skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'd guess we see tractors as the first step. They typically drive so slow the controller only needs to have stop button.

If a farmer could simultaneously monitor just 4 tractors, you could make tractors half the size while having twice the work done. This would double the number of sold tractors, which gives economy of scale. While also making assembly lines lot smaller and simplifying logistics.

Trucks don't scale in similar fashion. Inter-modal containers are lot bigger than ploughs.
Remember "buy.com" years ago which also was going to "take on amazon".

They did the same discounts and went under, bought by rakuten which then promptly exposed customer credit card info.

They are limping along today.

I suspect jet.com's end game is to be bought.
On top of that, remember that bitcoin has many prices, the most important ones being US dollar, Euro and Chinese Yuan. Right now bitcoin is around 500USD, but it's sitting on 450EUR. People buying in euros will be confident that the price will go up to 500EUR and they'll keep pushing up the price. Wich will push CNY price to 3450CNY, a very ugly price, so it will probably move to 3500CNY.
> That begs the question

It raises the question, not begs it. To beg the question is to engage in circular reasoning.

> - the added security is deemed too hard for a large part of the population, and would raise support cost too much

I think that this is a big part of it.

There's also the fact that really, cryptographically-secure cards cost more, and that someone would have to pay for the readers themselves, and (I believe) there's no infrastructure in place to prevent evil-retailer.invalid from charging one's card for more than one actually wanted to authorise.

With the rise of cell phones, I think that there's a real opportunity to build cryptographically-secure payment and identity protocols. A smartphone is, after all, a general-purpose computer that fits in one's pocket. The tough part isn't implementing the protocols; it's defining them, and making them user-friendly.
I love the New Yorker, but its forte is not sending photographers to the bottom of the sea or the heart of the Amazon.
well said. i just feel it is something people easily say, but hardly put into practice.

i am being unfair, perhaps, as the other comment here states. i may be identifying some negative aspects in some people with a whole group that did not deserve it. but, OTOH, you two may be resorting to the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.
Considering fewer enterprises trust Windows 10 with every new headline about how it spies on you, I guess they had no choice but to offer Linux as an option as well.

Also relevant to "Microsoft's love for Linux":

https://plus.google.com/+SimonPhipps/posts/c636Vp4kKbf
Well that and it was poorly managed and is currently operating "paycheck to paycheck".
> until they had practice at socializing while high

I've often noticed that my weed-smoking friends build a tolerance to getting high with regular usage. However, it seems like the anti-anxiety effect is hard for them to give up. Both of those things could account for someone feeling better about socializing as they use weed regularly for longer periods.
One of the significant highlights of legalization/regulation is the regular testing of cannabis products, which typically includes their cannabinoid profiles. This helps the end user find the product that works best for their use.
Whoa, gang programmers? Is that a thing? I feel so innocent.
The fact that none of the other commenters above made this connection is a bit strange for a community of Tech/Internet/Web people. Is all of this really that shiny?
Not sure why BBC is getting a hard time for reporting the news.
Most people who are taking classes from a professor haven't built enterprise software or been in client meetings. Most of them don't realize that their work while it probably makes life better for young rich white yuppies like them may destroy a way of life for huge swaths of other people for better or for worse. And generally college students haven't been trained to be cold or callous enough to express ROI in terms of human resources quite yet -- I'm sure the slide was gentle preparation for what is to come once they enter the capitalist workforce.
What is the difference between the two terms? I would venture that most people don't know. I know that I don't know.
Confused: making trucking cheaper (removing driver) will drive traffic to rail? Because rail will then be cheaper?
forgetting the cloud stuff for now, this is much more interesting:

"Collaboration on .NET for a new generation of application development capabilities, providing access to .NET technologies across Red Hat offerings, including OpenShift and Red Hat Enterprise Linux, which will be available within the next few weeks."

Xplat .net is coming to RC1 in a couple of weeks (per roadmap: https://github.com/aspnet/Home/wiki/Roadmap) and it's exciting to see that RHEL will support it. It makes sense for Microsoft, traditionally an enterprise company on the backend, to partner with a *nix company with, primarily, enterprise clients on the backend.

If nothing else, the toolset microsoft brings to the table will raise all boats on the -nix side IMO.
Replacing Elasticsearch Rivers with Mongo Connector
I've often read stories about fast refactors from Python or PHP to Go. I wonder if that would translate to a reasonably fast refactor to Rust later on, if that should become necessary or desirable.
>C# is a decent language

Just decent? I dissagree, it is the best language to my taste.

>NET MVC, though, is far from impressive

Tell me what is impressive them, becuase to me is a well stablished, easy to use and learn with static typing, there is nothing better.

