skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> rent out a scalable 14nm chip fab from AWS

I was pondering the viability of almost exactly this. Could one invest in a hardware pipeline that efficiently combines e.g. 3D printing with FPGAs to create the consumer-electronics equivalent of Lulu.com's just-in-time small-batch book printing + drop-shipping.

Or, in other words: you can do pretty much anything with the sensors in a modern smartphone. All most manufacturers probably need is smartphone boards (with maybe some options of extra sensors) in custom cases with fancy buttons and displays, maybe custom remotes, and a cute little 4-colour double-walled box. That describes everything from Nest to Roku to some drone controllers.
"... you need the source code to write a utility..."

Where in the comment is this statement?

Personally the primary reasons I would want the source code for the kernel and utilities would be 1. to assess its quality and, assuming the quality meets my standards, 2. to modify it to meet my own ends. In my case, the less I have to write things from scratch the better.

Let me know if you still have questions.
How's he doing at 82?
You at exactly right. The "paradox" is that people naively assume that the Real ("Real" = math theory, "real" = CS turing-computable
and physics "real universe") numbers are a smooth continuum, but if you follow the actual definition, you discover that it is too powerful -- the Real numbers could construct physically impossible objects, which proves that real numbera aren't real. In reality, we must confine ourselves to countable sets, which has ugly asymmetries: we must distinguish a set of "nameable" numbers as more "real" than the others, but we can choose any small-enough subset of Real numbers we want, we can choose every single Real number we practically encounter, but we can't choose all of them at the same time.
Understanding just enough to get things done, copying and pasting, and building thoroughly planned and well designed fundamental libraries are all just tools in a toolbox. Sometimes one or the other is the best tool for the job. For best results, learn to use the right tool at the right time.
Block malicious sites at DNS level
What's the disadvantage of those other foundations that makes them unsuitable for universal use?
Parsing HTML with a regex? That way lies ₥áδñèƨƨ.
It's all a little outdated - 9 months is a long time in the Docker world.
That's a good point. Makes me think again of "slow devices" and interrupts leading to EINTR or partial reads/writes. In my eyes a beautifully pragmatic solution to a real world problem, and yet at some point SA_RESTART was devised.
> developers most willing to guess about how code works, copy and paste googled code, and push others to feed them answers instead of doing research on their own are considered to be the top developers because they 'get things done'.

My guess would be that they're able to abstract out and isolate functionality they don't need to fully understand to work on the core code they need to write to get the job done.

In modern systems there are so many frameworks, libraries, platforms etc. that if you try to gain a detailed understanding of them all you don't get anything done.

The core skill in modern engineering is knowing how to proceed with incomplete knowledge.
Pixar did not start up from a few random people leaving a company with a new idea. Jobs paid the company 5 million for the IP and then invested another 5 million to get things started. Granted, he sat on the board instead of being the CEO, but he was far from a hands off invester. Regularly investing more money and eventually becoming the CEO.
I worked in a useless work position
Didn't have lxml installed. Or Beautiful Soup. "The best camera is the one you have with you." :)
Improve VPC Performance and Security with VPC Endpoints
Odd. I have no formal education, but I've held several management titles, including founder and VP on occasion.

To think you need a college education to lead or, as you said, "give orders" is preposterous.
> And also check whether the start up is type A (Uber, Dropbox, etc), type B (box, etc) or type C (unknown potential).

What do these categories mean? How can I distinguish between them?
I have found that the best developers try to understand the code they write, even if it is only after writing a guess at the solution after Googling for the answer or a hint of one. I have found it supremely important to understand what you are modifying because otherwise you are throwing darts at the wall blindfolded.

You absolutely can care exclusively about getting out as much LOC as possible, but it is the wrong thing to care about if you want to improve as a developer & be more efficient in the future. If you are able to generally solve problems well, what happens is that as you work at them more, you become more efficient at solving them quickly and you write more valuable, difficult code quickly.

If I had to recommend courses of action to improve, it would be to work on solving difficult problems, and to keep practicing your craft. Don't worry about what others around you are doing.
Hide My IP 6 License Key 2015 with Crack, Keygen Download
Think there's a massive population of people on HN who either aren't developers at all or who are aspiring developers looking to get better. There's a lot of top devs on here to be sure but I would handily bet you the ratio is at least 2:1 (not top):(top).
I used to work at Google, with some of whom many here would consider the “top developers”. I can assure you that they didn’t copy and paste googled code. ;-) You haven’t worked the best developers yet. If doing so is important to you, focus on improving your skills and find a better job.
> How do you square these two claims with the fact that "business" is just another name for a collection of people who have decided to work together to achieve some outcome?

