Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | LionessLover's commentslogin

Do turn your adblocker on for that site. I had at some point turned it off to be nice to them - but what I got this time was too much for me. Flashing everywhere, a third of my browser window for ads, and then an ad popup floating across the text that I had to manually click to close.


If you are interested in RTOS (real-time OS) courses I recommend checking edX for the expected September 2016 arrival date of a followup to this course:

edX course page: https://www.edx.org/course/embedded-systems-shape-world-utau...

More information: http://edx-org-utaustinx.s3.amazonaws.com/UT601x/index.html

The excellent quality of the above course - which includes programming actual hardware (you have to invest about $50 for components) - raises the expectations for that upcoming course.

.

EDIT

The page is already up for the new course "Real-Time Bluetooth Networks - Shape the World":

https://www.edx.org/course/real-time-bluetooth-networks-shap...

> In this lab-based computer science course, explore the complexities of embedded systems and learn how to develop your own real-time operating system (RTOS) by building a personal fitness device with Bluetooth connectivity (BLE).

- Enhance your embedded system skills

- Write your own real-time operating system

- Design, develop and debug C code

- Implement a personal fitness device

- Communicate using Bluetooth

More info: http://edx-org-utaustinx.s3.amazonaws.com/UT601x/RTOS.html


The actual study can be accessed for free on "The Pirate-Bay of Science publications" Sci-Hub:

http://science.sciencemag.org.sci-hub.cc/content/351/6280/aa...

About Sci-Hub: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sci-Hub


Yep. Human brains are made to see faces in clouds - and patterns everywhere. Because its the only way for that little brain to function. In reality nothing is the same unless it's identical (not a copy - but the exact same thing, maybe seen from different angles or at different times). We like our clever analogies, and they serve a purpose, but even when making them it's best to be aware that it's a product of our brain and to always be ready to question if it actually serves the intended purpose. Even if you can use a specific analogy in one context doesn't mean it's useful in another one. I think it's okay to make such analogies - as long as everybody including the person making them is aware of the shortcomings and that being able to make one is a very, very low threshold, given that it comes from brains that see animals and human faces in floating water vapor.


At the bottom of the article:

> This is an evolving publication, and I shall be extending it over the coming days and weeks to cover more topics on serverless architecture including some things commonly confused with serverless, and the benefits and drawbacks of this approach.

You can send a tweet to the author: https://twitter.com/mikebroberts


Which is wrong. As is the use of "absolutely" - to show that you have the universe-opinion. What hubris. And it does not matter that some guy "himself" posted some opinion either. Right were you link to there are different opinions from other people that show more thought was put into them. The "pg" comment actually is the only one for your argument, all others are against!


At the bottom of the article:

> This is an evolving publication, and I shall be extending it over the coming days and weeks to cover more topics on serverless architecture including some things commonly confused with serverless, and the benefits and drawbacks of this approach.

You can send a tweet to the author: https://twitter.com/mikebroberts


Terms such as "serverless" don't have a fixed sharp-edged meaning but are very fuzzy categories, except on a per-person basis, where you may (will) find people insisting on a specific meaning. When this story was submitted on some reddit forum (forgot which one) everybody was up in arms after just reading the headline, screaming "everything is a server" and "there is no cloud"! Don't take it too seriously. Human language is very deliberately a very flexible tool, with the same word fitting into very different contexts, taking on very different roles. Even in science, by the way.


Which is wrong. As is the use of "absolutely" - to show that you have the universe-opinion. What hubris. And it does not matter that some guy "himself" posted some opinion either. Right were you link to there are different opinions from other people that show more thought was put into them. The "pg" comment actually is the only one for your argument, all others are against!


pg wrote the site, pg is one of the owners of the site, pg was the only admin at the time that that comment was written. Admins/maintainers (dang) since then haven't disagreed. That makes it site policy, doesn't it?

When you come to a new site, it's usually considered civil to learn the rules of that site, although of course I cannot force you to do so. For example, assuming that reddit rules apply on HN is kinda silly. Relatedly, you might be interested to note that there are dozens of HN old-timers that will automatically downvote (nearly) any comment that contains a "downvote me if you want" or a "don't just downvote me if you disagree" or "these downvotes are BS" or something.

You're right, though, that not all users agree. And hopefully you learn from this comment that it's okay, on HN, to downvote me if you disagree, even if you think I contributed to the conversation.

PS: welcome to HN.


> pg wrote the site

What does ownership have to do with it?

That does not make him more right than any other human being.

Ownership means one can impose ones will, it does not mean you are omniscient.


>That does not make him more right than any other human being.

No, just the only relevant person to say what is welcome and allowed in HIS social bookmarking forum and what's not.

>Ownership means one can impose ones will, it does not mean you are omniscient.

"House rules" are not meant to be perfect or agreeable to all -- they are just meant to be whatever those running and owing the house decide.


> pg wrote the site

What does ownership have to do with it, you fucking moron?

That does not make him more right than any other human being. Ownership means one can impose ones will, it does not mean you are omniscient.


>What does ownership have to do with it, you fucking moron?

I'd say "you fucking moron" besides rude, is grounds for killing your account.

As to the question, rules on any property, including a website, are usually imposed by the owner.

That's what "ownership" has to do with it.

There are moderators, and comment and submission rules in places. Maybe you conflated HN with some kind of self-governing collective?

>That does not make him more right than any other human being. Ownership means one can impose ones will, it does not mean you are omniscient.

You wrote that again and I already answered. Nobody cares about PG being omniscient. He can impose ANY arbitrary will (right or wrong), because it's his site. He can even close it if he gets bored with it. Whether you or I find any particular rule "right" is inconsequential, as we're guests here, not even customers.


Well given that it's PG's site, I'd say his opinion is the only one that matters.

Besides, votes are used for agreement more than for any other purpose, and given that there's no way to force people to not do this, let's just dispense with the fiction that they can ever mean anything else. "Please no downvote" is just noise.


Horsehit - mass opinion obviously matters a lot more on this subject, since there is no way to enforce our arbitrary kowtowing to Paul Graham's wisdom. What is he going to do, yell at us for down voting incorrectly?

This is our website. Maybe pg 'made' it, but we use it. If most of us disagree that is what will (and should in my opinion) happen.


Hacker News has remained a relatively civil place for far longer than most online forums largely because of the policies pg and other admins have put in place.


And the self-policing of its users is the force that makes that happen, not the opinion of the admins.


>What is he going to do, yell at us for down voting incorrectly

He can always close down the side.

Besides, it's not about "what is he going to do" -- it's about what people coming here should respect.


He could, but it's unlikely he will close the site over improper downvoting behavior (which is rampant, but unimportant). And what I think people here should (and do) respect is the general spirit of civility; we respect Paul Graham's wishes because he asked for civility, not vice-versa. If Paul Graham asked us to be pointlessly cruel, we would not respect that (or we would be congregating elsewhere).

Therefore, what matters most in practice is the mass opinion of users of the site - what do we think is most useful and respectful in daily usage (following Paul Graham's lead to be respectful because we can all agree that this is a good idea).


Because the system JS uses is an ISO standard, it is a problem not just for JS, it works for the majority of use cases, and implementing a second number system (the old one will have to be kept forever) increases cost and complexity significantly without showing enough benefits, since those who need something different can do so.

For example, if you do "money-math" you could just use only integers (use cents instead of dollars) - your number will be an integer as long as it's a whole number and you re,main below Number.MAX_SAFE_INTEGER (http://www.2ality.com/2013/10/safe-integers.html). That's not enough for big-finance math where fractions of cents matter, but for most such applications it is.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: