skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Sorry, but I'm going to be "that guy", because someone is inevitably going to say "you can't patent that!", and there is generally a lot of misinformation about patents on HN. That particular document is a published patent application, and not a granted patent. You can tell on Google Patents in the field on the right that says: "Publication type: Application".

Moreover, using USPTO Pair[0], you can check the status of such patents, and it turns out that this one has been abandoned since 2011 for failure to respond to the Patent Examiner. So no, there is no patent on this (at least, not the one you pointed to).

[0] Publicly available database by USPTO: http://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair
Writing an x86 emulator to run in javascript on an x86 machine. (although of course this would work on ARM etc. too).

Pretty cool though in all fairness.
I wish we would. Caution over nuclear externalities and criticism of poor safety/risk management by various nuclear authorities over the years are laudable, but too many greens look at te downsides of nuclear power in isolation, rather than in the context of the even more problematic fossil fuel incumbents and the realities of high demands for energy in developed economies. There is a huge opportunity cost to this ecological purity theater. The US administration has not really provided any leadership here, but at least it has approved and helped finance the construction of the first two reactors to be built in the US in 30 years so I suppose that's better than nothing.
you can't go to jail for violating a gag order then?
While the larger conclusion about safety being made here are correct, the blanket claims about Fukushima's death toll <5 years after the event strike me as disingenuous.
You don't want to use the browser's cache here. You can cache the properties in a more granular way yourself. Relay will do that for you.
We've been working on it for two years and have invested a lot of time recording our own trips on it, so it's not going anywhere!

If we do monetise it, it will be around selling products (like postcards, or travel gear we really like), rather than the usual suspects like advertising.
I think Fukushima, and various investigations and revelations it inspired, showed how the problems are more social than technical.

Nuclear power plants produce a lot of power very cheaply for many years. But companies can't help but push the boundaries to boost profits, extending plant life past spec and skimping on maintenance and safety measures, with just a bit of regulatory capture to smooth the process.

I'm still pro-nuclear. We just need to follow through on the regulation. Maybe we can start by not being so damn secretive about nuclear stuff. Anyway, we have to build new ones to take on the capacity so we can shut down old ones. Which means we can't be so scared of building them, since not building them is what's unsafe.
There's plenty of pressure differential in a lifting plate in a positive alpha. There must be in order to impart a net downward acceleration on the flow, thereby turning it. Here, have some CFD: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KldLqShzCRM

The problem in these discussion is "Bernoulli" is used to refer to many things, some legitimately physical (mass continuity) and some not (equal time of passage). I like FYFD's point that what we're discussing is how to explain lift to laypeople, not how to calculate and analyze it (which is done every day in order to design aircraft): http://fuckyeahfluiddynamics.tumblr.com/post/121024503205/ev.... We (mechanical/aerospace engineers) know the equations that govern fluid motion and how to solve them, whether you abstract that with Bernoulli/Newton/Kutta-Joukowsky/etc. is up to you and not that significant.
That paper is pretty old now. If I remember right, it covered 1Password version 2. It's at version 5 now and it handles things different from before.
They aren't making it generally available to the public yet, only to certain beta folks who know what they are getting. It isn't broken out of the box since it isn't 'out of the box' yet.
I am usually the first one to come on here and say if you dig deep you will find that the numbers do not work. Replacing the sun is inefficient.

But this time it may be different because of the extremely low cycle times for the micro greens. If they got a very good deal on leasing the tunnels the economics may very well work.

Two problems, one is that they probably can rather quickly outgrow their market and second what if the micro greens fad ends?
Is dumping it in a mountain hoping we'll figure it out in 100,000 years not valid? I'm being completely serious. Our current problems are on the span of hundreds of years. If we have hundreds of thousands we will be able to sort it out. It's barely borrowing on the future.
I am completely OK with burying it inside a mountain or a geologically suitable mine. True, we should be very selective about where we put it given that waste can be hazardous over geological timescales.
Just removing the font-weight: 300 helps tremendously. Personally, I'm becoming less of a fan of external fonts. I've noticed lately that they're often the slowest thing to load on sites that use them (especially Google fonts).
Whatever you see on the store shelves 60% goes to the store, 40% goes to the manufacturer as a starting point; you can of course negotiate, but just assume this. You could back track from the egg minder being $80 and people who are shocked to find this out when they need a certain cost to cover costs, estimate that it was $32 originally to make a profit; still not going to work.

The key concept is to look in stores to find what product category you fit into. Are you selling a timer, what does another timer look like and cost, that's your target. If there is not a comparable item, then look to see what item has a similar finish, does it look like an Apple Watch or a $5 egg timer. Egg timer is $5 at Wal-Mart, start poking around that price.
> To me, functional programming just hasn't been around long enough to convince me that it is here to stay.

