skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
well everyone should be armed of course, and have gone through firearms safety training, but it's not just about the sheer number of guns it's also about their capacities but most importantly it's training that matters.

I definitely don't think that in order to provide security everyone needs an AR-15 or an AK-47 which is how some people over here think. Today in America the AR-pattern rifle (the semi-automatic civilian version of the familiar full-auto-capable M-16 or M-4) is the most popular model of rifle, with millions sold in the past decade. Virtually all of them produced in the past decade have abandoned the old M-16’s signature “carrying handle” rear iron sight for a standardized sight mounting rail, meaning that virtually every AR sold today can be easily equipped with an efficient optical sight. Firing the high-velocity 5.56×45 mm cartridge and mounted with a four-power tactical sight, a typical AR rifle can shoot two-inch groups at one hundred yards when fired from a steady bench rest. That translates to shooting eight- to ten-inch groups at four hundred yards.

Four hundred yards is a long walk. Pace it off on a straight road, and observe how tiny somebody appears at that distance. Yet a typical AR rifle, like those currently owned by millions of American citizens, can hit a man-sized target at that range very easily, given a stable firing platform and a moderate level of shooting ability.

But what a lot of people don't realize is there are a far greater number of scoped bolt-action hunting rifles in private hands in the United States. Keep this number in mind: based on deer stamps sold, approximately twenty million Americans venture into the woods every fall armed with such rifles, fully intending to shoot and kill a two-hundred-pound mammal. Millions of these scoped bolt-action deer rifles are quite capable of hitting a man-sized target at ranges out to and even beyond a thousand yards, or nearly three-fifths of a mile. In that context, the 500-yard effective range of the average semi-auto AR-pattern rifle is not at all remarkable.

I suppose what I'm getting at is that you don't have to break the bank to arm your society in an effective way. Your country will be doing just fine if most people simply have a bolt action scoped hunting rifle but what they really need is firearms training.
EPIC PIZZA RANT
> In my experience though, a good, unique cover letter will all but guarantee you an in-person interview.

I wish. The amount of time I put in to an application seems to have no bearing on my almost-nonexistent response rate, so I rarely bother with much effort anymore.
GoT, for better or worse, is a massive part of contemporary popular culture. Why do you think people should not be allowed to pay for it just because of where they were born? It's like saying, "Here's what you are expected to talk about and experience, and you're not invited because you're Ukrainian/British/Egyptian/etc."
Code::dive 2015 – C++ vs. C the embedded perspective
I've written the biggest Swift Mac app
> You don't test Phase 1 anticancer drugs in healthy volunteers.

[citation needed]
Benefits of Investing in Foreign Property
Amorphous Dispersal: Asymmetrical Information Distribution in Social Media
I'm amazed at how well-written and thoughtful these papers are given the product is a language I oppose. Well, it does have some good ideas. :)

However, what made my jaw drop was section 3.2: "a dynamic model" for making the system safe and easily implemented in hardware. The section said Stroustrup deciced not to publish it because it was impractical. One of few times see his name and go "what an idiot..." What wasn't practical in general case or that time period doesn't mean it won't be in future in other circumstances. Good ideas, esp simple solutions, have a way of coming back to us.

Specifically, efforts like Cambridge's CHERI processor are looking at minimal modifications to CPU's to greatly increase assurance w/ legacy compatibility. This concept should've been published as there's use in embedded and appliance field where a lot uses subsets of C++. He should've published it. I'm saving the paper for my collection just in case that idea comes in handy.
My favorite is a fictional one from "The Office" television show in the US. The one where Jim created a program that changed Dwight's name to diapers every time Dwight tried to type his name on his computer! I've been waiting for the chance to do a similar prank
I use foursquare all the time to find places to eat and drink around NYC. My wife and I have discovered a bunch of cool places to get a drink before dinner, or find breakfast, when we're in an unfamiliar neighborhood. I'm a big fan and hope they succeed.
Dirac said something closely related to this: "... it is more important to have beauty in one's equations than to have them fit experiment. ... It seems that if one is working from the point of view of getting beauty in one's equations, and if one has really a sound insight, one is on a sure line of progress."

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/the-evolution...
> It's a for-profit enterprise that would do well to listen to the concerns of its userbase.

Very true, and I'm surprised this is the first comment that points this out. GitHub doesn't need our thanks -- it gets our money. You could easily argue that the OSS/social aspects are excellent marketing tactics, not anything remotely like altruism.

I'm also starting to become concerned that GitHub, a for-profit, has locked in so much of our industry. In my opinion, they need to be responsible stewards of all that lock-in. Look at what happened when SourceForge stagnated and then started to spread malware. There's no reason the same thing couldn't happen to GitHub.
> losing that hub would be an absolute disaster.

