skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> And I do, but your tone in general -- and your last sentence in particular -- makes it very hard to empathize. Microsoft used its near-monopoly status to stifle innovation for years, and many of us have figurative scars that will never heal. You seem to think that they are making great strides (while I see them as half-hearted overtures), but either way I'm not about to "throw them a bone." Their decades of misdeeds, in my eyes, will not be expiated so easily.

I feel like Apple's has forgotten what was important, created then ruined a market, and lost everything that made it interesting (long before Steve Jobs passed away, by the way). Which cuts all the more deeply because back in the early 2ks they were walking the walk and taking a lot from NeXT's culture of developer friendliness. I grew up deeply invested in Macs and NeXT, which makes the realization painful, but... Apple wants to annihilate maker culture as it monetizes its platform. It's also stopped caring about design on a grand scale, instead appealing to very shallow notions of "visual simplicity".

That's all gone now, and they're consequently useless to me. I'd rather patronize a company currently doing the right thing after a troubled past than pretend a previously aligned company was still there.

It should be very telling that Apple AND Google's flagship hardware announcement of 2015 was something that Microsoft has been doing for years.

And if Microsoft suddenly goes evil again? Fuck them, I'll drop them and move somewhere else. Not Linux, unless the distros pull their act together, but I'm sure a competitor will emerge. Or I'll make one.
zgrep simply decompresses all the data and feeds it into regular grep. If the data is indexed in some way, it is possible to do better by not having to look at all the data exhaustively.
Can somebody tell me how Hashicorp makes money? They seem to employ people, and they have a page that sends traffic off to technology and solutions partners, but where do they make their own money?

We use Vagrant at work and I'm considering whether and how we could use more of their tooling. But I always want to know about the business model behind the tools I recommend before I recommend them.

Anyone?
Rabedik created C++ mod, for the VR to modify your virtual surroundings
One example is "Fast and Flexible Word Searching on Compressed Text". A copy is at http://www.cs.uml.edu/~haim/teaching/iws/tirsaa/sources/ACM_... .

> We present a fast compression and decompression technique for natural language texts. The novelties are that (1) decompression of arbitrary portions of the text can be done very efficiently, (2) exact search for words and phrases can be done on the compressed text directly, using any known sequential pattern-matching algorithm, and (3) word-based approximate and extended search can also be done efficiently without any decoding. The compression scheme uses a semistatic word-based model and a Huffman code where the coding alphabet is byte-oriented rather than bit-oriented.
What if you put in:

accept-encoding: identity
MIT invents untraceable SMS text messaging system that even more secure than Tor
You make some good points here, which I completely understand. Hopefully the future will bring better options for us all.
The Majority of Millennials Have $1,000 or Less in Savings
Care to give some actionable feedback rather than just ranting and FUD?

I've worked with Go but I would still prefer using Django to start off a new project. The rich set of libraries it provides is only rivaled by Rails among web frameworks. I've never felt I was fighting the framework and it actually taught me several good practices.

This grant shows how Django is embracing the new web and moving forward. I am happy I will be able to continue to use Django for use cases it does not cover now.
Man, I got so excited after I ran the following.

$ curl 'https://api.stockfighter.io/ob/api/heartbeat'
{"ok":true,"error":""}

I presume you'd like us to layoff testing your servers for a bit ;)?
The brightest part of Java is actually Scala.

Don't forget about F# for .NET too. Type Providers are a killer feature.
Comprehensive Python Decorator Tutorial with Example
Google Chrome issues with Windows 10/8/7
Building Types into a Module Using C# Compiler
If you can crash the venue API, which is written in golang, with pre-auth requests I've got bigger problems than your load testing.
> Here it's clear that xfs gives better results, with the average write beating all ext4 modes by a few hundred microseconds.

Am I wrong that the graph above that statement does not show that? While it shows xfs having better latency than ext4, the axis is labelled as "write latency nanoseconds", and the difference between ext4 and xfs is ~400ns, or .4µs; not "a few hundred microseconds."
Yeah, I really could not care less that a file takes up 40 more megs when it's one format over the other. Efficiency lost the war to ease of use and throwing cheap resources at a problem. I'm not going to go through the hassle of downloading and configuring the software needed to compress this into the most efficient format when the out of the box solution I don't need to think about works just fine.
AFAIK most proposals don't have a single entity owning a river, but rather people own rights to a certain amount of water from the river at a certain quality.

Isn't that pretty similar to how things work now, minus the quality part?
Let’s not let fear defeat our values
Old doesn't mean bad. Sometimes, it means "finished".

About the only thing that a small would need to be updated at this point is support for a new compressor. (that 2012 release mainly added suppport for plzip)
Pascal's wager is a fallacy. What benefit could it bring to the discussion?
On the server, it would increase the amount of time and memory required.
The original document from WVU detailed 3 vehicles, two by VW an one by BMW.

