skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I kind of feel like Google actually believed what they were saying at the time. Paul Buchheit, speaking of "don't be evil," said he "wanted something that, once you put it in there, would be hard to take out"--he wanted people to remember it and call them out if they broke it.

The fact that Page and Brin have increasingly distanced themselves from it, and gotten increasingly irritated when reminded of it, says to me that they've changed a lot since back then. The people they are today would never have saddled themselves with such a slogan in the first place.
You touched another interesting point. I remember reading somewhere that Steve insisted the mac shouldn't have a 2 button mouse for such a long time just because it would force developers make a simpler UI, where no 'hidden menus' could be created. The lazy option of just throwing everything under a 'right click' simply couldn't exist.

If you think about it, Force Touch could create that 'right click' in iOS, which I think is a bad idea for starters. We already have hidden gestures and tap & hold, so there's already enough stuff hidden from plain sight in the User Interface.

Let's face it: the popularity of these devices came from the fact that they are really easy to use to the average user (think your mom for example). Will she know about Force Touch and incorporate that in her interface discovery process ?
Even tho racist jokes are still jokes, they're also racist.
I suspect you didn't actually read the article, and that you're an idiot.
Not to make this discussion personal or anything, I'm curious have you ever worked in Ruby? You say things like "why bother" and "trying to squeeze blood from this turnip" as if you don't understand why someone would love Ruby.

Anyway, I do agree with your argument. Unfortunately Ruby is from the generation of programming languages in which I/O was just seen as an api, so the sane thing was to just map to the system api directly.

JavaScript is from that generation as well but got lucky because its requirement to run in the browser forced it to have I/O fully abstracted.
I think this could be better summed up as a guide to maintaining uninterrupted service during a DDoS. Which is only something you do in the first place if you run the numbers and find that being down would cost you more in lost revenue than staying up would cost you in temporary overprovisioning. It's another of those "a solution to a problem that only really exists at Amazon/Google/Facebook scale" whitepapers, except in this case the relevant "scale" is economic, not technical.
OSX has never gotten the basic keyboard interactions right that Windows has had from the beginning: The ability to trivially navigate menus from the keyboard.

I want Alt-F to open the file menu, and then "S" to save a file. Yes, I know that the Mac has Cmd-S to save, but there can be 50+ menu options spread across various menus, and the 10-15 that I use the most are far easier to remember (for me) as Alt-[menu letter], [hot letter of menu entry].

When you know what the underlined letters mean, it makes every new app have a completely discoverable keyboard interface that is easy to memorize, and it's one of the key advantages of Windows of OSX. That feature alone is why I only use Windows and Linux (except when I am forced to use OSX to do iOS builds) for development.
Changing for change sake is bad, but questioning long-held assumptions can lead to highly desirable changes. I largely agree that what we have works, but I also like to see how it may change.

One example that's been big in my life is the transition from a mouse to a trackpad. The mouse worked in many cases, but it was a nuisance for laptops. In my case, they also caused excruciating repetitive stress related-tendinitis which, thankfully, a laptop trackpad doesn't.

Funny you mention simple light switches not being "replaced with sensors so soon". Years ago, the very first modification I made when I moved into my house was to replace many of the simple light switches with motion, light, and time-based sensors, and a few with dimmer switches.
The whole driver of an economy is creation of value. Handing someone a basic income does not create any value, it just transfers it. It's unsustainable.
Greece and Syriza lost the public relations battle
Deploying a Meteor app to ECS
How is this different from Apache Lucene?
From my perspective as a digger during the Digg exodus it snowballed because a viable alternative existed at the time that the trigger event happened (Reddit, Digg v5).

There is no viable community for redditors to flee to this time, but there are probably dozens of teams of people spending the long weekend attempting to cobble together replacements for Reddit.

I've said elsewhere that I'm confident that Reddit will muddle through this debacle because they're the only game in town. But a highly-active contingent of their user-base is now in play, competitors will appear on the horizon over the next few months to draw them away, and they may succeed.
Please don't call my ideas "horseshit" and then tell me I'm the one doing myself a disservice.

You seem to think you have a pretty strong grip on things so you tell me: ballpark, how many hours of work do you estimate have been donated to reddit by its moderators and what's the dollar value of that work?
It depends what type of pressure you mean; the stream of air has a high dynamic pressure, but its static pressure is the same as atmospheric.[1] In any case, the air is not directed at the bottom of the screwdriver but at its side. It follows the surface (Coandă effect[2]) and then creates a region of low (static) pressure near the tip when it separates. This is lower than the atmospheric pressure at the bottom; thus there is lift.

[1] http://www-stud.rbi.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de/~plass/MIS/m...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coand%C4%83_effect
Businesses and companies want and expect universities and colleges to train CS grads how to program in certain languages. But that's not the goal or purpose of a 4 year degree. That's what a 2 year associates degree in application development or programming is for from atwo year technical or community college.