Not really. I agree GitHub is a great for open source, but its not essential. It would be a shame to lose the community, central location, user activity history, etc... but actively maintained projects would not suffer much.

The recovery process would be as simple as pushing to a new remote and emailing the core developers. It would probably take a few months to properly set up a JIRA or other bug tracker and for everyone to settle into the new work flow.

The genius of git (or should I say BitKeeper) is that its distributed, so having a hub isn't really important.
Nice read. You might also be interested in Cargo, and open source container migration service: https://developer.ibm.com/open/cargo/
Can anyone comment with regards to Mike's statment about bitcoins current fees being higher then cc fees. What is the driving factor behind this? Does the cost of mining directly raise the fees?
Only when they're known to be toxic, drugs which are considered otherwise benign (or at least not excessively toxic) which include some newer cancer drugs are tested in healthy volunteers.
Yes. I love the tyranny of structurelessness and reference it frequently.

Also, just to compound things - this gets even worse and more magnified with investments from VC's etc... which already have outsized power. Now they become the de-facto power holders in a sovereign currency.

Talk about disruptive technology.
On the one hand, they're of course correct. As with automation generally (whether cars, airplanes, or software deployment), once you get to a certain level of automation, you pretty much have to be all in because humans can't act quickly enough or with enough throughput.

On the other hand, it's easy to see why auto manufacturers and others are disinterested in an all-or-nothing goal that is likely to be decades away. Because they want incremental features they can sell in the interim.

Of course, their challenge is around what incremental approaches work given that humans will not pay attention once you reach a certain level of automation. Perhaps you enable full automation only under scenarios where it works reliably--say freeways in certain weather conditions--and is legally allowed under those circumstances. (Though I suspect the first step is that people will use "autopilots" and go ahead and play with their phones--even though they're not supposed to--given that many already do that today.)
Please use the bittorrent download option if possible. It reduces load on archive.org.
Honestly, what's described in this article seems to cross into sexual assault rather than just harassment. Moving into blatant physical contact, such as kissing, is escalation beyond suggestion and inappropriate comments.
Yes, considering you would still be liable for damages by the next of kin.
I'm just going to ask one more question :D What will your buddies do when Bernie breaks Wall Street up? :D :D :D
If there's any evidence that the 20k deaths per annum from prescription drugs come mostly from the development of new drugs, you haven't presented it.

What you have presented is evidence that net of deaths from drugs, each year's new drugs offer an extra 2 months of life expectancy to those living in developed countries. By inference, a new regime which uniformly imposed a six month delay to drug development would cost a net 1 month of life expectancy per person. Across a population the size of the US, that's over 300 million months of human life expectancy, or an order of magnitude more whole human lives than your figure for all prescription drug deaths...
While I also don't like the exception handlers in constructors syntax, not putting any work in the constructor doesn't mean that data members or base classes cannot fail to initialize.
It's not clear if the OP meant the City of London police HQ (Wood Street), or the Met HQ (Scotland Yard, not in the City)
So because they're poor, they shouldn't be allowed to make their own decisions? Honestly, the philosophy would be more equitable if we just extended this thinking to the whole population, right? Let's ban drinking, ice-climbing, skydiving, smoking, sweet cars, and burgers, just to get started. Because we know better than them.

The risks are understood for medical trials. Maybe they're not acceptable to me, but they are to someone else. Who am I to tell another man what risks he can take with his own life?
I've spent a lot of time both reversing and creating these kinds of schemes. Anyone else here?

I gave a talk a few years back, comparing both retro and modern copy protection schemes. Also designed hardware for dumping floppies at the bitcell level (ZoomFloppy) and co-designed the Blu-ray content protection system.

http://www.slideshare.net/rootlabs/copy-protection-wars-anal...

Now my day job (SourceDNA) is building tools to reverse lots of code at scale. A never-ending stream of apps provides a ton of "wat?" moments as you never expect developers to make the choices they do.
Well, right.

One may frame this whole "failed versus not failed" as a power struggle between two camps:

a. Those who own a large stake in the original BitCoin - such as the developers, miners, venture capitalists, the Winklevoss Twins, etc.

and

b. Those who don't own a large stake in BitCoin currently, but wish to own a large stake in the dominant cryptocurrency. Wall Street...

When you attack BitCoin on any grounds, technological or otherwise, you are attacking those stakeholders.
Pretty much the more important site on the internet.
I make a small automatic monthly donation; you can set it up in a few clicks via https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Ways_to_Give
> Personal attacks are not allowed on Hacker News. We ban accounts that do this, so please don't do this.

The article being linked is quite literally nothing more than a series of personal attacks.
Innovation and Architecture (slides by Adrian Cockroft)
An Enormous List of Referral Tactics
>There being nothing to stop you doesn't mean it's not a violation of an inalienable right or that I didn't have that right to begin with.

