> The OpenBSD project uses a lot of electricity for running the > development and build machines. A number of logistical reasons > prevents us from moving the machines to another location which might > offer space/power for free, so let's not allow the conversation to go > that way.
Initial ask for help: http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=138730448307723&w=2
How much it costs: http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=138972987203440&w=2
Why old hardware platforms matter: http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=138973312304511&w=2
Why not kickstarter: http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=138973837906139&w=2
And most importantly, the donation link: http://www.openbsdfoundation.org/donations.html
There is "opinionated software" and then there is Theo being an intolerable, obnoxious, ego-maniac.
As such many people are going to see this and laugh and think "good riddance", and will be happy to see OpenBSD disappear.
That will only be enhanced by the fact the books are closed, the shortfall on the electric bill is inexplicably $20k, and nobody is prepared to explain the detail.
In essence rudeness + shady accounting practice != open source community that should feel a sense of entitlement from non-core users
It's a shame because the code (especially the crypto code) is really good. Seriously, go read it: I used to love reading the OpenBSD source, but I never contributed anything because Theo was such an absolute jerk.
I hope the guys who work on the crypto stuff at least either keep doing so elsewhere (Free- or Net-), or a new project without the need for $20k in electricity bills spins up to keep going.
Link to relevant reddit comment thread: http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1vakm9/openbsd_develo...
Right now I feel like linux is slowly eating all the market share, if it continues that way the BSDs will regress back to the lines of Hurd and Plan9.
Competition is always a good thing, even in the OSS world.
The fact this was submitted here and disappeared is kind of indicative of their problems.
What I don't get is where people - presumably people involved in information technology - conclude that $20k/year is a lot of money to spend on electricity. What utopia of free electricity for all are these people living in? Can I host a few servers there?
if you use CARP or OpenBGPd and have never bought a CD, you need to buy two ;p
Imagine being without ssh, then go donate. :)
I'm glad I read through the whole thread because by the time I got to the end of it I had changed my mind. In one e-mail to the list, Theo basically said (in effect) that a donation of $20 wasn't even worth it. (Granted, $20 isn't much in the grand scheme of things but I feel that it reasonable covers my use of OpenBSD.)
There are many people who think that Theo is the worst thing for the Project (because he's such an asshole). OTOH, however, there are many who think that the Project wouldn't exist if it weren't for Theo.
SSH alone, and all the utilities that use it... have made my work/life SOOOOOO much easier. That may sound silly, but when you don't have to search for some 3rd-party utility because what you need is built-in... it makes life easier.
Exploit Mitigation Techniques: an Update After 10 Years (by Theo)http://tech.yandex.com/events/ruBSD/2013/talks/103/
An OpenBSD talk by Michael Lucashttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXPV3vJF99k
On another note, the readability of the font was a turn off for me. Fortunately, there is an option to view it in plain text. adding &q=raw at the end of the URL.http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=138972987203440&w=2&q=raw
when i make budgeting decisions (whether personal or in business), i start with the needs before going to the "nice to haves". for openbsd, i can't help but assume powering their various servers/systems is kiiind of a priority...
so what i want to know is:- the over all budget $ amount for 2014- what was the cost of power in 2013 * how did you get to $20k for 2014?- which priorities are worth funding over power
my suspicion is that there's plenty of room for give and take here.
Then we could put all the human language problems into human text type, and leave the simpler computer string type with easier semantics.
In Python, although there are no tools for that, I typically use the following convention: single quotes for computer text and double quotes for human text. I guess you could use byte arrays for computer text as well, but it would be more painful.
VLC has a very large number of users on Windows (80% of our users), yet almost none of the dev use Windows to code. Therefore, we use UTF-8 char* everywhere, notably in the core. We use UTF-16 conversions only in the necessary Windows modules, that use Windows APIs. Being sure we were UTF-8 everywhere took a lot of time, tbh...
But the worse are formats like ASF (WMV) or MMS that use UTF-16/UCS-2 (without correctly specifying) them and that we need to support on all other platforms, like OSX or Linux...
Maybe there might be a shot in getting developers to switch if Windows GUIs/native API would render Unicode text presented in UTF-8. But right now, it's back to encoding/decoding.
No debate there.
However, advocating "just make windows use UTF8" ignores the monumental engineering challenge and legacy back-compat issues.
In Windows most APIs have FunctionA and FunctionW versions, with FunctionA meaning legacy ASCII/ANSI and FunctionW meaning Unicode. You couldn't really fix this without adding a 3rd version that was truly UTF-8 without breaking lots of apps in subtle ways.
Likely it would also only be available to Windows 9 compatible apps if such a feature shipped.
No dev wanting to make money is going to ship software that only targets Windows 9, so the entire ask is tough to sell.
Still no debate on the theoretical merits of UTF-8 though.
I would like to have at least two options in memory: utf-8 and vector of displayed characters (there's many combinations in use in existing modern languages with no single-character representations in UTF-<anything>).
But of course being so incredibly anglocentric is not an issue, at least that seems to be the consensus of the participants when I read discussions on the Web where all the people who are discussing it write English with such a proficiency that I can't tell who are and aren't native speakers of the language.
I'm a little confused by this statement. Can someone clarify?
