skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
How to Make a Tutorial /Screencast Video
She also spun out the original HP business of test and measurement equipment, chips, transceivers, etc as Agilent (now Keysight). I never ever thought of HP as a computer company. To me HP was oscilloscopes, spectrum analyzers, network analyzers, and lightwave measurement gear. Spinning Agilent out was shocking to many people at the time.
> damnit, the son forgot to plug the car in when he got home

I don't see that as a significant problem: 'complain when at home but not charging' is a fairly easily implemented fix.
I get the point of this article and its tongue in cheek. Twenty years ago people laughed at electric cars with their maybe 30-40 miles of range and 8-12hour charging times. Tesla has done a lot to iron out most of these engineering problems and I applaud them for that. However, articles like this also smack of elitism, especially considering the 6 figure prices most Tesla vehicles sell for. I would love to own a Tesla, just as I would love to own a 2000 acre ranch estate with a huge mansion on it. When electric cars can compete in the range of commodity cars, then we can have this conversation about the merits of electric cars.

I just watched a video comparing the Dodge Charger Hellcat to a Tesla P-85d. Both have similar power, and while you can debate the level of quality of FCA vs Tesla you can still drive a Hellcat(which is an insane gas guzzler) for less money for 5-7 years depending on your yearly mileage. At that point, most people will likely purchase a new vehicle, and that is also assuming you only use free superchargers. A Tesla is definitely a luxury item, I get that, and there are other options. The problem is most current other options are more like the electric cars 20 years ago than a tesla.

Progress is being made and I am excited about that. I would love to have an electric commuter car as long as it could meet the following criteria.

1) seat 5 people comfortably
2) have 150+ miles of range(I drive about 120 miles per day)
3) cost between 30-50k
4) have reasonable performance(say comparable to a german sedan in that price range)
5) recharge quickly and easily, possibly have battery swap capability for the high use days
6) emphasize being a good car and not a "green" car. Im all for taking care of the environment, but will never buy a car with a 60" x 12" GREEN ECO ELECTRIC POWER emblazoned across the side.(In the same way I would never get a car that says "UBER HEMI BIG WANG POWER" either)
7) be reliable and comfortable to drive, with low cost of ownership at least comparable to a reliable petrol car.

I dont think any of that list is unreasonable, and I am glad that Tesla exists, they have done a great service to the electric car.
The thing about "coding" is that it's simply the means, not the end. The configurations you can program a Turing complete device with proper hardware into are, for practical purposes, boundless. Being a concert pianist can intersect with many fields as well (acoustics and music theory alone can get quite deep), but ultimately the immediate direction is much more narrow.

In fact, I would argue that just "coding coding coding coding" won't get you all that far alone. There's plenty of "reading reading reading reading" so you can actually have the skills and knowledge to write what's intended, and then there's all that lesser visible knowledge out there that is just as crucial, but hidden in (relatively) obscure references or papers - unless you intend on reinventing lots of square wheels.
I could be wrong about this, but I think it is referring to a specific review of a Tesla test-drive from a few years back. It doesn't seem quite so contrived with that in mind, and the point is also more clear.
Because the fast solver has moved on to a harder problem and is learning more complex new stuff.
Remember, the new cases curve is roughly the slope of the total cases curve. I read your data as more-or-less supportive of the author's claim.
And there are no type-coercion rules at play in case of 51 == '3', because type of '3' is int (as per ISO 9899 p. 6.4.4.3.2).
Inaccurate, internal combustion engines combust fuel, they don't explode it. Explosions are something you don't want in a motor.
Wow, it seems to be all about race. Blacks and native Americans get screwed.
> alerts the ops team

"Everybody" knows that no good Web 3.0 company has an ops team. We're too expensive and too easily replaced with a handful of shell scripts or can just be fobbed off as another responsibility of the devs who wrote the code. (After all, if the code was perfect, there wouldn't need to be an ops team, right?) Silly rabbit, ops teams are for lumbering companies who "Just Don't Get It."

