skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Is Wikidata only for notable data or any data?

Wikidata is only for notable data, but the notability threshold is much lower than that for Wikipedia. The criteria for notability are described at [1]. For example, we might add items for all known pathogenic genetic variants, but likely would not have an item for the fire hydrant on your street.

For things not notable enough for Wikidata, interested users could install a local instance of Wikibase [2], the software that runs Wikidata. Wikidata editors and administrators determine what is notable, and have places like [3] to discuss questionable cases.

> Can data be permanently, unrecoverably deleted, or is it more like Wikipedia

Wikidata works like Wikipedia in that regard. Previous versions of a given item or property are almost always viewable (and recoverable) through the History tab [e.g. 4]. In extraordinary cases, like a vandal posting sensitive information about a person, data can be hidden from normal view and/or actually deleted.

> Is the plan to assign a unique integer to every unit that's ever been used?

Basically yes, to my understanding. How many units do you think exist? We already have items for many units, e.g. meter, micrometer, nanometer, foot, yard, bit, byte, , gigabyte, etc. I can see how this implementation might seem naive; e.g. perhaps we could represent one standard metric (like meter or byte) and handle factor conversions of scale (kilometer, millimeter, etc.) through some mechanism we don't have in place right now. Consider also asking about this on the "Contact the Development Team" page [5].

1. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Notability

2. http://wikiba.se/

3. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_deletion...

4. https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q1&action=history

5. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Contact_the_developme...
Or rather, one needs to learn which constructs destructively manipulate a global environment, and which perform lexical binding.

In Python, an inner def will lexically bind a function, creating a closure. Python is not less dynamic than Ruby.

In Common Lisp, a defun inside a defun will behave similarly to Ruby; but if you want lexically scoped local functions, you use a different operator, namely flet or labels.

Scheme has a define which is lexical: it brings a lexical identifier into the scope for forms which follow.

Lexically scoped items, even in a dynamic language, in fact can be "cast in stone when you press the compile button"; they are cast in that stone which is the entire compiled environment of the surrounding function.
I don't have a writeup, unfortunately, but the "algorithm" I use is really simple and on Github:

https://github.com/psobot/wub-machine/blob/master/remixers/d...

The algorithm mixes a pre-generated template (in the key of the song) in with rearranged samples from each section of the song. If the song has 10 "sections" (verse, chorus, bridge, etc.) then the remix will have 10 sections too, and samples within each section will be rearranged and mixed with the template.

From the above link:

Compiles one "section" of dubstep - that is, one section (verse/chorus) of the original song,
but appropriately remixed as dubstep.
Chooses appropriate samples from the section of the original song in three keys (P1, m3, m7)
then plays them back in order in the generic "dubstep" pattern (all 8th notes):
| | :|
|: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 | m3 m3 m3 m3 m7 m7 m7 m7 :| x2
| | :|
On the first iteration, the dubstep bar is mixed with a "splash" sound - high-passed percussion or whatnot.
On the second iteration, hats are mixed in on the offbeats and the wubs break on the last beat to let the
original song's samples shine through for a second, before dropping back down in the next section.
If samples are missing of one pitch, the searchSamples algorithm tries to find samples
a fifth from that pitch that will sound good. (If none exist, it keeps trying, in fifths up the scale.)

If the song is not 4/4, the resulting remix is sped up or slowed down by the appropriate amount.
(That can get really wonky, but sounds cool sometimes, and fixes a handful of edge cases.)
yep, a demo would be great.

I've logged, and I already have a blog on github, and everything seems not very intuitive. But the idea sure is great
Well, less than 90 MPH I would guess for the backyard, seeing as how the structure the camera was attached to didn't fail etc.

You're welcome, and, yeah, I suppose a tough subject, this is the first time I've watched any live videos from this event 4 years ago. Can't say how glad I was when the tourists, who had a clue, and thankfully decided not to shelter at the Home Depot, got past the Lowes on Range line. The video starts right at the edge of major destruction (if you look at the street view of that Payless Shoes you'll notice they have a shiny brand new building) and they crossed right through the zone of total destruction. More later, probably, have a phone call.
Houstonian here: I feel your pain. Dallas and Austin often see new services tested and delivered there before we do. We're set to pass Chicago as city #3 by the next census but low population density really hurts us when it comes to bespoke delivery services. Amazon Now is here but fenced by zip code. I expect we'll catch up when commercial drones are allowed.
I'm very much interested in these things. To remain competitive indie developers and the open source community will need to apply these methods as well. I hope to see some publicly available tools soon.
Replace "stupid people" with "people being stupid"
"We" = the vast majority of people whose short term consumption addiction is being financed by China, which conversely is investing in our long term economic serfdom.
Wrote about that back in 2011. Surprised to see it's still an issue, really - I changed formats, but there's no reason for the JS to still work that way.

http://taoofmac.com/space/blog/2011/04/28/2233

(edit: Just noticed that someone else also linked to my blog post further down. Apologies for the redundancy.)
The prerequisite for such a way of programming is to use plain universal interchangeable data structures.

