skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Over 40 years you get quote a bit of dollar cost averaging going on which helps returns significantly. Including dividends 4.5% after inflation. Though fees may easily reduce that to under 4% for many people.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollar_cost_averaging

The real issue is you need solid returns the first few years of retirement or your going to draw down a lot of capital.
This comment reminded me of this bill burr clip

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hitc8haEu_g
Time to start playing with Angular 2.0
> swarm methodologies are about empowering individual agents with intelligence and information

man, it is gold. Sounds like a great pitch to lure into the swarm... Yet it is completely contradictory. Swarm is called swarm because it consists of insects. For swarm intelligence to work, individual intelligence must be dumpened, almost turned off, and the information dispensed to an individual must be minimal to avoid his/her swerving off its prescribed course of action that the intermediate or global plan/context may be heavily depended upon. It is like with a bricklayer or a soldier on the mission - him seeing and thus possibly trying to optimize the global plan especially by altering his mission/plan or its place/time inside the larger may affect his carrying over of the mission or the bricklaying scheme and thus endanger the bigger context.

>Isn't this only a problem because the "local context" is limited?

it isn't a problem. It is a feature.

>Humans can handle really large "local contexts"

not really. This is why we have abstraction process.
Netflix's async sendfile now in FreeBSD-current
That's a 'couch explorer' way of doing it - explore as long as you sleep in your bed at the end of the adventure. There are very many people that would go without the need for a way home. And that would be a heck of a lot cheaper.
Here, try this other slackcat.

https://github.com/skattyadz/slackcat

tail -F logfile | grep --line-buffered -v '^\s*$' | slackcat
Hell, even if they called themselves something completely different... that'd still be a valuable asset.
The "(verb)" and "(noun)" actually make it less clear, by the way.
Here is something in C99 that seems like a great idea and improvement and is often lauded, yet turns out to be ... meh: designated initializers. Sure, these address problems like the wrong function pointer being assigned when the positional order is wrong: the programmer version of buttoning up your shirt wrong. These things are even Torvalds-approved and used in the Linux kernel (whose compilation will complain, if you mix declarations and statements, that they are not a C90 feature!!!)

But here is the thing: all the initialization comes from the initializer, not from the struct type, and the only default value you get is the good old 0 (0 integer, 0.0 floating point, null pointer). So, if you want any other default, designated initializers are basically useless.

The designers of a data type want to provide initialization mechanisms with defaults which they control from the site of the definition of the type. We can do that in C90 with macros. Macros ensure that everything is initialized. If we add a member that must be initialized with a non-default value everywhere, we add a parameter to the macro, and the compiler will catch all the places where the macro is called with the old number of parameters.

struct foo {
char *name;
int bogosity;
};

#define foo_anon_init(bogosity) { "anon", bogosity }
#define foo_init(name, bogosity) { name, bogosity }

You provide all the variants in one place which do all the forms of defaulting which you need, and which stick the parameters into the correct place, and then just use them everywhere else.

Even if you have designed initializers, it's still good idea to wrap initialization that way; they don't replace its benefits.

Suppose I add a frobosity member, and there is no obvious way to default it. All the places where the structure is instantiated have to be analyzed case by case to choose the appropriate value. Designated initializers (alone) won't help; we add the member to the struct and nothing happens. It defaults to zero everywhere it is not explicitly mentioned with a designated or positional initializer. With the macros we just add it as a parameter:

struct foo {
char *name;
int bogosity, frobosity;
};

#define foo_anon_init(bogosity, frobosity) \
{ "anon", bogosity, frobosity }
#define foo_init(name, bogosity, frobosity) \
{ name, bogosity, frobosity }

Now "make -k" and fix all the places where the macros are called with too few arguments, choosing a value for the frobosity.

With designated initializers we can of course do:

#define foo_anon_init(bogosity, frobosity) \
{ .name = "anon", .bogosity = bogosity, \
.frobosity = frobosity }

But that brings very little to the table when we've gathered all this stuff in one place (which alone reduces mistakes) and we are initializing every member to a nonzero value.

