skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
For something that approaches restaurant quality and might include beef, lamb, seafood or fresh pasta, it's a decent price point, imo. Hardly "crazy" I would say.
Barcode Generator Crack and Key Full Version Free Download
That all sounds awful.
I do not know if the original commenter(commentator?) is okay with The Guardian as a source, but that twitter account is trash.

Sadly, one thing the original commentor(commentator?) seem to not understand that it's about what's being said, rather than who's saying it.
Elon Musk - Tesla and SpaceX. Although he does not advise to be a ceo of both.
Expressways to the future
This seems to be Alibaba coming up with a credit scoring system for people who don't have banking relationships. Here's more info.[1] The People's Bank of China already has a more traditional credit rating system. But most people in China don't have a credit rating in any form.[2] This seems to be a scheme to get the rest of the population plugged into the system. There's a Government policy document on this "social credit system".[3] The Alibaba thing appears to be a trial under that system.

Of course, it's a Government control thing, too. But China already had that - it's called a dangan. In China, many people really did have a Permanent Record. That's not as important as it used to be, because it was employer-maintained, mostly by state employers. With more private employers, it's less of an issue. This new system may become a modernized version of the dangan.

China has a centuries-long history of keeping records on everyone. The old systems worked when there was very limited population mobility and job mobility. Now, with a more flexible workforce, the old system is getting an upgrade.

[1] http://www.chinadailyasia.com/business/2015-06/09/content_15...
[2] http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/05/08/why-there-are-no-credit-...
[3] https://chinacopyrightandmedia.wordpress.com/2014/06/14/plan...
That makes perfect sense, and I don't argue with this logic at all. But since you're here, I'd like to say something (that isn't horrible :P) that I've actually wanted to [have the opportunity to] get out there about GCP for a while now.

The "Heroku-style free" tier is likely to be all I can manage for the short to medium term future, due to a variety of factors.

As a result, the two go-to systems I would turn to if I need code hosting are Heroku and OpenShift, and I have accounts with these platforms (although I'm leaning toward the latter lately). I am yet to do anything generally interesting with them myself, but these are the systems I take into account when talking to others, because I have no experience with GCP. (I wonder if this is true for others too, and how big that number is.)

I have zero idea how Heroku are fending off precisely what you refer to. I've heard about situations where individuals' AWS accounts have been hacked by automated systems that spin up "instances with everything", but once it was established with billing that the account was hacked, the charges (which in one case were 5 figures) were fully reversed. Perhaps this fact is relevant here.

I think the problem can be solved before it (theoretically) gets to that point, however.

Serving up webpages, doing the occasional database transaction, etc, produces a significantly different CPU load than bitcoin mining does. I don't consider instance CPU usage monitoring a violation of my privacy, so I think it would be perfectly fair to throttle back continuous high CPU usage, but allow for short bursts of high usage. (In fact, I think this kind of thing is already standard...?) For bonus points, make the system track instance CPU usage and adjust its thresholds to allow for periodic high burst usage :P (since, thinking about it, masquerading as a web server and doing 30 seconds of mining every 5 hours is going to work out to zero gain).

I wouldn't consider it at all unfair to offer a free tier with exceptionally aggressive CPU-time QoS; in fact, it would probably suit me (and a lot of other people) perfectly, giving the funemployed community the option to do things like spin up fascinating new environments like Erlang, Dart, Rust, etc, and play with these environments (which are not yet available on Google's cloud hosting infrastructure) for web serving and similar. (For more bonus points, I'd extend the heuristic CPU-time tracking I mentioned before to classify instances as "friendly" over the long term, and let them have exceptionally low latency! :D)

In short, there's a whole demographic of people out there that you're definitely excluding, including people like myself who are just at the "messing around" stage, to nervous types who don't like deadlines and run from the "free for X period of time" part of GCP.

I realize and recognize that your response here is only your opinion, not Google's, and I'm very happy to respond here or via email (my address is in my profile) if you'd like to discuss any of any of the things I've said. ^^
Found it from a couple of apps on https://unhosted.org/apps/

Seems like a swappable dropbox-apps-like backend.
http://thenewstack.io/sdn-series-part-eight-comparison-of-op...

This was the article that led me to discovering Ryu -- I am interested in the possibilities of Service Insertion and Chaining.
If I can rephrase this without it being a criticism: Go encourages particular patterns of use, much like any technology.

Rails, for example, strongly encourages programmers to keep a company's entire operations in a single application and memory space. Many Rails shops eventually discover that this is suboptimal for their needs, for example when one particular part of all of their operations need to be scaled up substantially but scaling a "monorail" requires memory proportionate to the total size of all operations times the highest desired throughput of any piece of the system. I'm aware of several Rails shops which needed to retroactively decompose a monorail, and many of them rewrote the performance-intensive part in Go, as Go is bugs-in-your-teeth fast for many common workloads.