Signed,

Slightly miffed ops person who thinks he does a lot for his company but feels woefully underappreciated in the new IT.
Apple’s Hypocrisy in the App Store
This doesn't just go for SQL, but it will go for NoSQL systems that support advanced functionality.

My current project went nuts with the Redis + Lua scripts. Trace statements and manual inspection. Feels like I'm developing on the Apple ][. It started innocently enough. Now it's a hydra. Nutty.

I found a HOWTO for debugging embedded Lua. Basically run Redis from within an IDE. Definitely not turnkey. Might be worth the setup effort, next time I visit that code.
This attitude will create ninjas/rockstars/whatever, even if the original notion isn't true. Folks who spend every waking hour thinking about and learning about something are going to be better than the folks who don't do that level of effort.

It will create people who believe themselves to be something special, sure, but that's all you can say for certain. Where are the results that prove it is deteministic? For every startup full of rockstars that succeeds, there are 1000 who worked just as hard and sunk without a trace.
1/3 of funerals in Taiwan still involve strippers.
I prefer a physical book and haven't used my kindle in some years now. I used the kindle when at the gym on an elliptical and even then, it wasn't nearly convenient enough yet. That said, as I find myself reading more lately and lugging some stuff with me to work, the kindle might be a good way to get rid of some of the burden.
And if you're LinkedIn you never communicate with them again.
I'm afraid you might be too sheltered to have anything approaching an objective view on the matter.
They're running in on top of TCP in their demos, but their goal is to completely remove the transport layer.
I think you're talking about two different things:

1. People that are dedicated to their craft, write A LOT of code and self-study in their free time.

2. Red bull drinking Valley stereotypes.

People from camp 1 don't live up to the stereotype of the "rock star" but definitely work way more than 9-5. Where work is defined as studying languages, domain specific knowledge, low-level code...
Yes, Electric cars are great and have many advantages and improvements over cars with internal combustion engines. I won't deny this.

But until such time an electric cars is available as a compact hatchback that has >800 mile range on a single charge, and go from from depleted batteries to full charge in < 5 minutes, I'll be keeping my VW Golf TDI. The latter fits my use and needs from a personal vehicle better.
That's not the only externality; another one is wear-and-tear on roads. In most countries, fuel taxes are used in part to pay for road and highway maintenance [1]. Certainly Norway's extensive, mountainous highway system is not free to build and maintain, and imo all road users should pay their share to fund it. You could have a direct per-km tax enforced via some kind of GPS unit, but that has privacy implications. Traditionally the fuel tax was a reasonable proxy, since vehicles used fuel in rough proportion to the amount of road traversed.

[1] In the U.S. the link is explicit: almost the entirety of the fuel tax is earmarked for highway construction and maintenance, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Trust_Fund
Apache, Nginx, PHP, HHVM? Test It Yourself with Ansible
It's hard not to be apathetic when your job description has become so stigmatized that it is synonymous with failure ("go get a job at McDonald's"). A math teacher at my old highschool used to hand back McDonald's applications for employment with failed tests.
It's probably also true that not anyone can become a truly capable finish carpenter, but we don't build an elaborate mythology around why that is, and we assume that most people have a pretty good shot at it, if that's what they want to do.
A shallow dive into DataScript internals
Yes, probably anyone can become a master painter, but for a person with a disposition and love to painting it's easier to start and to keep going. For someone who loathes painting, it's massively, prohibitively harder.

Success in any craft (and science) in 5% talent / luck and 90% hard work. But the love to the craft / science makes exerting this effort massively more rewarding. I don't think that training oneself to be a master is not attainable for someone who does not have a burning passion for this specific mastery. For instance, a mastery of programming might be a gateway to other things, for which the passion is burning.

The number of things for which ability to code is now a gateway is growing, be it financial modeling, computational chemistry, linguistics, etc.

Also, there's mastery and there is peak achievement. Everyone (except severely mentally disabled) can be taught writing skills and write nice, clean, well-organized texts. But probably not everyone can become Hemingway or Borges or Nabokov.

