skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My variation of this requires the input number (I) to be in binary,
and read from leftmost digit to the right (most significant to least
significant). Here's the table version of N = 2 through N = 4.

N = 2

| state | 0 | 1 |
|-------+---+---|
| 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 1 | 0 | 1 |

N = 3

| state | 0 | 1 |
|-------+---+---|
| 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 1 | 2 | 0 |
| 2 | 1 | 2 |

N = 4

| state | 0 | 1 |
|-------+---+---|
| 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 1 | 2 | 3 |
| 2 | 0 | 1 |
| 3 | 2 | 3 |

Each state represents a potential result of I mod
N. Constructing it becomes mechanical, as in each state you can either
double it (input digit D = 0) or double it + 1 (input digit D = 1). So
in N = 4, determining the outputs of state 2: You can double it, and 4
mod 4 = 0, therefore the next state is 0; You can double it + 1, and 5
mod 4 = 1, therefore teh next state is 1.

As to making this particular style graph, I'm currently playing around
with it.

EDIT: Hmm, left something out. You can convert this to any base, you just end up with more transitions out of each state (for a base B, you need B transitions).

EDIT Again: omaranto has it correct for generating the article's style of graphs. Guess I should've refreshed before posting, but working it out myself was fun and successfully kept me from sleeping.
The problem is NULL does not "fail fast". You could get a NULL pointer as an argument, and then not use that value until much later. Now when the bug shows up, you'll have to work back through your code to even figure out where it came from.

> Use of a class type implementing an interface as a "null type" is a very good strategy.

Have you ever programmed Objective-C? It uses the null object pattern (called "nil") for all Objective-C objects. This makes it really easy to put big logic errors into your code, since calling upon a nil will just give you more nil. So now you have to wait even longer until a fatal error pops up, and then find where on earth the original nil came from.

> NULL and nullptr are convenient ways to do that without a ton of extra code.

How do you figure? If malloc can return NULL and you want a sane error message, you need to write a NULL check whenever you do a malloc. Otherwise, your user will just get a segfault, instead of a notification that it was memory they ran out of. So why not do that by default, and for the few places where you have prepared yourself to handle out of memory conditions use a different malloc which returns a value that must be explicitly checked?
WHY would you pick an example number that's not divisible by 7?! Academics facing the real world are the strangest creatures. Also this is really cool.
There are a lot of things missing from Influx's query language. The most glaring issue is that you can't do 'multi step math' e.g. you can't do something like 'average series A and series B into 5min buckets then sum them'.
Impressive Demonstration of Facebook's AI by Yann LeCun
Ehh, you don't need to put wind farms in the cities/suburbs where NIMBYs are located. There is Central CA with abundance of flat lands as well as mountains
And also NIMBYs who believe turbines are making them ill.
It's buried about 10 paragraphs down, but it should be noted the author is a Graphite competitor.
And once the pricing matches the economics, the consumer can be trained (or make choices depending on your cynicism)
Amazon Web Services versus Microsoft Azure, Google, Oracle
I remember tearing into one of these that died, and found similar things. What was interesting too was that it seemed to be caused by a screw coming loose. The entire head assembly rides on a bearing, which is bolted to the chassis, usually on both ends. If I remember right, this one was only bolted on one end, the screw didn't have any thread locking compound on it. It came loose, instant head crash.
why not solar instead of wind? So many farms dont have water, may as well cover them over with panels or mirrors, no ?
But yet, here in Austin I don't get a choice for my energy company.
Here's another human-friendly scheme to test divisibility by 7 that I don't think is popularly known: Write down the number, then cross off the least significant digit, double it, and subtract that from what's left of the number. Repeat until you get zero or an obviously divisible-by-7 number, or not.

Example: 325 becomes 32 - 10 = 22, which is obviously not divisibile by 7.

Better example: 8638 -> 863 - 16 = 847 -> 84 - 14 = 70 -> 7 - 0 -> 7, so we have a winner.

