skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What resemblance does Mark Cuban have with Russ Hanneman? I really don't think Mark Cuban is that eccentric.
Just because some people can not resist and drink responsibly, why should the company take the profit?
Idealism + Capitalism = Profit?
Window to the Law: Cyberscams and the Real Estate Professional
On Linux, I regularly observe Chrome continuously consuming one whole core. Typically anything with a nice CSS animation seems to be implemented game-loop style: while (true) { render(update(delta)); }. Disabling things like spinner animations on a web page causes CPU load to plummet.
This is so true. As a investor, I hear a lot of pitches where the founders say their competitive advantage is that they execute better (the flip side of believing everyone else is dumb is believing you're especially smart). Do you know who else claims they "execute better"? Everyone. That kind of attitude usually reveals that a founder doesn't have a real sense of what makes their company special and defensible, and is a bit of a yellow flag for investors -- well, at least for me.
The course covers signals and systems. We talk about ways of modeling physical and electrical systems (or any other system really) as combinations of smaller components, and use the characterizations we derive of the smaller systems to characterize behavior of the larger ones. We use tools like the fourier transform to simplify the analysis.

This wikibook seems to cover the same topics: https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Signals_and_Systems
For IDs you can use

Model.find(1)
We had problems with AWS ML tonight
i would rename the second chapter from "functional programming " to "programming with functions"
(2003)
Americans’ Outlook on the Home Selling Market Cools Amid Economic Concerns
That's how the movie Gravity starts.
Just to point out: these days you don't have to use the dosbox/qbasic combo in order to have a qbasic-compatible environment. There is an open-source implementation called qb64 that is both qbasic compatible and cross-platform (Windows, Linux and Mac).

Also, in qbasic, line number is optional. With SUB and FUNCTION, you can actually do structured programming like what other programming languages such as Pascal does.
I'm curious. What are the tools/frameworks that you use for your work on Distributed systems(?) ?
There's always an exception, but your app probably isn't one of them.
>Most of us probably do not completely share values of the society we live in. It is up to us to push it in right direction.

This seems to me to contradict the earlier statement by icebraining that you defended

>Technically, because the EU countries are sovereign and can decide what rights their own citizens should have.
Isn't it always "closer than ever", by definition?
I wonder how many people on this thread actively workout?
Yeah... Google should stop and close up shop. Working towards fixing things tomorrow? HOW DARE THEY! Shakes fist at them menacingly
“America has only three cities: New York, San Francisco, and New Orleans. Everywhere else is Cleveland.”

So now we just have New Francisco, and a half-bulldozed New Orleans?
Hack.chat – A minimal, distraction-free chat application
The problem is not restoring the system, but the time lost in figuring out what caused it without any logs.
Neither does Apple. It's currently 6 days.

http://appreviewtimes.com
> Then my age group entered the workforce and redefined the term to mean an excellent programmer, as in hacker news.

It's worth noting that "hacker news" was probably never meant in the sense of "excellent programmer", but rather in the sense being criticized by the article: one of venture-capitalist-backed businesses "disrupting" industries to dominate said industries (bringing money to the venture capitalists in turn). The implication that HN - which was created and is owned and maintained by YCombinator, arguably among the more prominent of such VCs - was named in reference to anything but the very thing the article describes is inaccurate.
New design could finally help to bring fusion power closer to reality
Free supplementary materials PDF here: http://authors.library.caltech.edu/58610/3/nphys3416-s1.pdf

Edit: thanks for the downvotes!
Email me and I'll tell you :)
I definitely struggle with that wording issue, since there are a variety of devices and interaction methods that make it difficult to write about without the language getting cumbersome. :) "Click" seems to be the most commonly-accepted term for initiating a request for the browser to load a URI based on a hyperlink, so I went with that as a general term.
As someone who has been using Windows Phone devices since WP7 was launched the hamburger button making an appearance makes me just shake my head in disgust. To an extent Microsoft has been making reasonable use of it, in Outlook it's particularly nice since I no longer need to expand the app bar to get to my folder list - but I fear the signaling it may be giving 3rd party designers, that they can get away with mystery meat navigation and ruin one of the better parts of the Windows Phone UX.
(I'm the founder of SageMath.) SageMathCloud (https://cloud.sagemath.com) is a highly collaborative online web application for working with Sage, R, Python, IPython, LaTeX, etc that I've been working extremely hard on this for almost 3 years. We'll have a major new release this week with much new polish and functionality (the testing server is at https://web0.sagemath.com). Everything is 100% open source. https://github.com/sagemathinc/smc
Do you mind elaborating?
Sure, investment in tech yes, but I would be very concerned about the massive increase in "space debris" in our lower orbits if things are getting blown apart. Enough war in space and we will need a clean-up method before people go back.
There's no actual stupidity there - just conflicting unstated goals.

