skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
'If you were to come up with a sort of objective zoological IQ based on amount of evolutionary work required to reach a certain level, complexity of brain structures, etc, you might put nematodes at 1, cows at 90, chimps at 99, homo erectus at 99.9, and modern humans at 100. The difference between 99.9 and 100 is the difference between “frequently eaten by lions” and “has to pass anti-poaching laws to prevent all lions from being wiped out”.'

[EDITED: the intended quote is below. the quote above is the next paragraph of OP, which is only slightly less relevant than the intended one]

'Why should we expect this to happen? Multiple reasons. The first is that it happened before. It took evolution twenty million years to go from cows with sharp horns to hominids with sharp spears; it took only a few tens of thousands of years to go from hominids with sharp spears to moderns with nuclear weapons. Almost all of the practically interesting differences in intelligence occur within a tiny window that you could blink and miss.'

Yudkowsky's position paper on this idea explains this in more detail: http://intelligence.org/files/IEM.pdf
> It it was, every pentester in the country is getting way underpaid, because this is not an uncommon pentest finding.

No wonder there's a flourishing (and well paying) blackmarket for vulnerabilities. I wonder how much this keys-to-the-kingdom vuln would be worth (Mitm Instagram, bootstrap a botnet, steal celebrity pics, ... the possibilities are endless)
> Given the fact that dynamic languages (including maligned ones like JS and even PHP) seem to be about as equally successful in terms of shipped software as statically manifest typed languages, whether or not even something like TypeScript is really going to give engineering teams an edge seems like far from a settled question to me

I'm always so frustrated when I read this, because I've worked on a few dynamic language codebases as well as seen a few open source ones on github. Very often I see the pattern of the project contributors losing control over the dynamic language project. They slip up, the tests become insufficient and now they refuse / are afraid to touch critical parts of the code. Soon development slows down to a crawl. Or rather, there are no more changes - only additions / grafts to the existing codebase.

When I first started using TypeScript, I feared that I'm going to lose the benefits of a dynamic language and that I'll have to write a lot more boilerplate. I had no idea how little of that was true. TypeScript really goes out of its way to model as many JS idioms as possible, including some really dynamic ones:

* Structural types are formalized duck type checking. You don't
have to say your object implements an interface: if it has all
the right fields, and they're of the right type, it does. This is
similar to Go interfaces (but a bit more powerful in what it can express).
* Unions types plus type guards can model dynamic function arguments
* Intersection types can model record (object) merging

The entire type system in TypeScript is basically a formalization of the typical duck typing patterns that are common in JavaScript. As a result, TypeScript can model almost any common JS idiom. The loss of expresivity was very minimal - maybe 1% of the most dynamic code only. And even there, you can tell the type system "I know what I'm doing" (cast to `any`), turn it off, do your dynamic stuff and then tell it the resulting types (cast to whatever types are the result before returning).

Given the above, theres been absolutely no doubt in my mind whether TypeScript gave us an edge or not. Its been incomparably better than just plain JS.
https://www.google.com/search?q=futurism&client=safari&rls=e...
Free Online Classes for Student Who Wants to Take a Online Class
Has anyone considered that the slightly longer and forgettable name DuckDuckGo might have something to do with the low mainstream presence? I think they should rebrand and market with duckgo or maybe just duck.com if at all practically possible.
I, for one, am very excited to see that vendoring is leaving its experimental status. I think this is the most noteworthy change in the tooling.
Intelligence Explosion Microeconomics (one Why for Hard Takeoff) [pdf]
It's analogous to downloading the Flash player to see some of the websites around. Once downloaded and used, it makes my system rather bloated and unstable. I rather avoid this if possible.
We have a signed admission from the other side. We have one published conversation log (not from Yudkowsky).
How to rip and convert DVD to Apple TV 3
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10753797
That's really bizarre. I'll have to test it again on my ubuntu box.

Thank you so much for the feedback!
> 2. queries that require Natural Language Processing: Google understands stuff like "the bad moustache guy from XYZ series" where I myself have only a vague idea of what I'm looking for.

I suspect that Google has been trained by a bunch of people who just don't know how to search, and that's why natural language works and the + operator failed. Have a look at Reddit's "Tip of my tongue" subreddit for examples.

https://www.reddit.com/r/tipofmytongue/comments/3xbpmp/tomt_...

Doesn't mention that it's a live action movie; doesn't give any clue about time; doesn't mention that it's (probably) an American film; doesn't mention genre of the movie; etc.

https://www.reddit.com/r/tipofmytongue/comments/3xbpsu/tomts...

