skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I remember the LaserJet 4000 and the 4550 (color beast, the startup sequence sounded amazing with all those motors and the always-on fans). Worked flawlessly for hundreds of thousands of pages.

It had expandable RAM, and you could send files to the print queue inside the printer via LPT or Ethernet, and it did PostScript rendering inside, which was quite convenient when printing lots of stuff (reduced the amount of data you had to send, and no issues with interrupted printing). I guess that's why it needed its own processor.
I suppose. But once there's a bunch of stuff online that's linked to your DNA data, anyone who has your DNA data can correlate it all. And tie it to your true name.

Bottom line, I see no compelling upside to putting ones DNA data on the Internet.
(Preemptive N.B.—I'm far from an expert, but I'm very interested in seeing this aspect of the topic discussed further by folks who might be experts.)

Isn't the general premise here that one can choose to package up any program in as many deeply nested (virtual or physical) sandboxes as one would like, but there's an inherent benefit to the piece of software inside all those boxes exposing to one's adversary as few avenues as possible to attempt to escape them (specifically as it pertains to people in the business of painting targets on their backs e.g. Soghoian)?

Put another way, of course Gmail and Chrome have dedicated security teams, but they won't ever have prevent $GIVEN_INFOSEC_RESEARCHER's box from getting owned teams.
Why we should stop Facebook building an AI
"For deriving the relative risks comparing car driving and cycling, we specified a hypothetical scenario based on statistics in the Netherlands."

YMMV.
Python for Kids

https://www.nostarch.com/pythonforkids
This blog post is doing precise integer arithmetic without rounding, and dealing with polynomials of tiny degree. But for more general uses...

Anyone trying to work with polynomials as continuous functions using floating point arithmetic (or trying to work efficiently with piecewise continuous functions in general) should check out Chebfun, http://www.chebfun.org

People should avoid working with polynomials expressed in the monomial basis if possible, unless dealing with a function defined on the complex unit circle. The Chebyshev basis is generally faster and more accurate for polynomials defined on some real interval, and makes it practical to compute with polynomials of very high degree. http://www.chebfun.org/examples/linalg/CondNos.html http://www.chebfun.org/examples/roots/RandomPolynomials.html

For a lot more see: http://www.chebfun.org/ATAP/atap-first6chapters.pdf http://www.chebfun.org/docs/guide/chebfun_guide.pdf

Here’s the guts of their multiplication routine, which multiplies two polynomials and returns a new polynomial which approximates the product to near machine precision:
https://github.com/chebfun/chebfun/blob/development/%40chebt... (For the mathematical details see the (paywalled) paper http://epubs.siam.org/doi/abs/10.1137/120865458?journalCode=...). Multiplying values at Chebyshev points (similar to the blog post under discussion) would work too, but Chebfun natively stores an array of coefficients. In fact, they did multiply at values before April of last year, https://github.com/chebfun/chebfun/blob/05611dec557718b5b026...
No. We need those things. A robust, wealthy society does not come for free. Taxes fund all of that.

Regulations are necessary too. Without them, we will experience very significantly higher risks and with those come costs.

The reason is simple: They are not getting paid enough. Wages in the US have been essentially flat while most everything else is on the rise, including profit.
Thanks. I enjoyed letting him know people outside of the family took interest in his letters...I am not sure he believed me - ha.
> The "full stack" listed in the article was missing growing the silicon and screwing the servers to the rack

This is funny, but I actually know a guy whose last full-stack job entitled just that in addition to his dev duties! Since they self-hosted, he was responsible for data redundancy, etc. The guy's experience was definitely impressive
I used to use Mutt, but these days I do over 75% of my mail reading on a phone, and on a phone Mutt is a non-starter.
Not to disagree about the need to factor in the dev cost, but there's plenty of companies smaller than Google doing TCP stacks on FPGAs.

