skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Yes, but the point is that we would all benefit.

Now all that happens is that the other traditional car manufacturers get a leg up. They are all businesses run by profiteers rather than technologists. They have no interest in dramatically changing the scene.
> they are phenomenally overoptimistic

Musk is no better at this; r/spacex notoriously jokes about Elon time being actually Mars time.
I am perplexed. Apparently there are people in the English-speaking world whose leisure time is so unstructured and abundant that they'll spend 30 minutes reading a story by an unknown author on an unknown topic and not regret it.

I do not have a job, and it is Saturday, and I still felt time slipping away from me by the second paragraph and stopped reading after the third. How can I become one of these relaxed people?
This sounds interesting but I have absolutely no idea which conments you're talking about ("first" is variable), and why they would or would not be false.

I say this because every ZH story on hn is rife with astroturf (or just lowest common denominator patriotism), whose comments reek of "but, but, usa this, usa that."

Im not from either country, but Ive learned to tread the comments section with extreme care as soon as "china" appears in the title.

Yet, maybe you have a point. I just can't tell. So, would you care to elaborate?
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003NX7OA0/ref=dp-kindle-re...
When Trump started gaining momentum I realized how poetic his success was. Democrats couldn't say he was in it for the money and Republicans who thought it was ok to have unlimited campaign spending couldn't complain either.

Plutocrat candidacies are the legacy of Citizens United.
I stopped reading half-way through, it makes no sense at all.
Why? Isn't he a republican? So, if he ran, he would be stealing primarily the votes that would go to the Republican candidate.
What did he do with all his income? Senators make $174,000 per annum...
I think "blub" is relative. I look at people who think that cluttering code with boilerplate for error handling, and even those who think that boilerplate is sufficient is sufficiently papered over using macros, have yet to understand why exceptions are interesting or (often) how to use them correctly (as many uses of exceptions that people like to poke at are entrenched wrongness, much like how many people who hate the entire idea of relational databases really just hate MySQL, its limitations, and the attitude of its ecosystem). I feel one of the reasons I have been as productive as I have been over the years is that I have spent a lot of time studying error handling and even now have a sort of "theory of errors" that I will sometimes draw out for people on a blackboard. From my perspective, Rust is currently "unusable", though very compelling and will hopefully fix this problem. As much as I agree with other things it has built, and as much as I agree that my attempts to simulate those things in other languages have disappointing holes, after having spent a lot of time studying languages like Erlang and Haskell (and even as someone who teaches a class at a college on programming languages at the college level), not having exceptions or anything better than try! is a deal breaker for me, and while this person jokes about monads and how learning them might not be important, they would be well served learning why monads are interesting. One could even argue the entire section about error handling and how this developer is happy about how "straightforward" Rust is in comparison to monads is the "blub" issue rearing its head, but between Rust and Haskell. (The use of the word "straightforward" is always particularly concerning to me, as it is the general argument one uses for programming in C or Java instead of anything that hides intent.)
@chamath called it? https://www.quora.com/What-should-we-do-about-Trump-How-bad-...
The complexity sounds fairly similar, but my point is that there's a world of difference between server-side complexity (implement once) and client side (implement 3 dozen or so times).
I don't think it is possible to really be sure that you are a 10x engineer - it's more of an outside validation thing. Everyone thinks they're really good and that only they run into weird emotional issues that slow them down. People like to rationalize.

If you see one of your co-workers doing 10x the work of your other co-workers at high quality, then it's much easier to label them at a 10x engineer than trying to label yourself. Objective vs subjective.
> Plutocrat candidacies are the legacy of Citizens United.

Wouldn't he be able to self-fund his campaign even without Citizen United?
> What does the C++ code print?

And there it is. I programmed in C++ long enough to "know" this, but I still remember more jr. Engineers and even arguments with more sr. Engineers around this type of question.

Rust has removed this kind of question almost entirely from the language.

