Magic numbers, ... and strings, all over the place .Memory leak galore (debug code?) .Probably buffer overflows all over the place, here's one I noticed . I suspect others given the proliferation of opaque pointers and memcpy usage.
Any code commonalities with the pidgin skypeweb plugin?
I wonder why this took so long. The assumption that no sane site would want to stream in lossless when lossy codecs were starting to be really good (and obviously much smaller)? Lack of expertise, manpower? Priorities?  Does every FF feature has to be 'parity-chrome'?
It's even more interesting that Chrome also sat on this for ~5 years  and are just now about to release it also.
Like the Firefox thread insinuates, will pundits credit TIDAL for lighting the fire under browser vendors to support lossless streaming? No such link appears to exist, aside from TIDAL already streaming to Chrome using NaCl , but when we look back in 10 years and see both of the major browser vendors adding FLAC support now as opposed to any other time in the previous 5 years, what will people think?
 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=514365 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=586568 https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=93887 https://support.tidal.com/hc/en-us/articles/202654692-HiFi-O...
I know theres FLIF for lossless image compression and Zstandard for general purpose lossless compression that have recently hit the Hacker News front page. Are their adopted techniques not suitable for audio?
Meanwhile there are other formats that seem to be more important. What about WebP?
At work we are currently developing a kiosk system based on a big ass touch screen in UHD running in Google Chrome. I suggested switching to WebP for the pictures and it is saving a lot of bandwidth compared to JPEG.
That said, it surely doesn't hurt to have that support in the browser, I just don't see it being very useful.
4 year old issue: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=93887
I have very little memory of those first few hours. I now know what it is to be insane. I was so disconnected from reality that people have told me that I had long conversations with them that I have zero recollection of. The only thing I clearly remember was telling the officer that I had a gun upstairs and that if he didn't take it, I was going to murder the man responsible for her death within the hour. It was the most matter of fact confession of planning a murder imaginable.
After a couple of hours, I saw a Facebook post of hers and lost it, the insane calm left me and I bawled my eyes out.
It's her birthday tomorrow. I miss her so, so much.
Anyway, the point of this post: my daughter died of an overdose. She was at a party, a man gave her powdered pure fentanyl claiming it was cocaine. I have no idea why. She snorted some and overdosed soon after.
All I want to happen is that someone somewhere reads about what happened to my daughter and reminds their kids that without proper testing kits, they have no idea what the fuck they are taking. Drugs may not be bad, but some people certainly are.
Some kind of party had been going on when mom and dad were out for the evening. The young woman and assorted friends doing drugs. She passed out, it was hours before anyone thought to check out how she was.
I called in all the docs there were to call. We tried every trick there was known to try. Then heart rate fell to zero. All the effort came to nothing. Everyone was quiet, mumbled their sorrow, and slipped out the private staff access door. That is everyone but me.
That morning was about the hardest I ever faced, even in the decades since. Sure others have died on my watch, one cause or another. But that time was different. I knew I had to say it, give the worst possible news, the unnecessary death of a child, to grieving parents. I truly did not know how such a thing can be said, what phrasing is best, what stings the least?
I don't know how, but summoning the courage I walked out to where they were sitting. I was nearly in a trance, not only from lack of sleep, but stunned by the magnitude of what I had to speak. And I said what happened, the child passed away, never awakened despite the heroic efforts of so many healers sweating all at once.
I sat there for a moment, no more to say, listened to the mournful sobs. Though I felt a failure, more than anything I had no comfort to provide. They didn't find fault, they were not angry that we could not do more.
Seriously, a moment too stark, too profound to ever forget nor would I want to relinquish it. No repeat is necessary, the lesson deeply embedded, the value of life, the meaning of words, the merit of a healer's human voice, these are all worth keeping.
So I always did the trip on my own.
The loss hit them like a truck every time, I have a few memories that make me wake up in the middle of the night three days a week but the look on a mother's face when you tell her that her son is dead is something you will never forget as long as you live.
Still, I am glad I went to see every family of everyone I lost in all those years. There was crying and screaming and tears and a lot of blaming, I even got slapped a few times but I always told them I'll be in a hotel nearby for the next days and if they want to talk they can call me any time of the day.
Some never called but after a day or two most invited me back to their home or came by and we had a few long talks over the next days until I had to go.
I've been in touch with most of those families over the years and I heard a lot of times that it gave them peace to know that I was there when their son / brother / husband / grandson died and that I came by personally to try to comfort them before they got "the letter".
I wish everyone that you will never come into this situation because it's almost as hard and unfair to be the messenger as it is to be the recipient of that message.
Very sad, but very well written.
What a heartbreaking essay. And how tragic that death by gun violence is apparently routine in North Philadelphia.
The police called her and told her that her son had overdosed and was on the way to the hospital. In the middle of the call they all of a sudden say "actually, he's dead!" like it was nothing special. His mother of course screamed out loud, which made the police upset (they said "hey, it's not my fault" or something like that, I don't remember exactly).
I normally have great respect for the police but I think this was handled catastrophically. They showed very little sympathy.
The hospital is in census tract 016300 with poverty level 58.5%
Of the three of us who remained, only two of us remained cancer free and she wasn't one of them.
A week earlier, there had been five of us.
I knew this. I didn't know if she did.
I didn't know what I would say if she mentioned them. It was possible she had the same problem in her head.
After we caught up, she asked if I had seen one of them.
Telling her the truth wasn't nearly as hard as answering her next question -- what about the other girl?
