skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's fast because it supports the 802.11ac standard, which offers faster rates than 802.11n. The 802.11ac standard provisions for various rates, including the 1900 Mbps rate supported by this device. That's 600 Mbps over the 2.4 GHz band, plus 1,300 Mbps over the 5 GHz band.

802.11ac enables faster rates primarily by supporting wider bandwidths, more antennas, and larger symbol constellations (each symbol transmitted over the wireless channel can take on one value from a larger set of possible values, thereby conveying more information per symbol).
This is completely untrue. Even a sub-$100 TP-Link router will provide 800+ Mbps routing, far higher than a typical broadband connection.
Agreed, cracking communicator. And smart.
I thought this was certainly interesting as a companion piece (for a decidedly different era of graphics). I can't know this for sure, but I suspect a brief summary of the article -- in particular, an indication that it's not merely lambasting the Super Game Boy -- would have been helpful for folks who were turned off by the article's title.
> The attacker could also take advantage of compromised websites and websites that accept or host user-provided content or advertisements by adding specially crafted content that could exploit this vulnerability.

So ad networks are a delivery vector.

Interestingly, both ESC and EMET could help mitigate this, so I wonder if it's a JavaScript or similar exploit.
Boost is a very large project with varying degrees of API quality, and so when you say it depends on boost, I wonder "the good parts (any, variant, stuff that usually gets looked at for standardization)" or "the bad parts (Spirit, etc)". Also, as others have said, it's a huge dependency that generally raise a red flag (for performance and compile time).
Looks like a very interesting project which I'll keep a keen eye on. We're probably not ready to switch our entire stack from Mesos to Lattice though, especially considering you're missing some important bits such as external service discovery etc. (by the looks of it)
We're currently doing Marathon on Mesos with gliderlabs/registrator which syncs Docker and Consul - and then we're using consul-template + HAProxy for exposing applications externally. Works quite nice.

The differences (and advantages) between Lattice and Mesos could've been made clearer too I guess, although your docs and FAQs are quite nice.
I've always had a lot of respect for Woz's color hack on the Apple, which will apparently be covered in a later part. But I didn't see IBM PC hacks on the list, so here's an overview of old & new tricks to get colors out of an old CGA card. http://8088mph.blogspot.com/2015/04/cga-in-1024-colors-new-m...
Seattle Should Demand High-Quality Rail
Yes Anaconda is okay BUT it isn't a vanilla install nor is it a simple pip to install or update like it is on my Linux box.

Python should just be a exe and I can just use pip.
Other people using other email services renders PM useless in a way. I wish it weren't so.
would've rather slept to bad news than wake up to bad news. i guess i'll find out tomorrow.
Two things.

First of all, I think that both hosted and downloadable models are both equally viable, and IMHO both are worth pursuing simultaneously.

While I discuss the merits of a downloadable version below, first of all, staying hosted makes a lot of sense, not just because delivering all of npm is... tricky (kudos for managing to provide it :P), but also because it gives you the option to introduce a pricing structure in the future. (That said, please definitely do keep your current featureset free. XD)

A Google Maps Overlay[1]-style API could be a viable solution for developers who choose to use your hosted system who also need access to local resources: I'm thinking something SSL-encrypted (using symmetric keys configured via a dashboard), and perhaps a small (opensource, auditible) endpoint library that connects to your server (over WebSocket or XHR, to work around pesky firewalls), which the developer would be able to connect to the relevant bits of their data with a minimum of SLOC. (I'm not sure if it's outrageously unsuitable - it's probably only useful as an idea - but Netflix' newly-released Falcor library[2] comes to mind.)

I also think a cut-down version of your system could be a very very interesting competitor to Jupyter/IPython, and it's (reasonably) rare for competition to be a bad thing.