Have you ever tried to sit down and have a nuanced conversation with a mob? Or given a speech in front of an audience? Those are both pretty loose, flat organizations of people and they behave radically differently to an individual (and to each other, though one can sometimes change into the other). A company is a much more complex structure that absolutely deserves different treatment than an individual.

Surely you understand this. Have you never, or would you never be friends with someone who worked for a company you didn't like? Clearly there is a difference between an organization and the individuals who compose it, though the distinction is fuzzier in your case since presumably the corporation consists solely of you. I suspect that your corporation is also less likely to engage in the kinds of amoral hanky-panky that the large organizations get up to.
Yep. This is exactly the use case I had in mind when I was looking for a library like this. These features are useful in all kinds of social/chat apps that need to convert users' plaintext messages into rich multimedia content.

Identifying things in plaintext is one of those things that seems very simple but ends up being a pain to get right if you want it to be robust enough to handle all the corner cases.

There's a reason why this library has over 2k commits! I'd hate to have to rediscover all the lessons they must have learned the hard way...
Containers and persistent data
That's sort of Google's reputation in machine learning: if you're tired of the lower salaries and grant-chasing of academia (or just don't like teaching), or have had enough of the uncertainty of a startup, Google is a comfortable place to go, with a large and stable salary, good access to data & compute time, good benefits, etc. Seems more common for people to try out academia and/or startups first and then go to Google later, rather than the other way around. I haven't done any kind of proper count or survey, though.
How are they more ambiguous than fractals? The key structure is a shape that can be rotated onto a subset of itself.

I guess with common fractals, you camnoly scale an object onto a subset of itself. The magic of BT is that the ball-shape allows a rotation that looks like a scaling.
Not necessarily. Text streams don't have to by default provide all possible data for the next process in the pipe. Sure, you could keep all the command line arguments you had before to make JSON output manageable, but then you have two problems rather than one.
"less safe".
Pushover uses SSL, and then hands off to GCM for notifications. Yes, it's not end to end and you don't control the keys, but it seems to be the best current option and is MILES better than Pushbullet, who have yet to come up with a way to monetize.

https://pushover.net/faq#security

They also have a warrant canary for what it's worth
ttps://pushover.net/canary.asc
Which proofs depend on an infinitely discontinuous subset, though?
Cliometrics? At any rate, this is my favorite take on the concept of scientific history, courtesy of Isaiah Berlin:

http://berlin.wolf.ox.ac.uk/published_works/cc/scihist.pdf

The parent comment makes a good point here. Although I did appreciate the nod at the end to the larger archive of historical sources that digitization has "presentized" or whatever we want to call the process discussed here. I just wish there were more dialogue between practicing scientists and historians of science - in my experience there is virtually no professional interaction.
Well, now you're aware.
Is there not a blanket/implicit release of claim that goes along with posting code on SO?

When I copy code verbatim from SO or another "help" site, I generally put a comment right above that chunk of code, something like:

/* See: http://stackoverflow.com/a/xxxxxxxxxxx */

Don't know if that's enough to protect against any ownership claims though.
academia is extremely prototype oriented so it might even be worse than industry in this regard, fyi.
You're probably better off using something like Samsung's Artik (https://www.artik.io/) that is basically cellphone-grade integration using existing high-density components.
That wasn't really my intention, and I apologize if it came across that way.

What I meant to say is that confronting a schizophrenic about their delusions or disorganized thinking is almost assuredly a futile exercise, save maybe if you're a very well-trained professional. He clearly suffers from some paranoid delusions[0][1], and I don't think talking to him about the perils of racism is going to prove fruitful anytime soon.

> "he's schizophrenic so we sadly can't employ him"

In some cases, that's probably true - Terry Davis very likely being one of those cases. Conversely, my uncle is quite schizophrenic (pretty severe delusions and paranoia) but responds well to medication and is now gainfully employed, mostly because he hasn't said anything like "Spoiler alert, CIA. Guess how this ends? I have God. I win. You unconditionally surrender and suck my fucken dick. That's how this ends." [2] in quite some time.

Some people will require a large amount of care and probably aren't well-suited for the workforce. Why is that a bad thing? Your employment status doesn't reflect your worth as a person. We can, and should (not that we always do) take care of people unable to work. We have more than enough productive surplus to support their needs.

0: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/38u4zc/flight_s...

1: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/38u4zc/flight_s...