What my 4 year CS degree have me was a better understanding of the macroview of computer systems. It makes me consider "just spend $$$ on more memory" rather than "spend $$$$$+ tweaking the code". It allows me to quickly find issues related to computer systems from hardware/server setups/designs, networking, specific hardware, and software interactions. Its viewing the forest instead of the individual trees.
You're trying too hard to sound cool buddy and taking my words out of context in the process. A portfolio was never a big deal when i started working, they would just ask for some codes you wrote that you could even send through emails, nowadays everyone is asking to see a portfolio.

By generic and boring i don't mean a minimalist elegant design, i'm talking about a white empty page with a name, social links and a small paragraph
This is an awesome article, and has some similar ideas to what we are working on at Nylas. https://nylas.com/

I don't mean to steal this thread, but if anyone is interested in building the future of email (including this) I'd love to talk with you. mg@nylas.com
So, part of the problem is that computer science in a lot of schools (and I'm a bit familiar with both Rice and University of Houston here, having interacted a lot with students and teachers at both) is really some weighted sum of: computer engineering, software engineering, computer science (theory), vocational programming (lol game development), computational/applied mathematics and statistics, and maybe web development.

Depending on the program, these are weight differently--for example, Rice has some excellent computer engineering (compilers, networking) and (for a while anyways) software engineering projects (here's a customer, here's your team, organize and deliver this semester, don't fuck up but we'll guide you). It also had some good coverage on the purer CS theory as well as applied math (the robotics and graphics courses are pretty awesome for this). Next to no web development was covered (which makes sense to me).

As a result, you can take a Rice grad and drop them into basically any project and expect them to be okay--they could get up to speed on the vocational aspects or whatever weird algorithmic stuff you needed.

What I'm concerned about, though, is that a lot of programs seem to be adjusting to meet the gold rush mentality of the current software era, and are neglecting to teach fundamentals and theory that make the difference between a middling-decent junior/intermediate developer and somebody suited to really do senior and architecture work.

Our industry, incidentally, is doing nobody any favors. This is at least partly because of the number of well-meaning and excited amateurs who continually reinvent technologies and sharpen axes. This pretty much guarantees that any school trying to be merely vocational has its work cut out for it, and will be out of date rather quickly.
So long you behave consistent in that and do not complain if someone makes a gplv3 fork of your projects. So many people want to push their religious believes rather than just pick a license which suits them and then live with the consequences.
We should differentiate between computer science and software engineering. They are somewhat overlapping but SE obviously places more emphasis on software. And I be alright saying CS focuses more on hardware.
Well, I switched from Slashdot to Reddit eight years ago, so I'm calling it then.
Based on your recommendations, just now, I went to go check out the book and found they're having a one-day half-price sale on it at Apress, the publishers:

http://www.apress.com/9781430262503?gtmf=s

Nice timing. Buying now. Thanks for the tip.
I always found trackpads to hurt my hand somewhat after a while in contrast with mice. Maybe you just had bad mice?
OpenStax college
If you use BPF, you should be able to filter out the bad traffic effectively. Although, if you're getting flooded with an absurd amount of traffic (faster than the network card can consume), then there's nothing to do.
Counterpoint:

The whole driver of an economy is the transfer of value.

(See, it's easy to say vapid things and not back them up.)
It's more of the first point i guess. But being a web developer, your website gives the first impression, so i believe that it's important to take care of it
We likely are in agreement - isn't a rule against hammering a server 'a legal limit on the kind of behaviour to a publicly accessible system'? I was disagreeing with parent who said:

> there shouldn't be legal limits on that kind of behaviour to a publicly accessible system anyways.
Easy way to import files in Go
It may be more interesting to consider what would happen if this angry "minority" left for greener pastures.
In the pure thick shaft version, it looks like the jet is centered on about 1/4 of the way down the shaft - so it should be imparting torque on the whole thing, but the fluid dynamics are enough to keep it at what appears to be a pretty constant angle.

The angle is caused by the dynamic pressure of the jet; if you had a circumferential jet (like a Dyson fan), you could get it to float vertically.
> There’s No Feedback Loop Between Industry & Universities

Stuff the industry; CS isn't vocational training.

Most of the coding that goes on in the industry is mind numbingly dull from a CS perspective.

The idea that the industry should play fiddle, and CS should dance to the tune, is ridiculous.

This article fails to define what it means by "stagnating". "Stagnating" isn't a suitable single word for describing the memory of an experience (such as an undergrad program) which wasn't what one expected.

A CS department stagnates when it doesn't publish papers, I would think. Just like a political science department or English department. (An English department isn't said to be stagnating because it doesn't teach people how to speak English.)

