skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The police in the US have always been brown shirts for business interests, but it's gotten quite bad lately-- still not as bad as during the first Gilded Age, but it's getting there. Of course, the other real problem is that a hammer will find a nail, which is why we see people getting slaughtered during traffic stops etc.

Definitely agree about the pigs choosing the hard way-- it's all they know.

Their only strategy is escalate to force, whether in the micro situation of a traffic stop or the macro situation of rioting against police brutality. They just don't get it, and they don't want to get it, because they enjoy smashing heads and being unaccountable.

Voting aint gonna fix it, though-- most local candidates aren't about to make a problem with the cops that they rely on, and most national candidates aren't going to make it a problem because hey, all politics are local politics, so there's nothing to gain. Riots and peaceful protests are the way forward now, which is tough because neither are remotely legitimate or acceptable in the US. Predictably, the police will smash the peaceful protests, causing riots, which will ultimately end in disaster.

We saw a bit of walkback after the Ferguson / Baltimore burnings caught national attention, but there were no formal concessions and certainly no adjustment of police training. The de facto state of affairs is actually worse off than before the riots, since now the police have realized that the public has turned against them. Maybe a few more cities will be wrecked and then there will be some serious reparation. The shit factor here is race relations, which are already being played as hard as possible in order to keep the blacks and the whites separate from each other, leaving the blacks to carry most of the burden of police reform. Obviously, this doesn't work, because the blacks aren't considered to be legitimate political entities when it comes to police reform specifically because they've borne the brunt of the drug war's ravages.

In my pipe dream of police brutality being solved, we'd first need to get our national politicians to effect a formal surrender ending the drug war-- this probably won't happen, because "America never loses a war", but it's no secret that the drug war is lost. Ending the drug war formally would open the door for demilitarization/disarmament of the losers, along with closure of the legal loopholes and abuses that allowed police to raid houses and commit warrantless wiretaps nonstop etc. Once the weapons have been removed and the law patched to revoke the wartime leeway, I think we'd be in much better shape, and could focus on normalization of police-citizen relations via force drawdown, culling of the worst abusers, and retraining of the moderate abusers. We'd have a proper (European style) police force in the next generation or so.
Do you know some sites to find tech internship?
Place where tech people can find internship (preferably in USA). Ideally it also contains positions for international students/graduates. Share likns that you think can be useful.
Turning electricity into heat isn't all the work you can get out of the energy. Heat pumps get even more, by using the energy to move heat from one place to another (e.g from ambient outside air to the volume to be heated), and the heat from this process also heats the volume.
Looks like the Windows troll decided to show up. I'd be more worried about the sad state of Windows, its flagrant security issues and it's invasive privacy "features". No wonder the PC market is declining.
If you had been saying before now that this wasn't a severe bug and so we shouldn't be too concerned about disclosure, then you wouldn't have been presented with these strong counterarguments.

But that isn't what you've been saying - rather, you've been making the general argument that releasing information is not damaging or bad, and that we should only hold the people who exploit vulnerabilities responsible - not those who disclose them. Multiple people have argued against you on this.

Now you have switched your position to 'It's not bad to disclose vulnerabilities unless they are severe'. This seems much more reasonable, and came as the consequence of you being presented with what you are calling 'ridiculous' analogies.

To me this seems like a serious discussion done right.
Please email hn@ycombinator.com and we can help.
Rehash of previous Amazon articles. Nothing new.
Mirror (down at 4:54EST 8/17/2015)

http://pastebin.com/8t0BquQg
Looks like it's defined using the format you see in this json file: https://github.com/victorcoder/dcron/blob/master/job.json

The "command" field is the most important part. What you put there gets executed like this by their agent (on Linux):
/bin/sh -c <your_scheduled_command_name>
It doesn't appear that the user api is discussing the "non binding" variant of the agreements. Once these agreements are secretly made and they exit the "look from my hand only, no photographs, no copies allowed" "reading rooms" they are binding but then it's too late to react (by the definition of them being binding). The problem is that the interested parties weren't even allowed to have their own copy of them, even less to discuss the exact texts with others, as there are no copies.

The last time I've read about such a "secure room" and the computer setup, it was the way how CIA falsified to the congressmen their data related to the torture:

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-relea...

"Now, after noting the disparity between the official CIA response to the committee study and the Internal Panetta Review, the committee staff securely transported a printed portion of the draft Internal Panetta Review from the committee’s secure room at the CIA-leased facility to the secure committee spaces in the Hart Senate Office Building."
i had a spectrum and a monochrome (green phosphorous), beige box, TRS 80.

i always wanted to play games and write basic on the TRS80 just because i couldn't stand the keyboard on the spectrum.
Then they would have basically no way to compete with one another other than marketing and specs. Touchwiz and all those other gimmicks really do sell phones. That's just speaking from anecdotal evidence, but I assume big corps have done their homework on this one. Remember that the types of people reading this comment are not your average consumer. We might hate it, we might know it's not as good as stock android... but we're a very small segment of the market (especially for Android). You probably don't see a ton of nutritionists/personal trainers eating at McDonalds, either.