It does not seem possible in mainstream languages where the OOP dogma tells you to obfuscate your sets, lists and maps and turn them into non-reusable classes.
To be fair, Phoenix is also in the middle of nowhere. There's a decent sized city a few hours to the south, a big city a few hours to the west and a few hours to the east, and a somewhat decent sized city a few hours to the north but that's it. Mostly desert surrounds us. Our airport is among the busiest in the world. We have zero usable water access. I imagine getting stock into Phoenix is slightly more difficult than LA or Austin or Seattle or, well, anywhere.
Ouch. 1Password is probably the best usable password manager today; they can do better in a few areas, including this. Another area would be putting blessing/device keys on each device on top of a password, because I don't trust a passphrase alone, and many platforms are getting trusted computing features -- you have a slow process to put a device key on each thing, which is then entangled with your passphrase to decrypt. You could even do a hw token, too. Another area they could improve is network sync -- I don't trust iCloud or Dropbox, and wifi-sync is a pain, so supporting WebDAV or some other open format they could develop would be a lot better.

Long tangential digression:

My personal design goal is to maximize the number of distinct entities which have to collude to cause me serious harm.

Pure online SaaS is often very bad. There are cases where the risk is acceptable, but "here, maintain a password list" is not one of them. The "shared google sheet full of password" is a great example of this. Evernote is another example. I avoid these wherever possible.

Systems like LastPass where the binary is distributed by an entity every time I use it, and then talks to that same entity for the backend, are are better, but still bad. Hushmail was the canonical honeypot of this type -- download a java applet after logging in...

A long-lived binary (standard client software) talking to servers operated by that entity is better. Swapping the binary out is more detectable, and harder to do for a single user. iOS apps are probably the best for this right now, since Apple is sort of a semi-trusted intermediary here. You'd at least have a shot of catching the compromise after the fact.

Client software which talks to servers run by separate third parties is better. e.g. 1P using iCloud/Dropbox. It is better as the set of third parties is bigger and more diverse.

The ideal is being able to run client/server on your own platforms. Being able to run a cloud storage service (e.g. AeroFS) entirely on your own private network is ideal.

Open source on top of this is great, but in reality independence of operating the services is worth more. An open standard with multiple implementations, many of which are open source, would be meaningful, but merely publishing source code isn't as meaningful, at least without verifiable/repeatable builds and a good runtime level matching.
Modules are for us. They provide context.
You want to use a function name as a namespace and that creates problems for organization and conceptualization. Any compiler should be able to look at foo() and module:foo() (with identical side effects) and optimize. So what if I duplicate code? There's no clear advantage to focusing on that as a problem. Let the machines do the machine optimizations and you do your code organization (which is a harder problem).
I think that the issue is some people don't consider Dropbox a good option to store much of anything unencrypted for sharing... This comes down to Dropbox being a U.S. company, subject to DOJ requests and gag orders, and complying with them, iirc.

I'm a little less concerned... though, I use LastPass, I used to use KeePass on dropbox, but lastpass has better integration into the browsers on the platforms I use (less good on android with chrome though, and there's the fee). I don't know that there's a better option that's as seamless for users.
The usual "hospitals would be great if it wasn't for the patients" applies. :-)
Thadd is either an obvious troll or terribly selfish and delusional on what constitutes fairness. I would much rather the government rob me by mail in the spring than be stabbed year round by the poor. This attitude of "not my problem" and "but that's my money" is being taken to a really socially destructive extreme and is basically (incoming hyperbole) a type of crowd sourced genocide.
For me, only the first page load is faster but the actual search is slower compared to the full version with AJAX for the instant search (around 400 ms for /custom vs. 80 ms ajax response).
Only for remote files, and only if you choose to sync your files to a remote folder which is not icloud ( Dropbox and Folder Sync), it's not used for local data is it, and only for remote data (if you choose to do that) for certain services?

https://support.1password.com/switch-to-opvault/
It makes no difference if you use Dropbox or iCloud. It depends on the file format.
You should put a contact email in your HN profile.
This also stores the name of the site in plain-text.
I am not on that mailing list, but I'd like to point out Emacs Lisp, which doesn't have modules (they would rather be called "packages" as in Common Lisp, but anyway, they just are not there).

Instead, the idiom has emerged to prefix every function name with its "package name". I'd take a deep look at the discussions in the Emacs Lisp community, in order to see the matter from the other side.
It's terrible in the same way that selling vegetarian food which allows "unobtrusive meats" in the ingredients if a farm pays them enough money, would be terrible.

