skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Then the exchange breaks the 0.5x trade

Yeah, this can't be overemphasized. When some widow or orphan (or more likely GS) is on the other side of the trade, then clearly it should be broken. Wouldn't want them to lose any money. /sarcasm

As you say, the rational action is not to play.

Other people have opined on this and said that, if the "clearly erroneous" rules are properly defined, then a trade should never never never be broken. It should simply not be allowed to go thru. That makes more sense to me.

Edit: And for those who think this is merely hypothetical, or just whinging, you should read this: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/37fff9c6-0b36-11e3-bffc-00144feabd...
GS trades were broken. Hopefully the FT paywall won't block that link, it worked for me when I searched for the story. So who knows.
> the assumed lost of revenue due to inflated land costs is not actually "costing" anything.

Sure it is.

It even has a name: opportunity cost.

If I had the opportunity to sell my underwear for 1000$, but I chose not to, this decision cost me 1000$.

Say you make $300 a day.
One morning, I wave my gun in front of your front lawn and strongly suggest you don't go to work today. Your daily expenditure will be somewhat the same as every other day (mortgage, food, electricy, etc) ... Will you say I didn't cost you anything?
@cottonseed, @sall, @x3n

How do you remember faces or your house, or your car?
LevelDB's design is inherently unreliable. Nobody should be using it nowadays. https://www.usenix.org/conference/osdi14/technical-sessions/...
...because if there's one factor that correlates positively with national economic strength, it's population growth. /s
>Circumstantial scarcity of housing aside, unless the landlord is paying more in building maintenance and property taxes, the assumed lost of revenue due to inflated land costs is not actually "costing" anything.

Sure it did. It cost him risk and opportunity. People who buy property are at the mercy of changing economic conditions, whimsical government bureaucracies, and easily-led voters. They could have bought T-bills instead without any of the headache.

I wouldn't buy rental property, especially in San Francisco. Nobody's going to come by and drop off a check if you lose money, but they'll certainly be there to collect if your property goes up in value.
…I don't quite understand why you rebutted my points about Berkeley DB with points about LMDB.

The only point you actually rebutted without referring to LMBD was regarding documentation. Yes, some parts of BDB are copiously documented. Others are not. How cursors interact (or, don't) with partitioning is not documented at all. Some settings are underdocumented (e.g. the cache size setting doesn't specify whether "gigabytes" means 10^9 or 2^30). What the cache priority levels mean is barely even discernible from the source code. The documentation for how to set parameters like the total number of mutexes and active transactions to allocate boils down to "guess and check". Why enabling MVCC causes transactions to linger for ages isn't explained anywhere, beside maybe one mailing list post from 2008.

I'm glad to see that my experience with BDB is corroborated by that of the developer of BDB's poster child (despite your unsubstantiated claim that I'm "wrong on so many points").

That said, since you felt the need to claim it, I feel the need to ask how you can rectify the claim that "LMDB is so much faster than every other data management mechanism in existence, nothing else even comes close" with the fact that LMDB is Btree-based and thus must face significant performance challenges with both sequential synchronous random writes, and with random writes and deletes to/from databases whose working set does not fit in memory.
Chrome is subject to analysis by much more people than Safari by virtue of its larger market share and cross-platform nature. In addition, Google pays a great deal for security researchers to actively find bugs in Chrome. I would take the higher number of CVEs of Chrome as a positive sign for its security, in that they are preemptively searching and fixing security vulnerabilities.
The phrasing of the question is When you are awakened, to what degree should you believe that the outcome of the coin toss was Heads?

It's not actually asking for a strategy about guessing the correct answer, or how many times you'll be right or wrong.

It think whether you are a halfer or a thirder is going to depend on how you interpret the question.

If you see it as asking about the frequency at which "Heads" will the right answer, then it's clearly 1/3. But that's not what the question actually asks (probably - all language is interpreted).
Regardless, I hope my post dissuades any readers who think otherwise.
Academics don't want to play entrepreneur. We don't want all the money. We want enough to do what we like doing.
I just added the MD5 checksum from AWS S3 to the email alerts for each linked "evidence".
Maybe I'm just tired & not able to detect sarcasm right now, but isn't 2^80 bytes more bytes than are currently stored in the world? That's on the order of 10^24, which is something like 1 million exabytes, which is a million squared terabytes, right?
How do you know they haven't already?
There is definitely something similar in Michigan.
Um... population growth is very strongly positively correlated with GDP growth. It's well acknowledged that Japan and Europe's economic problems are mainly driven by aging and shrinking populations.

But I also don't see how this relates to my point. I'm not making judgements, I'm hypothesizing about the reason for a trend.
>as much as scientists might think of themselves, the world at large see's you as a tool used by politicians and entrepreneurs.