Languages that have keyword initializers are great when the class supplies defaults for all the ones that the constructor doesn't specify.

(make-instance 'foo :frobosity 42) ;; 50 other slots defaulted for us

If you want to change a default, you don't want to go to all the places where the type is instantiated and update the initializer!!!
Your variable my_string is a pointer to a constant string.

char * my_string

It must be a
const char * my_string
You can still assign a different string to that, as my_string is not const.

For my_string to be const, you'd have to use
char * const my_string

Now the location pointed to by my_string is writable but I cannot change the location.

To make it entirely unmodifiable, you'd use
const char * const my_string.

On the other hand, it might make more sense to use an array here.

const char my_string[] = "hello";
Here is one nice example of something that I'm unlikely to forget any time soon:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCO%E2%80%93Linux_controversie...

Note that Gates was still very much involved in Microsoft at that time.
oh Man, that show was brilliant. I am eagerly waiting for the next season.
What's nice about doomsaying is when you're wrong no one cares and when you're right that one time, you get that useless fleeting feeling of self-satisfaction
Twitter User Nero Unverified for “Policy Violations”
Show accelerating growth. Focus on that.
Multilinear Algebra and Applications [pdf]
It’s 2016, and the Promise of the Internet Is Dead
> but C++ aims to be a safer (higher level) C, at no runtime cost. I think it mostly succeeds at this.

No, it doesn't succeed at this at all. Large C++ codebases routinely suffer from the same problems that C does.

For proof, search the CVE lists for browser vulnerabilities.
Slides from a presentation about async sendfile can be found at: http://www.slideshare.net/facepalmtarbz2/new-sendfile-in-eng...
Given that it's at Network Solutions, I'm surprised they haven't been able to finagle a renewal. Based on the age of the domain, they probably simply never moved the domain to another registrar once the opportunity was available.
You may be interested, if you're not familiar, with The Retuses, a Moscow-area band that has used Esenin's poems as the basis for several songs. Unfortunately, they were never recorded as part of an album, but many recordings are present on Youtube. Some are better than others, and the recording for Письмо к женщине is particularly well done: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYgcUfMXJLw&t=2m30s

Шаганэ: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8NYyVB_QyI
Though I like this cover of it more: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEN3Zugtqgs

Пой же, пой. На проклятой гитаре: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ME_Kxc9VlFw though I've sadly never found a better recording.
Compile vim and/or gvim with Perl support, use Vim::X < https://metacpan.org/pod/Vim::X >, and enjoy.
I don't know about "for" other people, but definitely "to." The obvious example is showing up to work because it's expected of you, but more generally it's about keeping commitments. Socially, your health, personal goals etc.
Based on the comments here, I'd better practice up on being rude. Seems like I'll get better results.
That's super rude and your friend is incredibly patient for even giving the guy another chance. I'd have walked out on the first time.
I'm more interested in the security you have. Looks like to me that apart the obvious doubt users will have of how and what you will do with their data, there is the aspect of a big red mark on your back of getting hacked and giving access to countless of associated profiles.
What country are you from that uses CM for screen sizes? this space has pretty much been dominated by imperial units since pretty well forever...
Why Amazon's Data Centers Are Hidden in Spy Country
When you're using Valgrind and ASan, the "calloc for safety" advice becomes backwards. calloc defeats such instrumentation, because heap memory isn't uninitialized anymore.
> bordering on offensively so.

please don't.
How else would you implement them, seriously.

You have two choices, counted or terminated.

Counted places a complexity burden at the lowest level of coding.

With terminated you still have the option of implementing strings with structs or arrays with counts or anything.

