skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is what SkipLagged does for customers.
It's better to just remember that energy is conserved. Bernoulli's principle is a real thing and will add to the lift a wing generates without contributing to any net motion of the air upward or downward. The work done to compress the air below the wing and expand it above helps keep the plane in the air.

But, as everyone else responding to the parent has pointed out, the forces generated in this way are not nearly enough to keep the plane in the air on their own.
Even mighty IBM's lawyers can be sanctioned for bringing a frivolous case out of thin air. If you're careful, you should be OK.
I used to think same way, but 99% of your user won’t feel that way.

My hacker news app is a hybrid app. Available on iOS/Android/Windows/Mac and web, and I harldy see any one compalining about not being native.

There are some legit issues and peole think only way to fix is go native. Only reason I have not fixed those issues because I don’t have time, or I don’t use that functinality.
"planes fly by moving air up" simply fails the sniff test - every action has an equal and opposite reaction, after all, so anything that throws air up must be pushing itself down. Since lift is a net upward force on a wing exerted by air, there has to be a net downward force on the air.

Then, to your PS, If a huge amount of energy is required to break the speed of sound, you've explained why commercial jets don't exceed mach one, not why they don't get within 100mph of it.
Ugh.. My comment was meant in the Relay thread, but anyway, it sounds like Relay/GraphQL is designed to not fetch anything that isn't actually rendered. In my own SPA apps, I very frequently over-fetch to reduce latency. I was hoping there would be a nice compatible way to manage this use case.

I'm not too familiar how this works, but maybe it's enough to query the additional data in parent component or somewhere and it just works.
Thoughts on Annual iPhone Upgrades
Well it's possible and reasonable that you don't want to have what products your browsing to be snooped on by some sort of MITM attack. While probably not from MITM snooping, Target found out a teenage girl was pregnant before her own parents, and sent her parent's address Diaper and Baby advertisements: http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/16/how-targe...
Who do you expect to care whether the certificate is EV or not? (serious question) Google is not EV, facebook isn't either, banks are 50/50, almost none of the big online shops are EV (amazon included). I've never heard anyone raise this as an issue - technical or not.
Damn. What all incentives do you get for being in that secret club?
This is in direct contradiction to this article (also posted today) on new developments in tech: http://www.compositesworld.com/articles/aeroengine-composite...
Taking a look at Destiny year 1 and Bungie's business plan
And Graham Nelson's Inform 7 compiles to two different editions of the Z-machine: http://inform7.com/
Mark Zuckerberg broadcasts first live video on Facebook
More like it was going up against very entrenched PC competition--especially dBase which its usability advantages weren't sufficient to overcome.
Just as a side note to side note (preemptive strike against accusations of systemd for using gotos) — the Linux kernel has many of them either. This is idiomatic C-style error handling.

Also note that systemd employs gcc's __attribute__((cleanup(...))) logic to improve code clarity.
> Bernoulli's principle is a real thing and will add to the lift a wing generates without contributing to any net motion of the air upward or downward.

The compression of the air below the wing moves it downwards, more or less. There are no ways to get around Newton's laws of motion (barring relativity, and planes aren't fast enough for that).
> Planes actually fly by stretching air over their wings (creating low pressure) and the higher pressure air below pushes the plane up (to fill in the void)

So why can planes fly upside down then?
> Planes actually fly by stretching air over their wings (creating low pressure) and the higher pressure air below pushes the plane up (to fill in the void) - So planes fly by moving air up.

Even if your premise is accurate (I'm not qualified to say 100%), your conclusion does not follow. Water holds up the hull of a boat, but you wouldn't say that a boat floats by moving water up.
May not be making claims but the author surely abuses confusion of an ostentatious material and the color named after it, although Apple has done the same by introducing a watch made of the material and a phone of the color on the same day. Author also gets the history wrong -- rose gold peaked in the early 19th century not the 20th -- in order to buttress the final point about revolutions.
It's also worth mentioning certain credit cards will credit you the amount for some of these programs.