Pretty much all high-frequency trading today uses FPGAs, for instance, and that's often with teams of fewer than ten people.
Yes, but integers are a specialization of polynomials. For example, the number 263 can be written as 2x^2 + 6x + 3, where x=10.

(Note that for integers, a post-processing step is necessary to account for coefficients that are larger than the number base, but I guess this is relatively inexpensive).
I tried out IBMs around 1997 and it worked quite well. I guess people don't want them? Here's a 2000 video of the roughly the thing I tried https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuk5ED5szSA&feature=youtu.be...

(my one didn't have the speech recognition but had a mouse type device like this http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/article/980911/ibm_7.jpg)

In some ways it was better than Glass in that it was a full Windows PC. It didn't have internet connectivity though. I'd quite like something like that today. A proper os, high res display that can show stuff in laptop layout, not darn mobile layout, and 4G connectivity. Possibly without a camera to freak out the people you interact with.
Dive into the storm: how to survive the chaos of life and get what you want
Python for Kids

https://www.nostarch.com/pythonforkids

It's one of my favorites.
I've used mutt for ages, but a couple of years ago I switched to Karel Zak's mutt-kz branch (https://github.com/karelzak/mutt-kz), which integrates notmuch into mutt. The setup is a little fussy (although well documented), but the results are spectacular. Mutt's search was never horrible but with notmuch its nutty fast, and the tagging feature makes dealing with search and mailing lists very convenient.
Dude, why creating something in an universe somebody else controls, for free? Wouldn't it be more creative to come up with your own world and characters? It would be more challenging, sure, but much more rewarding in every way (improving your narrative skills, benefiting 100% from publicity of your work, not risking to be nuked with a DMCA from orbit, etc etc).

In the end, if you really must have a Jenina Proudmoore, just call her something else and give her a similar-but-not-quite-same background.
Sass Tutorial on How to Write Better CSS Code – Toptal
Most of this talk is, in retrospect, embarrassingly wrongheaded, but I think it does point the way toward better approaches. Unfortunately, I still haven't finished writing the counterpoint to it that I began writing in 2007, so I haven't published it yet.
Glenn Greenwald Debates Keith Alexander
Seems like the sentiment among most commenters is that they do most of what the author describes as Full Stack, as do I. The biggest thing I'd disagree with is adding UI design/Photoshop skills to an engineering stack. That's no more a part of software engineering than marketing or sales is.
Thunderbird and, I think, Kmail allow you to specify an external editor (probably vim, Emacs users would use something inside Emacs)
I use Thunderbird and keep it set as text only for sending and remote images loading is disabled by default (as it should be). JavaScript in emails is not loaded or run.
Wow, what a coincidence! I'm just about to start my Operating Systems class. This will come in handy.
RE: Thine assay on my coinage -

Costly thy habit as thy purse can buy,
But not express'd in fancy; rich, not gaudy;
For the apparel oft proclaims the man,
And they in France of the best rank and station
Are most select and generous, chief in that.

Neither a borrower nor a lender be;
For loan oft loses both itself and friend,
And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.
I get the sentiment, but I don't think a programming language is what Thiel was thinking of when he talked about "a secret."
I have used it from a phone with a terminal emulator over ssh (all of my phones have had keyboards). It was impressive to see how the keyboard supported mapping swipe gestures to cursor movement keys so that I could swipe up and down in my mutt message listings.
No, the email header sent by abine when they forward the email from 23andme. That contains their real email address in plaintext, and might also contain the masked address; if not, a timing attack given the time of 23's emails and the time of the forwarded email might work.

If the actual email is unencrypted, then the NSA gets everything for free.
You don't start a project for the sake of starting a project. The idea should be visualized in your head, along with some back end algorithms to solve it. That said, I usually start sketching it in a paper, then move to skeleton UI, making sure all my HTML is up, maybe use something like bootstrap to make it feel more appealing, then quickly code a lot of backend code (non-optimized) until it's functional..then jump back to UI, so i can visualize the ending project and then fixing remaining bugs/features/performance in backend then finishing touches in frontend.

