skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
While I understand where you're coming from and agree to some extent, I think there is a difference between "speaking `intelligently`", "having an intelligent conversation" and "leaving a comment on the internet".

I would argue that there is no such thing as the first without the second, because you are not 'speaking `intelligently`' if there is no one who understands you and is able to make a conversant reply. In such a case you are only being arrogant.
> If they don't this isn't science. It's marketing.

Reporting observations doesn't make them unscientific. Science doesn't leap from nothing to perfectly teased-out causality. Incomplete results are still useful, as they attract attention to possibilities that require further explanation.

Put another way: science isn't a waterfall project.
There are mio and serde respectively for your first two points, and mio in particular is really popular.

Regarding thread::scoped, I think that kind of issue isn't unique to Rust (Java, a language with a simpler memory model, has had all kinds of weird corner case bugs, especially around memory and concurrency). It's also, again, more an issue of "safe manual memory management is hard": the simple ways to avoid that issue would have been "GC everything", "sacrifice memory safety", or "remove reference counted smart pointers", which contradict Rust's goals.
Dinosaurs – Movies vs. Reality
Java as a language is still very simple. Frameworks are complicated -- but I doubt this can be avoided in the long run, Go will have similar problems.
A lot of comments are missing a basic fact of how science works. In science we have a theory, make predictions, then stress test them.

This is one study examining a theory which we have various lines of evidence for. It is not supposed to prove the theory - just test one prediction. It is not supposed to be the end of research on this topic. It is not supposed to be final. Criticizing it for any of those things is a demonstration that you do not understand how science is supposed to function.

For some of the background on this particular theory I highly recommend reading https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evolution-the-self/2009... and the follow-up https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evolution-the-self/2009.... (If you want to get to the point, it is probably better to start with the follow-up.)
I think that's reductive. I'm a "decent programmer". (I think I'm a little better than that, if I'm being honest.) I regularly use Ruby, Scala, C#, and enough bash to choke a horse. Some C++ too, when I have to, but it's not something I ever want to touch.

I can't deal with Go. And I don't think it's me--I don't do Haskell because of me, I don't do Go because of it. I find it almost impossible to think in Go. I find it incredibly primitive, well past the point of "stupid code is impossible to misunderstand" and into "stupid code because the language demands it." This wouldn't bother me, in a very "you do you" sense, if I wasn't stuck debugging faddishly-designed tools like Docker and Terraform written in it. To this end I think Go is a regression for the open source community, because what I see as veneration of stump-dumb languages makes it harder, not easier, to be smart about problems.
I, for one, am glad Ember is still going strong. And, as a heavy emberjs user, most of these changes feel like a step in the right direction. But after reading through the change log blog, I have several questions (not complaints) for the core team (in case Dale / Katz and cronies are reading this):

1. What happened to the server fast-boot thing? I was under the impression you guys wanted to ship it with 2.0; has that feature been scrapped / moved into a separate project altogether?

2. There was no mention of the deprecating changes to the initializer API (i.e. the splitting into instanceInitializer and vanilla initializer). Have we gone back to the old initializer API in 2.0?

3. With the removal of action bubbling, do we now have to manually bubble up actions that start in some nested controller but gets handled in application route? For example, say you have an AdminUserController and it has an action that generates an ephemeral flash message, but you handle flash rendering in your application route. Do you now have to laboriously put an actions: { handleFlash { ... } } on every route along the way?
Anthem and Government Data Breaches Could Do Damage for Decades
I'm not sure calling it a "neologism" is accurate. It's a borrowed word that has a clearer meaning than anything in English. Such a thing is hardly unprecedented in English.
Maybe I've been lucky, but this doesn't mesh with my experience at all. The oldest guys at my company are the ones teaching the classes about Haskell or Scalaz. They're the ones trying out Elixir. They're the ones building frameworks for everyone else to build on top of.

The youngest people are banging out feature #4,501 for the website.

As you get older you should be spending more time experimenting, teaching, mentoring, reviewing and building foundation.

The senior guys are senior not because they've pumped out more features this year, but because they're making all the engineers around them better.
Those with the resources will always have more to lose than those without. This doesn't justify greater protections for them, especially when the reasons that have more are directly tied to the kinds of protections they have.

That's circular reasoning.

What you have to show is that those who are investing more money are making better decisions. Because we want to protect those who make the best decisions, not simply those who have the most invested.
The upside to jailbreaking iPhones
All the packages I need have been part of nixpkgs, except for node packages from npm. For those, I run npm2nix to generate nix expressions from the package.json files. That's occasionally tricky when npm packages do "clever" things that don't work when translated to nix. Generally, though, npm2nix works pretty well.