>The routing is crap

The routing is highly configurable, by default it mimics Ruby on Rails routing and if you don't like it you can use your own, you have no idea of what are you talking about.

>Razor is designed to encourage you to dump C# straight into your views

Just like in JSP pages you can write Java code, or in ERB pages you can write Ruby code or in EJS pages yu can write JavaScript code, and if you don't like there a re plenty of options.

>which I really don't see as the future of web development

Your personal views are just that, personal, at least inform your self well before making ignorant statements.
It depends on what mistake you mean.

Having errors on return has merits. Particularly it make error handling more deterministic. What it tends to do though, in languages like C and Go, is be very verbose.

Rust largely mitigates that through judicious usage of some of its higher levels features. Specifically its try! macro wrap up the common case of passing errors up the call stack quite neatly. With that and the pervasive RAII, Rust does a pretty good job of making error management quite unobtrusive.

It also has quite a nice way of converting errors types using traits that, in my opinion at least, handles typed error propagation better than most exception mechanisms I am familiar with.

From a personal pov, I like the determinism and I like the type conversion. I probably prefer D's scope mechanism to RAII in general as I like thinks to be as explicit as possibly but without being too verbose. But I think Rust seems to have hit quite a nice balance.
Can you elaborate on how Amsterdam is terrible?

I recently spent a week day. (Partly on vacation, partly on business.)

I saw a country with great public transport, decent food, a vibrant arts scene, and while yes, the smell of weed was everywhere, people seemed way more laid back. No roving bands of drunk frat bros, no meth tweakers, and police who viewed their job as to increase the enjoyment of all citizens and visitors, rather than generate revenue for the township through fines.

If that's hell, well, call me a Satanist because I'm sold.
Nice and simple Explanation, like animation
Best Place to Learn Teradata Training Online by SRY IT Solutions
Why We Left PaaS and What We Did About It
Not looking for a community. I meant as a portfolio item, and someone might actually use it as a template to start their own app.
Or, in other words:

If you want to take over a company, always keep the middle management! They know how everything works and who to ask when special issues might occur.

If you want to take over a country, always keep the government officials! They know who to work with, what to do, etc.

Firing all tax collectors just to hire them again is a stupid idea.

Even worse when you destabilize several countries, make sure all educated people have left the country, and then are left with a bunch of radicals.

(Compare: Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan)
This presentation needs that back/forth javascript partition slider that allows you to directly compare old to new.
Heh, for auto-driving trucks it very likely will mean suddenly 10's of thousands out of work.

And folks out of work are finding it harder and harder to find word. Automation's ultimate goal is putting us all out of work. We're in a transition, and admitting that will help guide policy from here on.
With all due respect, I don't think that's how markets work. I know that people tend to psychologically anchor to round figures, but I don't see this situation playing out as you've described.
The states which list "software developer" as the most common job are also states which are home to quite a large number of gov/defense contracting companies.
> Why are jeans and hoodies the fashion choice of founders?

Because they're comfortable, familiar, and they can get away with it? I think it takes a particularly cynical and angry mind to stretch the choice of clothing to be a tool of oppression on the part of the founders.
As Tomku pointed out, it's the same company with the same scammer running it. I know back in 2011 they relaunched as MMM-2011 (creative, I know) and then in 2012, you guess it, MMM-2012. I know some people that were involved in it back then and one of them lost something like $5k. You can get people to do very stupid things if you convince them that you can help them get rich quick.
The alternative is the Nordic model!

Subsidizing farmers so heavily that even our socialist welfare pales in comparison. Here 50% of farms make 80% of produce. The rest just keep the land from accommodating wildlife.
There is some risk that they'll take it back closed source since its MIT licensed (with patent grant) and their CLA[1] gives them a broad copyright license. However, I think with such a high-quality implementation being open source would be hard to put back in the bottle, especially since Mono is already integrating much of the code into their runtime[2]. On the other hand, external contributions to the Mono runtime are MIT licensed so that project could jump back to closed source if Xamarin so desires.

It's important to note that all of this applies to the OpenJDK too[3]. So you are at least no worse off if you make a leap from the JVM.

[1]: https://cla2.dotnetfoundation.org/cladoc/net-foundation-cont...

[2]: http://www.mono-project.com/docs/about-mono/dotnet-integrati...

[3]: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-405177.pdf

edit: word choice
With all due respect, you have no idea what you are talking about. The headline figures for Ireland are very misleading. The bond spreads are coming down because Irish banks were bailed out at enormous expense and are buying Irish govt debt.

Meanwhile hundreds of thousands have left the place for good due to a lack of opportunity. Many ordinary people are still struggling badly. Ireland and Greece are nothing alike, we never went on a spending spree like Greece did, it was all the dirty dealings with the bank bailout that made the recession so long lasting.
What is wrong with UK these days?

