skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"Most people think of the parking brake as an emergency brake for some reason"

Some car manuals actually labeled it "emergency brake".
This is a momentous day for VR lovers!
And it looks like Mac hardware (even with bootcamp) is not supported either, so I do too.
VAT is based on the buyer's country for digital goods/services [1], and in other cases (such as this) if the sales exceed 100 000 EUR per year. [2][3] In some countries, like Finland, the limit is even lower at 35 000 EUR per year. [4] So if Oculus expects to sell more than 50 copies of the Rift to Finland, it will have to pay the Finnish VAT.

Also, Luxembourg's VAT is 17% nowadays. [5]

[1] https://kdp.amazon.com/help?topicId=A30464Q6OVH578

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_value_added_tax...

[3] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/vat-what-to-do-if-youre-an-overs...

[4] http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resources/documents/tax...

[5] http://www.vatlive.com/european-news/luxembourg-vat-rise-17-...
Would love to see the studies you reference.

I'd wager a guess that in some cases prices would rise when private enterprise take over because the government run enterprises are operating at a loss and making up the difference with taxpayer dollars (Amtrak).
Might be a small amount of profit in someone finding DK1-backers who have gotten out of VR and don't want a CV1 and buying their free devices off of them.
I did a poor job of providing examples of religious behavior, but as history shows people can believe and behave in a religious manner about most anything. Including self-driving cars.

I took a comparative world religion a long time ago; I can't easily find the handy behavior list we had to memorize. We were taught something vaguely Mandaville-ian, I don't know if that outlook is still current and cool, but at least you can find Mandaville's opinion in the wikipedia. The "aspects" section of the wikipedia religion article would be a good start.

Shared faith based belief in the inevitability of some rather objectively unrealistic future outcome, in this case "We're all gonna use self driving cars", critically based solely on faith. A mythology, using the "a story that is important for the group whether or not it is objectively or provably true" wiki definition, where progress has always happened in the past and therefore will always happen in the future, when reality is progress only comes from obtaining and using energy, and our petroleum is running out while our population expands, so you do the math on the realistic future trajectory of progress, furthermore there's no question in the religion about the narrative that progress necessarily automatically equals self driving cars, instead of "busses and trains and subways" or not commuting at all or whatever. There's a fair amount of superstition involved aka everything the general public or journalists say about anything technical, legal, or economic WRT the topic of self driving cars, they're just making unreasoned noises at each other. Its always accompanied by extensive and exhaustive ethical baggage, in this case about preferred lifestyles, the value of work, urban planning, as if the self driving car is actually important relative to VPN deployment or subsidized public transit or star trek style transporters, yet despite its irrelevance there's a great pile of associated ethical baggage and related extreme judgment. There's a strong self policing society, where certain aspects of the religion are strongly amplified via endless ceremonial repetition, and the not-devout-enough are tossed out or punished via ridicule or otherwise.

Note that you can discuss self driving cars in non-religious ways, much as you can scientifically study aspects of a religion. That doesn't mean the adherents are not thinking/believing, communicating, and organizing in a religious style or manner, that just means you looked at them from a non-religious perspective.

Some historical religions being a little hard to believe in the modern scientific world, doesn't mean all religions are false; quite possibly we will have self driving cars in the future. That future success won't be a disproof of past observational behavior, under the "walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it IS a duck" doctrine of what is a religion. Praying to each other for deliverance in the form of a self driving car won't bring it here any faster, but if it does somehow arrive anyway, the physical manifestation of that idol/miracle doesn't prove the praying was the cause of the effect/idol/miracle.
Pedestrians on the sidewalk want the car not run them over to avoid killing the Customer.
Windows 10 Now Active on over 200M Devices
Reminds me of the "invisible dragon in my garage" analogy from http://lesswrong.com/lw/i4/belief_in_belief/ :

> But now suppose that we say to the claimant, "Okay, we'll visit the garage and see if we can hear heavy breathing," and the claimant quickly says no, it's an inaudible dragon. We propose to measure carbon dioxide in the air, and the claimant says the dragon does not breathe. We propose to toss a bag of flour into the air to see if it outlines an invisible dragon, and the claimant immediately says, "The dragon is permeable to flour."
A Web Comic Aggregator – In Less Then 76k
When I had my first daughter, unplanned, when I was 23, I didn't quite understand the gravity of what had happened. I'm only 36. I'm in the best shape of my life (although RA is constantly trying to steal that away) and my daughter is excelling at a ton of activities. It's a ton of fun to watch her grow. We have recently adopted a newborn, and I'm looking forward to starting the experience again while multitasking a much older child at the same time.

I have a work from home job with a low stress company, doing complicated, but not overwhelming or ground breaking, work. I live in a small city with a decent cost of living. I get paid decently... One of the big three offered me a significant amount more than what I am making now, and felt comfortable rejecting the offer.

