skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You and me both. 2012 Mac Pros have retained their value quite a bit because of Apple's 2013 debacle. The Firmware upgrade (if you can score CPUs) makes the 2009 the best bang for buck.
The danger to the heart is believed to be from the immune response to the strep, not the infection directly.

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/rheumatic-feve...
I was not aware that a decent "free software live video stream" exists. Anyone know what technology they'll be using?
Turns out my CDN supports HTTPS (using cloudinary), so that's good. Thanks for the ETag reminder, I'm not doing that yet.
The problem with your logic is that it can be used to justify both legitimate innovation and any kind of snake-oil peddling. This just won't do as an argument.
This requires a definition of space. For your question to be logical, space should be taken as the thing that is among and around matter. Then on it may be researched physically. Buf if space is taken to mean the thing that exists among and around perceivable matter, then your question becomes obscure, as this means that space is matter, but just not perceivable. And therefore it exists, also without relation.
Feedback on my idea would be greatly appreciated
From a funding standpoint the first question that comes to mind is, "How did this happen?"

Theranos to date has raised $88.4M. The Series C was raised in 2010 following a 4-year hiatus.

In the ten years since the founding of Theranos, they were unable to hire anyone who would help them figure all this shit out?

It seems insane to me that a well respected venture firm like DFJ, who invested in their Series A,B and C, would not have done their due diligence and understood where Theranos would become vulnerable. Everyone knew that government regulators would be involved since day one.

I am bullish on Elizabeth. She is obviously extremely intelligent and charismatic but I'm bearish on her investors. Step one of funding should have been building a blood test that actually works and step two is getting that $88M test approved.

Without knowing the whole story it's hard to form an opinion about the situation but I am super interested in the psychology of how all "this" happened.

Thoughts?
Static Site Hosting with S3 and CloudFlare
>> -A single banana costs $.40. At scale, a banana is $.10.

There's a model for "direct from farmer meat": you pay a monthly $3-5 rent for a meat locker in your city , and than you can cheaply buy meat online from a variety of farmers . It does cut costs. And of course , this allows a group of people to buy in volume.
Isn't that the whole point of prefab houses?
Sony Moves PlayStation Headquarters to California
I was initially excited about this; a prover with a logic like Coq (dependent types!) but with awesome extensions (effects!) and with the automation of Z3 seems pretty neat. I decided to test-drive it with the first few chapters of the Software Foundations book (https://www.cis.upenn.edu/~bcpierce/sf/current/index.html).

Now, I must admit, I'm a lot less excited :-( You can see my results for (almost all of) the first two chapters here:
http://pastebin.com/5bL7Wugq http://pastebin.com/GRFLCF8Z

Unfortunately, proving in F* turned out to be a pain. The basic problem is that during proving you have no idea at all about the state of the proof; the only way I could get anything done when automation failed (and that was more often than I had hoped) was by working out, in comments, a very detailed proof, and then applying appropriate lemmas. If you know Coq, think of it as writing down tactics without seeing the proof state in the side pane, and having to get it complete before you get a simple yes/no answer telling you whether what you did was good enough to make the entire proof go through. But in fact, it it is even more painful than that: In Coq, you can apply/rewrite with lemmas just by naming them, but in F* you need to instantiate all arguments. So a proof step for one of the lemmas in the second document above, which would be rewrite -> plus_swap in Coq, in F* must be written plus_swap n m' (mult (S n) m') although Z3 could easily find the correct arguments itself. But leaving arguments off is simply not possible in a system of this kind based on the notion that a "proof" is written a well-typed program.

Oh well. Back to Isabelle/HOL for my regular theorem proving needs, although its logic is really weird and I wish there was some system combining the automation of Isabelle with the Calculus of Constructions.
On Intel x86_64 platforms with AES-NI hardware accelerated AES, sure. On other platforms, not so much.
CMS administers the CLIA program. This is about their ability to operate as a lab, not just about Medicare reimbursement.