It's a pop song. About moving west. Maybe from Georgia.

https://www.reddit.com/r/tipofmytongue/comments/3xbqxu/tomt_...

> I remember this guy who went out to the woods for the day. The guy was pretty young, I want to say late teens. He made some lunch for himself and then got lost on the way back. I found the video on reddit 1 or 2 years ago. The video production style is very Survivorman-esque if that helps at all.

I haven't carefully selected these. I just grabbed a few from New.

About the + operator. Check my math, but only 1 in 600 searches used it correctly. Another 2 in 600 searches used it, but used it incorrectly.

http://insidesearch.blogspot.co.uk/2011/11/search-using-your...

> In the past, we provided users with the “+” operator to help you search for specific terms. However, we found that users typed the “+” operator in less than half a percent of all searches, and two thirds of the time, it was used incorrectly. A couple of weeks ago we removed the “+” operator, encouraging the use of the double quotes, which are more likely to be used correctly.

I'm not sure what DDG is supposed to do here. Are they supposed to target "power users"? People who know what AND and OR and + and "exact phrase" mean? Because that's a niche audience. It would mean DDG is loved by a small group of people, but never breaks into mainstream use.
YTDownloader Chrome Extension – new movie downloader for YouTube
Also known as a bus!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/dec/09/uber-uberh...
Humans are very bad at self improving. Imagine how smart we'd be now if our intelligence had increased at the same rate that computing power increases. Now imagine how fast computing power would've increased if we'd been that smart. Now imagine...
> Wes counters that, "[Alex] never for a second believed I was operating on behalf of Synack"
I'm not sure how Wes knows what is going through the mind of Alex

As blazespin[1] mentioned in this thread, Facebook's own terms states that they only pay individuals. That's how Wes knows - because Facebook's bounty program never deals with companies. The only other explanation would be Alex is ill-informed about the terms of Facebook's bounty program.

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10755746
Valuations are falling. The era of cheap money is over
Big companies desperate for blockchain without Bitcoin is exactly like 1994
> JS is in exactly the same league with Python and Ruby and Perl other similar dynamic languages

There's a big difference to strongly typed dynamic languages that go out of their way to catch programming mistakes at runtime. With JS you get some "wtf" result when things go wrong and it propagates a long way before manifesting (if it's caught at all). Combine with JS's many weird semantics and special cases that are hard to keep in mind at once...

Recent favourite (minimized case after discovering unexpected piles of NaN's in some faraway place)

> parseInt("0")
0
> parseInt("1")
1
> parseInt("2")
2
> ["0", "1", "2"].map(parseInt)
[ 0, NaN, NaN ]
If the intention of a bug bounty program is for white hat disclosure, you have done pretty much everything you can for vulnerabilities to be dealt with a black hat manner.

Well done.
Now try to take a look at some real languages. At the languages with well-defined, simple, orthogonal semantics.

And, no, JavaScript is nowhere near any "powerfull, expressive language". It is embarrasingly low level for a supposedly scripting language and it does not provide any powerful productivity features whatsoever.

JS is also a nightmare for the implementers, it does not have a sane specification, therefore most of the tooling is not comprehensive.
Going to PyPy4 would be nice. But mod_wsgi doesn't support it. It has something to do with PyPy not implementing Python's embedding API I belive.

So I'll be sticking with 2.7 for now.
Have you considered publishing on Steam? Its a good avenue to monetise as well.
Congratulations Jason. it looks awesome and has come a long way in the last year.
I'm not sure I'd go for that TBH. I've seen candidates who are good on paper (one former university lecturer springs to mind) who was incredibly difficult to understand and his experience was irrelevant.

We typically need to hire quickly, and having to wait 2 weeks - and coach someone on all the different components, create accounts for them, etc. - is not "free" for us.

If you're that good you should blaze through the technical questions in half an hour, and give us all confidence we're not wasting each others' time.

Then again you're a freelancer to so it's a bit different to being hired as a contractor/permie. But either way, we want the hiring gap filled, not as something we have to revisit after 2 weeks before we decide whether we have to go back out to market.

Put it this way. You come in for an interview, refuse the tech questions and we're left thinking "this guy looks good on paper, so why doesn't he want to explain what a design pattern is?". Straight after you a guy comes in who answers the technical questions OK. Who do you think we'd hire?
While I'm pretty sure you don't have any bad intentions, you may want to consider how this looks like to someone [paranoid] like me:

- New HN member makes his first post claiming he made a game. He shares only a binary blob, no code. Also he doesn't have a website, or even a gameplay video. On top of that, he shares the game via dropbox.

Would that make you suspicious?

