skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I like Stylebot more. It integrates into the webpage better, so you can have live previews, and right click on an element to style in [0], and for basic changes (such as hiding elements) you can avoid touching CSS at all.

[0] Of course, it just takes its best guess as to which possible selector you really want to style when you do it this way.
Springer Textbooks More Than 10 Years Old Available for Free Legal Download
Completely subjective here but no Go would not be better. Java has generics. Java has more support, more tooling and Android's existing eco system is fully mature. If they started out from scratch it would result in worse language with less tooling and a smaller ecosystem.
Frontier of Physics: Interactive Map
I was born in 1990, started using the Internet at around age 5 with Windows 95. I don't remember life without it. I remember using Encarta, and playing Oregon Trail, and AOL's program. Those are my first memories of the Internet and Computing in general.
I've always found the best way to learn a new technology in general is to have a problem to solve with it.

Instead of trying to learn Postgres itself, try to do the following:

1) Get it installed and running

2) Write a schema for something (blog, billing system). Look through Postgres's documentation on types.

3) Get a role created for accessing the schema and update the hba config file to let your user access the schema from whatever servers you need to.

Postgres is pretty well documented, google "Postgres Whatever" will usually bring you to a postgres documentation page, for instance to understand the types 'Postgres data types' first result is: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.4/static/datatype.html
And just to save others some time, "declaring code" is defined in this footnote:

'Every package consists of two types of source code— what the parties call (1)declaring code; and (2) implementing code. Declaring code is the expression that identifies the prewritten function and is sometimes referred to as the "declaration" or "header." As the district court explained, the "main point is that this header line of code introduces the method body and specifies very precisely the inputs, name and other functionality." Id. at 979-80. The expressions used by the programmer from the declaring code command the computer to execute the associated implementing code, which gives the computer the step-by-step instructions for carrying out the declared function.'
there's a lot of people who objected to adding "class" syntax to Javascript purely for this reason. Javascript objects are not the same things as Python (or Smalltalk) objects, they don't work the same way and were never intended to.

There is a good case to be made that Smalltalk-type OO with multiple inheritance (like Python) is a bad thing. Javascript's type of OO is a good way of avoiding that bad thing.

I agree that elegance is purely subjective, and if you choose not to find javascript elegant because it lacks a certain "python-ness" then that's entirely your decision. However I would encourage you to expand your horizons a bit and stretch your understanding a little more.
Developers of open source software may be compensated by employment, contract, donations, sponsorship, and even social standing. Moreover, they benefit from having free access to the tools of a highly lucrative field. Everybody's got to get paid, and free software's “culture" hardly stands in the way.
> Cosmologists are people who publish papers that can't be tested

Once again you are wrong. Mather, Smoot, Perlmutter, and Riess are all cosmologists. Their Nobel prizes were awarded for results in cosmology.

Your idiosyncratic redefinition of the word "cosmology" is completely at odds with how the word is used in the physics community.
That its largely a symptom of credit card companies not giving a darn about security or their customers.

I get more upset by the companies getting hacked once their negligent practices come to light.
There is no technological equivalent for a dog's nose in reliability, form factor, and cost. That, and a Boston Dynamics type robot probably costs several orders of magnitude more than training a dog/trainer pair, and is much less flexible.

Amusing note: at least for ATF, all arson/explosives detection dogs are dropouts from the seeing eye dog training programs (too energetic). Source: relative was involved with the program.
Savestates for Rollercoaster Tycoon 1 and 2 are RLE. Makes sense as a savestate is one fixed sized/positioned datastructure with many runs of null bytes.

Doesn't fit the "a lot" usecase, but I wanted to at least give one real world example ;)
Apparently a lumper wrote TFA, while splitters wrote the equivalent meta-pages:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mergism

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Separatism
Aside from the different "tipping" services, is there a way open source authors and maintainers can raise funds without doing crowdfunding? Something that let's them sell something to raise funds like when schools sell chocolates? (:
WebAssembly announce:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9732827
oh! yeah I use \x only in situations when it wraps, so \x auto fits the bill.
Some scientific terms are too deep to directly describe them in layman's terms in a reasonable number of words.

Also, what one reader calls a layman's explanation another calls gobbledygook.

That's one of the reasons for inventing hypertext. For example, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemannian_manifold has a nice introduction paragraph, but it presupposes quite a bit of knowledge. If you want to know more, feel free to click some links to learn more.

And yes, things probably aren't presented in a way that is optimal for _your_ learning, but there is no way to do that for every reader.
Just curious, what qualifies it as Native?
A good way to start is to check up on your open issues across all projects: https://github.com/issues

Many of the responses I get are like https://github.com/bruderstein/nppPluginManager/issues/1

The most negative one I got was being told that "time doesn't fix issues, work does" - which is pretty fair.

