skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think that the information derived from what people say with money is more accurate than what they say verbally. I think that because of the basic nature of human cognition, we're all more or less liars and hypocrites (uncharitably stated) . Not in any evil way, but still fundamentally, we live in a story we made up. There's rising experimental evidence to support this. After all, we have the phrase "put your money where your mouth is."

So this is the substrate for "social interaction does not reward honesty" because social interaction is essentially adding other people to your set of narratives.

I think that economic behavior is more honest - a person who wears an expensive watch is saying something with it.

People who try to lie in markets don't do well. Markets punish the untruthful, generally - it's too much work to keep a lie going in that case. Of course some manage, but in general, no. How many Bernie Madoff stories are there? Not many.
You're just fanning the flames. That incident has nothing to do with this Busybox commit.
I too am interested in doing it with the python 3 interpreter. Can you share the relevant link
But it was adopted by Soviet army in 1949 officially, at least that's what Wikipedia says
dont stress on it
Well they could patent it. This is literally the purpose of patents. You can't patent it if you don't publish, and if you do patent it, you have every incentive to publish it. To get other people to use it and pay you licensing fees, or just to brag and attract better scientists to work at your company.

I do hate patents, and I think they are often given to ideas that seems simple, trivial, or iterative, rather than ground breaking. Stuff that probably would have been invented by someone else a few years, or even months, later. But for your hypothetical "revolutionary AI breakthrough", that's the ideal use case for them.
Eugenics is just another name for selective breeding and it is hard to come up with a proof that selective breeding works for all other species, but not humans.
Depends on what you mean by coping. I was poor, I managed to escape it. The brain effects studied, in my experience, aren't a life sentence fundamentally destroying your ability to survive and be happy. It's absolutely relative, having a $60K a year salary is going to be much better than $30K inconsistent. But it's not like you can't carve out a fulfilling existence with limited resources. I believe that's a way more damaging belief about the poor than the (wrong) belief that the poor are only poor because they are inherently incapable of being rich. Which is how I see people interpreting those recent research results.
Poverty also has significant negative effects on the physical, mental and social development of children.
Despite an Improving Economy, Young Grads Still Face an Uphill Climb
This is a great point. I enjoy reading about various languages and paradigms even if I don't have a particular problem I need to solve, just to see what's out there. But without a concrete problem I'm actually trying to solve, I never go very far into actually applying these techniques at the time I learn about them.

Similarly, I've never found tutorial-style docs helpful, at least not the type where they walk you through solving some toy problem. But if I'm actually trying to solve something, I'll use the tutorial examples to crib from while implementing my actual solution.

I've read about Goroutines and channels, but never implemented anything with them (my experience with go consists of writing a BF interpreyer). But it looks like I'm going to have to work with a library in C++ that uses the same principles, and having that vague background knowledge helps a great deal.

Interestingly, I personally find that if there's an external motivator for solving these toy problems (for example, in a class or job interview situation), I don't have this same motivation difficulty. But if it's purely for my own amusement, I'm way too lazy.
Maybe if you live in your car.
Since the Linus discussion years ago there is this myth that microkernels are slow. And it's the first post - here again - whenever someone mentions Hurd.

Nevertheless we read stories here again and again about how to achieve faster server speed - cloudflare stories come to mind - with userspace tcp stacks etc.
UW–Madison engineers reveal record-setting flexible phototransistor
The danger here to Rust is the usual "worse is better".

OS vendors will happily just add GSL and static analysis driven support to C++, with Rust becoming the language that drove them to do that and that is it.

Microsoft (GSL + static analysis, C++/CX, System C#, .NET Native) and Apple (Swift) are already working on what might be their next systems programming language.

They might lack full Rust like safety, but they are a good enough incremental approach to safety, come with integration with their existing tools and libraries.

Which leaves Rust adoption for systems programming to other OS vendors, e.g. embedded space or open source OSes.

Remember, languages are a tiny portion of the whole eco-system. Tools, libraries and community play a bigger role.
Just that: recorded history is recorded. History in general may or may not be recorded. For example, the exodus from Africa is part of human history, but it is not part of recorded history. Recorded history only goes back about 5000 years or so. History goes back a lot further than that.
They won. The Germans lost. What else is victory? Yes the Russians lots the most people in the war. Which seems like it only adds to "the Russians won the war". They sacrificed the most to do it. Maybe the problem is the word "won". In this case it's not "won" as in "to receive a prize". It's "won" as in "causing the defeat of the enemy".
Also Rust has the freedom to just leave dangerous features out of the language [1]. This is something we will never be able to do with C++ without transforming it in a not backwards compatible manner.

