skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
When you read part of an ebook, set it aside, and come back, you want it to remember what page you were on. You also want this to work if you switch between devices. It is technically difficult to make this feature work without letting Amazon also know what page you're on.
management at that point becomes providing direction and helping focus priorities and helping your programmers be their best.
American recycling is stalling, and the big blue bin is one reason why
The O(1) part is:

* It's O(1) for user mode to know which fd in the set is signaled after returning from the wait syscall.

With select() or poll() the caller needs to traverse the list to know which fd is ready. With epoll(), kqueue(), or IOCP, you are draining a queue consuming events, each event removed from the queue in O(1) without re-scanning the entire table.

* It's O(1) to add an fd to the set of watched fds, or to re-enter the "blocked" state.

Because select() and poll() specify the entire list of watched fds all the time, the kernel side ends up copying and scanning the whole list at every wait step [O(n)], whereas epoll/kqueue/IOCP just leave the list of FDs in kernel memory across calls.
Just because people are highly motivated doesn't mean they're intrinsically organized. You can leave the programmers alone, but you still need someone to decide what they're working on and how to best allocate resources. A manager ensures a team stays coordinated.
You are correct. We are not a direct competitor, but fit into a space between Wikipedia and news sites, with a bit of YouTube thrown in.
So as an experiment, about a year ago, I helped created this page [1][2] (it had been around for a while, but had been deleted a few times). Some editor keeps deleting it or redirecting it to "cold chills" which it isn't. It's also not ASMR.

I've never had any edit to WP last longer than 24 hours, so I was surprise some version of what I helped resurrect still around. It's been worked on, edited, and even had some warning flags placed on it. In general, it's an improvement over what I originally provided.

Trouble is, I can't tell if this is because this is a weird and obscure topic area, or because what I provided (with links to research papers) was good enough for some bot not to automatically submit for deletion. Some of my original phrases have even survived which is pretty amazing.

Contributing to WP is terrifying.

1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frisson

2 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8190451
There's VerbalExpressions, which simply wrap common PCRE tokens into methods/functions: https://github.com/VerbalExpressions
https://www.google.com/search?q=The+Benefits+of+Mind-Wanderi...
Personally, I agree that real name policies are not a good idea. Fixing the problems with using real names is a better idea, though often not easy.
Like Scribd or even including PDFs of source material. There's also a policy issue in that Wikipedia does not like primary sources, and prefers secondary sources.
Imagine SSIDs in a couple of years...

COMCAST56B4_nomap_output_security_reinforce_superhappy_wifienable_security_ALLOW-P^[A-Za-z0-9\.]+$-_DISALLOW-P^[pet][0-9]$
http://ortask.com/testless-case-studies-find-duplicate-tests...
"I don't like it, but that's how it is."

No arguing with that.

In the long run, we can hopefully select against business practices that have these kinds of human costs.
Note that you don't need a dumb compiler, register pressure, or an instruction with physical register constraints to require a copy. Two-address instructions suffice: simply have a register for the first operand that contains a value that is used later. A copy is required to preserve the value stomped by the mutating instruction.

In any case I believe the point of the GP is that any necessary copy can be done by going through memory, so register-register moves can be dispensed with where minimalism is the goal.
Eroot Download – Wonderful Rooting Software
Apple wants to focus and develop its expertise in doing stuff with high margins (high-end hardware design and software development). To run lean factories would be a huge distraction to them, it makes sense for them to just let companies like FoxCon do it.
The famous proof that the primes are infinite is a nonconstructive existence proof. And weirdly, it proceeds entirely by trying to construct a new prime. It just fails to do so (well, sort of) while still invalidating the idea of an upper bound.
Number 6 was the hardest for me to learn - I always wanted to give people another chance to change, but they never did. It is always hard to fire someone, but once you have reached the decision to fire do it as soon as possible.
Regardless of the merits of Haskell, I think that learning any new language -- while sometimes necessary -- is among the least valuable uses of your "learning resources". That is to say, it may be valuable, but there are probably much more valuable things you can learn (from new algorithms and data structures through OS design and all the way to hardware design). Programming languages are a small -- and not the most central -- part of computer science.