See here for a clear breakdown of responsibility among government agencies: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidanc...
That's how tests were in Data Structures class (but C# and the method boilerplate printed, so just fill in the blank)
> Should no one be working on this problem?

No.

> How do we invest in potentially innovative ideas in more complex fields before they have proven it out?

Honestly, you invest in carefully proving out those potentially innovative ideas before you release them. That way you have good data convince people who claim your ideas don't work.
Not unreasonable, but Clinkle and Color were both huge wastes of money and so far were more legitimately worthless than Theranos has been shown to be. The reaction seems more negative than I would expect with the information currently available - it's like the community wants to see them fail.

Maybe they are being unethical or it will turn out they don't actually have a real product, but it seems kind of early to lay on the kind of hostility people have been. A small part of me wonders if it's because there's a female founder.
Scientists claim to discover genetic, biologic cause of schizophrenia
Try show up as interested buyer and see what the real estate agents tell you :D
Nice short presentation also available on slideshare (DockerCon Barcelona) http://de.slideshare.net/Docker/gordons-special-session-dock...
Robert Greene, the First Bohemian
I used Cloudflare's free SSL - is this enough?

https://www.soundshelter.net
People can decide to give voluntarily, they may decide it's a good investment. They may even vote to partly decide what it goes to. The "nobody would pay" standard response is just wrong.
That is a trivial fact, the wave function of a system completely describes the state of the system and that of course includes the angular momentum. But the wave function has nothing to do with a physical wave with physical properties, it is a pretty abstract construction and the physical properties are essentially encoded in the base vectors of the Hilbert space. I only skimmed the paper but I didn't come across something that plausibly argued that the wave function is the fundamental physical entity.
...which requires surplus energy and sufficient free time
Sales Call Live Answer Rates Across US
In the past, I usually notice him using Google Hangouts.
Yes, and furthermore there's a very good reason to believe that this claim is true: as soon as they do, every copy of Chrome behind AT&T's network will go and snitch to Google, who will promptly investigate and get Verisign in deep trouble.

Here's what happened when Symantec issued fake Google certificates last year:

https://googleonlinesecurity.blogspot.com/2015/09/improved-d...

https://googleonlinesecurity.blogspot.com/2015/10/sustaining...

"Therefore we are firstly going to require that as of June 1st, 2016, all certificates issued by Symantec itself will be required to support Certificate Transparency. After this date, certificates newly issued by Symantec that do not conform to the Chromium Certificate Transparency policy may result in [annoying certificate warnings, just like self-signed certs]."

And that was just the work of a couple of employees who were inappropriately testing their issuance system and weren't even intending to attack anything. They got fired, which I expect is also a big part of why Google's response was so light.

http://www.symantec.com/connect/blogs/tough-day-leaders
And this problem (high-speed rail failing to deliver on its promise of sustainable alternative to air travel) is not unique to Britain. Same is happening in mainland Europe too:

http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2013/12/high-speed-trains-are...

Discussion thread of above article: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6920871
I was overwhelmed just reading the initial description of the author's device/media usage. My personality doesn't allow me to be fully engaged with that much external input at the same time - it just shuts me down.
Blithering nonsense. You can buy an advance ticket for 33.50, saving time, money, and "carbon."

With a little work you get:

£29.10
SHF LGE 10:49 11:30 £7.00 Advance
LGE EMD 11:30 11:34 £2.10 Anytime
EMD SNF 11:43 14:18 £20.00 Advance

That's easy - the report is complete nonsense, or the individual is misguided at best, or he just wanted a day in Berlin and this was his excuse.

Not sure which of those options I think is most likely.
Hello,

I would love feedback for my idea called Library, a new writing/publishing platform with a social structure built around the content to enhance the readers and writers experience. I know there are writing/publishing platforms there but I feel like they're lacking a social structure around the content that is written to enhance the reading and writing experience. Medium is attempting to create their platform into more of a social network but it is not there yet. There's a theme surrounded around the app. I want to give users the illusion that they are actually attending a library as they would in person.

