user9756

But another good example is rewriting an if/else chain as a dictionary lookup or repetitive code as a tuple of operations followed by a for loop.

I'm familiar with the dictionary lookup method but not the tuple. Perhaps it's obvious but could someone please give an example?

Great (basic) introduction with exception to the regex chapter because it felt like an introduction to regex instead of the regex features of perl6.

Some things I found interesting (in addition to what s_kilk mentioned and linked to and others have already mentioned some of them) * Gradual typed! * Multi subroutine * Hyphen in variable names * @numbers.=sort * .WHAT * Catch blocks * .defined * Unless

It will be fun :)

I however don't understand the reason for the naming of eg elsif, my, slurp/spurt?? (instead of else if or local or fread/fwrite) Is it a perl culture thing? Because they mention in the tutorial that Perl 6 belongs to the C-family languages (and then call the "for" loop in C "loop").

I'd like to take perl6 for a spin. However, other than playing with it I'm not sure how it compares to say python or ruby in terms of strong sides. I mean what are the cases perl6 would shine in comparison? (NOT TO FLAME! I'm asking for ideas to when perl6 would be an interesting tool for the job. AFAIK it had a good string manipulation ~ also I'm still reading the tut and currently it feels very bash and somewhat ugly (although helpful) with the % & @ prefixes).

Death? I mean, if you will not die, you could die? And taxes of course.

NEB (No Expert But...) Isn't Linux just the kernel?

On the page they think comparable systems to Circuit are CoreOS, and Consul and Mesosphere.

What I'm trying to say is this: are not all of these "linux installed" with some additional stuff thus making them an operative system (distro is it??

This article refers to https://securelist.com/blog/research/68750/equation-the-deat...

Where the Q&A rapport is found http://25zbkz3k00wn2tp5092n6di7b5k.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/f...

And how does this relate to US foreign policy? Or any foreign policy? Or how about HackerNews?

I'd like to comment though on the awfulness of the sign up pop up (popsign?) and the clunky website. It's awful.

I'm not sure which Muslamic country you're thinking about but Zionists had http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Megaphone_desktop_tool which I personally think was a very clever and convenient tool to organize ideological driven people (given the time it was introduced 2006)

And I recall reading a couple of years ago about a software that enabled a person to control several user accounts on one site or different sites. And I think the US military or some other US agency actively used it.

Oh No no no! That does sound like a "a defense of the theocratic monsters that run Iran"!

Remember that Iran has suppressed dissidents who question how the rich 1%, the banks and corporations run the country!

Those monsters in Tehran have preemptively attacked other states and destroyed their infrastructure! Iran has occupied territory and is killing civilians indiscriminately! Even bombing schools and hospitals!

Also they support various dictators in the World like Saudi Arabia in the ME. And they helped neo nazists take power in Ukraine. Oh god the evil. And I'm barely touching the surface.

The only thing they have going for them is that they accept homosexuals. Which we all know is the litmus test for a free and non-monstrous regime.

Could you please quote the antisemitic parts?

In general avoid politics on Hacker News.

Especially if you diverge from the "party line". Such truths hurt. Cf eg BugBrother's comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7795134) (no downvotes there incidentally...)

This would however all be comical if it wasn't so tragic.

"It seems that dictators generally need to make enemies out of the world's democracies."

The US (and Europe) has set out to antagonize not only Iran, but Russia, and China. For what reasons?

"This is so the populations don't start to get ideas about why their junta's steal so much money and they don't have any freedom. "Democracy and freedom are just lies -- the westerners are degenerates which tolerate homosexuality, etc."

Oh yeah, the evil easterners threatening our freedom.... So.. that the population don't get any ideas about the "elected" government's corruption (the military spending, the banks, the rich 1%, etc)?

Any form of government that "we" don't like is lying about everything -- the easterners are degenerate who tolerate nothing and support terrorism!

Don't waste your time. You can't help a person who has decided to hit rock bottom. They'll only bring you down with them. That's the tragedy.

If I understand this correctly, the pushed information by the master isn't stored on the server (hosting the application) and then retrieved by the slave device?

But can the pushed information be intercepted by the server?

Does anyone know if there are more applications/experiments like this? I really like this idea (if I've understood the concept correctly).

I think it is an easy fall back to make comparisons between the rich and poor, but that isn't the problem here. It is the government.

Government isn't an isolated entity in society it represents segments of a society. And usually that is the rich and or powerful.

That is a good distinction.

Although if I may digress and make a small comment. The market economy could be argued somewhat "command based" too. The difference being that you are given money to buy the food and shelter you need (rather than being given them directly). And then you have the entire "debt economy" when it comes to "laboring until their obligation is fulfilled".

While I now understand your argument, I saw the issue more as the state at least acknowledged an exchange, and a right for the worker to receive some compensation. Perhaps not the most valuable. But something, in a time were you could easily have slave labor; "payment" in its simplest form without any connotation to specific economic models.

Speaking of slave labor however. There was a part about slaves (in one of the articles I quoted). It stated that more skilled labor (doctors, nurses and teachers) were kept as slaves. Now, in a market economy those kinds of skills would (should) be especially rewarding in the model A you are talking about.