And people did of course. Many many different implementations of safe strings exist in C; the fact that none have won out vindicates the decision to use sentinel termination.
Great point,never realised thats the reason,may i say it has a very negative effect when you have tolitarian type admin with no,age limit on appointments,cant admins be obliged to shift people to other sections or sack people after 12 years if results of department had a lacklustre performance ,when opposition wins?
On the VC thing i think it stifles compatition and tax paying and i dont want to have any taxes diverted for somebody to go into space its not making my life any easier .id prefer all companies pay full taxes in 1)the countries where the raw materials are sourced ,2) the credit
card payment,end user country ,rather than keepng money in convinient little tax places ,charity setups and all that stuff ,its getting very unrealistic feeding of other peoples hunger and poverty and thinking your doing good!
Is the concept to map the distance of the route to the width of the quarter? 1 inch diameter quarter, ~1800 mile route (1.1405e+8 inches) -- off by one order of magnitude... nitpick aside, very clever visual depiction, and easy enough to explain the math. I'll have to remember this one.
Not everyone who acts like a jerk (as described) is seeking confrontation. Some people who act like this are simply a rare combination of finicky and totally self-absorbed. If you act happy and bend over backwards to meet their demands, they'll see you as a rare individual worth coming back to again and again and again. Sometimes you really do have to stop smiling and let such people know they're being unreasonable, because they're totally clueless.
I want this to work so much. So many people have tried this, and I have signed up for, or self-hosted, every single one of these things, and even convinced my friends to join a few. None of them ever take off. How is this different?
I always felt like NUL-termination, newline-separation, and (eventually) UTF-8 were all sort of complementary ideas: they all take as an axiom that strings are fundamentally streams, not random-access buffers; and they all separate the space of single-byte coding units, by simple one-bitwise-instruction-differentiable means, into multiple lexical token types.

Taking all three together, you end up with the conception of a "string" as a serialized bitstring encoding a sequence of four lexical types: a NUL type (like the EOF "character" in a STL stream), an ASCII control-code type (or a set of individual control codes as types, if you like), a set of UTF-8 "beginning of rune" types for each possible rune length, a "byte continuing rune" type, and an ASCII-printable type. (You then feed this stream into another lexer to put the rune-segment-tokens together into rune-tokens.)

In the end, it's not a surprise that all of these components were effectively from a single coherent design, thought up by Ken Thompson. It's a bit annoying that each part ended up introduced as part of a separate project, though: NULs with Unix, gets() with C, and runes with Plan 9.

One of the pleasant things about Go's string support, I think, it that was an opportunity for Ken to express the entirety of his string semantics as a single ADT type. That part of the compiler is quite lovely.
But Dennis could have reversed it by giving C -- and thus later Unix -- a better default, you know, like Pascal had.
Ok, fine. We'll just stay on this planet and stop all space exploration because an accident may happen.

Besides, I'm pretty sure this has been addressed many times before. It's not that hard to secure nuclear material; we've dropped nukes in accidents before and they didn't detonate because they were so well-built. Even if you intentionally dispersed some nuclear fuel at high altitude, the concentration would be so low it wouldn't make a difference.

And what do you mean about "that much nuclear material" anyway? We safely launch tons of cargo all the time. How much nuclear material do you think it takes to power a rocket? Do you have any clue how little nuclear material is in a full-fledged bomb?
You are 100% spot on. I've been part of 3 seed rounds, and one of those had a bunch of savvy investors jerking the founders around waiting to see how desperate they would become before investing (better terms I guess). I didn't want any part of it, called a meeting with all the wanna-be investors and the two founders and committed on the spot. Then those that would have eventually invested all followed afraid to miss out on the deal as it was set at that moment (which was a pretty sweet one for the founders).

So if you are in a situation like this force their hand, the ones that are in will still be in and the ones that were just dicking you around will bow out right away.

The company is still around, they're doing fine. They will never be a 'homerun' but I don't care, they're good people and they work hard, it's just that their pivot turned out to be less of a money maker than the project they envisioned starting out (it was either pivot or die, I give them great respect for staying alive and generating a ton of work during the last 8 years), and I'll always have their back, no matter what.
Could Saudi Aramco Be Worth 20 Times Exxon?
There's something odd mentioned right here: http://www.x.org/wiki/BoardOfDirectors/ActionItems/

> We lost 501(c)(3) status because the tax returns for the last 3 years didn't
get filed on time. This was a surprise(...)

