skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>The move fast and break things approach

Sounds like something I want no part in.
I understand trying to be humane to everyone, but you cannot just decide to not fire anyone, ever. If someone does not want to be at a job, it is not an act of charity to keep them at that job. If they really do not want to be there, they can cause a lot more grief to themselves or others. It's cruel to be kind.

You're not Schindler. Firing people is not a death sentence. If you fear for their mental health, fire them and direct them to services that can help. Hell, companies even do this routinely in a fashion: it's called outplacement.
Crazy that IOCPs were in NT 3.5 in 1994[1], but it took FreeBSD until 2000 to add kqueue[2], and Linux until 2002 to add epoll[3][4].

I guess it just must not have mattered that much? Is it only recently machines became primarily IO bound?

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT_3.5
[2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_FreeBSD
[3]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epoll
[4]https://lwn.net/Articles/13197/
Fyi bamboo isn't wood.
When did it become a Universal Truth that good management requires regular scheduled 1-1s (weekly or biweekly at most)? Clearly managers should meet frequently and in depth with people on the team, but the "regular 1-on-1" thing is mantra, and I'm not sure there's research/evidence to support its efficacy.

People never look forward to them. You gotta remember everything you did that week so you can report on it (even when told the 1-1 isn't meant for status reports... it kinda always is). You gotta think of some issue to bring up to manager's attention. It interrupts your whole day. Your manager didn't yet help you on your problem from last week -- now they want to listen thoughtfully to problems this week?

From the manager's POV: You've been keeping up with the team members all week, helping out and checking in every day... now you're gonna lose one or two days with back-to-back 1-1s which leave your voice hoarse. They need a few more days to finish out whatever you discussed last week... should you cancel the 1-1 and sync up on the next week (and lose the 1-1 tempo), or have a "no-diff" meeting that you both know you coulda skipped?
I really hate comments like this, I don't think 3 universities hold the monopoly on impressiveness.
I don't think your X Prize idea is good. The last thing we want is the people who are willing to donate time to editing to split between many competing sites. 10 wikipedias each a fifth the size would not be an improvement.
Re. civility, I've had very good results in reducing stress between both parties by clearly separating the defects in the work from the person / people involved. I think that's the key because I've had terrible experiences when that did not happen, when I was either blaming or blamed (seemingly) by teammates personally for any mistakes. Still, I'd rather receive any honest feedback than none at all, even if it is presented incorrectly and callous. Holding back feedback to be nice can grow problems and erode trust.
It's not really surprising, but many of the comments on the original article* focus on the relationship with the physical device qua inanimate object. But while the devices are running to part supply problems, the loss suffered is not the object itself but the uniquely developed pattern of the robot's adaptation to its owner; I think it is not too much to call this pattern a personality, even if it is a simple one. As we know, quite simple algorithms can give rise to very complex and chaotic behavior.

If the youngest one was made a decade ago one presumes those patterns are stored only in some sort of battery-backed memory. One wonders whether they can be archived in some fashion. It's very odd to me that we haven't seen any similar consumer products, though perhaps the combination of high cost and the recession explain why. Given the progress of mobile technology one could construct much more elaborate and responsive robot companions today than when Aibo was on sale, and I wonder why nobody seems to be exploring that space. For anyone who does, this offers something to think about.

* from the NYT. It was posted here a a few days ago but got ignored, unfortunately.
sorry if you don't have a sense of humor as this was clearly not a serious question
I wouldn't worry about it too much.

I find myself up at 4 am some mornings working, putting together emails, especially if it's something exciting or on my mind. If he only requires 6 hours of sleep he might be turning in at 10pm and up at 4am.

Or sometimes I find myself up for an hour or two around 3 or 4 am and then go back to bed after clearing my mind, finishing up some code, sending some emails, making notes about an idea.

So I wouldn't worry too much about when he's up emailing thinking about his business.

But you definitely are only productive 8-12 hours per day tops, maybe less. But being excited about something can result in getting an early start or being up an hour or two in the middle of the night.

If you notice he's exhausted, making lots of mistakes then think about asking him if he's getting enough sleep or wants to take the afternoon off.
UI Oh My
Not to be heartless, but why would it be a businesses concern if someone was depressed or not?
It has been amazing for me. The one directional data flow of react and flux has made component design so simple. The modular design of flux and react makes it versatile for various projects too.
I would read that as any entity doing commerce that includes a payment, online. I.e. - if you want to make credit card charges etc.

