skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
What passes as a "single topic?"

Often, "additions" are included in these last-second, "must sign" bills because they face resistance and are unlikely to pass on their own. No representative, nor the president want to be responsible for a "government shutdown" so anything that makes it into the last version of the bill is likely to become law.
> That cautious approach requires that the cars have a steering wheel, and a licensed driver must be ready to take over if the machine fails.

The article takes the tone that this will drastically limit the technology, but honestly at this point a restriction like this seems completely reasonable.

The cars are not good enough to completely drive themselves in all scenarios. At times, they will decide they can't handle a situation and safely ask a driver to take over. This is becoming more and more rare, but it's definitely still the case. Until the technology is proven to basically never need human intervention, it seems reasonable to require a person who can drive to be present.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rider_(legislation)

Riders are a terrible idea. This wiki does a good job at describing them and illustrating that other countries don't like the idea either.
The more technology can seamlessly take care of the foundation of humanity's needs, the better. Leisure is a very new concept and only came about when humans were able to destress from not having to worry about their next meal or getting attacked by predators. Despite all the progress, much of humanity still faces some basic problems due to inequality and access to resources. Technology combined with some other cultural and structural changes can do away with those issues for good.
Treasuries always dry up in front of fed announcements. It's marked on the calendar like job numbers and other macro items that can cause wild swings.

Its much cheaper to just not trade during those times than it is to build out the models/risk management components for most market makers.
Even though it doesn't look like it, this is actually great news since this provides a path for Google et al to get out there and build broad customer comfort around the technology.

And frankly I don't ever foresee driverless cars that don't have some form of manual ovveride - there will always be situations that won't make sense to the computer that make perfect sense to me.

====
Edited to add this clarification, as people on HN seem overly ready to pick nits.
====

The larger point is that humans will be humans and will never buy a car that will interfere with their freedom to do what they think is right at that moment.

And if you want a better example - maybe I want to speed to get to the hospital in an emergency. Maybe I want to block another car that's leaving the scene of a crime. You get the idea.
What if art were a kind of magic?
liquidity dries up in everything before big news announcements. resting bids and offers are asking to get picked off.
RDP doesn't have to be heavily integrated into the OS. VirtualBox uses RDP for remote display of guests regardless of OS [0]. There are a number of servers for Linux that implement RDP.

[0] https://www.virtualbox.org/manual/ch07.html
i'm not sure you'd consider it better markdown (i do), but do you know about reStructuredText? it seems to even predate markdown. http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/user/rst/quickstart.htm...
“All 2016 Presidential Candidates Are Watching You” #OnlinePrivacy
Doesn't it seem possible that we could start testing the cars in a simulated environment?
My previous partner used to suffer seizures of this type, this would have been incredible as often the only way I knew she'd had a seizure would be if she text me after she'd recovered, that was a terrifying thing considering they could hit at any time and any where.
> Wouldn't a simple fix for things like this be 'only allow a new law proposal to be about a single topic and nothing else'?

Define "topic" in a way that still lets legislators write useful laws while unequivocally disallowing the kind of thing you want to try to ban, and you can probably get published in a major poli-sci or philosophy journal.
Compromise is essential for legislation to happen, but I also don't think riders really are a form of compromise. It's an underhanded tactic.
Also, the Google cloud platform dashboard.
That is a good point. There may be some who believe that we shouldn't have to register for that either.
I tend to set password fields to varchar(400), though it's encoding info and base64 hashes.

encoding\options\base64-salt\base64-hash-of-normalized-utf8

I keep the encoding/options so it can be backwards compatible on change... when an encoding/options isn't the current when the user logs in, it will be re-encoded/saved in the current... this is so that security can be upgraded over time.

Run normalization on composite unicode characters & look-a-likes before encoding.

I do one thing some consider bad, which is strip leading/trailing whitespace which is more often a copy-paste error, not actual password entry.
Besides being poor choice it also costs more.
I.e. c4.4xlarge linux $7726.320 annually.
c4.4xlarge windows $13542.960 annually.
What are you wasting $5.8k for?
Which theoretically doesn't matter if the car drives itself.
Harder to buy a house, rents might go up, etc.

Also, harder to raise capital for startups. Though that's probably a good thing that the bar is raised -- will be better in the long term for everyone.
Looks like it is actually worse than CISA...

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20151215/06470133083/congr...
Software I write for customers always has a "Suggest a Feature" button somewhere on the primary nav.

Some of the stuff suggested is ridiculous or impossible but sometimes they suggest stuff that in hindsight would have been blindingly obvious but I'm not the end user no matter how hard I try to put myself in their shoes.
FF 6: Doing an HD Remake the Right Way
> I don't think most people run into this because most backend node programmers have moved to Go at this point

Comments like this are what make it difficult for me to take HN seriously anymore. It's just an example of the hivemind at work, assume that an entire industry has the same ideas as you about what technology to use.