If Adblock Plus believes that sites should be able to make money from advertising, they shouldn't make an Adblock product. It's a total conflict of interest.

It's like a bank vault company allowing selected criminals through the vault doors because they believe the poorest in society have a moral right to take from the rich if their situation is bad enough, as defined by the vault company.

It's sleazy.
What I want to know is how this is better/different compared to Rumprun or OSv. They appear to be its closest competitors.

https://github.com/rumpkernel/rumprun/

http://osv.io/
My mail got listed there as well, even though I send everything through google's smtp servers with my own domain name.
This is not at all an easy question to answer. For me, it would depend on whether I felt the degree to which they were being disrespectful of something core to my identity made things simply not viable. If it doesn't go that far, then working with them may be a means to improve the image your faith has in the eyes of others.

I leave you with the story of Hattie McDaniels, a black american actress who played the maid in a lot of movies at a time when playing the maid was the only role she was likely to get. She was widely criticized by black americans for taking that role. She rebutted those criticisms with a statement to the effect of "I can play a maid for $700 per week or I can be a maid for $7 per week."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hattie_McDaniel

In short: If you think the money is something you can get and their attitude is not so problematic as to guarantee that it will help destroy your business, I would take the money. If it is such that they will give bad advice, sabotage your business, etc, then walk away.

It's a judgement call.
First thing I read: "See how Volkswagen uses the Fun Theory"
The only way you'll get it on the same day is if you order it early in the morning for evening delivery. It's not a local supermarket, they need to schedule a driver and bring the stuff to you from their warehouse.

Most supermarkets around me (NYC area) do deliver. Some for free. On top of that, there's Peapod, Fresh Direct, and a bunch of others.

This is a profoundly stupid move by Amazon. I can't imagine anyone would want to pay for this considering the alternatives available in most metro areas.
TraPac and Middle Harbor in the Port of Los Angeles are automating. Oakland isn't considered big enough to need it.[1] for an overview of automation in Los Angeles ports, see [2]. The Port of Los Angeles isn't a port operator; it's a landlord. Thirteen private companies have their own terminals, docks and equipment, and two of them are automating now. To automate a terminal, you have to take it out of service and build a new one.

The above references may be too specialized for general readers. Here's a "gee whiz" video of Rotterdam port operations.[3] And a tutorial with animations, from the port of Busan, S. Korea.[4]

Note that the article is partly an ad for FlexPort. Automated ports have less need for FlexPort's service. Most automated ports have buffers, big stacks of containers. Containers come off ships and are transferred to container stacks nearby. On the other side of the stacks, trucks approach and have containers loaded onto them. The terminal handles container sorting.

Oakland loads many containers directly from ships to trucks towing container trailers, without buffering. Matching up trucks and containers is a problem.
FlexPort's concept is "Uber for containers" (I know, but here it's real.) Any truck, any container, any destination within some distance limit.

If Oakland had automated container stack buffers, FlexPort wouldn't be needed.

[1] [http://www.joc.com/port-news/port-productivity/us-ports-weig...]
[2] https://www.portoflosangeles.org/Board/2014/April/042014_ite...
[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxXZQ7emHC0
[4] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2t2cqiQl0BE
Because what people want from an ad-blocker is an affirmation of their logical consistency, and not "blocked ads". Uh huh.
I see. That's not assumption of benevolence, it's simple greed. The same "I'll be gone, you'll be gone" attitude that created the mortgage implosion and so much else that's gone wrong throughout human history. Xbox buyers don't really think China is benevolent, they just don't care because they figure most of the harm they do will be visited on others.
Totally tangential question, but does the "too many blood cells" translate into greater endurance and stamina for you?
> or new things hiding behind that n-th fractional digit

Indeed, this is where we disagree: you think brain science is at the n-th fractional digit (for some decent value of n) and I see little evidence of this.

> There is observable evidence that shifts probability towards some theories and away from the others.

This relies on having good priors and is therefore at the subjective side of science. Perhaps I have a less optimistic view of science than you: as a quite fallible human activity, often deceived, lacking in humility, corrupted by money, and basically chasing after whatever is in fashion at the moment. All of this gets us back to the issues discussed in the original article.
Ask HN: How to promote mobile game?
I've released my first mobile game for Android and iOS but I'm having a hard time promoting it outside of family and friends.

Does anyone have any tips for promoting games on the App Store and Google Play? Or is it almost impossible for a first time indie developer without a marketing budget to get any attention?

I've tried Twitter, posting on various forums, emailing bloggers and YouTubers, etc. without much luck beyond a few downloads and some generally positive feedback.
PHPRunner 8 Alternative Crack and Serial Patch Free Download
Do you not give the website your password is used at to 1Password?
" there are no "open source projects" - only "the open source Key-Value database of all functions"

There would be a function name rush in open source (similar to domain name rush) to claim cool, short function names.
I wouldn't oppose HN editorializing click-baity titles.
Download iOS 9.0-9.0.2 Mac Jailbreak
> The market might be ripe for a git based cms/blog why not build that company and service?