> Thanks to the SFLC we have re-gained our 501(c)(3) status.
Silicon Valley appears open to helping US spy agencies
I quite like the sound of xorg.org. Or perhaps they could rent x.org.org off the chap who currently owns org.org.
Exxo – build portable Python binaries
> Still a gutsy move which many of the current crop of angels and VC would pass on.

And some of them did and were brave enough to write it up:

https://www.bvp.com/portfolio/anti-portfolio
Used to be, the lump sum wasn't offered -- you had to sell your legal rights to the annuity to an investor to get it. You could still do this -- perhaps have open bidding on it; might net more than 62%.
The entire point of "memory-hardness" and "anti-parallelisation" and other such properties is to make it such that the CPU is the most desireable platform to for the password stretching function to run.

Why is this desireable?

This is desireable because your server has a CPU. Your attacker has a CPU, a GPU, perhaps an FPGA, and could possibly manufacture a custom ASIC. You do not want the attacker to be able to cost-effectively bruteforce on any of these platforms any more efficiently than a single CPU core can.

This makes password cracking difficult, and it also means we do not need to have absurd CPU runtimes for our hash, a handful of milliseconds is sufficient. (More is of course better, and for a single user system a delay of half a second isn't noticeable.)

What would occur if we did not design password stretching functions that had this property?

We would end up in the situation we have now, where nonstandard hardware computes hashes faster than we can, and thus instead of taking (a few miliseconds * number of possibilities) it takes (smaller amount of time * number of possibilities). This is undesireable.

This is also why you should never use a typical fast cryptographic hash function like SHA256, SHA3 or RIPEMD160 to hash passwords. This is also why PBKDF2 is considered less secure than say scrypt.
> A given non-trivial computer program can be relied on to produce results consistent with its definition (its specification), but this cannot be proven in all cases.

Provability is always relative to a formal system. The formal system you (should) use to prove a program correct (with respect to its specification) isn't the program itself.

> Gödel proved that their program was flawed. Surely you knew this?

Gödel didn't prove the futility of a foundations for mathematics. Far from it. What Gödel proved futile is the search for a positive answer to Hilbert's Entscheidunsproblem: There is no decision procedure that, given an arbitrary proposition (in some sensible formal system capable of expressing all of mathematics), returns `true` if it is a theorem (i.e., it has proof) or `false` if it is not.

If you want to lecture someone else on mathematical logic, I'd advise you to actually learn it yourself. I'm far from an expert in the topic, but at least this much I know.
They also spend their time and money in Portland because Vancouver is a hole. And I used to live in St. Johns (AKA Tweakville) so I know whereof I speak.
Mine has an "es." but if I remove the prefix it still works.
What is it?

Please don't ever ask me if I'm interested and ask for my email address before you tell me what it is.
Is video most of the times streamed over http? Couldn't find much on this except for some SO-Posts. If delivered via https (resource-intensive I guess?!) wouldn't this eliminate their ability to touch the video?
Week in Review 8 January 2016 – MailShark
...which is why using social manipulation techniques like these area great for working with strangers or people you will never see again, but mostly a bad idea in more permanent relationships. E.g. with colleagues, repeat customers that you want to see again etc.
No bug -- I've put $15,000 through it and only netted a tenth of that.
I always thought people misjudged CmdrTaco's comment, particularly here in HN, where everyone seems to think they're professional analysts. He was giving his personal opinion, not predicting the response of the market.

And his comment aside, I have to say the general mood of that /. thread was actually pretty positive towards the iPod: http://slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releases-ip...
> The immediate costs being run-time performance or qualitative things like maintainability.

I don't think that's true. There's no reason why memory safety has to cost either performance or maintainability.