We live in a scary world, not everyone trusts 'by default'. But if you are willing to open source it, feel free to contact me (email is in my profile). I can provide hosting for the website/game.
Why I love Industrious, and about coworking and offices more generally
Agreed. In addition I hope they provide a blog post about best practices w.r.t. vendoring in order to explain the problem and solution in more depth to a wider audience than the initial design doc.
On the other hand, Edge's asm.js implementation is younger than Chrome's but Edge is second fastest in Unity's benchmark while Chrome is third. Chrome's head start hasn't helped it beat Edge in this benchmark.
Isn't that completely crazy? IPv6 has been ready for production use for ... about ten years? And yet, people still build (and ostensibly are willing to buy) products that only exist in order to work around the shortcomings of IPv4?
blog.golang.org does: blog.golang.org/feed.atom

The linked article is part of the "static" documentation set though, which has no feed.

It's not ideal but Github does provide a "releases" feed, though it only links to the tagged commit (it's essentially a feed dump of https://github.com/golang/go/releases) you at least get a notification of new releases: https://github.com/golang/go/releases.atom
Great. Dropbox has disabled your download links because people like your game.
Funny how they would make this claim before Autumn was even over.
And not just logged in. The user also has to have browser sync for passwords enabled.
Would be nice with a low end alternative as well. At the moment I'm running the NAT instance on a t2.micro at $0.013/hour (On demand).
The price of this service starts at $0.045
Fair enough.

I can't get past their brand name. Low latency is one of the biggest challenges in VR, to get below 20ms, and a lot of discussion around latency dominates VR engineering.

Reading your article annoyed me that they come along and declare "zero latency", which is the first thing I scanned the article for - as in, how the hell did they achieve that. Then to discover it's only their brand name and nothing to do with actual performance metrics, which I think could have deserved a mention in your article given the whole buzz and significance around latency in VR discussion.

A poor choice of brand name because it deserves a footnote* whenever it's mentioned!

No harm done. Not an advertorial. Got it.
Currently getting:

Error (429)
This account's links are generating too much traffic and have been temporarily disabled!
I'm not sure if this is really how humans do it. Actually I'm not even sure humans recogise all types of images in the same way. It seems to me that humans use logic in some situations and lower level features in others, or maybe both to some degree.

For instance, imagine a view from a car onto a dark country road ahead, lined with trees. The road bends so you can't see around the corner, but you see a light getting brighter. Humans would conclude that there must be an oncoming car and they would focus on where exactly the headlights appear relative to the middle of the road.

Nothing else in the picture would matter much. The one thing that does matter cannot be concluded from the picture itself. So humans can compress that image as two points (the headlights) and the a line that represents the middle of the road. Pretty good dimensionality reduction I would say.

Machine learning systems can obviously be trained to do something very similar. But my point is that if you take away the situational context necessary for focus, what's left may not tell us much about how humans process images in most cases.

Also, how many examples of car crashes does a machine learning system need in order to recognise where the headlights should definitely not be? How many head-on car crashes do humans need in order to learn from their mistakes? But that's a wholly different subject.

Please don't take this as a criticism of the paper. I haven't (fully) read it and I know next to nothing about random projection. I'm just generally wondering about how lower level features and high level reasoning are interconnected. It doesn't seem to be a one way street (which doesn't necessarily mean that they are on a collision course though).
If you were using an open source framework, the source is available. The minified file is just to save space.
Tesla’s response to hacker who built a self-driving car on his own in a month
> but if it's between "call his boss" and "tell legal that a bounty participant has FUCKING GONE ROGUE WITH ALL OF INSTAGRAM'S CREDS"

False dichotomy - those weren't his only options, had he bothered to think more on it. There was an even better option, which strangely he chose not to take (assume an actual rogue actor got there before Wes and react accordingly: rotate the AWS keys, password reset for affected users, update SSL signing keys).

It bears asking - what exactly was he trying to achieve by calling Wes' boss, and has he achieved it? This is not his brightest moment.
It's fascinating how little we know about anything before the 11k/holocene barrier. There really is a lot of room for interesting things that have escaped our knowledge thus far.

Sibling species or subspecies appear to have been diverse, and another way of thinking of this might be that human genetic diversity was far wider. Even the concept of early civilisations is, I think, not out of the question. Possible relationships between events at that time (eg the great floods) and our mythology give it even more flavour.

This is our real origin story.
Show HN: Emoji Christmas Tree
I've programmed professionally in a visual flow language which supported loops, and you're dead-on about nested loops being the hardest part. My understanding is that the problem is caused by it being hard to think about the actual values on which each component is working.

