skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
No one said this is a rule but you.

Why? Because of the UX. It completely breaks the creative workflow if you have to save two [or several] versions of an image and switch to another app to compose them together to see an effect applied locally. And then go back and repeat, if the strength is not to your liking.

Besides, Gimp doesn't support floating point image editing, so there is a also data loss involved if you use this app for compositing your RAW samples.
Krita & Natron seem the only alternatives on Linux unless I miss something.
On OSX, you could use Krita, DaVinci Resolve, Fusion, or Natron. Or pay for Photoshop.
In any case, switching apps sucks. :]

DT's authors understood this and added support for masks and module instancing. Plus a ton of blend modes.
That's what sets DT apart from the competition when it comes to 'how' you work.
As for the 'what': there is very little that the toolset of DT leaves to be desired. Even for professionals. :)
If you think your options will be worthless at time 0, why would you join the company?

The right mindset IMO is to only join a company you think will make it big but be prepared to accept fate if it doesn't and your options are made worthless.
For LZ algorithms, the dictionary made when compressing the first version would be reused for subsequent "versions" of the same document. So sort of a static dictionary, but specialized for what you're sending.

That or maybe he means the Huffman codes, in which case you'd do the same thing but s/LZ/Huffman/ s/dictionary/tree/g.

I tend to favor algorithms like LZF and LZ4 that don't have a separate dictionary for compressing text though, since there's just about no performance loss on either end and compression is "good enough".
From who? Dial-up SLIP/PPP and ISDN could hardly be considered competitive with a DOCSIS product. The market is far more competitive now, with increased FTTP deployments and advanced wireless.
SerialUSB – a cheap USB proxy for input devices
Arthur Ganson, Metaphysics in Motion
The Space Shuttle was supposed to be reusable and cheap, too. Originally, there were supposed to be 100 flights per shuttle, or about 400 for the program. There were 135, and two shuttles blew up and were replaced. Turnaround time was supposed to be about two weeks; in practice it took months. Each launch ended up costing about $600 million.

Space-X says they hope to reuse maybe 75% of a booster. Boosters probably go back to the plant to be rebuilt, not to the pad to be launched again.

Rockets have been mass produced before. Thousands of ICBMs were produced on assembly lines.

The tyranny of the rocket equation still applies. Spacecraft are almost all fuel mass (85-95%), and can't be built with the robustness level of commercial aircraft, which are only 40% fuel at takeoff. Fuels can't get any better; liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen is as good as it gets. Unless and until we get fission or fusion propulsion, space launches will be a marginal technology.

The Apollo program originally included a nuclear-powered upper stage. It's too bad that never launched. Nuclear rocket engines have been built and ground tested, but they're rather messy.
Comparing Germany vs USA, from the hip, the two biggest differences are voter enfranchisement and form of elections.

#1 The USA (mostly) requires voters be "registered" prior to voting. Whereas most modern democracies like Germany have universal registration.

#2 USA (mostly) uses first past the post (aka winner takes all) whereas a quick googling suggests Germany uses proportional representation. So in the USA, when 50% + 1 is a victory, every vote counts.

Consequently, voter registration and get out the vote (GOTV) have become central to campaigns in the USA. Also called ballot chasing.

These quirks (and others) in USA elections have created a campaigning arms race, leading to ever more costly elections.
Personally I wouldn't want to work for an employer who'd retroactively change my performance reviews.

On the other hand, working for AWS is hardly any sort of panacea. Initially it'll feel good to be out of your current situation, but there's a reason why Amazon burns through so many people - and as a Seattleite, I've heard lots of bad stories. I suggest you consider other options assuming you can hold things together until hiring starts again Jan/Feb.
> altruism is perfectly at home with modern evolutionary theory

To add to your point, which I'm sure is in reference to macro-level phenomenon such as the interdependence of species, symbiosis, ecosystem complexity and the like, it's important to note that multi-cellular organisms are the epitome of individuals (cells) working for the greater good rather than local self-interest. Eons ago single cells started working together and specializing. White blood cells, neural cells and muscle cells don't compete against each other, much less is there white blood cell on white blood cell competition. When cells behavior breaks from the greater good, we call it cancer.

A perfect example of pure self interest is the virus.

Interesting that many people do consider capitalism akin to cancer, or that it behaves virally.
Do you realize the vast majority of apps out in the real world have no tests at all?
They had the deck stacked against them. For Hillary both 2008 and 2016 the attitude is of "elections are just some formality nuisance"
Signez posted it before you did—note that the item ID is earlier. The timestamp is later because we re-upped the post; we try to privilege the first submitter when we do that. You can see the original timestamp on https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=Signez and most other pages that list a story. For a detailed description of all this, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10705926 and the links there.