My goals have been simplified down to making sure that I do right by my children. Watching them succeed is #1. Me not being there because I'm trying to run a business or getting overworked by one of the big three is not going to do her any favors. I make more than enough to pay for lessons for whatever she wants to do, and still be able to make sure my wife and I can retire. I would rather sit down with her and discuss life and its myriad positives and negatives than chase money. Or play video games with her, or an instrument, or make sure I make her parent teacher conference.

It took a bit of meditation to actually convince myself that the money and recognition pipe dream just didn't have the same value as her success, and it really helped me understand my father who was a welder, putting so much focus into my siblings to try to make sure we succeed -- why he sold his business and took a job where he would have a steady income in exchange for the joy he took working long hours, but having complete control over his work. And he did take joy in it, I totally get it. I now understand the sacrifice. When he sees his children attaining success, he is overjoyed.

My children are my monument. Their grand adventure is mine.
I don't think the suburbs are killable. If there was a mass migration towards city centers, then rents would get even higher than they are now, the prices of homes in the 'burbs would fall. The suburbs wouldn't die, they would just be filled with people that can't afford to live close in.

I don't really see a big tension between city and suburb dwellers. I think they mostly just look for different things in their lives. At least for me, I live in the suburbs because I enjoy it more, not because there's any big problem with the city. I like having a big garden, I like having a couple of chickens, I like space between me an my neighbors (even though I get along great with them), and I like living close to work. A few years ago, we built an outdoor kitchen and there's pretty much nothing I enjoy more than sitting back there at the start and end of my day. This year my wife is building me a workshop behind our house that I'm excited about.

If I lived in the city, my life would be different, not necessarily worse.
But amazing for music because latency doesn't matter.
More interesting than the attack itself is their overall effort of combining formal verification with protocol implementation. Along the way, they've found all these problems in the other protocols because they didn't use such rigorous methods. Quite an argument in favor of using high assurance techniques for at least critical, slow-changing protocols like TLS.

Anyway, I found this paper...

http://www.ieee-security.org/TC/SP2015/papers-archived/6949a...

...that reminds me of older, high assurance designs. The classic way to do it is the so-called abstract or interacting state machine models. Each component is a state-machine where you know every successful or failure state that can happen plus argument security is maintained. Then, you compose these in a semi-functional way to describe overall system. Seems the miTLS people did something similar for theirs that they call "composite, state machines." The result was clean implementation and verification of what got really messy in other protocol engines. Plus, new techniques for handling that of course.

Really good stuff. Worth extending and improving in new projects.
Sounds like being treated like a school kid to me
Is it P2P? Secure cloud storage, movies, music streaming, and grid computing?
OK, I believe you, though I don't know any of the details. It's an important misunderstanding to prevent, though. In this case, including enough of the details to make the comment substantive would probably have been enough to clarify your intent as well.

you could have made the comment more substantive in a way that was clearly not a personal attack, and that would have solved the problem.
I think you are right vis-a-vis the article...but maybe the author does have a point that "Uber, Kickstarter, Airbnb, and the rest" could be disrupted through decentralization making the centralized services obsolete?

Example, I have an underutilized asset I want to leverage in the "sharing economy", say a house I want to rent. As long as the end user trusts the transaction is legit, which I think could be achieved through a decentralized system, I don't need the "tools" of these centralized services.
Themes in SaaS in ’16
Mike Brown: Obvious attempt at snark is obvious.

No it wouldn't suggest there are 200,000 earth sized planets in the outer solar system. Don't be absurd. The situation does seem reminiscent of how Clyde Tombaugh discovered Pluto (accidentally discovered a massive (compared to other nearby objects) outer solar system object in the Lowell Observatory telescope's tiny tiny field of view, no computer help either), but while it is possible that thousands of Kuiper Belt objects on the scale of Pluto exist (we've only discovered three or four so far because they would be so difficult to detect), hundreds of thousands of earth sized planets would have already collapsed gravitationally. Don't be absurd.
And this is exactly the difference between Scrum and Kanban. Scrum fixes the time periods and allows for adjusting scope, by cutting stories and features. Kanban fixes the scope while allowing the time period to be open-ended. Which methodology is more appropriate depends on which constraint a business wants or needs to optimize for.
I am trying to think of a way to prove without a doubt that the earth is not flat. I thought about sending them into space, and having them look through a window at the round earth suspended in the black. But then I almost know what they would say; the window is somehow distorting the true appearance of the earth. If it doesn't conform to their view, they will create reasons as to why. There are so many similar examples of people rejecting new information/evidence within our world now.
Which of your behaviors should we protect you from? You know, as a society.
"It's not a dragon, it's a basilisk"
I find these people particularly interesting, not because of the absurdity of their belief, but because of the certainty they have in their belief and how difficult it is to convince them otherwise.