Even from a pragmatic point of view, adopting a new programming language is one of the least effective ways to increase software quality. It is certainly the most expensive and wasteful way to increase productivity/quality and its returns are modest (certainly compared to the cost). I think that widely applicable -- and not at all "mathematical" -- techniques such as automated unit-testing have done so much more to increase software productivity and quality over the past twenty years than any language.
I've seen Federated wiki. Distributed publishing is interesting, but I think the wiki format, and even the article-based format of wikis and news sites is not suited to news on the web. We are basically making a database on news events that can be sorted and filtered by the readers, and wikis are not good at on-page sorting etc.
I'm using ReactJS with a rails app, and are doing so without needing the security checks on the client side.
i guess Nehe is no longer a thing... :)
How is it this only has 4 points in the last 20 hours?
Also:

> Thus, while it has been known for quite some time that x86 has far too many instructions, we can now contribute the novel result that it also has far too many registers.
If one considers the primary purpose of managers to be to improve the performance of those that report to them, then this list starts poorly.

It _is_ terribly difficult to manage unmotivated people, but most people only end up unmotivated because of poor management. And it's usually cheaper and ultimately better to motivate a proved achiever who has lower motivation than to find a replacement.
The last company I worked for was extremely high pressure, but I never encountered anyone who was harsh. They would be fired. It just isn't necessary.

Also, ENTP & INTJ all that stuff is proven to be bunk with no statistical evidence that it predicts anything.
Yes! This looks nice. I tried learning OpenGL some time ago but the resources were so mixed up and low quality that I gave up after few attempts. I might try now again because I remember it was really fun to make my own code generated 3d cube world (:
> If you fear for their mental health, fire them and direct them to services that can help.

If we're talking about Americans, their health insurance is almost certainly tied to their job. So firing them will force them to choose to either pay out the nose for COBRA or individual health insurance -- which means more stress, on top of the stress of losing their job -- or to give up access to the vast majority of those "services that can help" altogether.
What a stupid article. The author just proves that he has no clue what libertarianism is. His entire argument is that free and voluntary contribution spontaneously done by a large number of people under no coercion or threat of violence created something useful and wonderful. Ok genius. THAT is the essence of the market and the antithesis of the state (market does not need money to change hands, FYI any physical or psychological utility is enough). Non-aggression is the bedrock of libertarianism.
Thanks for proving the libertarian argument. Now stop writing clueless blogposts and go read a book.
There's this idea bandied about that Internet access is a human right.

There are certain services — currently centralised — that are large enough to start to be thought of as utilities. My family, friends, and colleagues are 100% bought in to Facebook. Family reunions, and literally every social event I go to (except weddings) are coordinated via Facebook. Friends and families announce engagements, deaths, and major life events through it. I don't know the email addresses and phone numbers for many of my friends, because it all goes through FB Messenger. I don't live in the same city as many old friends, and I travel a lot, and I know when they're in town and vice versa through FB.

This is not my choice. This is th collective choice made by friends and family. Stepping away from Facebook would mean my in-person social life would significantly diminish. I understand that some people's lives don't work that way, or they have fifteen friends from high school and three family members who are the only people they coordinate with regularly. Family alone accounts for 50 connections for me, and people I see in person at least once a month another 200.

There comes a point where we figure out that Facebook and Twitter are monopoly utilities, and need regulation as such. I can't sever my ties with Facebook in any meaningful way, and it seems odd that they should be able to do the same to me; my water provider can't cut me off, and my electricity provider can't either without legal recourse — that Facebook can seems odd.
Manning was in a different position because he was military. Putting your signature on that recruiting document both increases the legal expectations on your conduct and decreases the rights you have after you break the rules.
I look forward to 1-on-1s with my manager(s) and I've never used them for status reports.

Perfect time to ask questions about things not directly in my day to day domain.

Weekly seems a bit much for anyone but super-new-hires, though.
I meant that this software compiles brainfuck, rather than C. I was expecting a C compiler from the description.
That's wonderful/abusive. There used to be a macro assembler for the Apple ][ that came with an add-on package of macros that provided a BASIC-like language. It was heavily advertised in Nibble Magazine.

It seems someone managed to dig it up, collect some recollections by the author and demo it a few years ago:

http://www.kansasfest.org/wp-content/uploads/2010-neubauer-m...

https://vimeo.com/13739643

Circle is complete.
It also uses a single jmp instruction to branch back to the start in a loop.

Two values a and b can be compared by storing 0 into * a and 1 into * b. Then a == b if * a is 1. Then this value can be used to index into an array to provide different behavior based on if a == b.

Edit: apparently HN doesn't allow me to escape * with \, which the markdown spec says I should be able to do.
It's not just mov's. There's a non-branching jump at the end that loops back to the beginning. Termination is accomplished by reading from address 0.

It's based on this paper: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~sd601/papers/mov.pdf
To those interested, the exact same technique is achievable in imperative languages[1] -- only with less effort and in a less intrusive way -- with mocks.