Equally, everyone can be taught to write nice, clean, well-organized code. But probably not everyone can be a superstar like Knuth or Norvig or Carmack.

So I'd reserve the word "talent" for the highest achievers. Talent is not required to be a decent programmer.
As a data scientist, I draw inspiration from the infinite depths of understanding. Life is merely the unfolding of a series of recursive recommendation engines, each one AB testing the local gradients of human emotion. You think you are just buying a pair of socks online. Foolish mortal. That transaction was a multi-armed map-reduce set into motion long before the internet existed. Data science is the internet of things, it is big data at the speed of entropy, quantum mechanics at the scale of desire.

In data we trust. All others bring EVEN. MORE. DATA.
It's not that simple.

So, one of the best illustrations of how talent works is in football placekickers. To make it in the NFL, you have to be able to reliably kick a field goal at X yards. X goes up every so often. Some athletes can do it, some can't. I read a story once about a guy trying to level up his skills to NFL-level. He spent weeks out on the field practicing his kick. He could hit the goal, but not reliably. One yard closer, and every kick sailed right in.

One of his buddies, a minor league baseball pitcher, went out with him one day, asked to give it a shot. On his very first try, he kicked it right in. A pitcher.

To be great, it requires getting out on the frontier of human ability. That frontier often looks very, very weird. One seemingly small additional challenge turns you into a puddle of mush. Getting there requires hard hard work.

But excelling over everyone else who also put in that hard work requires talent, and it's generally a binary proposition. Until it isn't. Once Roger Bannister broke the 4 minute mile, floods of athletes started doing it.

Then the frontier goes somewhere else, the talent required to get there is increased. But one can only put so many hours of their day into an activity. So when you're talking about greatness, talent ultimately matters more than hard work. One should ideally find out as quickly as possible whether one has the talent to make it out to the frontier of human ability. So they don't waste lots of time doing something they can never find greatness doing. The aforementioned aspiring placekicker? Gave it up. Now he's a successful author, real estate investor and football coach.
I don't know why you are getting down-voted. Among doctors, this is called "defensive medicine," and there is active research about how prevalent it is.
This:

"One guy told me "I will kill you", but then he told my girlfriend "Thats the only sentence I know in english and I don't know what does it mean"."

ROFL. You made my day ! :)
That's really clever. The same concept could probably be used for cars. You could probably stretch it a little further. If you're selling really expensive sports cars you could hire models to pause, stare and smile at the client during test drives around the neighbourhood.

Manufacturing proof that "pretty women like men who own this" sounds like a winner, honestly.
Sort of related, a couple of free decent books with interviews with data scientists

http://www.datascienceweekly.org/pdf/DataScienceWeekly_DataS...

http://www.datascienceweekly.org/pdf/DataScienceWeekly-DataS...
Not really, programming is 'solely' programming, as in the ability to generate code that is reliable, readable, well organized, efficient, etc... .

What you are talking about is programmers that in addition to their technical skills have also leadership and management capabilities, which make them absolutely invaluable in a company, but not necessarily more skilled or "talented" at programming than others.
The video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hIJdFxYlEKE

YouTube doesn't have playback at 3x speed, unfortunately.
> Rust's compiler prevents you from moving data into a method which then nulls it out

Just for clarity, we have this in Nim too, eg:

type
Foo = ref object
Bar = object
val: Foo not nil
let
f = Bar() # Error, 'val' must be set

proc foobar(f: Foo not nil): Foo not nil =
return nil # Error, can't return nil

foobar(nil) # Error, can't pass nil

> At best this dangling pointer will look at garbage and cause a crash or undefined behavior. At worst, it will look at other, actively-used memory and cause a security vulnerability.

In C/C++, yes, but this isn't so applicable to Nim where we have GCed references and 'not nil' constraints.

