archived stringclasses 2
values | author stringlengths 3 20 | author_fullname stringlengths 4 12 ⌀ | body stringlengths 0 22.5k | comment_type stringclasses 1
value | controversiality stringclasses 2
values | created_utc stringlengths 10 10 | edited stringlengths 4 12 | gilded stringclasses 7
values | id stringlengths 1 7 | link_id stringlengths 7 10 | locked stringclasses 2
values | name stringlengths 4 10 ⌀ | parent_id stringlengths 5 10 | permalink stringlengths 41 91 ⌀ | retrieved_on stringlengths 10 10 ⌀ | score stringlengths 1 4 | subreddit_id stringclasses 1
value | subreddit_name_prefixed stringclasses 1
value | subreddit_type stringclasses 1
value | total_awards_received stringclasses 19
values |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
True | [deleted] | null | > Ah, no - to be good with recovery on Oracle it's essential that you spend a week doing drills every year for a while until you really learn the ropes.
Yea.. The job is called being a DBA. Also, Oracle's feature set is 10x greater.
> It's also less likely for you to need to do a recovery in my experience.
That's bull crap. No software is immune to hardware failures. | null | 0 | 1316774078 | False | 0 | c2lziuz | t3_ko3r2 | null | t1_c2lziuz | t1_c2lzior | null | 1427636675 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | AlanCrowe | null | Something I find frustrating is that there are two different concepts here.
Think about interpreting
if (a) then b; else c;
as an expression. What is its type? One answer is that b and c must have the same type and, having checked that they do agree, the compiler now knows the type of the conditional expression. The essence of the construct is that *b* and *c* are alternatives. We might wish that reflected in the name
alt (a) then b; else c;
It is hard to see how to apply this analysis to
if (a) then b;
*b* is optional. if, due to *a* evaluating to false, we do not execute *b*, we don't have an alternative. If we want a value it is going to be some kind of default and it is not clear what the principle of least surprise requires of the designer of the programming language. It would have been better if the core idea, that *b* is optional, had been reflected in the name
opt (a) then b;
If K&R had kept the two concepts distinct, with *alt* and *opt* instead of *if* the dangling else problem would never have arisen. It is a computer science own-goal. The warning from Yacc of a shift reduce conflict tells you that the grammar is wrong and needs fixing, but the warning went unheeded.
Perhaps *alt* and *opt* are crap names. One could use *if* for the alternative-construct and *when* for the optional-construct. Those might be better names if you are creating your own programming language from scratch, but they will not do for explaining the point, due to the *if* already being a keyword of the programming language being criticised. | null | 0 | 1316774210 | False | 0 | c2lzj1g | t3_kooiy | null | t1_c2lzj1g | t3_kooiy | null | 1427636677 | 0 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | kataire | null | Also, Mercurial, the DVCS. | null | 0 | 1316774212 | False | 0 | c2lzj1k | t3_kolze | null | t1_c2lzj1k | t1_c2lz3fm | null | 1427636677 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316774228 | False | 0 | c2lzj2a | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzj2a | t1_c2lz46e | null | 1427636677 | 5 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | kataire | null | From what I can tell, it uses a backend based on Rails, so you need Ruby on the server, too.
At which point I lost all interest in the project. | null | 0 | 1316774367 | False | 0 | c2lzj9f | t3_kolze | null | t1_c2lzj9f | t1_c2lz9g4 | null | 1427636678 | 6 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | FeepingCreature | null | The moment I really, viscerally understood how the rotary pointer _enables_ the Fourier Transform was one of the greatest Lightbulb Moments of my life.
I was walking down the street and going "It spins around .. and it records the function magnitude and then the integral and OOOOOOOOOOOHHHH. :happy face:" | null | 0 | 1316774386 | True | 0 | c2lzjag | t3_kogj4 | null | t1_c2lzjag | t1_c2lxwlq | null | 1427636679 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | cheesekun | null | Disable your extensions and addon's. Then run in safe mode and watch the thing fly! It will be pretty stock standard but it's still got everything you need - except Resharper :( | null | 0 | 1316774419 | False | 0 | c2lzjby | t3_ko3r2 | null | t1_c2lzjby | t1_c2lyt5d | null | 1427636679 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | cheesekun | null | Ensure when the login they are qualifying the domain. ie:
detnsw\cheesekun | null | 0 | 1316774471 | False | 0 | c2lzjf5 | t3_ko3r2 | null | t1_c2lzjf5 | t1_c2lxr8z | null | 1427636679 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | sreguera | null | I would say that other people thought about the problem and chose to use a different syntax, like in Ada or Python. I understand that this is not an option if you want to keep the C-style syntax like in D. *edit:grammar | null | 0 | 1316774503 | True | 0 | c2lzjgu | t3_kooiy | null | t1_c2lzjgu | t1_c2lz1xt | null | 1427636679 | 8 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | FeepingCreature | null | His article is not an attempt to teach beginners, idiot. | null | 0 | 1316774595 | False | 0 | c2lzjlw | t3_kogj4 | null | t1_c2lzjlw | t1_c2lxsjz | null | 1427636681 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | cheesekun | null | "likely tons of the use of dynamic running" Dude WTF. I highly doubt that the IDE would be using anything Dynamic/Expando-ish at all. Sure the UI might be WPF but the meat is still probably in C/C++. | null | 0 | 1316774714 | False | 0 | c2lzjs4 | t3_ko3r2 | null | t1_c2lzjs4 | t1_c2lxfvp | null | 1427636681 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | adam75 | null | > Scoping exists to modularise things, if everything was automatically global imagine the carnage it would cause, recursion would be all but impossible, all your variables would be cross referencing.