[1]: That support at least some notion of meta-programming/reflection.
How to Insert Tables in Blogger Blog Post – Onenaija Blog
Ask HN: Self-doubt, inferiority complex is killing me. How do I fix that?
I'm a CS student. Recently I have been battling with self-doubt a lot. I'm super self-conscious when I'm coding as well as when I'm speaking English--my 3rd language.
As a result, I avoid trying to solve hard coding problems. I freak out when I have to pair program with someone or when someone else is reviewing my code. And I tend to make a lot of syntax errors. I also tend to rely on documentation a lot.
Furthermore, I tend to make a lot of stupid mistakes when I'm speaking English even though I have been living and attending college in an English-speaking country for the past three years.

Could you guys please give me some advices on how to deal with that issue? Thanks lot!
Windows 10, the cluelessness shows at step one
I've been using React and Flux for a few enterprise projects, and although I don't have tons of experience with browser applications it is the most helpful and pleasant JavaScript technology I've ever used (aside from maybe jQuery, but that solves a very different problem).

I agree with the people saying that "stock" Flux has a lot of boilerplate. The upside is that when you're looking to add or change code, you know exactly where to go even as the UI and business logic get complex. Some of the newer Flux implementations look like they reduce the boilerplate, but I'd like to get more comfortable with the concepts before choosing another opinionated abstraction.
The regular 1-on-1 thing is mantra because people are notoriously bad at determining when they are actually needed, and because so many managers spend far less time actually listening to their reports than they think. They often spend lots of time with their reports, but usually talking to them or over them, or focusing entirely on tasks rather than giving attention to the person.

If 1-1s take one or two days of back to back meetings, to me that means the team is either too large for you to effectively manage without putting putting in place a team lead or more to delegate to. Or alternatively those meetings are really necessary, or you wouldn't have that much to talk about. If it leaves someones voice hoarse as a manager, it makes me think they're not listening enough.
I've found that groups of individual contributors are actually very good on deciding what is important, what they should work on and when, and how to work together to get things done.

Managers can provide a useful role in setting the scene, reminding what the goals of the organisation, the department, and so forth are, and how this connects with what the team is doing. They are perhaps most useful in working with individuals who aren't working well as part of the team at the moment - giving them feedback, mentorship, building bridges, connecting them with people, training, and so forth.

In my opinion, managers hurt more than not if they override the self-organisation of teams, and this most hurts when you need two teams to work together - and one of the managers has (explicitly, perhaps) made it clear that doing things "off the plan" is not appreciated.
> Maybe some use of XML

No. If you're even thinking about defining a language in XML you've probably already screwed up some place.
You should probably still learn Haskell, because it will help you get better at separating concepts in other programs you write. Ideas you will learn in Haskell that you won't necessarily in the languages you listed:

- type classes and their associated laws (e.g. generalize mapping: it's obvious that you can map across a list. it's less obvious that you can also map across a Maybe. it's even less obvious that you can map across a function...)

- sum types

- functions as a distilled programming concept without ancillary implementation details such as C's or C++'s "unique address" rules

- restricted effects - subsetting IO for stronger static guarantees (like c++'s const but way more powerful). STM was built this way. BufferBuilder too. http://chadaustin.me/2015/02/buffer-builder/ It's a powerful technique in Haskell that you don't get in other languages.

- the realization that monomorphization is a generics implementation detail

- the feeling that you get from generic, terse, dynamic-looking code that you can still rapidly iterate on in a repl

Haskell is not some pure ivory tower - there is plenty of imperative stateful code written in Haskell. The value of Haskell is that it introduces a pile of powerful ideas that you will carry through the rest of your career, even if you don't write Haskell on a day-to-day basis.
It sounds like you're saying "I can optimize my algorithms better than any machine could, so why would I learn how to write code that a machine could reason about more effectively?"

Or more accurately, "I don't write code that needs what Haskell offers, so I'm not going to learn it." Which is fine, so long as you keep writing the same kind of code.

Anyway, the reason we need these kinds of things to be more popular is so they are better understood. And if they are better understood, they will allow us to produce better ways of solving problems. Haskell is a very influential language in the world today, and it's not because it is strictly superior to other languages, but because it encourages ways of thinking about problems that are elegant and insightful in addition to being pure.

Haskell's performance is 'pretty good.' It's not great. But it's not awful, which is what it would be if it weren't as good a language as it is. And the reason Haskell is not awful is because of those features that you're saying aren't important to you. Those features took a slug and turned it into a rabbit. It may not be a race horse, but if you ported those improvements into something like C, you'll have a high-performance rocket. Code that could possibly automatically refactor itself into more efficient, more general components.

You could potentially get something faster and more expressive than any language you know. And "who knows what's next" may not be you, because you don't know what's now.

