skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Not only is he wrong, he's clearly wrong.

You keep repeating that, but the more you discuss it, the less "clear" it is.

> I don't understand your question.

You acknowleded that we need to have a specification in order to make sense from a piece of markup. When we know what elements are to be expected in a format, what "clear" and "useful" advantage gives an additional arbitrary syntactic separatation over a sub-element-only layout? and why is it more "reasonnable" to have this separation when it actually make it slightly more difficult to manipulate the data?

> My claim is that, in the context of markup languages, there is a useful distinction to be made between data and metadata, ...

Originally, attributes made sense "in the context of markup languages" because attributes were metadata and sub-elements where "content". This is a reason why Naggum was first favorable for the distinction. But then the line was blurred, because not everything is so simple and you find attributes that refer to "data" (title attribute) and sub-elements that refer to "meta-data" (<meta> tag, for example).

> (foo [baz bar] bind)
> ... you could tell that ... BAZ was a variable binding without having to know how FOO was defined. It's not a slam dunk, but it is a defensible position.

You don't need to know how FOO was defined, but you have a contract with FOO: there are many other distinctions one could make (not only bindings/parameters): will you invent a new syntax for everyone of them? Is that really useful? XML is used when you don't want to have a complex syntax and when a standard AST suffice. And then, attributes are an added complexity with little benefits.
I haven't been to many, but I'll throw in my 2c regardless.

- Venue. The space available can make a _massive_ difference in how people collaborate and get creative.

- Prizes. Most people need external motivation as well as internal motivation.

- Time/Convenience - I'd put it on a weekend. Most people (students, working adults alike) can't afford to use credit hours on a hackathon, regardless of what the prize is.

- Sponsors. The greater and more "prestigious" the sponsors are, the more likely teams are to network and get assistance in valuable ways. Mentorship is the most valuable part of the MLH hackathons I have attended.
I have been a games developer in a past life (my primary focus for over three years), and I am unconvinced I or any of the other people I worked with would have been willing to tolerate a low-grade performance degradation distributed around all of our code if we had access to programming languages that did not have that issue and weren't infinitely worse (and while I really wish I could use Rust, it just isn't infinitely better in a way that seems relevant for either the hardcore or casual gaming markets). Also, it sounds like there is something wrong with the Rust compiler if this landing pad generation really doubles the compile time... a poor compiler should not influence the language design in such a negative direction.

Solving problems like your iterator issue should not be difficult with exceptions: in fact, frankly, I don't see why it is any harder than with Result: your worst case is that you start with a primitive, "antitry!" (which should be called "try!", as it makes more sense than what "try!" currently does for that word) which performs an operation and returns a Result of either its value or its failure. Even if you do this "frequently", I would be shocked if this was remotely as common as the code that was assuming success and just wanted to fail if something fails. And, as long as you aren't trying to "handle" those errors (and it doesn't sound like you are, you just kind of want to fail out with a list of failure reasons) there is no semantic complexity either. Exceptions are the flexible primitive, not Result: simulating Result from exceptions requires a tiny finite amount of code, while simulating exceptions using Result requires modifications to an arbitrarily large amount of code.

As for fixing panic, what really sucks is that so much library code is going to be written using Result now when much of it should have been written with panic, both in the core library and from third-party developers, meaning that the boilerplate is going to be somewhat inescapable at the lowest levels of the program... I think the thing I like most about programming in Python vs C++ is that I don't have to wrap every single API I use to make it handle errors in a sane way. I don't think that fixing panic at some point in the future is going to work as there seems to be such awkward community momentum against exceptions and behind Result, when the real RFC needs to be "when you write your library, try to use panic, not Result".
Adding some ideas I've seen work:

* Raffle tickets given out to people who are "caught" helping others or generally helping out.

* Dedicated person who knows all the movers and shakers and is familiar with the attendees and skill sets, who can be reliably found in a fixed physical location on site, and who can summon helpers to track down people, solve problems, make introductions. Basically a concierge on steroids.

