That's not too bad for the added $65. The mini keyboard looks nicer than the ~$20 FAVI ones[1] I usually use.
At first I thought they'd figured out a way to add a screen. That would be great. But it looks like you need to supply your own.
I work with students in Uganda and it's hard to beat what you get from a $200 netbook. Much faster processor than a pi, plus the screen is integrated. You can't do GPIO stuff like you can with a pi though, so there are trade-offs. Twice the price of this, too.
> First of all: what is work? Work is of two kinds: first, altering the position of matter at or near the earth’s surface relatively to other such matter; second, telling other people to do so. The first kind is unpleasant and ill paid; the second is pleasant and highly paid. The second kind is capable of indefinite extension: there are not only those who give orders, but those who give advice as to what orders should be given. Usually two opposite kinds of advice are given simultaneously by two organized bodies of men; this is called politics.
> Instead we are mired in the innards of the machine micromanaging absolutely everything with incredible verbosity.
This is one area where Haskell really shines. If you want the machine to be able to do what you want without micromanaging how, than you need a way to formally specify what you mean in an unambiguous and verifiable way. Yet it also needs to be flexible enough to cross domain boundaries (pure code, IO, DSLs, etc).
Category theory has been doing exactly that in the math world for decades, and taking advantage of that in the programming world seems like a clear way forward.
The current state of the industry seems like team of medieval masons (programmers) struggling to build a cathedral with no knowledge of physics beyond anecdotes that have been passed down the generations (design patterns), while a crowd of peasants watch from all angles to see if the whole thing will fall down (unit tests).
Sure, you might be able to build something that way, but it's not exactly science, is it?
> Do common people in the US really identify with being a patriot?
Patriotism originally meant you were willing to sacrifice something for your country. Presumably the smallest measure of that sacrifice would be spending your time developing well-founded opinions about how the country should operate. (Just take a look at the federalist papers: 85 long, dense articles arguing in favor of the minutest details of the constitution. And the expectation was that people would actually read them!)
Unfortunately patriotism doesn't mean sacrifice anymore. It means something akin to a fingers-in-the-ear, uncritical fanboyism. Just plaster everything with flags and soaring eagles and call it good. It's not sacrificing everything (like Snowden did), it's something you do instead of sacrificing _anything_, even the time it would take to educate yourself on what your country is doing. And as a bonus you get to flaunt that very ignorance as an additional point of pride.
And yeah, common people here in the US definitely do embrace it to a nauseating degree.
We wrote our RF radio mesh coordinator software in Haskell, and it's been a great success. Working with binary data formats (various building control protocols) in Haskell is the kind of thing that spoils you forever.
The one issue I've run into is that ghc can't cross compile. If you want to run your code on ARM, you have to compile an ARM version of ghc (QEMU comes in handy here).
Every statement by Clapper has mentioned repeatedly how the program is lawful and falls under Section 702 of the FISA act approved by congress etc., etc.
But that assertion is meaningless because as a couple of brave senators have let us know (Wyden, Udall), the very court that's supposed to oversee activities under FISA, the FISC (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court) has found the NSAs activities to be unconstitutional[1]. The response to this finding wasn't reform, but to classify the findings themselves.
Small suggestion: In the case of selecting an item that's not the topmost, it would be nice if it was a one-step process rather than two (you need to first highlight with ctrl+letter, then activate with Enter).
Maybe a repeated press of ctrl+letter could actually activate the selection. Or maybe pressing and holding ctrl+letter for a short while.
+1 for this, also check out Graham's io9 video on the Counting Problem. The solution is beautiful and really got me excited about Haskell when I was first learning:
Agreed. Any relationship where you can freely "entertain ideas without accepting them" (- Aristotle) is something to be cherished. pg wrote an essay on this topic, for anyone interested:
http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html
Anyone smart enough to have an interesting opinion on this topic is probably also smart enough to see that there's absolutely no upside to expressing that opinion. It either parallels the mainstream (in which case it's redundant) or it differs in some way, in which case it invites a retaliatory shitstorm.
In a nutshell Salvatore said that he prefers to raise the level of abstraction (as programmers are wont to do) from focusing on how _female_ humans are treated unequally to focusing on how _all_ humans are treated unequally. At worst isn't this a disagreement on methodology rather than a disagreement on values?
What purpose has been served by turning this topic into a third rail?
When this topic comes up I always marvel at the _intellectual_ shortcuts people take to justify the _practical_ shortcuts they take to simplify the hiring process.
Working with someone is the only way to evaluate what it will be like to work with someone. Looking at their work is the only way to evaluate their work. Tautology is your friend in the hiring process. There is no royal road to hiring great people.
With regard to "you should be prepared to talk about your hobbies and interests" - Great people are (almost by definition) not interested in the particulars of your interview process. In fact, if they actually are great people you'll be courting them, not the other way around, and they'll be bringing their own ideas to the table instead of sweating over whether they're conforming to your preconceptions.
Neat idea. I'd definitely donate if the whole thing was going to be open sourced so I could run it on my own infrastructure.
Currently we use csshX for this sort of thing, and it does the job. It's an open source tool that opens a bunch of ssh sessions and sends each character you type to each session. You can launch it with command line args that specify the hosts you'd like to connect to and optionally the commands to run, so it's pretty easy to set up scripts that mimic the recipes in this video. If you're working with less that 20 servers at a time (about the limit of what you can read on screen at once) it's a great tool.
Instarepl: A portmanteau of instant and REPL, meaning a REPL that evaluates immediately as you type.
"context for the Instarepl": essentially the namespace in which the REPL executes, meaning that if you run lein-light inside your project folder you can get access to your project's functions inside LightTable.