1) What do you like/dislike about Medium or other writing/publishing platforms?

2) What's the biggest problem you're facing using the current writing/publishing platforms?

3) What new features would you like to see in a writing/publishing platform?

Looking forward to reading your comments.

Thank you!
Tonight's NBA Parlay – 8 games
Symptoms are the bodies response to infection. Regardless of what happens, because strep is present, then it occurs.
I'm not outraged by Theranos, but I do feel that stuff like this makes it all the harder for legitimate science to get investment, by "raising the bar" on the number of stupid, oversimplified, breathless claims you need to make to get noticed.

Real science is too messy to be able to compete with a press release from a sufficiently motivated huckster -- and investors love a huckster in lab coat.
From personal experience, I can tell you that is can. The i3 window manager in Linux comes with a status bar program called i3bar. It also includes a program called i3status which constantly feeds i3bar information to display via JSON through a standard pipeline.

I wrote an i3status replacement that does exactly this. It sends JSON to STDOUT at a set time interval. i3bar takes the JSON as it comes through STDIN and changes the look of the bar as it's read.
And to do this you'd have to stop the banks financialising people's lives. They are simply working out how much of labour they can possibly take and then that is how much the land is.

In the UK women going to work saw banks change their lending criteria from:

* 3 times primary income

to:

* 3 (or 4) times household income

voila prices double, the rentiers get more interest and the govt sees more money printed via mortgage lending and call it "growth". Meanwhile the man on the street hands over all his labour to the money creation monopolists.
TIL, though many people with a domain are going to want their accounts through it.

That said "delayed schedule" above means 1+ years.
> It seems insane to me that a well respected venture firm like DFJ, who invested in their Series A,B and C, would not have done their due diligence

She's childhood best friends with Tim Draper's daughter.[0]

It really is that simple. If you saw a state construction contract going to a firm controlled by a friend of the Chinese Premiere's daughter you wouldn't be confused at all right? So why should anyone be confused now?

[0] http://www.mercurynews.com/michelle-quinn/ci_26147649/quinn-...
Currently I see ~200ms difference (repeated those tests a good number of times, of course, those are results closest to average):

$ time curl -4 -s -o /dev/null https://drdaeman.pp.ru
curl -4 -s -o /dev/null https://drdaeman.pp.ru 0.00s user 0.00s system 2% cpu 0.300 total

$ time curl -4 -s -o /dev/null http://drdaeman.pp.ru
curl -4 -s -o /dev/null http://drdaeman.pp.ru 0.00s user 0.00s system 7% cpu 0.107 total

The host isn't doing anything, although the server is old weak Atom machine so it could take some time to do RSA. I followed some guides (say, used Mozilla-recommended cipher list) to get "A+" rating with SSLLabs. Currently it's just "A", I guess because of SHA1 deprecation on Startcom intermediate certs. https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=drdaeman.pp.r...

I'm also using 4Kbit RSA keys, maybe that's the cause, especially given that the server is a tiny Atom HTPC sitting in the kitchen (100ms is because I'm accessing it from the other country). Will try to find some time on weekend and test with 2Kbit ones to see if this is indeed the cause.

--------------

Added: seems that this worsens with latency, because I see extra 200ms. Maybe the cause is extra network round-trips, not crypto overhead. Or maybe there's something with my curl...

$ time curl -4 -s -o /dev/null http://stavros.io/404
curl -4 -s -o /dev/null http://stavros.io/404 0.00s user 0.00s system 4% cpu 0.180 total

$ time curl -4 -s -o /dev/null https://stavros.io/404
curl -4 -s -o /dev/null https://stavros.io/404 0.01s user 0.00s system 2% cpu 0.370 total

