skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Okay, as expected, Pluto is a very cold rock. No surprise.

What the heck is NASA looking for out there, some evidence of trash left by ET, a big, black, rectangular parallelepiped with some strange audio and electronic signals pointing to Jupiter? Don't think they will find it.

We have to expect that in the universe, both near and far, there are a lot of really cold rocks orbiting a lot of stars, "billions and billions". To get something "curious" on one of those will be really rare.

Want to see what one of the really rare ones looks like? Okay, three guesses, the first two don't count. Hint: Look at where you are standing.

IMHO, NASA needs to find some more important questions to ask.

Mars? Okay, if there is good reason to go to Mars, then, first, do a lot in robotics: Net, send robots that can build a colony, make rocket fuel from whatever is there on Mars, fuel a rocket, sent it back to earth successfully. Iterate several times. Build a bigger and bigger colony that is more and more capable. The colony should be really good, and safe for humans -- food, water, heat, comforts, safety, etc., and a rock solid, highly reliable, very well tested way home. Then test a lot more -- much, much more testing.

Then maybe send some humans.
Breakthrough Material Is a Better Way to Turn CO2 into Clean-Burning Fuel
Theres two components of "display that": process and follow through.

On the first point, we've set up a lot of tools and process to deal with stability, including testing releases against all open source code in existence. It's not perfect, but it does demonstrate commitment.

The second is the actual follow through. Due to said tools, we can calculate exactly how good we've done at it: so far, it's something like 97% of all code that was ever published still builds with 1.5. I'm on mobile so I don't have the real number on me. And that breakage was due to soundness updates, which we introduce over multiple releases, starting with warnings, so there's time to adapt.

Yes, it's early days, but that doesn't mean that you can't say anything.
If you hear an angel/VC saying they're interested in investing in you but they haven't done so within a couple of meetings, politely walk away.

When you're in the seed stage, angels are investing in you and the idea. Some will want to know about traction MRR (walk away)and others will want to do deep-dives of your concept (again, walk away).
As a gun owner, this article is pretty accurate account of why it should fail. The most important thing for a gun is for it to fire when the user wants, everything else is effectively worse than useless. Due to the wide range of operating conditions in which a gun must work, only the most basic of safety measures can be taken (generally a bar preventing the trigger or hammer from moving) to meet this requirement.

As the article states, pretty much the only acceptable way to improve the safety of a gun is to make sure its locked up correctly when not in use. This also has the side benefit of working on all existing guns with a minimum of extra cost to a gun owner. Smarts will add a few hundred dollars at a minimum to a gun design, vs a few 10s of dollars it would be to keep it in a safe along with the rest of the owners collection.

If they really wanted to make things better, they should introduce testing of safes used for gun storage and a set of fines for people selling safes that don't pass the test. A bunch of existing safe vendors attempts at security are worse than useless. See this video of a toddler opening a bunch of gun safes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erGOJxQIf5c It doesn't matter if the toddler was coached to open them, the point is it must be impossible for them to open the safe regardless of conditions. The FCC tests radios (generally through certified third parties), why cant they introduce something similar for gun safes and other gun safety measures?
You could have types
__builtin_type_like_char_that_is_not_char
and
__builtin_type_like_uchar_that_is_not_uchar
Red herring: http://judecnelson.blogspot.com/2014/09/systemd-biggest-fall...

Even without that, systemd is still technically unsound in its design: http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/10/11/0/
Treasure | San Francisco & San Luis Obispo, CA | REMOTE OK

Mobile Android Engineer

Treasure is a funded, mobile ecommerce startup. We have a strong founding team and are looking for an engineer to join us and lead development of our Android application.

Ideal candidate will have shipped at least 2 Android app and have a solid foundation in Java/Android development. You'll be connecting to our (Ruby on Rails) backend, working with payments and APIs, and converting wireframes/designs into working code.
Currently our team is split between San Francisco and San Luis Obispo, CA. We work in Slack and Asana daily. Remote work is definitely ok but we prefer someone in a US time zone.

