You're a human as long as you have a name." This is a position which is essentialist. And that might be a workable definition.

A non-essentialist may come along and challenge your ontology, though. "Ships also have names, but they are clearly not human." You may agree with this, and so you need to revise your set of properties. "Humans are things that have names, and walk on two legs." The non-essentialist may respond, "birds have names, and when they walk, they use two legs. Your ontology is incorrect.

You see where this is going. Those who take a position against essentialism claim that this approach to categorization is a folly. It's fundamentally broken.. To give you a counterpoint, I generally agree with a process philosophy, which means that I equate identity with _doing_, not with _being_. An example of a process philosopher's standpoint on ontology: "You're a Rubyist if you write Ruby code." This kind of categorization is more useful, because over time, my identity can change. I might be a Rubyist for a while, but at some point, I wasn't. And I might stop being one in the future, too. An approached based on do-ing includes things like a time component that an essentialist position never can.

So, returning to the original question, no, the question of an inherent nature doesn't make any sense, and therefore, neither does 'human nature'. So where do we go from there? Well, any claim that's reliant on an appeal to human nature is incorrect. For example, "Humans are inherently greedy."

Anyway, that's a hastily-typed overview of a concept in a HN comment, but hopefully that helps you get the gist of it.
Splunk offers free online training.
Yeah, and it's hard to get exposure to areas that might be fertile for inquiry if you aren't spending time with other people who are working on mathematics. It's a social networking effect, in the same way that you pick up programming tricks and get exposure to new frameworks/languages/techniques by spending time with other developers.

I'm sure there is a sizable number of "amateur" mathematicians who work on problems in their free time, but it is hard to know what to work on and where to look.
I'm leaving Dropbox, because I don't want to pay for 1TB of data when I only use 50gb. Other services offer smaller increments of payment plans.
Doesn't count. Microsoft has a monopoly on the sale of games sold through Xbox Live.
> When has Apple hindered a break-through technology?

Contemporary example: it's impossible (as in, disallowed by Apple's policies) to install a web browser with a rendering engine written in a memory-safe language on your iDevice.
Best web design tools, apps, and other great stuff of this week
Fair enough.

If I'm hearing you right, your point is that we should be careful about society only crafting one message about happiness, because we could lead that man into the wrong unhappy situation.

I do think the evidence is pretty strong that friends/community is correlated with happiness, though it's an interesting theoretical question whether or not it's correlated without causation.

People who tend to be happy might also tend to like being part of a community.

I do believe the relationship is causative, but admit it's a hard thing to prove.
Kubuntu 15.04: the first major distro to ship Plasma 5
This gave me a good chuckle, but as the first comment in the thread states, this would be pretty hard to do without the admin password. If this is real, then I'd say all the blame is on the owner of the computer for having it in a state that allowed his /bin to be so easily deleted.

Nothing that can't be recovered from though.
One legitimate use case for agent forwarding that I've used in the past is ssh-ing in to a development server and doing a pull from a github repo. Without agent forwarding to authenticate from the dev server to github that gets really annoying really fast. Whatever vulnerabilities are introduced by agent forwarding they pale in comparison to those you get by leaving your private key on the dev server.
Hilarious. Serves them right for thinking too different.
> For example, there are people with disabilities who can't take trains.

I have no issue with providing an exemption from tolls for people with disabilities to go across bridges.

> There are workers who live in areas of Queens or Brooklyn not covered well by the Subway.

So use the money to build better subway coverage. That's part of what I was suggesting.

> There are tourists who want to drive into the city from neighboring states.

Then they can pay the tolls. Even if tolls went up to $20 each way they would be a small part of the cost of staying in NYC with a car for a day, and for a tourist it's a one-or-two time cost.

To put this in perspective, we frequently ticket or tow tourists' cars. About half the people who have visited me by car have gotten ticketed or towed while visiting. It's a mess. If you want to fix the tourist driving experience, I'd look to that long before I'd care about bridge tolls.
You guessed right. And after I made that pronouncement to myself about C, I kinda lost touch with the programming community, as Turbo Pascal and my programming skills got me through college and gradual school in physics. When I finally came back up for air, of course C had won out, but programming a graphical platform with a low level language seemed too hard, and I reverted to higher level tools such as HyperCard, Visual Basic, and today, Python.
The beauty (which can also be seen as a disadvantage) is that writing Go does not exactly require comp sci skills. I suspect that Go is even simpler than modern PHP as a language.

You can of course go full comp sci implementing clever algorithms in Go, but you could do that in PHP, too, and none of content creators is usually interested in this.
Google does prevent you from using other trademarks in your Play Store copy.
So the concern about "innovation" within the context of a browser is that can disrupt how they currently work.

That seems to be a nice-sounding way of saying "breaking something that used to work", which is a significant problem with far too much "innovation" in modern browsers.
I actually had this exact same idea a couple months ago
Yes, I work as a programmer and bits of Foucault that I've read have been transformative for me. Most of my programmer friends are also at least aware of him.

The portion of his work that I'm familiar with was concerned with the insight that societies are organized by "technologies" of discipline and the "genealogy"[1] of these technologies in different institutional contexts i.e. hospitals, prisons, schools.