I cannot really see how you infer that from my post. Do you think you could elaborate?
I was refering to higher-order functions, a concept that many programmers coming from an OO background seem to struggle with. What I meant was that it's actually just as natural to pass a function to another function as it would be to use, say, an integer as argument. But for some reasons, we have learned to categorize them differently.
> The universal limitations programming offers are not arbitrary, they exist for very good reasons.
Perhaps. There are lots of limitations that arose due to constraints, either design or machine limitations, that may once have been good choices given a certain historical context. | null | 0 | 1316774726 | True | 0 | c2lzjsp | t3_kogj4 | null | t1_c2lzjsp | t1_c2lyxdk | null | 1427636681 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | cheesekun | null | Agreed. | null | 0 | 1316774733 | False | 0 | c2lzjt3 | t3_ko3r2 | null | t1_c2lzjt3 | t1_c2lxr96 | null | 1427636681 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | EdgarVerona | null | What I think he means by that is "fuck him and his 50 million": that he deserves to lose it for having put so much money into the cause of stifling innovation for personal gain. | null | 0 | 1316774884 | False | 0 | c2lzk0w | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzk0w | t1_c2lzd6c | null | 1427636682 | 31 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | grelphy | null | I'm just psychologically incapable of figuring out why people find pointers difficult. They seem like the most straightforward thing in the world to me: it's the address of some piece of data. It points to it, as it were. Where does the confusion come from? | null | 0 | 1316774999 | False | 0 | c2lzk6m | t3_kogj4 | null | t1_c2lzk6m | t1_c2lytp2 | null | 1427636685 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | bucknuggets | null | > Yea.. The job is called being a DBA.
The difference is that you can teach any sharp person to be a db2, sql server, postgresql dba in a few months on most databases, but it takes years to get good on oracle. Meanwhile, the oracle admins are screwing things up because there's so much room for human error.
> Also, Oracle's feature set is 10x greater.
And a lot of it simply sucks. You've got all kinds of crap that they've thrown into the database that you don't want there anyway. And stuff that just isn't as fast as the competition - either because after all that licensing you can't afford decent hardware, or because the shared-disk model isn't as fast at reporting as the shared-nothing model with db2, informix, aster-data, teradata, etc.
I actually don't know anyone that has spent a lot of time with many different databases that likes Oracle. The only ones I know are those that only use Oracle or with such limited experience on other databases that they might as well only know oracle. | null | 0 | 1316775128 | True | 0 | c2lzkde | t3_ko3r2 | null | t1_c2lzkde | t1_c2lziuz | null | 1427636688 | 0 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | librik | null | It looks to me like it's "simple" because you've got your own sophisticated hand-written specialized parser. Many languages these days start with the assumption that LALR(1) via Yacc syntax rules should be all you need to parse, plus maybe a few well-known lexer hacks. In that constrained world, else-matches-nearest-if is the easy way to go. | null | 0 | 1316775364 | False | 0 | c2lzkqv | t3_kooiy | null | t1_c2lzkqv | t1_c2lz1xt | null | 1427636693 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | tragomaskhalos | null | That's exactly right - Bjarne himself wasn't blind to this, and he explains very clearly (in [D&E](http://www.amazon.co.uk/Design-Evolution-C-Bjarne-Stroustrup/dp/0201543303) IIRC) that C++ would have been stillborn without its near-complete C backwards compatibility.
It really was a different world back then - C's domination of software development was nearly total, and even the fairly benign OO-ness of C++ was regarded as dangerous heresy.
| null | 0 | 1316775417 | False | 0 | c2lzkts | t3_kooiy | null | t1_c2lzkts | t1_c2lz42f | null | 1427636694 | 8 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | kabuto | null | It's written in [Coffeescript](http://jashkenas.github.com/coffee-script/) which compiles to Javascript. Coffeescript creates those generic variables in the function scope for things like variables used in loops and similar things. | null | 0 | 1316775461 | False | 0 | c2lzkw3 | t3_kolze | null | t1_c2lzkw3 | t1_c2lzemf | null | 1427636696 | 12 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316775519 | False | 0 | c2lzkyy | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzkyy | t3_kosg9 | null | 1427636696 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | FeepingCreature | null | Wait, he actually _did_ it? I thought it was a thought experiment.
Ken Thompson is badass. | null | 0 | 1316775531 | False | 0 | c2lzkze | t3_knhd2 | null | t1_c2lzkze | t1_c2lxj45 | null | 1427636696 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316775645 | False | 0 | c2lzl5z | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzl5z | t1_c2lz4dx | null | 1427636698 | -2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | sime | null | It's good to see that people are trying other approaches to concurrency than the old hazardous "shared memory and locks" style which we've traditionally had in our blue-collar languages.
| null | 0 | 1316775714 | False | 0 | c2lzl9n | t3_kos4z | null | t1_c2lzl9n | t3_kos4z | null | 1427636699 | 14 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | wadcann | null | I'd be fine with ending the granting of *future* software patents. Note that, however, I'm speaking here on my individual experience and some grave concerns that I've run into.
* I've seen companies patent trivially-invented processes (e.g. using HTTP to control the interface of certain embedded devices). It may be that nobody had happened to use HTTP before, but that was simply because there wasn't an infrastructure where everyone had HTTP-capable web browsers deployed before. They may even have been the first in their industry to implement it on their product, but any engineer, given the problem and set of constraints, is going to pretty promptly spit out the same answer, and it's not going to take him any expensive R&D work. Patents are intended to provide funding for expensive and potentially-otherwise-unfundable R&D work, not to simply grant monopolies to anyone who files paperwork enumerating obvious (in the common sense; the legal patent sense is much narrower) solutions.
