I like the sound of most of that, especially the two-factor authentication on all accounts. One thing wasn't clear to me,
"Wallets (and private keys) are stored using AES-256 encryption."
Are individual users wallets stored with a key derived from the users password? Or, rather, could you act, under coercion say, to transfer my funds without my password? (i.e. in a "bank robbery" situation)
There is some pretty cool stuff in there for a point release. It's cool that monad comprehensions are back in, but I'm most excited about Safe Haskell, which should enable enable some new types of application (safely running untrusted code).
An amusing analogy, sure, but I can't help be reminded of this xkcd http://xkcd.com/568/ - "you'll never find a programing language that frees you from the burden of clarifying your ideas". Haskell just makes that trade-off more 'up front'. Obviously it's not the right tool for every job mind, of course sometimes quick and dirty scripts win.
Yes, the argument presented for point one is pretty weak, but I do agree with it. Having the lazy I/O, and especially lazy bytestring option is great IMO. Although Oleg style left-fold enumerators as used by warp are superior in many respects, typically as a user you don't need to interact at that level; iirc you don't in Yesod, which is built on warp. As an example of approachability LBS approach, checkout this two line "wc -l" implementation, which beats "wc -l" by 64x, apples and pears no doubt, but shows fast enough,(from http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg18878.htm...):
> import qualified Data.ByteString.Lazy.Char8 as L
> main = L.getContents >>= print . L.count '\n'
edit: actually it beats "wc", and is roughly same speed as "wc -l".
That's right, but your co-founder(s) can sponsor you, and indeed you them. Provided that you could in theory be fired (a three person board for example) then you can be classed as an employee for the purposes of the H1-B.
I don't really see why you'd need that. In those sorts of circumstances I'd either add the new version of the function with a new name, or rename the function and add an oldFunc = undefined line to keep the type checker happy.
There doesn't appear to be any evidence of that being the case. Rustock (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rustock_botnet) appears to be responsible for the bulk of the drop in volume, but several others smaller botnets have fallen silent too. There haven't been any reports of it being used for anything other than spam and isolated ddos attacks (http://www.joestewart.org/rustock-ddos.html) in it's 4 year history. It is a bit of a mystery as to what is going on, but my bet would be it'll resume with a new approach or upgrade, rather than a complete re-purposing.
Well, populations are typically modeled as a sigmoid function, they only appear to be growing exponentially. I think it's fair to assume total population will stabilise whilst we are still resource limited to Earth.
although "functional programming" is in the name, any language can enter. lots of Haskell and other FP winners in there. Although in '08 a Java team won..
https://twitter.com/anderssandberg/status/145528744318439424...