The article points out that "many Americans" hold some kind of wacky belief and strongly resist attempts to challenge it: vaccines cause autism, global warming isn't real, the moon landing was faked, the earth is 6,000 years old, dinosaurs drowned in the Great Flood, ghosts are real, etc...

So rather than the Flat Earthers being anomalies, I actually think they represent the general public quite well; it's just that their crazy belief is different from mine or yours.

What I am really curious about is: what would it take to successfully convince one of these people that they are wrong? Because if you solve this problem, then you solve the problem in its generality, and you can apply the technique to the vast number of people who still believe the earth was literally created in 7 days.

My best guess? Ask them, "What would it take to convince you otherwise?" The problem isn't that most people are incapable of learning the truth — it's that they don't want to learn the truth. Take for instance someone who believes dinosaur bones were planted in the earth by the devil. I have a hard time imagining that if you handheld them and took them step-by-step through the scientific method (e.g., starting with archaeological sites), that by the end of a year's worth of research, they would still disagree with the mainstream scientific view.

And that's the cool thing about science: you don't have to take anyone's word for it! You can check what people are saying all by yourself. Go out there with ice core machines, thermometers, and satellites, and trace through the same steps that the climate experts have taken. After years of following their own work for yourself, there's no way you couldn't believe in global warming.

I think what it really comes down to is that most people would rather live with a comforting or reassuring lie than an uncomfortable truth, and even given the opportunity and resources for discovering the truth themselves, they would prefer not to.
Xamarin Starter Edition is free. There are some tough app size restrictions but apparently they want developers to at least be able to kick the tires!

https://xamarin.com/starter
I left the NSA a few months ago largely for these reasons. While I knew I personally couldn't do much (if anything) to stem the onslaught against human rights, I knew at the very least I didn't want my life's work contributing to it. So I left, leaving behind a very secure sysadmin position with good salary, six weeks of paid vacation and incredible health benefits. Now I'm a 1099 independent contractor for a financial services company with zero job security. But the freedom of burden on my conscience has been worth it.
HN is a strange forum, where ostensibly intelligent people will post uninformed, sensationalistic comments despite the presence of multiple earlier comments in the same thread by better-informed people explaining things clearly. To wit: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10848716

(While I am not sure it nails all the nuances exactly, especially around the distinction between web and language APIs, it is an infinitely better account of the situation than what I've seen in any tech media so far. Golly, I wonder why.)

Of course, it doesn't help that the better informed comment is also down-voted, making it harder to find.
Why don't they all just get together and walk over to the edge of the planet and see if there is a cliff or not. Seems like a really easy "theory" to prove. A coupe hundred people walking together while live blogging there attempt to the world should be save from secret NASA police.
Government Named Top U.S. Problem for Second Straight Year
The reference you give isn't for computer vision by the way. The ImageNet project isn't for image recognition. It's for a curated database of images which researchers can use to train algorithms or do other image based research. The error rate shown in the graph on that story (which you submitted) does not show computer vision image recognition error rate and %. It shows the number of errors in their own database which is human curated. In other words, right now if they have 1,000,000 images of cheesecake, and someone searches for cheesecake, and looks at the top 5 results they get, ~96.5% of the time the image will actually be cheesecake.

Having worked on a rather large, and well funded, computer vision project for one of the largest companies in the valley, I can safely say a few things. First, ImageNet database is very good and useful for image research. If you are going to be training an algorithm and need millions of well curate images, they are one nice place to go. Second, we are no where near approaching a 0% error margin on computer vision. Third, AI is certainly a thing and should be watched. It's neat and computer vision is one very neat and highly useful aspect of it. But please do not for a second believe that in 2016 a computer will be able to look at any random image of anything and actually know what it is.
The NYPL has posted metatdata about these collections on GitHub as well

https://github.com/NYPL-publicdomain/data-and-utilities
russjones is the author of this piece.
"'npm' is not in the npm registry" when trying to install it.
How to be a Programmer by Robert L Read
Mike, I'm going to say that you can continuously improve and upgrade your career, you can't say the same about your wife and kids. So, it's more important to date and look for a wife early, while with your professional career you have all the time you need.

From your name, I'm going to guess you're Jewish, so you would have had even harder of a search, if you wanted to marry someone Jewish, than if you did not have this additional filter. So, don't worry... you've succeeded in choosing your wife, starting a family, and now you have plenty of time to keep improving in your career. Consider the opportunity cost of doing the reverse - career first, then kids.
I'm a little confused. We have self-driving cars. Of course there are still corner cases and bugs and regulatory issues, but cars have driven for fair distances on existing roads without a human driving. I had assumed, therefore, that the point @VLM was making was that, like self-driving cars, we already have AI by many of the standards of earlier AI researchers (the "when it works, it's not called AI any longer" argument).
For $20 it is impressive - the problem is when it's $120 and "required" for 13-14 year olds of all income levels.
Can it play "drugwars"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drugwars
It's been edited.