When I think about it, I can't say that lower skill work really would seem to differ in the two models you mentioned. In today’s world you could find lower skill work that pays more than simply keeping a person alive (e.g. in many European countries), but generally speaking this is not true in all (most?) places.

But I digress. Again.

Eh, you simply changed the meaning of the word; it clearly states "paid" and not "feed".

You are fully aware that you can offer work in exchange for things rather than gold or fiat money?

From the other link we'll find

Free workers were even recruited from neighbouring satrapies at harvest time (Dandemaev and Lukonin, 1989: 157). Paid free-born labourers worked on the Babylonian canals, and free non-citizen farmers worked the land of the state, temples and the rich (Dandamaev and Lukonin, 1989: 152), and provided the corvee labour at such sites as Susa and Persepolis (Kent 1953DSf 22-58). They could not be sold, and so were not actually slaves, and could be considered non-citizen workers.

(my emphasis)

The discussion is more complicated than quoting a couple of random non-related articles on the Internet. But simply changing the meaning of a given statement and dismissing the entire counter argument is dishonest.

Actually I remember a documentary were it stated that the Persians paid men and women for their skills working on projects. I can't remember the name of the documentary (probably from the discovery channel).

A quick google search - http://hsc.csu.edu.au/ancient_history/societies/near_east/pe...

And - "Men, women and children worked in ancient Persia to support a diverse economy. Workers were paid in wine and grain, with skilled laborers paid more than unskilled, and supervisors paid more than workers. Men were paid slightly more than women, but female supervisors were paid more than the men working under them. Young women received maternity leave and were paid money for each child they had."

http://www.ehow.com/about_5414474_jobs-did-ancient-persians-...

I know this is a little off-topic, but I posted it given the recent discussions on HN (NSA, etc.)

Thanks. I suppose I kind of went too far in some places. And you're quite right, the "2nd" part is somewhat difficult...

"Keep in mind that most Westerners have no way of distinguishing propaganda from fact in the many things they hear about Iran. That's not because they're bad or dumb, it's because they haven't specifically looked into it. But most don't want to, which means there are limits to how convincing you can expect to be even in your best-case scenario. The only way to optimize that is to be scrupulously polite."

I know this. And I'm keeping your quote as a reminder.

Yeah, I thought about that use of the word ("natural") after I posted, but decided not to edit it out.

I agree with you that it could be cultural. But the behaviour of men wanting to control women seems to be prevalent in many societies regardless of culture.

Yeah downvote me, when confronted with a different set of facts, in the spirit of the free liberal society you advocate.

Not true. Stop lying. Are you eg familiar with the actions taken by the Iranian government which made it possible for people in rural areas to send their daughters to school? Being extremely traditional they were afraid of sending their girls all alone to school. Iran has a very high number of educated women thanks to the policies of the Iranian government.

(edit: yes women still have advances to make in rights vis-a-vis men in Iranian society, but you can hardly call that "war" more than a natural struggle for power between the sexes in a society)

"Any claim that HRW is part of a propaganda machine working against Iran" - never made that claim

"the onus is on you to back it up with evidence." - funny how that burden never seem to apply to those making the actual accusations. Often someone makes a claim about brutality and it's accepted at face value simply because the accused is somebody we don't like politically.

"Human rights" -reports on Iran are highly politicised; criticism against Iran is often based on political reasons and not for a real concern about any “human rights” issue.

Btw, if the report you're linking to is the same one I read about then it uses highly questionable sources (I think it was MEK operatives, not sure though).

I'm not saying the government is without its problems. No society is without these problems. The things you mention, and worse, however occur in the West too, but it doesn't seem to be an issue.

Then there is the question of “bad” compared to what. Say e.g. Saudi Arabia or Bahrain? The crimes committed there by the state are far worse by all accounts. Somehow those governments are “moderates” and not “bad”. Go figure.

The argument I’m making is that there are no real concern for human rights in Iran. The only concern is to make Iran submit to western demands. Take the issue of sanctions. The purpose is to make Iranians suffer so that they will “get the picture” and overthrow their government.

Or how about the support for the terrorist organization MEK? Or supporting Al Quada in Syria? The nonsense that “the west” (whatever that means) really cares about “human rights” (whatever that means) makes sense only to those high on the propaganda coming from the mainstream media.

I didn't question the history of media in India. I only pointed out that there is "blind spot" in discussing "free media".

And what happened to him? Thanks for the link, I'll look into it later. I have read about how the US negotiated with the "Mullahs" so that they could replace the Shah with them (in hope to have another Saudi Arabia?), but the US was "betrayed".

If we had some real journalist rather than those sad bunch of propagandist working for the corporate/state interests, we might have had a better understanding of what is going on in the world.

Funny, the same can be said of people living in the US and US allies. The west has a very "strongly controlled media" too, and the message being sent is quite clear.

The reason the "Ayatollahs" are a "bad government" has more to do with the fact that they do not yield to US power. The Shah on the other hand was considered, or would have been considered, a "moderate"--you know like the moderate Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Egypt (before their liberation), and so on.

I agree with your argument,

but why is he being down voted? All he did was to point out that this article has been published before.

Maybe there are some interesting comments in the "dupe" thread? (in this case no, but you get the point)

I'm still new to HN and I find the up/down vote behaviour rather peculiar from time to time. This is such a time.

thanks