(Looking at the whole picture, there will undoubtedly be political types who will take one look at Jupyter/your system and will point out "but one's fully open source and one's freemium," but nobody would be able to argue that, done right, freemium does undeniably have more resources going into it, and the developers involved get to work on something awesome AND go home to a full kitchen at the end of the day, which does sort of guarantee a certain consistent level of quality.)

In this model, you would have this hosted version with ALL THE PACKAGES (wow!) - and maybe some awesome paid features down the track - along with a slightly smaller-scale Github repo that people can clone and fire up locally.

Besides being "trendy", the downloadable version would be a boon for people who, for whatever reason, MUST have an air gap in their systems for whatever security purposes, but happen to be using Node for their work.

Finally, it'd be cool to offer the local version as both a loopback web server (for a standard browser) as well as an Electron[3]-based "standalone console". That puts you visually on par with IPython web notebooks and QtConsole.

Oh, and speaking of UI, one other thing would be to keep the downloadable version's UI as identical to the hosted version as possible, in both look and feel: it'd be a neat little mind trick to make devs feel like they're running your hosted version locally :P

[1]: https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/javascript/...

[2]: http://netflix.github.io/falcor/

[3]: https://github.com/atom/electron
A lot of his articles are awesome, I especially like this one http://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/
> They have more of all of the same resources as we do - land...

I'm not sure that China has more arable land than the US does.

> We should look to protect our innovative abilities, more than we protect their products.

Unfortunately, that's open source. (That is, the recipe is quite public.) Fortunately, very few societies seem to be willing to copy it. (Unfortunately, we seem to be willing to slowly degrade it...)
> Well, when the previous announcement was made, I immediately Amazon'd some C books, which I plan to devour in my free time. At which point I'll be learning Rust, and reimplementing LuaJIT in Rust, and hopefully convince Mozilla to host the git, such that it will be protected from FOSS corruption.

See you in 15 years.
Stealing a physical thing (Tesla Roadster) is not at all like infringing a patent or violating a contract. Your arguments would work a lot better if you didn't say things like that.
In some strange way that (non ironically) sounds like a feature.
It's vaguely disturbing to hear suggestions to use children as experimental subjects. It makes sense across a population (eg, all of UK) to do clustered RCTs, but the YCombinator nursery group would be tiny and so the evidence gathered would be weak, which makes (imo, I'd be interested to hear what the ethicists say) it more problematic.

And I'm even more unsure about this bit:

> how can kids really create something useful, can a company use this as a sustainable resource, etc.

Perhaps I'm misreading it? Better Off Ted had a bit where the children in the nursery were put to work. I don't think that's what you're suggesting?
> The Marxist "English" professor who tells you that what she wants most from your paper is "evidence of critical thinking" means she will judge your paper on how persuasively it argues in favor of her political agenda.

Or at least against capitalism, democracy, and/or traditional western civilization.
The difficulty of learning and using a programming language increases (all else being equal[1]) faster than linearly with the size of its spec, because much of the pain comes from the interaction of one feature with another.

If we handwavily suppose that difficulty goes like size squared (perhaps every pair of features generates a possible interaction you have to understand) then a description 3x longer makes for a language more like 10x harder. [EDITED to add:] Which feels about right to me for the relationship between C and C++.

[1] Of course there are exceptions; some "Turing tarpit" languages like Brainfuck can be completely specified with very little text, but are difficult to do anything useful with because they are stripped so very bare.
I think the key finding is this:

"Results for all cause mortality were similar. Prior to 2000, 24 trials reported all cause-mortality and 5 reported significant reductions in total mortality (25%), 18 were null (71%) and one (CAST) reported significant harm (Table 3). Following the year 2000, no study showed a significant benefit for total mortality."

So 24/30 pre-2000 trials they looked at reported all cause mortality. This is important because all cause mortality is the gold standard endpoint in a clinical trial. If you were cherry picking an outcome measure, this is the last one you would choose as it's the hardest one to get a positive result for.