Rep. Logfren (Democratic)http://lofgren.house.gov/biography/ Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoe_Lofgren
Rep. Sensenbrenner (Republican)http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/biography/ Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Sensenbrenner
Rep. Scott (Democratic)http://www.bobbyscott.house.gov/biography/ Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Scott_%28U.S._politician%...
Rep. Goodlate (Republican)http://goodlatte.house.gov/pages/about-bob Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Goodlatte
Rep Thompson (Democratic)http://mikethompson.house.gov/biography/ Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Thompson_(California_polit...
Rep. Amash (Republican)http://amash.house.gov/about-me/full-biography Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justin_Amash
Edit: Cleaned up one of the links and got rid of a repetitive sentence.
Clearing a SCIF, letting someone inside, then recertifying it would probably be the correct choice; It could be done, of course, but it's not cheap. (You can also potentially keep the person under observation the whole time, but given the purported Chuck Norris powers of Bruce Schneier, that seems insufficient.)
You can't have oversight unless you have expertise in the area you oversee.
You can't have oversight unless the overseers can impose immediate consequences upon the overseen.
Without these you are nothing but a spectator.
Can they brief Congress on what they're doing? All 535 publicity-seeking chatterboxes? No way. That's the same as issuing a press release.
So not telling Congress everything is (in principle) necessary. But who are these representatives Schneier briefed? Are they on the Intelligence Committee? If so, and they still can't get straight answers out of the NSA, that's a big deal. (And maybe the rest of Congress is saying that they don't think that the Intelligence Committee has done an adequate job of oversight.)
Edits: my guess: (Secure Communications Internal Facility)
I don't know how they do it now, but the Intelligence committees should also brief the rest of Congress at least twice a year, and I think they should be allowed by explicit laws to declassify anything they want in that briefing. No approval from the White House or anyone else needed. They are, after all, the ones that are supposedly in charge with oversight of the intelligence community.
So next time someone like Ron Wyden knows the agency is lying to the public, he should be able to tell the rest of the Congress in the briefing, all by himself (he shouldn't need approval from the rest of the committee), and it should be defined in laws that he's allowed to do that, just so there's no confusion, and no fear of repercussion.
Why wouldn't he?
I want to focus on delivering value to my customers - I'm not trying to become a pay button implementation expert. I'm not very happy about wepay making this move. I think I am going to be switching to stripe.
Many of their D2C products competed with the businesses that were using their APIs, so it makes sense to pick a channel and focus on just one side of the equation.
I really like everything about WePay other than the fact that it's limited to the US.
Having WePay sunset their consumer-facing products has a similar effect in that it allows us to transact more money through WePay while reducing potential confusion around which services are responsible for which part of the fundraising process.
The WePay team has always been extremely responsive to questions and feature requests, so I'm excited to see what they do with the added resources and renewed focus on partner services.
I imagine a future where a "web browser" is just a WebGL + Networking + JS API, and you just load in HTML5.js. The benefit of something like this is that it puts the power back in the hands of the people. You don't have to worry about Microsoft ignoring standards, you just load in the HTML5.js that you know works. Want a new feature? Fork HTML5.js on GitHub.
One other benefit that interests me is for games. Games badly need a free, standardized way to do UI. Porting v8 + WebGL is far easier than porting an entire web browser. There's a chance for greater performance too, since frameworks like ChromiumEmbedded typically only provide a memory buffer of the rendered frame, which you then have to copy (back) to vram.
(reposted because the other thread was killed)
0 - http://badassjs.com/post/20294238453/webkit-js-yes-it-has-fi...
2. How is this humanly possible?
I don't say that to take away from the hard work and exceptional execution of this project, but rather as a reminder that we should all get off our butts more often and make something. In the end this is stuff that almost anyone with enough motivation can tackle (though perhaps not with the same panache).
Looking at the code it could probably be a lot shorter if an array was used for the LEDs rather than the separate a, b, c, d, ... variables and lots of repeated code.
We'll be playing with Seeed Studio's Xadow platform, including a very nice low-energy Bluetooth attachment.
I still haven't use it at all. Dropbox, drive & even mega seem to be more seamless :-/
It's at the point where giving away your product for free is no longer a large-impact sales tactic, wonder how they'll innovate?
I would be interested in an application that makes agreements with the ISPs that have throttling or download limits so that traffic to and from their servers don't count.
Now they just all need desktop syncing programs with easily accessible public sharing urls and decent traffic bandwidth.
But we're now in the stage where there's a dozen frameworks out there, probably classifiable into at least three distinct paradigms, and then we have the languages that target the browser. And I suspect we're a long way from shaking this out into a semi-stable point.
The thing that I like least about this treadmill is that time invested in the ephemeral arcana of a stack/platform is time that isn't invested in skills that will transfer elsewhere and help you become a better general problem solver.
"As long as our hypothetical Blub programmer is looking down the power continuum, he knows he's looking down. Languages less powerful than Blub are obviously less powerful, because they're missing some feature he's used to. But when our hypothetical Blub programmer looks in the other direction, up the power continuum, he doesn't realize he's looking up. What he sees are merely weird languages. He probably considers them about equivalent in power to Blub, but with all this other hairy stuff thrown in as well. Blub is good enough for him, because he thinks in Blub."
I, personally, am very slow to adopt new languages or frameworks for serious projects. Still haven't found anything I can't do with Java and/or Ruby on Rails. I do try to keep up with the news so I'm not totally caught off guard, and I make a point of building toy projects in other languages like Python, Haskell, Scala, Clojure, etc. It's important not to be a Magpie, but also not to get caught up as a Blubber and end up looking for a COBOL to Objective-C cross compiler so you can make an iPhone app.
