skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
While I don't care much for IQ as a statistic, I do believe that discipline and hard work are important.

The author gives a quote from Euclid and two physicists, but for the aspiring mathematician, or anyone who is bewitched by the myth of a genius mathematician, I think a more appropriate quote comes from Terry Tao [1]:

> Actually, I find the reality of mathematical research today – in which progress is obtained naturally and cumulatively as a consequence of hard work, directed by intuition, literature, and a bit of luck – to be far more satisfying than the romantic image that I had as a student of mathematics being advanced primarily by the mystic inspirations of some rare breed of “geniuses”. This “cult of genius” in fact causes a number of problems, since nobody is able to produce these (very rare) inspirations on anything approaching a regular basis, and with reliably consistent correctness.

He goes on to describe how some of the most valuable traits in mathematics include asking dumb questions, pateince, maturity, etc. I would add to that the skill of being wrong. If you're wrong all the time and comfortable with being wrong, you can identify more easily when you're wrong or right and work to fix the wrong stuff and identify the keys to the right stuff.

[1]: https://terrytao.wordpress.com/career-advice/does-one-have-t...
I agree, `this` is a disaster. But, I just can't hardly think of another language where the people working in it mostly don't know the types. (Well, OK, PHP devs probably mostly don't)

And I don't just mean run-of-the-mill blub programmers who dabble in jQuery, I mean some of the best devs I've ever seen in any language. I had a self-proclaimed JS expert tell me that JS has integers and floats as distinct types. Even the people I work with every day who are fantastic did not know that function and array are not types.

Of course, things like `typeof` don't help the situation, so I don't put the blame squarely on programmers' shoulders. And obviously you can get a lot done without knowing that, technically, functions are just objects that can be called. But it still strikes me as kinda crazy.
How to Create a Legal Resume That Will Attract Attention
Many of the binaries provided by systemd indeed have a non-public interface between them, but they are all compile-time optional, with the exception of journald.

Would you say that the people who claim they are migrating to FreeBSD because of systemd are all misguided because FreeBSD, having all of its kernel and userland plumbing in a single repository and tightly coupled, is a monolithic system by design?

Here's a bug on Debian/kFreeBSD about a FreeBSD 10 kernel ABI change breaking ifconfig:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=740509#51

Would you call postfix monolithic too, given that you cannot replace any of its binaries with one from e.g. qmail because the interfaces are different? Is postfix any better than sendmail in this regard?

> They can seem like unnecessary work in the beginning, but it is going to be hell maintaining that mess of code in the long run.

Public interfaces aren't without cost - putting public interfaces where they don't belong is one of the best ways to add accidental complexity to your project and make it much harder to maintain.

If you find some minor design flaw in a non-public interface, you think about what the ideal interface would do, and then you just change the existing interface because you have control of both client and provider of the interface.

If it's a public interface it has to be versioned and you never can remove the implementation of older versions because you have no idea who is using it and what would break, and introducing a new version adds enough extra work that some minor design flaws in the interface will never be fixed because the effort-to-benefit trade-off is different if you have to keep compatibility in mind.

See this article from another successful monolithic project for some good reasons to have internal-only interfaces.

https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/stable_api_nonsense...

If monolithic systems are so obviously inferior, why are micro-kernel implementations of UNIX mostly a historic curiosity?
My best guess would be that this to test if solar works at all on roads. There were talks of this being really useful on Highway at non-peak hours.

If you end up setting Solar Farms, you're grabbing land from Nature. This way you can re-purpose the land already used (roads, footpaths, Highways) for more than moving person from point A to point B.

Also, it allows roads to be productive even when there's no traffic.
I'd love to see some financial analysis:

1) cost of producing the same amount of electricity with Netherlands' most common electricity production

2) cost of building this vs. a normal bike path, and time for recovering the cost considering #1

3) expected life of this system + anual maintenance cost

4) cost of a typical roof installation for the same surface
the String function is also a nice way to cast a value to a string (using .toString() is unsafe because it may not exist, such as with undefined and null): String(42) === "42".

An other thing that could maybe be covered is this specifity:

typeof "42" === "string"
typeof String(42) === "string"
typeof new String(42) === "object"

Native constructors are ... fun beasts, to say the least.
That is a decent counterpoint to my original comment I think. I work with clients who are very happy and very productive with Matlab, precisely for the reason you cite: fantastic docs and support. I just cannot justify the huge spend on every new module, nor is Matlab an option if you want to distribute software widely. Also my sense is that the somewhat more chaotic world of Numpy is more innovative, if less stable and user friendly.