The downside of having an open platform is that OEMs will add crap to differentiate themselves - just look at the weird media bs that comes pre-installed on tons of windows laptops.
Well that's probably more useful than what Amazon intended it for.
I used to feel this way. So, in large I want to agree with you. However, the syntactic affordances of languages doesn't really do this justice. In the same way that writing an outline of a novel is not the same as writing a glossary to go with it.

Basically, if there are any parts of the program that you would describe differently in conversation, then it isn't the same thing.

Now, I fully grant I am getting close to a scotsman argument. I also grant that this is not necessary to write bug free software. However, I do see them as different things.
I did a bunch of Java work in the 90's and early 2000's, and I converted multiple Java solutions to .NET over the years. We even were using Java in 1998/99 at a pretty large scale (big 3 auto maker work) and trying to make it work on Windows Server (ouch).

IMO, Java and the JVM haven't kept up with the pace of change in managed languages/environments. Frankly when .NET was released it was worse than Java and the JVM by far but that is one place Microsoft didn't miss the train and they really turned .NET into a power house. Not saying .NET is perfect, but performance issues, predictability, overhead etc all seem superior to me over the JVM. So in general I avoid writing my own code based upon a JVM centered language as I just don't feel it is nearly as resource efficient or stable. I'll say that the JVM is quite tunable to help mitigate a lot of my complaints but the complexity to do it right exceeds the benefits to me when other languages can do what I want without that extra step needed.

I will say though, that I rely on products that are JVM based and I am open to learning some of the newer languages that also depend on the JVM.

FWIW as well, my core language is C++, has been for my entire career. I still use C/C++ but most code I write is node.js with some growing golang mixed in replacing some of the C++ components we have.
It's presentations like this that give me a that spark to go out and build crazy-shit. Sometimes you HAVE to reinvent the wheel because wheels just don't work to move objects the size of the planet the wheel is bound to. I'm not a fan of re-inventing the wheel by any means but it's this kind of stuff that makes me love going to work every day and basing ideas off presentations like this!
Given two options, both unknown on how they would impact the problem (and near impossible to test even if we did implement a change because we cannot isolate other variables), I would default to the one that increases freedom and decreases imprisoning others.

Also, indirect prohibition has shown to be failure time and time again, often being more harmful than not.
I've also concluded that it's essential: Programming is the solution for the broadest space of problems in computing.

If you can narrow the problem space to some finite number of goals and workflows, you have a viable application. Application environments with sufficiently many workflows always reincorporate programming as a way to let the user build their own solution - and most things are implicitly programmable, whether through a defined API or through tricky reverse-engineered methods.

What I think muddies the picture is the line between "design" workflows and "engineering" workflows - in the first, you're piecing together the existing technology in a different way, while in the second, you are transferring math and science knowledge into original technology. As individuals we experience personal bias as to which side of programming is more "necessary," which is reflected in the resulting choices of tooling, code style, and preferred problem domains.

Sometimes you want design-heavy programming - e.g., you add some business logic and a UI on top of a database. Other times you want to add engineering to an existing design - you're writing hardware drivers using a common protocol, a data formatting plugin for an application, etc.

Library code acts as a way to expose units of engineering, while a framework defines a broad, but still configurable design space. Sometimes you have overlapping design spaces - you can have client code that works with a GUI framework, but also talks to an internal model and remote data sources.

One of the things that is exciting about programming's evolution is how much it is based on an ecosystem of technologies. Outside of some embedded fields, the era where you are given a hardware manual and are told to come up with your own development environment is over. Successful technologies tend to act parasitically on prior ones. This leads to a lot of compromises, but the general direction remains toward "better fit."
The Programming Language Quiz
How can that and "we find that ideas that elicit more positive evaluations are significantly more likely to
ultimately reach commercialization" coexist?

They are also working off 652 ventures coming out of MIT. Seems like a small and biased data set.
I am glad you did not list anyone related to GCC and LLVM, because both rely on the static DSLs (and code generation) heavily.

As for the rest - yes, compiler construction is not their main research topic. They can all be great language designers, but their approach to compiler construction is needlessly overcomplicated.