If there is no difference between the inalienable right existing or not existing, then it is a matter of faith to if they exist at all.
Well, do you honestly believe that VCs have even a fraction of the power that Wall Street does?
> Privileging the priorities of my private repos over their public dependencies would be shortsighted

I think that’s Github’s call, but I definitely don’t disagree with you and apologize that I came off that way. Open source projects exposed me to Github and greatly benefit the projects I work on in private repos. I really do want those projects to have an effective platform for growth and stability. I don’t want to water down their needs; I just wanted to offer some balance to the discussion.

My point was simply that this probably isn’t something that is as easy for Github to solve as it may appear on the surface. Any changes they make to the issues system can’t upset the low friction way it works for repos with a modest amount of contributors (and +1’s from clients are appreciated). I hope that positive changes come out of this letter.

If Github were to leave Open Source projects high and dry, they’d lose my business.
It seems that you've missed the point of the article entirely. He never said that they wanted to quash BTC entirely. Just morph it into something they can put a choke collar on and regulate the fuck out of.
The problem is that depending on banks roles, they are supposed to be trustworthy or not. In arms length negotiations, the banks aren't even supposed to have your interests at stake. But if they are managing your money, they are supposed to have a fiduciary duty to you.

Brokers don't owe you shit other than not lying to or defrauding you. But people don't realize this. Brokers are salesmen, pure and simple.

Worse, now brokers often have bullshit titles that hide their nature. For example, financial advisers sound like someone who has a fiduciary duty to you, but really they are just brokers. Trying to sell you on investments.

You should treat anyone who doesn't have an explicit fiduciary duty to you as you would a car salesman.
It’s not your fault
A replacement to default browser homepages: That Startpage Rocks
> The most valuable thing in the world is a human life regardless of callous examples of how cheaply they can be had or taken.

Until I hear that from a sentient creature that is not human, I won't accept it as an universal truth.
Great write-up, I had no idea that China was using machine learning to detect VPN setups...

I'd suggest the author make their Idea #4 random-padding code open source, but ironically if it became popular then surely the ML-based filters would eventually cripple it...
The hipster in your mind is a fairly recent invention and is the result of sales people carving a lucrative demographic out for themselves.

Hipster in this article is a different usage. It's based on the hipster type prominent 5-7 years ago (before they gave up on new tech and discovered their local farmers market [merging in with the folk punks and much less fashion interested community social worker types]).

These were people who needed to know that the mattress industry is interesting and kind of a rip off before the rest of their social group did.

Both types are annoying in different ways. The older nerd type is ultimately superior because although they are projecting superiority at least it's with novel factoids and saving money instead of a status play born out of morally superior consumption.
Dr. Memory and Valgrind both work on unaltered binaries -- quite different tools from a compiler option. I expect that AddressSanitizer is quite a bit faster because it's compiled in.
Nicer framework generators will produce dependency configuration, have params for what database backend to produce configuration for, and produce applications prepared to be 12-factor (log to stdout, accept configuration via environment) out of the box.

More generators than those will allow you to create reusable app templates which have these features so you don't have to repeat the (still very simple) configuration process for each app.
This is why although I like C++ a lot, nowadays my day job is spent between JVM and .NET languages, with C++ only when I need to step out of them.

From what I know, having the chance to ever find a job on my area where one can use proper C++ is very thin.
Parkinson's is a toughie - you don't really know what a patient is suffering from, just the syndrome they're exhibiting. I "have Parkinson's", by which I mean I have a series of symptoms that aren't related to any known purely-genetic disease (there are several, and I've been tested for all of them), tumors or structural issues in the brain (lived many a night in various scanning devices), are similar in general tone to those common to Parkinson's sufferers, and which respond well to treatments for Parkinson's. The syndrome itself, though, is a bit idiosyncratic, and may in fact be a constellation of similar diseases rather than a single disease. Diagnosis is still mostly a process of observation and elimination, despite what a few optimistic studies may have reported.
every other company is really just a collection of people like you and me

That's cool and all, but wasn't the motivation for the first letter the lack of humanity from GitHub in communication with the userbase?

I don't think they deserve a cooing public letter to reassure them on the basis of humanity after they've decided to give "empty response or even no response at all" to what read like perfectly reasonable attempts to communicate with them.

I'm entirely willing to use person-to-person social standards for a company. I'll start with a trust-but-verity attitude, because leveraging a double standard in customer facing business is often a way for companies to take advantage of customers. Once they show they're not interested: fuck 'em.
What if your email correspondence from companies was entirely handled through DRM that you controlled? What if you could revoke the right for a company to use your email? Basically, if such infrastructure were widespread, no company would actually have your email, unless they were to circumvent the DRM. Furthermore, such circumvention would then be covered under the DMCA, and mass circumvention would open up companies to class action lawsuits. (If properly implemented, either lawbreakers could be tracked, or the company that let the protected address fall into the wrong hands would be identified.)