It feels like there's some sort of fundamental dichotomy because we didn't know how to do it in 1980, and we're still using languages from 1980, but our knowledge has advanced since then.
Do the "Top Albums In 2015" come from RescueTime? If so, how can that be enabled from within RescueTime?
You can do it on Windows with the built in 3D scanner app with either a kinect or a webcam this works pretty damn well...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQPTxiK-Crw

The 3D builder app is one of coolest things that came out of MSFT for a while not sure why it hasn't gotten more attention it pretty much deserves it.
You can get an almost professional level 3D scanning for under 200$ and if you only are scanning simple objects then a webcam and a basic turn table will work quite well also.
Thanks for the suggestions. There has been some work to make formatting more customizable (https://github.com/cppformat/cppformat/issues/235). This will enable extensions like the ones you suggest while keeping the library itself lean. Generally useful extensions like thousand separators can be added to the core library of course. They are actually on my TODO list.
For an allocation of that size, it's likely that your system's malloc is requesting the allocation directly from the OS's virtual memory system with mmap(2), and freeing it with munmap(2), without ever actually writing a megabyte of zeros. Smaller allocations, however, are likely to require explicit clearing since they will hardly ever require a system call. (It depends on the details of your OS and malloc, of course.)
I've seen this so many times and did the same thing. Actually turned out about the same for us, so I'm glad other people aren't taking any guff.
If you load into C, you can JCXZ, instead of JZ, since you don't get the zero flag for free with a load.
I'm gonna have to steal this analogy. Its impressive how often these dick-measuring arguments pop up.
Intel Integrates Wind River Systems
sounds like Karl Marx
Proposal to extend PEP 484 (gradual typing) to support Python 2.7
tlhIngan maH!
ghom SIQpu'bogh programmers vo' barat. Qap maH Hoch bIquv javascript fullstack frameworks. startups vItu' Sey. Dun team Qap. vaj bIghuHmeH Daj qaStaHvIS Qap vIleghjaj.
What happens to the cobalt when you burn this fuel? Is the waste of burning purely C02? Or can you capture and re-use the cobalt?
FYI, on Safari/OSX your terminal animation now overflows:
http://imgur.com/CvjLwGH
That's also basically what happened to mighty Sun after it became the Dot in Dot-Com, right?
Unless you capture more than you burn and sequester the rest. If its even possible to sequester an amount that would matter that is.
> It's just too damn profitable and efficient to not become the standard way Silicon Valley works.

Not sure I agree with that assertion. While YC companies market cap is approx $30B (a recent Bloomberg cited estimate), the profits of these companies are minuscule.

The public tech giants do need to show profits for all their efforts. So this model works only so long as all these "experiments" aka start ups are relatively inexpensive to run and don't chip away at the bottom line too much.
Summits used to be meetings between heads of state. I guess this means that corporations have now risen to that level of power - at least in the eyes of the media.
In addition to the legal considerations, note that if your employer goes through layoffs, your investment is likely to tank right at the moment you need it most.

You're already have natural long exposure to your employer's performance. Be aware that investing in your employer is a doubling-down on their performance.

You also likely have some emotional investment in your career, which likely biases your judgement.

On the other hand, you may have industry insight that the market simply doesn't have. While working for Google, shortly after Google announced Android, I wasn't sure if HTC, Apple, or some third manufacturer was going to become dominant in the smartphone market, but I was sure Intel was going to be playing catch-up in the mobile space for at least 5 years and smartphones were going to eat the world. I also knew the huge amounts of money per year that my employer was spending on datacenter electricity and saw that for many server workloads, watts/SPECINT and watts/flop aren't terribly important. The CPU largely (oversimplification) configures DMA between the disk controller and the network card, and there was a window of opportunity for ARM to get significant market share in the server space. This was before HP or Dell announced any of their ARM server projects or I had heard of Calxeda. The server thing didn't work out for ARM, but my investment in ARM Holdings still went up over 8x over 5 years or so. I no longer think I have any more insight than the market into ARM Holdings's share price, but I was able to profit from insight I had at the time that the average trader did not.
Why are you not using the word conservative?
I wouldn't want other people trying to spend less time with me.