The Node/JS ecosystems are experiencing a Cambrian explosion in technology, with all that implies. If you don't like it, don't worry. It probably won't take 20 million years this time to settle in on the "best" ways of doing things.
One person can build something that starts a revolution. See Woz/Apple.

The real issue here is that self-driving cars are probably the wrong place for that to happen in AI. At best, a solo project creates a crappy prototype where there was no product before (again, see Woz/Apple). The expectation for driverless cars is too high – they need to be 100% good, because your life is on the line, not 80% good.

What's the AI project that would blow people away, even if it was a shadow of a working prototype? I think that's the real question.
In other words, the price of liquidity is much higher when impacting news (for any given security) is expected during market hours. To me this seems like a desired feature of properly functioning markets.
It's likely that they believe that even experience running a business into the ground is better than no experience at that level at all. It's possible that they don't even blame him for the failures and just chuck it up to the market.
> Wouldn't a simple fix for things like this be 'only allow a new law proposal to be about a single topic and nothing else'

Single-subject rules are adopted in many state, and they are neither complete solutions (viewing substantive subject-mixing as a problem), nor without their own potential problems. (And, anyway, to actually be mandatory, for Congress such a rule would have to be adopted through Constitutional amendment.)

Further, its quite arguable that substantive subject mixing is not a problem, poor representation is, and trying to limit substantive subject mixing just creates a new problem; where reps are effectively representing the interests of their district, why shouldn't they be able to effectively legislate based on considerations like:

1. X, considered alone, is better for those I represent, on balance, than not-X, and should be supported, and

2. Y, considered alone, is worse for those I represent, on balance, than not-Y, and should be opposed, but

3. X with Y, considered together, is better for those I represent than not-X with not-Y, thus, the combination of X and Y should be supported if X cannot be secured alone.

(While other representatives, with different constituents with different interests, see the same thing, but with X and Y reversed?)

If you could effectively prohibit subject mixing, that would prohibit compromises that are net gains for larger groups, even if smaller gains for the most-favored groups.

(Systems with parliamentary government with explicit coalition building essentially do massive subject mixing up-front in deciding the agenda of the coalition government when it is formed, and thus can avoid the need to do subject mixing when it comes to individual bills; the U.S. system works more on ad hoc coalition building, so the compromises are more on individual bills than anything analogous to the formation of a government in a parliamentary system.)
No, you've misread the thread. People who want to rent their places out on Airbnb clearly gain. I said, upthread, that this was a loss for those peoples neighbors, and it remains unclear to me how it could be otherwise.
look how many people get suckered into multi level marketing aka pyramid schemes. Imagine if those schemes were allowed to get their members to just "invest" money with promised returns for getting other "investors". It seems real easy for it to turn into a loophole for full on pyramid schemes to start popping up. Not to mention the kinds of ponzi schemes you can run when you can peddle stock in non-public companies that the average retail investor can not even look up quarterly reports on
> Are they?

No, but that's a point that a certain type of person likes to push. As this article [1] starts, "maybe it's that reporters don't like malls". You could add "and Hacker News commenters" after "reporters" there.

[1] http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/07/malls-aren-...
Cant speak for Babel, but the rest of it does not mirror my experience. I have had either no trouble or minor trouble upgrading Node versions. I always hard-code versions for dependencies, and then periodically upgrade which usually takes a few minutes. Once in awhile an API changes, and I have to spend a couple hours (gasp!). You make it sound like upgrading in Node is completely broken, but that doesnt appear to be the case in my experience.
It is impossible to make all science reproducible. Some studies are to expensive and just not possible. Do we need 2 Hadron Colliders? Since we need to reproduce their effects?

Here is some reading on irreproducible research. http://www.nature.com/news/reproducibility-1.17552
Yes, they're using reverse repos to enforce the lower end of the range (0.25%) and the interest on reserves to enforce the upper end (0.5%).

More detail here: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-16/fed-remove...
Someone asked me about this last night. Is there sourcing for this beyond "Techdirt says so"? Because on matters of law, Techdirt is extraordinarily untrustworthy.

I'd love to see the amendments or revisions that are purported to be doing this to the bill.

(I don't support CISA, but if you asked me which I'd rather get rid of, CISA or Techdirt, I'd have to think about it.)

update:

No. See: https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=10747359
The math to implement a working neural net is indeed simple. Even if you consider all the commonly used engineering practices to ensure its correctness and improve its accuracy (like dealing with under/over-fitting), it's still not that hard. In the end, it's just doing multiplications over matrices, calculating derivatives and propagating values back and forth.

Now, to understand WHY the algorithms work, and gives you the result it claims to calculate, is quite hard, but that understanding is not required to implement those algorithms.
Oh perhaps I'm not being specific enough. Apologies mate.