This casts doubt on the paper's central thesis. How to explain the difference in pre and post registration all cause mortality? The possibilities are:
1. Trials performed after 2000 are genuinely less likely to be positive because of altered funding, lack of low hanging fruit etc. It is a well known problem that estimating the survival of the control group in a randomised trial based on historical data is usually an underestimate, which messes up the power calculation and the chance of a positive result. Beyond a certain point, it becomes infeasible to do a clinical trial to show a benefit over a very healthy control group, because you would need 100,000 patients.
2. After registration became mandatory, fraudulent investigators who make up their results stopped doing clinical trials.

The other point is that in most areas, there are only a few acceptable clinical trial endpoints. For example in cancer studies, there are really only 3: overall survival (time alive), event free survival (time until the cancer comes back or starts growing) and response rate (% of cases where the tumour shrinks by 20% or more). Cardiology is a bit different because there is less consensus about valid endpoints. Nevertheless, clinicians and regulatory bodies are pretty strict about which endpoints they consider meaningful.

So in my opinion the authors chose the subject area that would give them the most 'shocking' result (Cardiology, due to having more options for endpoints), glossed over the interpretation (why such a big difference in the gold standard endpoint that is supposed to be immune to manipulation?), and over-hyped the significance of the result.
For users in some country can't access Google Account (e.g. China), Can I still buy and use it? That'll be no Google Account on daily use.
All software has security vulnerabilities, but organisations have vastly different attitudes toward fixing vulnerabilities as they are identified, and potentially different capabilities when it comes to fixing vulnerabilities in a timely manner.
A good intro to clear containers here, it's really fascinating reading: http://lwn.net/Articles/644675/
It means that this isn't a mind-boggling amazing idea. This is like taking A/B testing to its logical extreme where you can just inject new tests (code) into an existing product.

Also, since you were so kind to reply, why don't you explain what this means: "use it to steal information of a user, or post dick pics all over the app."

Thanks!
Do you believe the companies have never negotiated? It's a rather hostile way of interacting, but not unheard of.

It's "conducting business" in the same way as way a parasite is a type of symbiote.
Design Machines
In what state of mind does a person decide that looking at a toaster isn't enough justification for the sciences, and you also need to read philosophers like Sandra "Newton's Principia was a rape manual" Harding?
Get an external battery pack, sit wherever you want!
Who else was waiting for the real Chris Rock?
There are evenings, nights and weekends. The distant father-figure-bread-winner is a 20th century phenomenon that is rarer these days, at least in the western world, from what I am seeing.
"It's unlikely Google drops projects any more frequently than startups fail."

I don't disagree, which is why I also don't spend money on startup consumer goods that have any sort of requirement on "the cloud" (if the company dying makes the product virtually worthless, count me out) and also why I virtually never back tech kickstarter-style projects.

My opinion on google is that they are extremely bipolar (or at least give the external impression of being so) when it comes to experimental projects, they seem to go through periods where they are open to trying new things and then (very quickly) to periods of retraction where things that aren't ad focused are left to wither and die or just killed outright. I don't want my money caught up in their mood swings unless the value proposition is amazing, and in this case it really isn't.
I respect intellectual property, so the analogy works for me, but fine, it's like pirating an English film that's been dubbed into a language other than the one it was filmed in, and claiming that no piracy has occurred.

Edit: That first sentence came out unintentionally snarky, but I can't think of a better way to put it, so please understand that no snark was intended.
Also, consider reading The Sciences of The Artificial. This is in it, with so much more.
Reminds me of http://www.noogenesis.com/pineapple/Taoist_Farmer.html
Didn't Kaspersky just get caught crafting malware that makes other AV products attack critical Windows files?
Being that Django isn't to taste and you love SQLAlchemy (I have the same biases), I reckon Flask and Pyramid would be the best choices these days.

They are both non opinionated frameworks that do well with bringing in external code. I think both frameworks have opinionated/specialised 'metaframeworks' (eg Kotti or Eve) available though for those that don't want to make too many architecture or library choices.