But I definitely think there is a strong case for high cashflow when it comes to supporting a technology. Perhaps this might be good for Julia if (and only if) they can keep the OSS people motivated and onside.
Yes it is a radical simplification of the data center setup that allows for the scaling to design this.
I would assume this is because far less weight needs to be borne by the roadway. But that's just my guess.
Yes, that's a good suggestion. Boolean works as well, for coercing to boolean of course.
The article mentions an idiom for iterating over an array. It says 'an even nicer idiom is...' and then it shows it.

I just wanted to say that the behaviour of this 'nicer' idiom may not be what's expected - it stops iterating once it hits the first falsy value. I was quite excited actually when I first saw them idiom, until I quickly realized its limitations
With all due respect to Dijkstra, this is so narrow-minded. I love intuition in mathematics, primarily coming from spatial or geometric reasoning. Then it's time to put it into algebraic or symbolic terms, but that's pinning a butterfly to a board to show you actually caught it.

I like point (ii) above, as learning to let the rules of the game guide your writing is a very powerful technique indeed. But teaching math formally without appeal to intuition is what a lot of people do and it's boring and unpleasant to me. It doesn't simplify, it merely traces lines in the sand or on a page without taking the trouble to look up and appreciate the larger picture (sometimes meaning literal picture).

It's clear that Dijkstra & I appreciate very different parts of mathematics :)
BuzzFeed’s first pitch deck to investors in 2008
XArp – Advanced ARP Spoofing Detection
What could be more fun than a language that says the result of dividing by 0 is "Infinity"? It's a hoot!!
This is the right answer. This will effectively keep React from touching the element ever again after the initial render.
A pure math grad knows nothing about software engineering, while a CS grad should know some things.

By your logic a pure physics grad would be an even better software engineer, as physics is even more "low-level".
Interesting. This is essentially institutionalizing ageism.
Since calling constructor functions without `new` is generally an error, I'd rather use `parseFloat`.
I'm not employed as a programmer per se, so I see it from the other side. I was also a math major in college, and as a student, my only exposure to CS would have been a single obligatory course in programming. Fortunately, I programmed as a hobby. Most of my classmates took the course and then promptly forgot most of its content.

So, pick any random math major and any random CS major, and at the very least, the CS major has a better chance of having the foundations needed to become a good programmer.

On the other hand, pick math and CS majors from among the ones who have actually shown enough interest in programming to steer their careers in that direction... now the gap is potentially much smaller.

Now compare math and CS majors who have worked for 10 years in software development...
http://bjorn.tipling.com/all-this

Good stuff here.
I've only been here for a couple of months and this was nice to see.
Hey I appreciate the input. I'm actually EXTREMELY interested in finance so I'd love to know more about it.

Do developers in finance require any unique skills? Also is there anything special one would have to do to break into the finance industry?
Oh jeez, I just saw that the section you're referring to repeats the old canard about caching the length of an array when iterating over it. Come on, that can't still be good advice. It always struck me as ridiculous to begin with, but almost certainly now it's optimized away.

Not to mention the suggestion you're talking about, which I bet would bite programmers for the reason you mention. Seems like a bad idiom, I've personally never seen it in the wild.
Do you know how much the first Apple Watch to come off the line cost? Billions. R&D cost gets amortized through mass production; this is what it looks like at the beginning.
Yeah and not a big fan of them saying you can do for...in on an array while casually mentioning the limitation of doing such. I would consider it far better practice to NEVER iterating over an array with for...in.
I'd say that the actual news is that the Julia founders have found a way to make a living through consulting, enabling them to keep working on an free (in both senses) software. They've also managed to scale to bring on some large contributors too, which is even better. There are three choices, as I see it:

- They would have had to go work for another company that doesn't care about Julia. Its now a free time project.

- They would have had to go work for another company that does care about Julia. They get to work a bit on Julia, but focus shifts to what this company cares about.

- They work for themselves.

Not quite sure why this isn't a more common situation for open-source, it seems like the ideal situation for everyone.

I work on Julia, not for pay, and something like this only encourages me as it is a strong signal of demand by Real People writing Real Code.
I've found that technical interviews are their own best prep. I'm sure you get contacted by recruiters/startups pretty regularly (and that you usually pass on these opportunities). I try to say "yes" to one or two per week, and go through their technical interview process, just to stay on my toes.

