skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The best CS course I took was "Designing Functional Programs", an introductory course at Waterloo.

Haskell is used as the pseudo-code for lectures while assignments are written in Racket.

The course was great because the professor (PR) was:

1- Passionate

2- Knowledgeable

3- A kind person

I have found Racket to be a very effective way to make students (most of them have either no CS background or only have played around with imperative/OOP languages) more comfortable with functional programming.

The best memory I have was during the first lecture. After all the administrative fluff, the prof open his pdf and the first slide reads: "Induction"

I remember thinking "Is this a maths or a CS course?"

The second slide defined the set of natural numbers. As the prof start explaining the syntax and its meaning, I slowly start to realize the beauty of those few words:

Data Nat = Z | S Nat

where Z represent 0 and S the successor function.

We define the data type "Nat" to be either zero or the successor function applied to a "Nat".

It was my "ahah" moment. I was mind-blown by the language's clear syntax and immensely powerful semantics. (This is Haskell not Scheme/Racket).

We would later be introduced to lambda calculus (untyped vs typed), infinite data structures, interpreters etc... It was glorious... What a great professor.

The only "downside" to this is that Racket/Scheme isn't very much used outside of Academia. Which is clearly a shame given its incredible built-in features and elegant LISP-like syntax.

Should anyone have insights/opinions on why Racket/Scheme aren't more used, please feel free to share them with us!
Also related their previous work with RSA inventor Adi Shamir at http://www.tau.ac.il/~tromer/acoustic/
TestFlight improved this a lot last year and even more so this year with the bump to 6 external builds per day support and 2000 testers.

Note that only the initial major version will be reviewed on TestFlight but once that gets approved shortly, minor builds can be pushed without the reviews 6 times a day. It worked really well for us. Once we're happy with the build, it's one smooth process to push it to the app store.
Correct me if I am wrong but client side sanitization does not really count. It is really easy to bypass that check (send packets directly to the backend or use dev tools for example)
I think one thing is libraries. E.g. Python or Java has way more libraries for all kinds of stuff.
(had to read this article via a proxy, because of a redirect loop - anyone else seeing this? I'm in the UK.)

EDIT: and it was worth it, excellent article.
It's a feature, so you don't TL;DR to the conclusion.
What do they have solidarity with?
Telling someone to "grow up" is obviously uncivil.
No, literal:

http://projects.nytimes.com/interactive/sports/worldcup/spot...
They are intrusive in the sense that the code looks much different. On the other hand, I'd guess they are less error prone. Marking up syscalls would be a constant cognitive load, since you have to remember to do it each time (or else maintain an abstraction layer). But once you've decided to use futures, that's just how you do async.
Funny Baby Videos – Baby Stuck Under Chair Comes Up with Genius Idea
identify the markets that are being overlooked by others

That's what I meant about it being hard to escape reputations. The fact that so many other businesses are overlooking the market is part of what reenforces the status quo. Many businesses probably see challenging the status quo to be risky, since they don't know whether it's because of inherent properties of the market or because of a confounding factor.
I got a partially rendered page before, but it is not working anymore.
Effectively running one company is hard enough. Unless you have a team to help you, I wouldn't recommend running both if you are serious about them.

Picking the one with the most traction is fine. Also picking the one that excites you the most is good. You could pick based on any number of criteria really. But I would still stick to one.
I've been happily installing them all (I've had at least 4 in under a month), because I have an extremely recent laptop, and every update fixes something else! (dell xps13 developer edition.)
Having been through FCC testing, I can confidently say that the MacBook's case, and really any metal, consumer computer case, will do very little to help. EM radiation will leak through any gaps you have in that metal, and leak out any cables you have plugged into the machine that aren't also caged. For example: the power cable, USB cables, display cable, etc.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to crawl into a ball and cry away the FCC testing tears.
It still wouldn't have worked in the situation the article described, because their initial guess of who their users were was wrong. They posted on a forum, nobody liked it, but one of their users posted on another forum and it took off. TestFlight requires that you specify who the testers are, right?