I also have about 3K lines of nix code for packaging my apps, configuration, cluster definitions for nixops etc. There's a bit of a learning curve, but I find it really pleasant, now that I have the hang of it.
Saying a software isn't "free" makes other people feel like the software is bad

Really? I've never seen that, except when the "other people" understand that to mean it doesn't fit the FSF's definition. People who don't know about the FSF's definition would just think it's paid software, not "bad", in my experience.

What software are you thinking that is considered "free" (and not in the sense of cost) by some people but doesn't fit the FSF's definition?
>Would it outrage you for someone else to take your code, put a pretty GUI on top, sell it, and make millions while you make nothing?

If he does it with the same license as mine (i.e. GPL), then no, it wouldn't outrage me (I would even be interested in applying to his company, so he teaches me how she did it). What I care about is the freedom of the users of my software (so I want to seal it to not be proprietary, ever), not about how other developers benefit from my creation.
I take it that you read the paper. Can you give us a tldr that has a bit more than this abstract?
I can't help but think that the spirit of free software, namely control over your computing/computer, is more relevant today than it ever has been. Just that the problem doesn't really seem to be in any particular computer program... It's a shame that even the FSF has no solution for web services that make mass surveillance possible.
great product landing page. Loads quick and lots of information. Works great on mobile. 10/10
I've been working in the industry for 6 months, and so far I've learnt that having a data-of-birth, post-code and surname is all you ever need.

..and that for twins, having the same post-code can be fatal..
You seem to be analyzing this from a more economic approach, whereas I'm leaning to the historical. I think I can incorporate your position, but I feel as though you undermine the role of CSP. You see it as a "differentiator", whereas I see it as a central research interest of Rob Pike's that permeated all his previous languages and naturally had to make it into Go, as well.

See this excerpt from the Alef reference manual [1]:

chan(Mesg) keyboard, mouse;

Mesg m;

alt {

case m = <-keyboard:

/* Process keyboard event */

break;

case m = <-mouse:

/* Process mouse event */

break;

}

Now where the toolchain is concerned, again that was adapted from the Plan 9 compiler collection (which even OpenBSD at one point was considering but backed off due to licensing) which makes cross-compilation a surprising breeze.

Carefully designed standard library? Plan 9's syscall interface...

Composable APIs defined by one key abstraction? Plan 9 syscalls again, though there it was 9P.

Speed was a motivator, but again - direct side effect of the "5 Principles of Programming" espoused by Rob Pike [2].

[1] http://doc.cat-v.org/plan_9/2nd_edition/papers/alef/ref

[2] http://users.ece.utexas.edu/~adnan/pike.html
True, they are different forms. However they are both part of the process of making sure that the FSF actually owns that copyright.
sub-Saharan* Africa
I see no problem with the Wording of this study. Firstly the study is not trying to go so far as to determine the reasons for such results. That is it is not statinng the reason behind why ltrs have lower testosterone.

Instead it is seeking to determine "[...] whether being in such a relationship (rather than being married) is the meaningful predictor of male testosterone levels."

Emphasis on meaningful predictor.
Not in all legal jurisdictions around the world.

That's why Creative Commons has a "public domain declaration", which includes an all-permissive license for if that isn't possible.
Not in many countries, you can't. That's why CC0 exists.
(Sample of 1). I think my personal experience would seem to indicate so. I've been in a committed relationship for 2 years. But sometimes the wife travels, and I hang out with my single friends, going to bars, flirting with chicks, etc. And I find that I'm a lot more 'affectionate' after this episode. Could it be that I miss the wife so much? I have noticed a difference between when I do the bar scene, and when I don't.
> I really don't get why people don't just declare their work public domain.

Among many other reasons, because "public domain" doesn't include a disclaimer of warranty.
I really don't get why people don't just declare their work public domain.

It's simple to understand. If it is in the public domain, people can just strip your name from your work. I have always seen the BSD, MIT, and comparable licenses as 'this is effectively in the public domain, but please keep my name on what I wrote, and don't sue me if it causes damage'.
Beautiful Paris wedding video
Coding what? Web applications? Never. Learning algorithms? Yesterday.

It all depends on what you are working on. I know plenty of successful programmers who have gotten away with knowing absolutely no math (not even basic calculus). However, if you don't know "advanced algebra", there may be doors that are not open to you.
> I really don't get why people don't just declare their work public domain.

Because in many jurisdictions, this is not a thing that can be done. It is not in the author's power. If you want people in those jurisdictions to be able to use your software, you need to provide some sort of license even if you consider the work to be public domain.

Even in jurisdictions when it is possible to do this, it's understandable that hobbyists would still want the protections of the "Don't use my name" and "Don't sue me" parts of 3-clause BSD at the least.