Learned this as a kid (forget where), but it took decades for me to realize why it obviously works.
You have intrigued me, as what you say is true, but I wish you would elaborate. There are some architectures for which dereferencing an address of 0 does not cause an exception. If you are writing code for those architectures (or code that is meant to be portable), then you can't rely on dereferencing NULL to crash. This is universally well known amongst programmers who work on those architectures.

It's been more than a decade since I did any C/C++, so I wonder if you were referring so something else that I'm not aware of.
Oh I still have nightmares of this. As others point out, you can use DFAs to determine divisibility by various numbers (base, well, anything you like). I remember spending a few hours banging my head against the desk, trying to figure out how it works with only a bunch of crappy net articles. But it is somewhat fun after you understand it.
Interesting thing to note, the Icelandic airlines are using Reykjavik as a hub to Europe because you can fly a smaller A320 from new york or boston to there and its much cheaper than transatlantic in bigger planes. This is why they do lots of $200 round trip fares to Europe now.
> What I'd really like to see, though, is a language with parameterized typing with hybrid static+runtime enforcement. You should be able to be holding a raw address in memory, and then have that become one of two strong types at the language level depending on the whether that memory address is nonzero—"lifting" the NULL check into the type system, rather than replacing the NULL check with extra type annotation.

In Rust, the compiler optimizes pointer types wrapped in Options to nullable pointers. Is this the kind of thing you meant?
I agree it's possible to design a compiler that doesn't crash on a NULL pointer and still call the language C. Or certain optimizations could trigger that confuse a naive C programmer.

But modern hardware is frequently designed so that dereferencing a zero pointer causes a crash. Even embedded systems will often treat the first couple hundred bytes or so after 0 specially, since it catches so many bugs.

I think it's generally safe to assume you'll get a crash if you actually dereference a null pointer.
Perfect time to charge your EV.
You clearly don't have experience with California environmental politics. There's not a single spot of land (or water) in the state where SOMEONE won't complain about a wind farm installation.
Actually, I live in one of the countries that "benefit" from this treaty, and people here think the same as you: it benefits the US, some of the US people, and US corporations, not the people of this country.

You see, I don't see people in Chile wanting tighter IP/patent/copyright law, people in Chile also don't want to give their sovereignity to a random foreign court (like it happens with, say, Argentina)... but quite the contrary. Except, of course, for those who make money off these laws and treaties, because, for them, the TPP is most probably a winning bet. Why wouldn't them want to sue their own government to profit even more? Why would, then, they avoid treaties that force their own government to follow the rules of a foreign country that is so admired and beloved by rich people (and wannabes, too) like the US?
That's just glue to hold the shielding plate on. You'll notice its nowhere near the bearings; in fact, it's on the outside of the case.
Tạo nội dung video Marketing với 5 nguyên tắc vàng
So why does this work?
Works fine in Chrome 46.0 from what I can see.

My image downloader extension even recognizes the results as images and puts save buttons on them. :D

What would be really cool would be to open the source text into a <textarea> so people could play with it, with an "auto-update" checkbox and everything. :D

Also, atm to switch from the rendered result back to the source image, I have to reload the page. Maybe the button could toggle, or the result and source could be on the page simultaneously.
An optional type's "none" value represents the same properties that NULL does. The difference is that the optional type better expresses what's going on.

NULL breaks the type system. Now every pointer type is actually two types: the normal type, and the NULL type. You can dereference or call methods on one, but not the other, and only a runtime check will tell you what you're dealing with. Any time you see:

Object *

You cannot read that as "pointer to Object." You have to read it as "pointer to Object, or NULL."

This causes three big problems. One is that it's way too easy to forget to check for NULL. The second, related problem is that without a way to express a non-nullable pointer type, you have to rely on documentation and convention to express the difference. The third is that since only pointer types are nullable, you have to reinvent the wheel any time you you want to express the concept of "null" for a non-pointer type.