There is a lot of these kind of news coming out of UK in the last few months.
Assert_called_once: Threat or Menace
> In the abstract, economic sense, a 30% chance of making $1M is as good as a 3% chance of making $30M is as good as a 0.3% chance at making $300M

I see this repeated as a truism all the time by the anti-VC crowd and it sounds great. But is there actually any evidence whatsoever of it?

The success rate for startups which have raised a Series A is substantially higher than the success rate for startups and small businesses in general. If it were true that avoiding VC funding somehow gave me a 30% chance of building a $1M business, I'd be happy to give it a shot (at least for a year or two). But I just don't see any evidence of that.

If anything, it seems like companies which accept VC money have dramatically better odds of success than other startups. The only reason it seems like VC has a high failure rate is that nobody bothers to write a news article when a random small business fails.

EDIT: Downvoters, kindly provide any evidence that avoiding VC funding increases your odds of success by 10x.
RHAT is a great business in terms of its stock price but I am not the fan I used to be.

I started w/ Slackware and moved to Red Hat and then Fedora but eventually RH and Fedora became "the Linux that couldn't" when I was installing on either an old or new machine. On the same machine Ubuntu would install just fine.

I run a Windows desktop now and mostly use Ubuntu Linux in AWS, sometimes inside a VM on my local machine. I used to run the RH-derived AWS Linux, but eventually I learned how to do things easily in Ubuntu, such as installing and maintaning an Oracle JVM, that are hard in Red Hat. Definitely an enthusiast could find a solution with RHEL, but having a server OS that "just works" is what you need if you are the guy who splits his time between devops and bizdev.
Show HN: Beautiful Personal Site and Domain and Email in Seconds
I think we've peaked.
I didn't read anything else you posted after the first sentence.

While I have a similar sentiment regarding the fact that employers should get out of the business of retirement, life insurance, medical, etc., that's the way it's been for the older generation. Phase it out, don't just cut everyone over and cut benefits in one moment.

Same with Social security, for that matter.
This is a very misleading title. Bad spam filters are not the same as censorship.

The end of the article asks, "Who gave Verizon the power to decide what their customers can tell each other?"

No one did. Verizon's customers can (and should) be using a different mail service. Hardly anyone uses their ISP's email, especially because a lot of people switch ISPs often.
I'm so freaking happy that someone finally affirmed my feelings that maybe, just maybe, I don't need to start my own startup with the notion of "Unicorn or Bust". I've just felt wrong since graduating college 3 years ago, unable to motivate myself to hack outside of work, and this finally captures why I've felt so tired. I am tired of feeling like I need a Unicorn idea to justify working on something outside of my job. I want to work for myself, but it just hasn't felt possible without a plan to "Take over the world". I don't want to take over the world. I want to build something that people use and can sustain me. That's it. But for every idea, there are millions of reasons in the back of my head that stop me from doing it, all boiling down to "Well I just won't be able able to grow this as a startup".

I don't really care about growing something as a startup. I don't need to revolutionize anything. I just want to make someone's day better through software. I want to launch a cool product that people find fun, silly, useful, critical to their process, whatever you want, and NOT be beholden to interests of anyone who isn't involved in the daily operations of whatever product that is.

I just want to build something, and make it better every day. Something that I own, that I can change however I want, whenever I want. I shouldn't have felt like I needed a16z to invest in my company to believe that my product is worth something.
Perhaps your mental model of `the regular folks community` is wrong?

Let me try to explain why I, a regular schmoe who knows nothing about physics, reads these articles (and frequently, the comments) every time a new round comes out. This is how this story looks to me in the news as someone who has no association with NASA, etc.

1) Some nutter comes up with a theory of "mystic orgone drive" or something and explains how it works and demonstrates that if he hooks his widget up to the mains, it pulls.

2) A bunch of other people are like "lol idiote" and do the same thing with their own copies of his widget and are like "wtf..it is pushing..."

3) Somehow, NASA decides to investigate the mystic orgone drive. Because they are NASA and not a bunch of morans, they do a couple things differently from everyone else:
- They are very very careful to try to eliminate sources of error such as breezes from experimenter tinfoil hats, etc. and they document this experimental rig very carefully.
- They run the experiment backwards as well as forewards. Why not see if there's a dose response curve? Why not see if hooking the negative cable to the positive terminal produces backwards mystic orgone drive or whatever?
- They build a version of the device very similar to the original mystic orgone spec, except they put different runes on it or something that are incompatible with mystic orgones.

The results of this are (1) still pushing (2) hooking it up backwards makes it push backwards (3) the mystic orgone runes do nothing; that is to say the non-mystic version works just as well, so the mystic orgone priest's explanation of the device is wrong.