Frankly I'm not fantastically bothered if that's the definition. A lot of "traditional" internet rules/guidelines seems to follow the U.S. model of being an unregulated mess.
I don't think FB is infallible in its policies and service implementation; for example, I think Eric Meyer was 100% on point with his (very calm and empathetic) essay, "Inadvertent Algorithmic Cruelty" [1]

That said, while I don't think the OP is wrong to feel upset or worried, but what she wants can be done without equal unintended negative consequence. A couple things stuck out:

1. When Facebook took one user’s pseudonym away, an abuser showed up to events that person had RSVP’d to before the name was changed

2. Perhaps the most frustrating part of this is that the person who flags your account is afforded more privacy than you are. Even when it’s a matter of personal safety, Facebook will not reveal the accuser.

-----------

1. This is easy: don't RSVP for public events. Or don't do so in such a way that requires Facebook. Though I concede that there may be some events that logistically require Facebook login (through some 3rd party service, like Eventbrite)...I guess, don't go to those? Or privately call the event? Either way, the OP describes a drastic situation in which a stalker is so committed that he/she kept searching for the victim, even after early searches returned no results (because the victim had a pseudonym). OK, besides the possibility that, just maybe, the situation has elevated to the point where police should be involved...the more disturbing part is that the victim thinks a pseudonym is sufficient security-through-obscurity. No. Just no. If you have a pseudonym, and you insist on using a recognizable photo, and just a few of your friends have their profile public enough to show listed friends...then a committed stalker has everything they need to find you.

2. And this is an easier objection to rebut: the OP sees no downside to Facebook exposing the identities of accusers? Really?

[1] http://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2014/12/24/inadvertent-alg...
Disagree. The GT Advanced Technologies debacle is a concrete example. Sure Apple lost money on that one, but it would have been a bigger hit on their bottom line had they full invested in their own sapphire plant and tooling. In the big scheme of things, fighting a lawsuit with an external supplier is a small price ot pay as compared to missing an iPhone launch window.
> People never look forward to them.

I'm sorry, but...speak for yourself. I have nothing but respect for my manager and he respects me as well. It's there so if I have some persistent problem or concern with our project's direction, they can help. And, yes, it does provide the opportunity for you to market yourself and what you've done. Marketing is important.
Here are some of the things that can go wrong:

1) some teen drivers are not allowed to drive at night. Some people have a suspended license and are legally restricted to only driving to/from work or to/from school. These people might not be able to participate. How are the restrictions added to the system?

2) My timing is tight. Work ends at 4:00 and I have to pick up the kids from day care by 4:15. It's a 10 minute drive. Do I schedule a pickup every day or do I chance that I might be required to detour for someone else?

3) I live in the countryside about 10 minutes drive from the nearest neighbor. Do I get to have my own car? If not, how long does it take to get a ride?

4) I live on an island where the ferries to the mainland only run during the day, and I want to take the first ferry of the morning. How do I arrange a 5am drive if there are no cars on the island, or none close to me? What if there was a storm that prevented the ferry service from running the previous day?

5) Does the scheduling system know the ferry schedule well enough to know if a pickup is even possible? What if I and the car are on the ferry going from A to C, with a stop to load/unload at B, and there's a notice for a pickup at B. It's not possible to unload, pickup, and load in the short time the ferry is at the harbor, and the next ferry is an hour later. Am I penalized for declining the ridiculous assignment?

6) I do social work and visit 12 residences each day. If I partake in this system, will it introduce enough variability that I have to reduce the number of home visits I make?

7) I am moving and the car is full of boxes and luggage. (It took an hour to load everything.) Do I still have to pick up other people?

8) I suffer from social anxiety disorder and have difficulties dealing with strangers, including as a driver or as a passenger. Do I still have to participate or is there an ADA exception?

9) I have a restraining order on me which prevent me from being within 1,000 feet of my ex-spouse. I'm scheduled to pick up someone from next door to said spouse, and that address is well within the exclusion range. What do I do?

What is the resolution process should there be a conflict between what the system expects that you can do, and what the reality is?
For a long time now I've been looking at Haskell from the outside, and wondering whether I should take the dive and learn the language. I usually write apps and games, though, and my gut has always told me that there's very little advantage to writing code that's primarily declarative, imperative, or reactive in a pure-functional manner. Sure, I use some functional principles to minimize code complexity, but I haven't made the commitment to learning a new language to experience the purity.

Still, reading blog after blog telling me how awesome functional programming is, and meeting people in person who swear by it, and who try to sway me to the religion, made me desire to learn FP, just in case they were all right. I try to improve myself when I can, and ignoring other developers' advice isn't a good way to improve yourself.

But after reading this well-written article, I am at peace with my long-standing de facto decision not to burn time learning Haskell. I'll continue to use functional code organization when appropriate, and I'll probably keep reading the articles from time to time, but to me deterministic speed of execution is far more important than "code purity." I'm a good developer precisely because I'm good at understanding how code effects propagate, I'm good at designing code to be clean and fast, and I know when to allow side-effects and when to forbid them. I don't feel the need of a crutch to make my code "more correct," and I already have access to several options to help me make my code more concise. I wish I'd seen this (2009?) article sooner.