To illustrate, you point out malloc which returns NULL when it runs out of address space. What's the appropriate return type?

void *

Now let's say you had some other memory allocation call which could never return failure to the caller. Maybe it aborts execution on failure, or maybe it retries continually until memory becomes available. What's the appropriate return type?

void *

Oops. Same problem with parameters. Here's a function:

void f(void *ptr)

Are you allowed to pass NULL? Who knows, go RTFM. If the answer is "no," what happens if you pass NULL anyway? The compiler certainly won't catch it, and who knows what will happen.

NULL is "just a tool" but it's not a very good tool. It breaks the type system in a fundamental and painful way.

Edit: whew, HN's markup makes it kind of hard to talk about C pointers!
Looking forward to see what's next
The digital revolution in higher education has already happened
Brings Chrome utterly to its knees. 24GB, i5-3 GHz.
PayPal Phishing Account Access Limited – MailShark
For a bit of an explanation, see David's follow-up blog post: http://blog.tanyakhovanova.com/2010/08/divisibility-by-7-is-...
Geoff Hinton has a theory that Naive Bayes is just logistic regression with dropout: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DleXA5ADG78 And that if you divide all the parameters by a certain amount, you would get accurate probability estimates.
Not really sure what the purpose of this piece is. My research concentrates on figuring out what exactly is missing from MWI to make it a complete, sensible theory, so I am very happy to entertain criticisms of it. But the author don't make much attempt to understand the arguments of MWI proponents. It's basically just MWI bashing.

He mostly attacks the popular-level work of Tegmark, or other big-name MWI proponents like Hawking who don't actually publish on this stuff. Tegmark is a fantastically smart guy with deep insight on a lot of stuff, but his approach to the measurement problem simply isn't as clearly and exhaustively laid out as people who concentrate on this full time. In particular, you really need to address guys like David Wallace, for whom articulating MWI from a technical background is part of their core research.

It would be like attacking sloppy language in a popular book by a world-famous cancer researcher regarding evidence for natural selection. The cancer researcher has a pretty good grasp on what constitutes evidence for natural selection, but even he can slip up and (say) fall into a just-so story if he's not careful. Attacking that guy is not a good way to engage with relevant philosophy.

Anyways, I have a technical comment on this:

> This picture really gets extravagant when you appreciate what a measurement is. In one view, any interaction between one quantum entity and another – a photon of light bouncing off an atom – can produce alternative outcomes, and so demands parallel universes.

This isn't right in general. There definitely needs to be some sort of amplification (and hence, usage of negentropy) to get the production of branches in the wavefunction. Systems that have thermalized don't branch any more.
Comcast leak shows that data caps aren't about congestion
I'm not an investor; I'm an entrepreneur and an advisor. And you can call it anything you want, but I'm telling you that too much money absolutely ruins companies.

Bootstrappers are incredibly focused on the core feedback loop: they do something valuable for a customer, and customers give them money. But the more cash in the bank a startup has, the easier it is for them to get away from fundamentals and totally wreck themselves. For example, look at Homejoy:

https://medium.com/backchannel/why-homejoy-failed-bb0ab39d90...

As far as I can tell, they never had a functioning business. Money was too easy for them, so they never focused on delivering a reliable service with positive gross margins. Instead they got it half working, scaled up, and mistook action for progress.

And yes, investors definitely push for that kind of stupid spending. Why? Because they don't want mildly successful businesses; they want giant winners. They're perfectly happy destroying 8/10 of their portfolio companies if they can get 1/10 doing amazingly well in a winner-take-all market.

Raising "enough" money is a nice dream, but I don't think it will happen much. Not because investors are rubbing their hands together over power balance (although I'm sure they enjoy thinking like that). But because it's in nobody's interest to take that kind of money early on. Before product-market fit, and investor only wants to find out whether you'll get there; any money invested beyond that is wasteful. And entrepreneurs don't want to take more than that either, because it's too dilutive. Once they've proved fit, they can get money on much cheaper terms. And they're sure they'll prove it.
Possibly—does the Rust FFI allow you to import a C library, writing its foreign-function declarations such that the nullable pointers it returns are transformed into, from Rust's perspective, Option-typed non-nullable pointers, with no runtime memory overhead? And then, if so, does Rust further guarantee that those "virtual" Option-typed pointers can be passed back to the same API "just the way it sent them"?

