HN user
qrunk.com
I fly SFO <-> JFK very often. VX34 there and VX27 or VX29 back are my rides of choice, since I hate layovers and prefer redeyes. The wifi is passable too (don't try to SSH over it, though).
It's pretty straightforward, and as long as you don't modify the hardware it's completely reversible:
http://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer-information-fo...
> terminal with antialiased Source Code Pro Ligth font
Just have an ssh-able desktop/VM somewhere with emacs, install https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/secure-shell/pnhec..., and set the font to Source Code Pro (font instructions are in http://git.chromium.org/gitweb/?p=chromiumos/platform/assets...)
Is your programming done via SSH to a linux desktop or VM? You can SSH from a chromebook no problem: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/secure-shell/pnhec...
Operators and Things, a (supposed) first-person account of a schizophrenic who recovered from the condition and wrote about her experience. The second half of the book is where it really shines, since the author attempts to analyze her experience as a window into the inner workings of her cognition: how it broke down, what she experienced when it did, how it recovered itself, and what led to it. Since the author is anonymous, and talking about one's mind is very introspective, it's hard to take away real science from the book but I found it fascinating nonetheless. While I really dislike pseudoscientific explanations of brain functioning, after reading this I took up the idea that the conscious mind is more of a time-slice scheduler and message-passer than where the actual computation is done. So concentration is about controlling your unconscious indirectly, like training a puppy how to play fetch: you give it suggestions of what to do, and ignore it when it doesn't do that :).
I'm linking to the Amazon page, but IIRC the book is old enough to be in the public domain and there is a free text version somewhere.
http://www.amazon.com/Operators-Things-Inner-Life-Schizophre...
A lot of people here are commenting on GitHub being 'overpriced' or 'greedy.' TPW did an interview a while ago that has insight into why their pricing structure is the way it is. It's a pretty interesting read:
http://mixergy.com/tom-preston-werner-github-interview/
(search for 'which metrics') to skip to the pricing part).
Money quote: "That’s like buying a car based on how much it weighs. It’s irrelevant."
I may be biased since GitHub does a lot to foster the developer community in my area (I nabbed a sweet contracting gig at one of their drinkups), but I'm perfectly happy with their pricing.
The BSD networking stack.
So I'm not sure if I understand correctly, but let me put it this way: with a little more git craziness, you can crack apart a commit and separate it into two. This is good if you did two unrelated changes to a file, committed that, and realized you wanted two separate commits later.
The basic process is:
1. git rebase -i, and change a commit to 'edit' 2. git reset HEAD^, this 'undoes' the commit and leaves the changes in your directory as if you had written the code but hadn't committed it yet 3. git status 4. git add <filename> -p, this lets you add commits to your file a chunk at a time. first, add all the commits as a part of commit one. skip the parts you want for commit two. 5. git commit (do not do git commit -a here) and write the message for your first commit 6. now your working directory will be all the changes for commit two. git commit -a if you want all of them 7. git rebase --continue
This page[1] has a more concise answer, but leaves out the git commit -p part.
Note that if you mess up in rebase-land, you can always git rebase --abort. If you come out of the rebase and everything looks lost ('oh god I lost my data!'), use git reflog and pull up the hash of where you were before. Your data is still there.
Another note: if your commits are already separate, you can use rebase to selectively squash and reorder them. Read the manual on git rebase -i, if you rearrange commits and only squash some I think you'll get what I'm talking about.
[1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6217156/how-to-break-a-pr...
> However, I could use rebase to start combining loosely related commits, trading the time resolution for clarity in the commit history.
In general, your commits should be the smallest atomic operation that makes sense. When people talk about 'clean history,' they're talking about working in the awesome workflow git provides:
1. Write half-written broken code. 2. Fix that code up. 3. Add some more onto that. 4. Fix a typo! 5. Forgot to update the README.
Now, you could push that to master, but then the main master is littered with commit messages like 'oops' and 'typo.' Instead, you can rebase 5-1 onto the latest master, squash them together, and have one 'nice' commit that only has the cleaned up final changes.
This is one of the most powerful things about git: in a private repo, you can commit all kinds of garbage and half-written stuff without caring. When you want to make your stuff public, rebase and squash, then send it out. Be careful though! Only rebase your own private branches, or you're gonna have a bad time™.
This is great for people who are that organized. I'm not, so I like the 'just merge everything into master' mentality. See http://scottchacon.com/2011/08/31/github-flow.html
> The event-driven concurrency model makes it easier to write servers without worrying about race conditions and thread locks
Well, no, you're just writing the locks yourself in an ad-hoc way. Every time you have a callback calling another callback, you have a lock and all the race condition/deadlock issues associated with that. Of course, writing an application that doesn't have complicated synchronization requirements (streaming fileserver) can often require less boilerplate in an evented system. However, you run into a catch-22 here: by definition it's an application with fewer synchronization requirements, so you'd have to use fewer complicated locks in a 'heavy thread' implementation as well :).