You could not say that such a circumstance would be unfavorable. Typically, people come up with an argument saying that DRM doesn't work, and that such tools wouldn't be available in a true and trustworthy form to individuals anyhow.

Also, email isn't such a great example anymore, but having such control over one's medical records would be desirable.
That's already happened: Chinese controlled mining pools control >50% of the hash rate and could do serious damage to Bitcoin (or even fork it) if they really wanted to and were willing to take a short-term loss for a long-term power play. At the very least they could hold Bitcoin hostage by merely "threatening to threaten" to do this, since any such threat could tank its value. Speculative markets are hypersensitive to FUD in the short term if that FUD is even a little bit credible, therefore anyone with the power to FUD a market has tremendous power to manipulate that market. (That's why securities markets are studded with laws to try to prevent that... not that these laws work all that well.)

If other groups of super-rich/powerful elites wanted to control Bitcoin all they'd need to do is to buy similar levels of compute power and centralize it. If there is some Rothschild banking elite conspiracy, do you really think they can't afford a lot of ASIC silicon? They could also afford significantly faster non-great-firewalled Internet connections than the Chinese.

Bitcoin's proof-of-work mining scheme intrinsically favors centralized economies of scale for the same reason this kind of industrial-scale compute centralization is favored in cloud computing. The more compute you can put in one place the cheaper cooling, power, and system administration becomes per compute unit. All industrial processes are like this to some extent, and the effect is exponential.

But I wasn't even really speaking to that. I was speaking of how he copypastas old JBS conspiracy theories. There's this crowd who thinks they are "thinking for themselves" by rejecting the mainstream narrative and plugging into alternative and underground media, but most of them just end up uncritically accepting anything their new media feeds say. It's just as easy to propagandize the alt/underground scene as it is to propagandize the mainstream... maybe even easier since it's a lot cheaper to influence or astroturf indie media than it is to influence the New York Times. So you have lefties and anarcho/libertarian types running around parroting narratives originally penned by the John Birch Society and neo-Nazi groups without having any clue as to the pedigree of these ideas. Strange days.
1. I have no idea how to get Bitcoin. A quick search takes me to several exchanges that look like torrent sites for pirating shit.

2. Nor has anyone presented me a compelling reason to get bitcoin (other than the future). Off the top of my head, if a company offered me an account that would take care of my online transactions in a secure way using Bitcoin, I might be interested. Maybe I'd put a few hundred in it each month and use it for random expenditures, and hopefully get access to some cool micro-services.

But I have zero awareness anything like that exists.

3. If it's to succeed as capital, it will be a daring bank that creates their own bitcoin equivalent... followed by one of the norwedish countries making their own national bitcoin. Then the floodgates will open.
Am I understanding this right that the idea is that if a member of W3C sues anybody for reverse engineering their DRM then they get kicked out of W3C?

I wonder how much of a deterrent that is. W3C needs Google/Microsoft/Apple more than they need W3C. The content producers aren't even members of W3C I don't think. I guess it would be companies that create the encryption plugins like Adobe that could theoretically sue people under the DMCA. I just don't see how the W3C could even function without the biggest players at the table.
Yes, phase 1 is to ascertain if the drug is safe in healthy patients. These people opt in for these studies.
I'm not sure that blog post is really applicable. It's shunning the idea of using designer tools to generate mockups of Wikipedia which focus on eye candy at the expense of content. That's not really what's going on with Wikiwand.
DRM should not be confused with cryptography.

I am not confusing DRM with cryptography. See the cousin comments in this thread.

Full disk encryption is a better tool for protecting yourself than SecuROM.

Doesn't help when you have to share data with companies and governments, and the information ends up on someone else's disk.
Auto Industry Agrees to Cooperate with Government on Safety for Self Driving Car
Astounding Feats in Pen, Ink and Magnifying Glass
Here's the problem with the cover letter: the dominant strategy is to describe that you're a natural fit for the job, which sends up all sorts of BS flags in the reader.

The alternative, suggested here, is to be a little self-deprecating. Mention why you might not be the perfect candidate, but you'll shine anyway. Have you heard of price anchoring? It's everywhere, and if you start the hiring manager off with "could take a chance on this person, maybe a diamond in the rough" ... well, that's not a great place to start.

So if you're writing a cover letter, I'd recommend you make it sound like you're perfect for the job. But the strongest feature is "I've been doing this at my last job and want to do it somewhere else." That's a hard thing to make up if you don't have it already. And either way, it's not unique -- the "best" cover letter for a job is generally pretty discernible from the job posting. Which makes that cover letter table stakes and doesn't set you apart from the crowd of candidates they're actually going to talk to.