skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Have you built deep learning models before? Neural nets are not magical boxes that you stick data into and instantly get great, generalized, robust models at the other end.

I have no inside knowledge, but I would be very surprised if Google's self-driving cars use neural nets as a significant component right now (which isn't to say there aren't people exploring its use).
The "fix" for riders, in the past, has been the line-item veto (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line-item_veto_in_the_United_S...), which allows the president to veto parts of legislation.

It was passed in 1996, challenged, then struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1998.
A Debate on Animal Consciousness
The most interesting paragraph of the article is:

A coincidence is the most probable explanation for the
surprising bumps in data from the collider, physicists
from the experiments cautioned, saying that a lot more
data was needed and would in fact soon be available.

So the data analysis is extremely complicated, in part because the number of tries depends on the correlation of datapoints. So if you look at 2 sigma signal in one hundred datapoints you expect to find 5 and even worse, if you try one hundred different measures then you expect 5 two-sigma events, if the measures are independent, which they are not in practice. So to calculate the number of tries is a highly non trivial business, which depends on exact knowledge what each desperate grad student did on his weekend.

So the nice thing about data from both CMS and ATLAS is, that we can fix this by asking, what is the probability that CMS sees something at the same energy and in the same channel as the most interesting ATLAS result. And as it turns out, it is a 2-sigma event. So there is just a one in twenty chance that this occurs by random chance. However one in twenty is not exactly a discovery, just the probability that the Niners win on Sunday.

Edit: Two things, first that analysis is of course very conservative and second even if it is a real effect, it may be just a presently badly understood background effect.
Survival 101
What about the article title? ("How Poverty Changes Kids’ Brains")

There's absolute no answer on "How", only a couple of poor blind guess.

"Family Income Changes Kids’ Brains" would be more honest, since this is precisely what they found.
The fed interest rate is the foundation for pretty much all loans, cars, mortgages, whatever.

Low interest rates are good for borrowers. I want a car, or a house, or a power plant, or a jet, or whatever. I want to spend some money that i don't actually have. This changes the economy because more money is moving around.

High interest rates are good for lenders. I've got this pile of cash that isn't doing anything. The higher the rate, the more likely i am to loan it to someone who wants to do something with it.

The higher the rate, the more sure the borrower needs to be that they can actually put that money to good use. Not only do i have to get you your money back, i have to get you all the interest as well. Lower rates mean more activity, more people borrowing and buying stuff. Higher rates slow things down, but bring more investors out.

Say the fed rate went up 5%. Yesterday i could give you a home loan for 5%, today i could give you a loan and make 10% instead. Since that rate is the foundation of everything, my risk stays the same, but it's much tougher for you, because you have to come up with a bunch more money. They made a tiny, probably imperceptible change to you and I, unless you're actively looking to take out a loan.

Anyway, that's the gist. Borowers need to be a tiny bit more sure they can pay the interest.
Video: Instagram hack to create personalized videos
Does the requirement need to have a control unit at all times? It would be neat to continue to make it an option but also allow the console to hide the wheel and perhaps replace it with some more fly-by-wire smaller replacement.
I'm not sure if this is a specific reference to something like McSweeney's Interactive Guide to Ambiguous Grammar [0], to something else, or just a comment in general. (But I agree.)

[0] http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/an-interactive-guide-to-a...
> park in this no parking zone blocking traffic for 30 seconds while I run to get something.

I think you just made an argument against manual override there...
Yep haha, it's easy to be blind to all this if you haven't switched to something else. I knew it was bad but I didn't realize how much better platforms like Go were until really making the move. Too many people have grown used to transpiling etc, IMO it's not acceptable that we transpile pretty much everything server and client for usability.
And I thought it couldn't be possible to make LO any more infuriating to use. Well done guys, trebles all round.
No, likely easier. Think of it this way. Borrowing money costs you more, but makes the lender more money in interest. Lenders now have more of an incentive to loan out money, because they'll actually be earning more (eventually) on it.
Vehicle-tracking in wide-area motion imagery from an airborne platform
Yev from Backblaze here -> We don't throttle on our end, though ISPs and distance to datacenter can affect how quickly the data will get there.
Looks like another attempt at grabbing a share from NVidia's CUDA ecosystem... Not gonna happen.
> park in this no parking zone blocking traffic for 30 seconds while I run to get something.

No? Either park legally or go without. You are literally saying to everyone else "me saving 5 minutes by not having to park is more important than whatever it is you're doing."
When I read the geohot article [1] earlier I was thinking that there was no way what he was working on was legal. Would be curious to have someone with more expertise weigh in though.

Does this make comma.ai [1] or cruise [2] more acceptable in the eyes of the state?