You can apply via the link below or email me directly (email in profile):
https://treasureapp.recruiterbox.com/jobs/fk0h549/
One nit:

> As for spending on infrastructure - what budgets should we cut to get the funds?

He wasn't proposing cutting budgets to get the funds. He was proposing running increasing deficits to get the funds. While I consider that to be insane, given how far in debt the government is, and while it seems to contradict his first proposal, we still should state his position correctly before pointing out where it's wrong...
gotta take pictures first, don't ya?
No, they usually know other successful people to ask. Those who don't have to "get info from a website".
Exactly. Also noting that there is a similar theme that has gone around in business calling companies stupid for, say, not green lighting computer or idea that "a Wozniak" (he wasn't probably the only one just the one that we know about because of what happened next) showed them and didn't recognize the potential. Could have been the pitch could have been 1000 other reasons. (And of course sure maybe they did miss the opportunity possibly..)
So much incredible information in this document. I think the misstep some Founders make is trying to raise too early. I hear stories all the time about people trying to raise on an idea. And while that can be useful, it is usually the wrong time to go after Investors.

We made this mistake and failed miserably. It was only after we had a beta, some customers, and some press that people started to pay attention. Now we're close to closing our seed round and it's because we had better focus around what we were doing, how we were going to do it, and why it was important.

At the end of the day, a VC is interested in answering one question, "What's the 10x return?" How will you make them lots of money. Unless the pieces are all there to answer that question, Founders will get a lot of no's. The goal should be to go through your pitch deck and find ways to eliminate the ability for VCs/Angels/Investors to say "no."
> It can perhaps work for smaller programs in well-understood domains, and where the overall architecture is clear to everyone, but anything large, novel, or inherently difficult must be designed.

The disciplines of economics and biology might take exception to this.

http://fee.org/freeman/i-pencil/

> Actually, millions of human beings have had a hand in my creation, no one of whom even knows more than a very few of the others. Now, you may say that I go too far in relating the picker of a coffee berry in far off Brazil and food growers elsewhere to my creation; that this is an extreme position. I shall stand by my claim. There isn’t a single person in all these millions, including the president of the pencil company, who contributes more than a tiny, infinitesimal bit of know-how.
These rules are nowhere near as complex as combat rules in AD&D and yet I find my eyes glaze over when reading even clearly well-written summaries. I think the problem is actually that these are actually "combat rules", but they are never explained as such. The combat is between the investor and the investee, in that the investor wants as much as possible for his money under every circumstance, and the investee wants to give as little as possible in every circumstance. Certain important moments and thresholds have become "standard circumstances" over time, and these are basically used to divvy up the battle into bite-sized pieces.

Imagine a variant of D&D where every encounter begins with you and your party naked, and after assessing your enemy you have to negotiate with Elves for your armor and weapons - to be paid for after either winning the battle. (If you lose, you might have to give back your battered armor, and try a different group of Elves). In the best case, if you beat the final Boss (which is always the same, the Grand Vizier of Product Market Fit) then you get to keep like 10% of the treasure and the Elves get 90%.

(You could grind lower level monsters to buy your own armor, but that can take a very long time and it might wear you down until you're no longer fit to be a warrior anymore. The Elves are smart because they risk money (which is replaceable) but not life (which is not).)
Ordos – A Failed Utopia
Don't care about those people. Those are just the one that in the real world never finish a single project because they jerk off too much on the code. Just focus about getting some code working, as long as you're learning you've always room for improvements. You'll make mistakes and you'll get better.
It is my personal opinion, that I expressed in a commentary (definition: an expression of opinions or offering of explanations about an event or situation) section on the internet.
What sort of infrastructure?
I raise you the world almost ending several times.