So while I can respect the stoicism and clear focus on the emotions of the mothers of victims, I hope the author and other ER doctors also take some time for themselves to deal with the trauma they experience.
Quick comment about how your it's instead of its caused an English parsing error in my brain:
I read until the comma and because I saw it's, I assumed I missed a word in the first part of the sentence - I though it may have been something like "I just want to say I evaluated the style of the article and it's direct, it's frank, it's spot on!", but re-reading it didn't reveal anything I missed. I then considered some less common writing styles/expressions. None of that worked out, so I read past the comma and figured out what happened. All this happened in the span of a second or so. Not sure what it was about this particular sentence that caused me to stop at the comma, I don't think it happens often.
I've shoehorned it into my rationalization for being here as advice on how to have an extremely difficult conversation, but it still feel a bit macabre to have this here.
Seriously people, if your spouse is not cheating on you, beating you, or throwing the family money to the casino, lighten up about the little stuff.
End of public service announcement.
I don't actually mind tracking as part of a useful service (like Google Maps). I block ads because they're 1) annoying 2) funding mass media.
Depriving Bezos' WaPo or Slim's NYT of revenue is definitely a feature. If billionaires want to push propaganda, the least they can do is foot the bill.
Tracking is a distant third. If an outlet I cared about ran ads, I'd white-list them. It just so happens that valuable sites like HN or developers' blogs either don't feature ads or do so in a way that adblockers don't interfere with (like job posts here).
Anyway. I think the reason it doesn't work as a business model is that really, honestly, reading the paper provides very little in terms of value to the average person. It's a very mild source of entertainment and nothing more. It used to be that the newspapers where the only media to get important information (classifieds, job ads...etc). Not any more.
Only every government everywhere hates it.
If it is possible to pay for something anonymously, then there is no following the money of others paying anonymously for other reasons. Including paying for products or services that are illegal or even with money from such sales.
Yes, you might compare this to cash. Cash that everyone used to carry around. It the higher denominations are marked (serial numbered), at least for US currency. Still it takes a LOT of effort to track their flow. For any kind of digital currency this scheme isn't tenable or repeatable. The tracking would either be too easy to prevent abuse, or too easy to abuse (get around).
Maybe we can have this level of freedom, if we admit that being at war with our population is a bad idea. If we allow the legal and controlled use of current vices. It wouldn't be perfect, but at least in that world we could probably get by with just controlling the income phase.
Though if you wanted to tax wealth (not income) you'd also need to report a total of 'outflow'. Which makes obtaining 'gifts' from sources not clearly related to work a vector suspect as tax avoidance via temporal displacement of wealth.
I also hadn't realised Stallman wrote for the Guardian, but going through his historic articles shows a healthy number of articles.
I know we've a lot of crypto currencies right now, but I really hope that there is finally a new one coming, which is just simply fast, secure and somehow helps you paying anonymously.
 https://blog.brave.com/introducing-brave-payments , HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12411405
To improve your chances of being seen, turn your lights on and wear bright colors to improve contrast. Be aware that if the sun is right behind you, people ahead of you will have a very difficult time seeing you.
Another thing that I think he should extend upon with regards to saccadic eye movement is the phenomena of going around a roundabout etc. in the dark or where external references are not in high contrast - that can start your eyes involuntarily darting around as your inner ear detect an imbalance/change due to the sideways G forces, and thinks that you are turning your head.
I really believe that this article should be required reading for every student who learns to drive or ride on the roads.
Was just at a water park with my family and the guards there were doing this constant head nodding. Kind of disturbing to watch if you are not expecting it. But I looked it up and the explanation is they are "scanning" - making sure to move around their heads to observe their area better and not rely on just the peripheral vision.
Owls do that as well. Even I do it when getting to an intersection somewhat. I lean into the steering wheel and bob my head up and down a few times. I imagine it might look pretty ridiculous to someone from the side.
Driving is probably one of the most dangerous things we do here in US. Anything to make it safer is a good thing.
One of the tricks I learned from driver's ed in back in Eastern Europe is if you drive at night, and incoming traffic is blinding you, don't stare directly into the beam, but turn your head slightly to the right, such that you'd still see ahead but it would be out of the corner of your eye. Obviously not ideal as you're using your peripheral vision but if the alternative is to blinded and not see anything at all, it is still better. I've used that trick enough times since then and it seems to work pretty well.
Must read for drivers, explains lot of stuff in simpler understanding way.
There's an IRC client tucked somewhere in there, and the owner is in one of the channels.
I talked to him on it a while back through it, it's a side project of his. It's meant to be some kind of Youtube browser simulcast multi-tool (think: watch Youtube videos with your friends simultaneously over the internet... in 3D!!!).
As a side note, the Look Closer button consistently crashes my browser (firefox 48.0.1). Anyone else having the same issue?
That's not really true, even with vectors it's good to have different images for different sizes, that add details (for larger sizes) or remove details and increase component sizes (for smaller sizes), so the icons look good at different sizes. You can see in the tape recorder icon the author shows: at larger sizes, it looks much better than the bitmap images, but at smaller sizes the bitmapped icons look better; the vector icons become a mush of unclear elements. The bitmap shows pieces as proportionally larger than they should be, so the visual elements that you consider important still show clearly.
SVG is ridiculously bloated in comparison. Even PostScript and PDF are more efficient.
Other than that, pretty incredible work. Vector image compression at encoding level is definitely interesting. I alsolove posts in which binary formats are explained, so...