A lot of the reason the web took off was exactly this kind of serendipity; a dev found an idea to be mildly interesting, posted a rudimentary v1, it's not useful for what the dev thinks it will be, but users (usually not the users the dev anticipated) find it useful for something else.
I imagine that at some point Python lacked libraries as well right? What motivated the first developers to make libraries for Python?

I wonder what are the dynamics that makes a programming language popular over another, also what factors come into play?
I learned also to check the original source: the data there doesn't seem to fit such a perfect straight line and does show a slight S curling at the edges.

It just shows an S curved the other way to what I drew.
Can you define these terms? I don't understand what they mean exactly.

At first glance, this expression looks like a positive number, meaning you could still get a reward by upvoting everything. If we ever roll out something like this, it has to not be possible to write a bot to gain karma—except, of course, by writing a bot the identifies the best stories, in which case you deserve it.
Fwiw browsers do this in practice, so the subset of HTML usable on the web is already regular. For example, Webkit-based browsers impose a nesting depth limit of 512.
ICANN is doing something quite reasonable. They're insisting that online businesses can't lie about who they are. What's the problem with that? Business operators that don't disclose their actual business name and address are criminals in many jurisdictions: California [1]. European Union.[2]

The "respectyourprivacy" site raises the terrible fear that web site operators might get spam. Big deal. You have spam filters, right? Or that a business might have to have a telephone number that reaches someone. Any business which doesn't, you probably don't want to deal with anyway.

I'm annoyed with the EFF for supporting this. They seem to want to make the Internet a safe space for scumbags. Look who else is supporting this - Namecheap, a bulk domain company. Who needs domains in bulk? Only scumbags, with their spam and made-for-Adsense sites. Namecheap is worried that the junk domain business might collapse. That would be a good thing.

I've had my real address and phone number on all my domains for two decades. That info is also on my trademarks, patents, and D/B/A names. It's just not a problem if you're not a scumbag.

[1] http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=bpc&gr...
[2] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:...
Coming from the web, where we often ship hundreds of builds and variations for a production app in a single hour, “within a day” seems a little quaint.
I have this crazy idea that you could build Clojure on Rust the same way Clojure sits on top of JVM right now and it could provide you with some interesting benefits.

If you read some of the design docs and articles, you'll find that Clojure is designed to be a "hosted" language from the ground up. It would be a challenge to implement some of Clojure's dynamic features. You could very well do a Clojure-like language which has a different approach to being functional. Clojure is very Lisp-y in that it's actually a dynamic runtime fronted by a language that makes it look functional.
> Merging feature branches off of one branch that was rewritten into a new one into the new one is nothing anybody would ever do or recommend. Rebasing is a requirement here, and truthfully an operation with less mental overhead, since it's actually just "copy all of those commits over to here, then put the branch marker at the end of the new copy".

I'm not even sure what you're trying to say here. In general we don't rewrite history of shared branches thus rebasing is certainly not a requirement.

> It kind of sounds to me as if you're saying "i don't want my developers to not learn rebase because it's easier if they learn a little less". Is that a correct understanding? If so, then you're trading a little upfront work for a lot of cleanup work later on.

They're not my developers. I'm one of the developers. I'm trying to educate my coworkers more in the ways of the git, but it's slow progress. There has been no cleanup work so far, mostly because we're not obsessive over having a "clean history", and are instead more than happy with a realistic one.

> Depends on how shared they are and how big the fuck-up is. Everything is relative.

It's not a fuck-up. Bugs happen, noticing and fixing them is progress. The revert commit references the issue tracker, and this itself is valuable history. Instead of the commits simply disappearing for a time.

> That developer gets a notice to get his shit together and gets fired if he persists. This is teamwork, not cowboy work.

Git is there to faciliate teamwork, not to get in the way.
You will never see doctors or lawyers write a statement like that about themselves.

