skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"It wasn't his first job, it was a career you want him to give up."

Go read it again. That "years later" comes immediately after the part where he mentions transferring to a different school, and before he mentions working at The Wild Pair immediately after college. So yes, it was his first job and not a whole career as you supposed.

"Unless I'm reading this wrong, educational debt is still debilitating 40 years later."

40 years is a long time. It's long enough to have had many opportunities, even as a writer, to stem the accrual and compounding of that debt. As I've said over and over, there are serious problems with our student-loan system. Those problems weren't nearly as bad 40 years ago, and they're only "debilitating" now because of continued poor decision-making well after the fact. Whining about an outcome that's largely, even if not entirely, under the author's control doesn't help to solve today's student-debt problems. Au contraire.
> Until 2010 they were backed by the government

The same kind of loans-- not all loans, but the same kind as were before-- are still backed by the federal government.

What happened in 2010 was that the government took out the middleman ie the banks, saving taxpayers around ~$7B/year.
Tiobe is a joke. It is good enough for a very tough idea, but that is it.

That said, no programming language ever dies. Things are still being written in Cobol and common lisp. This doesn't mean focusing on them is likely to get you an interesting career with lots of choices.
America, love it or leave it. /s
> "What I'm suggesting is that people decide not to [boycott or pressure for no platform]"

I don't like how this argument generalizes.

For example, I am a strong opponent of the labor situation in Qatar as it relates to the World Cup. I want FIFA to either relocate venues or force Qatar to immediately improve their labor practices. Yet, I have no leverage over FIFA, so instead I decide to boycott FIFA's sponsors (Coke, Nike, and Adidas).

Now I'm actively punishing those companies because of their speech. And I'm doing it purely because it's my only way to attempt to change the behavior of an actor two-steps removed from them.

So, now I'd like one of two things:

- Help me find the lines for legitimate boycotts, or

- Help me determine why my boycott of Coke, Nike, and Adidas is a poor decision
I think the problem is there's mathematics on one hand and my experience of the real world on the other. I either didn't do any set theory, or I've forgotten it. So it looks just like squiggles on the page to me when I try to understand the maths.

So, all I'm left with is trying to relate what the words might mean in real-world terms. And coming up confused.

I don't think it's your fault. I just lack the grounding to see both sides of the picture.

One thought, though. I'm not trying to reject it because it offends my sense of reality. I'm trying to use my sense of reality (which is the only tool I have) to understand it.

For example, if someone came up to me at work and said, "I've just worked out how to cut a sphere up into bits and reassemble it as two spheres the same size," I'd say, "ok, then, show me."

If all they could do is make marks on paper I couldn't understand I'd think they'd got the paper wrong, not reality. Which is the dissonance here. I guess, speaking personally, if you want someone like me to understand it you'd need to really, really explain the maths (as if to a simpleton!), or explain what's happening in real-world terms and why it wouldn't work yet is still valid.

Does that help?
I think it is unfortunate when people do not express their biological potential, but I'm not sure that's what people actually want to talk about. I'm not sure that really improves the human condition.

I see the problem as the sum of human economic actions creating a structure where only a few people can win and most people must lose. What does it matter if we bump up people's IQ? Would that make it so that more people try to apply to be leaders and CEO's of tomorrow, when there are so few positions available?

Is the lack of meritocracy the principle emotional bother here? Does society become better if it were meritocratic? I don't think so. Why not focus on the fact that there's a race where only a few people win? Is it because we're okay with the current distribution of wealth if we find out that it corresponds with intelligence?

All I see from this is a more efficient nation due to better labor allocation, which is an agreeable value, but is that what people wanted to talk about? Economic inefficiency due to bad labor allocation?

I think GATTACA shows a meritocratic world. A very meritocratic world. Now, it may be that the movie has some moral message to deliver on "true potential" being more than biology, but that society was largely on target with identifying potential, at least way better than our current world. A few errors now and then sounds very tolerable for a futuristic system, even if it results in a few tragic stories about a denied astronaut with heart problems. I'm sure they can improve and become even more accurate at identifying aspects of human merit.

But in that world, we have corporate dominance of working opportunities, elite rule over inferior biology, a feeling of fate, and shitty jobs -- a world of winners and losers. There will always be more people of merit than there will be jobs of merit. If this last statement is true, what are the implications for the losers of society?
I absolutely love these "$EXISTING_BUSINESS for $TOTALLY_RANDOM_THING" startups, and this might just be my favourite. What does "Pandora for Lunch" even mean? Is it Pandora the streaming radio service or Pandora the jewellery company? Neither seems at all applicable to lunch!
Exactly this. It just seems the wrong type of app to use a freemium model. No surprises here.
Quality is more important than quantity.