This icon library shows some good examples.
And I was able to losslessly reduce it to 298 bytes with PNGOUT.
The smaller image is 257 bytes, and I reduced it to 186.
How's it compare to a minimised SVG, gzipped, in practical terms? I see projects elsewhere just blithely using SVG or SVGZ. (or, in horrifying cases, multiple sizes for hundreds or thousands of icons.) Perhaps this is a thing that would be suitable to wider use if it can get good lib support.
I find the work and ideas especially the
"attention schema theory"
of sentience, consciousness, self-awareness proposed by Michael Graziano most compelling in that area; they as well propose an evolutionary path towards the development of "consciousness"
And yeah sure, why should/could the mirror-neurons-"apparatus" _not_ be involved?
 https://www.princeton.edu/~graziano/ : including some The Atlantic essays.
> Otherwise monkeys would have self awareness and they don't
This suggests the existence of other research that has both defined the concept of self-awareness robustly and made it testable enough that we can state as fact that monkeys don't have it. Does anybody know what this might be alluding to?
These were dubbed "mirror neurons" or "monkey-see-monkey-do" neurons. This was an extraordinary observation because it implies that the neuron (or more accurately, the network which it is part of) was not only generating a highly specific command ("reach for the nut") but was capable of adopting another monkey's point of view. It was doing a sort of internal virtual reality simulation of the other monkeys action in order to figure out what he was "up to". It was, in short, a "mind-reading" neuron.
I don't really see how this follows- maybe the neurons are just recognising things that happened, like seeing a peanut being picked up. That doesn't require "adopting another monkey's point of view" or "figuring out what he was up to". It could just be the brain attempting to verify that the action happened, which is going to be seen regardless of who made it happen.
This final statement not only seems snide but also dumb to the difference between science and philosophy. (I'm not an expert on that difference but I can see that there is one. I can see that there is a clear difference in spite of the fact that each steps on the others' toes, that each side attempts to take credit for the others' insights at times, or makes snide comments at each other like this statement here.)
"Self-awareness is 'other awareness' applied to yourself where 'other awareness' is constructing meaningful models of other peoples minds in order to predict their behavior" ^ This is totally circular. You(others) have some way of guiding your(their) own behavior before being aware of others and using that to construct a model of behavior and self.
This essay is armchair philosophizing completely removed from any real experience. I'd go so far as to call it psychologically harmful to anyone that entertains the essay as true and attempts to apply the ideas presented in it to understand their self.
At sensory level our own "doing" is not really different then sombody else's "doing" , and that can pe processed by the same mechanism, but reconized as "our own doing" based on additional cues..
It also seems unlikely that a single neuron would carry a complete meaning in themselves... like probing a single bit in a data structure, you might be able to tell if it's odd or even, positive or negative, but probably need a constellation of bits/neurons to make sense of it.
But he may be simplifying in this high-level essay, and I haven't read papers in the field.
A very interesting hypothesis nevertheless. There are pathologies in which theory of mind is impaired. For example Baron-Cohen studies that aspect of autism. There might be hypotheses formulated what that means for self-awareness.
Sure, monkeys don't have self awareness.
I would use Linode if I needed to lease computational power, because it is still a great value vs AWS, but I could not run a high availability service there. It would feel like professional malpractice at this point.
The amount of distributed traffic happening right now against linode would probably only represent a 5% increase in traffic to a popular Google product. At least you know they have the expertise. Nothing against the very smart and talented linode engineers, but the two companies are on very different levels of traffic engineering.
Vultr had problems a few weeks ago, but I don't think it was DDOS-related.
Somehow things have been quiet on the DigitalOcean's end.
Also, we're on Heroku and they advertise Ddos mitigation as a feature, but "mitigation" sounds non-commital and I'm curious how they'd fare against a similar attack?
That's pretty harsh.
One of their experiments.
But I don't like the idea of having to install both Ruby and node just to work with a simple scss file. :-(
Also, the `container-side` thing is baffling. Why is that part of the framework? It seems like such a narrow focus. What kind of content is never visible on mobile? Why does it have to be on the side?
Not criticizing the authorthis looks cool and I'll give it a try, but I see a lot of these pop up and at work I've only ever used Bootstrap/Material/Semantic UI and for my own work I use Tachyons. Anyone use something a bit more obscure?
If anyone interested to buy, please contact me. Email is in my profile.
The main reason I plan to sell is because marketing it is too hard (I am developer).
Unfortunately time doesn't permit me to move them forward.
> While we have a tremendous respect for Mr. Crockford's abilities as a speaker and his contributions to our craft, we became aware that based on private feedback - not simply the dialogue on Twitter - that his presence would make some speakers uncomfortable to the point where they refused to attend or speak.
Okay so you are calling out his behavior making people uncomfortable, publicly, but you won't say why only that it was private feedback? Wasn't he one of the early speakers who accepted anyway? You apologized for lacking nuance on Twitter with your "announcement" and yet continue to do so.
Publicly claiming someone makes others uncomfortable and that someone is an older, white male, you know exactly what you are insinuating. Statements like this, especially against white males today, can be career ending even without proof as long as it simply goes viral.
I think the only responsible thing to do is to release exactly why someone would be uncomfortable. If you can't or won't do that then you shouldn't have made the initial insinuation and, instead, simply state he's no longer coming.
Stating he was "uninvited" due to making others uncomfortable without providing anything further is just irresponsible to the point where it appears you're trying to manufacture drama. Considering your event is $350 to hear some speakers who are yet to be defined this just speaks scam to me like many other talking events.