The most helpful response is something like https://github.com/asb/raspi-config/issues/57. Yes, I could be more tactful but it was never my strong point.
Well, I did say I wish they "could".
Edit: The Rockwool didn't substitute fiberglass -- inner walls are normally not insulated, they're just made of 2x4s with sheetrock on top. I could probably have saved some money by just using regular fiberglass in all inner walls.
Why not a hybrid drive train like the volt. So you run the gas engine to recharge in safe areas and run on batteries in quiet areas?

Also moderns cars seem extremely quiet. Why can't they apply similar silencing here?
Why didn't they look at fuel cells?
Makes me think about the "for dummies" series of books.
I think it was more for the practical research rather than actual use. Human response, movement tests, acceptable noise levels etc. All of that is very valuable in of itself.
Municipal Fiber is a solution looking for a problem. The overwhelming trend is toward mobile. Many people, particularly lower income people, have a smart phone but no computer. At the same time, municipal Fiber is incredibly expensive. Chatanooga spent $330 million plus on their network, to wire up about 71,000 subscribers. Plus, maintenance of that infrastructure is very expensive. Given that most states and municipalities are broke, and have neglected crucial electric and water infrastructure that already exists, they can't afford to take on the cost of a Fiber network.
So why didn't they go this direction at the start?
This is my new habit.
I always open an organization first.

First, it's easier for people to contribute when something is associated with an organization, they feel the credit is more evenly distributed, it's also easier to just leave since someone can jump in with no URL changes. Easier on the users, easier on the contributors. Win
http://intermezzos.github.io/book/ explains. We are sharing the "get into long mode" code, but after that, will diverge. Phil's tutorial is directly resposible for getting me back into OS dev.
What does it feel like being the CEO of a startup?
A country cannot have a widely distrusted currency for long, because everyone will do as you say (exchange away).This causes capital flight, so the gov't introduces capital controls shortly thereafter.

So the only way to do as you say is to be (far) more prescient than your peers. You need to be far more prescient because you have to beat the gov't insiders too.

Also, prescience does not save your future earnings (I.e. after controls have been imposed)

Or you take a risk and use the black market
Rumprun already has Rust support.
Ok, we'll follow suit.
Does this sound logical to you though? In 2009? You're saying that the software wasn't available online? The call center had to make a "call" to the SAS system? Could be true but sounds bizarre.
I'm dealing with this at work in an odd way. The users of the product are machines, as it is a predictive inference system. Humans will never directly interact with the product. So if you think about it, the input data is the user in my group's case.

Due to the failure in recognizing this twist the decision was made to have a very restricted way of representing features (metadata). The concepts in code base are all linked by the restrictions. There have been a few painful refactorings in the past year, and I don't see an end to it unless those restrictions are removed. So this phrase extends well to systems without human users.

Although like others I do agree that "bad product design" is probably a better term, but "conceptual debt" sounds more sophisticated.
I could have been clearer. I meant they could pull the electric motor out of the dirt bike and put it into the robot.
Free monads are very much `initial'. Compare the final approach: http://okmij.org/ftp/tagless-final/course/
Urban planners want us to live more densely and "efficiently." My primary response: Fix the noise problems. Then we can talk.

Absolutely. It's not a small problem or minor inconvenience. I once got home to my flat after work to find that my downstairs neighbours had come round and aggressively criticised my then-girlfriend for the noise we'd been making walking around the previous night... when we were staying with family 50 miles away. The noise was bad enough that normally pleasant people had apparently been very much not pleasant, and it was carrying across multiple homes such that they couldn't even tell who it was that was keeping them up all night. (Spoiler: It turned out to be the flat adjacent to ours on the same level, where the thin carpets originally installed had been replaced by otherwise attractive wood flooring.)
We are all very friendly with each other, and hang out in our IRCs, and #rust-osdev. I expect the situation to be better for all of us, as we can cross-pollinate, and improve each other's work. Ecosystems can be better than single monolithic projects.

There are a LOT of decisions that can go into making an OS. The compare/contrast in a few years should be really interesting.
I want to say I know the pain of vendor lock-in. We use an open source PaaS solution and it works well for the most part but the solution doesn't really scale the way I want it to be, and doesn't provide all the utility I consider to be crucial for a successful PaaS. Whether moving away from it has always been an interesting discussion at work. So I and my collagues are careful now with what to include in our technology stack pofotilo. I can't just have someone randomly decide to add a Redis to the dependency when the purpose is just a key-value store for some trivial task.

Anyway, the problem started with bad management to be honest, which I don't think my case is too rare to hear. When the first project rolled in, we ran PaaS on a single provider, but more projects joined, it was time to choose another vendor because of better equipment and better deals. Yet, none of them really provide good resiliency.

