skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think you're wrong to even call PG's test wrong, in comparison to this. His is executable while both have an assumption about distributions: with his that the distribution of group A and group B are the same, and with yours, if we actually try to solve the noise problem, that their distributions of outcomes are the same.

His assumption is more plausible than yours, because yours breaks down merely if the variance of outcomes (given a prior EV) is different. It's too fragile a test to hold up. His breaks own if the variance and tails are different, but even then it still gives you something to look at as a year-over-year metric.

His can also still show certain conclusions. If group A outperforms B in his test, that means either there's bias against A or group A has a fatter tail than B.

I don't think you took step 2. You took step 1+i.

> Or is your sole point to sit on the sidelines saying "haha, you don't have the answer yet, stupid math geeks?"

I think it's perfectly reasonable to criticize the cargo cult application of mathematics.

Edit: And that's the crux of this. PG's test is targeted toward the real-life situation where there's noise. That's a mere footnote to you, which means you're solving a completely different problem.
The whole "write a shared library, and layer your platform-specific UI on top of it" sounds great in theory and is brought up all the time, but vanishingly few apps actually do this from what I can tell.
Solaris came with everything turned on by default for a quite a while as well.
Far from bolstering generosity, a religious upbringing diminishes it
THIS

There's a few other startup grant opportunities out there but they're mostly province dependent and not very accessible.

What you're proposing is more of a startup incentive than an R&D incentive though. Not saying it's a bad thing, just different.
I wonder if this is what Paul Buchheit meant in this tweet:

https://twitter.com/paultoo/status/652547232504217601
EFF has published their initial analysis of the final text, https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/11/release-full-tpp-text-...

"The most shocking revelation from today’s release is how the TPP's Investment chapter defines "intellectual property" as an asset that can be subject to the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) process. What this means is that companies could sue any of the TPP nations for introducing rules that they allege harm their right to exploit their copyright interests—such as new rights to use copyrighted works for some public interest purpose. A good example of this might be a country wishing to limit civil penalties for copyright infringement of orphan works ...

... the E-Commerce chapter has the next most serious ramifications for users ... it restricts the use of data localization laws, which are laws that require companies to host servers within a country’s borders, or prohibit them from transferring certain data overseas ... The E-Commerce chapter ... imposes a strict test that such measures must not amount to “arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade”—a test that would be applied by an investment court, not by a data protection authority or human rights tribunal."

EFF wrote previously about conflict between TPP and US Copyright Office efforts to improve the situation with Orphan Works, https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/08/users-ustr-dont-sign-a..., "... the Register of Copyrights acknowledges a need to do something about the fact that "orphan works are a frustration, a liability risk, and a major cause of gridlock in the digital marketplace." The report includes a discussion of several proposals that could expand access to orphan works. One proposal is to put limits on the legal consequences for those who do anything technically infringing, in order to make it less daunting to take a chance and use them."
I'm not quite sure where you're getting that 25% reduction in cores from. Yes, it'd probably be a pretty bad tradeoff to dedicate 25% of the machine to busy-looping on IO just to reduce the IO overhead by a factor of 2. But that's not at all what I'm suggesting. I think there's a reasonable case to be made that application performance measured on two systems with exactly the same hardware would be 2x higher when the IO is moved into user-space.
Has anyone been able to get a letter of intent with just an idea? Is that even possible?
Check out https://plaid.com/ and https://github.kdc.capitalone.com/hhu373/plaid-django-app/tr...

I'm working on setting up my own 'mint' for the purpose of working with my expenses, and this is the service I'm looking into using.
Know your ActiveRecord objects
That's just sad and I mean it in a non-sarcastic way.
How to hire female engineers
What to do instead of significance testing?
What do you mean by "characterize me as soft"?
It will be great if that actually happens. I'm not down on the idea as an addition to the arsenal; I'm just pointing out that it's not as generally applicable as people might think. User-space I/O is another one of those ideas that has come and gone many times over the last few decades. This time it will find some applications, to be sure, but there are also good reasons why most people will probably continue to be better off sticking with the in-kernel implementations.
Forget it, says Kazuo Inamori, entrepreneur, management guru and Buddhist priest. Spend your time making staff happy instead.

Huh...and here I thought Kyocera had a reputation in Japan for being a terrible place to work.

(sorry, no luck finding links in English, but search for 京セラブラック企業) and you get a fair number of links.

https://www.google.com/search?q=京セラブラック企業

EDIT: (ブラック企業 = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Company_%28Japanese_term...)
This article is so poor, it's not worth reading. I know the author and publication usually have no idea what they're talking about, but if their whole point is based on their misunderstanding, then the article is just garbage. Heartbleed and shellshock have nothing to do with the Linux kernel.
Prior to restructuring their reporting, Google reported as a cost paid distribution. I left in 2010, I started tracking the number in Q1 2011. It was $337M for the quarter. by Q4 of 2014 that number had ballooned to $968M for the quarter. In 2015 they changed the way the reported this number making future comparisons problematic.