1 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10744206
2 - http://www.getcruise.com/
Wood, Metal, Cubes, and Words: A Few Story-Machines Since Gulliver's Travels
Really hard to say with Secret Service where and what they are carrying. Likely a handgun strong side carry on the waist but also perhaps a PDW like an MP5 or equivalent in its most concealable iteration under the arm on the weak side.

The hand position is pretty standard as a ready position for many fighting systems. Easy to go to a guard position or to initiate striking or pain compliance maneuvers from that stance. On a startle cue, from that position the hands will come up, at which point they can choose the appropriate response.
Maybe not hands on the wheel control but I would at least want it to be a wheel that is ready to go by just grabbing it, same with the brakes. If they collapsed or folded into the dash that could lead to issues where a software glitch doesn't let you take back control and the robot overlords end you.
This is probably a good idea since the product obviously applies to a large portion of society, rather than a specific niche.
This is pretty damn awesome!
That's an objection that many have raised (Hayek thought it made LVT impractical), though there are schemes to make it better than the current system (county-run assessors, whose values often bear very little connection to reality)-- self-assessment of your land value being one.
Ideas bv Basement Ventures
Sounds like a good idea for the first 10 or so years of self-driving cars. Remember, not all self-driving cars will be made by Google or Tesla. Some will even be made by the spaghetti-code-Toyota, the cheating-Volkswagen, or the we-send-updates-over-unencrypted-HTTP-BMW. It's best not to jump head-first (literally?) with this.

And it's not just about the "safety" code of these self-driving cars, either. Many of them probably still won't care too much about hiring top-notch security experts in the first few years, to protect their cars against remote hacking (which could be much easier with self-driving cars if they are connected to the Internet).
However, the cost of the home in many markets will have decreased slightly as a result.
Yev from Backblaze here -> We read everything. Already have some integrations working, keep an eye on -> https://www.backblaze.com/b2/docs/integrations.html and https://github.com/backblaze for updates!
I couldn't get the video to play, not sure why, but I think this is the same: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGffKBu9aNs

Looks interesting, but I'd like to try it/read reviews before purchasing
The world is complex, but we haven't gotten to the stage yet where you should feel lost, even as a layman. It is absolutely possible to know enough classical physics, QM, and theory of relativity to have a decent understanding of our current models. You absolutely don't have to be able to recite a table of elementary particles in order to understand this.

> I often wish for some kind of "Physical Philosophy". That tries to make sense of the world independent from those theories.

If your sense-making framework can (or must?) be independent from the facts, there is an enormous multitude from all cultures available for you to choose from. But if facts are important to you, and you don't know where to start, watch some popular science documentaries. If you prefer a touch of philosophy, I can suggest the original Cosmos series by Carl Sagan. But on the whole, sense and meaning is not something that can be prescribed by scientific knowledge - it can, however, help inform your own decisions about sense and meaning.

> For example: what if the theories just keep growing indefinitely?

This does not describe the current state of physics research. In fact, we are almost struggling to discover new physics, and so far most particle physics experiments line up so well with theory it's almost frustrating. What we can see right now is not the bottomless fractal recursion into nothingness which you describe.
He implemented methods from the literature using a sensor specifically designed for this application. Grad students do this for class projects.
I've also had a bunch of cases where old versions of packages (looking at you, esprima!) suddenly disappear from the official npmjs.com repository.

We have apps that are stable and have been running for many months, until suddenly we need to add a small feature. With a missing package deep in the tree — not one we were depending on directly — we have to waste several hours being forced to upgrade packages to newer versions, just to work around the missing version. It's insane.

(It's possible to unpublish NPM packages, which is what happened here. That in itself is terrible, especially since all you get is a 404 from NPM — no reason for the unpublish provided.)

The NPM tool itself is a mess:

* It suffers from sporadic bugs (the dreaded "npm ERR cb() never called") and isn't resilient against network issues (e.g., timeouts).

* It can't use its own cache for packages that have compiled artifacts.

* npm-shrinkwrap.json isn't stable. Adding a package tends to rewrite the whole file depending on whether it has resolved packages from the network or locally.

* Lots of surprising disconnect between shrinkwrap and node_modules. For example, "npm i package" does nothing if it's in the shrinkwrap file, but "npm i package@latest" upgrades (but doesn't, obviously, modify the shrinkwrap file).

* It uses a lot of files. We've had inode issues on some boxes because the sheer size of the NPM cache + deploys use so many files. Production deploys includes all sorts of artifacts (tests, documentation, readme, etc.) that you can't exclude.

* The nested tree (fixed, I hear, in NPM 3.0) is really unmanagable.

The microscopic, mutating nature of NPM packages is chaotic. There's no practical way to do upgrades in a controlled manner. (My wish list item: A command that prints out all upgradeable packages and a complete changelog for each version bump.)