Unfortunately, don't have time to meditate on Wireshark output right now. :(
If they don't bother why should people bother to pay for their hosting? There are many, many hosting companies that do bother and I am using one of them. Had no problem installing Let's Encrypt cert on shared hosting via cPanel there.
With a bike it would be even more faster and cheaper... :-]
In the network panel (in FF), I have a structured view on JSON data, and can expand nested objects and arrays (like here https://mdn.mozillademos.org/files/7421/nm-response-json.png). Same goes for JS objects, which is a thing that bugged me long time.
China has built a lot of ultra high voltage AC and high voltage DC transmission lines, and is building more.

http://dsius.com/cet/HVDCinChina_EPRI2013_HVDC.pdf

There's been some cartels in the power transmission scene. http://www.reuters.com/article/eu-transformercartel-idUSL726...
It could be ripe for some "disruption".
Perhaps. A VC portfolio full of unicorpses does look kinda like a bad neighborhood. Limited partners might get scared off.

Or maybe a good VC firm that also has some huge hits would just explain that they're just swinging for the fences, so sometimes they'll have a spectacular miss or two.

Honestly, I can't wait for a few unicorns to fizzle. But only because maybe then the whole "unicorn" meme will finally fade away.
> The Lagrangian is great for solving many problems. But it is definitely not more general than Newtonian mechanics

Sure it is.
It's true that for certain systems, you can derive one from the other so in that sense they might be "just different notations" for the same physics (I'm disregarding non-conservative forces, which aren't really considered in fundamental physics).
But the Lagrangian formalism really consists of two parts: Hamilton's principle and a choice (postulate/guess) of Lagrangian (or Lagrangian density).
When we say that Lagrangian formalism is more general than Newtonian mechanics, it means we can describe physics using the Lagrangian which we can't get to via Newton's laws.
For example, you would be hard-pressed to derive general relativity from Newton's laws, but if you start with the Einstein-Hilbert action, you can derive Einstein's field equations.

> A better example of a fundamental law would be action-reaction or something.

This is another example where the Lagrangian formalism is more general.
In this case, a translation-invariant Lagrangian implies conservation of (canonical) momentum.
But in more complex systems, Newton's third law might may fail when canonical momentum is still conserved (the prototypical example is the Lorentz force law).

> Using Lagrangians to derive it then begs the question "but why must electrons obey the Lagrangian?".

This isn't circular as much it is one less level of indirection.
It's like if you say the reason a dropped object accelerates to the Earth is gravity, you have just shifted the question to "why must gravity behave as an inverse squared law". You can go further and say that Newtonian gravity is not fundamental, but is an approximation of from general relativity, where the dropped object isn't really accelerating. Again, the question is shifted to "why is general relativity described by the Einstein field equations". At each level of reduction you describe one phenomenon by something more fundamental. That you don't have a further explanation doesn't logically preclude that it's more fundamental.
I examined the letter; here's what it says: Theranos's lab isn't CLIA-compliant in a way that potentinally puts patients at serious risk. DHHS is giving them 10 days to remedy some serious noncompliance issues (without reading the CMS-2567 form, I can't see for certain what magnitude they are), but this is very serious. If Theranos doesn't reply satisfactorily, DHHS will fine them daily and possibly revoke their CLIA certs as well as their ability to take Medicare money.

I think most people had already concluded that the company, if not outright fraudulent, was being very careful to hide a number of negative facts about their product's deficiencies. At this point nearly every scientist I know thinks their tech doesn't really work as well as they claimed, so it seems unlikely the company should have the valuation it does.
Who pays for the transportation and services? The people via taxes. Who reaps the benefit? The land owner.

Tax land. Tax capital gains on land. Untax labour.
No, he didn't - see my comment here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10984326

It's total nonsense.
iPhone users: Chrome for iOS will save your data
Theranos Lab Found in Violation of Clinical Standards
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanmac/2016/01/22/clinkle-up-in...

> Clinkle had a polished demo that came before things like Apple Pay, said one former employee, who declined to be named. But most importantly that person added, Duplan “was charismatic when he wanted to be” and could “raise money in absurd abundance.”

