skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I can see at least 5 viewpoints someone might have about ads on their site:

* They don't care about the money and don't want ads on the site.

* They're someone whose content is the advertising. A database consultant might write an article on using indices to speed up low-selectivity queries. He doesn't need to plaster his site with ads, but his articles do serve a secondary purpose of advertising himself. Or something like Angie's List, where people literally visit the site with the goal of being advertised to.

* They don't mind unintrusive ads, and these help provide money and motivation to work more on the site. Google ads would be acceptable here.

* In addition to their site's primary content, they also write sponsored content for companies that give them enough money.

* They only care about extracting as much value from their site as possible. They might hire ghostwriters on Fiverr to write cheap articles, apply SEO techniques to get them to rank higher than they should, and then plaster noisy ads and popups everywhere. They might buy cheap traffic on low-contested keywords, and redirect them to sites with more expensive ads to arbitrage the traffic. They might have a form to collect your name, email address, and phone number; and then sell your information to a mortgage reselling company. They might have loud ads that play music on page load, that automatically play video, that pretend to be a Windows error dialog, that look like download buttons, etc. Some of these are arguably the ad networks' fault, but the maintainer of the website is ultimately responsible for anything that appears on his website. They might release news articles with clickbaity headlines just to drive traffic to their ads.

I think most people take offense to #5. A minority also take offense to #3, since these track location and can form profiles of you between pages. I don't think anybody really minds the #2 or #1 people.

If you banned ads entirely, you'd still be able to monetize using method #2.
The answer, I suspect, is that it potentially wholly and fundamentally disempowers existing centralized authorities - as asset issuers, regulators, reputation police, debt collectors, and border-guards - and promises to outlive them, with relative guarantees of high availability and no SPOFs.
Wherefore Art, Thou? (Larry Wall 1997)
I read the same thing in this book! http://www.amazon.com/Idea-Factory-Great-American-Innovation... I'm from Holmdel NJ, the old location of bell labs. Really cool how they used to invent so much.
Is it wrong that my first thought was for them to claim it, draw up articles/flag, and create a new country?

"The first years were a violent affair with the eruptions and lava. We, however, persevered and steadily gained acreage and with acreage came abundance."
This sort of thing — grouping incoming students based on prior ability — is fairly common in introductory foreign-language courses. If you don't do this, it's extraordinarily difficult to teach at a pace that isn't generally too fast for the newbies and isn't generally too slow for the people who have done this before.

As someone who's suggested moderately overcomplicated solutions to introductory problems: that doesn't sound like social awkwardness to me. It sounds like people trying to be helpful who don't have any experience thinking about questions like "how can I help this other person solve this problem without introducing twelve entirely new concepts and four calls to an entirely new API?"
In 15 years when the search engine have failed to evolve because Google is a monopoly and has no incentive to keep improving it, you may have a different perspective.

I am not defending AT&T, just pointing out that corporations do not care, and all of them (even Google) ultimately seek profit margins at the expense of others.
Thanks for the link. Let me repay you with one:

http://www.amazon.com/Design-Essays-Computer-Scientist/dp/02...
Lately I have been very interested in putting faces and voices to words. After reading this article, which was over my head but I got a little out of it. I ended up reading Stephen Kell's homepage, which is crazy intense as far as academics go. He had a link to a video of his and I appreciated the quality and now have a face and voice to attach to the article, therefore will probably remember it better.

tldr; Here is a video of the same guy who wrote this article ==> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwicN2u6Dro

p.s. 5 minutes in and the talk is pretty good.
If it was illegal, will anyone go to jail? Also, is it happening in any other locales?
I can see that. Here's why I think it could work nonetheless:

(1) Torwalds is one of the people able to drum up the OSS community. If people hated him so much as to not follow him on a technical detail, they'd develop for BSD rather than Linux.

(2) the reason GPLv3 has mostly failed seems to be mostly due to the controversial nature of the changes while the change for more compatibility with another free license seems straightforward
"Coupling" I understand, as sort of opposed to "modularity". What do you mean by "cohesion" in this context?
Obama's Librarian Of Congress Nominee Supports Open Access, Fights Surveillance
Are you at all familiar with the history of consumer Internet in the US, and the role AT&T, Verizon, and later Time Warner and Comcast, have played in it and the laws that regulate it?