You want to not invite somebody? Fine. You want to disinvite somebody? Okay, but be prepared to be called a jerk.
But assassinating someone's professional character publicly? You'd better be standing on REALLY solid ground for a REALLY good reason.
Crockford might just ignore this--it's probably the best course of action given his station. He's probably sufficiently more important than these people that he's good.
However, one day these people are going to get someone with financial means all fired up and they're going to be dragged through court for a LONG time--and probably lose because they won't be able to put up the money to mount an effective defense.
Until one of these accusers loses THEIR ability to work in the field, nobody will pay attention to the repercussions.
If they are going to insinuate things about what he said, they should mention exactly what he said or did.
The fact that they don't somehow tells me there is not much there to go on.
To put it another way, if they have the guts to remove Crockford that should have enough guts to clearly explain why.
I've been saying this before, and maybe it is just me, but it seems Node.js community somehow attracts a disproportionate number of immature people but with big egos. Because, let's call this for what it is -- childish immature behavior. That's at best, at worst it is getting attention and hurting someone's reputation just for a power trip. "Look how important I am, I kicked Crockford out of a conference with a single tweet".
Well the lesson is when you pick some open source technology, the community comes with it. Maybe even if technology has good merits, it makes sense not to pick it because the community behind it is not compatible with what you think a community should be.
I almost feel in the minority (or just a silent one?), but I honestly don't care what kind of political views, personal preferences, outrageous statements or whatever problems a speaker at a conference might have, as long as he gives a good talk/presentation.
Heck, I wouldn't even care even if he wasted 5 mins or so blabbering about his political ideology, if he's advice on, let's say, JS programming, would be as valuable as Douglas Corckford's! Imho, it would be even acceptable if he would crack a few very politically incorrect jokes during the social event smalltalks if the jokes had good enough humor to compensate for their content.
Let's grow some thicker skin for fuck's sake! MDs, physicists, chemists etc. are all pretty comfortable with even cracking bad sex jokes at a party or conference from time to time and they get away with it pretty well.
Or maybe it's the fact that 90% of what most software developers is so meaningless and useless, especially those that have the time to speak at conferences and "evangelize", that they need to find meaning in some other shit and they gravitate to this uber-PC crap... Even a banning everyone which titles himself "developer evangelist" from speaking at a conference could probably raise the average talk quality for that event, event if that would a bit too un-PC even for my taste ...imagine the emotional damage inflicted by such a need for personal rebranding in order to still be able to attend.
The other issue at hand is how this influences tech conferences, because I've always attended conferences with the implicit assumption that I was there to learn first and foremost. Discourse and disagreement with speakers is natural and should be encouraged, as it oftentimes leads to enlightening discussions for bystanders and conference attendees, which was the entire point of the conference in the first place. By allowing certain viewpoints to dominate and silence a subset of speakers, we're ultimately limiting our views and building an echo chamber, which is not what conferences are meant to be. If we're going to dismiss speakers, it should be on merit of their talk and previous talks, not their speaking style.
If this even shows up on your radar and is a priority, then I'd say the mission you're fighting for has been accomplished a long time ago. Time to go home.
I don't know who really benefits from policing every word that public tech figures say. There's no monetary value to this unless this is a PR stunt to make the conference get social justice brownie points in some kind of a twisted form of social posturing. Who's to gain from this? Sociopaths wanting to exert control over others? I'm not quite ready to believe that.
Culturally, our tendency to troll needs to decrease on the web and increase in in-person encounters. I'm convinced we'd all be better off if we showed some spine and got more vocal whenever we disagree.
I also don't like these (I assume) inter-generational squabbles in our industry. It is clear that moral views can differ between generations, so a little understanding and empathy is needed on all sides.
Please respect your elders. If you disagree with them or feel they are being disrespectful or sexist, how about kindly discussing it with them and maybe getting a feel for their perspective first before launching into public reputation annihilation?
I mean, if you're going to ban Douglas Crockford from your conference it should at least be for his stated prejudice against comments in data-interchange formats. Not vague allegations that may damage his personal and professional reputation, to which he not only has no right of reply, but any response could be damaging by generating more attention. This is the classic trolling strategy, but stepped up a level.
If he actually did something wrong, take him to court and let the facts be decided in law. Otherwise, he's innocent and should be treated as such.
I also wonder, given that the allegations haven't been published, just implied, if he would have a libel case against the conference organisers?
I maintain a tiny blog and because of possible language barriers I decided to write all of my texts in English. It could've been much easier for me to write in German, of course, but this would exclude so many people. And this was simply unacceptable from my point of view.
My command of English isn't very strong but I'd like to paraphrase german philosopher Karl Homann: "The opposite of Moral isn't Immoral but to moralize".
I know nothing about the events there but when I read things like "public shaming" or "slut shaming" or "trigger warnings" or "social justice warriors" then I can only follow the "pragmatic solutions" to solve problems of that kind: avoid conferences, avoid any kind of non-technical discussion in English, avoid the community as a whole. Stay on GitHub.
Sure, it makes you a bit of a loner but at least you sleep more easily and don't get shocked in the morning when you open your twitter feed.
1) I personally don't like Douglas Crockford at all, I find him all together arrogant and overly concerned with presenting himself as an infallible single source of truth. I respect the work the man has done, but I personally think the conference is better off without him.
2) It seems that the conference organisers are all too concerned with coming out and proudly parading there actions without bothering to see if Crockford would be amenable to other courses of action like an apology or retraction of those comments.