> If we know this at compile time, because L is a quoted list literal, we have the strongest possible information about what it is, even more precise than most type information.

By '(x y z) I'm assuming that it's not a quoted list literal but a let's say list generated by a function at compile time. Where x, y, and z could be of different types like ('(2.5 7) 6 "hello"). It's very hypothetical, and the contents of the list generated cannot possibly be known at compile time.

> ... then you're talking about a completely different language that isn't one of the mainstream Lisps. At best a very oddball dialect.

And yes, what I'm talking about is building a toy lisp between an ML language and a Lisp to see how much Lispyness you have to trade off for the static typing and the type inference of an ML language. The definition of oddball!

In OCaml for example which has static typing and type inference you can't just have a "symbol". Even though symbols are a basic part of Lisp, you can't have really strong type inference for a "symbol" despite it being a fundamental type in the language as for strong type inference you would want to do stuff like have separate operators for adding integers and adding floating point numbers. This is very important for HM's algorithm w, similarly - in that case, car needs to be able to take one type, and return one type for it to comply with algorithm w. I'm trying to see if other people had ever tried implementing something like this.

Anyway, great conversation! I think DonaldFisk helped me out already, but thanks!
An oversimplification: Interest rates are going up over the long run in an effort to keep inflation from getting out of hand (very generally, asset prices go down when interest rates go up). The risk is that it will worsen unemployment before we're ready for it.
Facebook’s open-sourcing of AI hardware start of the deep-learning revolution
> People say you vote with your wallet, but they don't.

They do; they just don't vote the way you think they ought to.

Empirically, given a similar quality item, almost all people vote for lower prices, almost always, despite any amount of haranguing about how it'd be morally better to pay slightly more because of this or that benefit.

Other examples:

* During the US deindustrialization of the 1970s-1980s, there was a big "Buy American" campaign, touting the many benefits of paying slightly more to preserve the US industrial base and its jobs. It was completely ineffective.

* The political climate in San Francisco is ostensibly heavily biased against chain stores, yet the new City Target in SOMA had lines around the block when it opened. Laws to restrict chain stores by fiat were even deemed necessary to stem the tide of chains, even though empirically they do pretty well in the city -- meaning many residents actually do want to spend their money at chains.

* Almost everywhere a new Wal-Mart opens, people complain about all the local mom and pop retailers that'll be put out of business. Yet the new Wal-Mart is usually packed. Years later, it remains in business. They close locations that aren't profitable.

People do indeed vote with their wallets. They just don't usually vote the way you think they should.
Reminds of the quote from "The Social Network"

>> "If they had engineered a self-driving car, they would've engineered a self driving car".

You are just being absurdly accusative in your comment. That guy has done a self-driving car with nothing but tools available in the market.
It's a humor piece that attempts to get us to think about the issue. The quote is invented. The product is not real. But the ideas are -- hopefully -- thought provoking one.

EDIT. As user tremon noted, there is a word for this: the piece is satire.
It is now marginally more expensive than "free."
Ok, we took "sure-fire" out of the title.
José Valim was part of the Rails core team - it's likely he gets web stuff in a very deep way.
Cheaper than glacier (0.007), with none/few of the downsides, that's impressive!
We're definitely reading this ;-)

Appreciate the feedback and we'll take a look at that rsync utility. We're also working on a simple client app that will do rsync with B2.

We're also starting to work with partners to offer a variety of other integrations. Duplicity and HashBackup have integrated B2, and Duplicati has an early alpha version. Someone is working on a FUSE integration. So hopefully soon there will be many ways to use B2. We'll list them here:
https://www.backblaze.net/b2/docs/integrations.html

Please keep sharing feedback of what you need and how you'd use it!

Gleb from Backblaze
There are a number of really good (separate) points here:

1. Shrink-wrapping: yes, of course. Semver ranges never made sense to me. All changes are breaking changes. The idea that we could safely auto-upgrade a project is insane. A semver range is an open invitation to allow people not on your team to arbitrarily change your code at any time in the future. If it was up to me, npm install -save would just shrink-wrap. The idea behind semver ranges is fundamentally flawed since it relies on a human making a determination of whether the change is patch or major or what have you. Even if you automate it and tie it to tests you can't know for sure: Even in a magical world where a "patch" upgrade could be guaranteed to not actually break behavior, it could still have dire perf consequences (which in an async world could absolutely change the behavior of your running program by surfacing new race conditions or what have you). That's why this is the behavior on tonicdev.com: when you require a package we magically shrink-wrap it at that point in time. Reproducibility should be the default. All changes are breaking changes.