If you want an easy to digest article on the subject please read:

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/09/23/researcher-how-vw-got-cau...

And if you want less easy to digest material go read the actual study pdfs (they're linked in the wikipedia article on 'dieselgate' and are very interesting reading but it will take some time there are 100+ pages there).

So you are way off base with the claims in this comment.

Note that the WVU report does not state that evidence of a cheating device has been found. It was merely the catalyst (pun intended) in the whole affair causing the EPA to put a much bigger effort into the VW engine than they had up to that point and this is where the cheating device was uncovered.
I didn't claim feminist epistemology made no sense. I merely claimed it abandons objective reality. You seem to disagree with this, I take it?

The problem is that if objective reality exists, then all accurate beliefs must be nearly identical and all the other stuff can only play a minor role. I.e., two alternate beliefs (regardless of power or anything else) must be nearly identical to each other if they are accurate: |B1 - B2| < |B1 - X| + |X - B2| is the general idea (with B1, B2 being the beliefs and X being objective reality). That's the problem - if you allow objective reality then everything else is anchored near it, preventing anything interesting from happening.

Let me guess, there are mysteries hidden in tomes of knowledge you refuse to cite, and you are also unwilling to state anything formally here? Have fun with that act, I'm sure you are fooling everyone else here.
Being platform-independent is definitely a major feature that we’ve had discussions about over the last year. Ideally, yes, we want C4 to go beyond simply an API for designing interactions, exploring and building apps for iOS. We’re hopeful – with Swift now being open-source – that it will be ported onto other systems, and if that’s the case then we see a lot of potential for being able to have C4 be part of that movement. How that pans out is still unclear, but even in the shift from ObjC to Swift we’ve started to make attempts to abstract our API in ways that would allow us to make the jump to cross-platform more easily.

I definitely think there’s a future for non-native, but right now the lock on hardware drives the current climate of software development (for mobile). The current animation/media/interaction core of C4 is just a first step towards a lot of other integrations, add ons and components that we want to build out. So, for now I’m a subscriber to native because I think that it’s still a lot of work to build out C4 to something mature and stable for a single platform.

> Looking forward to hearing your experiences with using C4 for the first time.
No- you find a job title that has a lower prevailing wage- for example programmer analyst vs application developer or something else. Companies like Infosys and TCS pay $70K/year
You should go and read the report.
relevant link:
https://developer.visa.com/vpp/
1Pass – easy way for buying individual news articles
> Java chooses safety over performance.

Yet manages to be faster than golang.

Also, the two need not be mutually exclusive as you're implying.
Thnx...
have fun
Yes, this.

I consulted with a business attorney in Silicon Valley on this particular issue when I was considering getting a startup going on my own after hours. She basically said that there is enough "gray zone" in what I wanted to do vs. what I was doing for my employer (although I felt they were really distinct areas of computer science) that if my former employer wanted to go after me they could easily bury me in legal BS.

Whoever can spend the most on lawyers wins...
great cuz I want google eating up yet more of my personal habits and info
>and everyone should be rewarded or penalized based on the number of issues found post-release.

this sounds absolutely horrible. What a great way to remove all agency and ownership from an organization and incentivize people to pass the buck off to literally anyone but themselves and to work on easy, cupcake features with no risk.

>This keeps the devs incentivized to make sure everything works before the code goes to QA, and it keeps everyone incentivized to eliminate as many bugs as possible before release.

What kind of organization are you working in where you think devs have to be motivated by punishment or reward? Do you not hire the kind of people who are intrinsically motivated and want to produce software that doesn't have bugs? Do you think that if you don't explicitly incentivize developers not to write bugs that they would just fuck around and make shitty, buggy software? I just can't imagine working in an organization so dysfunctional that leadership thinks the default state is being happy with shitty buggy software.
This is awesome.

I was literally just wondering when there will be open sourced AI. I only saw a few repos on github so figured it would be at least 3-10 years. The fact that things like this seem to surface so quick, including recent AI announcements from Google, etc, are a very good signs for AI in the future.
RIP Prismatic. Got into it from the Clojure community, and hoping they do well in their next endeavor -- and their libraries remain maintained esp. prismatic/schema !
> I've just drawn attention toward the bigger picture within these events have unfolded and because commenters have raised questions as to why VW has been targeted so swiftly despite it's apparent that other manufacturers are having similar issues (more or less).