Since you didn't provide links, all I can do is say that I'll always look at any provided samples/source.
Genetic engineering is really hard. A huge amount of genes contribute to IQ. It's not possible now and it won't be until we can safely alter thousands of genes in an embryo. I don't see direct engineering in the near future. Iterated embryo selection (and just plain embryo selection) however, do seem likely in the next two decades.
I'm an American and I cannot grasp America.
Why Has Apple Spawned So Few Startups?
Well, you can do branches and multiple-parent merges, so as long as you don't care about directionality mapping to commits you can express the structure on connection, at least.
Docker doesn't actually use LXC anymore.
I agree with some frustration, but getting upset that apples aren't oranges isn't valid.

Someone would need to write the driver for this functionality. I expect Intel is happy letting apple do the work, but so long as that is the case, Apple has no need to support every hardware and protocol under the sun. They merely have to support their stuff fully, and beyond that it is someone else's problem.

Intel wrote the driver for windows, and it works on Windows. That's also apples and oranges IMO.
Here's what stinks about Goldman Sachs' deal with Apple
Unless you're dealing with stupid site that knows better how
your password should look like. Then you're out of luck.

Yup. And that's quite common in my experience.
Hackathons are a good place to make introductions. They attract the right crowd.
> I hardly, if ever, see people using it as a "cop out for all our problems", or people "shoveling all blame on colonialism".

I have. Mostly amongst fellow students. Perhaps it's just different experiences then.

> it becomes a way to dismiss these very real effects and ignore them altogether.

Meh. I am okay with dismissing past issues when discussing present problems. Past issues cannot be fixed. I am less okay with dismissing present issues as a sole result of past problems.

Of course, I don't want to dismiss the effects of colonialism, but when it is used as an excuse (which I have seen often), I'd prefer to dismiss the past effects in an effort to avoid having present effects be dismissed.

> because the economic impact of 200+ years of outright exploitation takes more than 50 years to recover from.

You're talking in absolutes. I never said that we should have recovered by now. I'm asserting we ought to have made more progress than we have. This is a matter of opinion so I guess we should agree to disagree.

> Slavery and legal discrimination are responsible for the current state of the Black community in the US - that's the whole point.

Sure, but it's not used as an excuse either.

> Incidentally, I do oftentimes see this same misguided criticism levied at the Black community, which essentially amounts to "you've had equal rights for 50 years now; it's up to you now to achieve success and end racial discrimination and inequality".

Oh, this is not what I'm saying either. Perhaps I'm not being so clear; but I'm merely against the usage of colonialism as a cop-out. You're clearly not doing that here, so never mind :)
If you're worried about encryption, though, you wouldn't be using their app to display the pushed messages, you'd be using something you control; you only use their push infrastructure as infrastructure.
Did you tell coke, nike, and adidas that you're boycotting them?
Indeed, I was surprised that didn't make the top of the list.
Right, and OS X is based on FreeBSD.
As is the idiom on HN. You're explicitly allowed to repost older things, but doing it for recent stories in order to get them multiple cracks at the front page is an abuse.

The title could use a (date) on it, though. I no longer work at Matasano; instead, me, Patrick, and Erin now run a company together.
I wouldn't say it's cheating but without using that function maybe we could see more of the language syntax itself. That way we are just seeing method calling.
This is the mistake everyone makes. Don't think in terms of someone being an asshole (unless it is you). Think in terms of chemistry.
Thank you!
I organically made it for sight singing so for voice - Bass, Tenor, Alto, Soprano.
But have also tested it with Piano, Violin, Cello and Flute.
I dont understand this sentence at all - "The students have no incentive to shop around and keep costs down while going to school." . There is a direct financial incentive to shop around and save on the cost of an education, which in most cases is one of the larger financial outlays in a persons life.
The idea that technical people are the only ones who can build something is one of the things that drives me away from most potential business cofounders. There are plenty of tools and free online resources that within a month or so, you should have the skills to hack some kind of prototype together in a reasonable amount of time. Lack of investigation into any of those opportunities signals to me that either a) the person doesn't believe enough in the idea to get their hands dirty, b) they consider themselves somehow above that kind of work, or c) that they're simply "not smart/savvy enough". The first two are obviously bad, and the third is not someone who I feel would be able to push through the fear and uncertainty that comes with starting a business.

To look at it from the other side, I wouldn't approach a potential CEO without bringing some business connections of my own to the table and ideally some seed money, or a potential CMO without some existing marketing efforts.
> Why should there always be a else to an if-elseif?

Because that's good style!