As far as the undergrads go, they would be poorly served if the focus of the program was to teach them some application stack du jour. Even if that's what the industry wants today, that may change by the time they graduate.
"We don't make software engineers, we make computer scientists who can go into research".
I don't think that part is ever obvious to people going into CS programs.

It wasn't to me. The frustration I felt for 4 years is beyond belief. I couldn't stand any longer in my fourth year. Stupid for dropping out at the 9th hour.

Now I wonder why companies aren't pushing for programming over the science.
Probably not, because it'd be insanely complicated to check testosterone levels on the subjects.
Really? Not just per mass? Huh. I am somewhat surprised.

Hmm, but one can scratch a cup fairly easily, can one not? (depending on the type of cup). This is removing some part of the cup. Hmm, I guess that still might take more force than picking it up?

But what if one has like, a really big thing of uh, I want to say talc but I don't know how much of that one could hold up without part of it breaking off...

uh, google tells me gypsum can be scratched with a fingernail, and when I try to look up its tensile strength (which I assume would be the relative measure when considering hanging a thing of it from one end of it), I get the answer of between 1 and 2 MPa at ambient temperature. Also it says gypsum board, which I assume is just a board made of gypsum?

Also, I am assuming that expressing the tensile strength in MPa is force per cross section. No other interpretation comes to my mind, but I could be interpreting this number wrong. I'll call the tensile strength P.

I find for the density of gypsum 803 kg/m^3 .

Then, for a block of gypsum hanging from the top end, with cross section area A, with g=9.8 m/s^2 , the longest height h it could be before breaking would be found by :

hAdensityg=AP

hdensityg=P

h=P/(densityg)
h=2 MPa / ((803 kg/m^3)(9.8 m/s^2))
h=2 MPa / (8039.8 N/m^3)
h=2 MPa / 8039.8 Pa/m)
h=254.1 meters.

So, if one had a column of gypsum 254.1 meters tall, and picked an atom at the top of it to pull up with force more than that of the whole weight of the pillar, certainly the whole pillar would not rise into the air, because its weight would be too much for the tensile strength.

So, certainly it would break somewhere.

If I was standing next to it near the top of it, I could scratch it with my fingernail, and so remove a part of it. But if it had much cross sectional area, the force I would need to do this would certainly be less than the force I would need to lift it. If the cross sectional area was one square meter, its weight, and so the force needed to hold it up, would be 2 million newtons (wolfram alpha tells me this is about 1/6 of the thrust of a space shuttle rocket booster at liftoff).

So, I would be able to remove a small part of it, but would be clearly unable to lift it. If the force that would be needed to lift it were all applied to some atom at the top of it, it would remove some smaller part of it.

I expect if enough force to lift it were to be applied to a single atom at the top, that, while it perhaps would not remove only a single atom, the part which it would remove would be quite small (perhaps only a few molecules?).

Yet it certainly seems like this would be termed an object.

(I guess if it was that thin it would fall over, but it can easily be imagined to be much wider, which I think would allow it to sit on the ground properly.)

So then, it seems like the force needed to pull it apart is significantly less than the force needed to hold it up, yet it still seems to be an object.
Well when a freelancer first setup his website to start getting work he's not gonna be that busy for a while at least, which gives him more than enough time
By chance, have you ever had a chance to use Quicksilver? If so, what are your thoughts on it? http://qsapp.com/about.php
agreed, especially for experienced musicians. the point here is that if the notehead carries its sharp/flatness in the shape, just like a notehead carries its duration (quarter vs half), it'll become 2nd nature. if a piece is in F# major, then pretty much most of the keys have an implied sharp... A is not A. it's A#. this way a student doesnt have to constantly remember the key sig & what notes are raised or lowered. sort of like python's explicit > implicit.

as far as note being able to determine the key, that'll still be specified as now - this is an additional visual hint.
The assertion that a 20% of a random sampling of Carnegie Mellon professors have industry experience in the sense that graduating undergraduates "go into industry" is, IMO, questionable.

I'm inclined to wonder how much of that experience came in the form of internships or jobs in industry research labs (which is technically industry, but not the same "industry" their students are going into).
CS is not Software Engineering, and should be treated as such. People who do nothing but coursework will be lousy developers, and people who don't get a proper CS instruction will have a harder time becoming proper software engineers. The problem is, getting a CS degree is by far the most major and common option available. Considering the number of people diving into CS to become programmers, I wish there was a bigger focus on _software engineering_.

My program was lackluster from a development perspective. No real projects, the coding-centric courses all had really poor execution, and a lack of instruction on how to actually program and design; however it was excellent for CS fundamentals and foundation. I ended up okay because I spent a lot of time in internships and just learning on my own, which balanced out with the abstract stuff from school, but I witnessed quite a few people graduating who could barely understand how to work with APIs.