2. The quickness of change is definitely also an issue. This may just be a price of progress thing though. I certainly wouldn't want to give up amazing rewrite the world changes like the development of React for a "stable" environment. I can also see the flip side to this though.
I suspect a LOT of products follow that same trend, even things that you may not consider discretionary (food, cars, clothing, etc). It may just be funds availability coupled with consumer sentiment near the holidays.
So can someone please help explain to me how this is permissible?

Taking this to extremes, why would politicians not sneak every crazy wild idea that they have onto this bill if it's a must-pass bill?
I also wonder if the rich are also programmed to empathize with others less.
This would be amazing, I hope I catch it. What's your blog's url just in case?
Sure, traction is an excellent indicator of a company's potential to succeed. I don't dispute that. And I respect you if you are in investor who is looking for companies with traction. However, in this case though, please don't call yourself "early stage". This wastes everyones' time. You get people pitching to you that don't meet your baseline criteria. Those people waste time with you instead of other truly early-stage investors who are actually likely to open their wallets and throw a few bucks at a couple founders so they can quit their day job and get working on their idea.
The the upload rate throttled?
'"F34r is the mind killer." as an example, does use replacement,'

This is the sort of thing I mean, though, when I say we don't usually use fully random replacement. 3 for e, 4 for a, $ for s, these things add very little entropy overall because they are so common. We don't really use "symbols" in our passphrases; we use only !@$& probably overall, and those in highly stereotyped situations.

Suppose you know the first four characters of someone's password are "hous"; what's the next character? Big, big spikes around e and 3, maybe a smaller one on E and i/I, then "everything else".
52,767 for Backbone and 599 for Ember. Datanyze don't appear to be tracking Polymer or Aurelia yet.
Not to mention that Product Hunt violates their own rules all the time: I see plenty of posts for big companies like Microsoft announcing products that aren’t available yet (e.g. Hololens, Windows 10 before it came out, etc), even though their FAQ explicitly states that the product has to be available to the public at the time of posting.

Really what should tip people off even more is the inability to comment. If the viewers of the site can’t actually interact, since commenting is only allowed for “approved" users, they should realize that the whole thing is just a scam.

See any ads on Product Hunt? See any monetization strategies? Oh wait, the whole website is an ad, and only those in the know or those who pay will get featured.
China? Mark Zuckerberg? Ashton Kutcher?
> I would call it satire, i.e. putting a humourous spin on a serious subject.

Ah, right. That's what it's called. Thanks for reminding us all about a sadly underused word.
There is a strong link between intelligence and nutrition. In many places where parasites deprive people of nutrition, there is also a decline in cognitive abilities as well.

http://www.economist.com/node/16479286
> Would this perhaps be a better question for StackOverflow?

A thousand times no! This was great!

More Lisp implementation posts, please!
Which makes you think - Schwab is keeping probably billions of dollars safe. I've never heard of a theft from them, including via online account compromise. Meanwhile, many other sites doing better jobs of following security best practices can't keep even email addresses secure.

Maybe we're the ones doing it wrong, and it's us that should be learning from them?
From Coffeescript to React to Flux – the evolution of our front-end stack
Nonsense, if I owned the whole building I would say "my [more familiar term than 'building']".

Perhaps an example will put you at ease:

"Oh could you help me take these to my flat? I know they're heavy, but don't worry, my building has a lift!"

Substitute apartment and elevator if so inclined.
Get a job at the best culture companies
The Average Joe's home loan just got a slight bit more expensive.
Fed raising interest rates 0.25% and setting a goal of "normal" 2% by 2018 means little to nothing. Market already priced the miniscule rate hike in as the move was widely expected, and move did nothing to assure markets that the Fed is in control, or set credible, measurable goals for future hikes.

Fed can continue to push on the supply side of money at the bank/institutional level all it wants. We need the Federal government to stimulate aggregate demand at the consumer level. How? Investing tax dollars in a smarter manner. Not raising the interest paid out on short term bonds so that institutions are incentivized to keep even more money in bonds rather than putting them to work in the economy.

Monetary policy needs to work hand in hand w/ fiscal policy. I feel bad for the Fed...its decisions are largely restricted and inconsequential when gov spending is broken, yet it receives all the attention and the blame.
Realistically, not much for a while. The FED still doesn't think inflation will hit its target until 2018, so low rates are here for the time being.

The two things you might notice:

- Slight increase in rates on CDs, money market accounts, and other short-term savings
- Slight increase on car loan rates, mortgages, and other long-term consumer borrowing
I can't find all of mine, because the name that they use for social interaction isn't the same as the name that Facebook will let them use.
I hope not. Tesseract delivers bad results on high quality scans, far below the same OCR quality achieved by services like Google Books.

What the OCR market needs is someone who will bring that level of OCR quality - or better - to the masses (perhaps some deep learning grad student with time to kill?), not yet another wrapper around Tesseract. We have those already!