1,629 karma · joined February 14, 2011
Edit: evidence that the first paragraph is real? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlD9UBTcSW4 (from http://www.reddit.com/r/gnu/comments/hv56g/source_of_the_fam...)
That being said, whether data sharing is a good thing or not depends on the situation. For example, copying to a cache can expose more memory parallelism in an application. I feel like you are taking this opportunity to take a jab at FP here ("the purists detest mutation"). While FP is my preferred paradigm of development, I wasn't trying to push it on anyone--I was merely making a technical point.
Explain?
Perhaps a similar approach could work for IVs.
Their monopoly let IE6, a total PoS, maintain a lead in the browser market for years and years and years despite the complete inferiority of the offering. The web would have been a different place if Microsoft actually developed IE6. It could have been the gold standard, the Microsoft Office, to our Google LibreOffices and Mozilla AbiWords.
- The word 'contract' has different meanings depending on which subcommunity you are talking to. For example, the Penn crowd often uses the word 'contract' in relation to refinement typing. The Scheme folks tend to think of the problem in different terms, but I am not convinced there is any substantial or insightful difference between the various definitions. As you seem to be an expert in the subject, I am sure you have read the manifest contracts paper, but I will leave this link here for the others: http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~mgree/papers/popl2010_contracts.pd....
- I have never heard anyone say that types cannot feature blame. I would argue that, for example, Haskell's type checker is quite good at blaming the correct party for a type violation. To argue the opposite you would need a precise definition of blame, and I am aware there are several papers written on this subject. I am sure you could find a definition of blame that excludes static type systems, but I am not sure that definition would be useful.
- Types are not proofs, but typing derivations are. Even if you consider types and contracts to be different, the execution trace serves as a proof of a dynamically checked 'contract' (which is really just a derivation in an operational semantics).
There is really no reason to be so hostile. Perhaps to show respect to the issue under discussion (depression) we could all resolve to be a little kinder to those we speak with.
You will see this called a 'PPT' in the literature, where PPT = Probabilistic Polynomial Time.
Here's the text of the article:
-------------------------------------
For years, the Central Intelligence Agency denied it had a secret file on MIT professor and famed dissident Noam Chomsky. But a new government disclosure obtained by The Cable reveals for the first time that the agency did in fact gather records on the anti-war iconoclast during his heyday in the 1970s.
The disclosure also reveals that Chomsky's entire CIA file was scrubbed from Langley's archives, raising questions as to when the file was destroyed and under what authority.
The breakthrough in the search for Chomsky's CIA file comes in the form of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. For years, FOIA requests to the CIA garnered the same denial: "We did not locate any records responsive to your request." The denials were never entirely credible, given Chomsky's brazen anti-war activism in the 60s and 70s -- and the CIA's well-documented track record of domestic espionage in the Vietnam era. But the CIA kept denying, and many took the agency at its word.
Now, a public records request by FOIA attorney Kel McClanahan reveals a memo between the CIA and the FBI that confirms the existence of a CIA file on Chomsky.
Dated June 8, 1970, the memo discusses Chomsky's anti-war activities and asks the FBI for more information about an upcoming trip by anti-war activists to North Vietnam. The memo's author, a CIA official, says the trip has the "ENDORSEMENT OF NOAM CHOMSKY" and requests "ANY INFORMATION" about the people associated with the trip.
After receiving the document, The Cable sent it to Athan Theoharis, a professor emeritus at Marquette University and an expert on FBI-CIA cooperation and information-gathering.
"The June 1970 CIA communication confirms that the CIA created a file on Chomsky," said Theoharis. "That file, at a minimum, contained a copy of their communication to the FBI and the report on Chomsky that the FBI prepared in response to this request."
The evidence also substantiates the fact that Chomsky's file was tampered with, says Theoharis. "The CIA's response to the FOIA requests that it has no file on Chomsky confirms that its Chomsky file was destroyed at an unknown time," he said.
It's worth noting that the destruction of records is a legally treacherous activity. Under the Federal Records Act of 1950, all federal agencies are required to obtain advance approval from the national Archives for any proposed record disposition plans. The Archives is tasked with preserving records with "historical value."
"Clearly, the CIA's file, or files, on Chomsky fall within these provisions," said Theoharis.
It's unclear if the agency complied with protocols in the deletion of Chomsky's file. The CIA declined to comment for this story.
What does Chomsky think? When The Cable presented him with evidence of his CIA file, the famous linguist responded with his trademark cynicism.
"Some day it will be realized that systems of power typically try to extend their power in any way they can think of," he said. When asked if he was more disturbed by intelligence overreach today (given the latest NSA leaks) or intelligence overreach in the 70s, he dismissed the question as an apples-to-oranges comparison.