But that isn't the case. There is 0 evidence that other manufacturers also included a defeat-the-test device, there is evidence that other manufacturers diesels exceed their permitted level of NOx in various circumstances but they do not employ a device that detects the tests and then re-programs the engine to comply with the test. It just so happens that under test conditions those engines more or less perform as advertised, there is no 'mode switch' based on the detection of a test in progress to reprogram the engine parameters. That's a totally different kettle of fish, the one is a narrow set of parameters where the engine will pass the test, the other means the engine will never perform as advertised except when under test.
Decorators in Python - Despite the name, Python decorators are not an implementation of the decorator pattern. The decorator pattern is a design pattern used in statically typed object-oriented programming languages to allow functionality to be added to objects at run time; Python decorators add functionality to functions and methods at definition time, and thus are a higher-level construct than decorator-pattern classes. So in Python a decorator is any callable Python object that is used to modify a function, method or class definition.
The reason a year passed is because the report does not indeed contain the sentence 'VW committed fraud', it simply notes some exceptional real-world performance issues for a specific vehicle under test and left it at that. The EPA then had to do a whole pile of work to figure out what exactly was going on and this led to the discovery of the defeat-the-test device.
This is your first post. Why should we trust you?
> I in no way want to sound like a dk but as an engineer it is your responsibility to practice test driven development but that's not enough.

One of the things that put me off when it comes to TDD is that it has always been a bit like religion.

What matters is whether the tests exist, not when they were written. I'd even argue that writing a test first and then being constrained by that box is a bad idea. Write the most elegant code first, and then write tests to cover all paths. You're more likely to know the problem better after the code is written.
It's pretty much a binary affair. Test detected -> engine reprogrammed instantly to comply with the test. The reason for that is that they don't know ahead of time which vehicle the EPA will pull off the line to do their testing on so they had to ship it in all of them.
Remote volunteering and internships at Zidisha (YC W14 nonprofit)
If all your QA team does is run through a bunch of tests that could be automated, then by all means, automate the tests and get rid of your QA department. However, good QA folks have a valuable skill, which is that they think of interesting ways to break software. Not many programmers do this very well.
The legal distinction is that the code in the VW ECU actively detects the testing regime and then switches the engine to a mode of operation it would never use during real world conditions.

That's no longer optimizing for a test, that's simply fraud. Other manufacturers performance deviates gradually the further away you get from the test parameters. The VW would never have the performance it has during a test in any real world conditions, not even those matching the test (because the vehicle is moving and it can tell the difference).
Txtr – A better way to text
Yes, that is my impression as well. That's why they've decided VW as a brand can be thrown under the bus as well as long as they get away with this. But it is getting so large now that I doubt this strategy is going to work they are clearly reaching for straws to be able to claim plausible deniability.
Best thing about libarchive/bsdtar is, it also handles zip, rar, cpio, iso files and many others.
So basically bsdtar xf is what I'm using to extract almost every archive.
Those who believe in climate change should just reframe the argument in the face of skeptics.

Just say, "you're right, we don't know the science is true but just like people/companies take out insurance in situations of risk so should we." Because when the problem is reframed as an exercise in risk mitigation then it is very hard to argue against. Especially when said activities have not been shown to have a measurable impact on the world's economic activity. In fact huge benefits will come if we invent largely free energy.
How we built our mission statement and core values for our startup
Not a bad way to put it. I've always wondered why framing things this way doesn't work: the things people claim cause global warming, whether or not they have anything to do with global warming, are on their own not sustainable, and will likely lead to long term suffering for humanity, so we should find ways to reduce them and find more sustainable ways of living.
"the weapon system used in question was a human-piloted, human-manned AC-130 gunship"

True, read the Ars article: "The BMC crew is responsible for steering the aircraft to targets, identifying them, and shooting them; the aircraft's battery is slaved to the sensor suite for targeting." - Aircrew, well trained, professional. As ethical as you can get.

Now what happened is "A US special operations team on the ground, given coordinates of the Afghani NDS building by the Afghan forces they were working with, passed them to the AC-130. But when the AC-130 crew punched the grid coordinates into their targeting system, it aimed at an open field 300 meters away from the actual target. Working from a rough description of the building provided from the ground, the sensor operators found a building close to the field that they believed was the target. Tragically, it was actually the hospital."

Will adding AI to this situation make any improvement when the real issue is ' lack of a "common operating picture,"'?
That's a strawman argument. Parent is pointing out that unlike guns, AI (and knives) have purposes other than use as a weapon, and therefore it is possible that their widespread proliferation would be good, even if that of weapons is bad. Certainly weapons (including guns) have non-evil purposes as well, but that's beside the point.
Written as Google eases its stance on operating in China [1],[2].

It's not ok when fear erodes our values, but, by the same token: it's not ok for profit/growth-potential to erode our values.

"That is why it’s so disheartening to see the intolerant discourse playing out in the news these days — statements that our country would be a better place without the voices, ideas and the contributions of certain groups of people, based solely on where they come from, or their religion."