Just like Rails "wants" to be a monorail, Go feels to me like it wants to be a collection of small, X00 to ~2k line programs, talking to each other via JSON messages passed either over HTTP or a queueing system. (Use NSQ! It's fantastic!)

Partly this is due to affordances in Go's design for e.g. deploying systems. If you want to re-deploy, just compile (for free) and copy the binary everywhere. Partly it is due to Golang not yet having much in the way of community norms for building really big systems. Dependency management is a very unsolved problem and gets worse the larger the individual pieces of your system get. Golang also isn't very opinionated about project structure in the way Rails is, which counsels keeping parts of your system bite-sized as a way of imposing structure on top of it. (By comparison, you can drop any intermediate Rails programmer into virtually any Rails program and say "Find the login page. Find the $FOO business logic." and they'll be able to do it in a few seconds.)
Thank's for sharing this inside info. It's hard to imagine a better example to explain the importance of rest and sleep even if people are motived to keep on working.
Junior doctors do similar hours, sleeping a couple of hours at the hospital when they can.

What is absurd is that the long hours juniors do in investment banking are terribly inefficient.

First because they spend them on tasks that could be automated or outsourced: compiling financials, formatting powerpoints (Microsoft shares a large part of responsability for their poor UI!).

Second because the more tired they become, the less efficient they are at what they do. It is often the case that they would probably get the same done quicker by calling it a day at 9pm and coming back the next day with a fresh mind. But peer pressure prevents that.

Third because even though they spend their time at the office they actually do not work continuously. Them staying late is more often than not because they were assigned something at 5pm with an unrealistic deadline. In this business managers usually disregard the implications of when in the day they give work or feedback. And I suspect it is often because they have been there, done that, as juniors, and have little sympathy for the juniors' time spent at the office. It's a kind of rite of passage.
If anyone read that, please give TLDR if don't mind!
I see more core problems:

1) This only scales if enough people are willing to give up a portion of their storage devices. I would think twice about that for my SSDs.

2) Private customer internet connections often have a lesser upload bandwidth and that is part of the overall traffic calculation of ISPs. So the networks have to change a lot to face changing traffic requirements in this regard. That is something that will not scale with the demand of a successful protocol (see BitTorrent). Also this IPFS traffic may harmful to other traffic like gaming sessions.

3) Illegal content will be the killer. Don't expect laws to change for IPFS. No one will permanently use VPNs / anonymizers permanently for using IPFS, because some law firms will specialise on gathering endpoint information like they already do with BitTorrent.
Don't wealthier Americans learn these skills at college?

I learnt how to cook properly at university (UK). I'd watched my mum a fair amount growing up, and in the final few weeks before I left she showed me things like how to shallow fry chicken, or check it was cooked.

I ate takeaway on the day I arrived, since everyone was too drunk, but on Sunday I paired up with people living on the same floor and cooked with them for the rest of the year.

It cost a fraction of what takeaway food would have cost, and we weren't trying to be super cheap.
Basically, it's an ability to dynamically define the control plane of your network. To a certain extent, this is also re-writing aspects of network protocols at a whim, perhaps based on the contents of a packet.

Here's an oldish video that I found helpful: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHeyuD89n1Y

In a sense, it's a buzzword, because it is the natural progression of periodically running scripts that dynamically test your network and shape iptables rules accordingly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_impact_avoidance#Hist... - Project Icarus is almost 50 years old. There was a paper about laser ablation 2 years ago. Lot of literature on many different collision avoidance strategies.
In the context of discussing modifications and purporting to be open to the idea of end-user modification ("police the violation"), you wrote:

> If the GPS on the car shows you on a public highway with a unlicensed binary drive train, frankly they can pull out the tyre bursting chains

To me, it's a bait and switch to lead off as if you're open to end-user modifications, only to draw a line ruling out doing so on a public road - the normal and only use of 99% of consumer vehicles. And I don't think my characterization of your solution as "fascist" is overzealous either - it's based on fundamental reasoning that if someone breaks the rules they deserve immediate and severe punishment.

Also FWIW, I don't think I've ever encountered any police officer who was a cryptofascist. Perhaps the ones in unmarked cars.

Now, looking at your profile I see that you are in the UK (although I should have perceived based on spelling and kph). And I know regulation works much differently in the EU, with deny-by-default whitelisting instead of only reacting to problems. Perhaps in that environment, an individual working on their car really is different from an "official" mechanic. Or maybe the more cohesive regulatory environment just has you believing that it's more foolproof than it actually is.

In the US, an individual and a mechanic are the same thing, both philosophically and practically. And while the US's ad-hoc regulatory environment causes its own problems, I wouldn't say that an epidemic of mechanically unsafe cars is one of them.