But what's a `git based cms/blog' ? A static website generator that commit on heroku ? Or a cli/gui post manager that uses git command-line argument as an API ?
It seems like it shows all the fonts found in the CSS. A font like Arial might seem very popular but in reality not show up for most people because it's often the second or third choice.
MAME does this as well, I believe they emulate all systems DICE does and more.
But.. But.. They said "No Software".
I will definitely be keeping an eye on how this develops. Parrish is so enthusiastic about her work it is contagious. I hope this project turns out positively, for her sake and the sake of the research.
which, no doubt could be handled by `import coolfunctiondotio from github.com/username/function`, and handled very much how Go does package imports, but on a function level
Joe talked about this in Strange Loop 2014, and it seems to me that the idea is far less crazy than it seems. The more functional programming I do, the more sense it makes.

A major reason for modules in OO languages is to manage mutability: There's some hidden state, and some conventions surrounding that state, that the module tries to abstract away from us. But the price is very high: We have to make sure our executables are built with the right versions of modules, and avoid incompatibilities: What we know as dependency hell.

But why do we need dependency hell at all? For instance, in Scala, why do I have to do gymnastics to use a modern version of Shapeless along with spray-routing? Because the JVM is not happy with multiple, incompatible versions of shapeless in the same classloader.

Under Joe's plan, all of that disappears. It's just a question of how much we lose in exchange for sidestepping a problem like this. Given that any libraries I write nowadays tend to have just a few hundred lines of production code, I am very tempted.
And where I am, courts decided that no, ToS are never binding. ToS are effectively worthless.
They take smaller blood draws from finger tip pricks that aren't large enough in volume to run on a standard machine from Siemens et al.

To get around this, they supposedly dilute the samples to a point where the concentrations of analytes are well below the machines minimum operating specifications.
A couple concepts here:
Associating data with your account: This is misleading, because the bulk of information about you isn't associated with your account. Rather, it's stored in other silos associated with a non-account identifier (consider this a way to make it easy to serve more targeted ads to people who don't even have a google account). This non-account identified data can be enriched by account data (when there are co-occurrences of account activity along with non-account identifiers).

The policy is vague and misleading because they should write: "We go to great efforts to track everything we possibly can about people's behavior on the web. We've configured algorithms to connect all the dots and make information about you (found in Service A, Service B, ...) useful. So useful that we can determine enough about you to tailor your online experience in order to influence your decisions when it comes to purchases, brand recognition, political leaning, etc."
And follow it up with:
"We do this even when the influence we have over you may harm your best interests, for the purpose improving ROI for advertisers" (Obviously this line is not conducive to the policy itself, but rather a blunt explanation of the effect of it which people are categorically unaware of)

The policies don't even explain that there is a difference between people seeing your data, and algorithms acting on your data. (Algorithms acting on your data are much more effective than when people do so. But that explanation in this case is lacking - it makes it seems like it's not all connected together, but in reality it is because of how databases work, and how disparate data sets can unique identify a person with enough data)
Thanks. Hopefully that's what's happening here. The article wasn't clear at all as to whether what's happening is what you describe or simply China getting copies of the source (in some form). What a difference it makes!
Maybe it's not really about auditing it, as it is about finding their own flaws to exploit. In the US, it's actually worse, because Microsoft also gives NSA the zerodays it finds on a silver platter, way ahead of fixing them (not necessarily suggesting Microsoft will delay fixing them on purpose, but as we know sometimes fixing a major bug can take many months - see the whole Project Zero vs Microsoft scandal - months in which the NSA can put those bugs to "good use").

http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/06/nsa-gets-early-acces...

Oh btw, Apple and Intel do this, too, now (Intel may have been doing it for years, but we know for a fact Apple "volunteered" to do it, too, this year at Obama's Cyber Summit). As far as we know Google has refused to do it, and hopefully it stays that way.
I made no claims about legality. Yes, CAN SPAM means you can spam legally. It doesn't make unsolicited commercial email anything other than spam.
> github.com/username/function

This looks a bit like a module :)
I don't imagine plain names would be very usable. The lowest level would be SHAs; then you'd have UUIDs mapping to signed feeds of SHAs (like Freenet's SSKs); and then maybe URLs that resolve to a server that 302-redirects to the UUIDs as URNs (where caching those resolutions becomes part of JITing code.)

A "module", then, would be e.g. a web server: a dictionary under your control, mapping symbols of your choice (paths) to [a particular trusted maintainer's ABI-locked sequence of fixes for] the functions you want them to map to.

A "library" wouldn't be the canonical container for functionality, but rather would provide a particular taxonomy; people in organizations would share "libraries" in order to speak the same design language.