skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
IBM Watson Discovery Advisor Development Jobs
IBM Watson represents a revolutionary set of natural language processing, analytics, artificial intelligence, and machine learning technologies that can and are being used to solve real world problems. The Watson group is at the forefront of the next generation for IBM and is comprised of the finest talent in the company and in the industry. Here's an example of the impact you can make as part of IBM Watson - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuLJYdyJSFo

We are looking for talented and passionate engineers who want to be part of our teams working on Watson Discovery Advisor. For a high-level overview, see
http://www.ibm.com/smarterplanet/us/en/ibmwatson/what-is-watson.html and look at the Discovery section.

At the nexus of engineering and design you will be instrumental in bringing industry-defining software products and web applications to users around the world. If you’re interested in making a global impact by delivering innovative user experiences and building a framework for Watson Discovery – we want to hear from you!

To see the list of job opportunities go here - https://ibm.biz/BdX7bT
Marco Arment sold Instapaper more than two years ago and as far as I know, is not directly involved with it in any way today. Still, as evident by your comment, his name is of course very much associated with it.

http://www.marco.org/2013/04/25/instapaper-next-generation
He sold a majority stake to Betaworks, but he is still an owner.
The previous announcement was also a Friday afternoon.
>The break out for voice will happen when the right form factor comes about with the right UI design.

Chris Maury? If so, hoping to see your progress on this with Conversant Labs in the coming year or so. After I read the article I was wondering if I'd see you on HN.

Also my daughter (who also has Stargardt's) found it very inspiring to chat with you at the accessibility meetup.
I definitely like the git workflow more... branch, work, rebase, PR, review, rework, rebase, review... merge.

short change cycles are easier to reason with.
Probably not "threatened" so much as chagrined by the flood of "ad blockers are killing the independent web" articles that accompanied the release of the iOS ad blockers, such as this one from The Verge: http://www.theverge.com/2015/9/17/9338963/welcome-to-hell-ap...

It's one thing to know you're hurting somebody's livelihood in the abstract, it's another to have them specifically call you out over it.
If the moon were one pixel
Lvl29 DevOp Looking for Group
I think the overarching aspect of agile has failed, in part because it requires more implementation than most companies are willing to put up with.

I see, in general (and I am a certified scrummaster, FWIW), that companies tend to embrace sprints - usually going for two weeks - and daily standups (which they might do poorly, but at least they try). Everything else - estimation sessions, lessons learned, burndown charts - are up for grabs. Maybe that's a failure of the company. Maybe that's a failure or Agile, for failing to take into account the normal inertia of companies - I don't konw. It is better than waterfall, but it's not fully embraced.
Technology companies today are increasingly colonial in their actions
Total speculation based solely on experience as a consumer (and I own a 2013 VW Golf TDI, so it affects me), but my guess is that the fix would be updated software to apply the stricter emissions controls all the time, presumably at the expense of engine performance.

EDIT: And reducing fuel economy, which is a huge selling point of the TDI in the first place. No idea "by how much" though, and typically TDI numbers are understated, so its possible that a reduction in economy will still be in line with their claims.
And this is why we can't have nice things - a decent parable about why "startup weekends" are the business equivalent of giving teenagers whiskey and car keys:

For the sake of argument, assume the idea was actually good:

- Legal ownership of the parts of the business are a mess; instead of it being cleanly concentrated in 1 - 3 people, each of whom has a clear "vetted" and "sustained" interest in the business, 8+ people now have options on any success. Recipe for drama.

- The screwed up ownership structure inhibits sane growth. The business is a long way from functional; at least 3 - 4 of the eight people need to show up for work next week and make sustained contributions for months to get a payback. Unfortunately, everyone present at the weekend can muscle in at the end (if successful) and claim a share of that work. So the long term incentive plan has been crippled....