Personally, I have no intention of ever going back to C/C++ for any new project I work on.
Regardless of how it splits the vote, I have a hard time arguing against anyone who pins their flag to the !Trump platform.
I disagree, Bitcoin is looking better than ever. I've been a miner for years. It was the best performing currency of 2015 and has remained surprisingly stable in recent months through all this time and uncertainty. The problem of block size is a great problem to have. It's like any technology business dealing with scaling issues. Bitcoin will revolutionize dozens of industries because of the many benefits it offers. To me, it is very clear; there is no denying that it will happen in due time. I have very little doubt in the success of Bitcoin, just as I have very little doubt that millions more people will be using the Internet in 2016 than did in 2015.
> Democrats couldn't say he was in it for the money

People run for president for the money?
I think you are certainly right that computation has really permitted Bayes to shine. But I think the stigma against the study persisted for decades: we had Metropolis-Hastings in the 70s, after all.

And as the book argues out, Bayes, even when limited to non-sampling techniques such as conjugate priors, was still useful for a variety of interesting problems in cryptography, search theory, etc.
Mostly C++ and a string search utility (like grep) since the codebase is massive. There are others languages (I recall Java and Perl) but their use are marginal.
I guess Ross Perot was just 18 years ahead of his time?
Great talk.

So he created cmake-ide for emacs. I'm wondering is there an equivalent for make projects.

EDIT 1: The github page [1] says "It automatically detects Ninja and Make builds and sets the compile command accordingly". I'm wondering if that means make is fully supported.

[1] https://github.com/atilaneves/cmake-ide
This comment is currently at the top:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10957933

OP: "LEDs are being built into systems that deal with surveillance of buildings."

Replies: "Lumileds only build the actual LEDs. No surveillance/data gathering."
What do you mean by #3?
Do Your Employees Have the Sunday Night Blues?
You can use the IWYU "export" pragma to inform IWYU that this is what you're doing. https://github.com/include-what-you-use/include-what-you-use...
> I have spent a lot of time studying error handling and even now have a sort of "theory of errors" that I will sometimes draw out for people on a blackboard

I would be very interested in a blog post on this.
Soldiers continue guarding Tomb of the Unknown Soldier despite blizzard
I'm not familiar with the implementation details but I can say that this idea is fantastic and much needed.

This is one of those things that will forever change humanity for the better. I'm working on something similar, although with a much broader scope.
Don't forget about how awesome C++'s multiple inheritance is! <sarcasm/>

edit: It's worth the down votes on this. Multiple inheritance is pure evil and confusion. In fact, even in Java I now rely on aggregation over inheritance.

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/269496/inheritance-vs-agg...
Well, he certainly has enough to buy the Presidency.
What makes monads in Haskell interesting is that someone identified them as a pattern, generalized their usage, and then syntax was added to the language that lets you compose them in a natural manner. Sequential execution itself "is a monad", but in most languages we express that using something as simple as ";" or "\n": Haskell effectively generalized the idea of statements to support anything that is monadic, which is why identifying something as a monad ends up becoming so interesting in Haskell as opposed to many other languages.
How I fixed libuv
Lotus is now Hanami
yeah..#1 on list: inherit dad's real estate empire
Exploring the Gnome Shell in Ubuntu by Jono Bacon (2015)
Of course it happens, few things are written in stone
A probabilistic justification to carpe diem
Bloomberg's views on guns are such that many Republican voters would refuse to vote for him.
Just compelling the ability to update does not mean anyone will make updates.

The only answer that makes any sense at all is funamdental legislation that any product where the primary product is the physical article and not the software must publish the source to included software. That way even if IoT devices are abandoned or become insecure we can update our own hardware.