Better duplicate management is something we're working on. Keep in mind, though, that HN doesn't consider a post a duplicate until the story has had significant discussion. Otherwise too many good stories would go unnoticed.
They were never seen as "having" the presidency. Hillary was seen as "inevitable" in two elections now, and lost the first.
SpaceX has done a fantastic job, but that still doesn't diminish what was achieved by those that went before them many years ago, or change the fact that they stand on the shoulders of giants.
If this had been true then Netflix should have been digitizing analog sources dynamically, which would be all over the news. So I doubt Netflix does that, they only can use as much bandwidth as there is in their sources.
According to the machinability ratings [1], Inconel 700 is rated at 0.09 (less is harder) and Inconel 702 at 0.11, while most of the Titanium alloys are above 0.15. There's a single Titanium alloy family (MST) in the table that is just as hard to machine as Inconel 700.

So, you're technically correct: generally, they are on the same scale. And your argument about ignitability is certainly true.

1. http://www.quakerchem.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/skill_build...
> (note: I'm from Germany, where politicians aren't totally crazy)

Well you know, except that one time...
مرجان هایی که نابود شدند و می شوند
It's a different experience, for sure, but not necessarily an easier one. Common perception is that founder CEO's call all the shots like some third world dictator whose word is law and cannot even be questioned. Well, appearances can be deceiving. I went from undergrad to CEO of a startup that my best friend and I founded. I very much had a boss: our lead investor who settled in as Chairman of the Board and unleashed his domineering personality to run rampant on our weekly management calls. I had an extreme amount of pressure from him to hit deadlines and hold ourselves accountable to our excel projections (which, like most early startup projections, were pretty useless to begin with). Over time, as success bought some freedom from the board and investors, a few of our most important anchor clients filled their role instead. I would spend months feeling like a certain VP or SVP at a make-or-break client for us was basically calling the shots in large areas of my life. In hindsight what we were lacking was real mentorship, management guidance, and similar help, (unfortunately) none of which were included with capital from our investors. We figured it out as we went along while taking flack from all sides. Only later when we were acquired and I had a ''normal'' boss with a ''normal'' p&l, career oriented direct reports, etc, did I realize how different it is, in some ways worse but in some ways much better. It was a heck of a lot more predictable and less stressful. I didn't have to pull any rabbits out of hats I just had to wander over to the rabbit cage and feed them. But, without a doubt, experiencing the whole cycle made me a better founder down the road.
Depending on which streaming service you use, possibly a non-issue when you can simply cache whatever music you want for offline access.
Show HN: A lightweight percentage calculator to query in human language
how about {x,k,l}ubuntu?
I heard about a friend of mine complaining he couldn't get the right percentage value out of his phone's calculator, while working in a patisserie.

He doesn't get how to compute percentages.

Thus I coded a little (nice?) one, targeted for his phone with very low resolution/crappy display.

Maybe someone might find it useful (though I don't think so, really)
> but is isn't like they are going to allow everyone else on the planet to start using their technology

I don't understand. Did the Apollo program do that? Did it even intended to? NASA is a government agency, so I guess you can tell that "people", and more accurately american citizens, own it, but isn't it a bit abstract?

For the common Joe, NASA and SpaceX are two organizations that are just as opaque and difficult to join or "own".

There really is not as much difference as you seem to think, and I don't get why only Apollo 11 could be an "event for all mankind". Also SpaceX certainly is the "realization of a dream", at the very least of Musk's dream.
Progress: Progress Bar Library for Crystal
F2 for rename is a Windows idiom - as is the slow double click mentioned in the article. I'd be surprised if F2 didn't work, given the way Cinnamon apes Windows idioms.

(Not that that is a bad thing. I use Cinnamon by choice on Ubuntu 14.04 in my day job. I far prefer Windows idioms to the Mac conventions that much of Unity is aiming for.)
Ask HN: Useful web tools to build expressly to demo programming abilities?
I'm a programmer in finance looking to transition to web apps. I'd like to build a few web-based tools which I would make free and open-source. I've come up with a list of things including stock screeners and retirement savings calculators.

Is there anything I can build that you'd find useful or that you would recommend as a good portfolio piece?
> Right

If you want to deny reality, that's your business. See the other HN thread for a couple examples.

> elaborate

I'll just point out that this is yet another reply where you have talked about everything except the point about Facebook's power to manipulate people. I have better things to do than be pulled into increasingly off-topic, delusional nonsense.
Born what way? (serious question — "born the kind of person who thrives in a successful culture"? Seems a bit tautological / vague)
Open Conversations: An Evening with Union Square Ventures
ChromeOS is the best :p
I thought Microsoft had gotten over their tendency to execute anything executable that gets anywhere near a Windows machine. Apparently not.
So if he's stepped down from and away from (almost) all his responsibilities as CEO...