I'd recommend you read up on municipal broadband, and the war the telecoms have waged against communities doing an end run around their shoddy and expensive service.

Likewise, look at the hoops they've forced Google to jump through to achieve even modest fiber rollouts. Google is among the biggest companies in the world. The only thing saving Google Fiber is that they are not some scrappy startup, but one of the most powerful companies in the world; without that power and economic clout, they would die a horrible death at the hands of AT&T's attorneys and pet legislators, as nearly every one of the thousands of independent ISPs did in the 90s and early 2000s.

Innovation in consumer internet service has been thoroughly strangled by the telecoms and cable companies. They've divided up the turf, come to some gentleman's agreements with each other about pricing and access, and now we're all just here to feed the cash cow. If ever there was a classic case of collusion (and, hell, I might even call it racketeering) among modern "legitimate" businesses, the telecom and cable business is it.

If you believe the lack of innovation and poor service is merely that no one is "competing", I'd encourage you to give that market a go. There's no competition, after all. It should be easy, right?
The Exceedingly Lucrative World of Selling Random Stuff on Amazon Marketplace
That applied to all system memory rather than what was in use. Memory errors in regions not in use are harmless while there are plenty of places where memory errors can occur in memory that is in use where they would not be noticed. Take the buffer storing this webpage in your web browser for example. A bit flip there would cause a misrendering that might not even be noticeable. Additionally, when a program crashes or the kernel panics, users are more likely to think it was caused by a bug in the software than a bitflip. In the rare cases where something goes catastrophically wrong, they tend to blame the software too.
Or you know - have the government own the poles and sell access to anyone who wants to run lines. Private roads are impractical except in limited circumstances (that require a huge number of public roads to enable). Infrastructure like this is similar.
You mean it claims to. In reality, these will be centralized things under management or control of companies with an ecosystem interacting with them. Regulators and lawyers will step in to do their thing. The result is... another set of authorities giving us problems. That's what future it's looking like will happen.

Of course, the problems on authorities' side might be better or worse with the new models. Nonetheless, my argument is that these blockchains are essentially a combination of specific tech, ledgers, distributed verification, cooperation, and incentives on infrastructure side. You can do all that without blockchains using simple, dumb tech with different organizational structure & participation rules.
i commented on the scihub article(o) posted earlier today by suggesting a possible solution to the issues that research publication is facing right now

the idea is to build a marketplace for peer review around an open publication, alike arxiv.org, that confers reputation and encourages multiple reviews

if a person hires a peer reviewer to review their work or someone else's, but you are skeptical of the review, you can hire a reviewer that you respect to do an independent review, one which could uphold or dispute the original review, or even illuminate some further clarification

such a community would address the issue of these 'hoax' and convoluted papers directly

(o) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11177957
Huong dan su dung may hut am dung cach
How brain research is helping machines learn like humans
It is amazing that Samsung got away with patenting mathematics.
I don't really understand why AirBnB has to be of help in this instance. Someone broke a contract and possibly vandalized a home. The truth of that statement and the penalties involved are enforceable directly through the court system.

I am very wary of companies that try to 'help' by requiring 3rd party private arbitration instead of taking it through the established legal system.
The author keeps talking about going through all possible proofs built from the axioms, as if that's a thing that obviously could be done. However, if your system is complicated enough to allow arbitrarily large combinations of axioms in your proofs, then I don't understand how you can expect enumeration of all proofs to be a finite process. Any statement that says "enumerate all possible proofs" followed by "and then do X" is meaningless, because you will never reach the "do X" step!
I use Trello.com (and have for about 4 years) for tracking all of my work tasks (from coding tasks, to making sure I reply to someone, misc things, and more). If you're not familiar with Trello, think of an online kan-ban board. They have a great web app, but also iOS and Android apps.

I have Trello organized with the following boards (from left to right on the screen):

"Thing to Do" - This is really my inbox. While I tend to make the cards in the list they need to go, if I just don't know I place it here. About once a month I go through it to make sure nothing has fallen off my radar that shouldn't or more importantly see if I can just delete it because it doesn't matter.

