senorprogrammer

You can write your own modules, you'll just need to fork the repo and write them in Go. There's no DSL for it.

Good idea about the config. I'll create a feature issue for it.

In the config.yml file can define the column and row sizes to whichever screen size you like. No reason it couldn't work with those dimensions. Take a look at simple_config.yml in the repo.

I use BambooHR, I don't currently use Jenkins.

FYI: installer auto-downloads but doesn't do any OS detection. Looks like this is Windows-only.

A minor point: a fire-proof safe is not absolutely heat-proof. Put one in a fire, and it will heat up inside. Better ones also tend to release water vapour into the safe itself when heated (as a mechanism for keeping the internal temperature down and providing a positive pressure for keeping smoke, fire, and particulate out), which isn't great for hard drives either. I wouldn't rely on an on-premisis safe to prove any data integrity guarantees against anything but petty theft.

As someone who used to work in the IFE software field, I can assure you these systems are perfectly capable of crashing themselves in endless loops without any outside help from the likes of us, thank you very much. ;)

That's a great clarification. Thanks for that!

I'd argue that while it may technically not be "criminal punishment", that is ultimately the final outcome. People for whom a criminal conviction cannot be guaranteed are instead "punished" by having their goods taken. However IANAL, and that is simply my perception of the effect.

> mathematics works by people guessing rules and then checking them

This will sound facetious, but I suspect many people treat great swathes of life this way. My wife has a friend who tries any random googled herb-based cure any time she gets ill. Recovery from this illness, this cold or flu, is always taken as proof of the validity of the cure, regardless of how long she's had to ingest it.

You, reading this, have already thought of half a dozen ways to disprove her cures, as have I, however no amount of evidence can assuage this need to believe. At this point my theory is that this belief forms an intractable part of her personal identity.

At the core of all of this, and perhaps for these "autodidact physicists" as well, seems to be a very primal need to understand the universe in terms comprehendible one's self, regardless the cost.

I'd argue the fundamental problem is that 'civil forfeiture' is 'guilty until proven innocent', an inversion of the way the rule of law is meant to work.

Requiring charges is a very small step in the right direction. I suspect what will happen is that people with money will now be charged for small, ridiculous offences, misdemeanours, as a way for law enforcement to skirt the law.

A real improvement is to seize, hold, require conviction, and then enforce forfeiture. If a conviction cannot be made, the forfeiture should be invalidated.

For me it seemed to correlate directly with the birth of my son. My theory is that his birth, the emotions of it, the sleep deprivation, and the neuro-chemical onslaught that most likely happened during that same time (it was easily the most emotional period of my life), have fundamentally rewired my brain to be more emotionally reactive (my wife would balk if I used the term "sensitive").

It's a good thing.

Just wanted to second this. When I climbed in Ontario, the cedars were pretty common knowledge and avoiding them at all costs was one of the tenets of being a good climber. Like any group, undoubtedly there's people who don't care; my experience was that most did.

That's an interesting question indeed, specifically: would easy access to legal weed reduce property crime in the area (for most of the crime seems to be smash-n-grab property crime).

My suspicion: no, no change. For all intents and purposes weed is legal in Vancouver. You have to be pretty out of touch not to be able to get it. But weed is cheap, and non-addictive (physiologically anyhow, I suspect the jury may still be out on psychologically; IANAP). I would be surprised to find that anyone is committing re-occurring petty crime to buy weed only.

As someone who walks through or along-size the DTES nearly every day, this is a fantastic response and summary of the situation, Jim, capturing the complexity of the situation nicely. The DTES is not as simple a problem as many people would like to think, nor can it be ignored, as more and more external pressures are put upon it. It is, however, a fundamental part of living in Vancouver, for better or worse.

As for the parent comment: on a minor note, no one who lives in Vancouver thinks the issue is weed by any stretch. Jim's assessment, above, is entirely accurate. My personal hunch is that legalized weed would have absolutely no impact on that part of Vancouver at all.

Wow, does that article ever bury the lead by not describing what Hampton Creek's product is until the very last paragraph.

For those who didn't make it all the way down, Hampton Creek makes a vegetarian mayo alternative called 'Just Mayo' that is a threat to egg-based mayonnaise, and is evidently gaining popularity. As such, the American Egg Board has been attempting to destroy them.