To me, these kind of incidents feel more like the conference using the drama to boost their attendance numbers than acting in any kind of best interest of the attendee's. That's not to say that there haven't been serious incidents that need to be dealt with at conferences, but, an outright banning without any kind of negotiation where the speaker is offered to retract/apologise for their comments where the banning is done on a public forum seems designed more towards gaining attention rather than justice.
I am posting from a throw away account because voicing an opinion such as this is reason enough to be targeted.
They imagine that folks will feel COMFORTABLE with such side-of-the-mouth backstabbing nasty smarmy behavior emanating from such a conference?
Such sanctimony. Such self-righteousness. This isn't about Crockford anymore, but about highly privileged people (like this Katye Russell deeming to speak for all womyn-kind or "minorities" and such, all the while blissfully unaware of her privileged Murcan boot capriciously placed upon the neck of any peasant her handlers wish her to besmirch the name of)
I'm 100% in favor of social justice, fairness, decency, and the end of abusing the 99%, the end of gender pay gaps, the end of racism, sexism, etc, but THIS agenda we see here is NOT in service to anything decent and good:this is "throw xyz under a bus because some influential people told us to"and the real powerbroker here appears to be this William Golden...
Nodevember is just another groupthinktank and their actions have only brought dishonor and shame upon themselves!
(even assuming one wishes to distance oneself from a horrible speaker, claiming that one is speaking for all and creating a safe-space for all just mocks any concepts of safe spaces. what a load of sanctimonious drivel!)
I certainly dont want to see sexist speakers at conferences, but this decision seems to have been made with almost no evidence and almost purely based on unsubstantiated rumours.
Things are not going to change until people, including speakers pull out of conferences that display this sort of behaviour.
Maybe someone can tell me what's offensive about the first comment. It seems to be poking fun at programmer machismo.
The second quote is more problematic. I'm firmly of the opinion that it is not slut-shaming because it presented both promiscuity and commitment in a positive light. On the other hand, it is perfectly reasonable for a conference to not want sexual metaphors in presentations. The whole "he used the word correctly" in TFA is a non-sequitur when the first definition is clearly sexual, and promiscuity is contrasted with commitment. Still, I would hope that less extreme measures than banning would be used to address this.
Now to one thing not in TFA, but in the linked medium post:
> Ive never dealt with Crockford in a way that I felt pleasant afterward. He is rude, unrepentant, and completely (one could argue willingly) oblivious to the meaning of his statements. Ive never seen a person use the word stupid so liberally in replacement of constructive criticism.
A conference is more than a bunch of people giving talks, it's a social gathering. If there were a lot of people who agree with Kas on this, then it's a much more reasonable reason to keep him out.
On a much smaller scale, I often run pencil-and-paper RPG groups. Being a jerk is much more likely to find yourself out of my group compared to game-mechanics related issues.
People demand the environments they reside in to be friendly and comfortable according to their definition. In a way they are demanding that all "hostiles" stop being "hostile" towards them.
The more sustainable way to not get hurt is to learn how to emotionally defend yourself and stand your ground. You just have to learn it once and are not dependent on others telling every attacker to stop attacking you for the rest of your life.
A community that accepts a covert hit-job like that Tweet is a garbage community. Don't be a garbage community Nodevember.
So I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt, out of sentimentality. At the same time, I know that one speech and/or book is not enough (if anything ever is) to judge whether someone has or hasn't been harmful to people who are not me.
But after reading the original critique on Medium, and the OP's transcription of when Crockford allegedly "slut-shames the audience", I don't feel convinced to have a negative impression of Crockford. I'm not saying that the original complainant isn't justified in their critique or that there isn't more to the story, because I know that things are different in person. But I could also be sympathetic towards the OP's defense of Crockford.
In terms of Nodevember's decision, well, they have different prerogatives when running a conference. And having a speaker who allegedly so openly derides other speakers is definitely something they have to think about in ways that I as an individual do not.
edit: One thing I personally find disingenuous about the OP's writeup is their appeal to the dictionary definition of "promiscuous" to defend Crockford. I guess it's just up to people's opinion, but I felt that Crockford was clearly using "promiscuous" in the first sense -- "indiscriminate mingling or association". I've never even heard of the second sense, and very little in Crockford's transcribed statement seems to suggest why "promiscuous" would be the right word to use instead of something like "heterogeneous".
That said, I also don't feel that Crockford's statement was slut-shaming. Saying, "Back in the day, you could browse the web like a whore, not caring what your computer connected to. But with the new web..."
But that's not what he says at all. You could read a sexual connotation to what he says, but the words he use is very much about being indiscriminate about security and identity. He even states that there is a benefit to promiscuity -- "because you could go from one thing to another and discover stuff and start forming relationships" and directly implies there's a tradeoff with the security of commitment.
One of the more successful "games" we invented for Habitat was the disease. There are three strains currently defined:
Mutant (AKA The Fly)
We only were able to test Cooties with live players, but it was a hit. It works like this: Several initial Avatars are infected with a "Cootie" head. This head replaces the current one, and cannot be removed except by touching another non-infected Avatar. Once infected, you can not be infected again that day. In effect, this game is "tag" and "keep away" at the same time. Often people would allow themselves be infected just so he could infect "that special person that they know would just hate it!" Every time the disease was spread, there was an announcement at least a week before, and for at least a week afterward it was the subject of major discussions. One day that the plague was spread, a female Avatar that was getting married got infected 1 hour before her wedding! Needless to say, she was very excited, and in a panic until a friend offered to take it off her hands.