Let's say you're writing a new web service in Java, because it has features aplenty and is also the language your team is most familiar with. You're confident the JVM is a platform you want to build on.
Now you need to:
1. Choose a set of libraries or a framework. Do you go for Spring or Java EE, or for something newer like Play or Dropwizard?
2. Choose a build tool. Maven? Ant? Gradle? Maybe we'll write some scala, so SBT?
3. Choose tools for deployment, config management, etc.
4. A database.
5. And so on.
All of these tools have different trade-offs. There are so many trade-offs that I don't think blog post comparisons (or whatever) cut it. And so you have the "magpies" who try and figure out some of these trade-offs for themselves by experimentation. (That is what, in my opinion, hack days and 20% time are for, not your new production system.)
But don't listen to me, we wrote our new web service in Go ;)
More seriously, it was a major decision and I couldn't possibly write a few hundred words on my blog to justify it. I may write a few thousand, though.
Likewise, this is why I would study something like HoTT--reasonable certainty that the things I'm learning there will form the basis of the final programming language.
I don't mind change, but I dislike putting weight in fashion.
There's good new stuff of course, but a lot of it is redoing an existing idea in a slightly different context, with new and exciting bugs waiting for you to discover them when you'd most prefer not to.
Thanks to this article, I may have found some more. It pointed to the 2007 article, well here's the latest Scott Hanselmans Ultimate Dev Tools:
I agree that newness is too fetishized, but trying out a fad can be a great way to unexpectedly learn and grow
I really want to start using Nimrod for real work.
I also tend to prefer catching errors early, and having a typed language that warns and errors at compile-time is great.
Or when I saw that /r/dogecoin was trying to get Reddit Gifts (a customer of ours) to support Dogecoin. Since we do all feature discussion on GitHub, I was able to get them involved. That one.... wasn't as productive as the bugfix. :)
My advice to all the kids out of college who want to be startup founders - don't try to come up with your own idea, because you don't know enough about business or the world to get a good one (hence the plethora of cheap social knockoffs that will never go anywhere). Instead, go find some older, experienced businessperson who wants to solve a problem in a non-technical space they understand deeply, and work with them. You're much more likely to succeed that way.
I can't count the number of tech people I've heard say they want to create a website that will get rid of the horrible broker system of renting apartments in NYC. But that requires convincing landlords to do something different, and so far they have had zero financial incentive to do so, since it's the landlord who uses the broker, but the renter who has to pay the cost of the broker.
So ten years goes by, and still you usually have to go through the ridiculous process of paying brokers.
I was surprised that my realtor, lawyer and mortgage broker all asked me to email sensitive financial information without any encryption and believed that a signature on a piece of paper is better than the cryptographic alternatives available today (which they don't even know about).
Especially with all of the intelligence-community BS that gets involved in the process today! I was flabberghasted that my lawyers office had no idea what an encryption key is. "Oh just email those bank statements over," they'd say. "No thanks," I replied, "I'll hand them to you myself."
And what a pain in the ass. I don't get paid to courier all that paperwork around.
And they have no idea. Think your insurance information is safe? I'd be surprised. These people just email sensitive documents around in the open. It's crazy.
5th percentile spend per year on an apartment is about $6,000.
95th percentile hobbyist spend per year on photo stuff is probably less than $6,000
Our key founder combines real estate and Valley backgrounds - as someone mentioned it's really important that we understand the industry we are trying to disrupt.
We have a suite of tools, focus on effective promotion techniques rather than self promoting and wildly expensive newspaper and industry glossies, and sell far more houses per agent than the norm.
We put together a site (watchmystreet.co.nz) that lets people flip the buying search process, but struggle for now accessing what should be openly available data from regional authorities.
Happy to discuss help with expansion or entry into other markets.
Smart competition isn't that scary. I'd rather have smart competitors and learn a lot even if I lose, than work in a world where stupid people have all the power. If you go into the dark recesses of residential real estate, you'll find that it's not smart-people-friendly. Residential RE might be one area where average-to-stupid people have an edge, because they're closer to the animalistic instincts (i.e. the 86th floor being twice as valuable than the functionally equivalent 85th because it's "the top") that drive it.
It might be attractive to business co-founders looking to build something boring and flip it, but it's not going to get class-A technical co-founders.
This space has the lack-of-upside that would cause VCs to deride it as a "lifestyle business", but because of all the un-fun shit that humans throw up when it comes to land and housing (people get really ugly when that stuff is at stake) it wouldn't have the subjective benefits.
Use the Oculus Rift to let potential buyers and renters take a virtual tour of properties.
Think how much time is currently wasted driving between properties. And many people probably end up with non-optimal purchases since they can only reasonably visit < 10 properties.
Is there some kind of 3D scanning equipment that would let my potential startup create a virtual environment by walking through a house with it? I guess there might be a technology gap there. Anyone know?
Software for estate agents needs to be become more modern though. http://nestio.com/ just rebranded themselves to do that for example.
There's a German property portal (number two in the market) which released an iPad app for estate agents. Property management, contact list, calendar etc. Something like 50 USD/month for the app or $100/month for the hardware&app.Website is in German, but there are screenshots and video http://immonetmanager.de/produkt/
Keynes thought people would be working 15 hours per week in 2030. If anything we'll be working 55 hours per week.