* Random access session at the start where people line up and have 60 seconds to say either: what idea they would like to work on, what skill set they have, what skills they lack and would like to pair up with. At the end of this people can talk to each other and form project teams if they like.

* Kid friendly - no ridiculous age rules for kids (but sure, kids need to be supervised by their guardians, that's perfectly reasonable). And kids categories for some of the contests if any. But no sequestering kids off in "kid" activities. Encourage them to participate in the same projects as everybody else.

* Generous food choices, including copious amounts of ice cream, sweets, and caffeine, and maybe a healthy thing or two for those who want that. Popcorn is not a generous food item. You burn a lot of calories. Food doesn't have to be gourmet... pizza is great.

* Lots of comfortable spaces and seating including nooks, tables, offices, open areas... a variety but most importantly plenty of spots for everyone with plenty of extra left over, so people can get a tiny bit isolated to focus with their team, if they want to.

* Open hours at the end where family or friends can come in without tickets (if tickets were even required) to watch the final demos / contest.

* A good platform or topic that engenders enthusiasm.

* If there's a contest for projects, have some funny prize categories. Leave room to make some up to fit the entrants. Encourage humor.

* Don't fixate on rules. Safety, sure. But lighten up.

What doesn't seem to add a lot:

* Huge money prizes... sure I have nothing against them but the fun seems to be more important.

* Group photo... this is always a drag, interrupting the flow and disrupting work as people run off to join it and you invariably get dragged along. And the photo is too few megapixels to really be worthwhile.
The Next Web: Enter to Win Apple Cinema Display
Congrats to the creator of Julia for completing his PhD on it :)

I note that the Acknowledgements page is empty. You goddamn did it on your own eh? ;)
Could you also list timings with just regular ssh-agent?
There are very good counter arguments you can easily find online.

I'll give you my favorites.

For intellectual property, it is not real property. Property is the category of things that are material and can exchange hands. Data, like speech, does not get literally exchanged, but copied. So there's no such thing as intellectual property.

Imagine you can memorize whole books. Would that be illegal? What if your friends could phone you and ask you to recite some paragraphs from memory, would that be illegal? What if you were part of a group of people that memorized the books they own and they ask each other to recite over the phone one page a day from a book they don't have? A hard-drive is a shortcut for that brain capacity we don't yet have. But if we did have that capacity to memorize, it would not be illegal. So instead of enjoying hard-drives to freely books and songs, we are criminalizing an arbitrary human enhancement.

For child pornography, I find it hard to justify the suppression of criminal evidence. We all should fear a government that has the power to arrest someone and suppress the evidence for their crime. If someone kills someone else even if just to film it, that would be a crime (or many crimes) but the video should not be illegal to possess. Evidence of gruesome deaths (intentional or not) are likewise legal to possess. What should be illegal is the act in itself, not the documentation with which we prove the crime.
Yup, I've had this: "ICMP is a security hole" lets turn it off.

such a tedious conversation to have with the networks(!) team
Gwern is Gwern Branwen. He likes Haskell. He has a website, which was mentioned earlier. He uses Google+ with his name here https://plus.google.com/103530621949492999968/posts/A3u1goGc... He is on Twitter. He answers questions on Quora. Some LessWrong folks are kind of obsessed with Gwern. Gwern is here too https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=gwern He seems very open about everything.
Usually people think of DOM as part of JS standard API, similar to Java's standard platform API library. There are many JS books that usually cover DOM but rarely books about DOM itself. As VBScript is dead, JS is the only language that uses that API. So you are technically correct.

What is questionable is "both JQuery and D3 are vanilla js". JQuery is a JS framework that is usually not considered "native". On modern browser it nowadays calls newer DOM API functions like one can do with vanilla/standard JS5. D3 is JS library that is mainly based around SVG, it's usually not considered "native", it calls SVG and DOM APIs like one can do in JS5. Each layer/framework on top means an additional overhead in combined JS file size.