If I had to differentiate between Flask and Pyramid, I would say that Flask has a slight edge for getting projects up and running while Pyramid is a bit better for projects that will grow and increase in complexity.

Or another way, Flask leans towards just getting stuff done (Hackers) while Pyramid leans towards enabling clean architectures (Software Engineers).

But there is a huge overlap in those characterisations - Pyramid is still great for getting stuff done and Flask is still great for cleanly architecting stuff.

Flask seems to be better known though and have more users, while Pyramid seems to have better release momentum lately. Those are probably the few objective advantages either has over the other.
Admittedly I totally went with an "io" (even works with the name, looks all fancy). But the challenge is securing that .com for the redirect.
Termbin.com – terminal pastebin
This is not exactly a fair comparison. The shell version works by using a rich library. The Pascal version presumably worked ab initio. If the source code for all the programs invoked by the shell scripts were included, Knuth's solution might look considerably better by comparison.
False. they just released the data a couple of hours ago. They've had it since your link
Out of Bethlehem: The Radicalization of Joan Didion
Jon von Tetzchner. He's got a team of experienced browser devs and fuck-you money from selling his last browser company.
Something bland, a bit stuffy, no Internet references, not a Domain name, no puns, something that oozes discretion, trust, experience, and service. A name that is derived from a last name or an address often works.

There does not need to be a linguistic relationship between your company name and property management or software.
I think making Boost optional would be a big win for you and your project. For one, given the aversion of so many C++ devs to Boost, removing Boost would probably result in more contributors. But most importantly, it would make life much easier for anyone who wanted to use the toolkit.
cma hit the nail on the head and you dismissed it.

Two departments or companies aren't going to use the same subset of C++.

Coding standards also evolve over time as languages evolve and better ideas about software engineering happen. 2015 C++ is much different than 2000 C++. Unless you always work on greenfield development with coworkers that strictly follow the same standards and C++ subset and you never do any kind of maintenance work, you will need to learn more parts of C++ than you may personally wish to use or learn.
I learned about this effect in Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality. Who knew?
Why Founders Fail: The Product CEO Paradox (2013)
Mr. Robot
We had a mayoral candidate who was campaigning on this plan, but Seattle voted for Ed Murray and his Highway 99 Tunnel project instead.
Sweet justice!
Turn Off Your Phone, Ignore That Email, and Enjoy the Moment
You could use an unrelated provider's DNS servers.

Cogent's are 66.28.0.45, 66.28.0.61

Level 3's are 4.2.2.1, 4.2.2.2

Hurricane Electric's is 74.82.42.42

Windstream's are 166.102.165.13, 207.91.5.20

Time Warner Cable's are 209.18.47.61, 209.18.47.62

O1 Communications' are 69.19.190.116, 66.81.1.252
It doesn't seem very plausible that Google made OnHub just to sell lots of them at the $200 price point. I think the official stance on this will be that they want to make the internet work better and be easier to setup. I do think that's plausible.

Plus, unless Google can snoop into HTTPS connections, how would this help them with ad targeting? (since HTTP will be phased out within the next few years)
Yep, we use HTTP::Tiny::Paranoid with additional blocklists for all external requests at FastMail. We have to allow requests to hit our external IPs still, because our customers could be fetching public data from other customers - but the requests route out to the external network, and our machines don't trust the external network more than they trust any other part of the internet.
I'm not afraid of a profit motive, I'm afraid of moral hazard à la subprime mortgage backed securities.
New open source full-featured Git client for Mac
A private space to share and discuss design work with your team
This is extraordinarily well written.
Mr Robot feels like the answer to both Matrix and Fight Club. 16 years later, we're still living in this dystopian pre-apocalyptic malaise, and we still have problems, but our solutions didn't work.
That's Standard ML for you ^