"What was frightening in the ‘60s into early ‘70s was not so much spying as the domestic terror operations, COINTELPRO," he said, referring to the FBI's program to discredit and infiltrate domestic political organizations. "And also the lack of interest when they were exposed."
Regardless,, the destruction of Chomsky's CIA file raises an even more disturbing question: Who else's file has evaporated from Langley's archives? What other chapters of CIA history will go untold?
"It is important to learn when the CIA decided to destroy the Chomsky file and why they decided that it should be destroyed,'" said Theoharis. "Undeniably, Chomsky's was not the sole CIA file destroyed. How many other files were destroyed?"
It was like I was in a research lab's clean room or something.
I purchased my last pair of shoes from Zappos, and I don't think they would be nearly as attractive if they didn't have such a good return policy (the internet-equivalent of see it in person).
I tried foot pedals (and still have them under my desk). They were better than nothing, but after I switched to the Kinesis Advantage keyboard I ended up not using them anymore. Hitting Ctrl+Alt with your thumbs is more convenient than hitting them with your feet, especially since I tend to fidget a lot. Another advantage (no pun intended) is that the arrow keys are convenient to hit, which lets you remap several standard Emacs keybindings. For example, I use C-b to switch buffers.
Neither switching keyboards nor using foot pedals solved my hand pain, however. I ended up having to take more drastic measures: I switched to the carpalx QGMLWB keyboard layout[1]. One of the advantages of the carpalx approach is the clear and powerful mathematical model which quantifies the effectiveness of keyboard layouts. I was able to select a layout that minimizes pinky strain--if I had switched to Dvorak or Colemak, I would have increased my pinky strain.
"If your senior high school computer science final project wasn’t building an issue tracker or Twitter clone, then your high school either a) didn’t offer computer science classes or b) you were a jock and didn’t take computer science."
Is this really true? My brain immediately turned off when I read this, but then I realized I have no clue what people in high school usually program.
I'll go first: around 14 or 15 I wrote a bytecode compiler for some god awful language that looked like the bastard child of Perl and Javascript... I guess around late high school time I was mainly working on Smogon, a competitive Pokemon website (still around and making money!) and NetBattle, an online simulator for several Pokemon generations (now defunct and replaced by www.pokemonshowdown.com)
So HN, what was your "senior high school project"?
But really, I just don't want changes on the desktop at all. I live in Emacs, the rest should just work.
So, +1 for tos-dr for letting me know, and a potential extra +1 if they help us get GH to change this policy. I'm going to let them know this matters to me, I hope others here will as well.
hie actually parses the file (using a modified version of haskell-src-exts to support more extensions), and gives show-type-at-point, goto definition, and auto complete with inline haddock documentation. Its autocomplete is context sensitive--for instance, if you type "import " you will only see modules. It also works somewhat incrementally and on-the-fly. YMMV, and it isn't documented well, but I use it every day and haven't had any problems.
If you want to try it out, you'll probably need Emacs 24. It might work on Emacs 23. Use hie-fetch.py to fetch the source for all of the packages you have installed, and "hie-hackage.py cachedir" to pre-cache your libs. First time import of Prelude will be slow, but afterwards should be instantaneous.
If you have problems the code is pretty self-explanatory IMO, but feel free to e-mail me (addr in the .el file) with comments and concerns.
I don't ever remember saying that the notability rules were broken. However, if others think that they are, I can respect their opinions. Likewise, I don't think I slithered out when push came to shove. Actually, when push came to shove, I continued what I was doing with the understanding that the naysayers were a special interest group with an agenda (wasn't this my previous post...?) However, I did say I would stop and spent a good deal of time apologizing here when it was clear that my understanding was false. How is this not taking responsibility for my actions?
Yes, people told me that I was wrong. But at the risk of repeating myself, they did not give me any reason to believe that they were aligned with the goals of Wikipedia, and others more experienced with Wikipedia assured me that they were not in fact aligned with said goals. I was willing to cooperate with anyone who took any effort to communicate with me: for instance, the first message I received on my talk page was asking why I put a notability tag on his article. He said it was notable, and provided a reference. I thanked him and removed the tag.
I don't know why you are so sure that I am acting in bad faith. If my intent was to troll Wikipedia, I wouldn't have used my real name.
I regret that I am unable to reply to each comment individually, HN's software stops me from making too many posts.
Regardless, I misunderstood Wikipedia policy and I apologize to those I have offended. I honestly didn't think a couple of deletion discussions was so grave, and I ask that those who abhor me so try to imagine what it's like to make a mistake and have it go viral.
I gave the following example in my Wikipedia talk page: the first paper on functional reactive programming is very famous. It describes a DSL called Fran. However, Fran could have not been given a name and the paper still would have been influential, because it wasn't the language itself that had the impact, it was the idea of functional reactive programming that had an impact.
(For the record, I got an A in PL! We used Coq. And proved a lot of theorems, mechanically.)