... is 1958 not long enough ago?*

* I'm guessing he means "statically typed FP"
We liked the idea of making our own verb, always nice to have if it catches on!

We've experimented with a few different concepts in integrating social media, but it doesn't feel right using social media as a primary source -- the value of creating a trip as something that you can come back and look at later gets lost when it's mixed with all the noise on twitter / facebook.

We added the usual "share this on facebook" style sharing, but it wasn't used much. We'll keep experimenting with interaction patterns ... if anyone has any ideas on this let me know!
I mean... back them up? :D
There was a lot of hesitation around ReactNative iOS because people are not sure when the Android version is coming out. Now, it is finally here!!! So excited....

Let's meetup to learn it together: http://www.meetup.com/SF-React-Native-Meetup/events/22536022...
Full Disclosure: I work at LastPass.

> "Turning on 2FA did not worked most of the times"

If you have a security issue here we'd appreciate a report at https://lastpass.com/security/ that said every report of this has always been a case of someone not reading the manual or FAQs so please checkout https://lastpass.com/support.php?cmd=showfaq&id=2775 first.

> "Sorry but I will never give trust to a password manager written in PHP"

The password manager is actually written in C++,Objective-C,Java,C# and JavaScript -- depending on platform. You seem to be focused on our website however (which only handles encrypted data with a key never get) which is written in Hack: http://hacklang.org/ actually, not PHP.

Regarding the user experience being less without extensions installed -- yes, that's true, we highly encourage installing those -- the extension-less access should really be used for emergencies only -- it's safer to login to the extensions since it's not relying on JavaScript you just downloaded, it's always preferred.
James Hansen is often considered pretty noisy and alarmist. He was one of the first to raise the issue, thinks we can't afford to go above 350ppm (we're at 400), and recently published a paper saying sea level rise could be much worse than generally expected.

In his book Storms of My Grandchildren he strongly advocates nuclear power, especially GenIV designs. In particular he talks about the Integral Fast Reactor.

Plenty of other prominent environmentalists are advocating nuclear these days; the documentary Pandora's Promise highlights several of them. And James Lovelock, who invented the "Gaia" concept, has advocated nuclear for years.
I lived in London for a couple of years... And I wouldn't dare to say that water scarcity is a big problem there. I saw the Sun a couple of times though.

Edit: Sorry to the Londoner that down-voted my comment. I didn't mean to be rude to you, guys.
This is a pretty confusing definition and argument. How does the author distinguish between Morality and "our beliefs about right and wrong"? The author seems to be appealing to universal objective truths, while waving away the notion that these truths are necessarily bound to human understandings of them.

If everyone called a tail a leg, it would be a leg. That's exactly how languages, and the truths surrounding languages, work and evolve!!!
My lifelong dream of THC sourdough is now one step closer.
Ah, nothing like a good old-fashioned brouhaha over angle of attack vs. the Bernoulli principle. This same argument was going on when my Dad was training as a private pilot back in the 60's. Tastes great! Less filling!

Personally, I think they're facets of the same thing, but I don't know anything about it. Beyond that the piece seemed a bit of a mess to me. The content has not aged well. I usually expect Wired to do a better job of conserving the state of what they publish.
If I recall correctly, this is simply a decorator. Using ES7, you could write the createContainer call using the new decorator syntax and avoid this uncomfortableness.
I'm not against nuclear as long as it's done properly and responsibly, but they usually aren't. As we all know, nuclear reactors can fail from either operational malfunctions or exterior effects such as earthquakes or tsunamis. However, when things go wrong, there are no backup plans in place for the backup plans when things go wrong, which is very much needed when we're talking about the types of consequences nuclear meltdowns can have. Not only this, but when things go wrong, the companies that run them try to keep the seriousness of the situation under wraps for as long as possible in order to protect the company and b then at which point it becomes too late to take more proactive measures.

To make matters worse, most nuclear reactors in the United States were built in the 1960s and 1970s and they were only designed for a lifespan of 40 years, which means most of them should be shut down. However, since a lot of money is at stake with how much reactors cost, regulators rewrite the rules and extend the useful life of the reactors and put us all in danger. That is what bothers me and that is why I am against nuclear reactors - because when money is on the line, all bets are off.
I take it you don't use a Mac, Chrome is a battery hog on OSX and I'd love to hear it isn't because I might try it again. For now it's Safari+FF for me. It's been a while since FF sucked.
See the discussion for a lot of needed corrections to the article.

Expanding on one comment WRT "You can have armor, firepower or speed, but not all three", you can indeed as we showed with the Iowa class battleships, and to a lessor extent the previous class or two.
No, there would be a small amount of lift generated, in accordance with Bernoulli's principle, despite there being no net motion of the air after the wing has passed.
Great find, thanks.