But really, nobody is selling you functional programming because it'll make your code faster. They are selling it to you because it inspires them.
This is almost surely a dumb question, but what would happen if someone made a processor that only executed mov instructions, which would be extremely simple, and presumably would be really goddamn fast. Would that be competitive with today's fastest CPUs? If it were, what would be the advantages and disadvantages of this design?
Good for mobile applications. For fixed location (eg. renewable energy for off-grid housing) I'm still keen to see the performance of Velkess flywheels: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1340066560/velkess-ener... which, being kinetic and held in vacuum, nominally don't wear out for a very long time and provide other benefits (reduce losses due to AC/DC conversion).
Candy box transformer [YouTube]
Regular expressions are a very obviously inefficient and confusing syntax, full of incidental complexity, and to make matters worse, they’re often a bit less powerful than we want them to be.

The best summary of the problems I’ve seen is from Larry Wall, highly recommended if you haven’t read it before.

First half of this page: http://perl6.org/archive/doc/design/apo/A05.html

Unfortunately, I think at this point regular expressions are too firmly entrenched in too many places to properly replace.
> HN doesn't allow me to escape * with \, which the markdown spec says I should be able to do

So? What does the markdown spec have to do with... anything? The XML spec says you have to begin your comment with a version number declaration, but you're not doing that.
Most programmers I know (myself included) don't need managers but facilitators, people who get shit out of the way so I can do my job.
Is this a bug in VMware or a bug in Windows?
Almost all students do internships in the two summers in between the three years of law school. These internships at top firms are themselves highly competitive, as they result in job offers for the best of the interns.
Good old Nehe O7
Personally, I just quit editing after 15 years (12 as an administrator) in protest at the deletion of good encyclopedic content. Frankly, I can see clearly why new editors don't want to become involved in Wikipedia - the community these days is positively toxic. I think, subconsciously, I was rather hoping someone would fix the problem and invite me back, but not only has the problem not been fixed but nobody seem to give a damn. There was a time when I even attended Wikimedia physical meetings with governments and academics and so forth. Well... no more: so long, and thanks for all the free edits.

My solution? Remove all the bullshit policies, reduce things back to a core of spirit-of-the-word driven basics, and then have a random selection of a panel of community judges (extra/uninvolved eyeballs) for anything at all that people want to dispute. This would do far better than the mob rule of yore, while lowering cognitive overhead and friction for new editors.
If your tests fail for any of the reasons the author leads with, and don't get fixed straight away with some soul searching on the part of your developers, you need to start hiring some engineers.
Right. The "studio couches" are couches.
I think you underestimate how focused the major law firms are on pedigree rather than on straight merit. Bypassing the standard process will indeed get you a law degree and a chance to take the Bar, but it won't necessarily even get you an interview at a top firm.
Where Maps are Going
I think you should work through the details with your team and own the project and defend your decisions. He can only humiliate you if you believe what he is saying. There are people you just can't please, however, that is how he is pushing you to be great. That is probably why he is successful.

To be honest I have never received even 4 hours per week from a manager, on a consistent basis. You need to manage him like he is upper management or a client, he will ask the impossible, not tell you how to succeed, and expect everything.

Build what he needs, and persuade him as to why it is great. He wont express the details because even he doesn't really know.
90 direct reports?
I think of regularly scheduled 1-on-1s as a shortcut to make employees feel like management is open to serious communication. It's a regularly-scheduled explicit opportunity to give feedback, so even if no specific feedback is usually necessary, when it is necessary the time slot is already booked.

Obviously, being open to communication is a good thing, so I'm not really critical of 1-on-1s. The fact that there isn't usually anything substance to talk about is a feature, not a bug. Sure, ideally the company culture and the individual relationships with managers would be such that everyone knows that serious discussions can be initiated any time they're necessary, but failing that, regularly-scheduled 1-on-1s are probably the next best thing.
The WMF collects over $50 million each year in donations. Don't you think they would be best to use some of that money for the prize?

It's taken 15 years and while there are a huge number of articles, the quality of each is, as you say, rather poor. The question is why? Why so much effort, so much pain, for such a low-quality result? Why are you still working on improving articles. years later? I think it's because the wiki software itself, while allowing initially fast content creation, is very poor at creating quality content.
Hmm. Sam was only at Imgur for less than a year. That's a lot of management lessons for a limited period of time...
Avdi Grimm: Seven Bedtime Stories
The most unmotivated people I have ever had the displeasure of having to manage were people I had no ability to fire or promote. There is basically nothing you can do yet higher management still holds you responsible for the lack of results.
Might want to look at the examples. They turn an equality check into two register stores and a load.