- This team is dysfunctional, at least in the relationship between business guys and tech guys. Billy wasn't open and honest about past work on the concept. He's incapable of controlling his prejudices and working with his team in a respectful manner. This partnership... won't last. Outside the pressure cooker of the event, it wouldn't have started.

- If the business model is truly dependent on technology as the basis of competition, this project is doomed; the business team doesn't respect the value created by the technology side of the effort. Once you view your technical staff as replaceable/exploitable, good luck on creating any value beyond minimum effort results or finding good talent.

- Finally, I think the technical team overvalues their work at this point; there's a large business component that must be completed for anyone to make money. The price that would satisfy them in a cash deal likely wouldn't be feasible for the business team / investors to pay....

tl;dr wrong environment to create a business. More value and more fun would occurred if they spent the weekend developing crazy Youtube animations or JavaScript games....
Right...but nothing about Marco's statement suggests anything besides, "It turns out I feel really weird about making an ad blocker, and there isn't any way I can make an ad blocker that works in a way that doesn't make me feel weird with the iOS framework, so I'm not going to make one anymore."

Why not take his statement at face value? He's personally reliant on ad income from his site, as are several of his friends, so it makes sense that profiting off an ad blocker makes him uncomfortable. No conspiracy needed.

(For background, see: http://www.marco.org/2015/09/17/why-peace-blocks-deck-ads)
Lots of people here trying to infer motives. Why not just believe what he says? He's a guy who has enough money, wants to do what he loves, and doesn't enjoy controversy. He's hacker enough to want to muck about with how to make a blocker, but it's not his joy.

Basically, he's what many of us aspire to be.
The subpoenable requirement is because you can rewrite history in git. If you just have a local copy of a repository on your hard disk, your opponent's lawyers might argue "Well, you might have used git commit --amend or manually altered the bits of the repository", and you can't show otherwise. Once you push to GitHub, the repository has become public, and a copy exists somewhere where you can't just manually alter the bits or run git commit --amend.

You don't have to actually subpoena GitHub and get their lawyers involved. The fact that you can means that opposing council will know that you're not bluffing or lying when you say "I authored this commit, and I have the commit logs to prove it". Or if they think you are bluffing or lying, they can certainly subpoena GitHub themselves...but if you aren't, that works in your favor.
Yeah that was how I first learned about this with ATI cheating on Quake III in 2001, as discovered by HardOCP. Here's a link to an article about it (original article doesn't seem to be around anymore):

http://techreport.com/review/3089/how-ati-drivers-optimize-q...
Just a question: what if you want to log in at a friend's house for example? Do you have to remember the encrypted password or do you just open the app with a master password? Could you please elaborate some?
you can replace the word "inconsistent" with "incorrect", and many uninitiated people will shit their pants on that too :)
Of course this is a major part of their marketing. If the EPA makes them reflash my ECU and as a result my fuel consumption goes up noticeably I'm going to expect them to buy the car back. They sold them on false claims.

This also pretty much guarantees that I will never buy another VW.
This was a longstanding practice to make diesel engines more efficient while passing the official emissions test. There was a similar enforcement against Caterpillar and other truck makers in 1998:

http://www2.epa.gov/enforcement/caterpillar-inc-diesel-engin...

And against Ford in 1998:

http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-06/documents...

along with a clear ruling that defeat devices were illegal.
It's really disappointing that all those the-sky-is-falling articles from tech journalists have apparently caused this.

Nothing has changed, no new issues were raised. Marco has talked about and basically supported ad blocking in the past. I guess he just doesn't feel like being the focus of their ire right now.
With a proper open source Web based Office alternative, MS Office would loose a lot of customers.
If that's the core message, why is the article titled 'Why Agile has failed'. Non-technical managers would ruin any engineering project whether it's agile or waterfall.
I don't have any issue with Bobby standing up for himself, that wasn't the part of the article I was discussing. The biggest problem for me was the way he kept creating this "us vs. them" mentality of engineers against the world. It seemed over dramatic and again, entitled. I believe you that this isn't the kind of person he is, but is the image I, and other HN readers, got from reading this article.
What actually incentivizes a customer to take their car to a shop to get this fixed though? It's not causing harm to individual car owners, and it's not like they can get collections agencies to sieze them.