The ARkStorm has several public policy implications: (1) An ARkStorm raises serious questions about the ability of existing federal, state, and local disaster planning to handle a disaster of this magnitude. (2) A core policy issue raised is whether to pay now to mitigate, or pay a lot more later for recovery.[...]

I think we can all guess what the answer to #2 has been since :-(
That's why there's such focus now on small modular reactors, with a bunch of startup companies attempting to develop them. The main impediment is the NRC, which has been slow to come up with licensing rules appropriate for small reactors or advanced designs (some of which have very good passive safety).
lookup dutch bucket system ... it is soil-less and use the same water/nutrients solution over and over (recirculating), you just need to fill the thank
NPR's This American Life has a good episode which includes Michael Larson's story as one of its angles: Million Dollar Idea http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/412/m...

Funny.. I could have sworn that I got a link to it from HN... Oh yea, I found it right after listening to this really good, yet embellished story about Shenzhen workers ("it's some kind of magic, [this tablet computer I put together]"): Mr. Daisey and the Apple Factory http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/454/m... [insert HN link here after meal]
It's right there in the link.

> The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), released a report on the Fukushima accident April 2, 2014. It stated that the scientists have found no evidence to support the idea that the nuclear meltdown in Japan in 2011 will lead to an increase in cancer rates or birth defects.
Amazing Fire and Water Effects in Unreal Engine 4
Like the other comment says, the font is way too thin on your site and actually hurts to read on my monitor. Any interest I had in this service is effectively gone now.

Text needs to be legible, please try and stick to normal and bold weights.
Affordable Child Care – Pareday (Private Beta)
That can't be right. There are obvious arguments against nuclear power. I don't think they're dispositive, but it doesn't seem right to claim they're invalid. For instance:

* Serious, INES 7 nuclear incidents can render whole regions uninhabitable.

* Health impact from nuclear incidents can be insidious, revealing themselves only in long-term statistics, which can make risks hard to gauge.

* Waste containment remains an unsolved problem.

There are probably many other valid arguments.

I think people underestimate the impact of coal, and de-industrialization is totally unrealistic and would almost certainly do far more damage to more people than nuclear would. But to suggest that nuclear isn't fraught, or that the only concern was proliferation... that doesn't seem intellectually honest.
VW unveils battery-powered Porsche in Frankfurt
That won't really fix anything, anyone who wants to MITM the HTTP can just kill the redirect.
Actually they are the only two events in the level 7 nuclear disaster ballpark.
(1976)
Airplanes can just fly a bit higher so the atmosphere is less dense and the drag is less of a problem. Non-flying vehicles do not have this luxury.
I didn't know at that stage. I don't know if it would have influenced me to not have children.
Was into this article until the 'survey' halfway down the page put the text into 'vertical seizure' mode
As a thought experiment to convince yourself of why this is not the case: How would flying upside down work?
Has anyone read McCullough's new Wright Brothers book?
Fast reactors can eliminate almost all the long-term waste, which consists of transuranic isotopes that fast reactors use for fuel.

Russia has two fast reactors in commercial operation right now, one since 1980. The U.S. had the Integral Fast Reactor almost complete in the mid-1990s, when the Clinton administration shut down the program.

The rest of the waste is fission products. Encase them in glass and bury them, they're back to the radioactivity of the original ore in a couple centuries. That's a human timescale. When I lived in Germany, we had a brewery in town that had been continuously operating for 800 years.
Whenever I've played a flying simulator, if I've put the plane upside down, to maintain altitude I need to push the joystick forward. In an upright plane it would cause a nose dive, on an upside down plane, it creates lift. Due to it's not optimal aerodynamics, it also requires more thrust to maintain. Basically you are changing the shape of the wing to compensate for the non-conventional position.
Cloud on your desk: This Docker container comes in… a mini shipping container
> Axiom 5 (which requires that there exist continuous reversible transformations between pure states) rules out classical probability theory. If Axiom 5 (or even just the word "continuous" from Axiom 5) is dropped then we obtain classical probability theory instead.

I actually recently read this paper and wondered the following question: what experiment supports the need for axiom 5, distinguishing quantum mechanics from classical probability theory? This came up because I always hear about "2-norm preserving unitary operators" as the only reasonable theory for quantum computing, which is of course different from classical probability. Is it just Occam's razor that to achieve the same results in experiments one would need to impose some large number of new states to a particle?

Most of my understanding comes from a light reading of Nielsen-Chuang and Aaronson's stuff. (A minor tangent: a theorem from computer science informs me that complex numbers aren't needed if you're willing to get a "good enough approximation" and polynomial blowup, but this paper argues complex numbers are necessary, even for finite/countable state spaces; I want to read the paper a bit closer to figure out where this discrepancy is).