I expect it does include fees paid to Apple so that Apple would send search traffic to Google, and fees paid to browser vendors.

Our experience as a search results provider was that there was demand for a more 'functional' search capability (not casual searching) many of the techniques we used have been adopted by Microsoft in their Bing engine which has improved both their recall and quality with respect to Google results on highly contested searches.

I certainly agree that Yahoo! has made a number of missteps with their search technology. I talked with them once (post Marissa's arrival) and in many ways they were confused as ever about how search engines generate value for the parent company, but such things are rarely permanent.
A few suggestions:

- The front page needs some short code samples and their output. Also, maybe showcase some libraries or projects the Octave community has created.

- Make 'Documentation' a top-level menu entry.

- Provide some 'Getting Started' documentation. I know there's a section in the manual for that, but I don't dive into the manual when I'm just trying to get a feel for what something is.

- The download page should have distro-specific installation instructions (e.g., apt-get install octave, pacman -S octave). For Windows, link directly to the exe. For OS X, link directly to the dmg.

Other than that I think it's fine. The design on the navigation menu looks a little dated, but it's not a big deal.
Teen who hacked CIA director now going after his FBI counterpart
>So who exactly should decide how much something costs? Do you think the author should not control how much a copy of their book costs?

No. I think competing publishing houses should print the book in different prices (any price each publishing house wishes), with a percentage of sales going to the author, and the market decides how high or low it goes. In the end, if not allowed to form a cartel, all publishers will reach a stable-ish price (differing only for different qualities of each edition, e.g. paper quality, hardcover, etc).

Else, it's like we limit a reproductible work in an artificial way as if it was an one-off item, by granting sole pricing rights AND absolute control of its sales to the author.
> Compared to Rust? I doubt that. Like I said, Rust lets you dance near the line.

Your problem is that you are trying to imagine what happens in the real world rather than just looking at it.

> This is from experience in various large C++ codebases. I'm not saying people use refcounting a lot, I'm saying it gets used more than Rust.

I count 56 imports of Arc and 37 of Rc in servo, would you wager the equivalent parts of chromium or firefox use more ref-counting?

> Not really. Aside from non-lexical borrows and a couple other nice-to-have things (but not necessary), the borrow checker is pretty precise for what it tries to prove.

The problem is that the borrow checker does not look at the function as a whole. You are a slave to the borrow checker, you can only consider other things when it has been satisfied, even if its trivially safe from a whole-function view. Some simple things aren't even expressible at all without non-lexical borrows, no matter what gymnastics you try.

> It sort of does. If you try to introduce borrows and listen to the suggestions the compiler gives you, and eventually end up nowhere, it's probably not possible to do it that way.

That sounds like a terrible workflow that I don't think Rust programmers use in the real world. I think they usually use shared ownership because they know they have shared ownership, not because they gave up on the borrow checker. Any instance of actually resorting to reference counting because of the inability to make the borrow checker happy actually counts against Rust, not for it.

> in practice IMO the things Rust makes you feel safe to do is a superset of what C++ lets you feel safe to do

People routinely do safe things in C++ that would be impossible to express in safe Rust code. You need to let go if this untruth.

> if we're going to talk about "all possible things C++ theoretically allows you to do", then you should include unsafe -- you were comparing "safe Rust" with "all C++", which is unfair here, since the entities to be compared for what you're theoretically allowed to do are "all Rust" and "all C++".

I focused on safe Rust because your argument was that safe Rust is just as powerful as C++, just proved safe statically. This is far from the truth and you refuse to accept the correction. Most people in the Rust community would probably say they accept the loss in power because they prefer absolute safety. This is a very defensive position. It's impressive just how little power Rust gives up in comparison to languages like C#/Java. But to pretend that you actually have more power in Rust due to psychological effects is just zealotry and doesn't reflect how people use C++ in the real world.

> Examples?

Any abstraction that uses dynamic checking that would be considered a bug to actually trigger. Some examples include borrowing a RefCell, random access of iterators, sequential access of certain kinds of iterator adaptors, etc.
> And yet, 300,000 new books were published in 2013. Wow! Doesn't that seem like a lot?

Isn't it amazing? And about that rate has been sustained for decades, as well. Can you imagine hundreds of thousands of books being published every year for decades? Who's writing them? How is this economicly sustainable? (If it's not, do we really need to incentivize publication with ever longer copyright?) This is why when Google Books tried to estimate how many books had ever been published, they got a lower bound of 129 million and no real idea how much off they might be.