And it's not only about safety: a language that doesn't suffer from the consequences of legacy design choices is just less mental burden, easier to learn and easier to teach.

[1] http://graydon2.dreamwidth.org/218040.html
Darpa's ElectRx Project: neuromodulation of organs to help body heal (2014)
I've been struggling with a decision about whether to leave consulting and join a startup as an early employee under similar terms. After reading your post and many of the comments within, I have been able to trust my gut a lot more confidently and stick with owning 100% of my own small operation. So at the very least take solace in the fact that your post helped others out in making better startup decisions!
>We know that eugenics efforts cannot produce any remarkable or decisive selection for increased cognitive abilities. We know this because eugenics is a sort of hobby-horse form of evolution, across handfuls of generations, and because evolution cannot, taken over thousands of generations, select any more strongly for increased cognitive abilities than it already has. If it could, it would; thus we must conclude that it can't.

I don't buy that argument. There's no reason to think that evolution has been selecting for cognitive ability as strongly as it possibly could.
Beating people up isn't market activity - it's at least borderline criminal. Every 14 year old Libertarian will bleat "but that's force" and they'd be right :)

I agree wholeheartedly - you can't get two, much less three people to agree on market failures. My bias is that they simply don't happen or only happen very rarely , that wealth and power are almost completely illusory and conflate status and money to an embarrassing degree.

I think that some people like stories about oppression ( I used to be one of those people ) and that this explains much of how it is that people disagree about this. A good way to challenge this belief is to read "Chief", a bio of Hearst by David Nasaw. This is why I refer to the Hearst morgue as feedstock for history - it's a lot bunk in that role, but every single person who reads history in what americans call high school gets it full in the face, and it takes some doing to get past it.
New to this, but basing such calculation on purely on CPU capacity would imply a bandwidth to memory (or some cache)

64 B / inst * 2 (read and writeback) * 3 inst / cycle * 3 Gcycle/sec > 1000 gigabytes/sec, which is insane considering 50GB/s is the norm to RAM right now.

*edit: Haswell L1 cache seems to allow a peak bandwidth of 64 byte loads + 32 byte store per cycle, so like other comments point out, this would match the CPU capacity. On the other hand, there is also latency. But it is hard for me to tell how latency factors into this.

Could someone explain how they would decide whether copying packets is cheap or not?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10437075
Meanwhile, greatest environmental disaster of this century is underway in Indonesia. Heard of it?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/30/indones...
Url changed from http://www.forbes.com/sites/federicoguerrini/2014/08/29/darp..., which points to this.
Meanwhile, greatest environmental disaster of this century is underway in Indonesia. 3 weeks more C02 has been released than annually in Germany & is currently releasing more C02 than the US economy. The flip side to this forecast in California. Heard of it?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/30/indones...
I couldn't agree more and appreciate your honest take on being an early employee at a startup. The equity mismatch between early employee and founder really doesn't make much sense to me and despite being interested in startups, it's really hard for me to overcome the inherent unfairness in the situation.

If you're a solid contributor, consulting with defined engagements and clear compensation schemes seems a far better exchange of time for money than a low salary with options that may or may not be worth anything, ever.
> The NT Kernel and OS was designed to run DOS, POSIX, ...

What you're referring to were what the NT team called "personalities", or more formally "environment subsystems".

A subsystem was an API on top of the native NT API. Win32 was one such subsystem; users were exposed to the Win32 API, and weren't supposed to talk directly to the intentionally undocumented NT API (although some developers did reverse-engineer it eventually). POSIX and OS/2 compatibility was implemented as subsystems, but these were rarely used by anyone, and eventually removed in XP. DOS was not a subsystem, but rather its own thing.

Note that this has nothing to do with microkernels. In a microkernel architecture, things like file systems and device drivers live run as normal processes separate from the kernel. In NT, everything was in the kernel. These subsystems didn't act as part of a microkernel design.

Oh, and NT was not a rewrite of OS/2. It was written from scratch. The project was started back when Microsoft and IBM had a good relationship, and NT was originally planned to as OS/2 3.0.
If you think the cost of the instructions to express copying is the main problem I'd call your mental model flawed. That is not the thing to worry about, when moving data the issued instructions matters very little.

No, the thing to worry about is the memory subsystem. How does the data interact with the caches? What DRAM access patterns do I have? How do I flow data as efficiently as possible?
Your comment is the shitty one. The guy makes more than 90% of the rest of the ENTIRE country, but he's "screwed"? Are you kidding?

Only someone with an insane entitlement complex can fucking complain about 165k a year not being enough.

Keep on being the reason the rest of the world hates the US, you're doing a GREAT JOB.
Really. Quite combative.

