skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
it's unethical.

I love Android because it's open and am happy that Google kept it that way... to an extent. Some of the things they do are backhanded. For example, there's a strong campaign to condition users to only trust Google for apps. Downloading any third party APK from Chrome brings up a scary warning: https://v5j7s7h5.ssl.hwcdn.net/v2/mkstatic/chrome-warning.pn...
If you do a mobile search for porn apps, half the screen is taken up by anti-porn apps available in Play Store. They campaign that Play is the only legitimate and safe source, but malicious apps find their way in Play too. Instead of lumping all third party sources as "Unknown" and potentially dangerous, there ought to be a way for third parties to earn "Known" status and verified as a trusted source. But I doubt we'll ever get that fair treatment.

It's not just Google though, obviously. These tech giants have the opportunity and thus responsibility to make a positive difference here. Instead, by blocking one of our most basic human desires, they often chose to devolve and perpetuate the war on sex.

I daydream that, one day, tech giants like Google, Amazon, or Yahoo, or VCs and banks will say, “Let’s open our doors to SexTech companies we can trust.” We try to operate everyday as if this is a possibility, because one day I hope it will be.

If you have time to spare, I go into a lot of it here https://modelviewculture.com/pieces/sextech-startups-in-a-ho...
There's also a long read on our blog about Operation Choke Point and how the government used banks and credit card companies to take down legal industries they deem immoral
https://mikandi.com/blog/featured/guide-to-operation-choke-p...
all of these lists sound nice and all, but think back to the people that you really respect that have taught and influenced you to become who you are today.

what was the most important part? for me it was the person who was many degrees smarter than the rest of the team and pushed everyone to be their best. In my case he was not the most diplomatic or encouraging, hell he yelled at me a few times (and trust me, i don't appreciate being yelled at even by my parents). but anyone who was interested in software engineering was in awe of his skill. He devoured tech books and prototyped things on the train to work so that he always had good ideas and answers. I was sold right from the interview where I could tell he just knew his stuff inside and out. My point is that having the necessary knowledge to actually teach people is so much more important than all those other things. For most of us that means a lot of hard work in the trenches during free time. New technology? there goes Saturday and Sunday. It's the only way to have all the answers to the ones above you, and the ones you're leading.

Additionally try to get your team the best development/infrastructure tools money can buy and the best learning resources (such as pluralsight, egghead.io, all-you-can-read online books subscription)
Sadly that's the wrong Room:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_room_1998/
I generally feel the same, but was woefully misled by a detailed, thorough, but overall negative review of "Spring[1]", which I found to be a delightful genre-bending tale that really surprised me.

I'm not suggesting it was the best movie of the year, by any stretch, but where the reviewer kept insisting that the alleged plot holes were completely unexplainable, I found that perhaps she just didn't "Get It", because not only were the holes absent from my viewing, but where she found holes, I found explanations that actually made sense (y'know, within the context of a film anyway).

[1] - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3395184/
very well written. As a previous PM I can feel all the pain and satisfactions mentioned in here.
"China has a... quite healthy attitude towards copyright and trade secrets. That is, they don't give a flying fuck here."

haha, I used to live in Dongguan.. Well, actually, Changping Town, Dongguan. It was impossible to get software that wasn't pirated.
Thank you for the correction. Gigantic oops moment there.
The Hollywood biased or caricatural vision is not exclusive to the middle East.

You should see also how France and French are depicted in US comedies and TV series. Usually people are dressed like in the 50's, streets filled with cars of the 50's, hotels are filthy, and actors speak some words of French that is barely understandable. I don't see such stereotypical clichés with England.
The Open Source Community should really join forces together to create an unified-killer app for it.
totally on board with something like this. I never understand why people say market forces will solve global warming, pollution and the future of energy.

Pollution is THE textbook case for an externality. By definition it cant be fixed by the free market.
If the .223 was designed to be less lethal it doesn't work very well. Over the years a hell of a lot of people have died after being shot by M-16/M-4s.
Snowpiercer was indeed sad, but I always assumed my negativity towards it was a result of having already read Hugh Howey's (rather good) Silo Saga, which it seemed to rip off at every turn, only having shifted the X and Y axes.