For example American Express credits the fee for global entry on their higher end cards:

https://www.americanexpress.com/us/content/expedite-your-tra...
There was a SF author (Bear or Brin?) who wrote an essay back in the 90's about the future of drug wars. Much of the enforcement back then was on stopping the import of drugs from overseas. But once gene splicing created a way to produce the drugs within the USA, the enforce would switch to raiding warehouses, etc. The next step would be when the technology reduced the drug manufacture to a table top box that could be in any home (think make your own insulin). Then the enforcement has to raid peoples homes. The last step is when the technology allows the drugs to be produced by symbionts growing within a person.
I really like the simplified explanation of how much energy to takes to move the air out of the way (v)^3 - I've heard this stated for vehicles before which is why roof racks are so bad for mileage.

Does anyone know of a similarly simple explanation of how much energy a vehicle must use relative to it's weight?
My idea is you need to have base protocols or metalanguages that people can build on and freely evolve the system.

So its not a static design but a dynamic process based on a shared information systems platform. The goal is to make that platform as flexible as possible so that anyone can create new designs, but you can still automate integrations and do holistic calculations.
Wildcards are prohibited on EV certificates per CA/B Forum requirements: https://cabforum.org/wp-content/uploads/EV-V1_5_61.pdf (Section 9.2.2)
An introduction to timely dataflow in Rust
"If we are serious about tackling emissions and climate change, no climate-neutral source should be ignored"

Well, exactly. The most noisy and alarmist aren't interested in producing energy at all. They are only interested in de-industrialisation and de-population.

Of course nuclear fission is the answer to large scale energy. It always has been. Weapons proliferation can be addressed with new designs and materials. Safety can be addressed with passive systems.

The technical answers are simple compared to fusion or elaborate harvesting of diffuse energy such as sunlight, wind or tides.

The logical conclusion is that the people making the most noise are not in it for the solutions, but for the noise and attention. I'm not the only one to think this, but expect the groupthink to smite my comment anyway.
The idea is that the wing is slicing through still air, so the molecules arrive back at the same spot much like you'd expect a slice of cheese to line back up with itself after cutting it. Friction on the surface of the wing means this isn't quite going to happen, but that's the idea.
There's one difference (I don't think it really matters though) - if you go to bankofarnerica.com and get a valid certificate for bankofarnerica.com, if would not be owned by "Bank of America Corporation". But I agree it's worthless because it relies on you remembering that bankofamerica.com has an EV cert normally. And people are terrible at noticing what's missing.
Here’s another one:

http://bellard.org/jslinux/

https://github.com/levskaya/jslinux-deobfuscated
Project for the New American Century
Yeah, 1password doesn't let you save the master password.
A lot of consumers have no idea how much storage is required per picture or per minute of video. So they just see the price tag and buy the cheapest to get admitted to the iClub.

It happens all the time at parties. People try to take a photo, there is no room and they ask "What's wrong?". Their eyes glaze over when I try to explain how all those pix on their phone are using up the storage. Then they suggest deleting a couple SMS messages .... as if :-(
If only it didn't cost so much. And, about every 20 years, there's a Chernobyl or a Fukishima sized disaster.

China has 13 nuclear stations under construction, with 61 reactors and a total capacity of 40 to 75 gigawatts.
Why I [Abe Voelker] dont use Docker much anymore
The benefit is that if I get BankOfAmericaa.com and try to get an EV cert, the CA is going to verify my actual company name, which will unlikely be Bank of America or anything similar. So now when I trick someone into visiting my site, if the EV area doesn't tell them "Bank of America [US]" then they should double check. Or flip it around - if a user is unsure they can go off the EV info instead of the domain name.