TL;DR: A bit of Front, a lot of backend, then some front again, a bit more backend, then finishing it up with the front
Exchange has supported IMAP, MAPI, POP, and SMTP for at least a decade.

In large implementations (such as Exchange Online in Office365) they may not support some of those services. IMAP can be very resource intensive and bog down a CAS or storage server.
Pentadactyl also allows you to edit input fields with any editor (and many other things):

http://5digits.org/nightlies

Same goes for vimperator, of which Pentadactyl is a fork.
If Mutt is not a traditional mail client, then what is? heirloom-mailx?

I read my mail with less. That's a nontraditional mail client.
But we need types people! Properly static ones that can be used to encode your intentions and handle inconsistency before even running the program. And yes I know that Clojure has an optional type system. But optional means that you cannot rely on having types in the libraries that you use. So you can't fit your stuff together with their stuff and have reasonable expectations that it will work once the user does that one thing you didn't think would be a most reasonable thing to do (of course it is, what were you thinking! And tell me again why you didn't just let the computer do that thinking for you?).
I can see why hotels in India might have quality problems:

> 2,200 hotels operating in 100 cities across India ... and 1,500 employees.

... financed with ...

> monthly revenues of $3.5m (£2.3m)

Revenues of ~$1,600/hotel/month? ~$2,300/employee/month? Am I misunderstanding something?
HTC+Desire+728+Price+and+Details+|+AnsMachine.Net
Have you tried a tiling wm?
I use i3, it's great :-)
For added peace of mind it does not take long to write an AppArmor profile to further confine Sylpheed to just the parts of your filesystem you'd like it to be able to access.

Do you have an example? Sounds like a pretty awesome setup that you should share.
Boost Profit with a Recommendation and Similarity Engine
I'm excited about IoT, and have ordered some ESP8266 development boards to play with.

With that said, don't get me wrong, but some of this stuff has to be failsafe, and making it smarter, makes it more complex. More like software, if you will.

I don't know if there are enough engineers out there, with the knowledge, discipline and experience designing failsafe products, to support the entire IoT industry.
A related thought is what an unfathomable amount of information is being created all the time. For instance just on YouTube 300 hours of video are now uploaded every minute. Even if all you did was consume 24/7, you can never catch up and will always be falling hopelessly behind.
Sorry, my comment was too oblique.

My points were two.

First, a whole lot of things have happened since, to the point that the environment we're operating in now is quite substantially different.

Second, the shallow numbers may mislead in trying to determine what's better - maybe something went right. Higher spending is only bad if we're not getting value for it.

Mostly, it boils down to "you're not going to get very far analyzing it at this level."
Thanks.

> I use Thunderbird and keep it set as text only for sending

Is that an option for viewing messages? That's where the security risk mostly exists.
That's why I would like to send my DNA in anonymously; I don't want to link anything to my DNA data.
One day we will find that perfect type system (and associated compiler/IDE/Interactive front end) and then everyone will take one big sigh of relief. And then we all will start fixing problems in a way that makes them stay fixed.
Geotrust/Symantec has revoked all SSL certificates for .pw domains
It depends on what do you use Celery for.

For launching a bunch of IO-bound "tasks", for example calling external services from Django views, I'd consider using Twisted (or Tornado, or asyncio). Your tasks would need to be either written in async style, or you'd need to spawn new processes from within Twisted (but built-in functionality makes this rather easy). Still, Twisted is rock-solid, doesn't leak and is capable of handling a lot of (IO-bound) tasks concurrently.

If your tasks are CPU bound you pretty much have no choice other than something based on multiprocessing. You can still use Twisted, but only in the second way. If the code of your tasks doesn't use C extensions you could use Jython with threads. This way you'd get parallelism without having to rewrite much code.

If you need your tasks parallelized and you want to run a lot of them concurrently then I'm afraid you're out of options in Pythonland. Personally I'd go for Erlang with ErlPort, but I know Erlang rather well.