That's sort of what I mean, here: the nullable ptr as the "canonical, machine-level" representation, with the type serving as a language-level abstraction, effectively a "lie" because it has no real effect on the type system, and only serves as syntax sugar for generating runtime checks.
50 years from now this will be called "drfuchs last theorem"
Oracles and Risk Contracts in OpenBazaar
Create.js – Make anything editable
I'd love to know what the benefits of cigarettes are.
Its not evolution but humans as animals i am talking about
This article seems silly: Both the Copenhagen and Multiple Worlds interpretation (as far as I understand, as a non-physicist) yield the same objective answers, so deciding on one interpretation or the other is really a matter of "taste" for the physicists involved... in a way, each physicist can arbitrarily decide for themselves which interpretation they find most useful for their work.

Now Mr. Philip Ball comes along, who isn't a thoretical physicist AFAIK, and says that the MWI people are doing it wrong.

In this article, the only concrete argument he gives for why MWI is "wrong" is because it blurs the idea of "self", which the author finds distasteful. But science doesn't "care" about tastefulness, all it cares about is hypotheses, experiments and repeatability. Unless the author can cite an experiment that shows MWI to be invalid (or alternatively can make a formal argument as to why it represents a needlessly complex hypothesis, ala Occam's Razor) he is not basing his argument on a scientific foundation.
It seems plausible that this work would have been entirely impossible without government endorsement and government-guaranteed access restrictions. Some of the data he used was public record, but some of it was "cajoled" from commercial broadband providers; I can't imagine those guys making that information available to public researchers.
At quoted "1.5 GB/inch^2" they are comparing their 100 layer medium against a single-layer 25GB bluray disc. At three~four layers, current bluray discs offer 100~128GB of capacity.

Archival Disc spec brings optical media to 300GB now, 1TB on roadmap.[0] This leaves current Quartz Glass an order of magnitude behind current optical media.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archival_Disc
>>first order of business was to move beyond the taxi roots and emulate Uber’s model whole cloth

Typical Chinese approach. What options do companies have when this happens?
Some interesting thoughts by Geoffrey Hinton that's relevant: https://www.reddit.com/r/MachineLearning/comments/2lmo0l/ama...

>Traditional AI researchers will be horrified by the view that thoughts are merely the hidden states of a recurrent net and even more horrified by the idea that reasoning is just sequences of such state vectors. That's why I think its currently very important to get our critics to state, in a clearly decideable way, what it is they think these nets won't be able to learn to do. Otherwise each advance of neural networks will be met by a new reason for why that advance does not really count. So far, I have got both Garry Marcus and Hector Levesque to agree that they will be impressed if neural nets can correctly answer questions about "Winograd" sentences such as "The city councilmen refused to give the demonstrators a licence because they feared violence." Who feared the violence?

>A few years ago, I think that traditional AI researchers (and also most neural network researchers) would have been happy to predict that it would be many decades before a neural net that started life with almost no prior knowledge would be able to take a random photo from the web and almost always produce a description in English of the objects in the scene and their relationships. I now believe that we stand a reasonable chance of achieving this in the next five years.

>I think answering questions about pictures is a better form of the Turing test. Methods that manipulate symbol strings without understanding them (like Eliza) can often fool us because we project meaning into their answers. But converting pixel intensities into sentences that answer questions about an image does not seem nearly so prone to dirty tricks.
Could you explain what you mean?
Right, but in malloc's case, it needs to express something about the fundamental type of all software, which is memory. There is nothing more fundamental to the software system. When you run out of memory and fail to check for that condition, the only right and proper thing to do is crash. NULL is a handy way to enforce that fundamentally, in that dereferencing a null pointer guarantees a crash.