* I'm concerned that it typically costs an order-of-magnitude or so more in legal fees to get an invalid patent revoked than to get the thing granted in the first place.
* It's usually relatively difficult to reverse-engineer software; people don't usually want to decompile someone else's implementation to figure out how to solve a problem. Software already has a copyright mechanism to protect it. It doesn't take time to "scale up" production of software. If I invent a new type of plow or something, anyone can look at it and make a new plow of the same sort tomorrow. If I try selling my new plow, it may take me years and lots of capital to scale up my plow factory sufficiently to produce lots of plows and make a return. Software, on the other hand tends to make its return pretty quickly; software that hasn't been improved-upon or updated in ten years tends not to be a big seller. I don't typically need protection for long to make my R&D investment back (if I'm going to make it back).
* At tech research labs where I've worked (large companies with mature competitors), important stuff doesn't get patented. The stupid stuff gets patented; the important stuff remains a trade secret. Why? Because it's become *impossible* to make products without hitting patents held by competitors. This doesn't destroy those industries -- their members have long since solved that problem, by cross-licensing all their IP. If you're AMD, you cross-license with Intel on CPUs. If you're ATI (well, AMD), you cross-license with NVidia and Intel on GPUs. If you're Fujitsu, you cross-license with Seagate and Western Digital on hard drives. If you put a new invention out and patent it when you're cross-licensing with all your competitors, you just give that edge to your competitors. So where's the benefit to companies like these in patents? It guarantees that no new competitors can enter their field, because there are huge masses of patents that prevent new entrants. If you want to start John's Hard Drive Company today, you're immediately infringing on vast numbers of patents held by every existing industry incumbent. Are you going to challenge all those patents? You're betting that you can get them *all* revoked, and you're having to spend vastly more to get each one revoked than it did to file for each one and get it granted. How many investors are going to want to give you capital? This sort of structure is great fun for incumbents -- every now-and-then, a company goes out of business or is purchased, and the field gets smaller and tends towards an oligopoly.
* Games have seen lots of advancement and huge amounts of cloning, but (relatively) few patents being enforced. Why is it that video games have advanced so much compared to most other forms of software, despite their lack of heavy emphasis on software patents? That isn't to say that there aren't video game software patents out there -- for example, [Namco holds a software patent on having a mini-game when a loader is running to start up a game](http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2008/03/patents-on-video-game-mechanics-may-strangle-innovation.ars). There's a reason that most video games out there don't include minigames during their loaders. Yet while [the number of software patents has seen an *explosion* in the last twenty years or so](https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/File:US_patents_1790-2008.png), most classes of software that exist today already existed twenty years ago. Things like word processors and spreadsheets were created in an environment that was more hostile to software patents, and where fewer were granted. It seems a difficult argument to me that we need patents to fund the creation of software -- it seems that we do this pretty well in environments with fewer software patents.
* Software is a fast-moving field. The length of a patent is a cost imposed, a slowing on the field. A utility patent is seventeen years. A plow invented seventeen years ago is still pretty much state-of-the-art -- it's a mature field, and one that it's likely we've taken the low-hanging fruit over the past few thousand years. Software is young, and seventeen years is an eternity and thus vastly more expensive. For reference, seventeen years ago, Windows 95 was not yet out. This year, we're getting MS-DOS-era locked-to-a-monopoly technologies still trickling into the public domain and becoming available to programmers. Everything patented since then would still be tied up in guaranteed monopolies. For a young, fast-moving field like software, this is an *enormous* cost.
I would not support elimination of all future non-software patent grants, however. There are some products that do *not* share the characteristics of software. Pharmaceuticals need to do expensive testing, have a product that does not have copyright or similar available as a form of protection, and due to the structure of US patent law, typically see only seven to twelve years. There may be patent problems with drugs, but I do not feel that I've experience on which to claim that drug patents are a net negative. | null | 0 | 1316775865 | True | 0 | c2lzlhf | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzlhf | t1_c2lzfwo | null | 1427636703 | 18 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | SurrealEstate | null | > Under the patent office's current activity, **patents have been come a way** to stifle innovation and prevent competition rather than supporting innovation and competitive markets.
Is "been come" a legal term? | null | 0 | 1316775985 | False | 0 | c2lzlo0 | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzlo0 | t1_c2lz4ia | null | 1427636706 | 6 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | wonglik | null | Yes but on the other hands on some petitions it was mention that non US citizens should not sign it as it would not help and might be even harmful. | null | 0 | 1316776365 | False | 0 | c2lzm8t | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzm8t | t1_c2lzl5z | null | 1427636713 | 5 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | gh0st32 | null | I couldn't use it, SQL developer craps the bed way too much for me. | null | 0 | 1316776382 | False | 0 | c2lzm9q | t3_ko3r2 | null | t1_c2lzm9q | t3_ko3r2 | null | 1427636713 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | nickdangler | null | TIL that the legislature has VERY big fans and even more hot air than I would have guessed. | null | 0 | 1316777070 | False | 0 | c2lznde | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lznde | t1_c2lzcjg | null | 1427636728 | 15 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | ezekiel | null | Pointers and recursion are indeed tricky.
A good explanation and a lots of studying only open the door to their use. Then you need to understand when they fit the problem, how to weave them in with the rest of your code, how to avoid the common bugs, and how to analyze/debug/fix code containing them.