In practise, since EV certs aren't used all over (say, WellsFargo doesn't use them), then the value is fairly diminished since lack of EV doesn't mean much.
Maybe they changed the blog post after you read it, but they link to their github repo (https://github.com/facebook/relay) and the NPM registry (https://www.npmjs.com/package/react-relay/)
I have a very simple to understand yet very unlikely to be implemented standard of persuasion. Industry executives and engineers - and their families - should make a point of living near their plants.
I never really understood the arguments against nuclear.

From the data I'm able to find, coal energy results in about 170,000 deaths per trillion kilowatt-hours globally, compared to about 90 deaths per trillion kilowatt-hours generated from nuclear.

That would mean that burning coal for energy is nearly 2000x more dangerous than nuclear power.

Is there something more to the opposition's argument than safety? Or is this just a case of the public being misinformed?
Yes, and if we had done that 30 years ago when it made sense there would probably be far less concern about global warming today.

Today, with the rapid decline in the cost of solar energy, I'm far less convinced this would be a wise move.
Poor people have private agents too, they usually gather the money to pay monthly. There are various types of private agencies, some are way more sophisticated, expensive and efficient than others. Some are just ex-cops trying to make a living (this is what it was like where I was). And it works great, poor people tend to have less stuff to defend from thieves while rich people have way more valuable property to protect so they attract more thieves and kidnappers than the poor and have to pay more efficient/modern/expensive agencies, which makes sense.
I'm not complaining about the paper; I'm complaining about the article.
Bluesmart (YC W15) Is Hiring an iOS Developer in SF
Huh. I definitely have the feeling that the difference is more than just information being non-rivalrous, but yeah it can't be as simple as I was trying to think... .

Didn't absentee land ownership used to be looked down on? Maybe that ties in somehow.

Trespassing, there's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_to_roam so it sounds like it's not nearly universal and at least in some places tied to liability concerns and (potentially) interfering with the owner's use of the property.

Maybe with IP it's that the owner/creator can't know unless they're told or actively go looking? But then that more-or-less gets back to non-rivalrousness.

Hm. Some information actually does have effects if known/used, like a successful stock trading algorithm. But then that's not "artistic", and brings to mind that IP is more than just patents and copyright.
Goddamn, guys, stop repeating the same absurd.

kdbus is NOT ONLY about performance. It's about the lifetimes, the availiability in the early userspace, the new marshalling format, the new user bus concept, and so on, and so forth. It's about separating the transport (in the kernel) and the policy (in the userspace).

Most of these points can be achieved without putting the transport in the kernel, but some can not.
>The most noisy and alarmist aren't interested in producing energy at all. They are only interested in de-industrialisation and de-population.

No. They are actually interesting in assuming power in the society by foregoing the standard societal ascension mechanisms.
Can I maybe email you if this is (in your estimation) a conversation worth continuing? I have a feeling it gets fast lost in an aging HN thread.

At any rate: probably the most important problem to be posed by such a "random input-output theory" is stochastic divergence. Random matrix theory, of which I can make little sense, does present some knowledge about the distribution of eigenvalues given some stochastic structure, which numerically gives us probability estimates to whether we're breaking Perron-Frobenius and posing an explosive system. But the relevant problem is in reverse: what is the set of acceptable stochastic conditions such that we can guarantee that S = I+A+Aˆ2+... = some finite value?
poles don't phase me but I guess you don't mean the dancing variety.

Okay thanks very much for the resources!!
Tri Alpha Energy Claims Fusion Breakthrough
Hydroponics is already very common in above-ground vegetable greenhouses.
The test site requires SNI and only accepts TLS 1.1 and 1.2 with ECDHE/DHE+AES-GCM/AES-CBC ciphers[0]. I'm guessing whatever SSL library your libcurl is linked against only supports TLS 1.0, doesn't support SNI, or doesn't support any of those cipher suites (OpenSSL 0.9.x won't work with this site, for example).