Drawing conclusions for whichever labels I present, when I did not specify how I might choose to apply the labels. Do you see where you're jumping to conclusions about my disposition yet?

My last words to you are this:

A burning death after mutilation is cruelty. The aggressors are torturing and burning the victims. The murdered suffering before the mob are victims. Everyone else witnessing the events is a spectator, although some of the spectators may be accomplices to the aggressors. Evidence for many of these events will surely be incomplete, and likely skewed. Without evidence in any direction how would anyone know.

But you, you're lashng out at people on the internet. At some point you marked me as an enemy. Maybe you'll realize you misread my remarks. Oh well, done with this conversation. I won't be replying to you again.
I legitimately can't up vote this enough. What kind of shitty society do we live in where making an insane amount of money isn't good enough?!?
So it's kinda looping at the end. Likely doesn't change that much any more.
I found David Edgerton's "Britain's War Machine) (http://www.amazon.com/Britains-War-Machine-David-Edgerton/dp...) quit interesting.

He highlights that the Germans---far from the technical wizards they are often portrayed as these days---won in the beginning despite inferior material. The British and their allies always had material and technological superiority. (Lots of their gadgets just didn't work very well at the beginning.)
https://blog.orangecaffeine.com/
Best post: https://blog.orangecaffeine.com/10-design-myths-founders-hav...
War is Boring has put out numerous hit pieces on the F35. Most of what they write is poorly researched, empty statements without any factual backing, or the equivalent of straw-man arguments.

This is about as sophisticated as their arguments get:

"Can the F-35 really engage, shoot and kill its enemy from long distances? There are reasons to believe it can’t."

The argument attempt they make in that section isn't an argument at all, it's hollow. They say something as though it's factual, without ever backing it up.

For example, that F35 dogfight outcome was with a very early F35, that was carrying a fraction of its final technology package. War is Boring intentionally ignores that completely because they're trying to defraud the reader and spin some propaganda.

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/07/f-35-p...

From The Joint Program Office for the F-35:

"The F-35's technology is designed to engage, shoot, and kill its enemy from long distances, not necessarily in visual "dogfighting" situations. There have been numerous occasions where a four-ship of F-35s has engaged a four-ship of F-16s in simulated combat scenarios and the F-35s won each of those encounters because of its sensors, weapons, and stealth technology."
Britain's War Machine by David Edgerton argues similarly. (http://www.amazon.com/Britains-War-Machine-David-Edgerton/dp...)
> Test the logic of this aside by changing "Academics" to "software engineering" and replacing "Liberal" with "white/asian, straight, males." I don't think it holds up very well.

I don't think the analogy applies: Software engineer quality don't vary in quality by gender and race and even if they did, we want to treat people as individuals. We don't want to discrimate based on those factors.

But Academia is a meritocracy of ideas; we do want to discriminate strongly against bad ideas. It's not a place where everyone gets a hearing - if it was, students and professors would spend 99% of their time on nonsense, learn little, and make little progress in their fields.

For example, I think AEI (his organization) have been climate change deniers. Should their ideas on climate change get an equal hearing in university science departments? What about creationists who think the world was created in the last 10,000 years? What about those who think the world is ending next week?
>The problem is that interactions of two other people can also impose cost on me. Then if this is worse than some opportunity lost is not clear cut.

The economic answer would be that the possible costs it could impose on you can be expressed as violations of your property rights, and if they wished to do this then they'd need to compensate you, or else you could sue them for redress.

>I know, but it's an absurd stance, isn't it? It let's you do things like seeing a person that has a heart attack and thinking "I see you have a heart attack, but why should I help you, maybe it's your preference!"

Being absurd doesn't necessarily make it less philosophically valid. In one sense the whole concept of morality is absurd, via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regress_argument. There's even a school of philosophy called Absurdism that based around recognition of the absurdity of seeking absolute values that inherently cannot be found: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absurdism.

On a more concrete level, the rejection of quantifiable utility is based on rejection of the extra assumptions it requires. Two in particular: firstly, it assumes some kind of simple relationship, so that if person X buys 10 apples for $100, then they valued each apple at $10 (linear), or maybe the first at $50, the second at 25$, etc. (polynomial). There is however no irrefutable logical justification for the assumption, e.g. perhaps they valued the first at $30, the second at $1, the third at $4, the fourth at $5. Secondly, it assumes that a person's preferences at time t have any relation to their preferences at time t+1.
There are compelling reasons for developers to require the latest OS versions; especially for access to the newest APIs.

As a developer myself I'd be interested in your opinion of what's a reasonable minimum requirement, and why. 10.6? 10.9? I assume you do not expect devs to support all the way back to 10.0.
Moovit helps you get around better than Google Maps
>Could someone explain how they would decide whether copying packets is cheap or not?