First, actual launch orders for nuclear weapons that weren't carried out. [0][1]

Bassett immediately ordered the other launch officer, as Bordne remembers it, “to send two airmen over with weapons and shoot the [lieutenant] if he tries to launch without [either] verbal authorization from the ‘senior officer in the field’ or the upgrade to DEFCON 1 by Missile Operations Center.” [1]

Followed by a myriad of false alarms on both sides too numerous to exhaustively list. [2][3][4]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasili_Arkhipov

[1] http://thebulletin.org/okinawa-missiles-october8826

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Soviet_nuclear_false_alar...

[3] http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb371/

[4] http://nuclearfiles.org/menu/key-issues/nuclear-weapons/issu...
Microsoft did not implement them in Visual C and wanted to claim C11 conformity without doing the work, so they bullied it out.
Newly created states each get two senators; if you think that a newly created state will side with yours on many or even just a single significant political issue, there is a political benefit to incorporating new states.

Creating a state is also a one-way transition in the United States; incorporating a territory as a state is a way to ensure that the territory will never be traded away or declared independent.
Show HN: Re:search, Amazon product review search and insights for sellers
> https://github.com/mschultheiss/Charme#why-am-i-not-allowed-...

One 'o' in "lose".
While reading random posts here I realised that there is a slew of people selling stuff on Amazon, relying on customer product reviews as their main source of feedback.

As Amazon does very little to make searching through these reviews friendly I decided to build something to facilitate getting useful info out of product review data.

There is a short video on the [landing page](http://research.oneiros.cc) you can watch in case below is TL:DR.

The basic idea is that you subscribe to products , the app scrapes reviews from Amazon (.com and .co.uk ATM). The user than has the ability to search through the reviews as well as get some basic breakdowns of words and phrases people use as part of positive or negative reviews (courtesy of a basic lexical analysis).

As this is a sort of `alpha` signup is of course free and fast (no email verification ;)), and due to my puny infra each user is limited to five products.

Anyway all feedback is welcome and extremely appreciated.
>>There are men on this earth who have cleaved an entire mountain. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dashrath_Manjhi

But no man has ever built a 747 by himself whether you or i or anyone has believed it or not. Additionally no mountain was cleaved by any man. This man simply spent 22 years digging a hole. This is certainly a plausible feat.

The foundations of your argument rests on the fallacy that anything you believe can become reality. Well. I believe I am right and that you are wrong. Look. Now it's reality.
It's funny. I read this and thought about a meeting with a VC a friend of mine had where the VC Partner was on his phone the whole time. My friend suddenly stopped talking and sat there for a good minute before the VC realized he had stopped. When he asked why he stopped, my friend said that he took the meeting to get his full attention. After a while the VC did it again. My friend closed his laptop and walked out of the building without saying a word. Weeks later they closed their seed round without that firm and now they're growing like crazy. I'm sure that VC Partner is kicking himself for being so inconsiderate.
And the parent thread will?
Did you get a roomba? There are vacuum cleaners out there that warrant a little excitement. :)
No need to apologize, I get where your coming from, good or bad leaders are glorified in some form or another, especially in organized crime.
wealth accumulation at the top necessarily comes from those below them

That's the fixed pie fallacy [1], which is the biggest source of misapprehension in this whole debate.

In a healthy economy, entrepreneurs get rich when their customers get rich, in the form of an improved standard of living.

Apple, Microsoft, Google, Ford, Samsung, Southwest Airlines are all examples of companies that have become successful because they made the lives of ordinary (and in some cases, low-income) people vastly better through, respectively, affordable computers, software, knowledge, cars, phones/televisions and air travel.

In some cases, they enabled many more people to become financially richer too (eg, the many people who now make a very good living writing software).

And that's not to mention the flow on effects like medical discoveries made possible by the use of computers, and lower cost manufacturing parts and processes thanks to the automotive industry that benefit more niche industries.

In all these cases, the income captured by the entrepreneurs is a small fraction of the benefit they deliver to society.