You really want to change the world? Forget being a programmer, learn to be be charismatic.
In addition to paying Apple a reported $1 billion for search traffic, Google has further boosted its efforts to drive iOS users to its search engine by improving its Chrome for iOS app.
Applets were a grand idea and probably responsible for spawning other (more usable) tech in this space. Or at least showing people what was possible.

Of course they sadly ended as a staggering failure.

Epic loading times of the JVM were the practical death knell. A grand-canyon of a security hole was the deal sealer.
Larry, thanks a lot. I can't wait - even if the majority of websites already dropped every Java applet anyway.
AWS CodePipeline Adds Support for Triggering AWS Lambda Functions
In retrospect: The selfish gene
1) Clinkle and Color are the butt of many many recurring jokes and a perennial punchline for people in startup land.

2) Neither of those companies had anything even a little bit close to a ten year run and a $9bn valuation. It's one maybe two entire orders of magnitude bigger as a flame out.
Spot on. This is the solution.
Throwaway for this--I'll get back to lurking (I'm not sure what password I used). I read it. I agree. The way there will be difficult. I've been on unemployment and noticed how pointless the weekly reports were. This will get rid of a lot of systems that need to be removed. I make good money and stand to inherit great money, but I do hope for all sentient life on Earth.
I mean angular momentum of macroscopic objects, which the spin of particles has little to do with.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go_ranks_and_ratings
Amazon Certificate Manager will issue certificates for CloudFront for free.
The point of my comment was that the infection does not travel to the heart. The immune response to the infection in the throat ends up having consequences elsewhere.
No. Obviously less is wrong. Here is an example: login over HTTP deliberate because the site doesn't support HTTPS is definitely not less sensitive.
As a dad, the family argument is the most important one but has already been well stated here.

I'd like to add that we now have the tools to make remote working not only on par but better than in-office work:

- Chat systems (Spark, Slack, HipChat…) provide the kind of informal communication that offices are good for, but with major improvements: asynchronous by default (though the conversation can easily escalate to become synchronous) and topic-oriented. Even when I was in-office, our team actually preferred chat-based conversation in many cases.

- Tele-presence (video call) provide the face-to-face communication complete with visual emotional cues that one would get in the office. Use it for structured meetings, or use it as an informal background video feed.

- Location independence helps the team be geographically dispered. You can then build a team that is spread out and takes advantage of time differences (useful in devops).

Just last week, my wife had a work-related conference out of town and instead of being apart for a whole week, I just worked from the hotel with no change of routine. After the work was done, we got to enjoy the area. Bonus: our child came along.

The one caveat is all this is predicated on reliable network connections, epecially for the telepresence part. However, homes have the option of reliable network access, and for crappy wifi at hotels or coffee shops, it's always possible to tether or fallback to text-only chat.
Not a single comment so far has mentioned Karl Marx. This "research" proposal is merely a technocratic rehash of Marxism: the inexorable forces of materialism and technological improvements entail endless progress driven by a Hegelian spirit. This will free humans from labor and eliminate the power of capital. Thus, somehow, unlimited production will enable people to live according to the motto "from each according to his ability to each according to his needs", and people will enjoy egalitarian heaven on Earth.

Marxism has been tried, and has failed, in so many places with such bloody results. Instead of wishing that somehow advanced technology will solve the inherent problems of Marxism, maybe we could all learn from the failures of that ideology, and revive an understanding of the world inspired by the words of Locke, Jefferson, and Smith, among others.

I despair. Are we going to keep repeating the mistakes driven by the ideologies of Marx, Hegel, Kant, and Plato? For examples of the atrocious consequences of "basic income" divorced from free markets, see the Soviet Union, East Germany, Red China, Cuba, Cambodia, and more recently Venezuela.
There are occasionally times when I want to suffer a MITM attack. For example, when I am on an airplane, at a hotel, or basically any other time I have to fill out a webform to get online. Perhaps those forms should not exist, but until they don't, I hope http://xkcd.com continues to work.
Genetically modified mosquitoes used to fight dengue, zika in Brazil