"The Document Object Model (DOM) is a programming interface for HTML, XML and SVG documents. [...] Though often accessed using JavaScript, the DOM itself is not a part of the JavaScript language, and it can be accessed by other languages, though this is much less common."

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Document_Ob...
I hope you never work at my company either! No one gives a care what's between your legs. Do your damn job.
Epic poem about Node.js
Iranian navy opened fire on oil tanker in the Gulf, say US officials
Precisely. On that note, allow me to offer a fun set of mental tangents.

Lambda (uppercase Λ, lowercase λ) and the Chinese character for human (人) are not visually dissimilar. Lambda is asserted to have derived from early semitic forms, which influenced Pstalter and Soghdian, each of which allegedly reached the western limits of Chinese empire and existed circa 400BCE.[1] Written Chinese has been around for about 2500 years. It also has another similar character - 入 - which in classical or ancient Chinese can mean 'to join' or 'to become a member of'. They say humans are social creatures, and social structures are built on identification. However, lambda in the programming sense means an 'anonymous' function. Unlike Indo-European languages, ancient Chinese in particular defaults to anonymity (operating on a higher level of abstraction by default - ie. less specific, more poetic, more applicable) due to an absence of enforced conjugation. OK, back to your regularly scheduled HN.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abjad
It's interesting how via the "sharing" industry the term "disruption" has now devolved into simply breaking the law in a highly predictable manner.

(Predictable as in: doing exactly what the law was meant to put a stop to in the first place, so obviously not "innovative". And in many cases, like for instance UberPop, not even creative enough to find an actually loophole, but blatantly breaking the law.)
Overall, JavaScript is a great language. I don't find the prototype-based approach to OOP any less intuitive than the class-based approach. I much prefer it in fact.

It just so happens that the prototype approach didn't catch on early enough. Developers are now just really set in their ways and are rather pretend that JavaScript is not a true OO language.

I feel that the addition of a 'class' concept to ES6 adds no value to the language itself, but I think it was probably a good decision anyway - Because JavaScript is more flexible and adaptable than the minds of most people - It might as well use that to its advantage.

Unlike the stubborn developers who refuse to learn about prototype inheritance, JavaScript is capable of change.
A project I contributed to recently switched from GPLv3 to MPL. In order to do so they hunted down every single contributor and got their permission.
Show HN: Emoji Crushing Mania – Crush the Emoji to Your Satisfaction
How the Sun Rose on Silicon Valley
"a proprietary standard library – however huge – just can't compete with the open source ecosystems of Python and friends."

Depends on what one needs. If data crunching ala R and Pandas is all one needs - maybe. But I've not found an open source platform that would do all Mathematica does as efficiently (as measured by development time). Also, if a software package brings value to a company, there is no reason they would not pay to use it if it brings obvious value above it's fixed cost.
Or you know, maybe they'll care about the violent crackdown part?

What is it about technology where people think the failure was information, not the bunch of dudes cracking you in the head with rifle butts, the legislators who approved the action and the public which votes them into office (including all the people who say they're so outraged with everything they'll just refuse to vote or engage with the political process - because yeah, that's sure showing them).
>writing thoughtful comments when there is some algorithm that just deletes them at random?

huh? i'm a very active redditor across many subs and i've never encountered anything like that. you're the first person i've ever seen even mention it. unless i'm not understanding what you mean?
When people filter ICMP is really really annoys me. Sure I get that some people don't like to respond to pings, or that you can ddos some routers by flooding them with 64 byte packets (old routers btw) but hey ICMP is a critical part of making the network work correctly.
As more and more people write software in languages that compile to JavaScript instead of directly hand-writing JavaScript the demand for JavaScript becoming a better compile target grows.