It takes the pressure off and keeps you on top of your game.
Ah! Well, I suppose I was always afraid of having to mess with OS related stuff instead of getting things done but I think it's about time I learn. Thanks for the information!
> Since calling constructor functions without `new` is generally an error

The behavior of Number, Boolean, String, and Array is well-defined, it's safe to call them without new. In fact, in the case of String/Boolean/Number, calling them with new will often do something you don't expect. (Calling them with new gives you a Number/String/Boolean object, not primitive, which can cause trouble when you try to compare them with ===, unless you remember to use their `valueOf` method)

Also, as noted below, it's possible for objects to not have a `toString` method, so attempting to call it to get the object's value as a string could blow up. So it's actually safer to coerce to string by adding an empty string or passing to String().
Kamcord is looking for Android Engineers
Tactical voting is still a thing in AV. If I think A > B > C, I might still want to vote A > C > B in an effort to drop B out first (hopefully giving A an easy win in a showdown with C).
Do you really believe that it is more efficient to build a bike lane paved with solar panels, rather than a bike lane paved with asphalt and separate, dedicated solar facilitates?

EDIT: Looking at the pictures others have posted you still have to use asphalt (or more likely concrete because you need better stability, which is even more expensive) underneath, so there really is nothing saved by doing this. What a waste of money.
New job search website
BlueBerry Mag is Hiring
BlueBerryMag is a new start up set to transform the media industry. Think Vice but with a regional focus. With large backing from an established media leviathan - BlueBerry's somewhat secretive project will bring original reporting and teams of local journalists to cities across the US.

We’re serious about proper journalism and hard hitting news. We like our editorial to be fun and lighthearted and don’t take ourselves too seriously.
We are looking for a COO to launch our NY office and grow the US business.
Experience in building teams in US regional cities, media and startups will be desirable
Apply at editor@blueberrymag.com
That's from IEEE 754 (a standard for floating-point arithmetic). `NaN` and -0 exist for the same reason.
Computational Hydrographic Printing [video]
No, but maybe something like Canada's. If the majority loses favor with the public, (simplifying a bit here) they just schedule an election and vote them out .
The article says to watch out for 0.1 + 0.2 not exactly equalling 0.3 , so as a complete newbie to JavaScript, how do you work around this ?
MacKeeper is just malware, from my humble opinion...
4 tips to get 10000's post views and become influencer
My experience says that asking questions that have no answer is the surest route to suffering.

Of course there are better math major programmers than CS major programmers, just as there are better CS programmers than math major programmers. It goes without saying that asking a question which has multiple truths as answers is equivalent to asking a question with no answer. It would then beg to ask the question, "Why are you asking questions with no answer?".

My advice is to ask a better question next time!
Blueberry Mag |New York City| COO
BlueBerryMag is a new start up set to transform the media industry. Think Vice but with a regional focus. With large backing from an established media Leviathan - BlueBerry's somewhat secretive project will bring original reporting and teams of local journalists to cities across the US.

We’re serious about proper journalism and hard hitting news. We like our editorial to be fun and lighthearted and don’t take ourselves too seriously.

We are hiring a COO to launch our first US office in NY, experience in media, startups and rolling out US city teams preferred.

Apply to Peter through editor@blueberrymag.com
You need to boundaries to be created by a well-known, impartial algorithm rather than a person. And you pay a committee of academic programmers from other countries, with no political ties to the country where it's intended to be used, to design the algorithm. And you use the same algorithm forever rather than changing it from year to year.

That solves the gerrymandering problem. Of course, it doesn't solve the problem of getting whichever party currently benefits from gerrymandering to agree to switch to the neutral algorithm.
https://xkcd.com/435/

How would Physics be more low-level than mathematics?
The only way I see to solve this without server side state is to replace the page-parameter with a list of items you have seen. The more button would then just find the top 30 items you haven't previously seen. Unfortunately, this would become unwieldy very quickly, and sooner or later you hit the browser limitations on maximum URL size.

A relatively simple approach that involves server side state is to periodically (once a minute?) generate the list of (for example) the 10000 top items.

(A high traffic site will most likely want to do this in any case, so that it has a cached list of items ready to serve to clients, instead of issuing a database query to find the top items for every request.)

Now, instead of overwriting the list of top items every time you regenerate it, keep multiple versions of the list. Then you can make the link to the next page specify the version of the list and the page number. That way, users will browse through one specific version of the list.

(This requires storing some state on the server, but the amount is relatively small. You control both the size of the generated list, how often new lists are generated and how long they are kept, so there is an easily calculated upper bound on the amount of state information you need store.)
The advertisements on that site are unbearable
Care to share the Amazon link where I can get me one of these Dirtboxes? Or what about the high-resolution 360 degree cameras plus tracking/ID software that they are presumably using? Oh, you mean that they aren't AGPL licensed? Shucks.

Practicality and availability is a non-negligible component of determining what a member of the public can actually do. Using military grade equipment on the presumably innocent general public, that is ~5+ years ahead of the tech on the market, is a disturbing phenomenon whose significance seems lost on you. No warrants, no articuable suspicion, yet it's OK to use these glorified, classified, and shady war toys on the general public?