When I first encountered Foucault's work as an undergraduate, I wished I'd read it much earlier as it would have helped me decode the prison-like experience of school. The contradiction between imposed ideologies of "freedom" (via studying US history, the news, conversation with adults, etc.) and the total control exerted by the state over where I could go, what I could say, and what I was to do nearly every minute of my life resulted in a lot of cognitive dissonance for me. If only I'd learned earlier what "ideology" meant and that it was well-known that "freedom" is not an ethical, political, or ontological given. Foucault's work reveals that we always exist within power structures and illuminates much of how these structures operate.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogy_(philosophy)
That's a good point. Sharepoint might have solved some of these problems, but I have made my bet in the opposite direction - my startup is making and selling a vertically-tailored content distribution system; it distributes the structured data via vertical-specific "apps", and the (as of yet) unstructured data as generic "documents" - a simplified,'locked down "dropbox" functionality . So, while Sharepoint is good for everyone, our system is great for the select few it's aimed at.

There are two large trends making it possible:

1) It gets cheaper to make software.

2) Technology becomes cheaper and more prevalent in the hands of the end users, especially mobile tech, thus increasing the addressable market size.

Resultingly, it becomes viable to create distinct software for separate user groups. This is a trend reversal from the previous 20 years, when different groups of users were trying to use the same piece of software. As the "universal" software gets more complex, it requires more customization, so its the usability is eroding (see: dropbox file deletion problem). A tailored solution is inherently more user-friendly. At least that's my story and I'm sticking to it! :)
Add one to the column of people who are into Elixir for reasons that have nothing to do with websockets.
The technique is useless if not applied to embryos which don't develop. What the article is talking about is foundational research, not an attempt to actually apply the technique, and I was referring to the eventual application.
I've been using Mint.com since 2008, and just the other day I contemplated how astonishingly little it has changed since then. The "Investments" section is still as unusable as it was back then (personalcapital.com is running laps around it). I think the homepage/log in screen was redesigned, and as you said, more overt advertising was added. Maybe there were some backend changes, but as a customer, the lack of progress is staggering.
We're talking about two completely different market segments here; the corporate/enterprise market which provides more room for creative & cutting edge solutions to be implemented and then there's the SME & consumers which favor more conventional, user-friendly and "popular" solutions like WP and the likes.
Small Intertial Navigation Module with Easy Integration ATOM AHRS-IMU
Having grown up in a big city like Chicago, yes, ambition gets drilled into you at a young age. My dad was pretty ambitious and many of my extended family are the same way. So I turned out to be as ambitious as they are. Now that I'm 35, it seems that all those years of having spent "making sacrifices" were both good and bad.

I had to move to Minnesota to learn what it meant to have community. I'm a regular church attender but never really took part in church community life until, oh, 4 years ago. Prior to that I had friends but it was an arm's length friendship.

Having traveled, and some times traveling alone, true friends are a rarity and, even though the fame and glamour of a career is amazing, what the author's sister had was far more worthwhile knowing that as she passed, there were people around her that cared and loved her. I'm guilty of assessing small town people as "simple" but in reality, while some crave simplicity, it's not all that bad because these are people who genuinely care for each other's needs and burdens.

One thing I took away from that article is that my ambition - though good - can be used to help the people I love. If my ambitions drives me to make more or earn more, then there's no stopping me from giving more. Community is, in a sense, all about giving abundantly and receiving well.
No, don't put it on the web! If there's one thing I hate about Microsoft's recent help solutions, it's that they're constantly checking the web when you search for something. Even if what you want is loaded locally and instantly available, you end up waiting while it diddles about.
I honestly don't understand why you'd defend Apple as an iPhone user - that actively harms you as a customer O.o
well, not useless. at least it exposes the complete lack of transparency. it's crazy that we have to cobble together stats from news reports, rather than official reports. that's the point. http://www.danham.me/r/2015/01/02/ois-api.html
I've actually been playing with the idea of a "monastery" for mathematicians; we could get a group of mathematicians together to live simply and cheaply somewhere, subsisting on a small amount of savings and freeing up time to study and solve problems.
You could approach the problem from the opposite direction. How do you define human nature, and what evidence do you put in favor of that definition and your assertions about it?
I spent over 10 years writing and working on (and debugging... many hours of debugging) Ruby code.

Towards the end I started to write all my Ruby code, as much as possible, as so-called PORO objects (Plain Ol' Ruby Objects). These feature zero inheritance, and are initialized with all the state they need to do their work. I started doing this because I found that writing code that way produced more easily testable, more maintainable, more stable code.

Then I realized that functional languages basically all already forced you to do those things, by not holding state anywhere, forcing you to pass it around.

These were all logical steps (with the end goal optimization of "useless work elimination"). There was no faddiness involved, other than having "a good feeling" about working with Elixir (over, say, Clojure, Haskell or the other options out there).
As far as I know, escaping single quotes inside single quotes doesn't work in bash:

tiksi@emperor:~$ curl 'http://\'test'
>
>
>
>^C
tiksi@emperor:~$ curl 'http://\'test''
curl: (6) Could not resolve host: \test
tiksi@emperor:~$

Anything inside single quotes is treated literally, so no escapes work.( Unless you're doing $'.stuffhere', but that's a whole other can of worms). The double quotes around single quotes does work though.