Atom is no longer needed since their non-atom CPUs have a low enough power profile now. We're stuck in single core performance hell because physics.
I don't know where you've been but GPU competition between nvidia and AMD has been pretty healthy for the last few years, and AMDs specifically have been quite affordable. (That's not even taking into account they easily paid for themselves with Litecoin mining at one point.) It's only CPU competition that has been dead, but that's been the case ever since the Core line came out. (I guess you could count ARM too for low-end CPU competition, but both Intel and ARM can actually afford to lose that market entirely as their businesses are propped up by other things.)
> It's as if the system was designed to be so complex as to require a team of people to operate, plus a manager to supervise, plus a support person to field phone calls
This is exactly it. Even if not intentionally designed, it ends up that way. As andrewstuart2 mentioned above, "[customers] also got the full expertise of the salesforce engineering organization (which clearly is far from incompetent) being brought to bear on the problem, at no extra charge to them as a customer". This is great I guess, but if your home-grown solution doesn't use, say, Oracle, to start out with, you're going to eliminate a heck of a lot of necessary engineering expertise when things go wrong. Break up systems even more and suddenly just one generalist can do it all on the side...
Brute force as an attack vector is dealt with by requiring "strong" passwords, not by using scrypt, so the thought of using a hash that protects all passwords equally with respect to the time it takes to try one, as an extra layer of defense for those weakest of the "strong" passwords, doesn't usually come up unless you're actually looking into how to design a login system instead of just copying from somewhere/some book as fast as you can and moving on. This issue with Tumblr that late doesn't surprise me at all.
At least one major benefit of SHA over MD5 is that you won't trivially find collisions and thus compromise the accounts of even those users with strong passwords...
My team isn't exactly doing "top-tier CS work", so if someone "showed off" how far above the average they are with a Coq solution or the quirky GP you replied to or the OP's neural net I'd be delighted and want to skip the rest of the interview, recommending an immediate hire (or at least a go-to-next-stage since I only give these questions over phone screens). The question is beneath them and they have demonstrated that, our team's work is also probably beneath them. We just use that question to filter out the totally unqualified. Their potential value is high because they are overqualified -- they didn't just pass it, they passed it with style. Most dev work at large companies is dull and doesn't require much knowledge that e.g. a CS degree supposedly gives, which is part of why it's amusing/frustrating we have such a bad whiteboard hazing culture insisting candidates can invert a tree or whatever.
I head the "what if they do it this other weird way?" question off by giving them a simple problem, having them solve it (or at least convince me their solution solves it), and then asking them to solve it a different way. My screens mostly follow the ideas from https://sites.google.com/site/steveyegge2/five-essential-pho... I allocate about 10 minutes max for "basic coding" where I just ask them (lately) to write a function that returns true if the given input int (which is assumed to be > 0) is even and false if odd. Then I ask them to do it in different ways. If they use bit-and, I figure they know enough about the "bits and bytes" section too for my team's purposes. Last time someone couldn't recall using bit-and but surprised me with a way I didn't consider, which was convert to string and check the last character. I'm sure there are other ways to do it I haven't considered either. Maybe someone will give me a solution with tensorflow someday, but what would be really impressive is if they bust that out within a few minutes. :) All I'm really after is "can you write code?", if the answer is no then very little time was wasted, if the answer was yes we can go into variations and other questions to rank the other yeses / find other red flags.
I don't know PHP 7 yet, but I'd say there's plenty to learn just in PHP 5 if you haven't kept up since PHP 4. Perhaps a piecewise approach would be best, starting with the 'proper' C++/Java-esque version of OOP that I'd say is the biggest feature of PHP 5...
It makes me really envious of those who went deep down the Lisp path and haven't had to look back. They don't have to spend time keeping up with the latest developments instead of pursuing some other goal, they have it all already.
Maybe. Python is under an MIT-like license, so you're fine, but if it were under e.g. the GPL you could still look to see if they have some form of runtime exception as GCC does. In any case it's rare for a company that's not well-established to care more about licensing that technical merit (and even any that do, the typical approach is to ask to buy a separate license if possible), and it's also rare that a company would use such a tool as this (created as a hackday project, in Ocaml, according to the author) rather than finding an alternative that meets their licensing criteria or just developing it in-house since it's not that big a tool and lacks a lot of useful capabilities like piping.
I'm mostly in agreement about Perl's status, but I'd rather take the small hit in verbosity for the niceness of the rest of Python rather than having to deal with Perl... Yeah it kind of sucks not having the backtick operator, but at least it's not too much of a hassle to do something like:
from subprocess import check_output as sh
files = sh(['ls'])
print files
This has its limits but covers a lot of basic use-cases for the backtick. I think some people first see an alternate way of doing this in Python that's a lot more hairy, even if more flexible, but it doesn't have to be that way...
This deserves to be called out in the readme, if for nothing else than to limit the wild threads on display here and maybe head off some future wild threads.
Fresh machine where and for whom? I doubt a simple batch script will get you very far (setup.exe exists for a reason...), and I doubly-doubt you would have enough overlap in the process that something that can convert the steps to bash would be an advantage. The only advantage I see for batsh is that it looks nicer to write in for the tiny subset of batch it supports. But then so is pretty much anything else -- it wouldn't surprise me if someone has already written a DSL in a well known language that can output to batch or powershell, we don't need a whole new language for this.