^^ China's "toleration" of Tibetan monks, the truth (just Baidu 'Tianamen Square' (from a Chinese IP)), and basic encryption/privacy [3], etc manifests in ways that land countless people in political prison or worse - and should inform Pichai's stance on (not) working with that government.

Google is the flag-bearer when it comes to keeping the web (and information at large) open and accessible: let's hope it doesn't cave for a third of the world's population. We'll see in 2016.

[1] - http://www.forbes.com/sites/miguelhelft/2015/02/26/exclusive...
[2] - http://www.reuters.com/article/us-alphabet-china-idUSKCN0T91...
[3] - http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/24/business/international/chi...
This x1000. Biggest pet peeve of mine is people's unwillingness to give a valid, time saving summary. Seriously, if you just ready it and your mind has absorbed it, what the heck is so hard about giving a short recap based on that summary?

Btw, TvTropes gives the kind of summary you describe under the "laconic" button, and it's a godsend.
You can be for the open Internet all you want. It's too late, that's the point. Our best chance has come and gone. People somehow still believe we have a say, we don't. Maybe we never had. I don't think this is like industrialization, were things got bad and then through much struggle got better. There's little to no indications that will happen. Partly because the open Internet was an anomaly. It's like how domains work isn't going to change, done is done. Many people wrongfully believed and believe that they have some sort of inherent influence over the Internet because it's "their thing". They don't. Maybe they should have, but they don't. The window for realistically doing something is gone, maybe some time ago. We have to live with what is now. Mostly with stories like these not even making the front page.

I'd like to end my rambling with a quote from, of all people, Winston Chuchill from before the second world war. "The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to its close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences."
Well... I imagine we are more in violent agreement than anything else - I might have some quibbles with the notion that ECUs are that simple and, having done a bit of work in that industry in that part of the world, I have some trouble following the notion that 'compliance departments' are so rigorous and independent.

To me, VW's story is at least somewhat plausible because it is not difficult to intentionally and specifically set it up to be that way. I don't have any trouble believing that they deliberately went to great lengths to ensure that and that outside of a small group of crooks (culturally and otherwise encouraged and enabled from above), it was borderline enough that nobody stood up and said 'this is illegal and effed up, I'm going home'.
6 Techniques to Dramatically Upgrade the Quality of Your Presentation
Inside the Mad, Mad World of TripAdvisor
> they would raise costs for the risky and decrease costs for the less risky

That assumes their risk model is correct.

Regardless, I don't want all my behavior evaluated and judged. You may feel otherwise, but it should be my choice.
Why do you assume it must be an external, centralized service? why not a browser plugin that you plug in your paypal email into?
Evolution of Pseudo Darkleech
> So, xz, lzop, and gzip are all the "best" at something. Bzip2 isn't the best at anything anymore.

Two points:

(1) It's very, very easy for the best solution to a problem not to simultaneously be the best along any single dimension. If you see a spectrum where each dimension has a unique #1 and all the #2s are the same thing, that #2 solution is pretty likely to be the best of all the solutions. Your hypothetical example does actually make a compelling argument that bzip2 is useless, but that's not because it doesn't come in #1 anywhere; it's because it comes in behind xz everywhere. (Except ubiquity, but that's likely to change pretty quickly in the face of total obsolescence.)

(2) lzop, in your example, is technically "the best at something". But that something is compression and decompression speed, and if your only goal is to optimize those you can do much better by not using lzop (0 milliseconds to compress and decompress!). So that's actually a terrible hypothetical result for lzop.

Heck, zero compression easily wins three of your four categories.
How to pitch your startup to a reporter?
Here is my prediction, after watching "Terminator Genisys". The dangerous AI is not the AI humans "invent". It is the AI that runs away. But, what AI will humans allow to "run away"? What scenario presents an opportunity for one group of humans to attack an AI and then provides the opportunity for said AI to be released from its lease ("run away") and become that which we all fear?

So, you have 'red team' and 'blue team'. Blue team is super rich and builds itself an awesome AI. Red team needs some "rally round the flag" pick me up and so, looking around for targets, decides that attacking a bunch of machines is a safe bet. If they win, awesome. If not, then they didn't kill any persons, just made a bunch of junk.

Blue team's response is to internalize the threat (as is only natural, or is at least politically expedient to some subset of blue team) and frame the situation as follows: "This is what we built our AI for. This is an existential threat. It has the capacity. We only need to let it off the leash. The choices are 'destroy' or 'be destroyed'. This is nothing less than an existential moment for our civilization."

And, with that horrible, non-technical, propaganda riddled rationalization the AI developed by the most well meaning of people will be let off the least, will run way, and nothing that we know about the AI up to that point will be worth diddly squat.

I respect anyone that tries to tackle this issue. But, the nature of the issue, the kernel of the problem, is nothing less than Pandora's box. We won't know when it is opened. But, the AI will.