2: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/38u4zc/flight_s...
I use it as a blanket term for history, English, literature, philosophy, foreign languages, art, American studies, etc. Anything non-technical. I'm surprised your school was organized that way.
I came to think that many, many times deep understanding an elegant, well crafted solution are just an exercise of style, not really needed, and not actually needed (often a waste of time).

And __DON'T__ get me wrong on this: I love understanding how things work and write beautiful code.

The thing is: you're working for a company, and let's say you're using $language and $framework. You have the deadline in a month (or two months, or n months).

You come across a problem. And here the kind of company you're working for makes the difference.

If you're working for a small or medium sized company, maybe it's just better to google an answer and do some copy-paste from stack overflow. Small-sized companies have more interest in getting things done than anything else. Typically.

If otherwise you're working for a big company, you're developing code which will be used by thousands (millions?) of users and your company has (or wants to establish) a role in the open source industry, then you sit down and examine the bug, you examine the stack traces, you fix it, and maybe submit a patch. Not only that, you also want to make your code as fast as it can possibly be. Because saving 2% execution time on two servers may not be that interesting if you have to spend three weeks, but saving execution time on 300 or 400 servers (or more)... Well, that matters.

As many other said, it's all about compromise.

You may want to consider applying for a position to $big_company.
Not "possible", " imaginable". "Possible" is begging the question.
Yes, parents do push kids quite hard in South Korea, because studying hard and getting into good schools are seen as plain necessary for success in life. But that doesn't necessarily mean the quality of education is fantastic -- a lot of the after-school classes kids get worked to death in are snake oil levels bad, and the teaching methods applied in the primary schools are often sub-par as well. Meanwhile many students suffer a great deal in that highly competitive pressure cooker, and it contributes to an unusually high teenage suicide rate for the country.

Education and parenting are complex. Education is not as simple as quantity-does-the-trick, and parenting isn't as simple as applying pressure.
Prison break: 2 killers escape maximum security prison using power tools
This is actually how my 4th grade teacher did it circa 1990. We had to prove we'd memorized our times tables up to 12. So when you said you were ready, she'd draw 1-12 in a 'random' order on the circle, write the number you were ready for in the center, then work her way around the circle, pointing with a yardstick (she'd occasionally jump around to keep you from working ahead). If you got them all right, you could move on to the next number.
Yes, hence why I said:

> Post 2010 the loans are issued by the government so you cut out the middleman taking all the profit.
> show up, do good work...

> work 50-60 hrs per week

Those aren't incompatible. In fact, based on current and former Apple employees I know, you're both right. It's also worth pointing out the extreme compartmentalization at Apple. I imagine that makes it more difficult to get a handle on systems-level considerations that are so key for lean startup teams.
It's utter bullshit to conflate Spring and Java like this.
Allowing future things to be get done better
This list of 92 startup failures was recently shared on HN: http://autopsy.io/
IANAL

Fair use is a pretty subjective thing that's up to a judge to determine. It's a four-factor test, and you can read more here: http://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/four-factors/

* the purpose and character of your use

* the nature of the copyrighted work

* the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and

* the effect of the use upon the potential market.

The fact that it's 2-4 lines may come in as part of factor 3, but the other factors also need to be taken into account.
Except how do you represent every possible data type without losing fidelity? I made this point in another leaf, but it's worth echoing again. A perfect example of this is Dates. There isn't a defined JSON type for that so we'd be back to basic text parsing again (which will cause anyone who has dealt with parsing dates to recoil in agony).

When you try to ram a one size fits all approach to everything, you end up with abominations like SOAP with XML. I simply don't get the fascination with trying to use the same tool for every job even if it's not applicable.
I have some experience in academia and I mostly see the extremes: either blatant wholesale copy/paste as much as possible, or an extreme "not invented here" attitude, refusal to use existing solutions, a sentiment that everyone else's code is useless crap, and a lot of reinvented wheels.
Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7547942
There are employers that what you to think the way you're thinking.

There are other employers that want you to copy the other guy before spending time in the details.

Adapt to the situation, find what you like in your off time or find a new job.

Learn how to talk to people and people will protect you. If you keep telling everyone else they're doing it wrong, no one will think you're helping them because you're being negative. Point out something you like.

I write circles around some of my coworkers, but they talk-circles around me in social dynamics. Everyone is good at something. Talk about what they like.

Find a reason to like the person you're working with. Don't be combative, this won't be the first time someone 'thinks' you're doing it wrong. Humility is key.
Yep, a major US news organization has just published the passwords used by 90% of all credit and debit card readers. And deserve loud praise for doing so because the passwords are already all over the Web.

About. Fucking. Time.

Kudos to CNN for ball and/or ovaries.

