skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't understand why people still believe in this concept. For me it's quite simple:

1. Our nervous system has quite narrow and well defined capability of receiving signals from the outside world. Every of our senses has own limitations. We can't see UV or IR etc.

2. Our body has a specific way of interacting with the world : we have specific size, strength, have to operate as one, undivided entity etc.

3. With such input coming from the above points, our brain creates a specific model of the outside world to function in it, interact, count apples and lions etc.

4. Part of this model is this cool toolset containing math and logic. It's very useful for us to predict and analyze the world and it's so flexible that we can expand and bend it according to our will in face of mismatch between observable reality and math.

So there is no surprise that we keep seeing math around us. We created it as a result of interaction with the world.

But to insist that math is the real way the world works is ridiculous. It's like saying that there's nothing beyond the visible spectrum of light because we can't see it.

I'm quite sure that any creatures with significantly different bodies than ours would come up with different "math" and different view of the universe.

EDIT: I was trying to imagine such creatures but gaps in my knowledge and limitations of my homo sapiens mind are hard to escape and imagine something unimaginable. But I'll give it a try: Think of a creature built of 100 autonomously moving clouds of particles, sharing one consciousness. The clouds can change their sizes in the ping-pong - planet range and communicate by radio waves. I think that just the ability to watch specific event from 100 perspectives would give this alien completely different psychology and approach to the logic, truth etc.
For his 10th prediction: Using the Chebyshev inequality (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chebyshev%27s_inequality) and assuming Yegge means being two sigmas away from mean programming talent to be "average" (k=2) we see that the probability for this to happen in 0.75 for any distribution. So most of us are average.
Building a Startup? Learn from success stories of industry leaders
But the word 'concept' refers to something specifically human: it's a name we've given to a category of human mental activity. Particular concepts may /refer/ to things that would be there without humans—but the concept making the reference would not. The whole issue under discussion comes down to that distinction.
Steve Jobs 'played no role at all' in designing the Apple I, Woz says
"Won’t car rental eventually become the only model of consuming cars?"

Arguably, this is Google's vision. But then, I find it equally as preposterous. :)
You might also want to have a look at https://github.com/buger/gor, which routes raw TDP packets directly.
The price drop was due to finally getting the phone subsidized by major networks.

If you bought it unlocked (or if you still do) it was the same price. It sucked a little for Early Adopters (like me) but it was completely predictable and wasn't honestly a huge surprise to anyone paying attention.

By the time the price drop happened they had sold over 25% of the smartphones that were bought in the previous quarter. They'd already met their goal of 1 million smartphones by the end of September at that point.

I swear... the rubbish I see over this: the iPhone was a wild success considering that Apple had zero involvement in that business before. It was the kind of success that many companies dream about for new hardware.
I agree with your points on Kalam but have to nitpick on everything else.

On the "describing reality" to "creating reality". Very few people argue for ex-nihilo creation but far more people tend to project that on the opposing side (ie where did god come from? what was before the big bang?). I don't think the author is arguing that mathematics allows for creating reality from nothing but that anything that resembles reality behaves mathematically and thus can transform into new situations with new mechanics (or realities).

Second nitpick: different mathematics. You don't loose the foundations of reason, rather you are stating that with different assumptions a system behaves differently. You are still computing the logical outcome with the premises given. If you have a universe where true and false mean the same then you have a very small universe that doesn't support any differentiation. Take comfort in knowing this helps solve Gödel’s incompleteness theorem. We can construct an infinite number of consistent mathematical realities but only by comparing their predictions to our reality can we resolve which reality is our own.
It includes hostname too. You can only get a collision if you do all of the following within one second:

1. Start an interactive shell.
2. Enter a command you want saved.
3. Exit this shell.
4. Start another shell.
5. Be unlucky such that the new shell has the same PID as the previous one.

This is not something to worry about.
What does "excess zeros" mean in the title?
> What that suggests is that a large gap between compensation and productivity is unstable

The entire economy is unstable. Things are never in equilibrium.

The labor market in particular is extremely illiquid. Employees don't change jobs twice a day, and employers don't decide to start new companies just because they saw opportunity on some competent person unemployed.

Also, jobs mostly don't appear by themselves. Enterprises need capital, risk taking, and several other factors that people don't just throw around.

Your completely liquid model needs plenty of adjustment.
Credit Card Forms Your Users Will Love
Do any solutions for the automatic management/setup of a large cluster of node + arm already exist? Managing a few, yet powerful servers is already tricky - it can only get worse when dealing with loads of low-power servers when you don't completely automate the management.