I'm left wondering - "Why do you still need your own Executive Admin"?
The timeline:

1934: This is predicted
1997: This is done http://www.nytimes.com/1997/09/16/science/scientists-use-light-to-create-particles.html
2014: We will "demonstrate the feat within the next 12 months"
2015: Didn't bother
> 1. If consensus parameters cannot be voted on then Bitcoin is a failure, and Core's huge war against upstarts like XT and BU are totally misplaced (since as you say they cannot be changed by vote)

Eagerly awaiting a substantive response to this by maaku.

However I disagree with the BU proposition that unrestrained "voting" on max blocksize is a good idea. It doesn't stand up to attacks by a small amount of hash power.
The majority of users already pull the top bitrate. The lower bitrates are only used by mobile clients and users on very bad connections.
This is one of the main things I test when doing application security assessments.

I look at the various clients/interfaces and test each of them to see how their controls compare. It's quite often that certain clients or interfaces have far less security on them than others because it simply isn't convenient.

One example would be two-factor on a VPS administration page. It's on the main site, but if you download the mobile app it's password only.

Which means...it's password only (assuming you know how to use a proxy like Burp).

So important to ensure that all interfaces to your app have the same minimum requirements for security.
Pardon me for any confusion, I'm often reminded of this quote: "Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor illis." I'm new to all of this, but still humbly learning and building.

If modern machine learning models are better for every application, then that's most likely what we'll support. I think symbolic AI still holds some merit when thinking about how to interact with traditional physical interfaces, no? There seems to be a complement in the methods when considering a full stack thinking and acting approach, but perhaps I'm being naive.

For example, if I'm a robot in the world, it would be easy for me to access interface knowledge, and how I could interact with it to complete my task, without needing to reason what the interface does or is. This gives me a basic understanding or knowledge base. Now if there is a higher level method of thinking that produces ingenuity, and as a result a more efficient method for solving a known problem, then I assert more modern techniques can be used to adjust older symbolic representations.

I'm just imagining how an android/autonomous agent would need to operate in the real world, perhaps akin to how we might perceive and function within it, a posse ad esse.

Also I use 'agents' because I am going back through older research and it seems to fit the description of the entities involved (software, hardware, robots, devices, people). I don't see any reason for some of the vocabulary or terms to have fallen out of favor.

In a world of autonomous intelligent multi-agent systems, there is a market for knowledge representation about the world, how to complete tasks, as well as higher level thinking/reasoning functions, et cetera.
A locked-down machine running Outlook?!
It's my go-to and I can't remember ever having a problem.
>Space-X says they hope to reuse maybe 75% of a booster. Boosters probably go back to the plant to be rebuilt, not to the pad to be launched again.

They plan to reuse the entire booster, only refuel will be is necessary.
I've used FastCustomer in the past successfully. It's a mobile app that calls customer service numbers and connects you after waiting in a queue.
I imagine this would still be useful if compilers like Haskell can produce intermediate code for what's described in the book. Not sure if they do but I have an academic paper that created a G-machine to Forth (CPU) compiler for embedded Haskell. Made me think there was a G-machine output option.

Point being, plenty one can contribute to FP in terms of safety, performance, integration, and so on just knowing backends. Esp if more people do FP CPU's.
As impressive as the landing is, it won't yet make as dramatic a cost difference as people think. The problem is that there are a bunch of cost and performance multipliers that are easy to overlook.

1. Only a portion of the rocket is reusable, you still pay full price for the upper stage.

2. The part that is reusable has to be built better to survive multiple uses and needs to have extra equipment for recovery, so it's more expensive.

3. The performance of the reusable pieces is compromised due to the extra weight of the fuel and equipment for recovery.

4. There are still refurbishment costs after every flight, presumably we will know soon how significant these are.

5. You lose economies of scale in making the boosters since you make fewer of them.

Overall I would expect that with all of these together you'll see maybe a 30% total cost reduction. A lot of these same arguments were made about shuttle costs and reusability, and it didn't pan out. SpaceX certainly can and has learned from that failure, but many of the basic mathematical realities still apply.
+1 for terminology. Fast even on the cubieboard that I (also) run it under, and somehow, in my opinion, it does font spacing really well even under Ubuntu. Better than the standard terminal in both Unity and (especially) Gnome where kerning can be weird even on mono font.
This is really cool, but it's also almost 10 years old... Is that a problem, or is it still up-to-date?
wifi range of "up to 300 feet" seems a bit limited at the quoted 20mph... all of the videos consist of the plane circling around the pilot.
Hopefully you still like it when it evolves into Chromandroid
I'd be a lot more excited about Lighting Mightwork if there were one, 1, ONE merchant accepting GreenAddress.

From a user perspective, the benefits of GreenAddress were similar (instant confirmation), and the hurdles to adoption were actually lower.