Run two machines. One runs packet copying software, the other runs non packet copying software. Both run on the same data set. Record the amount of electricity used. Multiply the numbers by the marginal electricity cost and compare. If the number produced by the packet copying machine is not significantly different from the machine that didn't copy packets, copying packets is cheap.
This sound really cool. Have there been any new significant developments in neurology recently?
It is good so long as the legal philosophy of the land is "unless something is explicitly forbidden, it is automatically allowed". This is not a good thing when that philosophy is "you're not allowed to just go and do new stuff until we get a chance to consider it and pass regulations".

There are plenty of examples around of "unless explicitly permitted, automatically denied" that are stifling innovation in my opinion. Pick a random county in America and try to build a residential dwelling using any sort of alternative materials or architecture for example.
What would you say it's worth?
Note to Russian HN readers: I'm giving a talk about Snabb Switch in Moscow on Tuesday afternoon at HighLoad++.
I would like some more details on the deployment and maintenance costs of this system. Maintenance costs play a huge role in long-term sustainability and if the initial costs are too high, many people in need of clean water might not get the system in the first place.
Serious question then: what would Europe look like today if the US had stayed home and not engaged at all in WW2 in Europe or the aftermath? How many more countries would have fallen to the USSR in Europe? Without US supplies, would the UK or the USSR have been able to keep fighting? Would WW2 have dragged out for years longer than it did? And so on.

The US spent a huge amount of money to stand off with the USSR in Europe after WW2 (which was in its self-interest). In fact it's still dealing with Russia in Europe to this day, trying to keep them from reclaiming more former Soviet territory, and carrying the majority of the burden in NATO.

Most Americans I talk to view their country's contribution in WW2 as the push that tipped the scales in the allies favor once and for all (rather than being the savior of Europe). Or allow me to paraphrase Churchill - he believed the war was won, when the US was convinced to fully join the war effort.

Further, what other countries in Europe are we going to claim had a large contribution to defeating Germany? The list is really, really, really short. The UK, Russia and the US carried the radical majority of the effort. It's that simple.
You should be able to get one that was made by the Brits, easily.
A theory that Jar Jar Binks was a trained Force user, knowing Sith collaborator
Yay! More 1-5-6-4 chord progressions! Just what everyone needs =)
Crowdsourcing a melody is like teaching a dog to walk on its hind legs. Be impressed that it works at all.
He dropped the charges for 24Mln soon after Tinkoff started a fraud case against him [1], nobody really knows what happened later but they probably got some sort of agreement and he got a compensation.

1: http://www.gazeta.ru/business/2013/08/14/5555829.shtml
> An aside: Academics are overwhelmingly liberal. People say it is a consequence of bias, but that is not necessarily true. If (broadly speaking) the smartest people are mostly liberal, maybe that tells us something.

Conservatives openly dismiss the value of academia compared to alternative pursuits like commercial industry. Why is it surprising that conservatives are, then, underrepresented in academia, even if there is neither any bias in selection to academic positions nor any correlation between intelligence and political orientation?

Members of a ideological faction that is openly disdainful of academia are, unsurprisingly, less likely to choose to pursue academic careers.
Just tried this. Really like it,

Superficially, this is a lot like Spotlight, Alfred, LaunchBar etc. However this is laser focused on one thing - finding files. It is very fast.

I like how it displays the full file path and not just the file name.

The shell aspect ("pi cd" etc.) is brilliant.

The search results are incredibly fast.
No, it doesn't assume or require equality. The p-value you compute for this test will be proportional to the smaller of the sample sizes.

Mins will fail if you conspire to cheat the test, it's true. Very few statistical tests stand up to conspiracy theories.
I guess peer review, which arxiv doesn't have, and their LEGO model - you (and others!) can go back and add new data to your first data point, thereby slowly arriving at the "story" by linking several data points from you and others. You can only replace arxiv papers with newer versions, and then only by you.
And this is hardening like a DMZ. I'd probably end up with an arch mirror VM on the same host, tell libvirt to isolate the traffic and tell the host to drop all traffic coming from these machines without looking at it after setting up the arch mirror.

And then cross my fingers that there are no KVM bugs.
Do you think the experience would have been better if people were working in the same office? Meetings would be easier or less necessary and wouldn't require phone calls at all hours of the day. Working remotely with people in different time zones is already a challenge when using traditional management. :)
Not sure how this constitutes fraud? Since when can't you alter the terms of a contract? It's not his fault they didn't read it. They sure hold other people accountable when they don't read theirs.
Content like this doesn't count as a Show HN. Please read the rules:

https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html