This is not to say that there are no negative effects from the activities of these companies or the related income disparities (job losses, housing affordability, environmental harms, etc).

But this is the key point: attack the negative effects, not the generators of the innovations from which we all benefit.

[1] https://mises.org/library/why-larry-summers-doesn%E2%80%99t-...
There was also the minor point that Larry and Sergey were just a couple of PhD students with no business and no clear path to revenue. Still a gutsy move which many of the current crop of angels and VC would pass on.
AVM FRITZBox: Remote Code Execution via Buffer Overflow
You could just store using offsets instead. You don't have to do sign bit.

2 bit example:

00 => -1
01 => 0
10 => 1
11 => 2

or:
2 bit example:

00 => -2
01 => -1
10 => 0
11 => 1

This even wrapsaround naturally.
Wow, that may really work for a sec, enough to get lost.
Is it better to fully qualify structs and unions or to hide their names by typedefs? I frequently see people hide all struct types because it's visual clutter and extra typing.
In other words, given some struct a, should I do:
typedef struct a a_t;

I realize this is a bit of a style question, but I'm curious.
Or even null pointer dereferences to wake you up to the fact that you have a problem.
VerbalExpressions: Regular Expressions with Normal Words
This is just click bait opinion and speculation.
*She
I can grep for -----BEGIN and find a few public keys and certificates, I doubt they're part of the program (but they might be, as I said I don't really know) http://i.imgur.com/IXgkWNu.png
some TLDs (mostly ccTLDs) have onerous ownership requirements, it might be easier in that case to just have ann agreement to let it be dormant, given whatever circumstances.
>>Meanwhile, the theoretical market cap of all current private-market unicorns ($300-$500Bn, depending on the source)

I am sure there are many unicorns that are overhyped and are going to fail.
The 300Bn is same as market cap of Facebook. If one invested in every one of Unicorns at current market, I think its most likely they will make profit on the investment.

Don't forget everyone thought FB was Way over valued when MSFT invest at 15Bn valuation.
Interesting, I never thought about this. Ants can know what to do next without to think, they just continue what was done by another ant.

In some way this article remember me that, in software, if we have continuos delivery, where we can see the current state of a software, we can be the next ant ant produce better product, like an ant seeing what was done by other ant, and continuing.

Software is abstract. It's a lot more easy to continue, like being the next ant, when you see the automated tests and the result of an hot deploy, these are fast feedbacks.

PS: Why people are feeling offended?
Object Pascal turns up in all kinds of places. WHATWG (https://whatwg.org/) wrote their Wattsi build tool in Pascal:

https://github.com/whatwg/wattsi
Hasn't 'twenty-something', in the popular vernacular usage, already taken on the meaning of a distinct life phase (not quite adult, not still adolescent)?
List of recent deep reinforcement learning papers
Apparently it is of interest to the audience!
I can think of a variety of behavioral things that might help:

* walk quickly, don't look lost

* keep your head up

* brief eye contact with people you see/pass

but honestly, 99% of not being accosted is being male, so it's impossible to tell what really works.
Relevant...

RSA Animate: The surprising truth about what motivates us

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc
Thank you! Your point about "starting from small numbers" is something else I was considering -- obviously increasing from $1/week to $10/week of revenue over the course of three months is not that impressive, despite being a 20%/week growth rate!

I wonder if a good way to explain this would be via examples of (starting point, growth rate, duration) tuples and an "interesting" / "not interesting" assessment for each. (Can YC publish anonymized data on its portfolio companies?) This would allow readers to look for an example which roughly matches their performance -- which may sound silly to people in the valley who are surrounded by startups all day long, but there are a lot of us outside of the valley who rarely meet anyone working for a startup and never see any sort of concrete numbers like these.

