jkeisling/hacker-news-corpus-2007-2022 huggingface dataset:
There are a lot of interesting ideas that you could put together when everyone has a private screen. I wrote up the cons and pros of having such a system and where the innovation will come from when I was looking at tablets as the controllers:

https://github.com/icefox/tablet_tv_games
A more formal way to write laws and statically analyse them is a common dream of programmers, me included. But it's unclear how you'd even start to do that. It seems like an AI-hard problem.

The Bitcoin community is starting to explore the idea of formalised software contracts, but they're all very basic and it's all very early days.
> the Java language is nothing to write home about.
Sure, but it is also not as bad as its reputation in hackerNews circles.
With the right libraries (Dagger 2, Volley, GreenRobot/EventBus, ...) Java for Android can be quite productive (not to mention that IntelliJ also helps a lot).
Kotlin could allow us to go even further and remove most of Java biggest weaknesses.
>That doesn't mean other properties (e.g. the evils of slavery) of those things automatically become transposable.

And likewise, just because things aren't exactly the same, doesn't mean that don't share many properties.

You are playing word games and have failed to address any of the content. Share owners, slave owners, the phrases differ by two letters. Western culture is a direct descendant of Roman culture, it would be strange if there weren't large similarities, especially at the level of organizational institutions. Why would you expect that the concept of people holding power over other people through directing them on what to do would just vanish?

You would do better to point out the actual differences than to fall back on the claim that because a word is slightly different there may be something different between the two.
It's positively galling how happy he is about such a terrible decision.

How many billions (trillions?) of wasted favicon.ico requests have been made because they didn't bother to engineer this the right way and make it a <link> tag in the document? And pushing the Windows-specific icon format was just icing on the cake. And now Apple's doing it too with two more of their own requests.

I wish we could send him the bill for all the wasted power, all the wasted developer time (even ten seconds per developer for all 100 million+ sites out there adds up to quite a lot.) Then see how glad he was he checked this misfeature in.

EDIT: I don't care if you downvote, but if you do so, please tell me why I am wrong. I'd genuinely love to hear why you think this was a good idea.
Interesting! Reminds me of when I first hired on with Lockheed in 1980. We used a system called Computervision for drafting and printed circuit board design. It used the same basic technology discussed in this video and was absolutely amazing at the time!
Yea, especially when some of our earliest texts are of managers. More accurate might be "earliest civilization in which we can find a wide breadth of insight into justification, rationale, and advice for managing a labor force. What have we learned since then?"

EDIT: Hell, one of the earliest hallmarks of "civilization" is social stratification. I'm betting people have been theorizing about how to use human labor (subjugated or otherwise compelled) far before the written word came about.
“You have a very small probability of making money,” he said.
“But if you’re right, you’ll never see a public plane again.”
-Taleb, on shorting treasuries
Might be interesting to take this kind of tack: https://xkcd.com/504
'Patriots' is an interesting word in this context. I say giving foreign intelligence agencies access to your customer's private communications is treason.
Nice going, Matt!
For American: these are people who don't pay a mandatory tax for consuming government-run media like the BBC and Channel 4 (perhaps because the don't watch or listen to that content).
I still play my PC CD Roms patched under wine so this is neat thanks!
this is a weird argument. It amounts to saying that since things are bad in many places, it would be good if things were also bad in places where they are currently good.
There was an item just recently about someone claiming to have it:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9233718
None of the experts commented, so I have no idea if it works.
deployment != fix

However, Microsoft does have to contend with a much larger and more legacy diverse codebase, and astronomically higher risk of regression.
Learn one or two foreign languages preferably before you're twelve.

The mental flexibility gained by struggling to make yourself understood using a completely different vocabulary and grammar will directly translate into an improved ability to adapt to other people's way of thinking, even when your language is the same.
Yes, seriously (at least that's what I heard people at Google calling it). How many different ways could you pronounce "gwit"? (If you really don't get it, it's like "quit" but with a voiced consonant at the beginning).
I am sorry. I have to let you connect the dots. I have a university job in China and I don't want to be kicked out of the country. Just follow the money.
If I understand it right that'll get going from the second season on.

"From season two, Formula E will operate as an 'open championship', allowing teams and manufacturers the opportunity to showcase their own electrical energy innovations. Working to the technical specifications set out by the FIA, teams will focus their efforts on improving and developing powertrains and battery technology, with the aim of this filtering into the everyday electric vehicle market."

http://www.fiaformulae.com/en/guide/overview.aspx
There needs to be a community for career changers.

I'm finding it extremely difficult to find a way to change my career and most advice online is not tailored to this.