Joel is correct. These are barriers which many new programmers seem unable to cross. | null | 0 | 1316777144 | False | 0 | c2lznht | t3_kogj4 | null | t1_c2lznht | t3_kogj4 | null | 1427636729 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | rasori | null | I almost *whooshed* on this one. Well played. | null | 0 | 1316777225 | False | 0 | c2lznmk | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lznmk | t1_c2lznde | null | 1427636730 | 7 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | troyanonymous1 | null | Ha ha ha
That's terrifying. | null | 0 | 1316777233 | False | 0 | c2lznn3 | t3_kos4z | null | t1_c2lznn3 | t1_c2lzc6x | null | 1427636730 | 18 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | Gotebe | null | >Let's say I'm a bank and I lent $50M to a company based on the value of its IP portfolio. Am I just out the money now?
Yes. Furthermore, if company is a using said IP portfolio to sue (patent trolls do that), not to create value(*which is what patents are supposed to do, hel-looo, lawmakers and others!*), I am glad you are. | null | 0 | 1316777265 | False | 0 | c2lznp9 | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lznp9 | t1_c2lyumj | null | 1427636731 | 10 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | rasori | null | Essentially by definition, if a "patent troll" has products it's no longer a patent troll. Patent trolls are companies which get huge numbers of patents covering broad subjects and never actually make anything, they just sit around until someone else does so they can sue them. [As explained here.](http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/09/study-patent-trolls-have-cost-innovators-half-a-trillion-bucks.ars) | null | 0 | 1316777424 | False | 0 | c2lzny7 | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzny7 | t1_c2lzev7 | null | 1427636734 | 25 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316777431 | False | 0 | c2lznyn | t3_ko21c | null | t1_c2lznyn | t3_ko21c | null | 1427636734 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | StoneCypher | null | The second you try to take away what other people have already invested in, you guarantee this will not be passed. | null | 0 | 1316777642 | False | 0 | c2lzobt | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzobt | t3_kosg9 | null | 1427636739 | 0 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | ethraax | null | Note: You need to escape your underscores:
"\_len, \_len2, \_len3, \_len4, \_ref, \_ref2, \_ref3, \_ref4, \_ref5" | null | 0 | 1316777664 | False | 0 | c2lzode | t3_kolze | null | t1_c2lzode | t1_c2lzemf | null | 1427636740 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | ours | null | >Expression Blend was a product I didn't even know existed
Because Microsoft thinks we are all +50 developer companies they sold the designer tool separate to the dev tools. It seems they had a bit more sense with the Phone 7 tools and distribute a Expression Phone 7 free with the rest of the SDK. | null | 0 | 1316777949 | False | 0 | c2lzovi | t3_ko2wv | null | t1_c2lzovi | t1_c2ltqas | null | 1427636746 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | rasori | null | >When the Pagerank patent expires in 2017, will that meet your definition of an algorithm of value working its way to public domain?
No. Because it's *17 years old.* I guarantee you Pagerank itself will have modified algorithms at that point, and suddenly the only public domain information I've received is horribly obsolete and useless in terms of implementing something competitively. Hell, in **17 years** I doubt the programming language that it's programmed in will be anything more than a novelty! | null | 0 | 1316778066 | False | 0 | c2lzp25 | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzp25 | t1_c2lzihx | null | 1427636749 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | JL235 | null | I think your being a little pedantic.
The comment I was replying to, had described the example company that received imaginary investment, as a 'patent troll'.
By using the same term at the start of my disagreement, it shows to the reader that I am replying to that specific point. The term helps to show the connection between my example and his statement. | null | 0 | 1316778117 | False | 0 | c2lzp5j | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzp5j | t1_c2lzny7 | null | 1427636750 | -6 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316778182 | False | 0 | c2lzp9n | t3_kogj4 | null | t1_c2lzp9n | t3_kogj4 | null | 1427636751 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | sgoody | null | SquirrelSQL | null | 0 | 1316778220 | False | 0 | c2lzpca | t3_ko3r2 | null | t1_c2lzpca | t3_ko3r2 | null | 1427636752 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | rasori | null | Right but you're not replying to that specific point because you're implying that the company in your hypothetical is doing something that the company in OP's hypothetical is not doing. If OP's company had invested money (from banks or personal money, doesn't matter) to create a *product,* then voiding the patent won't cost them much (basically the fees they spent getting the patent to begin with). A patent troll as being used by the OP however ("most of the value of the company is in software patent IP"), will crash because it *doesn't have a product to fall back on.* | null | 0 | 1316778502 | False | 0 | c2lzpt2 | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzpt2 | t1_c2lzp5j | null | 1427636758 | 11 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | expertunderachiever | null | Yet another language... no thanks.
Or put it another way, I know of no employers that will hire you for your indepth knowledge of
* haskell
* lisp
* scheme
* go
* go
* pypy
* rust
* lolcode
* brainfuck
etc...
If you're looking for a job in software development learn one of [or multiple]
* C
* C++ [those two are different btw]
* Java
* C# [sadly]
In most embedded environments C/Perl will take you far. In mobile spaces Java seems to be the way.... etc | null | 0 | 1316778556 | False | 0 | c2lzpws | t3_kos4z | null | t1_c2lzpws | t3_kos4z | null | 1427636760 | -36 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | dezmd | null | No. | null | 0 | 1316778558 | False | 0 | c2lzpww | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzpww | t1_c2lz4dx | null | 1427636760 | 4 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | axilmar | null | > To alleviate the size increase for Color, you'd have to switch to referencing as switching to Class will do nothing in C++.
No. In C++, I'd use a reference anyway.
> But std::vector has value semantics and is unrelated to the elements inside.