Most people would not be able to maintain their own devices, but we can easily end up with OpenWRT / DDWRT style products for each class of IoT device if they are required to be freedom respecting. Then techies will naturally instruct their peers to use supported devices, and the natural progression should get us most of the way to where we are today on routers - the liberated ones are recommended and can be supported by the community even if the OEM abandons them, and the ones that are not are a red flag to avoid. The only problem today is that since there is no compulsion to liberate routers a lot of them are sold to ignorant consumers who do not realize the mistake they are making.

So maybe that should be a regulation? Like with how cigarettes must inform consumers of how dangerous they are, proprietary IoT devices must have an FCC general warning their security is out of the users control.
GQ citing their dancing starwars girl as 'award winning journalism' is a joke GQ is making at its own expense. Leave it to buzzfeed to turn it into moral outrage. This is one of the publications that got Tim Hunt fired for making an obviously tongue in cheek mock-sexist remark to a conference of female scientists who found it funny. http://unfashionista.com/2015/07/07/the-tim-hunt-reporting-w...
It seems like there are way more interesting candidates this election than in the last few.

I wouldn't mind if either Trump, Rand Paul, or Bernie Sanders win. A glance at his stance on the issues shows I probably wouldn't mind Bloomberg winning, either.
> the definition of MVP definitely gets muddled and everyone has their own take on it.

I'm quite surprised by this, since to me there's little to disagree about. A "minimum viable product" seems like a very simple description to me.

> An MVP is the smallest possible experiment to test your assumptions.

I'm not sure where this is coming from, unless what you get out of it is a viable product, how is it an MVP?

I'm not saying you shouldn't experiment, or that you shouldn't build small things and try them out, but I see no reason to keep referring to something as a minimum viable product when it meets none of the three words.

> This reminds me of the No true Scotsman fallacy [1].

Again, I'm not really sure why what I've said seems so odd. If it's not the smallest viable product then how is it a minimum viable product? If it's not a viable product, again, it's not an MVP.

This is more like reading an article that says "A Scotsman doesn't need to be Scottish or even a person".

> This sort of critique isn't wrong, but it's not useful.

I feel it is, since I think the concept of an MVP is pretty important because at the end of it you have a viable product. If people are going to use the term MVP to describe proofs of concepts and mockups and a general process, then what term do you suggest should replace it for actually describing minimum viable products?
"to create a data exfiltration vector"

That sounds interesting, could you expand please?
Yes. Just not necessarily their own.
> Einstein had numerous colleagues essential to his success, but historians only list the accomplishments as they were Einstein’s alone. You don’t know any of Einstein’s colleagues names so writing down your place in the world matters.

What historical account of Einstein have you been reading?
Spot on our trajectory for the last two years
Your suggestion is not sufficient, you need also a way to roll out the updates, which means a network connection to the outside world, but for someone who has done a IoT set up himself it is probably a sane thing to put the IoT things onto their own network, without internet connectivity. So yes, it is likely possible that there could be sane regulation, but I lack thrust that regulation will be sane, and even more, I suspect that regulation will interfere with my use case, so that I have to jailbreak my light bulbs.
Author here. Using Donald trump wasn't as a role model but because you know who he is and that he makes lists.
I went almost straight into the workforce instead of going to college so I feel like I should be on your side here. However I don't think I would really mind some of my tax dollars going to people thinking about women in society as I rather like women, or managing sports teams, as I also enjoy watching sports. Is this opinion entirely out of vogue now? What the hell else am I getting out of my sizable federal tax bill?
Yeah this is basically what I'm thinking. It seems like Blue Origin might be able to do some brisk trade for awhile in Russian billionnaires who can drop $100k to hop up into space and impress whatever supermodel they're trying to woo this week. I don't see that ever getting to a launch-a-day.