Furthermore, I doubt the Pi is an ideal candidate for a server - the CPU performance might be adequate for node.js microservices, the IO performance and data persistency metrics of an SD card are horrible. At least for databases (in which single machine performance still trumps a cluster for reasonable loads and if you want some data integrity guarantees, ie. ACID), I still cannot forsee the move towards a lot of Pis.
When Is  React Native Android Coming?
Guess my word
Lego Officially Reveals Its Star Wars: The Force Awakens Sets
Also my perspective on it. The means by which we describe, comprehend, or measure something is not the same as what it is actually made of.

Math is a quantitative description methodology, but no amount of "math" will bring a single photon into being.
Russia Is Returning to the Moon, Paving the Way for a Crewed Landing
They also sell Photoshop Elements which is surprisingly good in my opinion. I got it in a bundle with Premiere Elements from Amazon for $67 in a deal. If you check Amazon price history websites (such as camel 3x) it has been that price twice already this year.

Now if they update them beyond version 13, I do not know...
Tragedy of the Commons
Nixon ended the Bretton Woods gold standard.
That's already on the "todo" list - check out readme ;)
But aye..that's the rub. Is there any difference between meat that appears to operate _EXACTLY_ the same as different meat (constructed using the symbols)? Computationally, no. But if two things in an information-theoretic world, are informationally equivalent, then for all intensive purposes, they are equivelent. Quantum physics says this with regard to quantum states, there's no meat to differentiate electrons, only informational states.

You guys basically complemented each-other, and came back to the beauty of the question.

I'd say what's more pressing is, does the information match the implementation. That is, is there any glimpse of external forces (that implement our universe) inside of it.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_in_a_vat

If our whole reality is more of a rouge, rather than an accident, then it's possible our reality has almost nothing to do with the parent-verse. And well, everything we seem to value as good models for the true implementation, are well, garbage.
What is an employee worth, as an economic unit? In the absence of a labor shortage or non-economic forces, it's just maintenance and education cost. A dorm in Shentzen, some food, and training programs. The maintenance cost on humans hasn't increased much in recent years. Why should wages ever go up?

Rising wages means that people are being paid more than they're worth as an economic unit. Unless you're willing to take the position that people should be paid more than they're worth, you can't expect wages to rise.

Unions once explicitly took that position. A century ago, when Samuel Gompers was asked what he wanted for his union members, he answered "More". That's really what unions are for. In the 1950s and 1960s, not only did unions take that position, many manufacturing companies had come around to agree with it. It was a basic bargaining position in UAW negotiations of that era that wages must rise with productivity. The auto companies went along with this. That drove wages up across the US.

That ended in the 1970s. It was the result of explicit policy decisions.[1] Ronald Reagan is called the "Great Communicator" because he was able to sell some of those policies.

[1] http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=35277
Open Sans is used everywhere in the page. Also the buttons on top..
Any sufficiently complex map is indistinguishable from the territory.
Can you do LaTeX on Typora?
Having fun with Competitive Programming
16 guesses in 4 minutes - surprisingly addictive.
He also might simply prefer writing programs to writing blog posts.
Put both in separate rooms you cannot observe and equip them with a two way mic/speaker. Would you be able to determine which was a meat bag and the other was a simulation? If you can then we know the description is inaccurate. If you can't then not only is the description accurate but the substrate that the computation occurs in is not equivalent to what defines the person as a particular agent.
Thanks for this info. I'm going to try this out. We host on rackspace and kubernetes wasn't playing well with networking on rackspace nodes.
The Madoko document states that it implements different flavors and extends it slightly.

> Madoko is fully compatible with basic Markdown syntax and passes the entire test suite. It also implements most extensions, like Github flavored markdown, PanDoc, Markdown Extra, and multi-markdown, and it adds quite a few features itself to make it really useful for writing academic and industrial documents.
Brooklyn Bar Menu Generator
Or... you could use anontwi[1], which supports normal twitter messages, as well as well as gnusocial, and is already well-developed.

[1]: https://anontwi.03c8.net/
Hindsight is 20/20. You don't get to reinterpret statements made earlier just because he got the general gist.

Like he said, his specificity screwed him (laptops, xml, etc) - He's totally not being too hard on himself. He's being fair and honest in his evaluation.

It would be super easy to predict trends if you are nonspecific: I predict new and shiny will win in 10 years. Bleh that's a non-statement.
Just Open Sourced: Log Search Built on Google BigQuery
Yeah, lets pretend there is a perfect process and also punish people who own up to mistakes. That is stupidly what most companies do: add more process, make developers stand on their heads. The fact is that certain types of logic errors are likely never to be caught by SCA, code reviews, test cases, or anything else. It's just a fact that bugs are going to get through no matter what. It's is far better to have an environment where fault tolerance is built in AND there is no punishment culture for bringing bugs to light. If you rely on process you will get a) people hiding bugs, b) blame culture c) more disasterous failures.
yeah it's awesome. I'd love to actually how they implemented it. It's gorgeous.
I don't see any problem using couple of SVG image files for example.. The problem is that I'm not such a great drawer myself. In the first version I just used big J, Q, K like this: http://pakastin.fi/cards_2006
There may also be inequality of information and negotiation skills as well.