Seems like they're going to have trouble getting compliance here...
Colorado does drive-by testing, on freeway on ramps, and other locations with high traffic. If your car fails, or hasn't been monitored by that system recently, you get a notice for the more complete inspection.

The drive-by inspection doesn't require the co-operation of the driver or car, so is harder to game by detecting you are being tested.
The slides "achille" posted are a must-read for people understanding what they're actually doing rather than nonsense about "unhackable." For instance, the seL4 team is clear on risk areas of their proofs:

http://sel4.net/Info/FAQ/proof.pml

What's really going here is significant work in high-assurance design and security of two systems. They're using best modern tools to help prove or even synthesize about every layer and component in those systems. They're also developing and improving tools to argue that they integrate in a way that's secure for the whole system. In the past, similar, high-assurance methods led to the most robust and secure software ever created per the experience reports. This work expands on such techniques while attempting to make the tools, methods, and software produced reusable in other projects. In short, they're applying The Right Thing philosophy to as much as possible.

Galois's Ivory and Tower languages can be found here:

http://ivorylang.org/

seL4 is found here:

https://sel4.systems/

CertiKOS, VeriML, and other FLINT work here:

http://flint.cs.yale.edu/certikos/

Termite Driver Synthesis here:

https://github.com/termite2/Termite

CompCert here:

http://compcert.inria.fr/

A how-to on certified programming that's more accessible for newcomers:

http://adam.chlipala.net/cpdt/
Thank you for the reference - appreciate that.

I wonder when that explicit rule was introduced. It says in the article:

"But in fact, at the time this game was played
there was no specific rule stating that a pawn
had to be promoted to a piece of the same colour!
Hackers Hold Silicon Valley's Hometown Newspapers Hostage
Yes we can do a lot to make things better!

1. Nerds should run companies. The core problem is this assumption the CEO needs to be a "biz guy" like this seeming frat boy. I don't know why nerds think this, I think it may be some high school trauma.

But being the CEO is a lot easier for a nerd than it is for a biz guy-- biz guys at best are going to not touch the product development side, and more likely are going to undermine it... while nerds can easily manage a VP of sales, a VP of marketing, etc.

So first solution- don't work for biz guys. Only work for nerds. (and for purposes of this discussion, I consider Tim Cook to be a nerd- his nerd area is global manufacturing, but he's not a "guy who owns a restaurant" and thus has no relevant skills for a tech startup.)

2. Biz guy ideas are not better than nerd ideas. I don't know if SW doesn't allow it, but they should have come up with an idea that they, as engineers, were passionate about and worked on that. I think the results would have been better.

3. Focus on bootstrapping. The way biz guys get in is that they have connection to money or money and they use that money to take over and exploit the nerds (VCs and the bad angels are nothing other than these exact same biz guys--only VCs are incentivized to get you to bet it all on a longshot to be a unicorn because it's better for their portfolio, even though it diminishes the likelihood your company will be a success. )
The technical debt of petrol engines is not relevant to this article:

> The allegations cover roughly 482,000 diesel passenger cars sold in the United States since 2009.
The VW/Audi 2.0t EA888 engine is capable of producing 100 more hp with a software update. These turbo/diesel/supercharged engines have a million parameters that they can modify to change driveability. I cant believe that they would do something like that to pass emissions testing though, that seems incredibly foolish. I would imagine that with diesel engines, economy and certain emissions are at odds with each other.
The article states clearly, more than once, that the move is not legal by current FIDE rules.
> So...in other words gmo foods can potentially change human genes or at least add new genes. How in the world would this ever be an argument for gmo foods. ::mind boggled::