So no Haskell for me. Long live Python/Lua/JavaScript/C++/Go/and who knows what's next. [1]

[1] Those are the languages I currently use the most. I make no claim that they are better or worse in some abstract way than Haskell. In concrete ways, however... ;)
I adore react. I've moved two companies to it, one on my own and one with a team, from angular and template toolkit respectively. It's been an enormous boon to each team, who have both found that it rapidly leads to clearer shorter code.

There's a dip. Your team will briefly get really screwed up, because the mind change is big, and since it's just part of the stack, after that you'll have some library support choices to make.

Try it on a side project. Once you have a gut feel for it, you'll know.

----

Edit: splelang si hrad
Let's do a reductio-style thought experiment: what if everyone was depressed? That's obviously a business concern.

The standard argument for socialism follows from the same reductio: what if everyone was happy? That would be GREAT for business.
Agreed, i dont do 1:1's with my team a) i have about 90 folks to deal with, so it would be near to impossible. b) all my folks know (and do) that they can grab 30 mins at any time with me if they have something on thier mind. I kinda keep track of who is not talking to me, and hit them up with a chat now and then.
I also do something I call "walking the floor", where every few hours i get around everybody and just say hi and ask how everybody is doing, and what they are up to, ask if they have any problems. Show interest in what they are doing. I usualy time it when i know folks are takimg natural breaks etc so i know im not distracting them.
Acceptable in what sense? Users know about it and accept it, therefore it must be acceptable. I don't think you can opt out, though.
If I had some persistent problem or concern I would just bring it up, I wouldn't wait for some scheduled meeting. I guess some managers might not be so easily available.
Yeah, traditional desktop users who were "casual" are dropping the desktop for mobile. #DayJob is primarily used by non-technical people and we've actually lost a significant amount of traffic on the Desktop.

I'm talking based on user accounts that are still active after at least a year. [e.g. YoY, we'll see them switch from 100% Desktop to 100% Mobile in some cases.]

Its too hard to tell the difference on "newer" accounts but the share of Mobile to Desktop traffic is definitely moving in Mobile's favor.
Perfect vision without glasses
> Having a challenging interview process with $30k in debt vs being $250k in the hole after graduating sounds like a pretty good trade off to me. I'd rather take the harder interview and little debt rather than a slightly easier interview and a crushing $250k debt before starting a day of work.

Maybe so, and I've said as much. This depends on your specific career goals. But note that "challenge interview process" here is really a euphemism for "will get a significantly smaller range of job offers."
I have a friend who unfortunately has the same name as a movie star. She sent in her ID and they still wouldn't let her have her own name.

To this day she has an account with her name misspelled.
AIUI almost all of the actual mandatory professional education in US law school occurs in the first year, 1L. It's possible and occasionally useful to do more focused professional study in 2L and 3L if you want to but you can equally fill your schedule with Literature and the Law or the like. An MLS (Master of Legal Studies) covers the same material as an Ll.M./1L, is open to non lawyers and qualifies one for nothing.
This is to address people gaming the old system by turning in 10-30 page books of barely readable garbage. Under that system authors were paid ~$1.30 per book each time the reader passed the minimum 10% book length.

This encouraged a flight to short, low quality books. This new plan should wash out low quality work as it's no longer profitable to publish pamphlets with great titles and near Markov-chain levels of nonsense.
Your google maps component looks awesome. I'm looking at a few frameworks for my company and react is the one that I'm leaning towards (I've used angular before but react feels more performant out of the gate). We use google maps a lot so having this would be awesome!
It seems like too much to have one person managing all 90ds. I guess this is where people either agree or disagree about the layers of middle management...for example have local leads reports to local manager, and local manager reports back to director/VP/SVP or whatever if you have people concentrated in various location.
What about something like "Capital in the 21st Century"?
I think it might that http://appurify.com is what powers the Cloud Test Lab behind the scenes?
Well, if it reaches a point where it can compile itself, you'll get your compiler written with just one instruction (assuming that's what you were hoping for).
It's a five year direct entry undergraduate degree. German universities only recently started granting Bachelor's and Master's degrees separately, instead of having the Magister or Diplom (direct entry Master's) as the lowest degree. Law and Medicine maintain the old model. Besides, German University preparatory high schools are at least equivalent to an A.A./A.S.
One of the best, directly measured sources for this:

https://www.quantcast.com/wikia.com

Says that desktop is mostly flat, more than it is evaporating.

Wikia has a vast amount of traffic, as one of the top ~20 sites in the US. If you take their average monthly desktop numbers from August 1st 2013 to now, there has been zero decline.