Education needs to change, certainly. The economy will move forward, certainly. But there's no reason to freak out. Society has moved through economic change before and we'll find a way through the internet-induced havoc as well.
In the past, merchants were often those without land who became merchants because it was their best option. Now, basically anyone can become a merchant immediately.
Jeff Croft wrote that being a web designer isn't enough to sustain a career. Jeffrey Zeldman countered that argument with the notion that being an expert in the field is enough to sustain oneself, but only if you can expand on your knowledge with other skills. Andrew Clarke then followed-up on both of those pieces.
It's an interesting time to be involved in tech, especially on the web. What comes next is simply more adaptation, what other choice to we (as workers) have?
1. http://jeffcroft.com/blog/2014/jan/03/web-standards-killed-t...2. http://www.zeldman.com/2014/01/06/its-2014-is-web-design-dea...3. http://stuffandnonsense.co.uk/blog/about/its-2014.-web-desig...
Your job vulnerability, I think, is not only a matter of automation. It also a question of "commoditization". If you become a commodity, meaning that, if* what you do can be well described* your workflow can be well described* the tools you use are becoming standard* there is no real barrier for entering your field.Then, you'll lose very quickly any bargaining power and your 'salary' or 'margin' will decrease.
Technology, as it progresses, tends to commoditize 'producers', whereas usually 'distributors' are less vulnerable.
Refrains of "oh we'll adapt to it like we always do" ring hollow as well. It might not be apparent in San Francisco, but large parts of the country haven't really adapted to the loss of manufacturing in the U.S. Good middle class jobs that existed in the 1960's and 1970's haven't been replaced with something equivalent, but rather jobs that are worse + more government support.
When you even start to consider another opportunity, think about why you actually want to move to the new opportunity. Is it that you need more money? Is it that you want to work on a different kind of project? Is it that you need more stimulation?
Then go to your employer, and without bringing up the other opportunity, see if they are willing to make the change that you want. Don't be angry that they haven't already done it for you, until this point you didn't even necessarily know you wanted it, you can't expect them to.
If they accept, then you are in an environment where you're happy, and your employer is probably happy that you are motivated and taking steps to make things happen. If they reject your offer, then pursue the better opportunity.
In that case, if they do give you a counter-offer, it's either going to be less than you need, which makes it easy enough to say no to. Or they will be offering you the same thing you've already asked for and declined to provide, which means they are doing it out of desperation and you can expect they will to an extent resent it if they feel it's something they can't afford, or they will have been actively trying to take advantage of you by denying you fair treatment when you asked for it directly.
I think first decide what it is you need, then give your employer the opportunity to provide what it is you need of their own accord, then accept an offer with another employer who can provide what it is you need. Then you don't have to worry about the counter-offer. You've already gone through it once on your terms.
If you don't make your employer aware that you want a change prior to your resignation, and they would have been willing to offer it to you all along if they knew, you're both in an awkward position. If the counter offer is exactly what you want and you take it, there will be some soreness and a passive-aggressive attitude that will persist. If you ask for what you want and get it prior to saying "Or else I quit" it's much smoother sailing for everyone.
When a friend of mine (also at Microsoft) told his boss that he had a job offer from Google, but wasn't explicit about whether he had accepted it yet, they bent over backwards to try and persuade him to stay offering, among other things, the promotion that he'd been passed over for in the previous two review cycles (so much for no promotion budget), pulling in upper management to spend time with him to persuade him to stay. All this just served to communicate to him how messed up his situation had been, if they can promote you now, why couldn't they before?
As long as you have been clear with your management about your expectations w.r.t. pay/promotion/work etc. then any counteroffer is simply an open display of organizational misanthropy.
w.r.t. Microsoft, one of the unspoken flaws in their review system is/was that by the time a review is delivered to an employee, it is too late to fix anything. If you think you deserved a promotion/bigger bonus/merit increase/whatever it has to wait until the next review cycle (a year) to be corrected (unless your manager is really prepared to fight hard for you and do things out of cyclepossible but hard)
If the counteroffer is amazing, it will poison your relationships with everybody in the company: colleagues will resent you for getting what they will see as a golden ticket when they didn't, and managers will resent you for what they will interpret as mercenary tendencies -- i.e. you're just waiting for someone to come along with an even better offer before you sell them out. So you'll have to work with a bunch of people whose opinion of you has just dropped through the floor.
And if the counteroffer isn't amazing, why would you consider taking it in the first place?
Wot? His company gave him a counteroffer with the attitude that accepting their offer would be unethical?
You have ongoing relationships with people, including your managers and co-workers - don't burn those. But your "relationship" with your employer [company], at least in Silicon Valley, is transactional.
Any way you slice it, you've shown your hand: you're out the door. A company where it takes a resignation letter to spur them on to pay attention to you is not the right place for you.
"Yeah! Always. How do either of us know what my market value is if I don't? It's only fair."
I thought that was brilliant. No he was never fired and he stayed there quite some time after that. :)
I worked at a place where they counter-offered two above average (but not great) developers who were working on an important client project. The two accepted the counter-offers, but still left for good in a few months. Everyone else in the office that wanted a raise or promotion now knew what they had to do to get raises: find another job and bluff. It put a big dent in the company culture.