"Priority Tasks" - These are bigger tasks that I know are things that need to get done as workflow permits.

"Doing" - What I'm currently working on. Usually 5-10 items depending on dependencies.

"Dated Boards" - At the start of each week I create a new board with the title of being just the date. All tasks that I complete that week go onto that board. For really long tasks I may copy a card and keep it in "Doing" but put a copy in that weeks board.

Trello also has card labels, think colored flags to identify things quickly. I always have the following labels:

Red - Critical, e.g. an emergency task that takes priority over all things.
Orange - Urgent, can wait, but not long.
Yellow - Time sensitive, I don't always use the date feature on Trello cards, so I use the yellow label for things that need to be done by a set date
Blue - Big tasks or Big wins. I want to be able to find in past week when I had a big win.
Green - Interdepartmental dependency, either someone else needs this from me or I need something from someone else.

At my current job I can see back nearly three years what I did week to week. I can quickly search to see when something was done, or browse it. But more importantly it's easy to make a Trello card and once it's in Trello I can easily organize my time and tasks.
I used to have a yellow legal pad that I'd make lists on. Cross items off as they were finished (always very satisfying) and add new things to the bottom. When the page was full, too ratty, or whatever I'd rewrite the page. Towards the end (I use Trello.com now) I had two columns to sort things.
Let's put it this way... its the equivalent to having a dance party in your hotel room as opposed to just having to dance with your significant other.

Sure, it is all 'dancing' but the quantity of people has a qualitative effect on behavior.
Related: if you want to read how the Telecoms have us over a barrel, and how they fleeced us all yet never delivered on what they promised, read http://www.amazon.com/Broadbandits-Inside-Billion-Telecom-He... (by Om Malik, of GigaOm fame)
Sorry, I got excited and imprecise. I suppose I mean "developing on and around".

I'm just trying to counter the idea that the excitement around ethereum is somehow manufactured by 'clever marketing'.
It's a reference to a story about Ramanujan, who once (remarkably) told G. H. Hardy that 1729 wasn't a boring number because it was the smallest number that could be expressed as the sum of two cubes in more than one way. Sometimes trivial but always erudite in the best way, that was Wes.
How wrong they were... Turns out storing tons of data is useless if it takes forever to seek drive heads to read it.
That single person who cloned it could also backdate their hashes and claim things changed when they didn't.
Postmodernist drivel speaks for itself. Richard Dawkins wrote a great essay with some good examples. http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/dawkins.html

My favorite:

>The privileging of solid over fluid mechanics, and indeed the inability of science to deal with turbulent flow at all, she attributes to the association of fluidity with femininity. Whereas men have sex organs that protrude and become rigid, women have openings that leak menstrual blood and vaginal fluids... From this perspective it is no wonder that science has not been able to arrive at a successful model for turbulence. The problem of turbulent flow cannot be solved because the conceptions of fluids (and of women) have been formulated so as necessarily to leave unarticulated remainders.
If standards are followed and cross platform libraries are used for functionality absent from the standards, userland software should work equally well on various platforms. An enormous amount of software available for Linux already does that.
He'd talk about computers for fun, at least. But try to convince him that the internet actually worked and you'd have a whole evening's conversation on your hands...
A New Moon Rises: An Exhibition Where Science and Art Meet
An elegant reply would be to enact a large fee on privately owned telephone poles, and then waive the fee for one-touch consenting pole owners.
One other thing I really like about Trello is it's extremely flexible so you can tweak how you use it over time as you use it more.
I'm confident there will come a day when I'm ranting about Google and their anti-competitive practices (and not just, or even most importantly, on the search engine front) and rent-seeking. Google will be scary when they achieve the soulless status of T or VZ.
I totally remember Deuteros. It was riveting. I remember adding more and more stations and bases, I thought I had the game down, and then after deploying a certain number of stations, I triggered a reaction from the aliens and little by little, they started destroying all my empire. I was never able to beat that game.