Would this premise hold true for sites like Twitter and Facebook? Probably not. Social sites with photo sharing are likely far more prone to erosion on the desktop.
Why are you not Concentrating on Study?
His examples were bad (asterisk etc.) but the point is valid. There is some hairy regular expression syntax that is pretty difficult to grok right off the bat. It could be simpler and clearer.
"It’s terribly difficult to manage unmotivated people. Make your job easier and don’t."

And where is the challenge if everyone is highly motivated and easy to manage? Then you can just leave the programmers alone. They don't need management in this case.
Well you say that but I work at a very high pressure job that requires me to be far harsher towards employees than friends.

I test as ENTP at work and INTJ at home just because success at work requires a different mindset. I don't like it, but that's how it is.
You could say that about any syntax. But actually coming up with a better syntax is much harder than just saying it can be done.
I’ll agree that “color space” isn’t the most useful term because it’s pretty vague, but there’s really not a meaningful “distinction between a color encoding model and a color space”, sorry; “color encoding model” isn’t a standard term, and is also not very descriptive. Moreover, “relative color encoding model” isn’t a term used by anyone ever and doesn’t have a prima facie obvious definition, so nobody is going to understand precisely what you mean by it.

I’d rather see terms like “color appearance model” or “color order system” or “device-dependent color space” etc., but using vague generic terms is occasionally appropriate, so we shouldn’t totally chuck them out.

In any case, such semantic quibbling is all fairly irrelevant to anything, and has very little bearing on whether the page under discussion is “misinformation”.
If people didn't depend on things they didn't control, the economy would probably collapse and we'd all be hunters and gatherers again.
California does not require a law degree to practice, although their bar exam is apparently extremely difficult.

http://www.calbar.ca.gov/Public/Pamphlets/BecomingALawyer.as...
For everyone interested in learning OpenGL I'd recommend learning WebGL. It's the same graphics API, except that it runs in the browser so you don't need to mess with compilers and linkers and your scenes will work on all platforms. If you think it's fun you can then move to native OpenGL later (if you must – WebGL is good enough for surprisingly many things).
Pure functions are beautiful, useful and desirable, yet I believe, like the post's author, that a language that tries to enforce referential transparency everywhere is misguided, in that it places too big a burden on programming while doing little to prevent bugs that really matter.

Not all bugs are created equal -- some are easier to introduce and/or harder to find than others. A language that chooses to reduce bugs by placing non-trivial constraints on the developer -- i.e. by increasing the mental burden -- would do well to concentrate efforts on those bugs that cost more. IMO, Haskell does the exact opposite, nearly eliminating data-transformation bugs -- that are very easily found -- and doing little (though not nothing) to reduce effect-related bugs.

Pure functional programming carries other burdens, too, some stemming from its conceptual roots in lambda calculus, like the lack of a clear complexity model.

I also reject the conclusion that if most costly bugs are related to effects, our best course of action is getting rid of them altogether (or relegating them to an opaque runtime). This solution seems strange, as side-effects -- in spite of their name -- are the most central component of useful programs. Effects are the things we program (unless we're writing a compiler). This solution seems to me like suggesting to a programmer that since typing is the cause of wrist pain, she should type with her tongue. There are better solutions already. Clojure's approach to memory effects is at least as effective as Haskell's in preventing certain types of bugs, yet the language places a much lower mental burden on the programmer.

Lastly, I think PFP has (unintentionally) caused many to believe it is the only approach to a more "mathematical" mode of programming, and the best course for formal software verification. Neither could be farther from the truth. Haskell could not have prevented the bug discovered in Java's (originally Python's) efficient sorting algorithms -- probably the most used sorting code in the world today -- a few months ago, and it would have been very hard to detect it even in Idris (if the algorithm is expressible at all in that language). Instead, it was discovered with a software verifier for imperative languages. It is true that PFP languages may depend in clever ways on the Curry-Howard correspondence to help (force?) the programmer to prove some properties of her algorithm, but spelling out a partial proof in the code itself is not the only -- or even the best -- way to verify a program.

All this is not to say that we haven't learned a great deal from PFP and its approach to software verification. But it is just one approach of many, and one that is particularly intrusive.
Forgive my ignorance but I thought being Turing complete was important because a Turing complete machine can in principle perform any arbitrary computation. As far as I know the program counter cannot be a destination for an X86 MOV. So you can't branch with only MOVs. How can you do an arbitrary computation if you can't branch?

Maybe you have to reorganize if(a) { b; } else { c; } as a kind of permuted b; followed by c; such that either the permuted b; or the permuted c; are effectively no-ops depending on the value of a.
Wikipedia should integrate NLP querying so you can ask it questions and it can attempt/succeed at presenting relevant and useful information from its graph.

edit voice search for mobile as well
You could say that about any syntax. But in most cases it would still apply much more to things like Perl regular expressions.
It's behind paywall. Can anyone paste it here?