This culminated in the following physics stackexchange question, which was probably not worded in the best way for the physics community[1]. I still don't really understand any of the answers. Maybe someone on HN can elucidate it for me :)

[1]: http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/205742/what-exper...
Is there any possibility that the US will get so much power from wind, solar, and other renewables that it can realistically anticipate not burning coal? Every year we wait for renewable to offset coal, more people die from coal's impact.
What happened to the noble art of the manly cry?
Again, this assumes the air is already connected to the air around it in the same way cheese is. You can't lift a layer of air and have it connected to the air it used to be connected to. Likewise, you don't have turbulence in cheese. There's a significant difference between solids and fluids.
Here's a recent article from IEEE Spectrum that argues that small reactors will never be cost competitive.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/nuclear/the-forgotten-histor...
Hang-glider landscape mountains in Unreal Engine 4
Ah - thank you. I'm so used to viewing Tweets in an App which doesn't support that feature yet so I was just redirected to a Web page.

Many thanks for taking the time to answer.
Aren't digital works fast approaching a value of zero? Taylor Swift is pissed she doesn't get paid enough from Spotify, but perhaps her music is worthless because there's already so much music available (the more abundant a resource, the lower its value). Attention is now what is constrained.
Charlemagne's DNA and Our Universal Royalty (2013)
Evernote has very good PDF support but you need a premium subscription to make it actually useful. I clip PDFs to Evernote and annotate them all the time.
At first glance I thought this was going to be a blog post about Stripe using Facebook's Relay internally...
"We're talking about megayear timescales"

No, we're not. Anything with megayear halflifes is effectively not radioactive.

There's a lot of great answers. None of them are politically feasible because instead of thinking of it as an engineering problem, people think of it with the Sealed Evil In A Can memeset [1] and treat it like it is eternally a baleful evil demon that smites everyone that so much as thinks about it for too long, by magic.

It is, literally, a small problem, as in, literally, we're not really talking about very much stuff volumetrically.

It's only a problem because paradoxically people treat it with such fear that it stays a problem, because we're so fearful that nobody is even allowed to try to solve the problem because to our fearful brains it would basically be poking the baleful evil spirit with a stick. If it were just legal to stick it in glass bricks and stack them up somewhere, as has been studied, we could be done thinking about it, but instead we have to leave it in a more dangerous form. It is frankly difficult for me not to see this as a problem that people in charge make sure to deliberately make sure stays unsolved because it suits them, not because I'm really prone to conspiracy theories but simply because while not necessarily "trivial", it's just not that hard of a problem. You should fear your local garbage dump a lot more than you fear a pile of glass bricks piled in a mountain in Nevada.

[1]: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SealedEvilInACan
I still have a copy of Zork I for PC in the original packaging, 5.25" floppy. I should have grabbed the data back when I still had a working drive.
Consider the reasons why people attend college:

- to get into professional school

- to get hired by a large firm

- to get into a PhD program

If you are entrepreneurial, none of those apply and may actually be distractions.

A few years in the trenches of a startup (yours or someone else's) will help clarify what the goal of the education will be, and also what kinds of activities and groups to join.

If the startup is successful, defer college a bit, if not (as is most often the case) start school with a keen appreciation of what you plan to get out of the experience, or if you are hoping to explore ideas, do so with a bit more realistic an idea of what execution will be like.
which is what you need to even begin the discussion on a new standard.

I only consider it whining if you point out the flaws, then don't do something about the flaws using the process for correcting them.

To even begin discussion? The discussion begins with pointing out the flaws. One person writes an article pointing out some flaws in a technology, then people comment saying how X is actually not a flaw, and how Y is also quite a major flaw. After that you start focusing on brainstorming ideas that address these flaws. Then you refine those ideas and come up with some specification or prototype implementation (followed by a specification based on it). All this has to happen before what you claim to be the beginning of the discussion.

You can do all of these things in private, maybe consulting a couple friends and colleagues, but you don't have to. You can also do it completely out in the open, on a public forum. In doing so you increase the noise, but you also increase the signal. Do you consider this process whining?
That's actually a bit oversimplified for highly aerodynamic objects like aircraft. It is known that such shapes can approach (v)^2. A (v)^3 characteristic is more representative of shapes that actually do have to accelerate all the air up to the speed of the vehicle such as the proverbial flat plate.

This doesn't change the conclusion; you still end up with a low spot on the graph. It is just that the graph looks more like a parabola.
Fukushima was caused by a Mw 9.0 earthquake / tsunami which cased over 15,000 deaths, in a 1st world country with the world's best earthquake mitigation. The meltdown was caused by an absolutely huge disaster.

The contamination might kill a few hundred, and has resulted in an exclusion zone.

IMO, the biggest problem with nuclear is how unacceptable disasters are. One old reactors built in high risk zone has a little meltdown, and the entire world freaks out over it. This is a major practical impediment to nuclear - you won't get costs getting driven down (for better or worse), because people see the risk as completely taboo.

It's like people worrying about tall buildings, because of 9/11. There's always risks.