A view of a compiler as a chain of stupidly trivial passes, ideally expressed as term rewriting, is not very common among the researchers, but so far it yields the best results.
Is hterm.js in any way related to http://41j.com/hterm/ ?
Oh please. Android 5.0 introduced a new runtime that was the cause of a lot of the issues. These have been ironed out in 5.1.
Breathing new life into an older Mac
I'm curious to read more on this topic. Where will your writeup appear?
> The treaties themselves are public

Really? Only you claim that. Can you post the link please?
If you ignore externalities, sure. But that's not how the realities of climate change and pollution work.
discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10073724
A nondeterministic Turing machine can be thought of as a machine that can try all possibilities at once. In this conception, it's the ultimate parallel computer. In this conception, the guess function is actually trying all possibilities for the number d, and if any of those possibilities is a match, it says so.

Another way of thinking about it is as pure magic. If there is a number that's a match, then that number comes out of the "guess" function somehow.

As for why we can't use a nondeterministic Turing machine to achieve what we want, it's because nobody knows how to build one. They're the computing equivalent of a frictionless pulley or a mathematical point: a useful abstraction, but not something you can actually construct. If anyone ever figures out how to send information back in time then it may be possible, but absent that we're stuck with the regular kind of Turing machine.
I think it comes with all the usual caveats of "don't run super sensitive things on external networks". My guess is the motivation is for presentations and other "one-time" usages like that.
Report: Windows 10's Mandatory Updates Are Breaking Data Caps
Misleading title - this document lists data for sale from dozens of businesses, not just Evite. (Which actually makes it much more interesting than the title implies.)
A Radical Plan to Save the Big Music Labels: Shrink the Big Music Labels
I've always thought it'd be interesting to write a display driver for VirtualBox that uses WebGL so you can essentially get a desktop through a web browser...
Ask HN: (married founders): How did you save your marriage?
(I apologise for not using my regular HN id)
My marriage currently resembles a train wreck in progress. It began when I decided to start business (solo bootstrap). My wife didn't buy into my vision. I have been coding/blogging from home and things are slowly getting worse and worse. My wife chose to be a stay at home mom and I think she resent my being in her space during weekdays. I still have some financial runway left . Not sure if I should abandon my dream so quick (the few customers I have seem to like it -- and I truly believe I can build a small business). My wife does not want to see a marriage counsellor .What do I do ?
I was looking into that too. Based on this job.json[0] definition from the git repo, it looks like it just executes the command. So I believe you could have the job written in any language.

But I think this also means you have to copy every job executable to every server that might have a chance of running the job.

[0] https://github.com/victorcoder/dcron/blob/master/job.json
Android M gets native Bluetooth stylus support so it should be supported.
Yup, thought the same thing.
Added to the docs, big omission, sorry!
http://dcron.io/docs/api/#create-or-update-a-job
Thanks for elaborating. I think that makes sense. I need to read it over again to make sure, but I'm getting there.

And I don't think you were too terse. Thankfully HN makes it easy to see sub-replies to your comments so I saw your reply to 1arity, which was exactly what I needed, and your reply to me capped it off.
If the air outside my house is warmer than the air inside my house, I'll just open the windows. Generally when one needs a heater it is because the system surrounding the house is colder, sometimes much colder, than the house itself.
I think that he's talking about the employee perspective, not the company perspective. Google's tech stack is mostly proprietary, which means you can't take your tech skills with you to a new employer.

...And I haven't found it to be a major problem, being an ex-Googler a little over a year out. Tech skills are easy to pick up on your own. My current startup is based on Node.js, a native Android client, and AWS; the one before it was Django & Heroku. Haven't tried looking for jobs yet - I made enough at Google to not have to worry about that for a while - but I occasionally get in-bound interest from big-name, fast-growing startups. Most clueful hiring managers look for experience with problems, not with solutions, and Google lets you face problems that the rest of the industry won't deal with for a while.
I've been looking for something like this!
> Sweating to make a big number get a bit bigger isn't good for the soul in the long term.

Depends on how beautiful you find the numbers you're using to get there.

edit

To clarify, there are personalities that derive quite a bit of pleasure from the puzzle without much regard for the picture it makes in the end.
Could you please point at their error recovery functionality (I could not find it by a quick scan)? My gut feeling is that combinator-based parsing is not very well suited for this, but I may be missing something obvious.
The question, of course, is who gets access to the data.
On the other hand, negotiators are pressured to come to some agreement, and a "compromise" halfway between the global consensus and one lone holdout isn't a true compromise -- it's extortion by a global power.

If the secrecy of the documents is supposed to protect that kind of extortion by major powers -- for instance, on the part of US negotiators insisting that the rest of the world honor US IP standards -- then they should be publicly named and shamed, not hidden by "the process", under the guise that their all-or-nothing extortion is a reasonable practice.