On the other hand, Celery is a nice piece of code. I think in most cases you don't need anything else, or at least nothing drastically different, like the options above. Perhaps rq would be a good idea. I also encountered an interesting project called Pulsar (http://pythonhosted.org/pulsar/overview.html), but it seems to be usable only on 3.3 and above.
Liberated implies that today's computers are limited in what they can do, which I disagree with. But I can imagine special purpose machines being constructed to carry out tasks faster than otherwise possible. If we depart from the von Neumann style of computers, we probably won't program these new machines in the traditional sense. I can see, for example, a computer designed to run an artifical neural network at the hardware level being trained on various datasets. In this case, training might be the new way of programming.
The headline actually is, "America's Poorest Are Getting Virtually No Assistance"
I had a terrible recent experience with Gandi, bad enough that after transferring a handful of client domains to them from GoDaddy, I turned around and transferred them to another registrar at my own expense.

Gandi support is worse than useless. They have no idea what they're doing, they can only read from a script, and the only way to contact them is by email with a nice long turnaround time. Even the tiny little registrar I've used for over a decade (who I don't otherwise recommend because of other big issues they have) has a phone support option and staff with functioning brains.
>but that just means people (and jobs) are reallocated to more useful stuff.

No one argues that bullshit is constantly being iterated on. But cars are bullshit - i.e. we lived for a long time without them, and they needed to be advertised to take hold. Now simply having a car is entrenched bullshit, and the cutting edge is convincing people to buy expensive ones.

You don't need a car, but cars are necessary to facilitate the American Dream, also sold to us by advertising in the 40s/50s, of living in suburbs. Home ownership and the things that go with it are equally bullshit.

One of the first documented shifts in public opinion orchestrated by a PR firm is America's belief that roads are for cars instead of people.
If Xiamoi makes enough of the stack, the devices with a desirable user experience...it might not be a problem at all for both Xiamoi and the customers at this phase of IoT - the vertical integration level is likely required to get it off the ground and make it a good experience.

Eventually, a shift to a more horizontal and open approach will win out, but it seems hard to do that at the starting point of an emerging market.
Hmm, I tried to drag the US back to where it is on the map, and it doesn't fit...
That plus there aren't many good open source (non-web) options.

Thunderbird is pretty bad.
‘Steve Jobs’ Review
Indeed, having a fast way to multiply in Z[x] gives you a fast way to multiply in Z and vice versa. In the reverse direction, you can encode the polynomial f = 2x^2 + 6x + 3 as 30602, and 30602^2 = 936482404 tells you that f^2 = 4x^4 + 24x^3 + 48x^2 + 36x + 9 (of course, on a computer you do this in binary as opposed to decimal).

This correspondence is often exploited in both directions. If you ask a sufficiently sophisticated computer algebra system (SageMath, for example) to multiply two large polynomials with integer or rational coefficients, chances are that it will reduce the problem to multiplying two large integers, then reduce that problem to multiplying two large polynomials (but different from the ones you started with), and then proceed using recursive polynomial and integer multiplications to compute that product... (i.e. going through a sequence of transformations Z[x] -> Z -> Z[x] -> ...)
It's also been attempted with buses:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-19254318

Some are probably trying with airlines too:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9916974

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8368727
How long did it take Twitter to finally clean up most of their "operational details"?

While being able to do a first pass of a working app from front end to back end is something many can do, planning for the unexpected, scaling, understanding edge cases and where things may break (including diagnosing problems in off the shelf components), digging deep into AWS issues, etc. Require a depth of skill and knowledge very few can actually achieve across a wide breadth.
if all of these have youtube, hulu and netflix ...to the consumer that might be the level of interop currently required -- interop with their fav delivery platforms, not necessarily the devices themselves
but... they did buy it... he got something not being offered for free: the combined ebook, which is in a different file format and contains extra material
The Arpaci-Dusseaus are some of my favorite professors at the UW - they're not only first-rate researchers but fantastic teachers.