Uh, I think you're forgetting PHP. Not to mention Clojure is at least as popular as Go. Dynamic typing isn't going anywhere, desire for 'gradual typing' is a very niche but vocal desire in the dynamic language communities. It may lose some mindshare but there are a lot of options to lose that to these days since even the holdouts of 'annoying' static typing with terrible type systems like C++ or Java are making it more and more feasible to ignore/not specify the types in your code.
Come on HN, this comment was answering the parent directly. Unless you've been under a rock for the last 4 years there's no excuse to downvote even if you think it's still low-probability...
I don't think it was foreseen when license plates were created the harmful use case of having a cop at every street corner with photographic memory and accurate speed measuring abilities who occasionally notes cars down for speeding / running a red light and who is networked with every other cop all working together reporting on such-and-such car now at position x,y while a team at HQ is constantly updating large maps with tacks showing the last known location of car x,y. Agree that the modern tech equivalent of the above has already been happening to various extents. Indeed we're fast approaching a time when we'll have enough sensors-of-all-sorts penetration to be able to track the whereabouts of anything of interest worldwide -- the underlying geospatial tech to make that scale already exists.
It's more people complaining about unforeseen possible use cases that are now seen and possible rather than the underlying bits of tech that make it possible. (What, should we make cameras illegal?) But because aspects of our law have a tradition of "if it's not explicitly illegal, it's legal, unless you get sued for it and the judges decide it's illegal" then it is not a bad idea to nip these sorts of unintended purposes in the bud with an explicit law before someone actually does it and we have to wait for a long court battle for it to be resolved. (And when that someone is the government, the odds aren't exactly 50-50.)
This is better, but still not enough. You can only put pressure on all of these parties (and others) by going to the top: change the law. This at least has a better chance at succeeding than telling people to not watch great shows.
While I wait for that to happen or not, I'll continue not using Chrome, IE/Edge, or Netflix -- nor buying music or movies except in a form I can copy and distribute and play on local devices with no network and no proprietary or secret bits. EME existing or not doesn't affect me one bit.
Yeah, there are many qualifications one could make to the "give us a CEO-King, doesn't really matter which CEO". For instance one might disqualify anyone from Harvard, or only count CEOs that managed large companies and didn't drive them into the ground, etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_life_of_George_W.... is an interesting wiki page though.
Thiel is a libertarian. If you're up for reading... http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2007/12/why-i-a... dives into some differences. The key one IMO being that no neoreactionary should actually vote. Trump is of course the obvious best candidate from one branch of the NRx perspective, but him taking office doesn't fundamentally change things. Another branch of NRx could argue Hillary is the "best", too, but the reasoning may be surprising.
The underlying reason for which I think Thiel might support Trump is that Trump is ultimately a businessman, like Thiel, and one in the messy business of real estate development at that. (For a fun fairly anti-Trump piece that could also read as support: http://slatestarcodex.com/2016/03/19/book-review-the-art-of-...) A common NRx thread is that pretty much any chief executive (which includes military generals) would do a better job at being President (and even better King) than the more traditional list of possibilities like lawyers and professors.
No one is apologizing for shit, because there is nothing to apologize for. That's the response you've been getting. If you want to see what apologizing for content looks like, take note of defenders of e.g. Linus' asshole remarks that say "yeah he's an asshole but he's really necessary and good for the kernel!". In order to be an apology there must be an admission of wrongdoing.
I was also surprised by the choice to donate the money. Given the huge homelessness problem in SF, I get the impression it's meant as a characteristic jab just as much as an act of charity.
It still happens today, but perhaps more rarely. For physical copies I'd bet a large part of the problem is simply availability, and by the 2000s most labels had gotten better at a solid distribution flow. If you sell out 10k albums in your first week, but have no more ready to go next week, you're going to drop pretty hard.
There's also long been talk about a big earthquake due in central Utah. Really there are so many "big ones" due it'd be thematically disappointing if they didn't all happen at once and then set off Yellowstone as a finale. But in the real world, it's scary thinking about how many people will die and how poorly it will be handled. Anything that could cripple a large part of the US has worldwide ramifications, too. Living in the Seattle area the best I can hope for is that I'm individually prepared enough and will have the fortitude to help others around me as best I can.
The effort to create something has always factored into the price. It's not the only factor, but it's there. Additionally, I take the main point of the response of "trivial" (in the case of typesetting it's often just providing a bundle of extra tex files to recompile your paper with) as less a remark on the price, and more a remark on the work. The question you answered was what work the publishers are doing, with the underlying qualifier of [to justify/correlate with their price] and the direct followup you didn't speculate on asking about what they charge for each item of work. It's like answering "what do doctors do to command such a high price?" with "scribble on a piece of paper". OK, let's assume that's really a good description of the work they provide, how much specifically do they charge for it? The full fee? Great, this exercise wasn't helpful at all. Can we break the work down into smaller units and try to estimate costs for each, whether those costs are "reasonable" or "unreasonable"? When I pay $30 for a single paper, what parts of the work endeavor does each dollar go to? We can even take into account fuzzy second-order fees like "well you're really paying back into the massive amount of work they did beforehand so they can scribble the right things now" when we're out of other ideas, but I can't imagine much of that $30 going specifically to the work of "typesetting" because it's so trivial.