A recruiting service for matching skilled, quality people who are looking to change careers with open-minded employers who are willing to consider these non-traditional applicants who may not have the standard background of X years experience in Y would be a good idea.
I talked to USDS before and after a couple interviews I got the impression that I'd be engaged in shorter engagements with customers primarily and that I would need to squeeze an engagement into a schedule that wouldn't work for anyone other than 1099 style contractors or those between jobs basically. That's a major part of where my speculation came from that many (or at least some) at USDS are being onboard as contractors because that's pretty much how consulting works classically. While that doesn't mean everyone works that way, it does seem contrary to the evidence that USDS is supposed to be exclusively (presumably, retained, FTE-ish, salaried) feds.

Regardless, I greatly welcome change to the federal service system in any way to promote better retention and progress for its tech workers. Federal service used to mean good and service a source of genuine pride. I went into federal service a long time ago with enthusiasm for change and left pretty damn disillusioned rather quickly.
Rust does eat its own dogfood with regard to macros, and over time has steadily replaced former language-level features like `log` and `panic` with macros. Syntactic distinction is a philosophical choice in service of making costs more explicit (and while it's true that functions can hide behavior, overuse of macros can trigger enormous code bloat, such as the `regex!` macro which compiles your regex into a state machine).

(There are also valid technical reasons for requiring syntactic distinction, as the sheer flexibility of Rust's macros in their ability to create new syntax run the risk of making it a nightmare to parse if you remove the unambiguous ability of the compiler to drop into macro-parsing mode. These challenges aren't insurmountable, just very hairy.)
I'm a little surprised at the strong support this comment has driven. Haha, I usually use this account for opinions that I would think controversial.
The defense released that photo during his (her) trial, and used his (her) gender identity issues as part of their case during his (her) trial. I don't think that this is really breaking news.
This looks like North Korea is starting the next crisis, expecting aid in exchange for stopping their actions.

Some explanation about previous crisis: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Korea/KK12Dg01.html
You're not coherent.

> in my mind shared memory means concurrent processes and memory have a common clock

You're aware that modern CPUs clock their cores independently? (E.g., AVX512 throttling.) Hence, no common clock.

> and are connected to the same power supply

That's irrelevant. Unused cores get powered down all the time. On x86, the OS can execute HLT instruction when there's nothing to do and the CPU gets woken up by an interrupt.

> This avoids confusion around how one handles some parts running while other parts are not.

What is a "part"? The system's scheduler can suspend a thread for an indefinite amount of time.

> memory safety can be assumed

What does that even mean?

> We can say that shared memory represents a known global state [...]

Except that it's false, every single point can be countered with a single modern multicore cpu.

On an abstract level, distributed computation is a computation where it's possible that a message does not reach its intended destination within a fixed time bound, for any reason.

If you can guarantee message deliver within an arbitrary, but fixed, time bound, you can simulate shared memory. Yes, performance will suck if the time bound is large, but you have an equivalent system. That's how HW works underneath anyway.

Tip: reading Lamport's papers is illuminating. You can also read about cache coherence protocols (e.g., MESI or MOESI) and you'll see that the illusion of shared memory is fundamentally implemented by message passing on HW level. The illusion is pretty much solid precisely because HW has time bounds on message delivery.
About 12 on a TI calculator. 13 on TRS-80 Basic, 13 or 14 for Assembly
And they would be completely wrong. Just like everything in life, it is about proportions.

Playing WoW in a cafe until you die: something wrong with you (even before the lack of heartbeat). Having an xbox party with friends once a month: nothing wrong.

It's all shades of grey in between.
I primarily read my news via Flipboard these days as I find a much more enjoyable experience, HN being one of the first tabs I visit, alongside BBC, Wired and Sky Sports.
If Google told him what was the problem, he could correct it.
I was 5. My parents bought me a Sinclair ZX Spectrum,
and since I couldn't afford buying games on cassettes, I started by typing in game source code from magazines and then I quickly started trying to change them at which point I learned programming pretty quickly, since there was a strong incentive behind it.
>Node.js was a contender but lost steam. May be .net once it becomes truly platform neutral have a chance to take on Java.

C# and CLR lost it a few years ago, GraalVM is taking this space really rapidly now.

I'm in opposition to most comments here hating Java for whatever reason, hoping JS or C# to destabilize this system. I absolutely love Java and its ecosystem. Super mature libraries, library for everything, great tools, literally for everything. A lot of tutorials, massive investment from several corporations contributing to OpenJDK. Java is super hot right now.
You get it (I was a PhD, too)
I happen to think he should. Not sure about the other income or wealth though, and I think it’s well within scope of the discussion to consider how he could be deprived of most of those while at the same time getting a fair deal.

I do think capitalists can perform a useful service by calculating risks an moving resources around to productive use. I do not think, however, that such work automatically should reward people with the right to extract rent from those resources for private gain. So I’ll happily grant Bezos an UBI as long as any rent extract from resources under his control is payed back to the commons.