So the only difference I see between modifying software and modifying hardware is that software has developed an insidious culture of "seems to work; good enough", even while being much more complex. But I think the answer to that is to push for openness and proper engineering, rather than entrenching manufacturers' sloppy processes of cobbling together reams of C and then keeping cameras out of the sausage factory.

edit: I'll respond to the points in your substantial edit tomorrow, since it requires internalizing the two very different philosophies of top-down guarantees vs bottom-up flexibility. But I will say that in the US, the self-preservation instinct has indeed been enough for people to mostly self regulate (and when it fails, insurance). Perhaps not as much as the UK (no idea about the relative stats), but it is sustainable.
A Ridiculously large accurate scale model of the Solar System
The major issue is that the Web is vulnerable to single-points-of-failure (unlike the Internet). Personally I wouldn't use the phrase "unravel from its own internal contradictions", but I think most people have been bitten by a SPOF on the Web, even though the Internet itself is robust to failures. IPFS is about making the Web as reliable as the Internet itself.
It's sad to see Rick Falkvinge seemingly advocating for a company that claims it doesn't have to comply with subpoenas while operating in the US.
A Tool to prevent consumer complaints – Amicus shopping assistant
I think it would be better for most people but coordination cost doesn't grow linearly. So if part of the job imply coordination or communication you will need more than doubling to have the same output.
But noone tries to fake them being the same as local calls
The Power of Yoga to Heal the Brain – Yoga Beginner
Tips for Breathtaking Architectural Photography
I respectfully disagree. No one is forced to take out a loan and go to college or university. You said it yourself, they do have options.

There might however be a lot more traction on one of the paths as compared to the other.

You're presenting this proposition as that the only way someone can make it, is by pursuing a higher education (with severe debt). I, again respectfully disagree. It is not that binary.

First of all, the path of not going into higher education is not as ridiculous as you make it sound.

Secondly, there are many variations of how to finance your higher education. You do not have to take out a loan. Especially not for the full duration of your studies.
How Far Can You Go with Screen Monitoring Software?
Does anyone know how to access past courses on coursera if you didn't sign up in a timely manner?
Half Life 2 was family friendly, slow paced and with boring gameplay. Painkiller was brutal.
> Whether you sympathize or not, saying "meh" to someone's death is a slippery slope with psychopathy at the bottom.

You literally made a "slippery slope argument". You might not be aware of it, but this is a logical fallacy [1].
Psychopathy is not the end result of lacking empathy to a certain person's death.

[1] http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/slippery-slope.html
Walt Disney would film deer walking around and then give that to his animators for Bambi.
> 1903 and 65 years later landed on the moon.

65 years and Two World Wars later...

This quote [1] from the movie 'The Third man' might be relevant.

>in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock?

[1]http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0041959/quotes?item=qt0359443
Agree on the buses vs trains. Infrastructure is already there for modern train systems to be automated.

>Buses are more complicated than cars (city driving, people at stops etc), so doing cars first makes sense.

I don't think this is a valid argument. I see self driving cars operating in Mountain View (a city, albeit not a crazy driving city like SF or Boston), these cars are aware of people as stated in the article, the condition of people at stops can start with stopping at... well stops ->recognizing people that are waiting there. Maybe prepayment to figure out how many people should have boarded.
The part where they said Muslims liked cats while Christians liked dogs is interesting. I wonder if this is still a bit true.
most websites need a shared database for all users. how do you decentralize them?
Peter Thiel also has a good description of how to differentiate (avoid competition), through either:
1. Proprietary technology
2. Network effects
3. Economies of scale
4. Branding
You can read the relevant chapters from the book 'Zero to One' on genius.com: http://genius.com/Chapter-3-5-of-zero-to-one-peter-thiel-ann...
We do try to follow the aggregation approach in our household but it still averages out as the same amount of preparation time per meal; time required to prepare ingredients scales linearly with their volume.

plus it wipes-out one of our only two days off together.

Unless you have huge freezer space that can accommodate multi-week batches there's no real way around that.
Just want to mention Jules Verne.

Some of the stuff[0] he wrote felt scaringly accurate even though the exact implementations differed quite a bit.

[0] :"Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea" from 1870 was one of my childhood favourites.
How I could hack internet bank accounts of Danish largest bank in a few minutes
The home page scrolls very jerkily, and I have a pretty beefy computer. Otherwise, cool thing :)
> no really, what do we know about ghosts not existing, in 2015 that we don't know in 1900?

We now know about the effect of low frequency sound on people and also on their eyeballs.
Apparently they lowered the reward ... it used to be $100. http://slumz.boxden.com/f244/dude-wants-to-pay-me-100-month-... - There is a copy of the email that they sent back to a guy that asked for info and and somebody had the conspiracy theory: "They are just setting up a network of computers where all the box does all day is just click on their Google ads. They need unique hits to either make more ad money or make their sites appear to be worth more to sell them."