But the values std::vector manipulates can be references. So, in essence, it has both.
| null | 0 | 1316778605 | False | 0 | c2lzpzh | t3_kljc0 | null | t1_c2lzpzh | t1_c2lvhd3 | null | 1427636761 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | jessta | null | Rust has some interesting ideas but it seems a bit scatted at the moment.
65 keywords, some are targeted at functional style and some imperative style.
It seems like the kind of language where different projects and developers will be using different subsets of the language and there will be dark corners that most devs never use.
Hopefully they'll pare this down a bit before a 1.0 release and pick a more clear style. | null | 0 | 1316778697 | False | 0 | c2lzq65 | t3_kos4z | null | t1_c2lzq65 | t3_kos4z | null | 1427636763 | 14 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | Tommstein | null | Microsoft has been burning idiots since the beginning of time. I don't think this is going to be the event that makes them pull their heads out of their asses. | null | 0 | 1316778724 | False | 0 | c2lzq7t | t3_ko2wv | null | t1_c2lzq7t | t1_c2lumlq | null | 1427636764 | -1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316778788 | False | 0 | c2lzqbp | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzqbp | t1_c2lyz4z | null | 1427636765 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | ithika | null | Interesting this is a classic psychology lesson. The result is generally pretty opaque to people until you use real-world examples.
All humans are mammals, all mammals are alive, therefore... all living things are human? Some living things are mammals? The "right" answer seems obvious. Trickier logic issues become much easier with concrete instances. | null | 0 | 1316778801 | False | 0 | c2lzqcn | t3_kogj4 | null | t1_c2lzqcn | t1_c2lxoha | null | 1427636765 | 6 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | axilmar | null | So, classes are structs with inheritance, and structs are classes without inheritance?
If so, then the two are truly the same concept, since inheritance is optional.
| null | 0 | 1316778849 | False | 0 | c2lzqfy | t3_kljc0 | null | t1_c2lzqfy | t1_c2lsoqf | null | 1427636766 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | Jameshfisher | null | Sigh. Was this proofread even once? | null | 0 | 1316778919 | False | 0 | c2lzql5 | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzql5 | t3_kosg9 | null | 1427636768 | 93 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | niczar | null | Haven't read this doc, but what I loved about Rust is the memory handling based on typing: if the compiler knows you can't have cycles, use ref counting, otherwise use GC. | null | 0 | 1316778923 | False | 0 | c2lzqlg | t3_kos4z | null | t1_c2lzqlg | t3_kos4z | null | 1427636768 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | cherouvim | null | Don't forget about the soul... it fucks up your soul as well. | null | 0 | 1316779171 | False | 0 | c2lzr38 | t3_ko3r2 | null | t1_c2lzr38 | t1_c2lt4eq | null | 1427636775 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | axilmar | null | It doesn't need to do it to the same level of a human for 100% of cases. Covering 99% of cases is good enough.
It's like garbage collection: for the 99% of cases, it's very useful and very liberating. For the other %1, you can do manual memory management and get the extra performance you want.
| null | 0 | 1316779197 | False | 0 | c2lzr56 | t3_kmp73 | null | t1_c2lzr56 | t1_c2lsk9z | null | 1427636776 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | yellowstuff | null | I don't know about your experience, but RMS is one of the most accomplished programmers who ever lived. | null | 0 | 1316779249 | False | 0 | c2lzr8i | t3_kl7h0 | null | t1_c2lzr8i | t1_c2lxb1u | null | 1427636777 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | yummybear | null | Except 2008 intellisense. My god it's horrible. | null | 0 | 1316779332 | False | 0 | c2lzren | t3_ko3r2 | null | t1_c2lzren | t1_c2lu6cz | null | 1427636779 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | DrSmoke | null | This is a retarded idea, and post, and op. | null | 0 | 1316779483 | False | 0 | c2lzrq7 | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzrq7 | t3_kosg9 | null | 1427636783 | -4 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | ithika | null | The confusion comes in their use. Knowing that `T *` is a pointer to a `T` doesn't explain why `foo(T** x)` is useful. | null | 0 | 1316779611 | False | 0 | c2lzrzi | t3_kogj4 | null | t1_c2lzrzi | t1_c2lzk6m | null | 1427636786 | 7 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | I think this is a great idea! Give it thought..let it distill, think about it! | null | 0 | 1316779618 | False | 0 | c2lzs03 | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzs03 | t3_kosg9 | null | 1427636787 | 0 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | bgovern | null | I'm not sure that the second part can be done without significant taxpayer expense. The takings clause in the constitution that prevents people from being deprived of their property without due process and compensation. I haven't done the research to see what the courts have had to say about the takings clause applying to IP rights, but it seems like they would fall under it. I guess the government could argue that they were void from the beginning so there is no right to take, but litigating that position would take longer than just letting existing patents expire. | null | 0 | 1316779834 | False | 0 | c2lzsf1 | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzsf1 | t3_kosg9 | null | 1427636792 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | Troebr | null | It seems to be bundled for rails, but usable with whatever backend you have, provided you put the js, images and css in the right place. | null | 0 | 1316779885 | False | 0 | c2lzsit | t3_kolze | null | t1_c2lzsit | t1_c2lzj9f | null | 1427636793 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | Forbizzle | null | 500 score on reddit, half as many signatures on the petition... | null | 0 | 1316780090 | False | 0 | c2lzsz8 | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzsz8 | t3_kosg9 | null | 1427636800 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | Juris_LV | null | Sorry, I need to post this here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KMU0tzLwhbE | null | 0 | 1316780156 | False | 0 | c2lzt4i | t3_kmevq | null | t1_c2lzt4i | t1_c2lpkfp | null | 1427636802 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316780340 | False | 0 | c2lztjz | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lztjz | t3_kosg9 | null | 1427636807 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | Talonwhal | null | Okay, so if I patent the wheel and get valued at $100 billion due to my IP portfolio then yes, that is money down the drain - sucks for me for being a fucking moron in the first place.