I just don't see how this is not interesting to you, as scientist. Science, especially physics, is about building mathematical machines that can predict the future: if you do this and this, this will happen. Classical mechanics is probably the second-most rigorously tested and understood of the mathematical future prediction machines of all time. Here, you have a bunch of very careful, expert men and women hooking up the mystic orgone drive to the mains power, and it pushes! But the prediction says it should NOT push, at least not nearly this much! How is that not interesting?!

I would think this would seem to a physics professor to be the essence of science, and exactly what ordinary people would and should get excited about. It's very difficult for regular people to understand that its surprising that at three giga electron volts the tau lepton did not decay into any of the known lucky charms marshmallows or whatever, DESPITE what Cereal Supersymmetry predicts.

It's very easy to understand that putting a pair of empty jiffypop tins in a vacuum and powering them should not lead to them trying to bend their handles. It's very easy to understand that if anyone would be capable of checking this carefully, it's NASA.

So if NASA does this and they don't know why they are detecting measurable jiffypop handle bend many orders of magnitude higher than predicted, how do you not click on that article? How do you not think that's interesting?
Be an Astronaut: NASA Seeks Explorers for Future Space Missions
Most of those "modest" startups are also VC-funded.
"Marijuana" is an etymologically dubious term popularized by Harry J. Anslinger and other prohibitionists circa the 1930s as an exotic name so as to exploit racial tension in order to sway public opinion towards the criminalization of cannabis.
The issue is that this is HN. I'm an avid Christian myself, and can surmise that jorangreef probably really knows his stuff. But HN probably isn't the place for this kind of thing.

On the Internet, I've met very few atheists or skeptics who really are able to play equally on the same playing field. Oh, if we debate physics and whatnot, sure, they often do great. But that's a completely different playing field. Debating historicity of scripture is very different from debating origin of the universe, just like how ice hockey is completely different from beach volleyball. And besides, if you know your Hebrew, you'll also know that a lot of atheists and skeptics likely misinterpret scripture when it comes to origin of the universe, so that debate is actually a moot point; but that's OK, so do many Christians who don't know Hebrew. It's like two people who are arguing about how to grill a steak when what they're actually doing is boiling eggs. But they're convinced they're grilling steak. It makes absolutely no sense. Anyway.

My point is that although having this debate may have an impact on people (hey, can't disagree with you on the possibility), I imagine that if we went all-out to have a debate on faith-related topics, it would not be appreciated by the HN community. The HN community is not here to debate faith. As much as I'd like that, being an avid Christian myself, I have to respect that the community is here to discuss cool technology, software, trends, business, and the odd quirky, geeky factoid/story. This falls under quirky and geeky. But if it turns into an all-out debate about faith, I imagine it will no longer be seen as quirky and geeky cool. It will be seen as an annoyance.

I can't speak for jorangreef, but I imagine his feeling is similar to what I felt when I saw some comments about death.

Here's a thread in which I discussed death, and we actually had a really good back-and-forth where we both tried to be really open-minded: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10136438

Here's another thread where I wanted to participate, but I didn't, because right away the tone of the poster told me that the discussion would not be productive. His tone was hyperbolic, overly emotional, and absolute: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10371259

When you get the feeling from a poster's tone that he's not going to be open-minded about stuff, why stir the pot? It's not productive. If anything, it starts to get trollish. And trolls aren't appreciated on HN.
> Implicit numeric casts that lose bits are not allowed anymore.

That's good to hear, but I want implicit conversion to be forbidden unconditionally (even int * float -> float). I've been bitten by even widening conversions, so I just want to let them go away. It might be great if such an option could be applied to module level.

> ??

Sorry if my understandings or my words were wrong, but I got the impression that D also suffers from destructors that throw. (double-throw) Is this not the case in D? If so, could you elaborate how it achieves that?

I'm personally rather fond of purging exceptions from the language level completely, like Go did(Of course panics are technically exceptions, but their usage is culturally discouraged). Of course, this is just my personal opinion, but I would be happy if D had a story on this problem.
> Nope, you're probably on your own in that case.

Right, and this is the very problem with Android.
Did you reply to the wrong comment?
This discussion is confusing terms. Economic meaning of a rational agent is a bit different than the one we're discussing here.

See: [0] about the definition and [1] about the feelings angle.

[0] - http://lesswrong.com/lw/31/what_do_we_mean_by_rationality/

[1] - http://lesswrong.com/lw/hp/feeling_rational/
They'll make it up in volume
this is apaypal issue, not ebay or credit card.

ebay do not let you sell or buy without a paypal account. which only allows credit card from a single country.

so why can't the police link the two things easily? seems to me people are either hacking paypal to somehow get the money out or paypal is going out of the way to make it disappear.

either that or using stolen credit cards for online purchase is completely safe.