With the third vendor probably around 12-18 physical servers were purchased and managed by the vendor. It was openstack. That version of OpenStack at the time was not compatible with AWS, which later becomes our 4th vendor, and runs our dev environment. You want to run additional performance testing, well, we can't get the same elasticity as AWS because we only have so many physical servers to provision VMs, but that's where our real data lives. So we had to do our QA on AWS and doing the data copy can take a whole business day. The script we wrote for Amazon doesn't work on OpenStack. Security, network, I/O metrics are not consistent across vendors. That adds complexity to code. I know exactly how to abstract things, but just trust me :-) it really makes code hard to maintain, and really painful to integrate with multiple vendors. As a matter of fact, I don't like working with AWS API (with boto) myself because API response formats are inconsistent!

Finally, we got rid of one of them, then two and finally we are on the final stage of consolidating everything on AWS and focus on infrastructure automation and lower the number of chores.

Like many projects out there, things usually start out real nice, but then once you get too busy fighting fire here and there, you will accumulate some debts. If one is not careful, the debt can backfire and we had our lessons. There is no resiliency in most of the other vendors because they require you to purchase more servers and they themselves have hard time to go true elasticity. AWS, at least, for the most part, doesn't run out of instance availability that often (it happened a few times to our EMR processing). I do have some issues with AWS myself, but so far, AWS seems to be the only true cloud provider you can hang on to for several years.

Before building a grand multi-vendor infrastructure, build on a single-vendor well, then decide on the next step.
The thing is that I went to a decent (~ top 50) university. Recruiters that end up contacting me usually start off with that; upon clarifying that I didn't actually graduate, things go downhill from there. I'm not sure how much good said projects do for me as it would require people to at least give them a look. If people contacted me with my projects foremost on their impression of me, perhaps it would be a different story.

I've considered removing the year range that I spent at uni, or at least making it clear that I don't, in fact, have a degree.
Yep. To paraphrase Freud, sometimes a game is just a game.
Looking forward to reading these patents to learn their cutting-edge blockchain implementation for making a $1 overdraft accrue $35 in fees.
On the whole this is useful, although I think it's a little unfair to Theano in places.

* Performance

I feel they should score separately here for compilation/startup time vs runtime. Theano's compilation step can be slow the first time around. (In my personal experience not enough to add significant friction at development time, but YMMV -- I hear it can struggle with some more complex architectures like deep stacked RNNs.)

Its compilation process gives some unique advantages though --
for example it can generate and compile custom kernels for fused elementwise operations, which can give speed advantages at runtime that aren't achievable via a simple stacking of layers with pre-canned kernels. Some of its graph optimisations are pretty useful too. In short smarter compilation can save you from having to implement your own kernels to achieve good performance on non-standard architectures. If you're doing research that can matter.

* Architecture

The architecture of Theano's main public API is clean and elegant IMO, which is what matters most.

When it comes to extensibility, firstly you don't need to go implement custom Ops very often, certainly not as often as you might implement a custom Layer in Torch. That's because Theano ships with lots of fundamental tensor operations that you can compose, and a compiler that can optimise the resulting graph well.

About the idea that it's hacky that "the whole code base is Python where C/CUDA code is packaged as Python string": if you want to generate new CUDA kernels programatically then you're going to want to use some high-level language to do it. As stated Theano gets some unique advantages from being able to do this. At some conceptual cost I'm sure it'd be possible to handle this code generation in a slightly cleaner way, but I don't really see anyone else in this area doing it significantly better, so I think given the constraints it's a bit subjective and slightly unfair to call it "hacky".

I also think it's something that matters more for framework developers than users. In my experience, on the relatively rare situations where you do need to implement a custom Op, it's usually as a performance optimisation and you can get away with something relatively simple and problem-specific, essentially a thin python wrapper around some fixed kernel code.

The CGT project (which seems to be aiming for a better Theano) has some valid and more detailed criticism of the architecture of the compiler, which I think is fairer: http://rll.berkeley.edu/cgt/#whynottheano

I'm also hoping in due course that Tensorflow will come closer to parity with some of Theano's compiler smarts, at which point I'll be eager to switch as Tensorflow has some other advantages, multi-GPU for one.
I can recommend this book as well. I don't write a lot of Java, but this is great for the general topic.
The trademark is orthogonal to the license and its patent grant. Why would Google be particularly concerned whether they can call what they ship "OpenJDK"?
How to systematically test startup ideas?
33 yo. I'm software developer. In my free time I think about startup ideas, since I've always wanted to be an entrepreneur but I've never been brave enough to start a company.

I have a list of about 50 startup ideas. Now it's time to start a company, but I need a method to test the different ideas (all/most of them are likely to result to be very bad).

Possible methods: thinking about them deeply, looking for the competence, setting up a landing page to see if people is keen on them,...