I am being a bit disingenuous here: I don't expect all equipment used by government officials to be publicly available. But, if you are going to make the argument that the public can do what the police are doing here, that's equally disingenuous. The public cannot practically buy this equipment from the manufacturers. The public wouldn't be able to get a flight plan approved as quickly (or at all) given the circumstances. Most importantly, these aren't escaped murderers or criminals which would necessitate exigent means (like these glorified war toys): these are general citizens wandering around a downtown area. Police aren't funded by taxpayer dollars so they can be curious about what's going on around town, and in this case, in peoples' homes. Private citizens can do that to the extent permissible by trespass and decency laws. I would hope to see cases taken up the legal ladder that question the PD's actions on these sorts of terms.
I agree promises to voters end up being silly. Interesting ideas though, I'm sure given enough thought (I certainly don't have the experience in these theings) it could work.
I noticed in your first code example you use a mixture of leading a method with an _ and some without. Ex. navigateToContact vs _hasUnsavedChanges and _saveChanges. I read somewhere that a best practice is to always prefix custom methods with _ to differentiate from React core methods. What're your feelings on that?
Go, the game. Sometimes focusing becomes tunnelvision. Go destroys that. Plus rock-climbing and yoga (which honestly I've not done in some time).
Probably risks of data loss are underestimated by most people, so they don't use neither NAS neither RAID (I would be surprised if many people without solid technical background understand what RAID is). Disks are reliable enough so majority is not affected and if data is really important, it often could be restored for those who experienced data loss.
Not sure why you are being downvoted, but I thing your comment makes a lot of sense, and I'd like to know why some think otherwise.
Sorry, but I still prefer the current state of affairs than having secret pacts that diminish the sovereignty of my country in favor of big transnationals, that only look for themselves, justify everything with a "we only look after our investors interest" and don't know the meaning of morality. The Philip Morris - a company that sells products that kill people - case against Australia is a clear example on how bad things end up with this kind of pacts.
TPA has been around for 30 years. It's always worked well.

The idea is that congress sets a standard and set of parameters for negotiation that the US Trade Authority then goes out to negotiate and structure trade deals. They must stay within the boundaries set by congress. Then they can go out and negotiate in good faith, knowing that if they stay in those boundaries, congress has agreed to debate and then approve or reject a deal within 90 congressional days (about a year). The bar for rejection is high, because the deal in front of them has to already fit within the parameters congress themselves set out.

The term "Fast Track" has to be one of the most misleading terms used in political lingo. Fast Track in this sense basically means almost a year for congress to approve a trade deal.

Moreover, very little about TPP or Fast Track is "secret" or "backroom" and is how trade deals have been done for the longest time. It's unclear why the EFF is taking up this cause.

This is also helpful, and is non-partisan congressional research funded by congress to surface the real facts: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33743.pdf

The amount of propaganda being spun up over TPA is surprising, considering we've had it for 30 years and it's been an economic boon for the US economy.

Edit: I have no idea why I'm being downvoted for this.
Truthonly.com
This seems like trying to understand how a car engine works by listening to the pitch of the sound it makes. Sure you can deduce somethings, but you aren't really going to understand the engine.
Is not a JS only thing, investigate how floating point values work.
Do dogs or cats make better pets?

I prefer farm mechanics and philosophers to cs grad when it comes to software.
It's because if you look below the talking points, nothing about TPA or TPP is new, nothing about it is "fast-track" and nothing about it is secret.
It looks like you're bucketing the ideas in the post into one of two categories. Either 1. Too obvious to write about or 2. Not a best practice because new ideas are always being introduced.

Regarding the first, those topics weren't obvious to everyone. Besides no one really benefits when posts are called out for this.

And re the second, these patterns have emerged from one year of maintaining a large app with a growing team. The points mentioned are tips for writing code so that your app will scale, not silver bullets for complex topics such as the general question how to write styles for React. The best practices mentioned in the post are just that, but they're not the only ones.
It's straightforward enough: you point out that the Scots have "almost unanimously rejected the status quo" and announce that following such a "clear mandate for change", supporters of independence, whose loyalties may have been swayed by the need to ensure at least some more political representation, must now be given a simple yes-no question. That's a rather easier trick to pull off than turning a referendum defeat into an unprecedented boost in Westminster seats months later. Pulling off a Yes vote might still be tricky, but just imagine a campaign for a "Yes" vote if it were happening, off the back of a resounding Devo Max win rather than a "No" win, maybe against the backdrop of a Conservative Westminster government pushing through Trident renewal and threatening to drag Scotland out of the EU with English referendum votes...

The only real difference is that a Labour party which opted to weight behind the Devo Max campaign rather being backed into sharing a "No" platform with the "Westminster parties" might not have lost so many votes to the SNP. That might have entered Cameron's political calculus too.