EDIT: Just to add some background: I graduated last fall, got into one of the top popular major software companies in the U.S., and reaffirmed that the 4.5 years I spent getting my degree did not seem worth the time spent. It wasn't a complete waste; the foundation is really important for software engineering, but there was a lot of cruft and "took a class because of requirements" that went on.
Seems really well done and well documented.
Sorry to ask this without exploring the code myself (!), but there is a check in common.hpp for C++14 compliant compiler. What features of C++14 are you using in this project?
The claim you always hear is that "people with a CS background have much stronger fundamentals".

I question that claim and believe that people perpetrating the meme have never actually hired and mentored software engineers themselves.

There's in my experience very little correlation between being academically great and being highly productive in an unstructured environment such as that of an early stage startup. In fact if you didn't go to school, and still managed to learn a ton about your craft and the underlying principles, I'm much more impressed.
CS has its fundamentals -- a queue is still a queue, a binary search tree is still a BST, a graph is still a graph, and it is useful to know how to traverse it. So those parts should stay there. Obviously there is exciting new work happening (distributed systems, CRDTs, others..) but a lot of those are still built on fundamentals.

But there are also classes tied to specific languages and technologies that are often not as relevant anymore. When I went to school in early 2000's we still had to take 2 assembly language classes for a CS degree. Those were very useful, but it probably could have been just 1 class and instead take another networking and/or protocols class.

There were other instances of that. There were almost a whole AI class wasted on Expert Systems. Those were cool but in 1980s not in 2000s. There was even a class tought in COBOL, it was an elective, but still... (I didn't know what it would be, signed up for fun, after the first class, almost half the people dropped it including me).

Another major driver for changes or lack of is faculty. Remember in US faculty is tenured for life. They can't be easily fired for not picking up the latest technology. They can still be teaching COBOL and Expert Systems. So that is what some do -- they just teach whatever they wrote their PhD thesis on, so you get a mix of whatever happened to be awesome anytime from late 60s up to 2010 (depending on how quick the tenure process takes). I personally saw some faculty do a fantastic job picking up latest interesting stuff, trying to stay relevent. Some, not so much.
I think there is a gradient when it comes to imterqctions and discoverability:

Text Buttons > Icon Buttons with hover text = menu entries with hotkey explained > menu entries with hidden hotkeys = ribbons > context actions with visible button > grouped context actions without visible button (right click / force touch) >> context actions with one hidden interaction per function (gestures)

The more complex your app, the deeper you need to reach down in this bag. What I want to say is, I'd still prefer a force touch menu over hidden gestures - what's idiotic is if you have enough space for something more discoverable, yet you opt for force touch or a gesture like in your watch example. But imagine MS Word on iPad with full desktop featureset - I'd be just fine with a force touch context menu there.
Comp Sci != Software Engineering.
hmm... i'm confused... 8vb is for lowering an octave. the proposal here is to make both clefs have EGBDFA. ie, the clefs are off by a third - this slides by a 3rd to make them have the same arrangement. ah, actually i think i got what you're saying: ie, just use 8vb and use treble for both. sure that'll work too, tho the A below middle C is kind of popular :), otherwise it'll have to be constantly dotted lined in.
He posted the same on the python argentina mailing list last night. Unbelievable; he merely published security holes on publicly available code.

Nothing wrong (nor legally, nor morally) there. It's not the first hole to get published recently either.
I think it's a consequence of one of the points TFA brought up - WIMP systems were originally designed to approach modelessness, but users want modal interfaces. They want to go into the context of an application and then switch into a "mode" where they only need to know about the keyboard shortcuts, UI idioms, etc. of that one application.

Sometimes you can't accomplish a task like this, but on the frequent occasions when that happens I'm reminded of exactly how annoying it is to, for example, look at a screen that's split between browser and terminal and switch back and forth between the very different interaction paradigms the two require.
I share a similar mindset, but I think the entire point of it is to say "Hey, I'm capable" to employers.

They want to know that you are an intelligent and competent problem solver.
Couldn't agree more, every time I'm asked to invert a binary tree in an interview I wonder exactly what kinds of problems this company is actually solving.

Like do they not have a general algorithm for this in a library?

Are they looking for more efficient ways of inverting trees?
half the population ... oblige the other half

I'd love to see an experiment where democracy was modified. People should get multiple votes, proportional not to their income or their wealth, but to the amount of taxes they paid the previous year.

There would need to be some sort of limit. E.g. nobody gets less than 1 vote nor more than 10.

But something like that would create what some call "skin in the game". Those people who pay the most money will have the most influence on government.

It's been proposed before, but never implemented AFAIK. Still, "the usual stuff isn't working". Why not some experimenting?
If all you ever wanted to be was a webdev, you shouldn't have gotten a cs degree, just like if all you ever wanted to do was be an electrician you shouldn't have bothered with the EE major.