Edit: In fact it's been removed.
"The biggest problem I see with gambling is that the Pareto effect shows an ugly face there: often it's just economically feasible for the operator because of the addicts."

I'm addicted to Hackernews. Does the fact that it's a free site make the operator any less responsible?

How about we just make everyone personally responsible for their own actions. Gambling addicts can just block the website.

Bartenders have a responsibility not because of addiction, but because someone could actually kill themselves or others when they are too drunk.

I also don't see the medical marijuana dispensaries responsibly for people that ruin their lives due to MJ addiction (yes, I know that it's not chemically addictive, but like gambling, you can get addicted to it).
I literally feel sorry for you, not in an unfriendly way, that you haven't seen the right demo yet and can't share the insane excitement that I have for this technology.

This is the FIRST consumer release! This is the Palm Pilot 1 of VR.

Yes most of the content right now is mediocre but there are some mindblowing experiences too.

For instance Elite Dangerous + DK2 + Motion Sim.

It literally feels like you are piloting a craft in outer space.

Here's a demo - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqr8ee7GORY

I have a similar rig and I literally have to fight off the skeptics / marginally interested after they try it.

The "strap on a clumsy" headset part is going to go away quickly. Every sensor in there is being miniaturized by the day. Magic Leap (and others) are using tricks to project imagery directly onto your retina. The form factor will wind up wireless, probably look similar to google glass.

Oculus + 3D audio + input + eventual tactical is going to completely blur the lines of reality in ways we can't yet imagine - gaming, training, social interaction, SEX, therapy, etc, etc - it's all going to be different in 10 years because of VR.

I believe that being a student of VR at this point, which I believe will be the top mechanism to consume content in the future, is akin to being an early iphone dev.

Plus gave me a good excuse to order the CV1 :)
Reinforcement learning isn't magic pixie dust that suddenly solves AI.

One thing we often do is assume for some compact subproblem that AI will offer massive optimizations relative to our current human baseline. However it often turns out that engineers have spent enough time to do a good enough job that the relative improvement is either not existant or small when focused on optimizing subcomponents of a system. With your video game reference there are some games that q learning does better than humans and others that does worse. For the factory floor I know data scientists and industrial engineers run optimizations to increase productivity and reduce costs. With their constraints it becomes hard or impossible for any algorithm to find a much more optimal solution especially when their problem is convex where the human generated solution is provably globally optimal.
The real question for me is:

What is motivating otherwise very intelligent people to promote the idea that AI will take all our jobs and/or enslave us?

Possible answers:

1) To prop up their investments in AI to get higher valuation.

2) To reach a political goal, such as basic income, which is often justified as necessary in a world where computers and robots take over the work force.

3) ?
> what would've happened had they waited, say, two years to release. Suddenly, the cost (of both the device and of the desktop PC) go way down.

When is this not the case? Two years into the future, hardware will be vastly cheaper /in two more years/
I absolutely agree. Quebec City is far and away the most European city in North America.
> There are certainly some external penalties, but what really keeps me up at night is the fact that past performance is a huge indicator for future performance.

It keeps me up at night too. But fuck that thought. If it's true, then I may as well go and kill myself now, and spare world the carbon I'll waste living. Faith in man's capacity for improvement is what's keeping me functioning.
TL;DR version = new tech is superior, not always better in the artistic sense and not always worth it in the trust and make, do, build sense.
I do agree---I'd rather have the family.

I'm not Jewish, but your comments stand all the same. Thanks for the kind words.
Startups Squandering Millions on Advisory Boards
Yea must p2p if it's grid computing.
Same (49, freelance).
Dodecahedron Desk Calendar for 2016 in LaTeX
So how does this explain anywhere how to evolve the architecture then?
Kids today.

In the late 1990s-early 2000s a decent gaming PC would cost you between $2500 and $3500, and those numbers represented more money than they do today.

A "very high end computer by today's standard", when it comes to games, would have a GPU that's substantially faster than what Oculus is requiring ... I find their requirement shockingly low and wonder if that is a tactical mistake.
Crowded 4-6 story buildings in nice styles.
$399 should be an all-in-one price anyway. Not going to be mainstream till 2017-18 even but we'll see some nice kiosks and promotional booths in businesses.
More efficient in the case of my one, which is a few years old now.
Who is to say xe didn't buy a bunch of it at $1 and sell it off, making millions, when it hit $200-$300?