technomancy

> And it's hard to explain why I like GitLab so much more.

In my case having the Atlassian all tools look the same seems to have backfired; every time I go to BitBucket it makes me think of Jira, which makes me cringe and wish I were on a different web site.

Nope; it's absolutely clear right on the front page that it's a subset of Scheme.

You mean libre or gratis?

If you build a compiler without runtime eval, you can use all the AVR's memory for user data. Still tiny, but not as cramped as this interpreter: http://microscheme.org Then again, if it doesn't have runtime eval, is it really a lisp?

I think you'll find the slowed pace happened a good deal before the managers came in if you look at the history more closely.

> Remote work is fine when you already know the domain, but that's not really what intern programs are for.

I'd argue that it depends on the rest of the team. The OP didn't mention whether he was the only remote or not, but if so then I agree; it's a lost cause, and there's no way this is going to work. But if he's joining a team of other remotes they can make it work if others are willing to try.

There's a world of difference between a well-designed pubkey interface like ssh-agent and what you get in today's browsers.

I don't know how feasible it would be to replace passwords for the general public, but if browser vendors were actually serious about security, they could go a very long way towards making client certs feasible just by giving up on their current strategy of putting their fingers in their ears and pretending it doesn't exist.

Teaching both would work for older kids, but a lot of Papert's work suggests that most kids under 12 haven't yet developed enough capability for abstract thought to use explicitly mathematical concepts to model the world, so teaching FP style at that point is just going to lead to frustration.

If you're going to teach kids at younger ages, you need to introduce it in a way that they can relate to physically, which is why Logo makes the turtle central; it has a heading and position just like a child's body, and it moves in a similar way to the way you think about moving yourself.

Anyway, you should read Mindstorms if you're interested in this topic; it does a great job explaining why the Logo approach is specifically grounded in a thorough understanding of childhood cognitive development.

I strongly disagree that there is any overall prerequisite relationship between the two fields. If you want to be a good writer, it's important to understand grammar, but telling children that they are not allowed to write at all until they've mastered a course in grammar is incredibly counterintuitive.

Learning needs to be holistic; you fill the gaps as you go.

> There is an obvious reason to oppose such things: opportunity cost. learning anything takes time, and the curriculum is full.

The way I see it the bigger bottleneck is not time but motivation. You can fill a whole day with studies that a student isn't interested in and end up getting nowhere, or you can spend an hour on a topic that is able to hold a student's fascination--I would pick the latter any day. Engagement is simply a prerequisite for meaningful learning at scale; without it progress is slow and uneven at best.

Python and Java are both compiled to bytecode and both interpreted as bytecode. It has absolutely nothing to do with compilers.

> Another thing is strict typing and debugging: since Python is an interpreted language, finding bugs wasn’t as easy

Wait, what? How is its interpreter remotely relevant to its semantics?

> if you have a syntax error in C, the program will simply not compile, on the other hand, in interpreted languages, the problem might go unnoticed for quite some time

Hang on--Python allows you to run code that has syntax errors? I'm so confused.

Weird, I thought that Python was trying to discourage functional programming with its extremely limited lambdas and the proposal to move map and reduce out of the core language.

It works fine; you just have to know up front to not just click "yes" for everything during the sign-up process. Not a big deal for people who already know how GPG works, but the whole point of Keybase is to make it easier to use for people new to crypto, and that audience can't be expected to understand that the default settings are a terrible idea.

> I'm sure Minecraft does a lot of impressive things on a technical level.

Actually, Minecraft is widely derided as being extremely wasteful with resources. And yet yeah, it still runs on my kids' 9-year-old laptop.

TOTP is overall more secure, but if Kenneth had used TOTP in this case, he would not have found out about the attack.

> It is not enough to use some strong passwords for the things you think are sensitive. Every weak password is a weak link in your total identity chain.

I get what you're saying here, but this is patently false. My HN account is not a weak link in my "total identity chain" in any way that matters.

Yes, obviously defaulting to strong passwords everywhere is a better default because you can make mistakes when judging how important a specific site is, but that doesn't mean that every site is critical.

> It runs Android 4.4.4, thus far I've not seen a valid reason for wanting something newer.

I have an Android 4.4 phone, and while it has worked acceptably for me right now as I am self-employed, if I were working for a company that required me to have access to sensitive customer data, having a phone that still received security updates would be a hard requirement.

Interesting; how is it possible for `ldd` to report the dependency resolution incorrectly?

Is it possible to fix this with `LD_LIBRARY_PATH`? I would like to avoid running one-off commands on my /lib directory that I don't understand if possible.

Damn; I assumed since it was shipped in Debian Stable it had all the same guarantees as the rest of the distro, but I guess the browser codebases tend to be such security disasters that they can't necessarily keep up.

It's worrying to me that they imply ESR is less secure; isn't the whole point that it gets security fixes applied to it? Less churn should make it more secure.

Looks like fun. I wish I could play it, but after manually chmodding and avoiding the tarbomb I get "./DLS: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.21' not found (required by ./DLS)" when I try to run on 64-bit Debian Jessie and "-bash: ./DLS: No such file or directory" when I try to run the other version for GCC 4.9.2. (I have GCC 4.9.3.)

Well, unfortunately I don't have many contributors yet, so I can't speak much to the collaboration features. The only thing I can think of is that it would be nice if it were easier to get CI failures announced in Freenode channels. I haven't looked into it in a while, but last I checked it was a bit tricky to hook up push events into IRC.

All the minor complaints I had a while back have been addressed (not showing the readme as the splash page, and not being able to reply to issue emails) so I've been quite happy with it.

I also appreciate how force-pushes to master are disabled by default. The fact that my browser's Emacs key bindings don't get stolen by the issue textarea to do stupid markdown stuff is very much appreciated. (glares fiercely at github)

I highly recommend using Löve; the simplicity is very compelling.

I wrote a bit about testing on my blog, but it's more about the architecture of how the user-input system meshes with the internal reprogrammability. There's a bit about fuzz testing though: https://technomancy.us/180

Maybe I'll follow it up with a more detailed post specifically about automated testing in Löve since it seems to be not well-understood.

> people in developing countries who might not have access to a smartphone

I live across a river from Burma, and I can tell you it's at least an order of magnitude easier for people there to get access to a smartphone than a desktop or laptop.

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/01/the-fa...

I mean, I agree that it's a deal-killer for people like you and me, but the idea that it would make it less suitable for underdeveloped countries is just silly.

I was pretty impressed with how easy it was to get free CI runs on pushes and merge requests with my OSS game: https://gitlab.com/technomancy/bussard/commit/73e84d11ed33ff...

> Additionally, just because a title isn't easily available for purchase, or available through your desired channels, that doesn't magically invalidate copyright.

I think most people understand that legal/illegal is only loosely correlated with right/wrong.

Emacs users came up with Cider, but they were able to do it because there were a whole ton of them. Cider has had 154 contributors: https://github.com/clojure-emacs/cider/graphs/contributors

Atom did this with the backing of a very well-financed company, and it still doesn't fare all that well with niche languages.

I agree with the general gist of your first post, but I think it's important to recognize that unless you can build on some portable standard method for defining editor support for programming languages, there is going to be a cost to living in the niche; it is going to make you more hesitant to experiment with new languages. (This is speaking as someone who has also implemented their own Lua-based text editor.)

What the hell is wrong with you?