Just who the hell do you think we are?
Testing - per the desired hardware page: http://www.openbsd.org/want.html

"It is important to spread sparc64 around the development community, since it is the most strict platform for detecting non-portable or buggy code."
To see why your argument is flawed, you need only realize the rental market in SF is not a monopoly.
While I agree that building housing is a better solution, it's hardly trivial. It's very capital intensive and in a lot of cases no one is willing to put that kind of capital up. Turn detached single family homes into denser townhouses? GOod luck. Turning industrial land into high rises is easy enough but that doesn't really cover the entire spectrum of housing types. What cities in the Bay Area really need to do is tear down 60's suburbs and rebuild as if they were 1860's London.

But that's not going to happen.
Also, it may be that those with higher incomes have a more stable situation, and are less likely to need to move, and thus are more likely to benefit from rent control.
I had the same problem. My comment:

---

"The crucial assumption is that the abstract program, as a mathematical object, requires design and therefore intent. Accordingly, only artificial things can compute. We cannot say, for example, that a brain computes."

I would argue that living things represent the spontaneous emergence of teleology in nature (i.e., evolution doesn't itself have a goal but it implies the greater success of creatures which do have goals). Brains evolved to help organisms survive and reproduce by allowing them to better process sensory data. So brains were "designed" for an "intent" (survival/reproduction), in the sense that brains that did not serve the intent died out.
> starts charging monopoly prices, and buys any new competitors for 100x earnings so that it can retain a monopoly, including paying commpetitors not to enter the field at all.

This kind of mustache-twirling evil plan is insanely expensive. As in insta-bankruptcy expensive. Plus you'd have all kind of things backfiring, like business moving away because their rent, or their employees' rent are too expensive.

> Now, let's say I want to run a monopoly like that.

By all means, go ahead, I'll buy your properties at the foreclosure auctions.

The only way you'd be able to make your evil plan work would be with the support of a government. (With someone else paying the tab.)
Finger-mounted reading device for the blind
Unfortunately, the nature of Objective-C as an Apple-centric language means a lot of people like it because Apple says they're supposed to, and don't take criticism of it well.

objc_msgSend is pretty amazingly fast, and is not usually a bottleneck in code, but the inability to do things like inline method calls when the target is known at compile time is a downer.
A land value tax ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax ) is an economically interesting alternative to rent controls that doesn't seem to suffer from the same perverse incentives that rent controls sometimes do.

FWIW, the housing market is pretty far from a free market, so well-implemented rent controls could be a good thing. I think like all government policies, really it comes down to implementation - I can imagine Germany doing a much better job than the USA here.
For reference, there actually was a BerkeleyDB backend for MySQL. The MySQL guys stopped supporting it and deleted it from their source distro, but it was available all the way up until MySQL 5.0.95.
> An observer of the produced random numbers can potentially deduce the next numbers from the first 1024 random numbers.

By definition, a cryptographically secure pseudorandom number generator cannot be predicted like that by a computationally bounded attacker.

Thus if any attacker could deduce the next number from /dev/random by observing the numbers before, the algorithms they adopt is fundamentally wrong, and nothing could the save the security in that case.
Hurrian songs
"the fate of my kids future and my family's future can be thrown off track by random shit"

That's life.
AAA titles dont get done in a year, which is about how long UE4 has been out. On top of that, I would say UE4 is just now getting to a place where it would be ready to be used in an AAA pipeline, so unless they spent a ton of time on asset creation before hand, I wouldnt expect to se any AAA titles for at least another year or even two.
I guess I've finally become a hopeless cynic, my first reaction to that statement was that somebody in the school administration and somebody in the company supplying the food to the district probably have a tidy little financial arrangement propped up by the peanut allergy boogeyman.
Really? I lived there are never heard of it when I did. Cite?
Phones have two gigs of RAM and four cores these days. Low what? If you're talking software on an internet connected fridge, then, maybe, but that's a pretty niche area even in today's mostly theoretical and overpriced IOT world.
Most pizza places will cut square if you ask, but only the better class of pizza places uses delicious Provel cheese. TIL Quad Cities is known for something... b^)
Recommended+by+BrainyNetwork
Rent Control (absolute caps on prices) doesn't make sense. In NYC, a small number of apartments are under it and have ridiculously low rent. Rent Stabilization (limiting how much landlords can raise rent on existing tenants) sounds like a bad idea economically, but it can be very hard on tenants to have their rent raised dramatically so they're forced out of their homes. The initial rent prices are set by the market, so it shouldn't discourage investment and development of buildings.
Thanks. SMC projects are private by default, but it does let users easily selectively publish any file or directory tree publicly. For example: https://cloud.sagemath.com/projects/4a5f0542-5873-4eed-a85c-...
I can't speak for the parent commenter, but from what I've seen some communities and social groups are like a bunch of crabs in a bucket -- if one tries to climb out, the others pull it back down. Anyone who is smarter, more ambitious, or more dedicated than these groups will be ostracized and ridiculed until they conform or drop out. The vicious, vile harassment of which some people are capable is disgusting.