That is a concise analogy of software patent portfolios for you. | null | 0 | 1316780376 | False | 0 | c2lztmu | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lztmu | t1_c2lyumj | null | 1427636808 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | wadcann | null | The reason they don't complain about companies that simply process IP portfolios is because there's no inherent theoretical reason why you can't have Research Company A which does research and sells their work to Software Production Company C. That certainly funds research. By the same token, Research Company A which does research and sells their work to IP Broker Company B, who then sells it to Company C still legitimately funds research.
I'm not convinced that the problem is simply patent trolls. For Microsoft and Google, and IBM and Apple, the problem is patent trolls. They can't whack trolls with their own patent porfolio. However, the problems extend beyond that, and Microsoft and Google and IBM and Apple represent their *own* problems to others.
if I want to use TrueType font hinting information -- just to make basic use of data in all the fonts out there -- I can't legally do so on Linux, because Apple's locked up my ability to make a compatible system that uses it with a patent. If I want to write a driver that uses a hardware card today that supports texture compression, I cannot legally do so on Linux, because S3 owns a patent on that (this is a primary reason why a lot of game software doesn't work in WINE and the like).
I think that use of patents to prevent the creation of systems that interoperate with another product is one of the most harmful uses of patents -- it easily allows extending a monopoly to other areas. It lets Apple (and maybe any other very large players who have their own fat patent portfolios who can force Apple into a cross-licensing deal) "own" the font ecosystem. Even if we had no end to software patents, I would *very* strongly want to see some form of fair use for creating compatible products compatible with other products. I'm comfortable not permitting patents that lock down interoperation between two different products -- I think that the cost here is particularly high. | null | 0 | 1316780480 | False | 0 | c2lztvz | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lztvz | t1_c2lznp9 | null | 1427636811 | 4 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | bananaskates | null | Yeah, it's pretty painful. Especially since it's a valid notion. But it needs a lot more work. | null | 0 | 1316780570 | False | 0 | c2lzu2d | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzu2d | t1_c2lzql5 | null | 1427636814 | 4 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | AcinonyxJubatus | null | Nothing that a transitional period wouldn't fix | null | 0 | 1316780602 | False | 0 | c2lzu4t | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzu4t | t1_c2lzgph | null | 1427636816 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | anonpatriot7 | null | > this is a particularly harmful use that permits extending an existing monopoly over one area of software. For example
For example? | null | 0 | 1316780741 | False | 0 | c2lzufy | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzufy | t1_c2lzlhf | null | 1427636819 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | icebraining | null | >I'm proud that there is "a relative dearth of patent applications for the video game industry, especially considering how technology-dependent the video game industry is, and given its size in terms of annual sales."
>Before issuing a condemnation, I try hard to think about it from their point of view -- the laws of the land set the rules of the game, and lawyers are deeply confused at why some of us aren't using all the tools that the game gives us.
>Patents are usually discussed in the context of someone "stealing" an idea from the long suffering lone inventor that devoted his life to creating this one brilliant idea, blah blah blah.
>But in the majority of cases in software, patents effect independent invention. Get a dozen sharp programmers together, give them all a hard problem to work on, and a bunch of them will come up with solutions that would probably be patentable, and be similar enough that the first programmer to file the patent could sue the others for patent infringement.
>Why should society reward that? What benefit does it bring? It doesn't help bring more, better, or cheaper products to market. Those all come from competition, not arbitrary monopolies. The programmer that filed the patent didn't work any harder because a patent might be available, solving the problem was his job and he had to do it anyway. Getting a patent is uncorrelated to any positive attributes, and just serves to allow either money or wasted effort to be extorted from generally unsuspecting and innocent people or companies.
>Yes, it is a legal tool that may help you against your competitors, but I'll have no part of it. Its basically mugging someone.
>I could waste hours going on about this. I really need to just write a position paper some day that I can cut and paste when this topic comes up.
>John Carmack
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=151312&cid=12701745 | null | 0 | 1316780806 | False | 0 | c2lzule | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzule | t3_kosg9 | null | 1427636822 | 20 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | vfr | null | Mostly due to network/db lag... if the server is on the same box it's usually fine, but connect to an underpowered server VM over a vpn and it's really frustrating. | null | 0 | 1316780845 | True | 0 | c2lzuon | t3_ko3r2 | null | t1_c2lzuon | t1_c2lxt3p | null | 1427636823 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | wreckerone | null | I would say this article is mostly bullshit. You see passion in tenured researchers, because they don't have to put up with other people's completely stupid ideas and pedestrian concerns. If you start trying to argue basic algebra with a professor of math ("does 2 + 2 REALLY equal 4"), should that person waste time placating your ignorance-based skepticism so that you feel inspired, or let you know that the debate is not worth having? For some reason, "who fucking cares, lets get to the real issues" is not allowed for developers because they're not pensive or steadfast enough about what less experienced people incorrectly deem important.