I have this idea that this problem could be solved with a visual flow language where, at runtime, you could see the collection of all values that each node is emitting during program execution, rather than just the current value. I have not seen that approach in any flow language, so maybe I'll implement this idea in the future as an experiment.
https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright...
Total aside: I have a startup idea to throw a wrench into your accurate depiction of how things currently play out: little guy hires full time lawyer from large pool of unemployed lawyers, suddenly has legal counsel at reasonable (relative) price for extended time. Suddenly little guy has more of a fighting chance to fight back against lawsuit, instead of having to pay out his counsel at $1,000/hr. (He can add a full time yearly lawyer at the clip of every 2 weeks of his adversary's costs)
Interesting idea - I hadn't thought of that. Duly noted.
> I'm going to post anonymously, but even so, I'm afraid I have to disagree with how you're looking at this.

Appreciate your disagreement, but why anon? :-)

> According to the article he made about $750k over four years at Box ($95k/yr salary + $350k in options total), but would have made nearly 60% more, or $1.2M, working for a more firmly established post-IPO tech company during the same time (say $160k/yr base salary + $40k/yr bonuses + $100k/yr in restricted stock).

This was in 2009, when salaries at established companies were not that high. I came from eBay, where neither of the three components were anywhere near what they are today. Also realize that he was in IT, where salaries have never been that good.

> Still wouldn't have been able to buy a Bay Area house (not sure why you suggest it could),

I didn't say 'buy'. Just down payment.

> but he would have had all of the other payouts you listed, with basically no downside risk at all.

I prefer to define "downside" with not just money, but with the whole experience. Defining upside/downside with money builds mercenaries; not missionaries. And in a startup, whatever level one gets in, one should be the latter. If you can't be one, then IBM is a better place to be and to stay at.

If you are primarily focused on monetary payout, you won't be able to do the best work of your life, which is an opportunity a fast-growing organization provides, which nobody else can. And when a 1000 people do the best work of their life, everyone invariably gets rewarded.

At that point, 350K or 500K doesn't matter. What matters, is that you've spent 4 years of your life with incredible people doing incredible work. That will always open far more doors than it'll close.

> Seems like pre-IPO companies like Box are increasingly a bad deal for the employees. I'm genuinely sorry you guys ended up getting the short end of that stick.

That's the point. We didn't get the short end :-) Even Sutton says, that overall he is fine. Because he too, understands that it's about the whole experience and the future credibility. He is just ranting about one piece - viz. mismatched monetary expectations and doesn't want us to generalize.
I'm happy to give you credits to host it on Google Cloud Platform :-)
Shoot me an email campoy@google.com
Drunk+girls+funny+falls+-+YouTube
Your.MD – AI powered health advice in seconds
Nvidia Loses ITC Case Against Samsung, Qualcomm – Market Talk
But we do dominate bears. They continue to exist only at our sufferance; we tolerate them for the most part (though we kill them quickly if they ever threaten us), but we could wipe them out easily if we wanted to. We probably won't do it deliberately, but we drive a number of species to extinction if they're in the way of resource extraction by us - there are estimates that 20% of extant species will go extinct as a result of human activity, and that's with us deliberately trying not to cause extinctions!

(There are more technical arguments that an AI's values would be unlikely to be the complex mismash that human values are, so such an AI would be very unlikely to share our sentimental desire to not make species extinct)
APT tilting train: A laughing stock that changed the world
I can confirm that this works incredibly well. At my previous job, my team was responsible for technical training. So our interview process involved having the interviewee give a 30-minute presentation and teach us (the interviewers) a technical topic. Everyone we hired ended up having stellar job performance.
It's mostly just Unity3d and lots of elbow grease.

I used blender for the 3d objects and animations.

I used inkscape and the gimp for a lot of the texture work.

I used audacity for a lot of the audio work.

I also made my own library for data serialization with generics. It's pretty cool because you can have multiple tables with any data type and it'll just take care of it for you. I'd like to make it able to update to and from a server someday. C# really makes it easy though.

None of the tech is crazy, but you can make the Sistine chapel with mud and a stick if you poke it long enough.
I really recommend you read Bostrom, he really does succinctly argue the relevant positions, if a bit drily.

It's one of those books that put the arguments so clearly you're suddenly catapulted to having a vastly superior knowledge of the subject than someone trying to do simple thought experiments.

Both of your arguments look out-dated if you're one of the people 'in the know'.

Also, I suggest looking a bit more into what's going on in machine learning, it's suddenly got far more sophisticated than I personally realized until a couple of months ago when I was chatting to someone developing in it at the moment.