T_S_

Not really. I am expecting my grandkids to still be the same species.

Who is "we" exactly? Go back in time far enough and you will find your ancestors are of a different species. So why are we throwing a pass to some future "alien" species? Is this some sort of cosmic chain letter we just received?

The arguments I hear on this subject really sound more like a guy talking himself into buying that Porsche (or Tesla!) than anything else.

Keep sending the robots!

Second that. All tiling window mangers. Much more efficient.

Are you a dev? Try awesome. Invest two hours of confusion and RTFM and you may never go back.

Hutton's book is excellent (and thin!). Work through that and you will learn about some deep stuff without even realizing it.

If anybody would like to run something like this at Hacker Dojo in Mtn. View, let's discuss.

You're giving to much credit to Madison. There were a couple of other Fathers around. Plus the Senate has evolved a lot since those days.

Overall I think the gridlock is overrated. If we get some bone headed politicians actually passing laws maybe people will start to care again who gets elected.

Odd. I had this problem in 10.6 (Snow Leopard) and it went away when I upgraded to 10.7 (Lion). The most obvious symptom is the machine does not seem to be able to make use of the inactive memory (the blue slice of the pie in Activity Monitor). I did not notice the problem at all when I first started using 10.6. When I hunted around on the help forums a few months ago I found lots of users with the symptoms, but nobody acknowledging the "validity" of the problem. In fact a lot of deniers out there. I wonder if it was quietly fixed or will recur after the system gets used for a while.

It certainly would if only one bank did it. However such a rule would have to be evenly applied. My belief is that this would drive down volatility in markets since it would end the game of "Old Maid" in a crisis. Depending on how many institutions were under this rule, trading volumes may decrease, although I could argue this the other way as well.

The solution is close to hand and it does not involve regulation--at least the kind that regulators want. The solution is transparency. Just make all the big banks report their actual transaction on a live feed. This simple solution would have been infeasible even 20 years ago, but not any more.

The implications would be enormous. No more need for accounting reports, indexes or anything else that requires a judgement call by a corruptible human. The job of watching the banks would pass from the power hungry (or worse, sleepy) regulators to the public (you and me).

Once upon a time I performed the risk mgmt. function for a portion of a large bank. We used a couple of servers running every night to track a few thousand positions. The system knew every detail of about 95% of the positions. Today a team of 50 could track the entire banking system--given the right feed. Make the same information I used public and open to competing teams of analysts and then risk becomes a known quantity.

Of course, banks and regulators would be strongly opposed to this approach. They will howl about privacy, proprietary information etc. But the fact is when you ask a bank for a loan, they know all of your relevant financial information in order to judge your risk. It's only fair for the taxpayers to turn the tables and end our old-fashioned and broken system of disclosure. And if the risky part of banking is driven into a part of the industry that doesn't share information, then their investors should do without a safety net.

I am one of the Directors. Hacker Dojo is a non-profit community center--a hacker space. It has a Board of Directors to keep the lights on and the IRS happy, and its members vote on operating policies. The Dojo is currently running a campaign to raise money for expansion. Part of the money has already been raised. We are located in the same neighborhood as Y Combinator's HQ, but are unrelated.

Really long article, but missed an important point. Technology has atomized the required scale of a new company with reasonable ambitions. It costs cents on the dollar to accomplish what would have taken a scale (10mm+) investment to get done in 1995. The dark side of this is that 1) Only companies with superb prospects will attract large capital investments required for job stability. 2) Lots of risky jobs will be created at little companies versus big "safe" companies.

Great answer. Thanks.

Can anybody explain to me how much value I can give the user in a "gamified" app before it is considered gambling?

Why do these articles alway hide the cap table?

One idea: White room. Similar to copyright avoidance.

We need an independent invention defense. If I can show I had no knowledge of your patent and came up with the idea on my own then it must have been obvious. If 2 other parties did also, then it must of been painfully obvious.

Looks to me like you divide by 1.5 to get the right time.

"Put up again thy API into its site: for all they that take the API shall perish by its terms of service."

Did my 17" MBP just become a collectors item?

Cross compilation is not yet supported. You want to build on osx/intel and target ios/arm. Not yet. ghc still needs to target the platform it was built on.

I learned this a long time ago: "If you want to get something done ask a busy person to do it."

Very true. And a few remaining A+ devs ended up with high job security since there were some systems they were very slow to redo and they were afraid something might break.

To me the biggest lesson from APL is to always try to manipulate the largest data structure you can your hands on. For example, don't think about for-loops, think about 'map'. When you can do that, life is good.

The limitations of the language that I saw (in the mid 90s) were around interoperability. Devs saw it as esoteric and steered toward something more 'marketable' like C++ and later Java. The extensive use of memory mapped files for persistence made it 'viral' in terms of building apps to access data. The language (or more likely the library support) was great for pricing algorithms but not so great for business applications filled with corner cases. As I recall these were reasons it was phased out at Morgan Stanley.

Morgan Stanley used a variant of APL called A+. It was used quite extensively in parts of the firm. They open-sourced it a while back. http://www.aplusdev.org/

If you do your indentation "wrong" and nothing breaks, then you will do your indentation "wrong". That's why I find whitespace-sensitive languages easier to read, YMMV.

In this post-material economy, attention is what is scarce. Quality interactions are scarce. Of course we will are not quite there yet, and the material economy is becoming more influenced by externalities like carbon output. Both trends are making it difficult to use the price system as an efficient means of allocating resources.

> Patents and software need to get a divorce before somebody gets hurt.

Well said.

tl;dr. Guy upset with the tiny snippet of himself on 60 minutes and how it was used to illustrate one of their points and not make his.

> It's also driven home by how the Lesbegue measure in d-dimensions assigns zero measure to all (d-1)-dimensional (or lesser) objects. Adding a dimension just makes space immensely larger.

> And so pegging the size of our unit ball to its 1-dimensional parameter, the radius, causes its volume to vanish.

Funny. I was just going to enter a comment how that was the most useful intuition in the whole thread.