Its an argument for GMO foods (or, more precisely, an illustration of the naivete of a common argument against GMO foods) in that it illustrates that the processes used in GMO foods (but accelerated and more focused) are not as dissimilar to the processes that are responsible for genetic change in the wild (and which are accelerated and more focused in traditional breeding), so that the difference in kind that anti-GMO crusaders try to draw between evil GMOs, on the one hand, and safe products of traditional breeding, on the other -- on the basis of the methods that produce the genetic changes in each -- is an illusory distinction.
If utilitarian ethics are better than deontological ethics, then you're right. But it's hard to value one system over the other. I'm guess Marco is acting on principal here, and not on greatest good for the cause.
It seems it would come down to an under-sampling problem. You should be able to weave through the sequence any way you want, but if you weave through at a frequency different (ie. lower) than the frequency needed to sample the small discrepancy, you will begin to measure artifacts of the "original signal" (ie. your small discrepancy sequences).
For those curious, this process is called "anaphora resolution", which is the process of understanding what a reference(usually a pronoun) actually refers to.
Do you pronounce Py as 'pee'? If so that's interesting. Py is pronounced 'pie' in my head and when I occasionally say it aloud.
While this is a interesting point, grammarians will bristle at such an imprecise use of 'it', which should unambiguously refer to one antecedent.
To scale: The Solar System [video]
A little off topic, but I'd love to chat with anyone who has a significant percentage (leaning towards a majority) of their revenue generated from ads served on the mobile web – shoot me an email.
Unless you sign some sort of documents when you participate in Startup Weekend.
Support for 250 nodes is scheduled for October.

https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/docs/ro...
Anybody know of any projects of a similar concept but applying to unikernels instead of containers? I've had way more luck working with OSv than I have had with Docker and I'm kinda burnt out with futzing with it...but I do like the ideas behind kubernetes.
Just one clarification, and it will seem picky, but while Marco's site does have ads, Marco-the-person is in no sense "reliant" on ad income, as an early Tumblr employee who did well in the IPO and then didn't blow it on yachts and helicopters. In addition to IAP money from his podcast app, selling Instapaper, etc.
Grand Central Dispatch Basics
Instead of fining the manufacturer, just fine everyone who owns one. If every VW owner was forced to pay 20k or so, the problem would fix itself.
How is FastSpring different from using Stripe.js or Checkout? Both claim "automatic fraud detection".
Big Software Company officially changed over to Agile this year.

If they phrased it that way, they probably didn't. There is no such thing as "Agile". That is, "Agile" is not a methodology that you can adopt. It simply does not exist. There are a number of processes out there (Scrum, XP, Crystal, etc.) that can be described as "agile" because they conform to the tenets of the Agile Manifesto to varying degrees. But anytime you hear a company say "we adopted Agile" you already know that they don't know WTF they are talking about, and can stop listening right there.

Sadly, misunderstandings of "agile" are so pervasive that the term basically has no meaning anymore. Most - if not all - of what the author of TFA is ranting against, is very explicitly not "agile" in any sense.

I wouldn't say "agile" (that is, "a set of principles and ideas as articulated in the Agile Manifesto) has failed at all. I'd say a lot of people who don't understand what "agile" means have overloaded the term with another meaning, which is being the word to describe their fucked-up hybrid of waterfall and cowboy coding.
Big Data doesn't exist
Ahmed Mohamed, clock-making teen, transferring to another school
Do what you feel is morally wrong, and give away the profits? That's... bad ethics.

"It's wrong, but it's for the greater good, so it's OK!" should be a major red flag. It says that what you're doing is wrong, you know it's wrong, and you're rationalizing. What lies down that road is the destruction of such morals as you currently have. Don't go there.
It's obvious in the sense that free trade advocates regularly say this should be part of what happens.