[0]: https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=helloworld.le...
Fortune's Unicorn List in a mobile app
If the paper is a little dry but you are interested in the concept of axiomatically deriving quantum theory, try this wonderful written lesson from Scott Aaronson: http://www.scottaaronson.com/democritus/lec9.html

The lecture is part of his course, "Quantum Computing Since Democritus," which features some of the clearest prose you will find anywhere on topics like complexity theory and P vs. NP.
> The fact that it is still a central point of failure that contains the keys to the kingdom is worth noting.

I think the difference between someone who uses a password-manager user, and the vast majority of people who don't, is that those who don't have HUNDREDS of points of failure that contain the keys to the kingdom, some completely insecure.
Another side benefit is addressing water shortages with nuclear desalinization.
A few people have posted links already, but here's another that I found simpler and punchier: https://danielmiessler.com/blog/why-planes-fly-what-they-tau...

Basically, the idea that the Bernoulli Principle is the primary factor in airplane lift is a popular lie. For some reason it continues to be broadly taught, so you can't be blamed for not knowing better. The main factor is actually angle of attack--when you hold your hand flat out a car window, tilting the leading edge up drags your hand upwards. That's the core principle of powered flight.

Most conventional planes have the wings installed with an upward angle, so they can achieve lift in level flight. Fighter and aerobatic planes have wings parallel with the fuselage, which means they have to keep the nose slightly up to fly level, but in exchange they can fly upside down almost as well as rightside up.
I agree with you on the problem of modern society seeming to be unable to make good collective decisions.

I'm not convinced restarting nuclear makes sense today though. Solar seems to be on an economically winning trajectory and building nuclear plants is very expensive, apparently even for countries that are good at it, like France.
Not sure if they'll amend their certificate policy or not. My guess is because their process is automated, they want to confine their certificate issuance to specific domains/sub-domains and not wildcards. It mitigates some repercussions in the event of a compromised cert.

Pg. 24 of the Certificate Policy:

For DV-SSL The Issuer DN of a DV-SSL Certificate shall be its Issuer’s subject DN. CAs shall include FQDNs or IP Addresses of the Device in the subject Alternative Name extension. The Subject Alternative Name extension may contain more than one instance of the name form. CAs may include a FQDN or IP Address in the subject DN for backwards compatibility, but this name shall be also included in the Subject Alternative Name extension. Wildcard names are not permitted

https://letsencrypt.org/documents/ISRG-CP-May-5-2015.pdf
>coal energy results in about 170,000 deaths per kilowatt-hour

Are you saying that running a gaming PC for 2 hours results in 170k deaths?
Phone and MacBook Cases – Tote Bags – From REAL SCIENCE
Apparently this is starting to happen in select places (like Saudi Arabia). This is a very.good.thing.
I used to just let Chrome remember everything, but then jumped on the LastPass bandwagon after Heartbleed last year.

I've been happy with it. The mobile app works well and it is very convenient. I just can't help but to have this nagging feeling since all their salts were exposed, I am really no (or not very much) "safer" than if I let Chrome remember them. If someone gets on my machine and knows what they're doing it is probably all over anyway, right? (And no, I dont let LastPass remember master PW, and I do use a system-level password so you cant easily see them in chrome://settings/passwords unless you have that to...) So the question is who do you trust more to protect the credentials that are synced to the cloud: Google or Lastpass? I don't know the best answer, all things considered (local and on the network). I would guess Google is a much harder target than LastPass.
It fetches whatever you ask for.
Obviously, one of us has learned something since the ancestor comment. Hopefully it's more than how to move goalposts.
Every time there's a new post about GraphQL, I become even more concerned that "GraphQL" was the wrong name to use publicly. It seems like most people assume it's just another combination of two buzzwords, Graph and QL, and incorrectly pattern match it.

In an attempt to help resolve this issue, I suggest that you think of it as ProductQL or ProductAPI instead.

It's not a storage layer. It's not really a query language. It's an alternative way to define an API that more closely matches the typical mental and product domains than REST.