And it's not just books, either. There's maybe 100,000 albums being released every year, which means in our lifetime we'll hit 1 billion+. The number of feature films keeps going up (4000 a year not terribly long ago). The TV industry is feeling shellshocked by just how many programs are in production now. And all these numbers seem like they must be undercounts because who is really able to track how many new songs get uploaded to Youtube every day by professionals, amateurs, and all sorts of indescribable people? And in the rest of the world like China?
With very few exceptions, open source projects (particularly infrastructure projects that add value to end-user projects) are not getting financial contributions from the companies that monetize them.

Just look at GnuPG, OpenSSH, or OpenBSD. These are projects that produce some really essential infrastructure that runs the modern web. This software has been in use at companies like Amazon, Facebook, Google, IBM, etc for decades. They have received almost no support whatsover. Werner Koch (of GPG fame) was so broke and desperate that he considered getting a corporate job. Theo de Raadt tried to get support from any of the hardware vendors that used OpenSSH in their products. He eventually got a laptop from IBM after pestering them for a year. I doubt busybox or mksh get much in the way of support from Google or Android hardware manufacturers.

I would hazard a guess that Firefox is better-funded than most open source "infrastructure" products.
I guess I'd prefer it to a situation where anyone at all could make a clone of me on their 3D printer slash uterus.

There are an awful lot of ethical and legal considerations when custom-designed intelligent organisms become possible, I'm not sure if IP is high on the list.
The DPDK operates (or at least it did the last time I looked) in a run to completion model for packets received. once the current batch of received packets has been processed by a thread, the DPDK run time immediately looks for more packets to process. The number of polling threads is configurable, and often there are multiple threads per network interface (esp. on 10 gig or faster interfaces) with recieve flow steering to direct related packets to the same receiving thread to maintain cache coherency during packet processing.

If you have long-lived work that shouldn't block processing more packets, it would be typical to offload that to separate thread/process from the one doing the packet processing (e.g., for control plane work).
Things seems to not have changed so much. We spend more time designing and planing things that it takes to implement them.
Super exciting!
Another lot of Guix devs use GuixSD, I think. ;-)
IMO people should only try to use DPDK if they're willing to go all in on "1975 programming", so the event loop is a minor annoyance on the scale of things that you have to deal with. Besides, kids today love event loops and callbacks anyway.
It could have been a lie but it wasn't.

We can play that game all day.

Even if the cops had heard him, the doctors who treated him wouldn't know if the cops were lying.

The judge, who had the final say about extending his observation beyond three days couldn't have known if I, the other friend, the cops, the paramedics and the doctors were lying.

There is often more nuance to real-life situations than "I contend that I didn't say that. He can't prove that I did say it."

Namely, my friend needed help. It was obvious to everyone, except him.
Faraday Future Aims to Take on Tesla Motors with $1B Investment
This is the first time I've had to downgrade after upgrading. For avid users of Tree Style Tab I can report that it is completely unusable in Firefox 42.
Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10461019
I think "unicorn" is strictly reserved for the Ubers and the AirBNBs of the world. Anyone who calls the company that gets fusion energy working a "unicorn" will probably be laughed out of the room.
You said, "Killing another human being is always collectivist according to your [ctlby's] definition."

Now you argue that killing another human being for philosophical reasons is always collectivist according to your [asgard1024's] definition. That does nothing whatsoever to make the quoted statement true.

[Edit: For that matter, I see nowhere where ctlby gave his/her definition of "collectivist", nor where he/she assented to yours definition.]

To your point in this post:

You are kind of arguing a tautology. If someone expresses a moral philosophy (no matter how twisted), but they are the only one who believes it or adheres to it, they're collectivist, because they're trying to motivate other people to follow their code. But if someone doesn't express their reasons as a moral philosophy, "he's just crazy or a psychopath". You dismiss any possibility that such a person is following an inexpressed philosophy. In fact, you have pretty much defined out the possibility of there even being such a thing. From that starting point, you argue that your position is correct, but in fact it was contained in your starting assumptions, so your argument is of no value.
Coal is subsidised in China, and a lot is produced by state owned firms. So price does not necessarily matter so much, it is political will.
To further expand on this:

>When Inamori talks about making employees happy, he doesn’t mean they’ll be putting their feet up. His brand of happiness comes from working harder than anyone else. It’s infused with the Buddhist idea of “shojin,” elevating the soul through devotion to a task.

That's nice and all, but not if it comes at the expense of employee leisure time or pay.
Las radiaciones wifi en las escuelas
.. And nowadays you can't even trash the "/bin" (latest OSX release) :)
Ah got it. I think implementing it as a server policy is fine for now.