In that sense adoption of Dart, ClojureScript, TypeScript, Elm et all will continue to accelerate JavaScript (language and runtime) improvements.
I assume you still generate a small thumbnail for every picture, right?
Doing basic imports is a valuable addition to hello world, as it demonstrates the tool-chain is working :-)

I just found out that my rustc-arguments probably were wrong (for most uses, anyway). Or rather, they link dynamically to the rust standard library -- which while "equal" to C, won't hold most of the time. All (non-embedded) systems will have libc for the foreseeable future -- assuming that they have rust libstd is probably not a good assumption to make.

I found this out after I upgraded to rust-1.0, and the lib/libstd-<hash?>.so files changed names.

So while:

rustc -O -C prefer-dynamic -o hello hello.rs

works, that produces a really dynamically linked little binary. One probably wants:

rustc -O -o hello hello.rs

This statically compiles in the rust std lib, and leaves a binary that's ~332k after stripping.

(Btw, -O is equivalent to -C opt-level=2)
Looking for reasons, why Myntra went App-only – these numbers can help
They're not discussing "simulation". From the article:

Today he would not respond to questions about
the new allegations from the FBI that he also
messed with the systems during a real flight.

But WTF was he doing talking to the FBI back in February in the first place?

There's nothing good that ever happens to people when they speak to law enforcement. The ego these guys must have is enormous. It's like they take lessons from movie supervillains who can't resist bragging to James Bond.

Those Bond villains sometimes have the right idea. Goldfinger's first inclination (he should have stuck with it) was to simply dispose of James Bond:

James Bond: Do you expect me to talk?

Auric Goldfinger: No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die!
The arrow I am providing for progress is one towards abstraction and automation; so, fine: we are right back to where we were before, with you making an argument that is of the exact same form as those people from C, Go, and Java who argue against adding abstraction and automation to keep things explicit and transparent, the people you were so painfully opposed to being lumped together with, and you seem to have exactly as little concrete rational as they do for making that "tradeoff". It isn't clear there is any tradeoff in play here, and you haven't tried to demonstrate one.

My argument is "given that there is absolutely no demonstrated benefit to doing so, and even some clear downsides (performance of normal successful code), being forced to litter my code with tons of boilerplate--something you can clearly see if you glance almost anywhere in the code for Cargo--is a major and depressing step backwards". Your argument seems to still be "I don't want that much automation, I like things being explicit, and of course you should look again the comments from pcwalton you already responded to that complain about Java (really just Java) being slow"... :/.
VivaAerobus Receives First of 52 A320s on Order
* all participants retain 100% ownership of all digital assets produced during the hackathon

^ if that's included then it some kind of a scam IMHO. Why would an team want to program in a legally onerous environment as opposed to say, a mall food court ?
I just added an OpenBSD firewall in bridge mode between my Comcast router and the rest of my network. It's implemented on a Shuttle DS57U (dual-core 1.5GHz Broadwell Celeron 3205U), with 16GB Crucial DDR3L RAM and a 128GB Crucial SSD (leftover parts). Total price: $358. It's a pretty sweet box: fanless, metal chassis, dual Intel Gigabit Ethernet. The only (minor) quibble is the CPU doesn't have AES-NI.
Thanks. Why does the source host sets the Don't Fragment flag?
You, sir, are an evil genius.

I wondered if other passive methods (radiography) would be applicable but they all seem to rely upon having a sensor behind the subject. I suppose your suggestion would be something like sonar, however I cannot find any clear references to the difficulties of the applications of such techniques through solids. Did find this interesting tidbit, though: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-frogman_techniques#Ultraso...
I think you misunderstand him, he saying if you are proceeding straight then you shouldn't wait in the right turn lane to proceed straight. which makes sense
What? No one said anything about “crossing over a lane of traffic”. You start in front of the cars in the regular go-straight lane, and then when the light turns green, you ride straight across the intersection. If there’s a bike lane on the other side of the intersection, you aim for the bike lane.