As for GPL, people choose that because they have different priorities than you. For an obvious and topical example, see Richard Stallman. He believes that nonfree software is actively harmful, and therefore takes measures to avoid accidentally supporting its development. You may not agree with this viewpoint, but he is clearly sincere in holding it, and it is his right.
On a laptop which frequently faces this threat, network access can be restricted to VMs which are isolated by use case:

- host outbound traffic disabled except security updates & VMs
- non-persistent "browser VM" for captive portal login
- non-persistent VPN VM
- user data VM(s), virtual NIC routed only to VPN VM

This can be done with VMware, Parallels, Qubes, Xen, KVM, etc.
I agree that the JVM is way, way ahead when it comes to things like agents and monitoring.

For me personally, those aren't a big of enough of a win. I would rather have simple code that is fast to scale and fast to understand.

Dealing with something like a thundering herd of traffic is much more difficult when your application can take upwards of an entire minute to start up, and to optimize itself to run at decent speeds.

There is likely a sweet spot however. My good experiences with go are working on high scale projects with a handful of other senior level developers. Some other projects I am involved in are with more enterprise shops with many more developers with a wider array of skill levels. In projects like these the other aspects of JVM like how well supported it is and how there is so many other tools for it, it might still win in one of these enterprise environments.

But for many of my use cases, the JVM just feels like it has everything-and-the-kitchen-sink, and sometimes you just want a small, nimble solution that does a few things well.
I certainly can't deny the Plan9-ism.
(fixed, ty)
Why Programming Languages Use Only One 'View,' and How to Fix That
>> although in r/fatpeoplehate's case, "more than 5,000" is a bit of an understatement;

The truth is literally somewhere in the middle on this. FPH used CSS to inflate the number of subscribers by an order of magnitude.
Ah, but is waiving of all the rights that you have under the copyright umbrella the same thing as "public domain"?
While I believe there are those who is genuine when saying that, I am a bit burned by all those people who would quickly complain if someone made a patched version of their code and put it under GPL.
> However, for everything else, I'm inclined to use GPLv3 / AGPL and offer commercial licensing under MIT for companies

Do you actually use MIT, or something similarly permissive but without permission to redistribute in source form? Because offering a true MIT license to paying customers means they could then redistribute that version to everyone. (Of course, doing so might mean they don't get any future versions from you under that license, but still...)
Summary: Nairobi needs a datacenter, with Akamai and Cloudflare.
"These days it's all secrecy and no privacy"
We have contemplated a POP in Kenya. We will get there. Johannesburg should be less than 200ms, so let me see if I can improve that... I would expect about 100ms.
Feel free to draft stuff and send it in. The guy you want to talk to is Dan Mikusa, who writes the majority of our KB articles.
I have access to the article. This statement is key: "By increasing libido, higher T may encourage mateseeking
behavior."

Of course testosterone drops when you find a mate. You don't have to fight for one any more.

They go on to show that it further decreases when you have children. Since virility is affected by T levels, it's a good hypothesis that having kids is likely a trigger to reduce the risk-seeking behavior in males after children are born.

It's kind of a "no duh" result in that light, and they sought to find evidence that supports this hypothesis. However, they are clear to state that they cannot address causation directly.

"High-T men may
be less likely to enter stable, romantic relationships. Additionally,
affiliative interactions with a partner may decrease
T levels, in turn reducing mating effort. We also expect T
variation within the group of paired men to be consistent
with variation in mating effort, although we are not able to
test this with our data set. For example, it may be that
paired-male T levels will be highest during times of sexual
activity with a partner (as suggested in Hirschenhauser et
al., 2002) or that variation in the strength of the pair bond
might explain variance in T levels among paired individuals.
These are all topics for which longitudinal data would
be of great help in teasing apart cause and effect."
I really don't get why people don't just declare their work public domain.

Well there's one very good objective reason not to: it's not clear if you legally can in all jurisdictions. It's not clear that you can just relinquish all IP rights to something. This means that the user of the IP can't be completely sure what they are and are not allowed to do with it, and they may be less inclined to use it than they would a BSD style license where they know what they can't do.

Some public domain desgnations, like CC0, partially get around this problem by including a clause that says that if they can't relinquish all rights, then they'll relinquish as much as is legally possible. This helps, but doesn't completely get around the uncertainty.

But mostly I think they are really concerned about this

Please don't be so quick to pass judgement. First, there are plenty of people who use the GPL to maximize the amount of software that is free, for whom "jealous control" is a secondary objective or completely irrelevant.

Second, there's nothing wrong with what you label "jealous control". If someone is made uneasy by the idea of someone taking their code and "stealing" from them, but they still want to embrace their users' freedoms, and they use the GPL, more power to them.