Researchers also are expected to (and do) viciously but professionally attack incompetence, lack of knowledge, and dishonesty, something for which a developer in a corporate team setting will get managed out. Their goal is to expand scientific knowledge through individual effort, not make other people around them feel good about themselves (that should come with true successes). | null | 0 | 1316780924 | True | 0 | c2lzuwk | t3_korcu | null | t1_c2lzuwk | t3_korcu | null | 1427636826 | 21 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | kitsy | null | No, *technically*, this post is asking the the Obama Administration to solve the problem. | null | 0 | 1316780950 | False | 0 | c2lzuz9 | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzuz9 | t1_c2lzbz2 | null | 1427636836 | 6 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | DownvoteALot | null | Yes, we must discourage funding this kind of practices by scaring investors until these companies become reasonable, instead of maximizing profits through phalanxes of lawyers and tearing apart every company that relies on any kind of abusively patented software. | null | 0 | 1316781004 | False | 0 | c2lzv4k | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzv4k | t1_c2lzk0w | null | 1427636829 | 5 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | robmbrooks | null | I have a patent on "use of an online petition to void previously issued software patents", you are all in trouble now ;-) | null | 0 | 1316781022 | False | 0 | c2lzv63 | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzv63 | t3_kosg9 | null | 1427636831 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | KayEss | null | A stack is like a pile of plates in your cupboard. When you've cleaned a plate and you put it away, you put it on the top. When you want to use a plate you take the one off the top. The top plate gets used the most, and the bottom plate gets used the least. | null | 0 | 1316781028 | False | 0 | c2lzv6w | t3_kogj4 | null | t1_c2lzv6w | t1_c2lyc5t | null | 1427636831 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | wadcann | null | Honestly, I imagine that a real, legitimate patent on any one of the six simple machines would probably be worth much more than $100B.
Now, it also certainly wouldn't be enforceable under existing patent law, because there is obvious prior art. If you mis-valued an existing patent as being a $100B patent based on the existing rules, then that's simply due to a poor job of valuation on your part.
But that's not what is happening here -- a lot of these patents *do* follow the rules, even if the rules are incredibly over-permissive when it comes to getting patents granted.
Look. I am not happy with the idea of thinking of taking my age, adding two decades, and having to put up with software patents until then either (and it would be very unlikely for software patent grants to suddenly stop tomorrow). But dislike for the prospect isn't a great way to drive policy changes. Grandfather existing stuff to avoid disruption, tough it out, and leave a better world for our children, I say. | null | 0 | 1316781110 | False | 0 | c2lzved | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzved | t1_c2lztmu | null | 1427636837 | 0 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | diewhitegirls | null | If anyone signs this, they clearly do not understand the implications of what would occur should this go into effect. Sure, it seems nice to let everything go open source, but every economic equation that I've ever written shows that IP has a net benefit to society.
[A very entry level chart explaining why the optimal # of firms is smaller, not larger.](http://i.imgur.com/RjJ4C.jpg)
That is a simplistic take on the matter, but most IP discussions should start from that chart and be proven wrong from there. | null | 0 | 1316781165 | False | 0 | c2lzvjh | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzvjh | t3_kosg9 | null | 1427636841 | -2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | selflessGene | null | And the president has the power to set agendas.
In 2004 presidential election, the big hoopla was about gay marriage constitutionality. Bush couldn't have made gay marriage unconstitutional by himself even if he wanted to, but he had the power to make it the focal issue. | null | 0 | 1316781187 | False | 0 | c2lzvli | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzvli | t1_c2lzcjg | null | 1427636841 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316781204 | False | 0 | c2lzvn7 | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzvn7 | t1_c2lz9mp | null | 1427636838 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316781213 | False | 0 | c2lzvnv | t3_ko2wv | null | t1_c2lzvnv | t1_c2lzisd | null | 1427636838 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | wadcann | null | I moved it [over to this post](http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/kosg9/white_housegov_petition_direct_the_patent_office/c2lztvz), which had more relevant discussion; I was describing the TrueType hinting data use patent, and the 3d card texture compression-using-driver patent.
Both patents block the creation of products properly compatible with other products. I see that as particularly harmful. | null | 0 | 1316781246 | False | 0 | c2lzvqt | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzvqt | t1_c2lzufy | null | 1427636839 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | To be fair... not really. It's a screenshot of a program behaving badly. Just because it's a development tool behaving badly doesn't mean this is programming related.