I did look up the company, though, and they plan on building vehicles that can compete with the Falcon 9. At that point the competition would start to get more interesting since that opens the doors to everything you just mentioned SpaceX could wind up doing. SpaceX is launching Falcon 9's now though...
I used to be critical of BO for exactly the same reasons, but this video changed my views, because I'm pretty sure SpaceX and BO roadmaps are going to be completely different:

- SpaceX wants to enter the traditional rocket market, and use that money to slowly but surely extend into reusing rockets. This means that the most important thing is actually putting stuff into orbit, which also means that they won't do any launch that has less than a Falcon 1 capability. SpaceX has so fare managed to land 1 rocket but not reuse it.

- BO wants to enter the space tourism and do that through rocket reuse. Since there is no space tourism market yet it all has to be funded privately though. However space tourism is an entirely different beast; the requirement, for the moment, will only be to hover over the Karman line and glide back to earth safely, which is much easier than what SpaceX is doing, which means they can concentrate their efforts on other more important parts. And we've seen that in the video: they've been able to reuse a rocket, ie do what everyone is chasing, and do it successfully.

Elon Musk wants to colonize the Solar System; he's in for the very long term. BO "just" wants to send people high and get them back to earth for cheap. BO has a much more attainable goal, but they have made a bigger dent into that by reusing their first rocket.
- CPUs can do 64x64 multiplies that give 128-bit results. GPUs cannot.
- CPUs can do add-with-carry. GPUs cannot.

That means that GPUs are not very good at doing high-precision math. They lose a lot more efficiency implementing high-precision math than CPUs do. And GPUs are also worse at doing parallel calculations that end up following different paths, which inevitably happens when one pixel diverges before another.

My back-of-the-envelope estimates show that GPUs are not worth it for this use-case. I will change my mind when I see a GPU-based deep zoom fractal program.
Same here. I have worked on projects where we had a very good understanding of where we wanted to go and had autonomy to make the right decisions. We cranked out a product in 6 months the company is still living off 15 years later. That was with 3 people who could be rated as 10x for this project.

And I have worked on projects where nobody knew where things should go but a lot of people had a say in what not to do. So we all ended performing at 0.1x.
Simple explanation for the article: Bryan is "talking his book".[0]

Joyent doesn't sell unikernel services, hence unikernels are bad. Color me shocked. Is it me, or has Joyent become less than upfront about their motives over the last few years? I don't require everyone to embrace "don't be evil" or whatever, but I always get a "righteous" vibe from Joyent employees that seems at odds with their actual behavior. Maybe they feel under siege or whatever, and are reacting to that? The whole thing is vaguely off somehow.

[0] http://www.investorwords.com/8436/talking_my_book.html
There is absolutely, positively no way Trump will win the election. He's the entertainment.
Interestingly enough, I just noticed this happening on websites that have been doing it for years. Yes, some of these ads are in your face and you can't help but notice them, but a lot of these ads are in the background. I call the ads because to my mind (and to the mind of most people; see usability studies) this garbage is just automatically tuned out except when it can't be. Whether an actual ad was there or something that looks like an ad is absolutely irrelevant. I'm not going to see it anyway. Which just makes the idiotic messages that try to guilt and shame me more idiotic. For years (this is hardly a new trend) I've been ignoring them. Even after I read them, I ignored them and laughed at them.

Seriously, people let a fucking website tell them how to feel to the point that it actually affects their feelings? Now that is a serious security vulnerability that probably can't be patched.
I'd imagine the manufacturing process for Rey toys is 99% the same and it doesn't make sense to not make all the variants in a single line.
It's much worse than just passive webcams. Some devices which were never meant to be connected to the internet are out there.

Stoplights?
HVAC Systems?
Carwashes?
Ice Rinks?
POWER PLANTS?

Yes!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cWck_xcH64

EDIT: I looked at his more recent talk from last November ... the situation has not improved

"115 batshit stupid things you can put on the internet in as fast as I can go by Dan Tentler"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMtu7vV_HmY

Featuring Spanish Chicken Controls
New FREE Version of ZebraPlan for Startups: Cloud Lean Agile Project Management
Death to JSON
>Definitely not true! I have been in companies where 1 engineer outperformed 10 others with everything else being the same and on the same team. It was really obvious too. It does happen.