NPM could learn a lot from Ruby's Bundler.
Secret club feelings are one thing, but in terms of HN's content, most things people say about the old days are probably nostalgia bias. Since you pinpointed 5 years ago, I looked up the front page from 6 years ago:

https://web.archive.org/web/20091215131033/http://news.ycomb...

That's surprisingly little different than how HN would look today, except there's arguably more fluff there.
> 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'?

How do you define "a single topic"? Who gets to decide what is and isn't topical? Who gets to enforce it? Can you see how this definition might be abused for political gain?

Myself, I see it only making things worse.
I have had great result using tesseract via gimagereader. Are you sure your configuration is good?
> park in this no parking zone blocking traffic for 30 seconds while I run to get something.

You're not thinking in driverless terms. You don't need to have the car block traffic while you grab something. The car can drive around the block and swing back around to pick you up or just go find a parking be spot elsewhere while you do what you need.
Good crazy ideas revolve around solving one or a handful of extremely hard engineering tasks, which make everything else easier "assuming the crazy thing works."

Bad crazy ideas break any part of that description. The single hard thing is new science/research instead of engineering, or the new hard thing won't make the rest easier, or the new hard thing is supposed to get rid of all the other problems.
Oh yeah, my mistake - you're totally right. So in this case what type does car output (or how do I write the type definition for car), because it can't output multiple types otherwise I wouldn't be able to check its value at compile time?

And yeah, Full Metal Jacket seemed cool (and it's a great name). Do post it here when you start putting those tutorials up!
Curious if anyone knows what is the average VC fund return for the time-span of 2010-2015 for the past five years?

Suppose if Fed plan to gradually raise interest rates to 2.0% to 2016 year's end; and with that corporate investment bonds, municipal bonds yield also rising to match and go beyond that baseline.

Then, how attractive would VC funds be for mutual and pension funds in relation to other investment alternatives: a) bonds, b) publicly-traded companies following general market trends, c) REITs, d) commodities and precious metals?

For comparison, major Internet IPO's since inception:

GRPN (-87.97%)

TWTR (-42.23%)

FB (+176.6%)

BABA (-10.02%)

ETF Tracking since ETF inception:

SOCL (ETF for Global X Social Media) (-38.8%) vs. SPY (+62.93%) vs.TLT (+1.85%);

FDN (ETF for DJIA Internet Fund, but distorted to contain established Internet companies; GOOG) (+267%) vs. SPY(+65.62%) vs. TLT (+44.18%)
I believe "There is no such thing as toast." is only a theorem.

Theorems may be rejected all day long.

Edit: A null hypothesis in this schema would be something like (a bit ridiculous, but not my example): If toast exists and I eat it for breakfast, I should be able to detect that I ate it for breakfast at a higher rate than the false positive rate of my ability to determine whether what I eat for breakfast is or is not toast.

Keep downmodding. Or, you know, refute what I have said.
I second the recommendation to build something with Plug first. Phoenix was my first dip into Elixir, but I quickly found that I didn't know wtf was going on. I built a little API thing that accesses sheets via the Smartsheet API, and decided to do that from scratch. Started with a GenServer to do the API access, and then added Plug. This showed me how all of the pieces fit together without starting from even a Plug template. Very useful exercise!
They do that all the time.

That's why I'm a professional developer these days, instead of a professional poker player.
Previous conviction record is not one of so-called protected characteristics (gender/race/religion/etc), it is completely legal to discriminate based on that.

Basic human rights include a lot of things, but the list of those does not include a right to be trusted despite your prior actions, and it does not include a right to be served in particular location - those are privileges or interpersonal relationships that may be granted or withheld as the others believe is best for them.
As I understand it, by slipping it in on an Omnibus budget bill, leaders get to add in bullshit that nobody in their right mind could defend on the floor and then expect an up-down, yes-no vote on the entire budget, including the add-in, by the membership.

In addition, because it's a budget bill, regular conference committee rules don't apply. The idea was that having conference committees dicker over each line item would be a great way to prevent both houses from agreeing. So the "fix" they made for money bills can be used for cyber-surveillance bills too.

I may have missed the details. Apologies if that's the case. If this was added to the Omnibus, the reason why was obscurity. My misunderstanding of the details is a prime example of voters not being able to track who's responsible. That's the point.
Its nonsensical to think a human can take over at a moment's notice during a particular maneuver. Its the threat of death/accident that makes me pay attention to every moment of driving. On autopilot I wont have that kind of attention. Its simply a trait of the human attention span.

That being said, every self-driving car needs a manual override because there are plenty of situations that cant be easily explained to a computer. the override could be done with a steering wheel and gas pedal, or just a joy-stick mode on the touchscreen pad.

For instance someone has a big empty lot and they want to move a car from row A to row B. The new spot is exactly 50 feet to the right. I just want to back the car up, and go forward while steering over to the right a bit. Row B has no 'street address' to program into a route-computer. I could click on a map but the map doesnt know where on the grass i want to drive.