If it's a small organization - stay if you actually like it.
The difference is that small organizations understand people, the risks, the sacrifices, etc, because they're still human. Large organizations only care about their bottom line. They will hire your replacement, probably a junior level person, train him up, replace you, and then do the same thing to him years later when he realizes he hates it for the same reason you do.
Besides, life is about growing and doing new things. Not the same shit forever for a 2.5% raise (if you even get that)
Perhaps the counteroffer is a guise as they hire somebody to replace you, then you'll be let go as soon as they hire somebody.
The relationship can never be as "warm and fuzzy" as before you tried to quit.
If you love working at the current place, you have a great relationship with your boss/team and your only issue is money, then a good counter-offer may not be a bad idea. In fact, many times it is the only way to get a raise unfortunately. Consider the alternative. You might be making ok money but you don't like your team/boss/company at all, then do not take the counter offer even if they offer you more. You never know how it will turn out later on.
In the end, I'm glad I turned down the counteroffer and got out - I do think that my relationships would have been poisoned if I had stayed, and some core issues would not have been fixed. That said - I should not have taken the job I did. Chasing money was a rookie move, and I'm now more unhappy than I was at the previous company.
My advice is to think very realistically, perhaps pessimistically, about what life will be like at the new company. If you're not sure, ask questions. Don't take a new job because you want to get out - take a new job because you want out AND because the new job is freaking amazing. I'm now job hunting all over again, and it sucks.
Companies should be proactive about keeping their employees engaged, challenged, and relatively happy.
Whatever you do, keep the connections you've made--don't burn bridges. The new opportunity may not be all it's cracked up to be, and it will be nice to have some people to call when you're on the hunt again.
It is an old language with lots of cruft, but it's been used in all sorts of places for something like 25 years. Perhaps people's experiences with the language are colored by using it as a means to customize behavior in some big hairy enterprise app.
I never encountered it again, but its elegance always stayed with me. Except for uplevel. Fucking evil.
No it doesn't... unless machine translation is "there" and built into Tcl.
> Every string is internally encoded in utf-8, all the string operations are Unicode-safe, including the regular expression engine. Basically, in Tcl programs, encodings are not a problem - they just work
Really? Perl's Unicode support is pretty much second-to-none, IME, but you still need to know the encoding of your file handles and so on. Once it knows this, Perl will Just Work(TM). How is this handled in Tcl?
TCL lends easily shell-like syntax so it is great for adapting your DSL to a REPL and even maps fairly cleanly to REST.
Years ago, I built a REST-like API that had one URI to which one could POST a TCL script. That script in its most basic form would be a series of pipelined API calls. There was even limited transactional support. I saw this important for mobile applications as it would reduce latency.
The biggest problem with the above is that TCL safe interpreter still allow loops and other blocking operations. It means that you need to write a reaper to kill long-running threads / processes.
Combining such techniques with ZeroVM (or even Docker, or both) would be interesting.
I haven't kept up with it and enjoyed seeing there's still those who find it productive
Another topic I would like to see introduced in a similarly friendly way is event loops. At my work I am dealing with some Tcl/Tk code that uses event loops and it's a bit of mental gymnastics to get my head around what gets executed when.
SMS Text Messages: A Goldmine to Exploit
Oy vey--they don't even care anymore, do they? They're not even trying.
Fuck it, have a friendly octopus:
Now I wonder if NSA is able to penetrate services like WhatsApp, Snapchat, etc.
interesting definition of metacontent
Like the union types, but not so much the list operations; seems more natural to:
[1;2;3;4] filter isEven sum
List.filter isEven [1;2;3;4] |> List.sum
in Scala it's: List(1,2,3,4) filter isEven sum
Of course I'm not familiar with F# so don't know all of the WIN within (Type Providers, for example, are very impressive, would love to see that on the Scala side of the fence one day).
I like EaselJS's API the most, but only other libraries had a WebGL backend so far.
Likewise, the map of Philadelphia misses most of south Philadelphia, an area that is gentrifying extremely quickly with several hundred million dollar condo developments set to go up in the middle of the ghetto.
Interesting statistics, but I don't know that the conclusions that the authors are trying to draw are valid.
I'd be surprised if Obama holds any of the views he expressed during his campaign. A campaign is a marketing effort intended to install a team of people in power.
Generally speaking, the vast majority of power holders agree that aggressive spying is a good idea. This is closely related to their strong preference for maintaining the status quo across the board. We should not be surprised that Obama did not reverse any of Bush's controversial decisions because they were not actually controversial among those with power or with the potential to gain power.
Generally speaking, when an issue is touted as being highly controversial between the major parties, it consists of 98% solid agreement and 2% hyped up disagreement. The disagreement and the "fray" are part of the choreographed propaganda undertaken by powerful interests to create the illusion of dissent.
But here's the thing: it's unconstitutional. It's illegal.
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized".
Meaning: 1) You can't read my email without a warrant and 2) you need specific suspicions of me to get one.
Any interpretation that says the grocery list in my pocket is covered by the fourth amendment, but every electronic communication I make is NOT covered, is insane. "Houses, papers and effects" was the writer's way of saying "everything I can think of belonging to that person." Email and phone metadata and GPS location weren't imagined, but can you seriously say they would have been excluded?
So: balancing security with privacy is a hard thing. It is. But pooping on the constitution isn't a solution.