> in the original if-else, the if in the else clause does not have a else

An if can live without an else. BTW, there are many books and online resources about programing style.
For some reason I found docker very unintuitive, even writing a simple build script was confusing. I agree, this book would have done a much better job of introduction than the docker site.
It's not that the cuts are strange, it's that they involve infinitely small details. You can't cut physical atoms like that, and so the construction fails in the real world.
When is decentralization a good idea?
Urbit was initally released into the Public Domain, and still retains that spirit even though circumstance compels the project to now bear the MIT License - I suspect non-attributed copying would not be challenged.
This is just the beginning, both for robots and for asian dominance. Culture plays a huge role, and in our culture we're happy to watch Reality TV and let government babysit our kids. Government doesn't care about robot competitions. I assume in Korea but believe in general in asia, the parents are more on top of their kids, so that even if they have a "lower quality" government (Which is always debatable) in China, for instance, eventually we're going to be less and less the source of these kinds of technical advances over time.

Hell, even if the chinese culture doesn't inspire creativity and achievement, just by demographics they should produce three times as many innovations as us, since if the innovative people are %0.1 of the population, they have three times the population.
There is zero experimental basis to assume embryo selection will work better than breeding for complex traits in the near future. It's a scifi idea that for some strange reason gets nerds excited.
> I don't see where these are not one single problem. Everything is a file.

A very general format could solve more problems but as I said earlier I think the lack of comments in json makes it sub par as a config format for human editing.
I totally agree that trying to filter the output of ls is madness when compared to using the built-in flags. But doesn't this also indicate that command output should be more unified in it's output format? "cut", for example, is a useful tool, but it seems ham-fisted as a way of formatting output data for anything other than a one-time job.
It's not about the aesthetics but about security : a Frontpage 97 looking website screams noobs or fraud, I don't want to give them my credit cart info in either case.

In fact nowadays noobs and frauds are doing better than that, it's probably just a joke.
Honestly, most of the things you list above make one sound like a semi-technical founder.
Worse is the fact that above grade 13 promotions greatly favor those who do not take risks and who do not rile others. This makes avoiding risk one of the top success strategies for a career in govt.

The risk averse culture of govt is probably more a factor here. To actually shut down a system that is "working" because it is not secure is likely to prevent someone from being promoted, as it at least implicitly points the finger at others, which is a major no-no.

It really sucks that those affected have no recourse in the courts or any other venue to seek redress, and it is unlikely that the cost of the inevitable identity thefts and other dirty tricks that will result from this will be borne by individuals, when the govt is clearly culpable.

I never have understood why we hand power over something to the govt without a means of holding govt officials responsible when they wield that power inappropriately or incompetently.
This book gives a good explanation of a construction, at a reasonably non-technical level.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Pea-Sun-Mathematical-Paradox/dp/15...
Agreed, I was quite surprised when I realized there was a pay-per-share model being attempted. I mean I'm sure it's cheap but as a consumer I HATE games/apps that do this. I'll pay to unlock features or level packs but paying for something that costs the developer nothing. The costs of the server were tiny and getting a couple hundred dollars a month from V1 sales dwarfs the server cost.

Their best bet would have probably been to just add the new features to the existing paid version behind a $1-2 IAP (One time).
This is a really interesting (and not a little disquieting) thought. In the case of the Sistene Chapel ceiling - the scale and artistry of which really is difficult to comprehend if you haven't seen it firsthand (truly, pictures do not in any way do it justice) - it was, at least, a commissioned piece of work, which I believe Michelangelo was initially reluctant to accept.
> (notice: a, b, c, d)

Either I am wrong or is the actual order a, c, b, d in x86 (I remember at least the 32bit GPRs being coded in the order EAX, ECX, EBX, EDX)? :D
Most of the time, data binding IS one-way when using Knockout.

Input field? That's one-way from display => a variable in your viewmodel.

P tag? That's one-way from variable in viewmodel => display.

But when do you really need two-way data binding? Form validation and formatting. Man, this stuff is hard even with two-way data binding. You have to be able to accept, parse, format, and validate all in the same element. It's very helpful to be able to use knockout for a task like this.
The Qt Contributor's Summit just wrapped up today, and some of the discussions [0] touched on the author's points [1][2].

Unrelated to above, I just wanted to make a note: Just because the standard is out does not necessarily make the language easier to use; it is entirely compiler dependent. Also C++14 was not supposed to be as big of changes as C++11, if I recall correctly every-other standard is supposed to be major-minor changes to the language, though I don't have a citeable source on hand for that.

[0] http://wiki.qt.io/Qt_contributors_summit_2015_Program

[1] http://wiki.qt.io/QtCS2015_ModernCpp

[2] http://wiki.qt.io/QtCS2015_LocalQtMeetups
If you are non-technical invest your time into learning how to build, or paying someone to build MVPs. Once a product has some traction, bringing in talent will be easier and certainly cheaper (equity-wise).