Remzi in particular has a very dry but hilarious sense of humor. His exams are a hoot (but are also great questions to see if you really know your material)

http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~remzi/Classes/537/Fall2013/OldExam...
I fully agree.

Without types you just can't do much, or at least, if you're super good, compiler can't do much.

And most of the time you're trying to make something faster.
The upside is getting potentially profound information about yourself, in a way that is inexpensive and convenient.

There are also significant benefits to biological research. Most genetic variation is rare, and the effect of each of these rare variants is small, but they add up. Having access to larger datasets will allow us to be able to better correlate those variants to diseases. 23andme is already doing this with Genentech: http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2015/01/06/surpris....
Ah - the other title was from the automatic bookmarking thing
You have a point, every time there's a recommendations thread someone comes along to crap on the most popular recommendation (I'm guilty of that too).

I've had to work with a pretty large number of different registrars and hosting companies over the years -- part and parcel of being a troubleshooter -- and I'd place Bluehost squarely in the middle of the pack. They've never done anything infuriating, which puts them way ahead of a lot of other companies, but there's also not really anything about them that sets them apart from the rest of their competition, other than maybe their size.
> That's exactly what the GP was warning about: people will just go into a different "meta-queue" in which they vie for being the technically-"last" person to enter the real (LIFO) queue [1], with all the externalities that involves. People are still spending time waiting, they just have to do it in a more roundabout way. No free lunch (in money or time).

The ability of someone to "cut in line" by leaving and then coming back is obviously a critical failing of the system if doing that is cheaper than doing the thing you're desired to do. But you can imagine rules to address it, like if you leave and come back then you get the same position in the stack as if you had never left. (And if this is being implemented in a computer then maybe you get a message on your phone once you're at the top of the stack.)

> So ... the entire counterintuitive result is just an artifact of how this method makes it more expensive (in time spent, assuming away the meta-queueing problem above) at peak times? But then it's no different from the case for peak-hour pricing (or the opposite in the case of happy hours and early bird specials).

It doesn't make it more expensive at peak times. The total cost is exactly the same, but it is imposed highly disproportionately, so that instead of 120 people each waiting 15 minutes, you have 105 people who are served immediately and 15 people who would each have to wait two hours. The theory being that at least some of those 15 people will then give up and leave because they can go do something productive with two hours when they couldn't have with only 15 minutes.

You get essentially the same result by putting a small hard limit on the length of a queue and then banning anyone who showed up when the queue is full from entering the queue until it is completely empty.
It would definitely be ideal if such a system were created by sane-minded people, as you have suggested here. Just like nuclear weapons, powerful AI really should be kept out of radical hands. As usual, there would be an arms race between opposing political powers, so hopefully those making the decisions keep human existence as the highest priority. We don't need a "doomsday machine" in the form of a singularity. Anyway, your suggestion of a perpetual desire of the system to keep humans around is a good idea. Another good idea could be to have it stop and ask the humans for approval to continue after every so many iterations, thus keeping the people in control. This would prevent a never-ending auto-growth mode and allow changes to the plans as times changed.

Overall, the possibilities are pretty much endless, just like with most types of software. Whether it be one or multiple entities probably depends on design. Nature chose multiple entities, with the ever so curious sexed species that require two individuals to make a new hybrid at each testing iteration. Bacteria, on the other hand, are asexual and reproduce through binary fission. But of course a thinking self-creator is a different ball game. It would probably be fruitful to have some sort of end goal built into the system, rather than having it consume resources simply to become as computationally immense as possible. For example, perhaps its goal could be to solve a set of questions humans have about the universe, and perhaps it would stop iterating once all those questions were answered satisfactorily. In a way it could serve as a god that answered people's questions. Then again, perhaps we are all living in a simulation running on the singularity of an earlier universe, and who knows how many turtles that spans.