Edit: Btw it’s not just about fixing inequality. For me it’s also the realization that markets are exceptionally bad at allocating resources to intrinsically motivated labor, biasing the whole economy toward optimizing for greed. An UBI could alleviate this problem somewhat by allowing more amateur work to flourish.
See, the thing is--I'm reasonable. If you want to run your own security system, stored locally, and provide that data to and only to the police when and only when a crime occurs? Fine. We can deal with that as a society and as communities. But the thing is, even that is horseshit. It's not "helping solve crime". Even with a photo ID, the police in most jurisdictions are not going to go out of their way to do anything about property crime. (Nor, really, should they, unless somebody's actually harmed.)

Privately managed, secure, local and unshared recordings are fine. Ring and other scumshit "security" peddlers? It's a gimmick for data-slurping corporate-interest assholes to get additional on-the-ground data about people for whom there was no attempt to acquire permission, let alone any moral right to do it. That's why these things exist. Don't fall for the fucking okeydoke.
> illegal

Citation needed
There's some discussion here, written by Attila Baksa who according to his linkedin is "Designer and developer of flight software of On-board Computer of the Rosetta Lander of ESA, which was successfully launched in 2003 and arrived to comet P67 in 2014."

eg:
"The on-board software of the central computer
of the Philae Lander consists of a real-time
operating system and 8 application tasks. All
these software modules are specially developed
by our team for the Harris RTX2010RH
microprocessor. The co-ordination of the scientific
program and the overall control of the
algorithms used by the application tasks are
done by the MSO modelling language."

http://www.hiradastechnika.hu/data/upload/file/2004/2004_12/...

Also the "scheduling system, called the Rosetta SGS Scheduling Component" is discussed here:

https://ai.jpl.nasa.gov/public/papers/chien_iwpss2013_schedu...

which uses a framework called APSEN written by NASA:

http://aspen.jpl.nasa.gov/

which takes code like this:

Activity prevalve removal {

duration = 15

slot subsystem

after prevalve prep with (subsystem == this.subsystem)

before prevalve replace with (subsystem == this.subsystem)

Reservation hydraulic lift usage {

resource = hydraulic lift;
usage = 1;

duration = 5;

requires state prevalve-purged TRUE

requires state prevalve-illuminated TRUE

to control the thing

http://metahack.org/isairas97-aspen.pdf
Well, let's say that Facebook is using other company's code with a similar patent grant. Then Facebook can't go on the warpath in the first place.

I understand there might be a chicken-and-egg problem here. But the final outcome seems optimal with this license. And someone has to go first.
So, sort of like Apple did with the Publishers in order to move in on Amazon's turf? I believe what you're describing is against anti-trust laws, if not in exact legal terms, then certainly in the spirit of the law. Best Buy still has exclusive releases (as does Wal-Mart, Target, Amazon, iTunes), but they are part of a larger dynamic market.

YouTube effectively has monopoly status as a "Videos-with-music" service. iTunes/Spotify/Pandora/Beats/Deezr/Rdio are a different service class, so don't even try and throw those into the pot, because that won't fly.
Title has been edited so it's not clickbait.

Actual title: "Technobubble: The 23 Most Expensive Tech Stocks"
Cross browser is on top of list. Would really appreciate any contribution.
My M.S. thesis was essentially an attempt to answer this question. The answer, it turns out, is that the readings you get from single bright celestial sources (sun, moon) aren't accurate enough to enable navigation primarily from this data, even assuming perfect timekeeping.

You can use multiple readings of multiple celestial sources (stars) to navigate reliably, but then you've shifted the problem. With a single reference source your main problem is the sensitivity to error (slight angular errors translate to miles). But if you use starlight your primary difficulty is simply measuring the light sources in an affordable way (i.e. short of taking images in real time and doing real time image processing and graph construction on them).
We're not talking about secrets and government employees!

You have expressed your desire to not have any judgments except monetary compensations.

And I'm pointing out that harassment victims would rather live in peace than get some money in exchange for their state-sanctioned(!) victimhood.
Unfortunately in the US.

http://blog.fastmail.com/2013/10/07/fastmails-servers-are-in...

Note that just because your servers aren't in the US, doesn't mean they're out of reach of the NSA's surveillance apparatus.
What "math" means to people outside of math--including physicists and engineers--is completely different from what "math" means to people inside math. We really ought to have a different word for the two fields. Even "applied math" doesn't cut it, because most applied mathematicians still think like mathematicians, and it ain't like the rest of us.

What mathematicians don't see is that when they rail against the kind of concrete, heuristic definitions that non-mathematicians use for parts of mathematics, is that it isn't just that we don't care that there is a better, more general, more abstract, more justifiable definition out there, it's that we can't understand them so they aren't useful to us, even a little bit. You may as well try explaining Shakespeare to your dog: it'll frustrate you and annoy the dog, who is perfectly happy to use Shakespeare for his intended purpose, which is to say, chewing on the edges of the "Complete Shakespeare" for entertainment.