In Bob's scenario, maybe Bob doesn't know his value and is happy to take the job at $10 per hour. Bill, who works with Bob, negotiated $50 per hour. Bill has no idea how much Bob makes. Bob took $10 per hour because he compared that to a market rate for workers in that industry. Bill knows that their skills are relatively rare and that their work creates a lot of value.
If the decision was "it's not too late to make it big in this market if we start NOW", I think you would have done okay.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-inflated_model or in Q&A format http://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/13509/zero-inflated...
You can download Madoko and run it yourself.

http://madoko.codeplex.com/

http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/daan/madoko/do...
Side note on the janitorial side...but I wonder why there hasn't been a "Roomba" type creation that can handle a lot of the grunt work for that? Sure it is hard to automate scraping gum off of odd surfaces, and there are lots of floors and such, but I wonder if there's an opportunity for more robotic automation in that area.
Thank you. Testing is one of my biggest weaknesses. I get bored and negative about my own software when using it.
From that link:

"Former police officer Eric Parker, who is accused of injuring Patel, was fired from the Madison Police Department and charged with third-degree assault. In March 2015, Parker was charged by the FBI with felony civil rights abuse."
We call this "Milton method" of open-source community management.
Thanks, that's great source!
Marky – an open source markdown editor
Very interesting but it seems that to fully explore this and other similar sites they will need to develop underwater robots that are capable of doing underwater what archeologists do on land.
And my point is that that's not a very good argument. We don't have to use random walk algorithms to look for our solutions to the problem.

If someone shows you a list of sorted numbers and tells you they were sorted over a period of millions of years using bogosort, that may be true but it is not a good argument against the existence of efficient sorting algorithms.
My reading of it based on his grading is "preemptive multitasking with shared state"
> I don't think the author is arguing that mathematics allows for creating reality from nothing but that anything that resembles reality behaves mathematically and thus can transform into new situations with new mechanics (or realities).

I'm not sure I follow. What does "transform into new situations" really mean?

> We can construct an infinite number of consistent mathematical realities but only by comparing their predictions to our reality can we resolve which reality is our own.

If this is really what he meant, I appreciate the correction. If it would have been clear from the text, I would have proceeded with pointing out with pointing out the dodgy assumptions that underly the finetuning problem, but that would be even more like arguing against a deist/theist.
He didn't seem to be arguing against the principle of charging for the service. But, from a user's viewpoint, having to pay for something is rarely an argument in its favor.
Would love to hear more about the assertion that clojure is user hostile. He last elaborated in 2012 here:

https://plus.google.com/110981030061712822816/posts/KaSKeg4v...

which basically boiled down to an impression drawn from a conference where a speaker warned against using macros. I fully accept Yegge doesn't dig clojure, and perhaps he owes nobody any further explanation, but given his previous visibility as a champion of lisp and all the cool stuff happening in clojure / clojurescript, it just doesn't add up; his critiques are incomplete in that they fail to acknowledge the positives in the language.
In my opinion, Microsoft should think about making their compilers/linkers make-friendly, e.g providing cross-compilers ("cl.exe", separated compiler and linker).
I will add flipping ;)

Only thing about is that it easily looks like crap. I mean if you don't curl & flip the card looks too solid..but I'll check it out.
They did not close "all of Solaris".

Primarily, it was OS/Net that source is no longer available for.

Some consolidations such as pkg(5) (aka IPS) are still open and some components moved to already open consolidations such as userland even though license did not require it.
Show HN: Low – live video texting from anywhere without being overheard
> What is an employee worth, as an economic unit?

The value that he can add to the business.
Really?

You realize you can get all of their products for a little more than a dollar a day, right? Personally, I can't think of a better way to spend my money than to buy something that I use every day that will easily pay for itself in a month's time.

Feel free to use this XKCD chart to figure out if it's worth the money given your people's hourly rate: https://xkcd.com/1205/
Trying to flatter an employer by doing a lot of pointless work is dumb and says something negative about the employers who respond. The "typical" way to ace a phone screen is: 1. be young and just out of college 2. pay more money to the person who wrote cracking the code interview and memorize the problems 3. Scan glassdoor and other sites for interview questions that the interviewers will, as predicted, lazily reuse. The real way to ace a phone screen is not to be involved in one.
Sure, but Yegge's original post wasn't cautioning about speed of adoption being slow, it was ridiculing the notion that companies were even close to knowing what consumers wanted and suggesting there were huge collaboration and content problems, as well as technical issues, questioning the idea of a $500 price point for ordinary consumers and suggesting that smartphones and tablets people actually wanted to buy weren't going to happen for a "long time".