And actually, it's what happens in the US. It's a pretty common thing to go along with trade bills. [1] It happened again as recently as June. [2]

I think we can agree that there should be more, and that we should do more for all sorts of workers, not just those affected by changes brought on by particular trade bills. In which case, it sounds like your problem isn't with free trade, it's with the US's generally poor treatment of workers. I'd agree with that, but I think more trade helps the situation in that it benefits consumers, and people are more willing to be generous when they feel richer.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_Adjustment_Assistance

[2] http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2015/06/24/p...
> If utilitarian ethics are better than deontological ethics, then you're right. But it's hard to value one system over the other.

No, its not. Its quite easy to do so, and people do it all the time without any particular effort.

Its impossible, not merely hard, to argue that someone else should value one over the other, without first choosing some from of one or the other as the basis for the argument, since you can't get a value conclusion without a value premise.
I'd urge you to medidate on what the constant complaints about paywalls imply about the public's appetite for non-advertising revenue streams.

Journalists have to eat.
This is why you address system security holistically. There are countless projects that sprang from the Aegis processor that address the fact that RAM and devices aren't trustworthy. One had the start of an EAL7 argument for security of software from all those attacks via the hardware mechanism without modifying the processor's internal RTL. Another shows security of information flow of a design down to the gates. Others are about just synthesizing correct designs that arbitrary parties can produce for a fab and composing them into a trustworthy system.

The problem, if not specific attack, has been known a long time. The Tandem NonStop architecture assumed that its memory, I/O, and key components could fail. So, they designed system to work correctly regardless plus linear scaling of resources. My proposal was to integrate above technologies with older, non-patented version of NonStop for high security and availability.
Making the Solar System [video]
I've been using Linux since 98, when I was 9. I know too well that this isn't the dawn of the Linux desktop, but it put a huge smile on my face.
On the other side of the fence, also Canadian, my debit card has been compromised many times. Bank always shuts it down immediately and lets me know, then returns the money. I have never been asked to prove anything. Usually they ask me to double check and see if any other charges than the ones they caught were fraudulent.

This has been as simple as someone using a copy of my card to buy candy and video games, something I could have done but didn't in this case.

Really impressed with the services of my banks when it's come to debit fraud.
A bit of nuance to part of the story:

IBM previously had told it's legion of "buying IBM won't get you fired" IT managers that the 286 powered PC-AT was the last PC model they'd have to buy for a long while (one reason Compaq was the first to come out a 386), and demanded OS/2 run on it.

Unfortunately, the 286 was seriously crippled for doing this sort of thing, as I recall, switching segment registers was very expensive. And for those of you who didn't live through the ugliness of 8086->286 (and 386 and beyond compatibility modes) programming, these were thoroughly 16 bit computers, where you had at most 64 KiB segments each of stack, code and data, unless you switched one of those segment registers to point elsewhere. That was cheap enough for the vast gain in memory on the 8086/8, and the 286 in its compatibility mode, but native? That mode did a lot more for you (like, hey, memory protection!), and Intel when that decision was made and implemented slowly simply didn't understand how people used their CPUs.

Anyway, Windows 3.0 and on was taking off, no one but stupidly managed Lotus wanted to program OS/2 Presentation Manager, and prior to in 1988 that DEC killed off a RISC CPU + new operating system effort in favor of continuing with VAX/VMS for a while longer. The software people, at least, were in Bellevue, WA, and many were hired to develop OS/2 3.0, which due to the above morphed into NT 3.1 (which really was around a 3.x Microsoft quality release :-).
Because the non-programmers didn't write it. That's how copyright works, and it's why big companies are so careful about this, and make you sign reams of papers.

This is also why it's such a pain in the ass for open source projects to changes licenses -- they have to get permission from everyone and anyone who contributed code, or rewrite that person's contributions.

You write it, you own the copyright for whatever part you wrote unless you formally transfer your copyright via contract. You don't even have to file any papers to get copyright, it's automatic.
I, too, was curious about Lady Cynthia Blunderboro. It seems she's a fictional persona prone to hoaxes.

https://www.google.com/search?q=lady+cynthia+blunderboro