skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
BTW, existing, rule based CAD nails those cases.

Hell, I was showing people how to make parametric buildings in the mid 90s...

Those standard cases have been ripe for the picking, and it's been done for a long time now, usually with a combination CAD and rule system, and verify ways for humans to input various things.

There will continue to be nice gains and a simplification of CAD as well as the factoring it out on those. We have never needed CAD to do that stuff. CAD just helped do it better, more efficiently.

For the growing body of stuff we do need CAD to do, these approaches are nowhere near the maturity needed. Novel things do require people, and they must iterate, collaborate, analyse, etc... CAD is the best we've got.

When we get a real AI, that has real analytic and creative skill, maybe. Will be exciting too. Long way off though.
Thank you for your contribution, but please change the title to something more descriptive.
Data in American Politics (Part 1): William Jennings Bryan to Barack Obama
StackOverflow tackled this by intercepting plus one posts and telling people to just vote. GitHub should do the same (with starring or following).
I think that possession is the essence of property rights. People have a real viceral reaction when you come and take something out of their house, or out of their hand.

However, copying no matter how perfect isn't the same kind of infringement under law or common morals.

If someone peeks at your house, then builds a perfect replica on their own land then you may be sad that you lost the uniqueness of your properly without their paying you for the privilege of copying it... But it's not "piracy", and will hardly cause a pitchfork mob to form outside your neighbors newly copied house.
That's a misnomer. Old clients cannot validate the new transaction types at all and will blindly think they're valid.

This is the equivalent of your browser accepting any single SSL certificate that says "X.999" irregaddless of if it's signed.

Instead of your browser saying "I don't know how to validate this certificate, please upgrade me so I can".

--

Bitcoin core has for better or worse grown synonymous with Blockstream. A majority of commit access holders are employed by them, and unsurprisingly they tend to all vote in a bloc.

The roadmap does mention the lightning network, just as a reference to "off chain solutions". The two main issues with lightning are:

1) centralisation pressure among hubs: The number of jobs will eventually converge to a small number of central nodes.

2) Lightning is being developed by a single company in essentially-private, in contradiction to how Bitcoin development has been done since its inception. They refuse to accept outside contributions and only pay lip service.
Once the fad is over, will we admit that hierarchy can be beneficial? People don't want to admit that. Ideological bias.
> The typical argument is that colleges want kids who are more 'well-rounded' and Asian kids are stereotyped to be less so.

I didn't know any college used that argument. Certainly those kids should be judged on their own merits and not on stereotypes.

> I mean the preference for other races besides Asian when academic performance is held equal.

My point above, which I might not have explained well, is that racial preferences are unavoidable. Academic performance can't be held equal because the various applicants are competing on playing fields that can differ radically. (Also, as I point out at the end, Harvard admits students on many factors that aren't due to performance but due to the applicants' families' social networks and wealth.)

The best Harvard can do is manage the situation to make it as fair as possible, which may include balancing the discrimination against some races with preferences in their favor. I can understand arguments either way but I don't think it's realistic to eliminate that component withhout looking at its affect on the whole system.
Maybe I'm wrong here, but my major issue with Groupon is how you're treated as a customer when you go to the establishment. In my experience, I always get treated worse than a "normal" customer. Either they just care less about you, or it's always like a "what is this? I need to go ask my manager".

That's hard to manage as it's out of your control, but I would love a focus on making people care equally about you (not more, I'm asking to been seen as a normal customer rather than a burden).
What Does a Good Online Gamer Need
Kindle; so e-books right? That's digital content, and that suffers from the same problem (and silly restrictions) Netflix is having. Real — sorry — physical books might work.
Yes, there is no such thing as a purely decentralized, trustless protocol.

The major innovation here is that the miners have the option to vote with their feet by either accepting or rejecting new monetary policy from the developers. Banks can't just dump all of their USD and US bonds if the Fed makes a decision they don't agree with. So there's a different power dynamic built into the network.
Great progress is being made on this. Basic CAD features are now on phones, and we are now able to do things electronically too. This has been a very long and expensive effort.

Before we really see CAD marginalized in any real way, we will see it in everyday use first, and it will be easier.

It already is. Kids can do it now on phones.
And just who will be enforcing this? Right, nobody. A bad law is worse than no law.
How One Bullied British Student Became a Teenage Business Tycoon
Their main page:

> f.lux is patent pending. Do you make a cell phone, display, lighting system, or other cool sleep tech, and want to talk about collaboration? Email us: support@justgetflux.com
That's not what Yule-Simpson implies. They're missing the data breakdown by school, so you can't make the conclusion that somehow they're lying instead. Again, they don't make a conclusion and you can't either. In the absence of that school-centered data, it is reasonable to come to their conclusions on the national data set.
Students who got into S schools would have even more reason to go to them over A tier schools. All students would have even more reason to apply to S tier schools. A tier schools, who depend more on tuition dollars and would need to charge or find other sources of funding (likely without much success- governments have been cutting funding for decades, they're all already tapping private sources as much as they can). S tier schools would become comparably less desirable. This loop would continue (other than schools who try not to charge but depend on tuition dollars falling into the A range).
I could rant for hours about all the things GitHub doesn't do (or does wrong) for "real" software development.

