coroutines

I don't have an electron microscope and I wouldn't know what to look for.

I see your point that we do need to implicitly trust the company at some level, but what's upsetting is we want to encourage the widest possible audience to be able to "look in" and with closed-source change they've stepped backwards by decreasing the number of people who can casually [or pointedly] audit their devices and software.

It is more closed to me now.

Honestly I thought they were a company that cared more about providing the security we need rather than making a profit off intellectual property. I thought they understood the niche community they were providing for.

I can't [implicitly] trust this - not after having had better in the past.

So who's going to make a Docker image of this? :-)

Even if power use is a minor concern for desktops, it would be good to program with energy consumption in mind :>

Network utilization, CPU usage, memory, disk usage, energy consumption. Lots to focus on...

Hmm, good on the NSA for being cost-effective.

:-)

Maybe they're deciding how many humans they should spare in the upcoming war.

I imagine the puzzles garner little sympathy.

I'm actually of the opinion that when we can't scale smaller we will then scale horizontally/laterally.

More transistors, larger chips.

We have bought so much physical space going smaller and smaller - and I think a lot of people will happily pay for a thicker iPhone if it's not more room allocated for a larger battery.

Eventually - when that becomes ridiculous - we will write better software. More likely we'll buy an extra couple years after the end of Moore's Law and Intel will make some unexpected breakthroughs to go smaller again.

Color me cynical?

I'm not sure others got this reference :o)

Where are their minds...?

I would really be interested to know why we need a special syntax for tail calls. (genuinely curious)

I'm from Lua originally and we've had tail calls forever... why would you point them out? It should be obvious:

return wat()

I hate to play Devil's Advocate but accuracy can be important. Geoip means they can serve me offers for businesses in the same city, but I'd [almost] love it if I were served offers for a taqueria down the street from my browsing location.

More than likely they'll just correlate browsing habits with location and sell that information to third parties, though. High quality advertising is just not in this reality.

I kind of worry about service providers also being content producers while simultaneously coercing consumers into agreeing to contracts with binding arbitration.

Judge, jury, and executioner?

I say again: Javascript can learn many things more from Coffeescript.

Coffeescript's future is diminished, presently (hah) - but ES6 only picked up a handful of magical features.

TypeScript "won" because certain folks will happily trade some coherency for more complexity.

Types (can) be helpful.

Friend wrote this a long time ago when he was a young C++ coder. It's hosted on another friends' Github but the author is John Brooks, the author of Ricochet.

https://github.com/rburchell/fastdup

:-)

We are now friends. Hello friend. :D

> You cannot learn from your enemy without invasive action, and you cannot test your capabilities without constantly attacking your adversaries...

I'm sorry but this just sounds unethical and wrong. So much can be learned passively.

This is a good read: https://www.nostarch.com/silence.htm

I think it's important to remember that Array::map() and Array::filter() construct new Arrays (even if the old one is quickly "lost" and collected). It's probable v8 sees this and does some trickery to make use of the existing allocated Array, but I doubt it.

let next = [ 1, 2, 3, 4 ].map(x => x * 2);

versus:

next = (x * 2 for x in [ 1 .. 4 ])

...which becomes:

// Generated by CoffeeScript 1.10.0

(function() { var next, x;

  next = (function() {
    var i, results;
    results = [];
    for (x = i = 1; i <= 4; x = ++i) {
      results.push(x * 2);
    }
    return results;
  })();

}).call(this);

Array::map()/filter() get points for encouraging immutable transformations.

It's scary seeing reality start to match 1984, but scarier still seeing new avenues of surveillance come to light that Orwell couldn't have predicted.

Orwell didn't write about FitBits or Chromebooks.

What really pisses me off are the posts about Coffeescript being supplanted by ES6 like it's a complete substitute. Array comprehensions are just one example of what JS folks are still missing out on.

I hope someone sticks a couple hundred FOIA requests in that hole they speak to the people from. Hold them accountable: "What did the FBI get out of this?"

So, I've added another [smaller] closet for faster access in front of my original closet. I've experienced several cache misses and I've decided just to wear what I'm wearing... for the rest of my life. Is this data-oriented? Am I doing it? :O

Are the poorly-dressed just disgruntled system analysts???

You cannot mention Dijkstra's algorithm without linking: http://www.redblobgames.com/pathfinding/

http://www.redblobgames.com/pathfinding/a-star/introduction....

:-)

That's awesome! :D

To me it just seemed silly that we'd continually upgrade to get more dedicated circuitry for things like low-power video decoding. I know programming an FGPA still wouldn't be as efficient as it could be, but I think in the future it might be nice to have an FGPA available for adding things like x265 hardware decoding a year after purchase.

What I'd REALLY love to see is an FPGA in a Chromebook for students. School will be so awesome in the next decade.

I would fucking love to have an FGPA included with the newest Intel procs or something. :D

Kinda looking forward to lowRISC with minion cores, though - if we ever ditch x86 for games.

I think if I were using Linux I'd prefer an option I can specify in modprobe.d to disable signature verification for the kernel module handling this (at my discretion).

Or would this be at like layer 7? :>

It's just really hard for me to view an interviewer as a friend usually. A couple weeks ago I had a really amazing interview experience with a company called Volantio because the first screening was a 'get to know you' sort of thing. Dude made it easy saying he wasn't yet interested in my qualifications/education and just wanted to talk about my interests.

We must have talked for over an hour about how great we think Coffeescript is.. (I'm a zealot).

Anyway, I wish I could make more interviews like that. I've actually started putting it in my cover letters that I'd appreciate going for lunch or something just to hang out and talk about frameworks.

It's great when I can detach myself from 'needing a job'.

I hate that because we understand we have a responsibility. I just wanted to share cat pictures discretely with my friends. </lazy>

I thank you for your kind and very welcome advice.

These are great questions - I think I probably have trouble locating more junior dev opportunities.

I always do research on the history of a company but because of turnover it doesn't score me any piñatas to know where they started if the interviewer can't engage with the stuff I'm mentioning. :(

I wonder how they decided spending money on this would be a good investment.

They must know how the internet works.

What specifically were they paying for that made it worth it? Keeping references to the incident away from their Facebook page?

Who HASN'T seen that image by now?

What a misguided allocation of funds.

I am a junior dev.

It is hard for me to get in that dating mentality that I should be testing to see if my interviewer and I are simpatico. I feel a lot of pressure to fill in the blanks on what I want to know without asking, so I don't seem like I'm still deciding if I want to work there.

I know that sounds ridiculous.

The only time I do well is when interviewing for roles in faraway Australia because I feel like I have no chance of getting picked up.

Or maybe Australians are just great at no-bullshit interviews and put me at ease like talking to a friend? Confusing.

Stay strong, Snookie.

(in seriousness - good luck)