In practice, the ultimate form of today's smartphone was starting to take shape in secret in Cupertino pretty much as he wrote his article, the now ubiquitous design went on sale within 2 and a half years, the App store came the following year and Apple alone had already shipped 30M units before the "at least" 5 years were up. The release of the iPad also took less than six years.

Yegge didn't see significant enough innovations taking place within 5 or so years to make an impact. In fact, all the innovations that lead to over a billion people owning smartphones today took place in that time frame, with only incremental improvements since then.

I think it's pretty generous of Steve to give himself more than half marks for that!
Frankly, I'm quite happy clojure has not turned into a "yes" platform as he suggests. I also find Yegge's approach of insulting anyone who doesn't agree with him to be very off putting and not constructive. What I took away from it is that if you disagree with him, you are going to fail and be labelled hostile in his mind.
> Things are never in equilibrium.

Indeed, and I now think that intellectual progress in the 21st century must be done with Permanent Disequilibrium models. Equilibrium models have taken us as far as they can. Equilibrium models emerged in the 1600s and they gave us the Industrial Revolution and 300 years of economic progress. But we've gone as far as we can with them.

For educated Western policy-making elites, the world view of the last 300 years were shaped by equilibrium models. Among some of the most important:

1.) the Law of Supply and Demand

2.) Darwin's Theory Of Natural Selection

3.) Newton's Laws Of Thermodynamics

The whole idea that you can take a piece of graph paper and trace some functions on it (functions which have a cross over point) is an idea with vast power, and it created the world we know today. But I suspect that we've also mined that particular style of intellectual research for as much as we can.

The argument against Permanent Disequilibrium models used to be that the math was too hard for humans to handle conveniently. Certainly, that is true. For a point of comparison, I can easily imagine how the Law Of Supply and Demand effects the price of bread. And yet, I am utterly unable to imagine the price of bread in a Permanent Disequilibrium model, for that involves how each persons response to any change in Supply or Demand sets off a new ripple in the Supply or Demand that propagates across the graph.

But now we have computers. And, better yet, we have a paradigm that allows us to make use of those computers: agent based simulations. And agent based simulations gives us an easy way to see the outcome of Permanent Disequilibrium models.

More so, we are lucky enough to have a generation growing up that has grown up playing video games. And the better video games (massive online multi player etc) are agent based simulations. So we have a whole generation coming along that has an intuitive feel for the advantages offered by agent based simulations.

The future of economics will be created by those who grew up playing World Or Warcraft and Starcraft and so many other games. And this generation will free us from the tyranny of idiotic equilibrium models, such as the one posted by WalterBright.
2- Google App Engine and Heroku are not Open Source, can't think of an Open Source PaaS or one that is Open Source and made somebody a lot of money,
Rasky, rpi based KVM over IP update: schematics almost done
I addressed the bit about keeping Bob's productivity a secret in another post here.
Nah, just showing the other side of the coin... if anything, it's a good thing that smart people ditch bad places.
It's called "trying to capture more value than you add." Seems to be a key idea behind many SaaS/PaaS startups these days. Not an indicator for long-term success.
Silicon Valley, Seeking Diversity, Focuses on Blacks
Hmm. That's an interesting counterpoint.

Suppose we discover our universe is a simulation. This would imply that the universe is Turing-computable. Would there not therefore exist a "Grand Unified Theory" that simply described, with absolute precision, the operation of the simulator? Or would it be impossible to produce such a specification?
From Russia with Math
The thing is, the definition of a concept, is the axiom that it exists outside of human understanding. Concepts are informational objects. Anyhow, the question you really ask, is does information exist outside of conscious humanity. And it might not. It might just be an interpretation.
They aren't open source, but people run lots of open source software on them.
I think you have a mistake here:

> ...the same as different meat (constructed using the symbols)?

Your answer is talking about a comparison between, e.g., a human and an essentially identical human /constructed/ using a set of symbols that encodes our understanding of the human's constitution.

The original question is comparing, e.g. a human and a set of symbols which describes the human.

I consider each of the following to be meaningfully separate questions:

Reality is mathematics.

Reality can be created with mathematics.

Something equivalent to reality can be created using mathematics, if 'informational equivalence' is the equivalence relation in question.
It's interesting how similar the temperature is between San Diego and Santa Barbara, despite their distance from each other. I always think of SD as much warmer than SB, but the data doesn't show that to be the case.

I do like the cool nights in the winter that we get in SB.
OP (Benjamin de Cock) is one talented guy. Some of his work is phenomenal.
As for the subject of this discussion, you could have quite the debate about how many times intelligence has evolved independently.