+1 from the Kubernetes project
There are three types of people who are into Bitcoin:

1. People who are in it out of sheer curiosity.

2. People who are in it to get rich quick.

3. People who have been scammed into it.

The people who are in it out of curiosity are the people I don't take issue with. At its beginnings, I found Bitcoin to be a curious thing because it was a novel and new idea. However, as things progressed and I learnt more about how it all worked, I saw it as a cumbersome idea that wouldn't effectively replace anything and as a result now I'd rather make jokes about it than take anything about it seriously. I've never spent more than $20 CAD on Bitcoin and I have gotten it all back for that matter too.

People who get scammed into Bitcoin typically get scammed either one of two ways: they're either being coerced into using it because they've gotten something like malware on their machines (CryptoWall and its variants) or they see it as an investment alternative. The only times I've ever seen non-technical people experience Bitcoin is when I have to tell them that the malware on their computers will only release their unbacked-up data requires a payment using the cryptocurrency to get it all back. And that is really what a non-technical person's experience with Bitcoin is going to be: it's a way to pay thieves.

As for the get rich quick people, they tend to fall into the third category or they themselves are scammers.

Right now there are two forces dominating the Bitcoin community: the miners and those who are holding out on whatever magical unicorn rainbows makes the coins have value. The miners don't want to see changes to the software because it'll hurt their bottom line and the people holding and exchanging it want to see these changes so they can benefit. So as a result, Bitcoin has entered a war of attrition and is starting to show its problems. Mike Hearn's leaving is definitely a consequence of this problem.

Earlier yesterday [1], I made a quip about how it's insulting to suggest that we get those who are "unbanked" as a result of living at no-fixed-address (ie: "homeless") should eventually move on to Bitcoin as an alternative to mainstream financial institutions. It's really for the reasons that Hearn made: would you want to wait a random period of time ranging from maybe a few minutes to a few hours for your transaction to go through? It's already insulting enough that they're living at the bottom of society, so why would we want to get them to use a bottom-tier financial system? Why not instead suggest making it easier for them to participate within mainstream banking schemes?

I anticipate based on my last remarks that the responses to this post will consist of feckless anecdotes and pointless accusations that I and others have a "problem" with Bitcoin. I guess to a certain extent the statement of me having a problem is true, but at the end of the day Hearn is right.

Bitcoin is a failure and if you invested into it then you're getting what you deserve.

[1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10898408
Stack Overflow tried preventing +1/-1 comments[1], and the community came to the consensus[2][3] that those comments can be useful.

[1]https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/277314

[2]http://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/277319

[3]http://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/283935
Could we say it partially because of mono-culture?
Almost no one uses GNU lsh as a client/server, dropbear is mostly used as a embedded system sshd.
OpenSSH has to many thing integrated and enabled by default.
Twitter provides material support to ISIS, lawsuit alleges
We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the HN guidelines.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10902539 and marked it off-topic.
Users with public SSH keys would be easy: https://github.com/JohnMaguire.keys

When a new user signs up, ask them for their existing Github username and to upload an SSH key that matches.
>but what I'd genuinely like to know is why don't big projects just move to their own thing?

Github is a great advertising and marketing platform for large OSS projects. Quite the opposite, large projects should be moving towards github, because it's a great stage for them to perform on. On top of that, it's rather become the defacto replacement for sourceforge (sorry FOSShub, it was a bold try), with all that implies.

The thing I really don't get is why people use it for small projects. Like Facebook, Twitter and basically every other social media site out there, it's a drama factory. It incentivises people towards public grandstanding on creative and technical issues, and encourages resolving disputes by forking the repo, burning bridges and splitting the dev team rather than discussing all aspects of the problem, chewing it over and making a group decision.

That's the last thing small OSS projects need, and I'd have thought most 5-15 man projects would be vastly better off throwing up a kallithea repo (if they don't just use DCVS the real way) and a dokuwiki and then knuckling down to business. I acknowledge that this reduces discoverability by some amount and thus risks taking a hit to your developer acquisition, but I'd love to see some hard numbers on how much. I'd wager that much like the Apple app store, if you're not in the top 50 on github, you're no one.