Really? I've often heard doctors and lawyers engage in a little self-aware self parody.
Won't your registrar change all of them at once for you? Who are you using? Or do you have different contact information on each domain, in which case you made your own mess.
I love Clojure but it's unsuitable for realtime problems because of GC. For example, a programmable audio synthesizer. Audio signal processing has to be realtime or else it can't sync with the music playing. Rust may not be suitable for that either, but it seems like it's much closer to being able to do that than Clojure will be anytime soon.
They asked YOU to give THEM money!? That's absurd. I've worked in startups in San Francisco for a few years and have never heard of this. I wouldn't bother. I'm sure you can find another startup who needs frontend work that wouldn't ask you to pay them.
FIFA’s rot goes far beyond Sepp Blatter, insiders say
Or how about the other way? If you know when your blood is used and where, you might be able to make assumptions about who is getting transfusions. Granted that's probably small potatoes compared to all of the other privacy concerns in health, but hopefully this program is optional for the recipients.
I totally agree with the article except one thing: it's much much more a pleasant experience to code iOS app than Android, even without considering the fragmentation problem.
Yes, ConvNets are limited and results are pretty arbitrary sometimes.

The net correctly identified "leopard". Was it taught about sofas? Who knows, maybe Sofa had a high score as well on the output.

Or, look at the Dalmatian/Cherry picture. The net identified "Dalmatian" which is a 100% valid response! But whoever labeled it wanted "cherry". The picture is 50% cherry 50% dalmatian.

Pictures often have more than one element and a pure ConvNet is "one picture to one label"
Apple is the biggest indirect vector of malware..not apple itself but all these naive users. Think of all the tens of millions of people who downloaded malware infested iphone modifications..mindblowing
Solaris Zones? OpenVZ?
Taking the Work Out of Short-Term Rentals
This is beautiful:

"""
All we know is the past. All we are is the present.

All we know is form/information. All we are is energy.

Energy is conserved, thus it is always present. Conversely, energy is only present, so since it can never fall into the past, it is conserved.

Form manifests as a confluence of energy. Be it energies interacting, energy moving from source to receiver. The act of measurement involves using one form of energy to interact with another. So it should be no wonder observation is part of the creation of form/information.

Are quanta energy, or are they form? We can't measure energy, only its form, so how do we know?

If energy didn't have form, would it exist?

Could form be measured, without energy?

In order to be determined, doesn't an event first have to occur? Events are first in the present, then in the past. The laws may determine a particular outcome, but as there is no way know the total input into an event prior to its occurrence, than how can the outcome be deterministic?

All our knowledge is momentarily stabilized energy. It only seems deterministic due to the inertia. The only thing truly deterministic about the future is that it will happen, because the energy is conserved.

Someday this "quantum weirdness" will seem about as normal as a round earth and those who thought it strange simply had illusions the earth is flat.
""" - John Brodix Merryman
> It's just not a problem if you're not a scumbag.

If you want to avoid harassment for voicing your opinion online (see: gamergate), WHOIS privacy is quite useful.

EDIT: If legal action is necessary, why wouldn't a subpoena to the registrar be sufficient?

If ICANN had a policy that registrars must verify the contact information is valid, I could understand that- but this isn't what that is, is it?
https://hn.algolia.com/?query=Vivian%20Maier&sort=byPopulari...
"Congratulations, Herr Schmidt, your 2014 taxes have just been spent on a chandelier for the rebuilt Berlin city palace!"
Yup. It's annoying to hear that I should stop whining because the internet is fine, when he almost doesn't experience oppression in the same way.
Yes, the first few weeks of Rust, I wanted to strangle the borrow checker. Now, it seldom gets into the way b/c it's a seamless part of my thinking when I'm writing Rust. I rarely hear from it because I wrote/structured things the right way the first time.