There's an inevitable conflict between "Make as much money out of patients and the entire health system as possible" and "Care for patients as efficiently and effectively as possible."
I didn't read that as fear of their hypothesis. I read it as irritation with the enormous amount of quantum waffle offered by loons, quacks, and frauds. Evolutionary biology has also had to deal with pseudoscientific intrusion from the get-go.

This paper may be totally legit, and quantum magic may really be how biology works. But I can totally see why someone would whip out Occam's Razor and start slashing after reading that paragraph.
I get home around 7-8. Half of the time I'll cook dinner with my wife, talk about our days as we cook, eat dinner together. Around 8:30 or 9:00 we'll hang out in the living room. If I have energy and am feeling ambitious, or I have to work a bit extra, we will listen to music and I will code (for work, or open source, or side projects), while she reads. This might last until midnight, and then we'll go to bed. I try to read for at least fifteen minutes before bed on a kindle as I wind down. Seems to work well.

If I'm too tired to work, we'll watch netflix together.

Two nights a week I try to exercise (martial arts classes) and instead of cooking I'll get take out or eat at the local inexpensive Japanese or Mexican restaurant.
The End of Error (http://www.amazon.com/The-End-Error-Computing-Computational/...) is the book describing them in great detail... I'm working with John to put together a publicly accessible wiki, which I hope will be up in the next month or two. That being said, the book is worth having.
I'm not advocating a protest...I'm advocating that us techies should focus our extra energy for creative activities locally and share the, rather than keep them exclusive with this desert party.

All these well known famous tech founders such as the FB guys or Larry and Sergey are big burners and certainly participate in arts there but are nowhere to be found right here in SF/Oakland. Same can be said about my peers sadly.
Amazon yet again lying to it's customers about the status of the service is the only real issue I see here>. Services fail, it's a fact of life but at least admit it's broken and that the issue is being fixed instead of blatantly lying and saying minor disruptions.
I like how this reads as jaded, was actually just an attempt at a bit of humour! Of course I agree with everything you said, that's probably what it actually was.

I've still not learned, probably never will, that tone rarely comes across in text :-)
Way back when I was young and webvan.com was hot, I also worked on similar stuff. I didn't know then who I was, or even slightly what I wanted in life. Typical early-20s kind of thing. Anyways, I understand exactly what this guy feels like, as I feel the same way about the things I did back then. And these days I have turned down a couple of jobs that I felt were being too aggressive about advertising. One company's product was to give you a kind of GMail search, at the cost of collecting all kinds of information about you and aggregating it on remote servers to use for advertising. The founders were real cool guys, but this was just not something I am willing to contribute to.
Three comments. All praising the article with two words. All from accounts created within a span of ten minutes. One with the name of one of the article authors.

I smell some kind of rat.

Look, I don't have any problem with the article itself. But the comment pattern looks very suspicious...
When time is the dimension, yes.
What happened to that 99.99% availability? Either way this just got posted at reddit.com/r/sysadmin which might be useful to some for tracking error rate: https://pulse.turbobytes.com/results/55c8751aecbe400bf80005f...
Sorry, it was not my intention to suggest that trading is not productive, or that it's truly a zero-sum game.

You probably know this already, but I'll provide some more context for the interested:

In reality, two parties can walk away from a trade believing (in the moment) that they got the better deal. Otherwise, they wouldn't be trading in the first place. This results because people have different utility functions. A farmer might be willing to buy insurance that gives him negative expected value, because his utility function incorporates a larger risk term than the insurer. A fur trapper sells furs to a buyer because 1 pelt is not scarce to him. With derivative contracts this analogy gets a bit abstract, but the justifications hold.

Liquidity providers add liquidity to the market precisely because they think that the rebates are "worth more" than the liquidity they are providing. A liquidity taker might still fill their trade because they have a different utility function. The net gain for society would be the net gain in total utility, if we were somehow able to convert them into normalized units.

However, if the liquidity taker is a nearly identical firm with a nearly identical utility function, then that implies that the liquidity provider and taker disagree over who is on the losing side of the trade. One party has better information or luck than the other and the future eventually reveals which was the better choice.

To put it another way, I believe it is a zero sum game if players with identical utility functions (i.e. two small prop shops with $200K book) trade with each other. Both probably have identical utility functions, and future events will reveal whether buying or selling was the correct choice in terms of utility. There are quite a number of such players swimming in the market, so there is a zero-sum game of "who knows more" that goes on underneath the actual net utility provided by liquid markets.
Yes! I wish more people would actually read that book instead of throwing the word "disruption" around vaguely. After reading it, you'll realize the established business almost always has the advantage, and start ups only succeed in certain environments.
FDA Loses Another Free Speech Case
What happened to the hacker ethos was the absorption of computing into the advertising industry. The hacker ethos survived the Microsoft era, but not the Google era. Microsoft was about tools, which was consistent with the hacker ethos. Google is about ad clicks, and its success created a whole industry focused on ads and user exploitation, not tools for user empowerment. That's what destroyed hacker culture.