You want to surveil everything? Say so openly, explain your case, and try to repeal the fourth amendment. We're America: we decide by voting.
Secretly discarding the highest laws of the land is tyrannical, whatever the justification.
This completely vindicates Snowden's point about the current system being one of policy instead of law, and of enabling turnkey tyranny.
And so, the wheel keeps turning...
I mean, seriously .. its like black and white with Obama. Pre-Presidentiality, Obama was real. After-President'ness, he's become some obscure caricature of all other Presidents who came before him..
So is there some sort of secret Presidential chamber that all the past Presidents get to donate their DNA to, which gets injected into The New Guy, to make him into some sort of transformed hybrid clone, or something? I seriously wonder sometimes, if the enemies of the USA haven't realized that the real backdoor to infiltrating America and bringing it to its knees is in the Presidential Training Program that goes on with newly elected victims. It sure seems like the President of the USA gets a new skin, anyway .. I've only been watching for the last 4 Presidents or so ..
This strikes me as backwards. Seems that a president with a steely spine would be strong enough to maintain the rights of citizens in the face of such challenges.
With Obama, yah, he came in as the 'outsider' (typical of all candidates I suppose) with all these things he would 'Change' (Shepard Fairey anyone?). But alas, it's been one disappointment after another. Net neutrality, spying, real universal healthcare, not going after politicians of the Bush area that blatantly broke all kinds of laws, etc. All a sham.
It's playing out like a sci-fi story where anyone can be an enemy of the state, just choose your own adventure: leaker, no fly list, dissident, downloader, photographer/videographer; the list goes on and one.
I suppose I shouldn't be surprised as this isn't really a democracy anymore. Every law, decision pretty much has to have some 'but what about business/economy?' question. Excessive lobbying makes sure these decisions/rules will never change short of revolution. The fact that corporations are 'people' and that they have no donation limits anymore, pretty much ends what the founding fathers fought for - we the people.
The message of the 21st century america: get rich. Get above the law and above the fold of the 99%. Go where the rules don't apply to you. Go where you make the rules for everyone else.
Okay, so given the trend of these powers is to increase, and he's not going to be in power after 2016, does he trust the next guy with even more powers, or the guy after that with even more than that?
When civil liberties advocates visited to press him to do more to reverse Mr. Bushs policies, Mr. Obama pushed back. He reminded me that he had a different role to play, that he was commander in chief and that he needed to protect the American people,
The role of President isn't to follow through on the platform you were elected on?
That's the whole problem. The NSA spying is being sold as if it stops terrorist attacks. It does not. They have not cited a single incidence.
Nothing is going to change, it's a big boys club, debating it, writing about it, all fruitless.
If this is meant to be taken at face value, and it's at least plausible given how the US government seems to operate, how can Obama not follow it up with at least a strong commitment to making the American security apparatus more clear and transparent?
So a non-existent threat was what made Obama decide that the surveillance state was necessary. Great decisionmaking here.
Obama spends most of his time going to eat-dinner with the same rich people that benefit from printing money. The rest of the time it is with the praetorian guard that "protects" him.
Anybody believes he is going to make the same people he surrounds most of the time furious? The same people that put him in charge?
This people are the eyes and ears of the "king of the world". He is living in a bubble.
If that's true, it seems to indicate that Obama is not an overseer at all.
Have our worst fears been confirmed? Is the NSA an unstoppable organization that reports to nobody except itself?
By the way if your getting most of your updates on this subject from HN, you're most likely out of the loop. Since a lot of the insightful content doesn't make it. IIRC there's even a penalty on this subject on HN.
The ability read/listen to all electronic communication without warrants gives the NSA too much power for this not to happen.
I was in Burlington, VT; about as liberal a town as you will find in the USA; and there was a strong anti-war movement. That anti-war movement bought Obama's promises hook-line-and-sinker and the same people that were out holding signs and going to rallies were canvasing for Obama. There was a march through the streets when the counting was done; people cheered as if we were finally turning a new leaf.
I hope, so deeply, that people will have learned their lesson; that, if some politician you have never heard of suddenly starts getting a ton of press and magically enters your consciousness; he is being tapped by big players to do so. Obama, more than any other public figure in the last twenty years is proof positive that there does indeed exist a shadowy cartel that are fucking with us for power.
If you believe Obama started out pure-at-heart and was 'corrupted' after becoming president; you are naive beyond all comprehension. Remember early, early when Obama was asked about marijuana? One of the easiest, most obvious blatantly fucked up policies our government carries out.. something that every single non-political marginally liberal person is absolutely crystal clear on should be legal for adults: he laughs derisively like it's a terrible idea.
Why? What is it about Obama being so full of hope and change and feel-goody liberalness that makes him laugh at marijuana? Talk to 50 non politician democrats and you will find 49 think it's obvious to legalize marijuana. But talk to 50 politician democrats, and you will find maybe half of them. The higher up you go, the less likely they are to be pro legalization. Why? Because their interests aren't yours.
If you think that there will be ever be a 'main stream' candidate that will represent your interests over the 'shadowy cartel' of government interest and lobbyists, you are sorely mistaken; and we all pay the price.
"it's okay when we do it"
We are lied to all the time by them.
We don't need the US Congress. We don't even need the President in it's current version.
We can vote on legislation ourselves. We can approve a budget ourselves. We can veto stupid and corrupt laws.