They most likely want to use it as a proxy so they can have a good pools of different IPs.
> No company charges a "fair" price anymore. The price a consumer pays for a product is entirely divorced from the cost to manufacture said product. The price a consumer pays has been maximized to "whatever consumers are willing (and able) to pay".

Yeah, that's true, but hasn't it been always? "Whatever consumers are willing (and able) to pay" is pretty much the definition of "price" in Econ 101.
Rude/abrupt, yes. But 'horrible' through an email and a tweet seems like a stretch to me.
No trace in the law doesn't mean it was illegal. What that means is that no court has reported a case on the matter. That can mean it was very rare, or just was so accepted that it was never challenged in court, or happened in those many places where courts were not much of an option.

Even if something gets to some form of courtroom, the chances that a decision would be written down and reported were slim during most of english history.
In Sweden - the current interest rate is 1%. This is financed by the state and is low because of a multitude of factors. One being that it is practically impossible to default on the loan. It will stick around.

(The tuition is free for higher education in Sweden, but you can choose to take out a loan for your living expenses during your study period).
Show HN: Someone.io – Task management for teams made easy
Amazon Redshift – Working with JSON Data
I haven't tried using Flux yet as I haven't really felt the need... Does anyone have insight on how to use it with React Native? Do you have a single action creator / dispatcher for your whole app? It feels messy since my screens in the app are usually pretty independent (but maybe I haven't written a complex enough app yet... hard to tell).
1) The plan is to incentivise people with schemes like http://filecoin.io/

2) Yeah, I'll admit the asymmetric nature of home internet is a bit of a hassle. I suspect you'll still require machines on the backbone seeding content, with domestic machines focussed more on providing content to local peers and/or seeding rarely accessed content. In the long-term, IPFS can help ISPs in reducing their costs (content can be grabbed from within their own network, instead of having to peer with another network for almost everything), which might help to convince them to change.

3) IPFS doesn't force you to host any content you don't want to. If you choose to host illegal content, that's your problem.
The ragdolls in Dark Souls act like that on purpose, precisely because it's funny how they bounce around. They could easily have just disabled interaction with the player (see DkS2), but thought it was hilarious, so left it in. Also, have you seen what happens if you combine a corpse and the dark woodgrain ring? http://i.imgur.com/tRp71Lp.webm
I think your first point is obvious, but I disagree with your second, at least 'at-scale'.

In the case where you have loose coupling but are representing multiple entities that scale in different ways, microservices allow you to separate concerns and separately scale those concerns relative to their requirements in terms of memory/CPU/disk/network/etc. The best factored code running in a single horizontally-scaled layer will be inefficient if 90% of requests are manipulating entity A, and entities B, C, and D have a lot of intricate business logic but are rarely touched (they are better off if separated and scaled individually)

The overhead you allude to is definitely something to take into account. If you're a 5-20 person startup without a serious need to scale up or lacking people who have built the tools that make microservices easy, you should avoid the issue for now. But ultimately, decoupling services so they can horizontally scale independently is a huge win.
So that would be like $40-$80M at current valuation... and not much control unless they have some kind of preferred shares.
This is a naive idea that is wrong is so many way. It keeps popping up recurrently and I don't understand why people didn't see yet that it won't be the next Internet revolution. Oh well!

Let me try to explain it again. The idea of content base key is strongly narrowing the application domain of the system. Modifying your information (I.e. typo correction) invalidates all the keys. More precisely, people holding the old key won't be able to access the corrected information. of course this model fails completely with dynamic data.

The other problem that is often overlooked with such idea is the function that translate your key into the location of the information. That is: determine the IP address of the server(s) hosting the information from the hash key of it. One needs something like a distributed index for that. Don't use an algorithm because you don't want to add the constrain that your informations can't be moved or replicated.

Another problem is staying in control of your information. An owner of information want to be able to fix or modify it, or delete it when he wants.

Finally, another naive idea is sharing a distributed storage. This is a nice idea but it simply doesn't work. Some People will abuse it. To avoid this you need a system to monitor and control usage. Accounting ? good luck. By the way, this is the problem of Internet today. It is a shared resource, but a few are consuming a hell lot of it and earning a lot of money without sharing back the profit. I'm looking at you google with YouTube.

I'm thinking and working on this problem for a long time. My conclusions are :

1. Decouple keys from content
2. Make the distributed locating index your infrastructure
3. Optimize keys for index traversal
4. Owner of information must stay in control of Information
5. Owner of information must assume the cost of hosting
Porter Robinson Reflects on “Worlds” One Year Later