But hey, I'm apparently an old fogey born young, and I prefer to self-host when I can, so maybe I'm just pointlessly resisting the tide of the inevitable or something.
One of Milgram's experiments (not the infamous one) tested this, using people standing on the sidewalk looking up.

https://youtu.be/P0e6zG8IbE8
The Resolution of the Bitcoin Experiment
If someone can actively MITM in your network you have other problems.
They seem a little late coming to the game. 4B is not much compared to how much money and effort are already going into autonomous cars. Seems pointless.

But it seems there's also willngness to discuss future rules and ethics for self-driving cars, which is good.
> The blocksize increase you're describing only benefits a single individual once. Once increased and there is no more competition, transaction fees drop to almost nothing again for all miners.

This isn't true now and it hasn't been for quite a while now, transactions need to carry fees to go through because miners have another choice that you happen to overlook - they don't have to mine a transaction if they don't want to. Miners can ignore transactions and let another miner mine them. This is actually beneficial for them because it decreases their blocksize and therefore their latency. If a miner mines a block unusually quickly by chance and wants to be generous, they can include more low fee transactions but I'm not sure this something anyone is doing automatically.

So it isn't the bleak outlook you describe because mining small fee transactions isn't to anyone's benefit.
Part of me was hoping they'd let it go. While awareness of this issue is greater now than it was six years ago, I'm not sure if they've been pushing this wave closer to shore or merely surfing it.

If this is truly the world health issue they think it is, now that iOS is taken care of seems like they should focus on Android, TVs and Kindles instead of begging Apple to let them compete with a built-in feature.

After their last PR push and petition campaign (which landed them on various media outlets and the HN homepage twice in three days) it took them 7 weeks to land 5,000 signatures.

I appreciate their passion but talking about cancer, weight gain and acne -- while providing affiliate links to salt lamps and Swarovski crystals -- just feels weird.
But what content do you put in the advert?
Do you know of any examples out there on how to write plugins using ClojureScript? I got into Emacs a few months ago, but have been considering switching over to Atom so I can write plugins in CLJS
Who said anything about good ideas?
Haha yes that must be a bit weird! Well first of all, we think it's a beautiful old Swedish name, it was actually the name of my dad's grandmother. But also we wanted it to be a reflection of trying to build something simple and easy-to-use, as opposed to many players in the CDN space that all use the same type of big-enterprise-tech-corp names - Cloudflare, Cloudfront, Limelight, Edgecast...
https://justgetflux.com/research.html
It does, and not the scale of things, this is early, with really great advances to come. New manufacturing methods will help too. Additive is very well matched.

I'm watching this closely. Additive, weaving, composites, nano scale, all are converging into a space that looks a lot more organic than what we do for the most part today.
I never understood how attribution worked on Stackoverflow anyway.

1. I post something to SO and the terms say it is CC-BY-SA.
2. Someone uses my post and properly links back to SO.
SO's terms require this.

Shouldn't the attribution primarily mention me, the author of the post?
How can a link back to SO be required as attribution for my content? It's not that I assigned my copyright to SO, I just posted my CC-BY-SA content on their site. SO is just the middleman.

I'm OK with attributing SO and I don't doubt the terms are legally clean. I just goes against my understanding of CC-BY-SA.
as well as the new SO MIT attribution construction.
FFmpeg Zero-Day Lets Anyone Steal Files Remotely by Playing Special Video
> Why shouldn't GP be entitled to the same thing? Is their money and advertising-eyeball-hours worth less?

Because the owners of the content, for whatever reasons (yes, these reasons are utterly stupid, of course), don't want to sell it to them.

Before, I used a theoretical example of one-copy album, but thanks to Wu Tang, I can just direct you straight to them.
So the code being under Creative Commons (as it was before) wasn't a (even worse) law?
Except that their license for the content isn't tied to the customer's billing location, but their geographical location, and people are mobile... sometimes for relatively long periods of time.
> As an aside, do you have any idea how pretentious you come across?

No personal attacks on HN, please. This comment would be fine without that last sentence.
Here's the related MacRumors article with more info on Apple's Night Shift app. It's currently available to developers but apparently only runs on iPhone 5s and iPad Air and later.

http://www.macrumors.com/2016/01/11/apple-ios-9-3-night-shif...
It is often asserted (for example, in the Bitcoin white paper [22]) that a cartel can double-spend Bitcoins. In a strict sense, this is true: a cartel can spend a Bitcoin by paying it to a player Alice, receiving goods or services, and then shifting the consensus choice of history to a branch where that coin is instead paid to a different player Bob. However, we argue that double-spending by a cartel has a limited payoff. Bitcoins have value because people are willing to trade them for goods and services. If players were unwilling to accept Bitcoins for trade or unwilling to spend Bitcoins for fear of having their payments nullified, the value of Bitcoins would diminish significantly as players lost confidence in the system. Worse, because players are encouraged to generate a new identity for each transaction and because identities are not linked to any side information, players cannot easily determine whether a proffered payment is coming from the double-spending cartel or an honest user. Thus, a rational player should refuse to accept any payments when there is a significant threat of double-spending. As a cartel must outmine the entire Bitcoin network and thus outspend the entire Bitcoin network for as long as it would remain a cartel, we believe it is very unlikely that a cartel could double-spend enough to recover the cost of the attack.