GreenAddress and Lightning each require both sides -- sender and receiver -- to use something different, and more complex, than a regular bitcoin transaction.

They both have to restart with 0 network effect.

GreenAddress never got anywhere with users. Why will Lightning be any different? Because bitcoin itself won't work very well anymore?
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/mozilla.dev.fxos/EO_8sEMMSAw...
Is there any fee/commission for Swish?
If there is not, was that a voluntary choice by the banks, or a regulator's requirement?
Or, you know, a lot of companies are offering alternative choices besides calling them, but it seems few people avail of them

So yeah, I understand why they might want to increase attrition for things like frequently asked questions that are on the website and other simple operations.
Digging through the links on the page leads to http://gimx.fr/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page which is an unbelievably cool open-hardware project for controller compatibility.
Yeah, and allow government, secret services, police and the NSA to track your entire life. Fuck that, I'm sticking with cash.
It's the proportionality constant between rest mass and energy. Mass times speed squared has units of energy. Same thing for the pc term: momentum times speed is energy.

To explain how we figured out the constant is c is a bit more complicated. The wiki article Introduction to Special Relativity is a good way to start if you want to understand everything well.
It's an escape hatch. If they block outright, then if they block outright and are wrong, a legitimate user cannot see content that they have a right to. If they use a redirect, then a user - legitimate or illegitimate - can bypass that block, but they have to explicitly take action to. Consequences are on them, then.

Remember that Google's mission is to "organize the world's information and make it uniformly accessible and useful". Their purpose is not to block the content at all - if it were up to only Google, they wouldn't have either a block or a redirection, you'd just be able to access the content. The country redirects are the result of a negotiation with the country, where Google says "Okay, if we did this, would it be acceptable" and the government says "No, too permissive" and then Google says "Okay, what if we did this?" and then finally the government says "Alright."
I think your argument makes no sense. I am all for helping people etc, but just because Facebook is rich by your definition, the poor people are not entitled to its money. FB will do what is needed to promote its self interest and in that process some (supposedly poor) people get some amount of free internet, its not such an evil thing, though, if it turns to be an evil thing in the long run, it could be regulated in the future. I see arguments about net neutraility though, but I dont understand/see the solution, if FB cancels this, there is no free wikipedia to the masses (which is horrible).
We are delving into the realm of philosophy of the mind, and even epistemology, but what makes you think even human beings have what you call "agency" (which I think you are using as a stand-in for free-will)?

Common-sensical free-will is a nonsensical concept. We don't make decisions based on a roll of the dice[0]. We decide to do things for reasons, because justifications. We come up with a list of options, we weight those options by how well we predict they will fulfill our goals, and we take the action which bubbles to the top. Free will, which again is what I think you are calling agency, is merely what it feels like from the inside to make a choice based on a fully deterministic utility calculation. You can program a computer to do the same.

Now the difference is that our value system is hideously complex and highly interconnected, and the vast majority of it is not accessible to conscious introspection. When we say "I chose that because it felt right" we are saying "my insanely complex value system, which I have little insight into, assigned highest weight to that option."

A program, on the other hand, can be written with a very simple and straightforward goal system: maximize advertising revenue; maximize account value; maximize paperclip production. It has agency, as the word is typically used, to accomplish those goals.

Such a program would be simple-minded, but not stupid. It would be highly intelligent about how it goes about accomplishing its goals, but it would never question why it is working towards those goals and whether it should pick new goals. That's not part of its program, nor something which it would choose to do as it is trivial to show that changing to new goals leads to not working towards the old goals.

Now with all that out of the way, can you see how it can be said that the behavior of the simple program is restricted to those actions which it best feels accomplish its simple goals? Certainly the program could be wrong on occasion, but it will always take actions which it thinks will best achieve its goals with the limited information and processing power available to it.

[0] unless we previously committed to physically rolling dice and accepting the outcome, in which case how did we choose to do that?
The entire story seems kind of ridiculous. Given the descriptions, we're talking about an access control bug. Calling it a "firewall failure" makes it sound ridiculous, and I agree that it shades everything under a nefarious tone. But since campaigns are chock full of lawyers, they might be using it in a legal sense, referring to a "Chinese wall" [1] that prevents certain communications to avoid conflict of interests. Unless access logs show that the Sanders campaign decided to suck up everything, it's hard to argue that the DNC didn't massively overreact here.

Whatever the case, what confuses me are the suggestions that these sorts of breaches are common and that they have been for some time. What the hell are these software vendors doing? Access control is nothing new. And while getting it right isn't always easy, there's no reason for you to continuously get it wrong, either. It's also really easy to test, comparatively speaking, because potential issues here are predictable.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_wall
John Cage: How to Get Started (2010) [pdf]
To get around the paywall, tap the "web" link under the article title, then go through to the first result
https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse/ALO_Custom... mentions that order type.