Anyone who begrudges a parent who wants to live in a good community has never felt the brunt of living in a bad one.
> No, because there aren't enough people who are willing to pay $3000.

In S.F. there might be.

In Manhattan too.
S3QL: an S3 FS with encryption, de-dup, immutable trees and snapshotting
You really want GitHub analyzing your code? REALLY? If the internet found out they were analyzing every push the backlash would be 10x what it is now.

Even if it's public... That's still a Gmail-esque situation that would immediately raise privacy concerns.

Developers should pay attention to what they're doing. Your AWS keys shouldn't even been in your private repo. You should find another way or you shouldn't be using a third-party for source control.
I think it shows some societies and people are willing to take the long view.
It's better than just hoping something good will happen. Or that a government in shining armor will come to the rescue. They understand that some sacrifice of more or less status symbols, do provide a vehicle to success for their offspring.

In addition, to many of them, joy comes in the form of seeing their offspring do better than themselves. So, to them sacrifice does not equate to not enjoying their lives. Their state of mind is different.
There is TONS of investment capital sitting on the sidelines looking for decent returns at the moment. Capital availability is not the issue here.
I'd rather not talk about "rights," but how about preferences? I would certainly prefer that "the people (through the government)" did not have the ability to apply price controls to the market.
I'm no academic (just a CS student), but from the very little I understand about GC algorithms, there's no free lunch. In other words, choosing GC isn't like shopping for a new condo... different algorithms have different advantages and implementation difficulties. There may also be caveats with some algorithms that others aren't plagued by. "Better" means different things to different people and in different situations.

For what it's worth, many of today's finest, most important algorithms are from the 50s-70s, or maybe special adaptations of them. Theory doesn't obsolete like technologies do.

No need to get depressed by this. Hard problems are still hard (until proven otherwise), and taking out the trash is the same today as it has ever been.
You're quite likely right. My three year old wakes most nights in some sort of semi-aware panic. It's a fairly bizarre state - sometimes coherent, sometimes not, sometimes eyes open, sometimes a little zombie.
The tool has a huge bug! Even if he wasn't putting credentials in there, it could still have led to sensitive source code getting out or something!
Then don't use Go. Go was pitched as a systems language, but has found its niche as a server language. It's to be expected that the maintainers will make decisions that tune it for servers.
Proposition 13 also promotes the holding of land in legal vehicles, like Title Holding Trusts.

This saves big property owners a lot of money when it comes time to sell, but even seems to make sense for individuals.

Near my old neighborhood (where house prices are roughly $400k), 30-40% of the houses to the south of me were held in trust, and they appeared to be titled as individual's trusts.
But that's still not the question.

The stated question is When you are awakened, to what degree should you believe that the outcome of the coin toss was Heads?

Not, Should you _guess_ Heads or Tails?

The probability of the coin toss _does not change_. The probability that "the reason they are waking you up is because the coin was Heads" does change, but that's not the question.
Thing is, the entire Bay Area is seriously affected by the failure to build in SF. You can think of the SF Bay Area as a lower-population NYC with really shitty public transit.

> ...the upshot is closer to saying you couldn't live in Manhattan.

I'm not sure what you mean by "The upshot"?

Edit: I'm asking this question because I can't reply to the rest of your comment until I have its answer. I'm not snarking or trolling; I'm trying to have a productive conversation about a touchy topic with folks who probably don't share my views. I don't want to misinterpret what you were trying to say and say something incredibly dumb. :)
Many of your points were about embedded stores, categorically. LMDB is existence proof that as a category, embedded data stores are perfectly suitable for just about any purpose.

Cache size: "All sizes are in powers-of-two"
http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E17076_04/html/api_reference/C/set...

Cache priority levels: "The lowest priority: pages are the most likely to be discarded."
http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E17076_04/html/api_reference/C/mem...