The only way that the GPL restricts my licensees is by requiring them to not use the fruits of my labor to restrict other people's freedoms. I don't want to be involved in infringing on people's rights like that.
It doesn't feel right to say go is "between" java and c. There isn't a tremendous amount of expressiveness in go that java can't replicate, and there's enough in java missing from go that makes it a wash, for me anyway.
Also, QUIC helps a lot.
I'm curious about two things.

(1) where does Rust fit in this?

(2) and if Go is lacking in the concurrency department and loses to Erlang in latency. Why don't people use Erlang/Elixir for servers and Python/etc for client side?
I am not (Dale / Katz and cronies) but I read somewhere that major fastboot work will begin after 2.0 beta is released. This will be to align it with glimmer changes. So hold on tight we still have more goodies coming in the 2.x series :)
I want this for something like Fiverr.

Instead of my kids accumulating more junk, they learn the skills of hiring and delegating.

Don't want to mow the lawn in this heat? Use your allowance to somebody else to do it. As long as the job is done they will earn their allowance.

I just need a way to make sure they're not outsourcing their homework or paying somebody buy them alcohol.
Solution: let's replace the "Internet" with only 100 faster-loading websites that we (and the local governments) approve. Win-win, right?
The nice thing about "no duh" results is that, every once in a while, something unexpected happens. And then, if you're lucky, a new glimpse of the world happens.
I'm on a really shitty Internet-connection, and this 1-page-per-slide format is hell. :(
If this was true, and not a just-so story, then it should be easy to point to several well-known open source projects that started out in Golang and ended up in some other language, or several concepts that were prototyped in Golang and then ported over to some other language.

Like every programming language ever, there are surely many Golang users who've used it solely to add a keyword to their resume. That's not a very interesting observation, because the same thing is true of Rust, Scala, and even Haskell.

Further, that doesn't really address the question of why so many teams select Golang in the first place. A programmer might use Golang to get the keyword on their resume, but a team shipping a new product has no such incentive.
Those things are not in short supply. The level of economic ignorance in your comment is stupefying.
A Free Guide to Simple Landing Pages (pre-launch)
> what about physical access? What about compromised individuals, or nefarious agents?

Always a risk and a very hard problem to solve since someone always needs access and that person can be compromised. Detecting and preventing this is what counter-intelligence is for, but counter-intelligence is never a guarantee of security.

You can trade off usability for security to slow the speed at which an attacker can copy everything giving you more time to detect the activity. This only makes sense if they information is exceptionally important to protect. That being said, even paper can be stolen in large quantities. Jonathan Pollard managed to steal quite a bit of classified paper from the US during his tenure. The Israeli's needed multiple highspeed copying machines to keep up with his output [1].

One could imagine a system in which records are stored in multiple places and people only have access to the local files. No one agent could compromise the entire system. Then again, you might be so secure you protect the information from yourself and may not be able to "connect the dots" which is probably what you have the information for in the first place.

As Snowden suggested, "The Two Man Rule" [2] can also make enemies spies jobs harder. While it is true a determined attacker can overcome it by gaining the other parties credentials, such actions raise the risk the spy being caught.

A very silly idea:

I've been told on older nuclear armed submarines the device used to launch the missiles must be carried from one part of the sub to another to begin the launch sequence. The device was extremely heavy and awkward requiring multiple people to move it and making the movement of it very obvious and loud. Thus, they accidentally achieved an additional "Two Man Rule". Perhaps if very secret information was encrypted and then stored on heavy large objects which could only be read/decrypted at another location in the building than it would be difficult to quickly steal and decrypt many of the files. A computational version of this would be a cipher that requires massive resources (memory, CPU) to decrypt. This is likely more fantasy than reality, but at least enemies spies would have to break a sweat.

>Interesting, and in line with your comment about the Gozer Principal (is there anything more than a tweet about that?)

I've been working on a blog post on it, but I don't really have enough content to flesh it out and make it worth reading at the moment.

[1]: https://books.google.com/books?id=MDZlAgAAQBAJ&pg=PT66&lpg=P...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-man_rule
On the other hand: If all the decent people refuse to work for broadly 'evil' organisations, the organisations are going to stay that way without there being anyone within them who might resist bad things.
Barely at all. Long Short-Term Memory network blocks, for example, are basically perceptrons with feedback controlled by two or three completely conventional non-linear nets running off the same inputs.

Deep learning networks are an assembly of existing connectionist parts, enabled by Moore's Law. There's nothing bad about this: the progress being made is real and substantial, but it's being made in ways that are true to Edison's prescribed ratio of inspiration and perspiration, although a lot of the perspiring is being done by machines.

The architectural tweaks, while small, are still very important. But the core learning algorithm is still backprop deployed over the new architectures.