I love this paragraph--I think you nailed it. Netheads and bellheads.
From Amazon:

"Hello, We have just become aware of EC2 network connectivity issues in the US-EAST-1 region. The impact of this issue is loss of network connectivity to EC2 instances in US-EAST-1. The AWS support and engineering teams are actively working on bringing closure to this issue. I will share additional information as soon as I learn more about this issue."
How to symbolicate watchOS 2 extension crash logs from device
Their SLA guarantees 99.9% on a monthly basis. The 99.99% mentioned on the product page isn't guaranteed at all.

As for what happened, my money is on this: https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2015/08/amazon-s3...

> You can now increase your Amazon S3 bucket limit per AWS account... Amazon S3 now supports read-after-write consistency for new objects added to Amazon S3 in US Standard region.

The 100 bucket limit used to be an absolute, unchangeable hard limit - rare for AWS and thus likely something deep in the architecture from S3 being one of their first services - so I suspect the lifting of that limit involved some fairly major changes to the backend.
Looks like it was first crawled by archive.org in July, 2004: https://web.archive.org/web/20040815000000*/http://www.ra.is...
Ask HN: If you could build anything, what would you build?
You're already wealthy beyond compare. Profitability doesn't concern you. All the standard startup stuff has fallen by the wayside.

What do you build? Do you hire a team, or are you building it to learn?
Is this is how things actually work? I was under the impression that once you use a code the system won't let you use "previous" codes, and move on to generate the next set.

Edit: Found this:

No codes are ever repeated, and once the alternating signal -- like, locking an unlocked door -- has been released, all previous codes are invalidated, which is intended to be a fool-proof safeguard.

RollJam, though, hacks the process: hidden near a car or in a garage, RollJam 'jams' a signal with a radio, blasting noise on a common frequency used by automobiles, while another radio captures the rolling code. A user will press the fob again, thinking the device hasn't performed the intended function, and RollJam simultaneously captures the second code while releasing the first one -- the car is now locked, but RollJam has the second code needed to unlock the vehicle.
http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/626/1/012012/pdf/1742-65...
Interestingly there is a common tie between Mudd and UBC: Maria Klawe (a truly inspirational woman). I would t doubt she had her part in both these courses.
I'm risking being inflammatory here, but do people really believe that they get better uptime from AWS compared to renting dedicated servers?

I feel like AWS has way too many moving parts to be stable.

It's very tempting for them to reuse bits of infrastructure everywhere which increases the chances that if something goes wrong somewhere it will break your stuff. So for example, hosting instance images on S3 means that when S3 has issues, now EC2 has issues.
It is helpful. It gives you the confidence to change things. It allows you to feel productive. And it's true often enough that it's a reasonable default, IME.
Going 4K
and "closer than ever" could mean 1000 years, and still be true
I once turned down a gig from someone who wanted a tool to spam fake Yelp reviews. He had an elaborate vision for it: a control panel he could use to choose a target and whether to make the reviews good or bad, which controlled a fleet of instances on EC2, Rackspace, etc, so that when one was detected he could just use others.

It's easier to turn down unethical work when it's only a few thousand dollars, vs your full-time job. Still, I felt pressure because I was actually talking with him on behalf of a guy I was subcontracting for, and who had invited me to partner in his own agency, so I did worry about injuring that relationship. It did make me wonder though, if those were the leads he was turning up, whether a partnership was such a good idea. . . .
Foolishly, I don't really. I made the connection in some other thread on HN, and it's stuck with me. My advice is perhaps terrible: find yourself an old engineer and just do whatever it takes to be their friend and follow 'em like a puppy. It's sorta weird how effective it is to just be around people like that (and I think some PE licenses actually require apprenticeships for that reason).

But I do have two formative things:
Feynman's lecture on Cargo Cult Science is excellent, with this gem:

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself--and you are the easiest person to fool. So you have to be very careful about that. After you've not fooled yourself, it's easy not to fool other scientists. You just have to be honest in a conventional way after that... I'm talking about a specific, extra type of integrity that is not lying, but bending over backwards to show how you're maybe wrong, that you ought to have when acting as a scientist. And this is our responsibility as scientists, certainly to other scientists, and I think to laymen." - Feynman [0]

I can't tell you how many times this has saved me in the field. Replace the word 'scientist' with '<YOUR DISCIPLINE HERE>' as needed. (And I think moreso for engineers than scientists, since safety absolutely requires this mentality.)

