jallmann

29 ms·

241.
by jallmann 12y ago
> Attracting and retaining users isn't hard. Have you tried? It is hard, especially in a saturated market with plenty of choices. For mass media (TV, news, social), the scarcity relationship is reversed: you're effectively comp
242.
by jallmann 12y ago
Successful social businesses have a big moat in the form of network effects. If it were any easier to cross the social-networking moat, Facebook would not have paid $19 billion for Whatsapp. Attracting and retaining users is hard. The numbe
243.
by jallmann 12y ago
> The Ocaml standard library is pretty shitty Oh come on, it's not that bad, it's just minimal. Usually I can get pretty far without having to reach for something like Batteries. That's a good thing, especially when writ
244.
by jallmann 12y ago
What's puzzling is how often FOSS advocates, especially from the permissive camp, frame the idea of contributing code as a purely altruistic action, in that code should be open-sourced and contributed back to because it is the Right
245.
by jallmann 12y ago
> Don't forget some people speed, flee from the cops, fall asleep at the wheel, get drunk, text, look at maps, have strokes etc. Again you are falling into the same pit: a nonsensical comparison of human and computer operational&#x2
246.
by jallmann 12y ago
> The key to self-driving cars is to realize that they don't have to be perfect - they just have to be better than us. Again, that's skirting the issue. Do you have any idea how close self-driving cars are to being "better
247.
by jallmann 12y ago
When I started school, my dream was to figure out a theory to underpin a grand unified model of artificial intelligence. Imagine my disappointment once I started studying the subject in detail. Most functional AI nowadays consists of algori
248.
by jallmann 12y ago
> The idea that nVidia and AMD are detecting your games, and then replacing shaders, optimizing around bugs, etc should be absolutely terrifying. Actually it's par for the course, if you care about backwards compatibility. Raymond C
249.
by jallmann 12y ago
Damn. I read Gigaom regularly, really appreciated the straight up news. It will be missed. Gigaom had an excellent writing staff, hope they get back on their feet quickly so we can keep reading their pieces.
250.
by jallmann 12y ago
That's a problem with people, not with the LGPL. Would you sign a contract without reading it through? The same goes for software licenses. Suggesting an alternative license doesn't absolve people of the responsibility of reading
251.
by jallmann 12y ago
Linking is really not big a deal with LGPL, provided you're comfortable with the GPL. You might have to think a little harder if you're distributing statically, but given the goals of the LGPL and the technicalities of linking, it
252.
by jallmann 12y ago
The article is bit muddled in describing the nature of the charges; it seems like there are multiple GPL violations. Withholding the source to BusyBox is one of them, in addition to the violations involving the Linux kernel.
253.
by jallmann 12y ago
Is there any information about why VMware thinks they are not bound by the GPL? Curious whether they have a technical justification, rather than simply being a blatant licensing violation.
254.
by jallmann 12y ago
I don't think so -- what exactly is satirical about that interview? (Not that I really care to know; this is getting way off-topic.)
255.
by jallmann 12y ago
Not so sure about that [1]: > Q: Are your articles (like Missing Missy), real emails? > A: The email articles are verbatim ... Even if his pieces are meant to be satire, IMO it's not particularly good satire. To each his own, I g
256.
by jallmann 12y ago
...That guy is just an asshole. Not funny at all. He should just have declined instead of screwing around and wasting everybody's time.
257.
by jallmann 12y ago
Sure, that's what the Wikipedia article says (since calls are what ACDs were originally designed for), but commercial ACDs have been multi-channel for a long time, doing all the things you mentioned.
258.
by jallmann 12y ago
You are doing yourself a disservice by talking about "primitives" and "call state" without naming the actual, industry-standard mechanism you have built. This is an ACD. In the cloud. Using common terminology gives other
259.
by jallmann 12y ago
So, basically an ACD?
260.
by jallmann 12y ago
Because the friend I was with (who lived there) said so, after I asked about it. This elevator didn't need an operator. Especially considering it was one elevator among several other operator-less elevators. There are useless jobs ever
261.
by jallmann 12y ago
> When I was in India ... Useless jobs are endemic in India. Once, I was in a Mumbai apartment building with several elevators, and one of them had a full-time operator, despite being a normal, modern elevator. Why? "Because he need
262.
by jallmann 12y ago
> what the goals of the GPL license are besides a warm and fuzzy feeling that no-one is ripping them off GPL ensures freedom for users of the software, not developers of the software -- a distinction that is missed every single time
263.
by jallmann 12y ago
Monads themselves are composable via bind, but the values encapsulated by the monad are not. Consider there is no real converse to the return operator: once something has been wrapped by a monad, then it is forever stuck in that monadic wor
264.
by jallmann 12y ago
OCaml is usually statically compiled with ocamlopt, so distribution is pretty easy. As long as build/deploy platforms match, then you're good to go. Shared libraries only come into the picture for unusual cases, eg FFI. OCaml tool
265.
by jallmann 12y ago
Here is the HN thread in which NSQ was announced, and similar questions were asked. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4631994 Although I don't know how the system has evolved since then.
266.
by jallmann 12y ago
> what is it about F# or Scala that you don't like Haven't used either, so giving an opinion on those wouldn't be fair.
267.
by jallmann 12y ago
> Are you sure that's even possible? No. Simon Marlow and Philip Wadler tried to make a type system for Erlang and couldn't do it [1]. And if they couldn't do it... well, it's a very hard problem, for many of the re
268.
by jallmann 12y ago
Yes, while Dialyzer was somewhat useful, it only seemed to catch a subset of possible errors. The set of errors it missed was large enough that I just gave up on Erlang altogether. I never took the time to figure out what Dialyzer could and
269.
by jallmann 12y ago
I tried to do a startup in Erlang a few years ago. Haven't been able to watch the video because there aren't subtitles or a transcript, but here is why I don't use Erlang anymore: the type system. Erlang/OTP does MANY th
270.
by jallmann 12y ago
> huge mega-corporations like Apple and Google have such an intrinsic advantage They really don't. All it takes is one designer with good taste, or a developer frustrated with the status quo. Sure, big companies have the resources t

More ›