I came away from it thinking that if I hadn't read the Silo Saga, I might possibly have actually enjoyed Snowpiercer, though definitely nowhere near 95%'s worth.
And conversely a lot can still be learned from as far back as 1964 (e.g. APL).
There are only 2 asset classes that yield reasonable ROI now - real estate bubbles in the mega cities and unicorns. Investors don't have a lot of choice.
I've removed the update reminder from two win7 machines. It wasn't difficult.

Instructions are here:
http://www.myce.com/news/how-to-uninstall-kb3035583-the-wind...
You don't know what her coursework was a Stanford. She may well have skipped the intro classes.

I don't think the makeup of the board is that weird. Yes, it may mean they're shady and are trying to leverage political connections as much as they can. But even if they had a great product, dealing with regulators would still be a huge problem/pain for them, and they would still ideally want a board with lots of politically influential people.

There are many reasons to be wary of Theranos. I don't think the board makeup and Holmes being a dropout are among them.
Looks interesting, too bad they stopped after 2012.
There's a big difference between dropping a smart bomb on a specific target and flattening an entire city in the hopes of getting that target. Guided weapons certainly aren't perfect, but they're miles better than the alternative.
This very reasonable. Movies, music, art, can't be reduced to a single numerical score. In this sense no rating 'should' be trusted, but instead we need to make choices based on entirety of context. Seems trivial, yet we always want an easy answer.
> The rating will be very high around release time

Pretty simple, people see movies they think will suit them early so will rate slightly higher than the rest who see it later / on DVD and rate it less.

There's a type of movie that fools critics and American Hustle was one. I think it was great but it was over rated. But it took a while for that to get out.

Rarely it goes the other way where movies break genre so the keen people are a little disappointed but the rest are pleasantly surprised and the rating goes up.
some google searching found that they don't sell that style of table to the public. but if you have a friend who's a craftsman they can certainly make one for you. Expensive, but on the plus side you can support a local craftsman.
Well, there are almost no real vectorizable primitives or functions in the core library so I'm not surprised that you don't run into people vectorizing much. And, go dev team compiler focus has been elsewhere the last year.

And, so far the go team hasn't seemed to be able to interest Intel in doing the heavy lifting that they might do for some other compilers..

So, branch predictions and faster sync primitives would be great, not least because they would speed up channels in many cases, which would be cool; it would be nice to widen the use cases for channel-based communication significantly, but they're just VERY slow if you want to use them at scale in a large application.

I am using go for some large scale numerical processing, although it's the sort with lots of logic attached, not just a giant matrix with some glue around it. It's kind of a PITA. We are picking and choosing some outside libraries, and spend a lot of time massaging the go code for speed and bitching about the garbage collector. (Did you know that for i, _ := range is often 3 to 4x faster than for _, v := range? Do you know how awful code written down four or five nested loops that uses indices looks?)

But, the size codebase our team can manage with go is pretty great. We wouldn't be nearly so productive in many other cool (or .. experienced) languages when you add up the full life cycle costs including innovation, enhancement, bug fixes, maintenance and deployment. It's a win. I'd do it again in a heartbeat.
Some performers do use Patreon. But if you want to promote your erotic work, Patreon doesn't accept accounts promoting porn with live actors, only drawn art.
ObjC's dot syntax?

Sure. That's easy in Lumen: https://github.com/sctb/lumen/commit/6410c8cc2de66d1976515bd...

Is it possible to use this technique to introduce, say, infix arithmetic operators?

Yep! I wrote a macro to swap any instance of `x with the previous expression. Meaning, it allows you to write:

(foo `= (x `+ y))

rather than

(= foo (+ x y))

The reason it was so easy to do this is because `foo is shorthand for (quasiquote foo). So the macro simply steps through a body of code, looks for any instance of quasiquote followed by an atom, and then swaps it with the previous expression.