Even with lidar, etc. there are grey areas that self-driving algorithms are going to have trouble with. Drop a sheet of tissue in the path of a self-driving car moving at 60MPH. The lidar will see it as a solid object and might decide a very dangerous plan - maximum braking - is the best plan, when going through it is actually the best plan.
BD Don't
Electronic stability control (standard in US passenger cars since 2012) has already mostly solved that problem.
http://www.safercar.gov/Vehicle+Shoppers/Rollover/Electronic...
Technical users that had never heard of Diceware before, because it's obscure, don't use it :)
(1) Liquidity always dries up prior to the announcements. If you're a market maker, you don't want to get run over by someone moving the price on new information.

(2) It's a myth that raising rates will give the Fed more ammunition. That's like saying you should exercise less now so that if you gain weight in the future you'll be able to make a bigger change in the amount you exercise. (Not the perfect analogy, but I hope you get the idea.) The fallacy comes from thinking that the change in interest rates is what stimulates the economy, not the interest itself.

A second issue with raising rates to 'increase ammunition' is that if you choose a rate path that is too high, you'll depress economic growth, pushing rates down, counteracting your goal of higher rates. Monetary economist Scott Sumner writes: "Fed funds target rate increases tend to reduce the Wicksellian equilibrium interest rate, and hence give them less ammunition for the future. The ECB in 2011 is now the classic example, but you can cite Sweden, or Japan (2000 and 2006) or the US (1937) as well."

Here's a neutral-point-of-view blog post that discusses whether it makes sense to think about rate hikes as 'adding ammunition': http://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/2015/05/small-shoes-and-he...

And here's a blog post that argues that while rate hikes might not give you monetary ammunition, they still might give you reputational ammunition: http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=31361
Hackers Threaten to Shut Down Xbox Live, Playstation Networks This Christmas
For cases such as if the car detects a malfunction, this probably won't be a big deal, but for most extreme situations where a human will need to take over, and that can't be fixed by stopping the car, will a human be able to take over in a timely enough manner to solve the issue? We are often talking split second decisions, and it will involve a human who likely wasn't paying any more attention to the road than a passenger.

Imagine a car where the passenger's side is fully set up to drive, and with the push of a single button, the driver can swap all control to the passenger. I'm having a hard time thinking of situations where this is better than just stopping the car.
"eventually have to start selling you something"

I'm pretty sure they already are. See any ads on Product Hunt? Turns out the entire site is an ad. I wouldn't at all be surprised if companies like Microsoft paid PH to get on the front page.
Not sure how much it will impact startups with saner valuations, but yes I do suspect we might see a unicorn apocalypse at some point in the future.

If it happens it will unroll more slowly than a public market crash since these markets are mostly illiquid and private. What you'll see is former unicorns raising down rounds and a general regression of other valuations in proportion to how over-inflated they might be.

I wonder if it might even help the other "99% of startups" by making their saner valuations seem... well... sane.

Tangential but I've wanted to ask around here for a long time:

WHY would a founder seek such insane valuations? I feel like there must be something I don't get. I understand wanting a higher valuation to raise more money with less dilution to a point, but insane valuations strike me as very dangerous. If these valuations fall then the effect is not terribly unlike a full ratchet and multiple liquidation preference and other founder-hostile terms.

Right? Or am I clueless here?
They don't want to be the next myspace. Keeping it more formal (with real names) seems like a reasonable idea
Meh. If you are really looking for savings, I'm much more in favor of PassiveHaus [1].

To me, minimizing temperature variance is a much more useful goal than say "hey solar!"

[1] http://www.passivhaus.org.uk
> 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?

They try; there are various constraints:

(1) Individual members can't just stick a rider onto a bill, riders are amendments, and are voted on.

(2) Riders are, in effect, a strong-arm negotiation tactic between one house of Congress and the other, or between Congress and the executive -- a gamble that the other side sees the other provisions of the bill as "must pass" enough to accept the added conditions. But those gambles can be wrong, resulting in neither the main bill or the added provision getting passed. So, the biggest incentive to add non-germane riders is to a bill you are less concerned with passing than those you are trying to get to accept the rider as a precondition for the rest of the bill, where them rejecting the rider is more unattractive to them that it is to you. If you really think its a "must pass" bill (rather than just wanting others to think that so that they'll accept the rider), you won't want to risk causing it to fail somewhere in the process because the rider you attached was unacceptable.
> it is completely legal to discriminate based on that.

Unless you're breaking the rehabilitation of offenders law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rehabilitation_of_Offenders_Ac...
Here's one thing I don't get, pardon my fundamental lack of understanding of macroeconomics here.

How is there so much liquidity when fed rates are zero?
Show HN: Better Feature Prioritization Using the Fibonacci Sequence
Configuring multiple USB devices: An alternative to udev