That's an overstatement, but the gulf between the mathematician's mind-set and the mind-set of physicists and engineers is still far wider than most mathematicians appreciate, and it really would be valuable to have a different word for what physicists and engineers do when we "do math", because it is not "math" the way you mean it.
Standardized testing is widely vilified, but it's probably been the greatest single force for meritocracy in American history. Prior to widespread adoption, elite universities awarded slots on a "holistic" basis. Which mostly meant the well-connected scions of high society families.

When the SAT went mainstream in the 1960s it opened up a world of opportunity to the previously overlooked gifted kids from middle-class families and excluded ethnic groups. It was now possible for a bright kid whose parents were garment workers in the Lower East Side to objectively compete with the Kennedys or the Astors in Exeter or Dalton. And the raw numbers meant that college admissions officers could no longer pretend this wasn't true.

It's almost certain that the 21st century's version of "holistic admissions" winds up operating much the same way as the early 20th century. There will certainly be more diversity window dressing. But at the end of the day it will still primarily benefit the powerful, rich, and well-connected. They'll be a few less Rockefellers and Bushes and a few more descendants of Eric Holder and Carlos Slim. But at the end of the day, the result will be the same. Keeping out kids from the wrong side of town.
This isn't press, this is sensitive and classified information.

In what way, at this point, is Assange not part of the press?

Remember, a large part of the Constitution is meant to provide checks and balances to prevent government from being able to abuse its power. The proper Constitutional role of the press SHOULD be to inform the public on the actions of the government so that the public can get properly outraged about things they do not agree with.
As I understood by reading the articles, they have their own "Internet" through which they communicate via cables, and every cable has it's own strict structure.
That quote isn't quite correct. The PEP quote is:

"There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it."

The "obvious" portion of that makes it a little less strict than your quotation. I think it is a "good" axiom to try and aim for. The problem is people think differently and you can't force that really.

I like Perl, where almost anything goes, though. :)
That's a great observation. From my own experience I would agree- smart & young sometimes requires thrift; smart & thrifty can be ageless; thrifty and young sometimes requires making smart choices.

And, eventually, the product of smart choices and thrift by someone young can make them rich.

That said, no- I don't know a single early adopter who is independently wealthy (which fits my definition of 'rich').
sure, just email me (profile)
It's not only NYT releasing info about #cablegate, check out Guardian too: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/the-us-embassy-cables
Yes, but Perl has a huge scientific following as well, so Ruby should be able to used there as well. However, I think with Python and Perl in that niche, it would be hard for Ruby to break significant ground there unless a RoR moments hits for that area with Ruby.
It's really very different. Paramount are doing something that only hurts fans of their own movie. The fact that they are legally entitled to is beside the point. Paramount are legally entitled to pull all copies of Top Gun off the shelves and stop selling it. People would probably complain if they did that too. If there is enough of a public backlash, Paramount will reverse their decision. It's much less stupid than getting into a fight with some police.

Also, there is the matter that the public has the right to complain about laws that they feel are unfair. In this case, copyright law has over-reached beyond what many people feel is the purpose of the law (protecting content creators profits from infringing competition).

Your attitude seems to be one of "well, it's the law, what did you expect?" The answer to that question should always be "fair laws that exist to serve the public interest".
Sickening when you consider the sacrifice of PC Keith Palmer who "un armed" stopped a knife wielding attacker attempting to breach the Houses of parliament.
> Maybe you started on AOL and later realized AOL is terrible. You could export your address book and move to a client/server you trust more and notify all your contacts from the new location.

The whole point is in avoiding starting with an AOL like service. So far only big matrix provider are reliable and performant enough to be usable. This is @gmail.com all over again but with @matrix.org tld.

Except you won't be able to carry your messages from a tld to another when you decide to rely on another domain name (your own or someone else's).

How long before Matrix foundation send messages telling users they are going to delete their rooms and messages if they don't log in once a year ? Or that they are now restricted your account to matrix.org rooms to "save operating costs" ?

The whole tech stack is free but operating costs are not.
I've read the word "mitigation" so much (not only here, and not only you; so this comment is not directed at you personally) that I only hear doublespeak now: when people say mitigation I immediately think of a slab of concrete in the back of my car to compensate for not having any brakes installed. Please recognize for what it is: a design failure that is pampered upon. A mitigation is not a solution, it lessens the impact of the failure mode that was identified. Afaik, if the flushes and changes actually work, it is not a mitigation but a workaround: the failure mode cannot occur anymore. Mitigation sounds better than workaround though (and is probably the reason it was choosen).
Masterful code has some kind of straightforward simplicity. Every function does one thing and does exactly what it is supposed to do. Everything is very predictable and boring. You can see from the code how clearly the programmer was thinking and how well the program structure was planned.