I personally feel that the "this subreddit is for exactly what I think programming is about and not one thing more" crowd can be overly picky and dismissive of things more times than not, but in this case they have it right. The only possible takeaway from this is "Don't make your programs do this" and if you're the kind of person who needs to be told that, chances are you're not the kind of person browsing /r/programming. | null | 0 | 1316781310 | False | 0 | c2lzvwi | t3_ko3r2 | null | t1_c2lzvwi | t1_c2lvzo2 | null | 1427636839 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | paranoidray | null | By hand: https://raysforge.net/viewProject.xhtml?fn=MathParser | null | 0 | 1316781311 | False | 0 | c2lzvwm | t3_kh9sr | null | t1_c2lzvwm | t1_c2lef59 | null | 1427636839 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | Well then, we might as well direct this petition to Homeland Security. Which tree is an important question. | null | 0 | 1316781406 | False | 0 | c2lzw5b | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzw5b | t1_c2lzbz2 | null | 1427636844 | 5 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | atlben76 | null | Select into is PL/SQL and not part of the standard oracle SQL dialect. You have to use either
insert into new_table select * from old_table
or
create table new_table as select * from old_table
| null | 0 | 1316781449 | False | 0 | c2lzw95 | t3_ko3r2 | null | t1_c2lzw95 | t1_c2lynjy | null | 1427636844 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | drzaeus | null | Nice try, Mr. Lahey. | null | 0 | 1316781451 | False | 0 | c2lzw96 | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzw96 | t1_c2lzcjg | null | 1427636844 | 10 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | [deleted] | null | 0 | 1316781491 | False | 0 | c2lzwdd | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzwdd | t3_kosg9 | null | 1427636845 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | wadcann | null | >The rediquette requires me to explain my downvote
I'm not going to sign the petition (and I explained why), but I'm not going to *downvote the post*, because I think that this discussion is important and needs to happen. | null | 0 | 1316781682 | False | 0 | c2lzwu4 | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzwu4 | t1_c2lymu8 | null | 1427636850 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | wadcann | null | I've described a [number of properties that typically differ between software and non-software patents](http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/kosg9/white_housegov_petition_direct_the_patent_office/c2lzlhf) that would make the existence of software patents less desirable than software patents. | null | 0 | 1316781747 | False | 0 | c2lzwzs | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzwzs | t1_c2lyw69 | null | 1427636854 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | gsg_ | null | What about the good old
if (condition)
consequent();
more_consequent();
Would you consider issuing warnings based on suspicious indentation? | null | 0 | 1316781867 | False | 0 | c2lzxae | t3_kooiy | null | t1_c2lzxae | t1_c2lz1xt | null | 1427636857 | 7 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | tiphphin | null | He's Australian? He's just writing with [Australian Questioning Intonation?](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_questioning_intonation) He can't help it? Although, in fairness, I have only ever encountered Australian questioning intonation through speech? I have never seen it written down? | null | 0 | 1316781872 | False | 0 | c2lzxau | t3_ko2wv | null | t1_c2lzxau | t1_c2lz6hg | null | 1427636857 | 3 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | vfr | null | Barking up the wrong tree?? Only if we want to blame someone, but we're looking for a solution here. The courts aren't going to change their interpretation of the current law, we need new law to redefine things for the courts.
That said, it probably won't happen without lobbying from major companies which MS and some others have already started doing in small doses. | null | 0 | 1316781903 | True | 0 | c2lzxdl | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzxdl | t1_c2lyz4z | null | 1427636859 | 0 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | TheWix | null | >C# Sadly
Yea, I don't get this... | null | 0 | 1316781905 | False | 0 | c2lzxdu | t3_kos4z | null | t1_c2lzxdu | t1_c2lzpws | null | 1427636859 | 9 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | tgehr | null | > Some have tried to say that undefined behavior means the compiler could format your hard-drive. Problem is, since the compiler doesn't know when this situation happens it can't actually do such things.
I think nobody would seriously claim that a compiler could legally format your hard drive during compilation if the compiled program contains undefined behavior.
That is because it is specified as a tool for compiling code and not as a tool for formatting drives.
Undefined behavior means that the behavior during runtime is unspecified. A compiler could compile in some additional checks and make the resulting executable format your hard drive in case it encounters undefined behavior. The reason why no compiler I am aware of does do this is because:
* It would incur some overhead on correct programs.
* It would be complete and utter nonsense. | null | 0 | 1316781945 | False | 0 | c2lzxh6 | t3_knn5p | null | t1_c2lzxh6 | t1_c2lssmr | null | 1427636860 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | mithrasinvictus | null | The industry (the part that is actually productive and innovative anyway) might be onboard. Why waste resources on defensive patents when you can eliminate the necessity for that defense. | null | 0 | 1316782013 | False | 0 | c2lzxo9 | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzxo9 | t1_c2lz3gw | null | 1427636862 | 7 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | sltkr | null | > That totally solves this problem, right?
Yes, that's one way to solve it, the other is to *always* use an else-clause, but that's ugly too.
Personally I use curly braces only for non-trivial blocks of code. So I might write:
if (something) foo();
But if the if-body involves another if-statement, I would write:
if (something) {
if (something_else) bar();
}
| null | 0 | 1316782025 | False | 0 | c2lzxp2 | t3_kooiy | null | t1_c2lzxp2 | t1_c2lys1l | null | 1427636862 | 10 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | wildbob | null | Then why even make the observation that you have never seen a useful algorithm work its way through the patent system? By your own definition of its not possible.
As for the length of time an algorithm and language can be useful: Is quicksort any less useful because it is 50 years old? Is C++ a novelty despite it being developed in the 80s? Yes, we're in a fast moving industry, but software can last longer than you give it credit for: Cobol and Fortran are still used in limited applications; several of the underpinning algorithms (quicksort, merge sort) and data structures (linked lists, hash tables) that are essential parts of any programmer's toolkit are 50 years old. I'm not using this as an argument for or against patenting software, but don't make it out like the software industry reinvents itself every 5 years. | null | 0 | 1316782110 | False | 0 | c2lzxwj | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzxwj | t1_c2lzp25 | null | 1427636865 | 2 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | mconeone | null | Upvote for trailer park boys reference. | null | 0 | 1316782205 | False | 0 | c2lzy61 | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzy61 | t1_c2lzcjg | null | 1427636869 | 1 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
True | [deleted] | null | Donvoted because I am NOT registering with whitehouse.gov . I wouldn't trust it with a pickle, they'd find some way to weaponize it. | null | 0 | 1316782342 | False | 0 | c2lzyio | t3_kosg9 | null | t1_c2lzyio | t3_kosg9 | null | 1427636875 | -4 | t5_2fwo | null | null | null |
Subsets and Splits
Filtered Reddit Uplifting News
The query retrieves specific news articles by their link IDs, providing a basic overview of those particular entries without deeper analysis or insights.
Recent Programming Comments
Returns a limited set of programming records from 2020 to 2023, providing basic filtering with minimal analytical value.