The moment you have a baby, you immediately regret all the times past that you could have napped and didn't.

I would love to see a meta-analysis of the 'when to post on HN' articles to see if a) there's consistency, and b) if the stories themselves have skewed subsequent conclusions (i.e.: will everyone now post at 7:45 on Sunday morning?)

Where I work, we ask candidates to do a take-home task after they've passed the first in-person interview. The take-home task is trivial, something most developers with a few years experience should be able to knock out in less than an hour. All components of it are easily googleable.

The advantage is that we're building a corpus of solutions to the same problem that we can compare against each other, which is interesting. More importantly, we're building a corpus of solutions that we can then pick from to have the candidate analyze in-person, and talk us through what they see, what they'd do differently, what they like/don't like, etc.

In short, we familiarize them with the problem via their own answer, and then ask them to analyze someone else's (anonymized) answer. Our sample set so far is too small to draw definitive conclusions from, but it feels better than our old ways of doing things.

Spend some time around sailors or classic car restorers. They'll really freak you out.

> 24/7 uptime is essential

And all that for only $7/month. Seems reasonable, for an essential service.

That seems like quite a bit 'only'.

Too many people seem to misunderstand that 'freedom of speech' does not mean 'freedom from repercussions'. Pretty glad to read jobs had been lost as a result of this.

Surely you jest.

Also known as "telling a story".

I'm going to disagree with this only because it comes down to the intent of the interviewer. If they're looking for a boolean right/wrong answer then you're absolutely correct. Feel bad for the interviewer who asks such things thinking they're being clever (and believe me, I've suffered through those interviews).

Instead, if it's the starting point of a conversation then hell, bring Google into it. Use that topic to figure out if the candidate is someone who converses well, thinks well, googles well, bullshits well, ultimately is it someone your team would want to continue working with.

Contrast that approach to something like FizzBuzz, which really affords no avenues for interesting conversation and the difference becomes apparent.

I'm not so sure it's a bad interview question. Or rather, perhaps it's only bad if you, as the interviewer, have a specific answer in mind.

We used it once with the caveat that "there's no right answer, we don't really know every step either, lets see what happens". We collaborated with them, it was great, and by the end of the conversation were pretty certain we wanted to keep the conversation going by hiring them.

Set your expectations accordingly, I suppose.

It seems the United States has managed to evolve the term "police state" into something new: in the traditional form the police are the enforcement arm of a political power. In the current United States, the police are seemingly beholden to no-one (I include district attorneys as part of that mechanism).

For lack of a better term, American police forces now operate largely 'extra-state'.

Yes, I think so. The current language around drone strikes is one of precision, sanitation, and infallibility. It's a one-way message that's easy to swallow. Faced with widely-reported counter information, such as actual photographs of "collateral damage", that spin must surely crumble.

This is obviously well-known to the military, having learned from their abject failure to control reporters during Vietnam. And is why reporters are now "embedded" within the military rather than be allowed to roam free (the spin for that, of course, being "safety").

As someone with chronic pain, nope, I don't think one builds up a tolerance to it. Instead, I think I'm lucky in that the severity waxes and wanes. Below some threshold it recedes from being pervasive, going into the background and I have to go consciously looking for it to see if I'm still feeling it.

Exceed that threshold and it's always there, front and centre, just pain. At that point, as throwaway91214 says, I consciously try to ignore it.

When it exceed the next threshold, life pretty much stops for awhile until it recedes again. Those are the sleepless nights and long, minimal days.

(I use the notion of thresholds for simplicity, it's perhaps closer to an exponential scale).

I've had mine for about eleven years. Such is life.

This argument fails repeated testing. It turns out that human-human conversation involves both parties paying attention to the environment and co-operating to insert pauses and situational awareness. In essence, h-h communication in a car requires much less cognitive load on the driver because a large part of it becomes shared.

We've all seen this fail at times too. That's when the driver has to tell the passenger to stop talking so they can concentrate on directions or signage, etc.

No, because to be a currency of any kind someone has to be accepting it as tender for something else. There needs to be a trade of it somewhere.

Now Canadian Tire money is a different, yet somewhat analogous, story. It's not virtual, but it certainly is used as currency (my local university pub used to accept it at par the first Monday of each month - that was great).