This is safer for everyone involved than your suggestion of parking your bike in the turn lane.
Going to sound a bit cynical here, but really isn't $30 million just spare change to a VC?

To us we see $30 million and think "that's a ton of money!! how could he get that funding?" but to the VC it's like "Here's a bit of spare change, maybe you'll make something out of this, maybe not".

From that viewpoint alone I could understand why a VC would fund this. I mean, could you guarantee that it's NOT going to be some breakout hit? What if you did pass on that $30 million investment and the company did actually turn out to be valuable? It's easy to say post-hoc once the company has been stupid that the VCs ought to have known about it, but it looks different if you think back to what the VCs must have known when they were approached.
In German, some of their novels were published by a major publisher, Suhrkamp. The movie Stalker is well known, which is based on one of their novels. I'd say they probably were the most prominent USSR SF writers of their time.
This is fine for the most privileged, but unlimited speech means unlimited ability for harassment.
Maybe safer but also a way to tell cyclists to be very patient and don't think of going anywhere quickly. Cycling on sidewalks is only a little worse than that.

I prefer doing like cars, waiting in the middle of the road. There are usually cars waiting there too and they act as a sort of shield. Obviously on large roads it can be difficult to make it to the center of the road and in that case I do a Copenaghen left myself.
It helps to have fairly young people who are desperate to prove themselves in the arena of strict meritocracy.

It helps if they don't have anything else to do for a weekend except cobble together a prototype or even a design document, though the latter is more acceptable if progressive women are involved.

Other than that- hiring booth babes as masseuses for the marathon coding sessions usually involved would absolutely increase success of your Next Hackathon (tm)
A readme would be helpful.
I've done many many years Java, then hit Dart and was very impressed.

Since that I have had to do a fair bit of python, php and JavaScript at work. I think if I hadn't seen Dart first I would have quite liked python.

The problem with Dart is that once you've been developing in it for a while it spoils you from liking anything else. I really cringe with python, JS etc autocompleting to a million irrelevant things.

And going back to Java you have the slow dev loop that comes with a compiled language.

At the end of the day I've simply never had a development experience anywhere near as productive and enjoyable as Dart.
Airbus Helicopters’ H145M Receive Certification by EASA
The language agnostic Jupyter with its interactive notebook comes close to Mathematica's environment. http://jupyter.org/

Jupyter supports Python and other languages like Julia (https://github.com/JuliaLang/IJulia.jl ). I don't know if there are JS and Lua bindings but both would lend themself because of their first class functions and functional language features.
Wow, this rings so many bells. I took my first swimming classes after I graduated from college. While others were lapping around the pool, I remember swimming backwards somehow while holding a floater. And yes, crossing the middle of the pool going towards the deep end was the scariest part. With the encouragement of my teachers and some students, I managed to do a few laps by the end of the class.

In US, it seems like everyone knows how to swim. I am relieved that there are others like me who struggle with this as adults.

Kudos to the OP for sticking through it!
Note how Tesla chiefly intends to avoid central battery fire today.
Why was the PhD defense standing-room only?
Nice, I had fun listening to Robo Sagan recite some of the Pale Blue Dot speech, with some fruity additions ;)
> what "clear" and "useful" advantage gives an additional arbitrary syntactic separatation over a sub-element-only layout?

It syntactically distinguishes information that applies to the tag from information to which the tag applies.

> why is it more "reasonnable" to have this separation when it actually make it slightly more difficult to manipulate the data?

It's a tradeoff, of course. Reasonable people can disagree about whether the tradeoff is worth it. But that's my point: reasonable people can disagree.

> But then the line was blurred

Any language feature can be abused. The proper response IMO is to stop abusing the feature, not to eliminate it.

> will you invent a new syntax for everyone of them?

I don't know. What other kinds of distinctions did you have in mind?

> attributes are an added complexity with little benefits

I understand that you believe this. Do you see how a reasonable person might disagree?