> If you use iterators in Rust, you never need to worry about out of bounds errors

Well I was not talking about iterating through a list, but rather maintaining arbitrary indexes to a mutable list. Eg, a Sprite which contains a index to a Texture array. In that scenario it's just as easy to miscalculate and crash your program via a bounds-checking error as it is to crash by nil-deref.

> To offer a counter-viewpoint, I find that Option<> (and Result<>) are very easy to reason about..

It's good that Rust works for you, truly. And like I said in another post, I agree Rust's design here may be better for some domains. However, Nim's design still feels more elegant and straight-forward to me. Luckily, we both get a powerful language that suits us, regardless of which one we prefer :)
It's not contrived. All the points you mentioned about the downsides of EV are true. That's why they're a single digit percentage of the market right now at best.

The point of this article is to point out the compromises that we are currently making. They're invisible to us because they are the compromises we have been making for generations. I can imagine a 538 article that illustrates how much land we allocate to gas stations using several graphs. For some people that article will be interesting. Other people's eyes will glaze over. This kind of article uses humor to make the same point.

I don't own an electric vehicle. I'm very aware of the advantages of electric vehicles for society at large, but reading about how funny it is to not be able to store things in the front of the car made me realize how much of a feature that really would be. Reading about his concern that an gasoline powered car is less safe because you have a giant engine in front of you made sense to me in a way I previously hadn't thought about.

He didn't even make a bunch of other points that I often think about - like the level of soot in cities. Our children will probably look back at us the way we look back at London in 1850 shrouded in coal dust.
Why can't one use Cargo for bare-metal applications?
> we theoretically don't need the car industry at all

Oh, so we reached the new milestone of 100% people living in urban centers and nobody has let me know ? :)

Obviously a ton of people need cars every single day to actually move from their home to their work place, because, you know, there's not just public transportation everywhere (and even when there is, it can be crappy and inefficient as hell, too).
If you are going in the wrong direction, you won't get to your destination by going faster. You should stop and rethink and you won't do this unless you can admit that you might be wrong.

How much research had you done before you assertively proclaimed that those lines don't exist? Because it looks nothing like a smooth transition to me.
The semantics are important.
This could very well mean that those people won't get proper internet because "hey, what do you need that for, you've got internet.org!"

I understand the "some internet is better than none" but this isn't the internet. This is internet.org

On top of that, it means that Facebook gets to micromanage a populations internet usage, what they can and cannot see, with no legal oversight because "were doing you a favour!"
In the real world, sometimes you have an external data source, in csv (which you can't control), which is changing, which you want to reread as quickly as possible. :)
It's more akin to spending 8 to 10 years writing a program (med school + residency +....) and then it takes 15 minutes to run the program for the individual instance
Why do plants turn yellow and how to fix it
On magical ability: there's a joke image going around which tells you how you can easily learn to draw an owl. http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/how-to-draw-an-owl

1. Draw two circles.

2. Draw the rest of the owl.

This is a common problem in art, music, sport and programming - you have an expert trying to teach newbies, and they say "just do this". The newbies have no idea how to begin to do it and the expert knows it so intuitively they cannot break it down further. Everyone ends up staring blankly at one another.

Getting people past that point seems to be a skill of its own. Certainly it's not been easily packaged for programming. Learning involves a lot of guided experimentation, and keeping the student's morale up is just as important as the material itself.
That's not the point of the article--it's not that there aren't some people with insane intrinsic talent, it's just that the majority of people fall on the below-average - average - above average distribution, and that you can create plenty of great stuff right in the middle.

The other point is that the "concert pianist" and "master painter" are damaging stereotypes for the development industry--almost no one is Mozart, and the persistent and toxic idea that every programmer needs to be Mozart prevents good people from feeling good about their work.