But more generally, it's easy to write a macro to do whatever you want. If you really want infix expressions all of the time, I could imagine writing a macro which matches the pattern (... + ... + ...) and replaces it with (+ ... ... ...)

That's made-up notation, but the idea is just "look for some set of symbols, like + or /, which occur within a list in between all of the other elements, and then move the symbol to the front of the list."

The power is available to you, but whether you choose to use it is a separate question. Prefix notation tends to be a win for everything except math. And even for math, it's usually a matter of code formatting. Rather than

(- (* 2 (/ (+ x y) (+ a b c))) 1)

try

(- (* 2
(/ (+ x y)
(+ a b c)))
1)

or

(let u (+ x y)
(/= u (+ a b c))
(*= u 2)
(-- u))

Once Laarc has support for indentation-as-parens, it'd look like:

let u (+ x y)
/= u (+ a b c)
*= u 2
-- u

which is rather pretty, and has no ambiguity. One of pg's essays on Arc mentioned this feature, and it seems like a good idea, so I hope to pursue it.
>Each startup that goes through the three-month program now receives$120,000 in cash — $20,000 from Y Combinator, plus $100,000 from the outside investors – in exchange for 7% equity in their company.

$120k for 7% in a company!? Is that really a favorable term to startups? There's no way I would ever, EVER sell 7% of my company for a such a small sum. Who would sell out their passion for such a pittance?

It's very possible I'm missing something here, because my impression is that YC truly tries to act as a partner with founders. I just can't see giving a go at a startup - with all that entails - for an idea I believe is worth only $1.7M (even at the nascent stage).
lwn.net has a number of articles covering photography with Open Source software.

Doing a generic search via DuckDuckGo [ https://duckduckgo.com/?q=site%3Alwn.net+photography ] shows a number of articles which may be of interest.
Why is Avro better than Thrift?
I think engineering and or technically minded movie goers find Snowpiercer a lot harder to enjoy than maybe a critic who can discount such issues and focus on plot themes and movie making. There is so much that doesn't add up when you try to imagine how the people on the train solved all the problems they would have faced. It can make films harder to enjoy when you can't pretend that technology is just magic.

There are a lot of very interesting themes in the story though, the action is well done, the production quality is high, and the movie pays homage in tone and style to other great movies. When a movie's technobabble is terrible, it helps to pretend it's fantasy. If you don't and you let bad science get you down you could miss out on the other parts.
You don't necessarily need to be a US citizen. (Not speaking of SpaceX specifically, but commercial space activity in the US in general.) It's possible to get an "export license" which allows you to participate in ITAR-controlled discussions, even if you are a not a citizen or Green Card holder. (My understanding is that it takes some effort, though—it might be hard to find a company that would jump through the hoops without a strong motivation.) Another option is to participate academically through a masters or Ph.D. program—some are well connected with the commercial-space world.
Flexible, healing and feeling artificial skin a step closer
It wasn't Closure Templates - those are what's used on the Apps side of Google (GMail, Google+, Docs, etc.). The technology in question lies in a grey area as far as confidentiality goes...it's been mentioned once in a recruiting presentation and there are references to it in other Google open-source projects...but I figure I would be safer by not naming it.
intuitively people with higher incomes should more to charity. However, a recent study found the rich DO NOT give a higher proportion of their income to charity. Incomes of $25,000 or less a year gave away an average of 4.2 percent of their incomes; those with earnings of more than $75,000 gave away 2.7 percent.

There are certainly a number of things that could explain this.
Docker Registries: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
The site you linked is unreadable because they write everything in all-caps. Unfortunate considering that the titles sound interesting and that there's lively discussion in the comments.
As OopsCriticality points out above, it's incredibly difficult to judge the potential of Theranos' technology because they have so far refused to perform and/or publish peer-reviewed randomized clinical data comparing themselves to the standard of care.