What would be nice is to have 1password regenerate and assign new passwords for certain supported services when a user leaves a vault. Not sure about its feasibility but if implemented correctly it can be a big feature win.
HTML5 projects built by kids
Dropbox started out as a consumer company, not enterprise. When they launched, most of their customers were individual people not affiliated with a company.
Why is this there? Is it to facilitate things like Typeable? I believe that there's no language-level way to do things like runtime type reflection. And even if there were, how would one express a complex type like (Vector (forall a. MyTypeClass a => a -> Int, String))?

I'm also curious if dependently typed languages like Idris, which presumably must be able to have runtime access to type information, handle this stuff.
His letters to shareholders are worth a read: http://amzn.to/1XTv2Xj
Man this takes me back to the big bad Microsoft days. Classic FUD
I had noticed this too, when docker.com seemed to slowly become more and more cartoony and juvenile, for lack of better words. I don't quite hate it either, it certainly makes the technology seem more approachable, but I think they may have taken it a bit _too_ far.
Thank you. That's kind of the point I was trying to make. For a storage appliance - and that's the most common deployment model for the software I work on - it's great. I just don't want to see every "full stack" halfwit trying to use a specialized tool for general-purpose stuff. That often ends up wasting everyone's time - especially that of the people providing the tool.
While this isn't necessarily the exact kind of analysis you're talking about, it's very close to what the Government Accountability Office was set up to report on -- and from what I can tell, they do their job pretty well. We don't hear about them very often in large part because what they do isn't very "sexy," politics-wise.
A great example of what computer "Engineering" can look like is the On-Board Shuttle Group (Lockheed/NASA).

http://www.fastcompany.com/28121/they-write-right-stuff [1996]

"This software never crashes. It never needs to be re-booted. This software is bug-free. It is perfect, as perfect as human beings have achieved."

"The most important things the shuttle group does — carefully planning the software in advance, writing no code until the design is complete, making no changes without supporting blueprints, keeping a completely accurate record of the code — are not expensive. The process isn't even rocket science. Its standard practice in almost every engineering discipline except software engineering."
How Capicola Became Gabagool: The Italian New Jersey Accent, Explained
I went to a python talk where the guy did genomics . I asked him how long his program would take and he said I'll tell you when it's done. This means his analysis programs can take days to weeks and he really didn't know how long the current one can take .
Linux Foundation Sets the Stage for Easier Sharing of APIs
MCU based PicoLisp machines for sale
> On the other hand, starting a startup is not in fact very risky to your career—if you’re really good at technology, there will be job opportunities if you fail. Most people are very bad at evaluating risk.

It's true that career risk is low, but opportunity cost could be high. If you're well into your career, taking a few years off to work at a startup that might fail could really be a million dollar tradeoff.

So you really gotta believe in your startup.

(Note: I left my comfortable high paying job earlier this year to start a startup)
NeoSensory, Inc. | Houston, TX | Full Time | ONSITE | Industrial Designer

http://neosensory.com

NeoSensory develops "high-throughput" sensory substitution/addition ("augmentation") wearables. An overview of our technology can be seen in co-founder Dr. David Eagleman's TED talk from this past year:

http://www.ted.com/talks/david_eagleman_can_we_create_new_se....

We're hiring for a full time ONSITE Industrial Design position in Houston, TX. If you like delicious food, amazing local beer, and have a passion for neuroscience and cyberpunk, this company is for you!

Are you an injection-molding connoisseur? Do you have a keen eye for how things should be enclosed in other things so as to provide an enjoyable user experience and look good, too? We’re on the hunt for an Industrial Designer to help with:

- Enclosure design for various components related to our current wearable technology

- Leading product development for future form-factors based on our underlying architecture

You should have a strong foundation in SolidWorks or other relevant CAD applications. Prior experience with haptics a plus. Because the company is in its earlier stages, the position will have a fair amount of autonomy, flexibility, and creative input in shaping the company.

If interested or have questions, drop us a line! novich@neosensory.com
Getting there, we've got a few thousand users at the moment, largely from HN and ProductHunt. Feedback from tech-savvy users is incredibly valuable.

https://www.sonadier.com/
> If Canada wants to do something for startups, they should setup a sovereign wealth fund that does early stage investment in Canadian companies -- and then it should actively help make those companies successful.

The Business Development Bank of Canada (a financial institution owned by the federal government) actually does this - it has a venture fund that's one of the largest in Canada.

http://www.bdc.ca/EN/bdc-capital/venture-capital/strategic-a...
Disruptive Students Hurt High Achievers Most