Additionally, he makes "good programming" a bit more nuanced. "Programming" isn't a monolith that you can either be good at or bad at--it's composed of many subcomponents that you can have various competencies in without suddenly passing a magical line from good to bad. I think the argument is quite a sane one--the stereotypes that people fall back on are just that: an attempt to reduce a complex set of conditions into a simple binary.
The vast majority of road wear and tear is caused by trucks, not cars:

"Heavy trucks obviously cause more road damage than cars, but how much more? According to a GAO study, Excessive Truck Weight: An Expensive Burden We Can No Longer Afford, road damage from one 18-wheeler is equivalent to 9600 cars (p.23 of study, p.36 of PDF)."

http://archive.gao.gov/f0302/109884.pdf

http://facweb.knowlton.ohio-state.edu/pviton/courses2/crp776...

With regards to your point to taxes, remove the per-milage tax and charge a flat per-vehicle rate based on vehicle class, distributing the cost to trucks more than to passenger vehicles.
Moreover, I don't know how we could undercut Microsoft on price either. I mean Azure and all of Microsoft Cloud Services(being Microsoft) probably gets Microsoft Windows licenses and all the licenses for free of cost and people like Rack space would have to pay for the licenses...

The only thing we could do is become better than Microsoft at reliability (hah!) and customer service (which there might be a shot at in the short term).
I think the article is a bit simplistic;

There are different types of skills -- and if you can combine them, you are the 10 to 100x times person;

Understand the business problem, and then have enough tech skill to solve it and you can move mountains. Most managers know neither the business domain, nor the technology, which makes it even harder.

Like in everything in life, 90 to 95% is BS.
This cuts to two important points. First, you will be hiring as if it was bimodal.

The second point, though, is more whether or not it actually is bimodal, or it is just taught into a bimodal distribution? That is, is it intrinsically this way, or is that a biproduct of how society values and teaches it?
Yes, rewriting Perl 5 in Perl 6 would be quite an endeavor. However, that's why Inline::Perl5 was invented. It lets you use Perl 5 libraries in Perl 6 code:

use Inline::Perl5;
use MyProprietaryModule:from<Perl5>;
use YAML:from<Perl5>; # take advantage of p5 cpan

my $foo = YAML::LoadFile('foo.yaml');
my $bar = MyProprietaryModule.someMethod('baz');

So what this allows you to do is use P6 features where they might benefit your project, but still use all the P5 code you've invested in. There are some cases where Inline::Perl5 has problems, such as running P5 code multithreaded, but aside from that I've had few problems using it with stuff from CPAN and with my company's own proprietary code base.

There are also the modules Inline::Python and Inline::Java (for the JVM backend), but I haven't used them.
"Which is something that most people just don't get yet."

Yes, yes, and more yes.

People still don't really understand electric cars yet. They see an EV as a sacrifice. They think that you buy an EV either to save money on gas or out of some vague sense of environmental responsibility. They don't understand that they are just plain better.

Right now, gas cars offer three advantages over EVs: there's more variety in the market, they're cheaper, and they go farther. These are not insignificant advantages, of course, but people don't realize that EVs are equal or better in all other respects.

It's coming around now that EVs are getting more exposure, and especially since Tesla keeps getting so much attention for producing a car that's good on its own merits, and not merely good "for an EV."

The other side of this is that people are blind to the problems of gas cars, because they've grown up with them. One of the biggest problems people see with EVs is charging. But if you hadn't grown up with gas vehicles, the idea of seeking out a specialized filling station once every week or two and then dispensing dangerous, toxic liquid fuel from an apparatus that doesn't even seal it off from the outside would seem completely mad. You have to do a complete change of the engine lubricant how often? The windshield wiper fluid cap is in the same compartment as components that get hot enough to cause serious burns? Every time you slow down you just throw away all your kinetic energy, and grind down your brake pads while you're doing it? This is clearly not a viable technology.
Dear MS.

Thanks for going open source with dotNet. We will use it on our Linuxes and BSDs, with gratitude and joy.

But when it comes to your intention of bringing your non-open-source'ed software to our data centers: we were actually almost finished taking them out, and feel much better that way.
>Ask your interviewer: “What do you need?” and see if you fit that description.

If a candidate, after hearing the answered, says that they can do that, will you believe them?