Some interesting variations to try on this are: Touch 2 people to cure; this would cause quite a preponderance of infected people late in the day. The "Happy Face" plague: This simple head has the side effect of changing any talk message (word balloons) to come out as "HAVE A NICE DAY!"... can you imagine infecting some unsuspecting soul, and him saying back to you HAVE A NICE DAY! ??? ESP and mail still work normally, so the user is not without communications channels. The Mutant Plague: The head looks like the head of a giant housefly and it has the effect of changing talk text to "Bzzz zzzz zzzz". We think these all will be great fun.
The pendulum ever swings, don't let it hit you on its way back.
You need to declare yourself a closeted gender-queer trans-sexual immediately. After that, anything you say will be excused due to past oppression. And the conference will re-instate you.
Drop a message below if you want my help with this. I will give you a step by step PR strategy to achieve this.
Paul Graham: if you're reading this, would this be a viable startup idea? Helping people declare themselves closeted gender-queer trans-sexuals to escape oppression from SJWs?
As part of being in a secular society, you have an obligation to put up with public speakers that you might find offensive or irritating. You don't have to attend their events, and you're free to climb on the rooftops and call them an asshole -- but you have an obligation to put up with them.
If you run a conference with lots of people attending, and your speakers have any kind of interesting personality at all, you should be prepared for 1-3% of the attendees to be put-off by their history. That's good: it shows that you're doing a good job of bringing in interesting people to speak. Likewise, if you're a participant in a large conference, it shouldn't be surprising to you if the past history of somebody speaking is unpleasant to you in parts. You are, presumably, a grown-up. Get over it.
In my mind, the only thing that should matter, assuming the speaker isn't a terrorist or criminal on the run from authorities, is whether or not the information they present is worth it to you as an attendee. That's what the conference is about. It's not about making every member feel safe and secure. Screw that. Even looking past the fact that it's an impossible goal, nobody wants to go to a conference that's dumbed down to only cool kids who think correctly. Nobody in their right mind would want to live in a world like that. "Don't hang around jerks" is a fine goal for your family, your team, or your personal social circle. It's a clusterfuck to try to implement at any scale beyond that.
This bothers me because I could see at the extremes, there might be a case for excluding speakers, assuming there was something terrible in their past. Adolph Hitler, had he survived WWII, would have made a bad keynote speaker. People could never look beyond his history. But without a detailed argument over what the situation is here, both conference attendees and future speakers are getting screwed over, operating in the blind.
And that's the final result: everybody affected here doesn't really know what's going on, how to prevent this from happening again in the future, or what they might have missed. This is not about Crockford. This is about nibbling away at the value of a group of people gathering together trying to learn by promoting impenetrable and unclear illiberal values. I'll never go to a Node conference. But I'll remember how this thing played out.
I think he is not conventional with his netbook if he still uses that and that pisses people off.
Nodevember's tweet seems borderline libelous to me, unless they are willing to explain exactly what the event/statement/whatever is that got him pulled from the lineup is.
These "women" aren't making it easier for real girls in real engineering programs.
The theories here about sociopaths attempting to exert control are quite exotic and interesting, though :P
I am reminded of the half-assed measures that were taken to mitigate the risk of DC10 cargo doors blowing open, prior to the Turkish Airlines crash in Paris. Am I missing something here?
I've got a pretty awesome picture of me and my son standing in front of that empty section of bridge from the detour route. They essentially routed I-5 traffic into the town and across another bridge. If I had to guess, the stores in that area probably made more money during the detour...
Er, that's less than half the recommended distance. How did the copy editor let that through?
ON THE ROAD TO SUCCESS, THERE ARE NO SHORTCUTS.
Common fucking sense.
It's also interesting to see which words Google determines is bad, and which they mysteriously don't. The API does real time processing of sentence structure and will return "<three asterisks> on me" and "cum to the park" correctly, based on intent. (Sorry for the offensive speech!)
For a side project I needed to find every single English word/phrase the API would filter. Stumbled upon that in amazement.
(Side note: speaking a long list of bad words into a microphone very slowly was the most fun QA I've done)
Reminds me of those rumors that swearing at an automated phone system will usually cause it to direct you to a human operator. I've never given it a try myself to see if it's true.
HURRAY! And, it never shall.
See for example George Carlin's "Seven dirty words" as returned by the SpeechRecognition demo https://cl.ly/3A1F0r3U1H1D/Screen%20Shot%202016-09-03%20at%2...
We work with a decent number of older, non technical people, and our product team would love to be a fly on the wall to hear where they're frustrated in the product. Obviously due to security concerns we could never implement something like this, but in a perfect world this would be a killer feature.
(Just kidding, for those who can't detect sarcasm. That's a killer idea - build an app that detects sarcasm in text, deploy on HN, have a happier community.)
Is there a southern grandma setting?
When calling functions written in Asm from Asm, you get to decide exactly how to do it: Pass arguments in registers in any order, on the stack, a combination of both, directly following the call instruction itself, etc.; the limit is practically your imagination. You can choose the best way to pass arguments for each function instead of being forced into one suboptimal one for every function. Ditto for return values --- you can easily return multiple values, in different registers, and also make use of HLL-inaccessible "registers" like the flags (carry bit in particular is quite useful).