And I really like the ideas in The Pragmatic Programmer [1]. More than anything specific, the idea of not being married to any particular concept or solution, but rather to pragmatically chose what is correct then for that circumstance helps a lot. The book is opinionated, but reasonable, and copying that pleasant tone is a fast way to make allies when solving problems in a group. And it's a pretty good book to boot.

[0] http://neurotheory.columbia.edu/~ken/cargo_cult.html (and is an HN favorite, to be sure)

[1] https://pragprog.com/the-pragmatic-programmer (another HN favorite, though not always brought up in terms of engineering)
Again you are technically right. But in practice this is of no help.

The AC21 allows you to change employer when you have filed the I-485. That is step 3 of the 4-step green card process. One can't file the I-485 until the "priority date" is current. That is not an issue if you are from any country other than India, China, or Philippines. Else you are looking at a delay of 4 to 11 years. So as I said, not practical for the poster who is from India.

Technically it is also possible to accept "normal career progression" changes in employment, i.e., promotions and raises, as you correctly pointed out. However in practice, what constitutes as "normal" is subjective, completely at the discretion of a visa officer. For a long time, this was very easy and a formality. In the last 1-2 years, the Visa Officers have become anal about this. Cases are being audited for something simple like Data Scientist using Python to Data Scientist using R (actual anecdote in my company).

Also visa officers are going back to approved cases from several years ago and retroactively denying them on some technicality like the above. So even if you know cases that were easily approved in the past, they can be suddenly denied and the employee can retroactively become "undocumented" for the past several years (again actual anecdote).
We had problems while connecting to S3 standard US region from us-east-1 at 19UTC but it was solved 20 minutes later.

edit: seeing connectivity issues again at 19h50UTC
The whole point is that all of the structural axioms are known to be consistent (relative to ZFC or another foundation) because there exist known models of them. The fact that we don't need to assume group axioms hold, but can instead prove they hold for at least one structure is a huge distinction. There is no way to prove there are models of ZFC or another (suitably powerful) foundational system without appealing to a foundational system in the first place. That is the content of Godel's second incompleteness theorem[1]. So the axioms of ZFC bear some scrutiny, while those of a group etc. don't. This is a completely technical distinction.

> That argument would be a lot more compelling if Mathematicians formalized their arguments in terms of an underlying foundations, because then we would always know that all assumptions are checked.

But they do! You can find many books on real analysis that prove that the reals exist from the foundation, as well as proving that the naturals and integers exist on the way. They don't constantly refer to the foundations, but they use facts that have been rigorously proved from the foundations. And although they don't write "axiom schema of specification" every time they consider a subset satisfying a property, that doesn't mean they don't know that it is required.

> In short, what matters is that people accept the incorrect fact and move forward from it, NOT whether that incorrectness comes from foundations or from something built on top of them. The impact of either depends entirely upon how many people trust the result and build on top of it.

My whole point is that you don't have to trust the group axioms, because they can (and typically are) validated relative to ZFC. Since the trivial group can be constructed within ZFC they are consistent in ZFC, full stop. The same goes for refinements like commutative groups. If the group axioms lead to a inconsistency, it can only be because ZFC itself is inconsistent. Do you not think that being a possible source of inconsistency or not is an important distinction?

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_...
I did this for half a year, and it was a great opportunity to learn a broad spectrum of Tor-related matters. The rest of the Tor people are very approachable if you need help answering, and there's a lot of material on Tor's StackExchange that you can point to. This is one of the best ways to become part of the Tor team. :-)
> You seem to have completely missed the entire point of my comment

This is a little hyperbolic. You've basically recommended a labeled hamburger menu - 'Sections' instead of 'Menu' - and text labels definitely have a demonstrable advantage over icon-only buttons, but the OP isn't advocating for text labels instead of the hamburger icon (see NBC example that had a labeled hamburger menu originally), it's proposing that the menu items be surfaced into tabs, segmented controls, and lists. That's not viable on sites with a flat structure.

nytimes.com uses the hamburger icon with the 'Sections' label, as you suggest, but it's important to acknowledge that this is just a variation on the theme, not a complete rejection of the 'menu items hidden behind something else' principle, so we need to be precise about the problems that a hamburger menu can and can't solve.
Is it still a "straightforward photographic copy" now that they've added the ruler for scale though? Perhaps that makes it copyrightable.
Kind of hilarious that we're worried about code size in browsers these days.
They actually would let you increase that, but only up to a certain point and only if you specifically requested it. I don't see them mention the absolute ceiling being lifted, so that is probably still in place somewhere.

I'd wager it's more likely that read-after-write change.