Part of programming is about memory management. You can hide it with a sophisticated compiler but it's always going to be there, and there are always going to be two types of memory: that which is available, and that which is not.
Gridmanager – JavaScript Drag and Drop Grid Builder
Population grew didnt fall. Job growth is the amount of new jobs crrated. Its not that exotic a concept.
My father-in-law was a pre-teen during the devastating Korean War - orphaned during the war and grew up in poverty. Got into vegetable wholesaling during the beginning of the boom years and made enough money to get into real estate speculation which then boomed even bigger -- making him a nice bit of money along the way. He's now semi-retired, plays golf, lives in a luxury house his son built for him and my mother-in-law, drives a nice foreign car and splits his "work time" between maintaining undeveloped property his U.S. friends have purchased for investment and buying and selling small apartment buildings.

He once took me to a small museum where they had on display various "traditional" cooking and houseware items. Wood, stone, woven rice straw rope, a bit of metal here and there for blades and things that needed weight. I thought these were relics from maybe the 17th or 18th century (or earlier) since they were "traditional" -- and in truth lots of it looked like late Iron Age level technology. He said that he grew up with that stuff, cooking in handmade pots, wearing woven hay sandals and rough woven fabric clothes.

By the time my wife's generation was born, Korea's industrialization was well underway. It wasn't maybe "first world", but 20 years after a war which completely flattened the country, my wife was born into a world with running water, electricity, cars, schools, colleges, coffee shops, restaurants, telephones, high-rise apartment buildings, cheap and secure food...as a young girl she grew up on American schlock-80s imported TV like MacGuyver, A-Team and so on, they had regular video game arcades, home computers, boutique coffee shops, designer clothing, malls, department stores, a robust television, film and entertainment industry and so on. Her 80s childhood would have been not much different than a kid growing up in New York City. That's 30 years after the war.

Korea had joined the "developed" world when that first generation was young and had ascended to first-world before that generation was out of working years.
>Cars that are made in China have a lower fault rate than those in the U.S., according to J.D. Power

I looked at the J. D. Power assessment [1] and they are IMHO hard to compare:

>The 2015 China Initial Quality Study (IQS) is based on evaluations from 21,707 owners of new vehicles
purchased between October 2014 and June 2015.

>For 2015, the China IQS has been redesigned to include more specific diagnostic questions around eight problem categories [snip]

Now if you look at the same report for the US [2] you'll notice that there's no note of a redesigned questionnaire, which makes me doubt that you can compare both results if they're not gathered the same way. The US report also has four times as many participants (84k vs 21k) which may have skewed the results. In fact, it's hard to gauge the methods in general, very little detail.

In the end, the problems reported in the Chinese report aren't particularly severe:

>Unpleasant interior smell/odor is the most frequently reported as well as the most severe problem this year

I feel like that's an issue that doesn't have much to do with the car's actual quality (and it's also relatively easy to fix/cheat). It doesn't appear in the US report, which is weird - I'd expect the same brands to have the same problems (or is differences in smell a cultural thing?)

[1] http://china.jdpower.com/sites/default/files/2015169_china_i...

[2] http://www.jdpower.com/sites/default/files/2015080_IQS.pdf
If this article were true, how can you explain lower divorce rate in Asian countries?

China? S Korea? Japan?
note: there are also "skip locked" and "nowait" clauses in Postgres 9.5 for more flexibility when dealing with row level locking. This gives you the option of failing immediately (nowait) or just getting back the set of rows that aren't locked (skip locked).

https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/What's_new_in_PostgreSQL_9....
Okay, but crashing the client isn't the same thing as compromising the client.
What does a modern metrics stack look like? There are so many words... Graphfana, Kibana, StatsD, Graphite, etc. Which bits should I choose and attach together?
21=3*7

you are subtracting multiples of 21, then dividing by 10, which is coprime with 7
Status - https://status.zoho.com/

Service updates - https://blogs.zoho.com/service-updates