An interesting facet of mining cartels is that they can censor certain transactions. The cartel can choose to ignore any transaction it does not want appended to the log. Further, the cartel can choose to treat any blocks appended by others to the log as forks which it will not attempt to extend. Thus, other players will naturally also abandon these transactions, possibly even consciously if the cartel announces that certain transactions (or transactors) are disfavored.

https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~kroll/papers/weis13_bitcoin.pd...
Crimes and Punishment, the follow up to that game is actually quite good. There's a new one out this year called The Devil's Daughter.
The risk is the boiler remaining off when you are not around; that's the condition where massive property damage would occur (pipes freezing). If you're present, presumably you would notice a failed-safe boiler running often and address the issue. The boiler controller would preserve the safety of the system itself even if the thermostat calls for heat constantly.

In the event the house is too hot, you could open windows, leave, or if it is above freezing outside simply turn off the boiler directly. If it gets too hot while you're asleep, it's not "dangerous": you would wake up sweating. Granted, infants or the infirm may have issues, but in general they face a multitude of dangers that need special consideration or supervision.

What Nest should have really done is include an old-school analog control mechanism as the fail safe (reed switch, magnet, and a bimetallic strip?) that would maintain a safe baseline (say, 50ºF) if the "smart" controller fails.
Meteor meets NPM
* Mobile Wi-Fi extender. Bridges to your existing network and gives you a portable connection to your home network thereby extending your range so long as your drone is able to communicate with the base station. Portable network extender that moves with you rather than requiring fixed infrastructure.

* Mapping - Drones will fly and map roads, pipelines, electrical grids and update the data faster and more regularly than now. Will also replace Google Streetview with drone view.

* Drones will be tethered to cars and provide alerts about traffic conditions ahead and on side roads in near real-time. Intrepid individuals will hack them to alert them to speed traps and other "hazards" ahead.

* Mobile response forces for municipalities. They will be sent to investigate things like water leaks, power outages, outdoor smoke, etc. to ascertain severity and determine what, if any, response is required. I.E. someone calls in about a power outage and a drone goes zipping along the power line to figure out if trees are down or whether a transformer blew to reduce the response time.
The problem is that GitHub has a monopoly and is considered _the_ current standard for Open Source. But I think that once some of the major projects move to alternatives like GitLab (which has many of the features described in that letter) GitHub will have to obey its user base. Unfortunately no Open Source project with a large user base will dare to do the first step.
I am not sure this is how that works.
Most people in the Bitcoin community have a pretty shrewd idea who is responsible for the DDoSing. But no proof, of course.

(Hint: Certain libertarian leaning early adopters who want Bitcoin to remain as a government-proof store of value, viewing any small reduction in decentralisation to be a terrible thing, and not caring about its use as an actual payment network)
Recently even Python language planned to move its repositories to github.com for network effect, instead of helping projects like kallithea SCM and trac by partnering with software conservancy or gnu. Python should learn a lesson when they decided to move their repository to closed source system like github. But obviously as people use Facebook, developers use github for the same reason, network effect.

I hope they change the decision to support one of the project like Kallithea or trac by migrating their system and build network effects.
Snoop Dogg Goes After Microsoft and Bill Gates Online
The Compute Architecture of Intel Processor Graphics Gen9 [pdf]
Maybe more constructive than just banning would be to approach a solution together with the initial developer. Honoring his innovative approach and eventually granting him temporarily a slight advantage in exchange for bringing his innovative idea to the ecosystem instead of just playing copycat...
There are more authors on the second page.
Related NY Times article: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10904397
Being too successful is of course a good problem for github to have, but for the individual maintainers, it's still a source of frustration that can lead to maintainer burnout. If too many people get frustrated and leave, then it can quickly turn from a problem of too many people to having too few.
4sq has struggled mightily with traction/retention since the big change. Yelp is ubiquitous in the US and they are making strides into other countries.
Once again thank you and I'm still impressed by what you are putting out, but that still isn't quite what they click with.

To be honest a lot of the tech startup people I interact with have tremendous egos and they need to know the end of the tunnel fulfills that ego, so big money startups is what resonates with them. I'm looking for the marriage of startups and government basically.

I'm just being hyper critical, but I figured raw feedback would help