But since there are about 50 ideas I wonder if you have any "systematic" methods to check startup ideas. Or what methods do you use to decide whether start working on a determinate idea is worth the time or not. I'm working and I have to take care of my family, so I don't have much time. Of course launching a startup is very risky, but I would like to start with an idea that at least has been checked.

Thanky you!
Michael Burry, the Inspiration for the Big Short, Says Tech Needs to Be Careful
Two things that Etymotics earphones cannot block: the sounds of your own mouth (like chewing) which are greatly increased by plugging your ears, and the scratching sounds of the earphones own wires, especially on the ER4 with the twisted wires that rub together.
The American standard is logical: command and "and" are interchangeable:

"A and B and C"

"A, B, C"

"A, B and C"

The Oxford style is inconsistently, doubling up command and "and" in the last item.

This is silliness. There are two styles because English grammar is a not a precisely logical formal language.
Neither side is wrong; English is ambiguous.
Any examples of who's currently doing this well in Silicon Valley?
While it looks like a nice exercise in front end JS, and looks cool, does it solve any problems? Do users actually need some more abstraction layers on top of Google Drive / Dropbx, etc? Either I am getting too sleepy, or they didn't provide any actual use cases in the homepage.

It provides some sort of API ("simple, modilarized and flexible JavaScript APIs so you can easily make changes, extend functionality and create applications") but is it just a new look for single page applications?

I am not trying to be cynical or anything, just curious :)
I haven't read these papers (thanks for the links!) but there has been one major recent improvement. Starting with Broadwell (and I presume continuing with Skylake), the CPU can now handle two page misses in parallel: http://www.anandtech.com/show/8355/intel-broadwell-architect...

The other interesting thing is that page walks themselves are actually not very expensive: something on the order of 10 cycles. They only become painfully expensive when the page table is too large to fit in cache, and spills into memory, necessitating a load from memory just to get the page table. So improvements in memory (and cache) latency will have strong positive effect.
Is software really worth that much? I mean, its intrinsic value to society? It's normally used as the backdrop to a business process, wasting time or sharing cat pics, or some such thing, but really, a $51Billion valuation?

Why can't we put a clamp on the problem of every random developer thinking they've created something that lasts a few minutes and has more value than most small countries make in a year?

The entire system of copyright and software licensing needs to be abolished, and any software that is written instantly becomes the public domain. This would do away with many industries that serve almost no purpose for society, other than to attempt to extract value where no value has been created.

The conventional way for developers to make money should come from becoming thought leaders on Twitter or maybe playing a few shows down at the bar.
Someone smarter than me, please explain: are they seriously just trying to patent bitcoin, which already exists? Or are they inventing new ideas that can be done with blockchain technology?
There's no other way to "reproduce an API" in Java than to copy the names of methods, classes, interfaces, and packages verbatim. Otherwise, it would not be a compatible API.
Tertiary symbolism in Byzantine erotica?
Managing China's economy becomes ever more difficult
Reminds me of something I saw way back in the late '90s called MyWebOS, which looked cool but never caught on.

Also, I see the Internet has unleashed its usual brand of stupidity on the demo. There are files in the shared directory with names like "Got any good porn.txt" and "dicksmoker.odoc".
Very nice, although it must have been a lot of work for uncertain benefits.

It also reminds to what eyeOS (http://eyeos.com) were doing a few years ago.
Very impressive. Looks like my debian desktop.
Maybe, maybe not. I still believe in single-vendor approach, perphas because in my view I am either going for AWS or GCE.

There is so much to with than just be able to spin up an VM and then run Ansible/Chef/Puppet on it. Heck I can write all of that in Fabric. There is no direct connect on Digital Ocean. I am not sure how you set up VPN with Digital Ocean or Linode. We use cloudformation on AWS, and I am pretty sure there is no such thing on Linode or Digital Ocean. Exception and response codes different across providers. Able to reproduce an environment from scratch is important to us, and of course, we try to do that in stages. I own a DO box myself, and that box turns out to be really slow in the NY region (where I live), maybe I am just an lucky bastard.

But to be honest, did you really build your entire infrastructure in three vendors to begin with? What are your reasons to really build on Linode, Digital Ocean and Vultr? How do you copy your data across environments? Are you splitting dev/qa/ci/sandbox/stage/prod?
They're not "copying the OpenJDK API".

They're changing the Android Java runtime to actually use OpenJDK rather than its own proprietary implementation of the Java APIs.

Which is, perhaps, all that Oracle wanted all along.

Ater all, everybody wins from this.

- Android developers get up-to-date Java APIs that aren't years behind other Java platforms.

- Google gets to spend its engineering resources on things that matter specifically to Android rather than endlessly duplicating, and playing catch-up, to the OpenJDK platform.

- And Oracle gets a major industry player behind Java rather than fragmenting it and creating a slightly-incompatible variant.
I like the lawyer one better, because if you wanted to, you could actually color it, but not really for the fortran.