Ultimately it's an engineering tradeoff problem, and you have to weigh lightweight node-style cooperative multitasking with the ability of a traditional thread system to better handle highly complicated scenarios.
Or you can be Russ Cox and argue that this is a false dichotomy[1] and that we should all be using CSP. I'm in that camp.
Andrew Birrell: threads.
John Ousterhout: events.
John DeTreville: no.
Rob Pike: yes.
There's an interesting paper that came out of Stanford's WebBase project that might be helpful: http://ilpubs.stanford.edu:8090/422/1/1999-66.pdf
> simple boolean logic
A SAT solver[1] can automatically figure out a range of acceptable solutions for your conditions. 'I want this goal, is there a way to make that happen?' Security people love this. SMT solvers are even crazier[2] and can automatically determine solutions to linear equations or inequalities (this comes in handy when analyzing loops). Z3 has an online version at [3].
Also, if you have a lot of nasty cascaded if-statements, a K-map[4] and espresso[5] can reduce those down to a minimal set of branches. Note that fewer branches means fewer branch prediction penalties, which means faster code!
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boolean_satisfiability_problem
[2] http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8ywn1iesH1r6uu3b.gif
[3] http://rise4fun.com/z3/tutorial/guide
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karnaugh_map
[5] http://embedded.eecs.berkeley.edu/pubs/downloads/espresso/in... and ftp://ftp.cs.man.ac.uk/pub/amulet/balsa/other-software/espresso-ab-1.0.tar.gz
I meant a physical wall clock, not an app. I suppose I could mount and iPad on my wall and run the app, but I don't want to spend several hundred dollars on a clock that will sue me.
On an unrelated note, I wish there was a wall clock with the real Swiss stop-to-go[1] action...
Edit: and [2] would make for a great 11.5" laptop sticker
[1] http://www.3quarks.com/en/StationClock/index.html
[2] http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b2/SBB-CFF-FFS.sv...
> on his resume.
This is Apple. The resume will simply say 'worked at Apple Inc. developing software.'
Which one did you get? The Samsung 550 is the one to get IMO, the touchpad is pretty great.
+1 to the chromebook. It's now my main laptop (although I can't run windows/mac based linux software on it yet :/
"This program was originally written at Berkeley in the early 80s"
This phrase gives me the same feeling I'd get from finding an old Thomas Bangalter track or something.
Mildly unrelated, but I wanted to point out the awesomeness of the K-map[1] for handling simple minimization problems like these.
Unfortunately, once your dimensions get large it becomes difficult for humans to visualize the optimizations, which is where Espresso[2][3] comes in handy.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karnaugh_map
[2] http://embedded.eecs.berkeley.edu/pubs/downloads/espresso/in...
[3] ftp://ftp.cs.man.ac.uk/pub/amulet/balsa/other-software/espresso-ab-1.0.tar.gz
> How can you make your HTML5 code as fast as native?
Much easier to use blekko's 3-engine monte, since it strips formatting that might give away the source engine. Just add /monte at the end of a query:
Does anybody have any non-scribd links?
> There should be a word for this.
> Does anybody honestly do anything but stick their hand out
The patrons outside my poorly sound-isolated SF apartment prefer to whistle all through the night, unaware that I have a better chance of hearing them than the cabs do.
> Well when you consider that a traditional bank has teams of security experts, spend millions of dollars on security infrastructure
Those banks are often guarding a considerably larger amount of money, which is something to take into consideration. I think your point still stands though.
> When did Apple patent pinch-to-zoom? This video is from 1988.
The video is from 1988, but it appears the work was around 1983. The pinch-to-zoom (on 'portable communication devices') patent[1] was filed in 2006, issued in 2010.
God, here we go again. Yet another example of companies stealing from Apple. This is clearly similar enough to the Macintosh (1984) that I'm surprised Apple didn't sue the hell out of AT&T. They certainly sued the hell out of Microsoft[1], so AT&T must have been lucky.
Around the same time, Myron Krueger had the gall to demonstrate pinch-to-zoom[2], nearly 23 years before Apple patented it. So many people piggy-backing off of Cupertino's innovation :/
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer,_Inc._v._Microso...
[2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmmxVA5xhuo (skip to 4:32)
> The best case scenario is a better internet, but only for google products for them.
Google operates a search engine, meaning most of the time it points people to other websites. Many of these sites are not under Google's control, but many of them run AdSense. The more pages you visit, the more ads you see. If the internet gets generally faster, Google sites or not, that works in their favor.
> A cold shower and a drive in a Volkswagen before you can post again.
What an excellent retort.