I believe 2x, 3x maybe 4x but 10x seems far fetched. Are you normalizing for hours worked in your appraisal of performance?

Per the arguments laid out in Peopleware I am opposed to my team members working more than 45-50 hours a week outside of rare crunch times.
Robots! Journalism! Ethical decisions!
Even the PR people from Telia and Ericsson (who are partnering to do this again, just like how they launched "the world's first 4G network in Stockholm in 2009") say (when interviewed by Swedish media) that this will be similar to the 4G preview/test. So what we can expect to see is city-wide coverage and a few thousand heavily subsidised end-user 5g terminals (probably USB 3.0 modems at first - at the 4G preview in 2009 they came from Huawei.) Making Stockholm/Tallinn-wide coverage a reality with that few users isn't super costly.

Ericsson are happy because they get a realistic field test of usage, handover between base stations etc. They also get a credible proof of concept for further sales.

Telia are happy because they get to project the apparance that they are ahead of the curve to their customer base.

Telia and Ericsson have had this symbiosis thing going on for 100+ years now, btw. It seems to be working quite well for them both.
From ritter.vg:

"You're browsing without Javascript! If you have no idea what that means, you should ask your technical friend about it. Otherwise - kudos."

No, kudos to you. I could count on one hand the number of times I have been congratulated by one of these capability detection messages for browsing without Javascript.
Data Elixir #69: AI in the NFL. Pac-Man Projects. Thick Data. Learn D3
You might be making the false correlation that education == schooling from reading your comment. Being schooled does not make you educated, and you can be educated without being schooled. Just because today the expectation in the west is extensive schooling to provide education does not mean that is the best way (or even a viable way for many) to be educated.

Personally I want there to be more coop learning. Combining democratic resources like wikibooks / open courseware and like minded individuals that want to learn the same things, plus a potential volunteer veteran or two, and for a lot of people that can produce a much better education than an overpriced book and lecture seminar with standardized testing ever could. For others, apprenticeship may be optimal. Or fully automated programs like Code Academy or Khan's Academy might be best for some, where they learn best through self-enforcement and learn-at-your-own-pace self pacing.

One of the largest takeaways from the past twenty years should be that trying to push a generation through traditional lecture-based coursework in classical university settings is not a one size fits all solution to education, and that it did not work - this article presents plenty of statistics denoting the failure of that model.

Edit: Side note, I think Stack Overflow is a great model for tutelage in the future. That is basically what it already is for the entire software community, and they have expanded the model into many other disciplines - that kind of ask a question, the community decides on the best answer, and once solved is locked / memorialized for others to easily find when they themselves encounter the same question is immensely valuable. It would be revolutionary to get most people answering their own questions through resources like that.
It isn't about the total intelligence - it is about the excess intelligence. If someone has to have a programming intelligence of 100 to do some job, you might only need a pi of 110 to be 10x them, not 1000. Very similiar concept to climb performance based on excess power in a twin engine airplane.
> I'm mostly okay with laws (whether they exist or not yet) that say that if your negligence or stupidity was the root cause, as a manufacturer of these goods, you are on the hook for a multiplier of damages.

Such laws won't work, however, without a regulatory framework that ensures that -- for example -- click-through EULAs aren't used to lock customers into sleazy "binding arbitration" agreements that sacrifice their rights in return for permission to use an appliance they bought in good faith.

It may be difficult for regulators to keep up with specific technologies, but much tougher consumer rights protection is essential in order to hold negligent manufacturers responsible, because it's cheaper for the cowboy manufacturers to hire a lawyer to draft some dodgy contract boilerplate than it is for them to hire security experts and ship a safe product.
Thanks! I didn't know that, but I'll check it out. Thanks!
It would be good to add a "Next" link at the bottom of each part to go to the next part so people can click through instead of having to scroll to the top after reading each time.