HN user

stonemetal

3,102 karma
Posts7
Comments1,838
View on HN

equal numbers of terms won by each party. Therefore, in my view gerrymandering doesn't really have a negative effect on democracy

The point of democracy is not to deliver an equal number of victories to each of the parties. It is to reflect the will of the people. A 10 percent lean in one direction is a 10 percent negative effect on democracy.

More than half a dozen Boost libraries have made their way to the standard.

Boost continues to exist because there is large overlap with the standards committee and they use it as a staging ground to try out new ideas before they are standardized.

Delayed ACK seems like the better default to me, whether it is telnet or web servers, network programming is almost always request response. Delaying the ACK so that part of that response is ready seems like the correct choice. In today's network programming how often is tinygram really an issue?

In this case I would consider the bug to be git lfs. Even if Nagle's was enabled I would still consider it a bug, because of the needless syscall overhead of doing 50 byte writes.

Content providers pay their ISP bill or they wouldn't be on the internet. End users pay their ISP bill or they wouldn't be on the internet. ISPs unable to figure out how to run a profitable business is no one's fault but their own.

If they can't provide the service they claim to provide at the prices they charge then they probably ought to look into a price increase.

If he actually did any research how could he get it that wrong? Nothing about being built in America, just that the owner and charterer must be Americans, the actual operating crew can be whoever. The coastwise endorsement further defines American ownership with if the owner is a corporation then "must be American" means incorporated in US's legal jurisdiction and voting majority of the board is US citizens.

The dredge act (as linked to by the author) is short enough I will quote it here[1]:

§55109. Dredging

(a) In General.-Except as provided in subsection (b), a vessel may engage in dredging in the navigable waters of the United States only if-

(1) the vessel is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade;

(2) the charterer, if any, is a citizen of the United States for purposes of engaging in the coastwise trade; and

(3) the vessel has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement under chapter 121 of this title or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement.

(b) Dredging of Gold in Alaska.-A documented vessel with a registry endorsement may engage in the dredging of gold in Alaska.

(c) Penalty.-If a vessel is operated in knowing violation of this section, the vessel and its equipment are liable to seizure by and forfeiture to the United States Government.

[1] https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim...

I work at an office that does 9 80. At first they tried the half one Friday, half the other, but switched to everyone in on the same Friday. Basically it annoyed and confused customers trying to reach people. It is just easier to say the joint is closed every other Friday than have the customer try to remember if they need to call Bill or John on Friday.

It isn't but it kind of is. It is a 95% chance that you should reject the null hypothesis. For example if we flip a coin a 5 times and get heads every time that gives you a p value .03 for rejecting the null hypothesis that the coin is fair. If I run the five coin flip experiment a 100 times and never once reproduce a significant result is it because gee science is hard, or is it because you hit one of those 3% of cases. The same goes for real science if you can't reproduce it more often than not then you might be close but you haven't figured it out yet.

What do the reviewers do? They don't try to reproduce it. So yeah make shit up, as long as it is plausible no one will notice.

For example Yoshihiro Sato was recently (2016-2017 time frame) caught fabricating results, turns out he had been doing it for 30 years. He had more than 20 papers retracted. Also note he wasn't caught by a fellow scientist in the field he was caught by a statistician bulk processing papers looking for anomalies. So yeah big penalties if you are caught, but the odds of getting caught are so low you have to be stunningly stupid to get caught.

The effect of this function will be DIFFERENT.

Obviously the output will be different the input was different. The equivalent C code would have passed pointers. In that case the behavior would have been identical passed in values not swapped contents swapped. Just because Java only has object references, doesn't mean they aren't references.

Popularity to a certain extent is a prerequisite for viability. Given problem X, and given that language Y is the most suitable language to solve problem X, how likely are you to chose language Y to solve it? If you are unaware of language Y's existence? If you have heard of Y on a internet forum but have seen zero lines of language Y code? If you have written 10 lines of language Y but you are the only dev at your company to have done so, and all other code at your company is written in Z?

The more popular Y is the easier it is to choose, not because we are pop culture, popularity hounds but because popularity conveys certain benefits. Libraries and infrastructure, documentation and blogs, knowledge in other people on the team. That is why large companies are able to so successfully produce new languages, they are able to pay people to convey those benefits without the chicken and egg problem of natural growth popularity. For an interesting example of this D is almost the same age as C#(2001 vs 2000). D had to grow its user base and tools organically vs C# hitting the ground with thousands of devs working on an in it full time.

Note: the article is from 2015.

To get better developers need to increase their area (Breadth * Depth). Going deeper and deeper in one area may make you an expert on that topic, but it is easy to become irrelevant if you have no breadth and a disruption occurs. Of course being wide but shallow can be equally troubling, since you can't do anything that requires more than the basics.

I would put that on the implementations not following the standard rather than the availability of the standard. How many C# devs out there have read their ISO standard?

I disagree. In the case of MIDI, or a printer it has significant non infringing uses, and they weren't implemented solely, and with great detailed knowledge of the work in question. If you had a printer that was designed specifically to print Steven King's It and wouldn't work with any other novel then you would have something parallel to what they have built. Their project isn't general, you couldn't use it to target a couple of open source games, or a couple of games you wrote yourself.

Does tang yield the same flavor as fresh squeezed orange juice? On the one hand yeah they both taste like their source, on the other there is a quality difference that is noticeable.