I can add some nuance to the WSJ article as a veteran of medical devices and FDA inspections:

The WSJ article quotes the inspection as a "surprise". There are only two reasons this inspection should have been a surprise to Theranos. Either in their conversations with FDA they appeared to be less-than-forthcoming, or if they were not familiar with how the FDA operated. Pre-approval inspections (i.e. you submit an application to FDA and before they make a judgment they do an inspection of your site) are very common for new technology and in some cases mandatory. When exactly they show up you don't know, but you plan for them to show up, and you expect it within a certain window of time.

Theranos CEO Elizabeth Holmes has been vocal about the FDA exercising oversight over all "lab developed tests", i.e. novel testing methods developed by a laboratory for use only by that laboratory and not for sale to others. Currently, these tests are not regulated by FDA, but FDA's sister organization the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), under a set of regulations called CLIA. CLIA regs are not as stringent as FDA oversight and are more about good laboratory practices as opposed to the safety and efficacy of any new technology. So, Theranos and Holmes are trying to hold themselves to a higher standard, which is admirable.

The caveat with doing that is that you should be familiar with what that standard is going to be. I am suspicious that we're getting the full story from the Journal article, because I find it bizarre that no one at Theranos thought that FDA would consider their "nanotainers" a medical device: when FDA gets involved, anything that is part of a diagnostic system gets their oversight. Someone with 3 months experience in medical device regulatory could have told Theranos this.
Pretty sure it used to be <$20k for the same ~7%. The main value of YC has always been the training, network, and vote of confidence, not the funding. Not everyone finds it worth it for their particular situation, but many do.
I'm very interested as well! I'll shoot you an email!
Former Twitter COO Ali Rowghani to Lead Y Combinator’s $700M Growth Fund
I am rooting hard for José and Elixir.

I picked the language up about a month ago after hearing Chris McCord talk about his web framework, Phoenix, which is seriously great, but Elixir as a whole is the most fun I've had programming in a long time.

Also, it's quite something when you post a question on the mailing list and usually receive an answer from the creater of the language in a matter of hours. He seems like a really smart and kind guy, and I love working with Elixir, so I hope they both go far.
Thanks you for the elaborate answer, I think this more than answered my question!
In London they are proposing to build new tunnels under the Thames which will could massively increase traffic in east London.

Whether traffic moves faster or slower pollution is bound to increase.
>but you don't fuck around with the FDA

As 23andMe found out the hard way.
Uncoiling the spiral: Maths and hallucinations (2009)
Fossil find suggests humans spread to Asia long before they got to Europe
Theranos, in my opinion, is a self-licking ice cream cone.
The HTML5 spec is very explicit about which tags are auto-closed, and it is neither a parse nor validation error if those tags are omitted.
First, 200 billion number is total BS.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7709556

Second, Europe has telecom monopolies and the US doesn't. What Europe does is force the monopoly to sell service to ISPs. But only one company owns the copper/fiber. There is one company in charge of building a fiber network and everybody has to use it. The ISP competition makes sure nobody is ripping you off, but it doesn't ensure network quality at all. Since there is one physical connection to your house. They have no incentive to keep their costs down. They have no incentive to build faster networks. And there is nothing the ISP can do.

So what they do is regulate the telecom. Make them do it.

In the USA, most areas have two competing telecom-ish companies. The telephone company (AT&T, Verizon, Qwest, Frontier, but never more than one of the above) and a cable company. In populated areas, both of these provided high(ish) speed internet. In some areas only one does, and in some areas none do. But these companies actually own their networks. But they don't have to resell their service like Europe enforces.

But that increased competition on the network to your house doesn't work very well. If Verizon makes a huge upgrade, there is no insurance that people will pay more for it. Which is exactly what happened. Verizon spent a ton of money on a nice fiber optic network and people mostly stuck with their old cable service. So in America you have two networks, with overlapping coverage, each delivering to roughly half the market. Competition actually causes less efficiency.

But in the end Europe and Americas ISPs aren't really that different. America has better ISPs than the France, Italy, Spain, etc. But countries who can more effectively regulate, have better outcomes.