I think the PC BIOS / DOS API is a pretty nice calling convention, clearly designed for and by Asm programmers; all arguments are passed in registers and CF is used to indicate success/error. These compiler-imposed calling conventions like cdecl/stdcall/fastcall are just awfully inefficient in comparison because of how much memory access they require, especially when "fastcall" can only pass two arguments in registers.
Incidentally, these 3 examples are also great at showing how compilers can be so very stupid at code generation. Observe that in all 3 cases, the return value in eax after calling foo is written to memory --- then immediately read from memory again, into the exact same register. This is not something that should ever appear in human-written Asm, and I've actually made use of this fact in marking a course assignment: asked to manually "compile" a short function, some students cheated and used the compiler (with no optimisations, i.e. the defaults), and it was dead easy to recognise.
It's funny to see the entirely-register-based fastcall somehow still managing to generate 5 totally useless memory accesses. If I really wanted to write a fastcall min() function instead of just inlining it as I probably should, it'd be 4 lines:
mov eax, ecx cmp edx, ecx cmovl eax, edx ret
mov eax, [esp+4] cmp eax, [esp+8] cmovl eax, [esp+12] ret ; ret 8 for stdcall
 Like this:
call puts db "Hello world!", 0 ; execution continues here
He was the designer of the widely-used Oswald font, hosted at Google Fonts, and was a passionate advocate for the creative possibilities of open source.
This is his essay Free Fonts Freeness as a Technological Component of Typeface Design:https://web.archive.org/web/20130514085121/http://code.newty...
His blog at his design site New Typography has been down for months, but can still be viewed at archive.org:https://web.archive.org/web/20150707211405/http://code.newty...
I will use it
I know that Stan is like the most production ready one right now but it's also somewhat large. This project seems much more tractable.
There's a whole list here http://probabilistic-programming.org/wiki/Home and I'm not sure which ones are like "real projects" that can be used in production and which ones are like toy/research projects and I'm not sure if they all interpret the idea of probabilistic programming fundamentally differently or if they are all just flavors.
When I think of dams, I think of catastrophic failure which almost always ends in thousands of deaths. I think of how quickly untended dams will fail. I think of what kind of target a dam makes. I think of flooding and burying wilderness and wildlife and even towns like this.
I also think of hydro-electric power and water availability... but aren't there other ways to tackle those problems?
Are dams ever a good idea?
The theory is IMO wrong for a much simpler reason. It assumes (as many theories of history do) that the vastness of our planet means that we used to live in disconnected communities, islands of humanity spread out and yet not talking to each other.
You can walk around the globe in 10-20 years. It is unimaginable that trade routes such as the Silk Road did not carry knowledge such as how to smelt bronze, like those African ores, and any other precious good. Wherever there were people, they were innovating and trading goods and knowledge with their neighbors. Only exceptionally were pockets of humanity actually isolated.
You don't need an emperor and his navy to carry knowledge halfway across the globe. One or two people, on foot, will do it, and did it, and so, this nullifies the theory that Chinese civilization somehow sprang from Egyptian civilization. The two co-developed together with the entire connected world at the time.
I think its plausible that civilization itself spread via sea faring peoples, so perhaps it was some hyksos like people that brought not their genetics, but knowledge.
Way to be impartial, headlines.
In 1956, GM made a promotional film for self-driving cars. It's a musical. There's also GM's "Design for Dreaming".
The modern version of such ads, from Volvo.
 https://youtu.be/xKOdux6Gjno?t=720 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2iRDYnzwtk https://archive.org/details/Designfo1956 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJwKuWz_lkE
Great work, keep it up!
The latter tend to give all kinds of arguments about why owning a car is necessary, including safety, convenience, and cost. And they may be right -- for them. They live in the hills of a relatively remote area, like La Crescenta or Burbank or Chatsworth, and have Sunday brunch at some place in the Valley, and drive to Costco to fill up a freezer and a garage with goods, and drive to their dentist, doctor, and gym across town as well. It's a whole series of decisions, and it locks down tighter and tighter.
But newer residents are showing that a different way of life is possible, by making all these decisions differently. It's fantastic. It has changed the streetscape a lot, as various local enclaves spring up to offer services within walking or cycling distance, or near to transit.
But the gap between these two lifestyles really makes for some major disconnects around subjects like housing development along thoroughfares, density of development, parking, and bike lanes.
I suppose it depends on what you're definition of Los Angeles is, but if you argue that Thousand Oaks or Chino Hills is considered "Los Angeles", then this argument doesn't really hold water. The urban sprawl was built on the assumption of commuting and 2-3 hour commutes are not unusual around here. I realize LA might be a bit of an anomaly, but you can drive from Santa Monica to San Bernardino before you've really "left" the city and trying to argue that a carless life is really going to happen using this definition is a bit suspect.
There is an introvert/extrovert angle here also. A car is completely private. You can go anywhere in your pajamas in total asocial mode with a car, and I wonder if that's why so many people are in their Pajamas at Ralphs. A car service requires contact with strangers.
I am in LA and I tried getting a bike once, but it was impossible. Road conditions are horrible, and I had nowhere to park my new mango colored bike comfortably. People would yell "nice bike" from their cars, and it was uncomfortable. And everyone I knew who rode a bike had multiple accident stories. If some idiot is going to hit me or suddenly open their door, I want to be in a car.
For me, Tokyo is the perfect train city. Fukuoka is the perfect bicycle city. And LA is still the perfect car city. But if you hate to drive, now you have options. It used to be you had none!