I think it's very likely that the secrecy is meant to hide bad actions on the part of some negotiators representing powerful interests, and not for the true benefit of the constituents the negotiators are (theoretically) representing. I think the entirety of the fast tracking process in the US (and other nations), the secrecy around the negotiations, etc is at the behest of and for the benefit of major powers extorting other people, and shouldn't be respected, at all.

Do you have some reasons to suppose that it's otherwise, given the nature of the drafts we've seen and leaked comments from negotiators suggesting that the US negotiating team is attempting to extort the world in to accepting the (rather ridiculous) US IP position?
IRS Breach Bigger Than First Thought Total Victims Reach 334K
> Prior to this I worked at a small startup that had been around for 2 years. Got cancer, was told that I'd be employed til my treatment was completed. I worked every day, made a point of not being a burden to my team members, and was fired the week of Christmas (with 4 months of chemo to go). The company was being acquired, and didn't want any dead weight on the payroll. (Get it?)

Jesus Christ. Do you mind sharing who they are?
Who would of thought the IRS's initial estimate would be inaccurate?
This is totally true, of course... I just think that exploring examples that would be really hard with Excel would make the point better.
Messaging, What's the Matter?
>> This was, essentially, my point. Business Administration will always be relevant, but Business Administration for Startups is a little too focused. What happens when the startup fad is over?

I got my MBA 21 years ago. Practically speaking, nobody's going to ask you much about your MBA after about 5 years of subsequent work experience. After 20 years, it doesn't matter whether you've done a generalist program or one focused on startups, assuming you can even remember all of the stuff you learned 20 years ago. Let me put it this way, the technology course I took in my MBA -- it was a waste of time intro course that talked about paper tapes, Winchester drives, etc. Most of my peers didn't even know what e-mail was.

No matter what, the typical MBA program requires you to take a lot of common courses, so even if you're a Business Administration for Startups graduate, you're not at a significant disadvantage over the next MBA.
No need for Tasker: http://apps.getpebble.com/en_US/application/55123f98e28a6598...
...except for Jeff's own habits. Now I don't actually have a bad view of Amazon on the whole, but Bezos and his personality is well known for many years as demanding to the point of monomaniacal, and often cowing of others. That isn't just taking a pot shot, that's a repeated observation from many people over many years. It's like saying Larry Ellison likes boats or Scott McNealy hates dentists.
any feedback would be really appreciated!
I wish they'd tried to work with existing formats :( http://jsonapi.org/ / https://github.com/jsog/jsog
I disagree, though maybe I could see your point if you are unfamiliar with The Never-ending Story. Even then, they are in different spaces so a mental name collision seems unlikely.
I know almost nobody who thinks a “core appeal” of SF is the low density and poor access to transit of the neighborhoods south of I280 or west of Highway 1. All the people I know who live in the western half of the city complain bitterly and incessantly about car traffic and how crappy the bus and light rail are.

The charming parts of SF are all the bustling little neighborhoods in the northeast quarter of the city, which have easy walking access to anything you might need.

If the low-density areas of SF doubled in density (we’re talking some percentage of 4-story low-rise apartment buildings instead of exclusively single-family homes), along with a commensurate improvement in transit, almost everyone would be thrilled, and the city would be more charming, not less.

Here’s a zoning map. http://www.sf-planning.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documen...

All the parts that are zoned as one housing unit per lot, with no allowance for commercial uses (RH-1), along with similar zoning throughout the Bay Area, are the cause of our current housing crisis. The name for it is “suburban sprawl,” and it’s a crappy way to organize a society, antithetical to community and to human health. (Not to mention, they are hugely inefficient from a resource-use perspective, and are at a national and international scale causing the destruction of the planet.)

It would be lovely if some portion of those were re-zoned to RC-3 or similar.
http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ttip/documents-and...
(Video autoplays)
OP failed to provide the surrounding context. Here it is:

> Using data on 652 ventures in multiple industry sectors, evaluated over an 8-year period, we find that ideas that elicit more positive evaluations are significantly more likely to ultimately reach commercialization. We further show that these results are driven by venture ideas with
documented intellectual capital in research-and-development-intensive sectors, such as life sciences and
medical devices. We find no evidence, by contrast, that experts can effectively assess the commercial
potential of venture ideas in non-R&D-intensive sectors such as consumer web and enterprise software.

More evidence of why a bunch of tech entrepreneurs (YC) are not the right people to spur biotech (and other hard sciences) innovation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9997722

What's transferable between different tech ventures (other than connections and money) is knowledge about people and how to sell to (and generally deal with) them - issues that regularly come up long after the venture is formed. But the most important factor in R&D-based hard sciences ventures is deep technical expertise. Once that is in place, it's pretty obvious what needs to happen. And you can be sure that YC isn't getting those 'obvious' inventions.
Absolutely wrong. No species engineered us, that was natural selection. If it can happen once, it can happen again.