I'm excited that Haskell could bring more developers to ML-family languages.
CGA in 1024 Colors – A New Mode: The Illustrated Guide
So what is your solution, other than hoping the FCC will get the definitions right to allow the practices that are convenient for you and disallow those that are inconvenient - and not overreach into still more areas of communications, and not be generally corrupt, and so on? If rigorously applied, the precedent set here WOULD apply to corporate networks doing the same thing, with the FCC involved in deciding which rogue APs are or are not "legitimate" threats to security. Oh boy, they'll sure get that one right! As I said, consent is at least a clear and enforceable standard, plus it gets the FCC out of everyone's boardrooms and bedrooms.
Thank you for your patient and lenghty replies. I still think we disagree - but I think I'm getting a better grasp on your view/ideas.

How do you see taxation/fees working across borders? Clearly agreements can be made, but it seems much more feasible to piggyback on trade agreements than to erect a new international body of law just for digital content? How do money paid by a Chinese factory worker find its way to an American poet? And vice-versa?
Science is not the only thing that goes into a toaster. You are ignoring the enormous social institutions that go into modern society and economy. Those social institutions, in fact, have been the subject of intense thought for millenia, and the institutions you have now are rooted in relatively recent philosophical investigations.

And eventually they will be supplanted, and their successors will be rooted in philosophy that is perhaps being done today.

Also, your statement is a terrible piece of rhetoric. Do I have to spell out why it's not a really compelling rhetorical question?
When I looked through the article, at first I saw nothing that was not covered in the official announcement.

But no, I didn't scroll far enough, there is indeed content there worth linking to. Therefore no, I was wrong, this is not blogspam, it just really looked like it.

Your snark and the downvote brigade are not appreciated.
At a certain point, having the .com will be unnecessary. Are we there today? If you're a techie, yes. If you're a relative Luddite, it may be some ways off yet. In RE, you'll need the .com, best of luck.
Arnold Schwarzenegger Really Likes You
I think that's the full and whole point of the article: The unix command line tools can be combined by a mediocre systems engineer to do the work of Knuth in less time and with easily assessable correctness.

This is a form of wonderful magic, available only because of the discipline and vision of those who wrote the original tools.
Oh, excellent observation. I am wrong. :)
Metatables seem to be supported, have a look at benchmark/suites/mtvsclosure.lua
I've created a Homebrew formula to make this easy to install on OS X which is PRed to the homebrew-games tap at https://github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-games/pull/305

Game is a lot of fun, thanks for making it. I'm glad to see neat projects being done in Go.
SKIN CARE TYCOON: DOES SKIN CARE TYCOON LEGIT?
Nice. I was futzing with covariance matrices in Scala today at work and realized I really need a refresher on some of this stuff (college was over a decade ago).

Fortunately, we have a couple of scientists on staff I can usually bug for assistance when I get confused.
> An emic approach ... considering what historical actors “rather than the present author or his readers” considered to be “knowledge.”

The "emic approach" may be helpful if your plan is to study how people from other times thought about their own life and work. It's a nice way to get yourself fully immersed in a different world. But by focusing too much on what those people actually thought, it risks leaving out all the unacknowledged and unrecorded assumptions that lubricated their society. Some of those things only become apparent when you are far enough from the scene.

There is "information" as it objectively exists and functions in the universe. Then there is "information" as it is subjectively acknowledged and exploited by any given person or society at any given time. The two are related but not identical. Both are interesting and important to study. It's okay if you want to focus on one more than the other, but there is no need to disparage the other.
1) It does not seem credible that all this would go on before multiple witnesses with no action whatsoever.

2) is there no dress code of ANY kind?

3) you keep speaking as "we", yet there is no indication that his supervision is in that "we".

4) I find "we asked HR" to be both out of line, and suspect -- it's wholly inappropriate for peers to contact HR in such a context.
No - you said drop off a file somewhere. Connecting to their open AP is a crime in itself. I was trying to point out that the legal system has no idea how to deal with the legalities of accessing APs. Of course, they would have prove I had a malicious intent (assuming they could track me down).