This has had a huge impact on pushing my productivity in Rust back up toward, while not Python-ish levels, at least golang-ish levels.
I think there is a huge untapped market in privatizing prosecutorial duties, with the full cost of a trial born on a 3rd party to go after (for instance) environmental and white collar crime, while that 3rd party would see at least half of the money from fines as well as court costs. It would be a corporation that eats the rich.
Does using a registered agent service fulfill the requirements of California law? If so then I fail to see how that's really different from whois privacy. I mean most corporations have the same address: 1209 North Orange Street, Wilmington, DE
Zero Divided by Zero (2003)
No, absolutely not. This is why many registrars recommend that you disable WHOIS privacy when transferring a domain; if it's left enabled, the "private" email address displayed may not reliably forward confirmation emails to you.

There are some differences from registry to registry, but the .com/.net registries don't even store contact information at the registry level -- WHOIS is the only source of contact information.
The problem is the class of people who care about this stuff (like you and me) have largely lost control over shaping the future of the Internet, its protocols, and the things attached to it.

When it comes to the web, it feels like Google are now doing more to shape things to their business model than anyone else. HTTP/2, WebAssembly... it's only a matter of time before Chrome becomes the Play Store. This is a completely different vision to the days of centralized but federated services like e-mail, newsgroups and IRC. The web still feels like a pool of ugly hacks, but now it's ripe.

When you look outside of the web, there's little innovation on the open Internet. You can probably count the exciting non-proprietary stuff that has touched mainstream in the last 15 years on one hand (BitTorrent, Tor, Bitcoin). Most of what's 'hot' on the Internet isn't innovative at all, and it's all walled, proprietary, and monopolised (IM, social networking, VoIP)
> the latest derivative tech company

If the Internet were more decentralized, wouldn't there be more 'derivative' companies just due to the fact that there would be many companies competing in the same space (e.g. many companies offering social networking via federated, but decentralized services)?
Depends on what you mean by safety. "People may die" safety, no; but "data may be lost, existential risk to business" safety, yes. Dropbox is writing a block storage engine in it.
The laws were recently changed in January. They've removed the loss of license but replaced it with a lenghty ignition interlock requirement.
... doesn't explain the real world
application of homeomorphically
irreducible trees, ...

... which are deeply intertwungle with computer networks and computability problems, but you know, don't let ignorance get in the way of a good dissing of something you don't understand.

... which apparently aren't really *math,*
but graph theory.

Because, you, know, research mathematicians just sit around all day multiplying together really big numbers.
Thanks to you and aaron-lebo for pointing that out. I'm not sure how I missed that, as I distinctly remembering noticing the language selection in the corner.

I probably should have written something like "no longer want to participate in." "Use" is too passive, probably. That being said, "quit" feels distinctly stronger than how the German version.
> Quick: tell me the tendency among all clinics as you move from year lavender, to red, to yellow, to green, to black, to peach in clinic 1

The other clinics show reasonable self-similarity in years 3, 4, and 5. But the fraudulent clinic is reporting almost nothing at all. Not whatever codes it reported in the past, not whatever codes are worth the most money, not even randomly selected codes -- nothing. It's true that that might not be interesting if the other clinics showed similar behavior, but they don't. (And actually, I think "no medical demand for a three-year period" would be pretty interesting too.)
Working link: http://www.wired.com/2015/06/course-china-russia-snowden-doc...
> Look who else is supporting this - Namecheap, a bulk domain company. Who needs domains in bulk? Only scumbags, with their spam and made-for-Adsense sites.

Aside from being an ad hominem attack, this isn't even an accurate assessment. Namecheap's domain reseller services are generally used by companies that want to sell domains (e.g, web hosts), but who don't want to go through the expensive, complicated process of becoming accredited as a registrar themselves. Painting them as "supporting scumbags" simply because they resell domains is ridiculous.