We do everything else online, why can't we govern online?
The people in power don't want this to happen, so they convince us they are actually doing something.
Barry, that's what happens when you get caught lying almost every time you open your mouth. Clearly your mother didn't teach you much.
There are people out there every day who are plotting. The notion that we would put down a tool that would protect people here in America is hard to fathom.
Raidz2 is not fast. In fact, it is slow. Also, it is less reliable than a two way mirror in most configurations, because recovering from a disk loss requires reading the entirety of every other disk, whereas recovering from loss in a mirror requires reading the entirety of one disk. The multiplication of the probabilities don't work out particularly well as you scale up in disk count (even taking into account that raidz2 tolerates a disk failure mid-recovery). And mirroring is much faster, since it can distribute seeks across multiple disks, something raidz2 cannot do. Raidz2 essentially synchronizes the spindles on all disks.
Raidz2 is more or less suitable for archival-style storage where you can't afford the space loss from mirroring. For example, I have an 11 disk raidz2 array in my home NAS, spread across two separate PCIe x8 8-port 6Gbps SAS/SATA cards, and don't usually see read or write speeds for files exceeding 200MB/sec. The drives individually are capable of over 100MB/sec - in a non-raidz2 setup, I'd be potentially seeing over 1GB/sec on reads of large contiguous files.
Personally I'm going to move to multiple 4-disk raid10 vdevs. I can afford the space loss, and the performance characteristics are much better.
 Scrub speeds are higher, but not really relevant to FS performance.
Add a flash memory based (SSD) ZIL or L2ARC or both to the box. That'll help improve read/write performance. I believe the ZIL (ZFS intent log) is used to cache during writes, and the L2ARC is used during reads.
You might want to look into disabling atime, so that the pool isn't wasting energy keeping access times on files up to date. Not sure if this is relevant with the architecture of HN or not. This can be done with
zfs set atime=off srv/ycombinator
I actually think you'll probably have a lot of fun with ZFS tuning, if that's the problem with news.yc. FreeBSD's page is pretty detailed: https://wiki.freebsd.org/ZFSTuningGuide
Instead of doing that, they probably dropped a bit more than a thousand dollars on a box, and are probably saving thousands in costs per year. This is money coming out of someone's pocket.
This site is here, and it's a charity, being provided free of cost, to you. Who cares if HN is down for a few hours? Seriously? Has anyone been hurt because of this, yet?
[the current release is pretty old: https://github.com/wting/hackernews]
Thanks for all you do!
Out of curiosity, do you have an idea about the source of the corruption problems?
Hoping the box has ECC ram, otherwise zfs, too, can be unreliable (http://research.cs.wisc.edu/adsl/Publications/zfs-corruption...)
If someone does offer a new software architecture, and hosting, would people be open to move hackernews there?
I'm sure other more experienced DTrace users can offer tips but I remember reading this book and learning a lot. And I believe all the referenced scripts were open source and available.
Would recommend a new SSD-based ZFS box (Samsung 840 Pros have been great even for pretty write-intesive load), with raidz3 for protection and zfs send (and/or rsync from hourly/N-minute snapshot for data protection which should eliminate copying FS metadata corruption, as not sure if zfs send will).
Happy to provide and/or host such a box or two if helpful.
I didn't realize HN had enough disk storage needs to need more than one drive. I guess you could have 1+2 redundancy or something.
Why? I still can't get this out of my mind:
Also before anyone gets too serious with a reply, learn to laugh. Humility goes along way! I poke fun at Ruby/Rails all the time.
Bell Labs is not just another glass box in the burbs because Saarinan was not just another bullshitting architect.
Fun fact: The architect who designed this building also designed the Gateway Arch in St Louis and the iconic Tulip Chair.
(Isn't it a shame Larkin is no more?)
A question to no company in particular, though this seems to be a good place to ask.
Why are you not taking backorders? I have noticed, across multiple startups and other electronics companies, that the pattern seems to be:
1) Produce $QUANTITY items in the first production run2) Sell out in $RIDICULOUSLY_SHORT_TIME3) Order $QUANTITY * $MULTIPLE while telling potential customers, "We ordered more from the manufacturer, check back later!"
The last step turns getting an item into a sort of lottery. If you take backorders, though, you get a defined backlog to work through. Your customers will definitely get what they want (eventually). Plus, you know what $MULTIPLE should be going forward because you have a defined set of work for the future. I spent the first four years of my career as an EE with an aerospace company, and for us having a backlog was a good thing (as long as we could meet our contractual obligations, of course). Few, if any, hardware startups seem to be embracing this concept.
I think I've just found something to go upstream of my main home router (using the router's USB socket for power). The main home router can become a basic switch/wireless access point.
You could also use something like this as a portable personal firewall/VPN router running off the laptop's USB ports for power.
I was too slow this time though!
It does not come with built-in antenna though, so an external antenna is required.
Also, I don't have a list of these handy, but I've found long annotated notebooks/blog posts of worked data science examples very helpful for refreshing my memory on applied techniques. http://derandomized.com/ is a great example, maybe other HN readers have some favourites we could add.
Quoting the section 'An Academic Shortfall':"Academic credentials are important but not necessary for high-quality data science. The core aptitudes curiosity, intellectual agility, statistical fluency, research stamina, scientific rigor, skeptical nature that distinguish the best data scientists are widely distributed throughout the population."