Come on.
The point was, I thought, that Fibonacci numbers don't appear in nature, and nor does the golden ratio. Spirals, yes; logarithmic growth patterns, yes; fixed ratios, yes; but Fibonacci... no, not specifically. Did you have an example in mind where you believe the Fibonacci sequence actually does crop up, naturally?
W.r.t. the Ice-T example, a good liquid democracy implementation would still have several advantages over what we have now:
1) If Ice-T does a poor job, his delegators complain that something bad was "done in their name", they can trace to their Ice-T delegation and remove it. They don't have to wait two or four years for an election cycle.
2) Even if Ice-T doesn't know much about, say U.S. foreign policy, he may find someone who does and whose personal values are in pretty good alignment with him and his fans. So, Ice-T delegates his us-foreign-policy votes to the expert he trusts.
3) Ice-T may take his increased power seriously and start learning more about foreign policy so that he can do a good job. And option 1) puts him in check if he does not.
That's quite true, except that even OpenBSD is not _necessarily_ secure as a hypervisor.
You don't get to be "right twice"

The question is When you are awakened, to what degree should you believe that the outcome of the coin toss was Heads?

It's not a guessing competition, it's asking you to assess the probability of a past event that you have no new information about.
The State loves control, especially when it is packaged as "fairness." In the case of rent control, it's simply "fair" that you should be able to afford a place to live in the city and not have the evil capitalists prey upon the middle class. As the article mentions, price controls are nearly universally understood as inefficient among economists. The inefficiency expresses itself as a shortage of housing. Those who are able to find a place will enjoy cheap rent and then thank the politician who gave it to them. The rest will need to commute so they are out of the voting district anyway :-)

The article mentions building limits. Call it "zoning" or "neighborhood preservation" or "green belts" but it's all State control over what should be private property decisions made by individuals. Artificially limiting supply through a restrictive building permitting process will drive up costs. Hence, the need for rent controls.

So the State controls both the supply and price of housing in these metro areas. Any public figure or pundit who blames "capitalists" or "failure of the free market" for the housing woes should be laughed out of the room.

How can we solve the problem? Stop trying to fix it with government. Allow rents to equalize at the market rate and allow supply to be determined by the market. Until the statists relinquish control, the problem will never be resolved. But the upside is that we will get to read these nice Economist articles forever.
> No need to politicize it.

I was summarizing the linked reference which covered the politicized nature of the debate and quoted positions from both parties.
Well, I wouldn't say categorically unacceptable - if I had kids I wouldn't want them to be supervised by a child molester even if the person had completed parole, and that's far from the only troublesome corner case I can think of.

but as someone on the left, a great deal of what is taken for granted in the US penal system is categorically unacceptable to me. In my country (Ireland) and most other EU countries except the UK, people in prison are still allowed to vote in elections, for example; we consider the ideal of political self-determination so sacred that it is inalienable even if you lose your liberty.

Of course a cynical rejoinder to this is to point out the futility of voting as a political determinant and I can't really answer that other than to stand on principle. As a pragmatic matter I dunno how you expect people to reintegrate into society by formally excluding them from the annual rituals of civic participation but then most hardliners aren't interested in the rehabilitation arguments anyway. As a foreigner living in the US I can't vote anyway and I feel left out on election days; I think eliminating the franchise for people with a felony conviction is an appalling psychic injury to inflict on people (even if they never voted before going into prison) and it's one of the least defensible features of UK and US culture.
The saddest thing about this article was the linked NYT article by Krugman on San Fransisco's housing crisis .. From 2000!
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/07/opinion/reckonings-a-rent-...
Looks like nothing has improved in the last 15 years
I think you changed the question. Before you go to sleep you know you have a 50% chance of waking up to heads and a 50% chance of waking up to tails twice. When you wake up you haven't learned anything so those probabilities can't have changed.
Drupal 8, IoT and Graph Databases (ArangoDB, OrientDB, Neo4j)
"We have to assume the conviction is correct."

That takes quite a faith in process that has little remedial feedback.

Unlike say engineering or medicine where there can be a said to be an objectively observable system where all strive towards similar outcomes - and even those disciplines screw up constantly.

"Otherwise that leads to basically letting everyone go free just in case they're actually innocent"

There is a huge category of crime where long term incarceration absolutely does no help to anyone whatsoever.
And herein lies the problem. You say Given that you have just been awoken, what are the odds that you were awoken as a result of the coin landing heads?

But the linked post says (ambiguously) When you are awakened, to what degree should you believe that the outcome of the coin toss was Heads?

I don't think your interpretation of the post's question is accurate, but it's worded in vague enough terms that in effect we're arguing about the writer's intent rather than stats.
> Ideally, you'd want a device which blocks if and only if the entropy pool hasn't been properly seeded yet, but which never blocks again after that point. Apparently this is what the BSDs do, but Linux doesn't have one.

The getrandom() call added in Linux 3.17 does this. By default it reads from urandom, but it blocks until it estimates that urandom has been seeded with "a sufficient number of bits", which seems to be around 128 bits of randomness.

http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/getrandom.2.html

When available getrandom() should probably be preferred over both /dev/random and /dev/urandom.