I wish America regulated it better, but it's not corruption. Just a bad policy choice made in 1996.
You are wrong. So, so, wrong.

If you were allowed to, the best thing you could possibly do for your early stage company would be to go take $100,000, nay $500,000 plus 30% of your stock and give it to Paul Graham in exchange for being let in to YC.

It's not just the education you get, nor the peer pressure of being in a 'class' with other companies, it's also the social cache, the network of other YC funders, the access to investors, and lately, the benefits of YC punishing investors who treat their portfolio companies badly.

Good/Great investors are all people you would always pay to have on your board, and gunning for your company. The money they give you helps keep the lights on and grow, but it's really a proxy for getting (and holding) their attention and focus on what you need to succeed.
It's a business decision. When it doesn't make sense as one or when the criteria are something else, then it shouldn't be done. On the other hand, when it makes business sense, it makes business sense.

Anyway, my understanding is that those terms are relatively favorable in comparison with those oft times offered by other investors.
Hey,

Some reading material:
A very general blog about philosophy : http://radar.oreilly.com/2015/07/data-has-a-shape.html

A slightly more in-depth blog : https://shapeofdata.wordpress.com/2013/08/27/mapper-and-the-choice-of-scale/

A very accessible book about topology (especially from an algorithms perspective) : http://www.amazon.com/Computing-Cambridge-Monographs-Computational-Mathematics/dp/0521136091/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1444971634&sr=8-1&keywords=topology+for+computing

Blog exposing persistent homology : https://normaldeviate.wordpress.com/2012/07/01/topological-data-analysis/

Videos exposing persistent homology :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKfUzmznd9g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKfUzmznd9g

Some free software:
Python Mapper by Daniel Müllner : http://danifold.net/mapper/index.html

JPlex library by Harlan Sexton : http://www.math.colostate.edu/~adams/jplex/index.html

Dionysus by Dimitriy Morozov : http://www.mrzv.org/software/dionysus/

Topological Data Analysis in R : https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/TDA/vignettes/article.pdf

Infrastructure
Our tech stack is:
Backend
HDFS for storage
Our ML and Math code is hand-rolled C++ and Assembly(7% LOC)
All coordination/distributed systems code is in Java
ZMQ for communication
Protocol Buffers for protocol
Frontend
D3
Backbone
Hand-rolled webGL graph visualization (we open sourced it at https://github.com/ayasdi/grapher)

We currently don't use GPUs or any other fancy hardware primarily because today, our customers use commodity hardware and getting F1000 companies to buy cutting-edge hardware is just plain horrible.

We have an awesome GPU rig at our offices that we test algorithms on and it can really make our algorithms scream, but again, none of our customers have/are willing to invest in GPUs.

Apache Spark - it is interesting that in our experience, making it work for ML algorithms is really too much work unless you invest the time to understand the framework and its fundamentals. It performs very well for ETL type tasks, which is what we use it for.

On a public offering: no comment :)

If you have more questions - I am easy to find :)

Gurjeet
I found the first half of Wool to be very good and the rest of it readable, although just barely so. Howey is a terrible writer with interesting plot ideas. Howey has a compulsion to explicitly tell you in minute details through every other passage exactly what is on everyone's mind. The concept of using symbolism and actions to portray people seems lost to him. His sentence structure is terrible. He's saved by Wool's very interesting idea and the first chapter of Wool was admittedly very good. I read the entire series and I really think at a high level his ideas a very interesting, but he just doesn't really have the skill required to write well. I am not sure an editor would help, maybe a co-author.
Wow, you could not think of a single redeeming thing about Snowpiercer? And you preferred "The Room"? Now, I think you're trolling! ;-)
Gunnar wrote a review article a few years ago called Topology and Data (http://www.ams.org/journals/bull/2009-46-02/S0273-0979-09-01...). It is an amazingly well written and accessible paper for a technical audience.

Pair it with Afra's book (http://www.amazon.com/Computing-Cambridge-Monographs-Computa...)