I absolutely agree about keeping the guide short though -- this is more a matter of something I'd like to see you (or someone else at YC) write more about in the future.
Which is useful for early prototyping I guess, but does it have any way of interfacing to non-HDMI screens? You wouldn't want to use HDMI for a product, and even for DIY hobbyist stuff it's probably not ideal; small HDMI screens with touch are exotic, expensive, and not all that small.
> The domain is currently registered in the name of X.Org Foundation LLC, which the foundation dissolved when forming the 501(c)3 organization.

How is it even vaguely possible that there's no paperwork assigning all assets of X.Org Foundation LLC to the 501(c)(3)?

Where is the lawyer who handled this for them?
Note this is just a way to convert CO2 into liquid fuel. Its not perpetual motion - it takes about as much energy to create this clean-burning(?!) fuel as it produces. But if clean electricity is used, then the net cycle is CO2 neutral.
I agree with this so much. For me, I was getting so many people hitting me with different advice. Don't include this in your pitch deck. Ask for less money. Don't reach out without an intro. It's tough to know who to listen to. However, the best advice will come from yourself and just putting yourself out there. I met with some really cool VC folks who gave me great feedback. I think the best feedback I got (and would equally give) is to have a thick skin. This is your baby, but if you can't take honest criticism then you're in the wrong business. People may not like what you are doing, but as long as your open minded enough to listen to the feedback and take it to heart, you're doing the right thing.
Which is also why it's a good place for people to critique your opinion. On that note, I believe you are invoking a fallacy by the name of "I'm entitled to my opinion".
Yeah, you're right: https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=alloca&apropos=0&s...

The "machine dependent" reason is out of date though.
The set of requirements to raise a seed round changes as the set of requirements to launch, test and validate an idea changes.

Money from seed rounds in the past would be usually spent in infrastructure and distribution. With cloud providers and app stores that part of equation got changed, so some ideas (not all) can be validated on the cheap. (I believe even one of your examples, Google, existed as a proof of concept product called Backrub, working on Stanford network, before the incorporation event took place).

Another point is that investors judge the pitch by the quality of other pitches they heard this day/week/month/year. If you browse AngelList, there are companies raising seed rounds with a functional team, a built-out product, traction and a plan to scale. If someone comes right after them and tries to raise a similar round with nothing but a Powerpoint deck, they will be (even subconsciously) compared against the others.
Do Good Microservices Architectures Spell the Death of the ESB?
Absolutely. Habits are hard to quit. For me, it's the "time to spend" habit. I put off making a big purchase, but once I do (say, building a home theater system or something) it becomes easy to just keep spending on it because you've already mentally committed to the project. All fine and good so far. But then you notice something else you 'need' or that's wearing out, and you buy that without thinking about it. Then you buy another thing without thinking about it, because you're in the habit. Sometimes you need to do a spending detox after those splurges.
> However real black and white photos represent the actual intensity of the light waves

No. Black and white negatives represent the intensity of the light (possibly with some lens filters in between) multiplied by some light frequency sensitivity distribution of the film, under some nonlinear time/intensity response function composed with another nonlinear time/chemical strength/exposure function from the chemical development of the negative.

Then to get from negative to print, black and white photos undergo another pair of multiparameter nonlinear functions (representing the exposure and chemical development process), possibly including intentional manipulation by a human operator.

Depending on the film, filters, development process, and printing techniques used, this can be relatively close or quite far from a naively converted 3-channel color picture.

For details cf. for example Ansel Adams’s books The Negative and The Print.
You haven't described what being an adult means to you. If I understood correctly, you are saying the "adult"hood is a feeling that you know when you have it ?
I don't know where this thinking gets us. My computer, once I disconnect it from the internet, is actually a finite state machine and not a Turing machine, which I think you acknowledge. How does that help with anything?

If my program uses one kebibyte of memory -- no I/O and harddrive, then it loops or halts within 2^(2^10) steps. For me to detect that, in general I need to store a history of length 2^(2^10), which is more than 10^300. That's 10^301 bytes that I need to detect if a 1kb RAM program loops.