Financially, I'm not sure that I actually 'save' money. I live within 100yds of a ton of bars and restaurants, and a 5 minute walk to Trader Joes/Metro. I Uber most places but also take the Metro to DTLA and Santa Monica pretty often.
The whole car payment/insurance/gas/maintenance costs for sure are more than what I pay to Uber/Metro but what I'm not sure how to value the 'cost of walking.' I definitely pay a premium for my location and I often wonder, if I lived in a less convenient area (had to drive to groceries, far from Metro) if I'd be able to not have a car. Because as it stands, car costs < uber/metro/rent premium
Uber certainly helps deal with the lack of public transportation but the other big issue is LA is HUGE! My sister lives in Glendora (far east side of LA) I was staying in Venice Beach. It's about 45 miles. And that's not even one side of the LA metro area to the other, that's just LA itself. On Uber that would be ~$55 or so. A similar distance on the train system in Tokyo would be $10-$20 depending on how many different companies' trains you have to use.
Of course it might still be cheaper than a owning a car if you're not making the long trips often.
LA Metro opened up the Expo Line, a light rail between downtown LA and Santa Monica, in May as part of its effort to wean people off car ownership. When it began running, Uber ran a promotion for $5 off Pool rides to or from Expo line stations. For ride-hail companies, partnering with public transportation agencies to market themselves as companion services can increase mutual ridership. Kan, Lyfts LA general manager, said three of the top 10 destinations for Lyft rides are metro stations.
If this trend continues and becomes more common, it has potential to really change transportation in LA. LA Metro is working on expanding the rail lines but there's always the "last mile" problem (not literally 1 mile, but usually last few miles to get/from rail station to destination). UberPool/Lyft Line can be the solution for this and the more people use it, the better solution it becomes.
I haven't owned a car since I moved to LA 4 years ago, it's pretty great.
Certain parts of the city are easier without a car than others. A lot of it comes down to how far you live from work too. I walk to work everyday (10 minutes) and there's a plethora of stores in my area to walk to and shop at.
I'm about to sell my car and I'm not sure if I'll be getting another anytime soon.
Commuting is one thing, but cars are often necessary for other things (for instance, going hiking/skiing on weekends) where public transportation/uber isn't an option.
I wonder what is the recommended solution for this. In my case for instance, rental wouldn't be cheaper than owning a car. There's a car sharing service in my city but again, not significantly cheaper than owning the car.
Impact on jobs:
Unless and until Uber starts treating their workers fairly (treating them like employees and allowing them some negotiating power over their own livelihoods) not only is it bad for those workers and working people in general, but it's also bad for the country, which has to cover health care and other needs for those workers. Does anyone know how Lyft does in that regard?
* Buying a new car creates the impact of mining raw materials, processing them, manufacturing, shipping, etc. I have no idea what that impact is.
* For purposes of the trip itself, I think using standard taxi/Uber/Lyft services probably increases climate impact over a personal car: The ride-hailing cars drive around empty part of the time, waiting for rides; your personal car is parked when you don't use it. Otherwise, whether you are in someone else's car or your own for the trip, the impact is the same (unless your car is more/less efficient than the ride-hailing car)
* Sharing rides, such as in trains, buses, carpool, UberPool, etc., obviously is much more efficient. I suspect the more people in the vehicle, the more efficient it is: Trains beat buses beat carpools, but I really don't know that.
Cars, housing, education and medicine are massive rent seeking areas sucking people dry and I cant wait until all of these are subverted by new systems.
Decimate means to reduce by 10%, hence deci.
I personally think storage should be the second thought. First get to and above 100% renewable at peak times. Ensure that there is a well working market for electric energy and people and businesses of all sizes will find a way to benefit from it, thereby solving storage. Death by a thousand cuts.
"Moving water uphill lets producers of solar and wind power bank energy for use when it is needed most"
Lists get discussed about 700 pages in, so while the book is very thorough--I like that it opens with Lambda Calculus--it seems a little wax on wax off if you haven't first gotten your feet wet via other means.
Nice, it looks like it is a good book for beginners. I hesitated between Haskell and F# as a first "real" FP language, I might give Haskell a try.
Also, nano is actually a useful tool, despite its reputation as the editor for those who don't know what they're doing. It's an excellent editor for quick edits that aren't worth pulling up emacs for. Although I would never reccomend it for Real Work, that's not really its intent. And it owns its field, having crushed all competition save vi, which is really in its own class.
Also, nano is frankly a lot more powerful than a lot of people give it credit for: It's just not programmable, which is a necessity in editors these days.
With this release we return to GNU. For just a little while we dreamt we were tigers. But we are back in the herd, back to a healthy diet of fresh green free grass.
Happy to see RMS was willing to compromise and keep nano in the hurd.
See also, if you have time to read:https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/4p9n7e/as_of_nano_26...
My main editor is acme, and when I need to do large edit jobs on remote servers I control I use sam. However, when I have to edit files on servers I don't control, or when I have to do a quick edit job and I don't have a sam terminal started yet, I use ed.
Unlike all other editors, ed doesn't erase the screen. I find this extremely useful. Also, ed is always the same. Vi is not always the same on different systems. Sometimes it has syntax syntax highlighting by default, forcing me to make effort to turn it off, sometimes nocompatible is set on or off, etc.
Ed is always the same and has no settings.
Sometimes inside my acme session I run win(1), and sometimes in my win sessions I ssh to some system and run ed inside acme.
I forced myself to use ed exclusively for a week some years back, and since then I stuck with it.