(Though I wish they'd kill their autoplay video.)
Giving you advice about being a programmer is like giving career advice to an actor, musician, writer or other creative person.

That is, there are many ways you can be successful as a programmer and that different workplaces have different attitudes about what a good programmer is.

For instance, sometimes the best way to learn something, be you working on Greenfield or legacy code is to think about it a bit, make an informed guess about what to do next and do it.

You can answer surprisingly many questions in a technical job interview with "look it up in a hash table" and "look it up in the literature." Any research project starts with a literature review, so there is no problem at looking at what other people of done. In fact, sometimes I hit a StackOverflow page where I get to choose between 10 or 20 options, some with a good explanation of the theory.

Similarly there is nothing wrong with getting help from other programmers. If somebody can tell you in five minutes what would take you five hours to do on your own, you vastly increase your value and productivity by reaching out.
Why not build ‪#‎OpenJDK‬ 9 using ‪#‎Docker‬?
You can teach maths on a blackboard. Can't teach maths on a whiteboard.

Don't ask me to explain it, but it's true.
Adblocking and the End of Big Advertising
Sure, but what are they gonna do from 23 parsecs? Smurgle at me? I can totally cranch the hempigwarls and they'll never twiggle.

Spa, fon, wankers! I mean, pseudocysts! [wriggles eschaton]
Mt. Gox, for example.
You don't believe it is true?
That's silly, there is no good reason to believe it true or false, except in the sense that you think one of Chess or Go is the more fun game of the two.

Or you don't believe it is a meaningful to try to choose an answer? That's ZF, the home to the portion of set theory that has anything useful to say about the physical Universe.
Parsing Unicode without normalization (as JoshTriplett's solution) is another sort of mádness. (Or is that mádness?)

In this case there's an oracle that tells me if I have the right answer, so there wasn't need for anything more rigorous.

(Edit: looks like my LATIN SMALL LETTER A WITH ACUTE vs. my LATIN SMALL LETTER A + COMBINING ACUTE ACCENT didn't make it all the way through the system. Haven't researched to figure out where the normalization occurred.)
So days_of_week[0] is actually Sunday. Assuming a zero based index.
I wish these things were more language-agnostic.

There are all sorts of fancy refactoring tools out there, and most (all?) of them seem to be intimately connected with the language in question.

I mean: take compilers for example. GCC isn't C-only. Or rather there are lots of compilers built around the same framework. Why can't it be the same for refactoring tools? They both are doing effectively the same thing, after all. Turing one form of code into another form that's better, for some definition of better. The distinction being that compilers tend to not have the input language be the same as the output language.
If only it wasn't hosted in the awful cmd style terminal with it's frustrating style of edit functionality and lousy completion. If it had the feel of a Unix terminal I think I could get used to it.
That's an interesting point, replacing a lost key is always going to be the weak point in any security scheme, unless you intentionally make the process hard/cumbersome enough that it isn't, but makes losing the key a very unpleasant, costly event both for the user, and the service you're trying to access.

Why would businesses like Facebook implement such a scheme? As you predict it would probably end up in them losing a lot of customers when keys are lost.

I think any business, even where security is critical, would worry about this too. I.e. 'what, my bank makes me call up their customer service, wait on hold, speak to 8 different individuals, then wait three days for processing, if I lose my key? No thanks, remembering a strong password seems an easier alternative - I'll just go to a competitor that allows that'.

That's not even to mention wrapping up the scheme in an easy-to-use way for non-technical users. It'd be fine until the point it isn't, at which point the customer service / PR fallout cost of things going wrong is very high. Everyone understands passwords.

I think there are enough problems here that such a scheme would likely not have enough adoption to become mainstream.

But I think more importantly, isn't the fact that your key(s) would have to be tied to a physical client the true deal-breaker? A website that you can only access from a certain set of physically secured devices with the correct keys installed throws away perhaps the biggest advantage of the web.
Which is why governments and large companies ought to be using zero-based budgeting.
I remember a two word name, something like "fluctuative" history, but I may be wrong. I'll happily take your suggestion though it looks fascinating.
I generally like the idea of tabular text files where the last column is free form text.

If you need more commenting freedom or flexiblity, why not make another indirection and generate the data from some source which is tailored to your needs? After all, relational data is often not suited for manual input. It's meant for general consumption by computers.

For example, as a sysadmin, passwd / shadow / group is not enough to model my business objects directly. I keep my business data in a custom database, and generate the text files from that.
Sure, here's a single example [0]. It's true that in principle I should have provided examples to begin with...

[0] http://feministcurrent.com/9226/johns-are-now-an-oppressed-s...