In my estimation, none of those aptitudes are covered by teaching technical skills like databases, NLP, ML, graphical models, and the other topics this curriculum covers.
The "core aptitudes" generally boil down to asking the correct questions, establishing the correct answers, and correctly defending them. Academia doesn't automatically instill these skills, but it can do a great job of doing so.
Either way, inside or outside the ivory tower, an ace programmer who masters NLP, ML, Hadoop, and everything else could easily still come out without the required core aptitudes, and be thoroughly unprepared to do what data scientists are really expected to do: answer questions.
Thanks for putting these resources together.
 -- http://nltk.org/book3/
Particularly http://videolectures.net/pascal/ has plenty of lectures and tutorials from their summer schools on very relevant topics for machine learning.
> I geared the original curriculum toward Python tools and resources, so I've explicitly marked when resources use other tools to teach conceptual material (like R)
Why did you choose Python over R? Personal preference, a bent toward Python in the online courses you found, or is Python generally considered the de facto language choice for professional data scientists?
I imagine you could tackle these courses with any programming language, but if Python seems to be the way the data science community is going, it would be helpful to know that. Personally, I'm curious because I'm trying to decide if I should pick up Python on the side to supplement the knowledge I already have of R and various other programming languages.
Also, thanks for putting all this together. It's great!
Regardless of any path you take, these are very exciting times to be in computing sciences. All the best to everyone and keep upgrading your skills and knowledge :)
While I'm sure it was an interesting exercise, the author could have saved himself some time and simply Googled the name, there are published scripts and COM objects to deal with this encoding stream such as.
> x = sys.stdin.readline() > while x: > > x = sys.stdin.readline()
for x in sys.stdin:
Does anyone know where I can find either the application in question or some other program that will at least encode this format?
I don't think describing one as risk-averse is fair when risk is different. When A and B are given the same risk, and A takes the risk and B doesn't, it is fair to describe B as more risk-averse than A. When A and B are given the different risk, and A takes the risk and B doesn't, it doesn't tell much about B's risk-averseness.
I think it is not that Japanese culture is risk-averse, but that doing startup in Japan is actually more risky. These two are not the same statement.
I also call bullshit on "lack of disruptive ideas". How can one even imagine such thing is true is beyond me.
That being said, the discussion is largely a repetition of what we've heard many times before (Though the parts about long sales cycles and the non-entrepreneurial VC was interesting, since these are the only two parts that came from the author's own personal experiences). There's a limit to how much astute insight can be drawn from Japanese Americans (which he must be) like the author or myself, because in the end, we are outsiders and will never be completely immersed or invested in understanding the intricacies of the socio-cultural issues that pervade the scene there.
I've of course thought about these issues in Japan myself, and my current assessment is that the best talent in the country have so much to lose and so little to gain by leaving their larger company posts and creating their own thing. The incentives and rewards are completely different than just 40 years ago, where there was very little to lose by being brash and taking outsized risks, both inside and outside large companies.
A teenage girl spends much of her time reading books that interest her and is drawn toward writing fantasy fiction on her own. This runs against the grain of the cultural norm of devoting herself to studying for university entrance exams.
She is inspired by a boy her age devoted to making and playing violins, who goes to Italy for a year to pursue this dream. His family supports and encourages him in this endeavor.
Her parents are understandably worried about her choice to pursue this risky dream, but decide to support her choice in the end.
The movie really drew me in emotionally to what it must be like to choose a more creative path in a society with a strong norm of conformity. It made me think of how the animators must have felt telling this story, as it must have mirrored their own past.
It also makes me wonder how so many creative people have managed to flourish in Japan, and what path they took to arrive there. There is so much creativity in manga, anime, video games, and all the other cultural artifacts of Japan so popular throughout the world.
And what about the Japanese who do manage to successfully start new businesses? How do they manage it?
Three other points I would like to share come from discussions with Japanese friends over the years:
- For men in certain industries, there is a strong social encouragement of working for large companies for decades, and the expectation at many (but not all) corporations is that once you are hired, you are in for life. The companies make it easy to do so -- I have a friend at a large electronics company who said they took care of housing, relocation, even a company hospital ("hospital" was the term he used, although I suppose it could have been a clinic).
- Entrepreneurs are seen as somehow tricky or ethically lacking. This was expressed to me by middle-aged salarymen at giant multinationals a few years ago, so I don't know if the attitude has changed.
- Large companies have extensive and deep supplier relationships that discourage taking a chance on an upstart.
I'd like to hear the observations of other HNers who are Japanese or have long experience in the country.
I see that in US, there is a media circle that continually builds itself around entrepreneurs and celebrates local innovation (like how TC began as such an idea), as the old ones grow bigger, younger ones come in and keep even the fringe entrepreneur in the lime light
In addition to the Tech industry you can also see this in the US sports industry. No other country perhaps has made sports such a successful business endeavor as in US. A great part of credit goes to its media.
Another big plus for US startups is 'local adoption', I consider this a huge advantage for all of them. Perhaps you have never felt it as you have never seen the other side of it. For e.g. you can never take it for granted in India, in fact being local startup has a good chance to work against you with customers. The positive news is that there is a sea of change in enterprises here, I have had recently a large corporation go for our product vs that of IBM/SAP. This alone can be a start of good times for Indian startups.