To make a comparison here, an analogous statement might be: "Twilio, an automated phone call company. Who needs automated phone calls? Only telemarketers..."
Cooking Fever Cheats Hack Tool 2015 No Survey
Any service that your heart melts most for.
I find this an interesting perspective because I prefer reading linear graphs. Show me a linear graph and explain the axes and I'll easily see what kind of distribution it is. Show me something that grows non-linearly and I would have no idea if it's exponential or polynomial or what.

> We all know how much a thousand dollars is (as opposed to an income centile), and how hard it is to get a $1000 raise as opposed to how hard it is to get one that will push us up by one percentile.

The point here is that wealth is not linear. Getting a $1000 raise depends entirely on what you're earning. What you're earning depends on where you live and so on. With linear axes I can easily compare the numbers around my own context, but it doesn't help me extrapolate beyond that. No matter how you choose your axes will fix this.

Ultimately there's no right answer to how to choose a scale. Different scales will show different patterns. The log-scale is useful here because it also represents the distribution of the wealth (to some extent). A log-scale will basically stretch out the data points at the lower values, giving more space to present the data for those who earn less. And there are more people who earn less!

I do wish they presented the dollar-amount for the log-scale though.

EDIT: Wait, the income-rank is actually a percentile of how much people earn? That's perfect! Then I can look at Rank=50 and know that 50% of the population is represented by the left side of the chart. That's actually very useful.
WHOIS significantly predates the existence of the web. The notion is if you have a public network resource identifier (IP address, domain name, AS number, etc.) that there be a record of who to contact to report administrative or technical problems to pertaining to that network resource. It is perhaps similar to having a formally registered place of business on record for a company to receive important correspondence.

Obviously the usages of WHOIS have drifted over time to go beyond that.
Biotech firm creates fake rhino horn to help save real rhinos
Study Finds a Way to Prevent Fires in Next-Generation Lithium Batteries
Ha! I was wondering this exact thing. How could it identify a sofa if it never learned about one? It seems very contrived. At the same time, the example is kind of clear, but we are making neural nets that are emulating Pollock and Dali, not Monet. If you can dig it. The whole beauty is the overlapping interstitial matrix of weighted values that leads to these beautiful discoveries. To rank such a fractal-like algorithm on whether or not it predicts a label satisfactory to the average human is to mis-apply the elegance and potential of these mathematical wonders, in my humble opinion.
This seems like a really big deal. Two important quotes:

The findings [...] could help remove a major barrier to developing lithium-sulfur and lithium-air batteries, promising future technologies that could store up to 10 times more energy per weight than batteries now used in consumer electronics and electric cars

In tests, batteries with both chemicals added operated at 99 percent efficiency after more than 300 charge-discharge cycles, compared to significantly decreased efficiency after 150 cycles for batteries treated with lithium nitrate alone
Scaling Arbitrary Graph Computations by Doing Them Online
...and the higher powered they are, the more that time and context switching costs them
Grokking xv6
Designing+with+Class:+Sinatra+++PostgreSQL+++Heroku+-+Michael+Herman
No, because it's not a website with a network between the backend and frontend. It's a desktop app, with no network connection, just using html for the gui. Nobody can send packages to it.
That is neat. Just for fun I tried to figure out how to set up Caffe on EC2. I got it to work, but I didn't get CUDA up and it probably would have been faster with Anaconda. But for what it is worth: here are my current notes https://github.com/JohnMount/CaffeECSExample
They're not talking about automated companies. They're talking about distributed companies. That's entirely different. This is the micropayment dream, again - everything is making tiny micropayments to everything else. I knew some of that crowd back when Xanadu was a thing. (Xanadu was Ted Nelson's thing, a predecessor of the World Wide Web. Everything is pay per view in Xanadu.) They were all fanatical libertarians.

Somebody read "Atlas Shrugged" too many times. (Part 3 of the movie is out, and in Redbox, if anybody cares. "The weak cinematic trilogy derived from Ayn Rand's 1957 screed-cum-novel limps to its merciful end." - Variety)