It's critical to realize that you're implementing an API. GraphQL does not concern itself with sorting or fetching data as the name might lead you to initially believe. It has little to actually do with graphs (except they are more easily expressed). It is designed to be added on top of your application layer and business logic to provide a single, well defined API for your product and tools.

It primarily targets product developers. From the scheme/API side, it is up to the server developer to decide what to expose and how, based on the product and any technical considerations that need to be made.
I just posted a brief answer above that may explain it better: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10218403
I think you mean giga-watt hour.
How to Ruin an Ad – Part 4
Not a Big Suprise: The Marines' F-35 Operational Test Was Far from Operational
I'm not a mathematician, so please bear with me. I'm trying to understand your definition of addition. Surely that can't be enough? At the very least a+b=0 satisfies your formulas (should I use the word axiom there?).

What I'm trying to understand is how I am supposed to think in order to prove/disprove my statement above. Disproving something by contradiction is easy enough, if you can find a contradiction but what if you can't? How can you be sure that you've covered all variations?

This is something one struggles with as a developer too. There are cases where you think that a fundamental function does the right thing for all inputs but then you discover an edge case where that isn't true. The number of cases where this has been the case even in high profile libraries suggests that I'm not alone in this.
Buddy, abstractions aren't magic built on top of thin air. Abstractions can be built upon abstraction and can be built upon other abstractions but when you follow the supply chain all the way down to the logical conclusion you will hit a physical road block grounded in reality. Eventually there will be an abstraction that must be built on top of a concrete primitive.

What is this primitive thing at the end of the chain? Energy and material. Think about it. Your poet, in order to have the luxury of writing poetry instead of foraging for food must have physical requirements to assist in his writing of poetry. He must eat food, he must have shelter and materials to support his endeavor. When you give money away for poetry you are giving money away for concrete things. You are paying for his food, you are paying for his shelter, you are paying for his leisure time to allow him to practice his poetry. Food comes from plants, plants can only grow with sunlight... aka energy. Eventually the chain must end at a physical primitive.

Lets talk about a hypothetical island economy with a population of two people. Let's say these two idiots are poets. You cannot have an economy of two poets where both poets pay each other to recite poetry. The poets will eventually die of starvation. It's a mutually recursive abstraction that never ends and is unsustainable; An abstract infinite loop with no primitive at the root. TO fix: put a farmer on the island and have the farmer give food to the two poets in exchange for a recitation. Boom, there's a real economy. An economy of pure abstraction only exists in your imagination and even your imagination needs food for sustenance.

So when we talk about economics, when we talk about programming, we are not talking about magical abstractions built upon nothing. We are talking about reality. An economy will always be bounded by the physical limitations of the world because abstractions are built on top of the physical world itself, the two are one and the same thing.

Ironically the primitive in economics is the exact same primitive in the programming universe: Energy and material are the same thing as Procedure and State. The philosophical implications are profound. Even crazier is when you follow the chain in the programming universe you will find out that both state and procedure are abstractions on the same thing: Silicon and electricity. What is silicon and electricity? Material and energy. Yes that's right, not only is economics bounded by reality, but so is the world of programming, so is the concept of abstractions.
I'm pro-nuclear, I think, but no argument on HN ever got more persuasive by tacking on a preemptive dismissal of disagreement as "groupthink".

Do you want to talk about nuclear energy on HN, or do you want to talk about how you feel about talking about nuclear energy on HN? The former topic seems much more interesting than the latter.
My point is all this work and it's only a small part of the equation.
Well then, how about charging more for faster flights, to account for fuel? I mean, domestic business class isn't that great, but people who pay others people money for it would presumably go for a faster flight.
I disagree. Was Hayes acting solely on his own behalf, or on theirs as well? Were these or other attempts to manipulate Libor sanctioned by UBS? From another article:

"The document [that Hayes points to] instructs Libor submitters to clear their judgements on the rate with certain named traders. Defence lawyer Neil Hawes last week suggested the traders held derivatives positions dependent on Libor."

http://www.risk.net/operational-risk-and-regulation/news/241...