If you are a technical founder, invest your time into learning marketing. It really only takes trial and error.
The streaming radio service. You sign up, tell us about your diet, and every week we email you a calendar of lunches from awesome local restaurants. Easily modify the suggestions with our online interface, or just sit back and let the good food come.

As for the "X for Y" meme, I agree they tend to oversimplify. Nivi of AngelList provides compelling arguments why they are worthwhile anyway: http://venturehacks.com/articles/high-concept-pitch
The chances of finding a preexisting viable alternative actually make the prospect of developing all that technology seem trivial.

Life has evolved over hundreds of millions of years, influenced by the earths environment, which itself has been influenced by its size/gravity, proximity to the sun, axial tilt, air composition, our atmosphere, and countless other macro scale variables, many of which are random and independent of each other. Most of these quantities have exceedingly small windows that can support human life. Furthermore, the particular sequence of these variables changing over millions of years has shaped evolution.

Think of it like this: there are 68 teams in the NCAA men's basketball tournament. This makes for 9.2 quintillion possible outcomes. There are certainly many orders of magnitude more variables that have shaped the evolution of life on earth. I'm not saying only one of those permutations results in a planet suitable for humans, just that the sheer scale of how large of a cosmic accident we are makes me think we'll run out of time before we ever find another earth suitable for normal human life.
I think the part about patch schedules is hilarious. Apple is the one who, before chrome existed and microsoft was anywhere close to doing it, set up updates to happen automatically. Like years ahead. I think even before linux got it. And yeah, they don't push security patches out on tuesday because they don't have vulnerabilities every week.

It is a straight up lie to say they don't patch "continuously". They do this both for the OS and for the Apps in the AppStore-- one of the advantages of the AppStore is that if a vulnerability is found in one of your apps, the developers can push out an update and it can get patched without you having to even know it needs to be updated.
Well, when I try to get something done in a calendar, having to do that remapping of the beginning and end of the weeks mentally... it gets in the way.
The subsets you partition in are necessarily non-measurable sets. That makes them very strange. Any reasonble set that you can come up with is measurable. Even the set of points with rational coordinates is measurable. Of course you cannot partition a gold cube into two pieces, one with the points that have rational coordinates, and the other with points that have irrational coordinates. Non-measurable sets are even weirder.

This is only an indication that arbitrary subsets of R^3 are not a good way to model three dimensional space.
See also the Ada Gems serie of articles: http://www.adacore.com/adaanswers/gems/
Yes, I absolutely agree entirely.

The reason we had individual velocity measured, is because our management wanted to use it as a metric to determine our performance (Which I think is an awful method for measuring performance). I work in a digital agency, and our management tries to be very hands off, but then they do something like look at individual velocity and our amount of git commits to make sure we're working.
But what we're saying here is this.

We use sets to model the real world. They do remarkably well, and the math we've developed to work on them includes calculus to make bridges that stay up, fluid dynamics that make aeroplanes fly, and discrete math that helps us understand routing, scheduling, and all sorts of stuff.

We use the real line to model distances. In the real world we are limited as to the accuracy we can use, but modelling those limitations is nasty. It's easier to assume that things are continuous. In its turn, we make choices that make working with these models easier, and they turn out to be amazingly useful.

But then we start poking the dusty corners. The choices we make in the development of the theory have consequences, and math is about exploring both the choices, and their consequences.

So we can choose that between every two numbers there's another number. We can choose that there's a number whose square is 2. We can choose that the sum of the reciprocals of squares : 1+1/4+1/9+1/16+1/25+1/36+ ... : is a real number.

And we can choose that there is no smallest positive number. That has a consequence. If you believe that there is no smallest positive number, then 0.99999... has to equal 1. You can't have one without the other.

So we can talk about "the length of a line." Then we can talk about the "length" of a set of points on a line. Then we start to find that these simplistic models, these obvious and natural choices, even though they are amazingly useful have some unexpected consequences.

Does that help you to understand the context?

I'd be really interested in developing an agreed dialog about this. Will you send me an email?
I agree. Nothing is as easy as it seems. There is a whole reason why someone is hired to do QA, and why there are research in software testing.
But the poverty IS effecting the ability for these parents to feed their kids right, even if technically money isn't the limitation. I see where you are coming from, but my argument is that the effects of being poor are preventing these parents from the tools, time, education, patience... and so on to properly feed their kids. So yeah, it's direct and indirect.

My main point is that poverty is creating an interconnected web of issues for kids. What might seem like a parent not caring about feeding their kids right might be connected to that parent living in an unsafe neighbourhood where a bus ride to the best food source is impractical compared to the corner store's junk food.