But what a memory.
Quite. Minsky was actually advisor to my company, which is based in part on his notion of common sense computing. There is much to mourn recently.
> Another case of the government intervention in the free market hurting the consumers

Your statement is worded as if this is the expected outcome whenever there is government intervention in to a market. I'm not sure if I perhaps misinterpreted that, because your conclusion suggests further regulation. Regulation (from government intervention) doesn't ruin a market - bad regulation does. Just like all private companies are not like Enron - some governments have regulated the telecom market to increase competition.

It's easy to critique the failings of regulation because there are so many examples. Good regulation in my limited observations is very difficult. In my experience, the best regulations are from independent groups such as IEEE. IEC-60079 (Explosive Atmospheres) for example is a great set of rules and regulations from my perspective. As a manufacturer it would likely increase costs, and pure market thinks may suggest that the safest/cheapest manufacturer would win. However that simply doesn't happen in the real world as there are many more variables that our simple models account for.

I'm afraid I'm not sure what Georgian rent over space means, so I can't comment there. However I believe you have effectively suggested more regulation - rather than encouraging further free market, which I would agree with.

Any time there is a monopoly (poles in the ground), it must be controlled with appropriate regulation to ensure the system isn't abused. I lean towards government owned and privately operated/maintained in these scenarios - however that too has it own set of dangers.
GitHub Hires Notorious Social Justice Warrior to Work on ‘Anti-Harassment’
GP's post was about a 2-year-old. Obviously a 14-year-old has the strength to operate a firearm.
I just tested by typing ".[cr][cr]" into the new tweet box, then cutting and pasting until I was over the limit. 93 new lines. Which is, indeed, int(140*(2/3)).
Good feedback. Thank you so much.
Damn, just over 5 minutes in we have a working live demo that you can also try. You attach gdb to a running process, in this case a GUI clock called xclock.

The video I linked to above is a great compliment to the linked article.
This sounds like it'd be a full table scan to me.
Yeah, I suggest them changing the title to something that says it's letsencrypt. Had I not glanced here, I'd have totally skipped it thinking it was some scare tactics from security industry or government to push their agendas with.
If it's not too personal, I'm curious what your goals might be?
> I do not think that the well-worn stories about funding fundamental research for society's benefit are even remotely true.

Your observations of academic politics mirror my own, but I don't think your conclusion follows. In general, academics don't have nearly enough ROI as political sockpuppets, documentary hosts, or sources of cocktail-party quips to justify the level of funding they receive. If those were the only outputs of the scientific process that society valued, society would have switched to more efficient sources of them long ago. Instead, there is a consistent perception among those who finance science (taxpayers and, to a much lesser extent, wealthy patrons) that it fills a valuable niche of human progress that isn't served by other institutions.

And they're right. Yes, society doesn't know how to align scientific incentives with actual scientific value, which means that large amounts of funding are wasted and that actual progress is largely incidental to the games that researchers play on a day-to-day basis. Is that any different from any other part of the economy? Incidental progress is still progress, and the scientific game is better at producing its variety of incidental progress than any other game in town, so the decision to fund it would still be rational even if those outside of academia knew how thoroughly rotten it frequently gets. Not that they would be surprised -- academia does not have a monopoly on bullshit and politics, far from it. That's just how the world works, and most people are not foreign to the notion of sticking with something even if the absolute efficiency is dreadful.

You're reading intent into the incentive landscape that society presents to science, arguing that it rewards X, Y, and Z so therefore X, Y, and Z must be what it really wants. I think ineptitude is a much likelier explanation. Society rewards X, Y, and Z even though it really wants A, B, and X. Promoting human progress isn't a "well-worn story," it's the reason why we bother at all.

EDIT: Also, it's worth keeping in mind that Machine Learning is currently a hot field and therefore attracts opportunists and scumbags in droves. They exist elsewhere too, but they're going to be over-represented in your corner of academia.
Torvalds couldn't move the kernel to GPLv3 if he wanted to. Every contribution under v2 without the "or later" clause would have to be relicensed by the contributor, first.
This is a losing tactic, just delaying the inevitable or buying time. Legislation can only stop progress towards innovation for so long.
There's a karma threshold to downvote.
Indeed -- it's struck me recently how Wes was probably among the first (if not necessarily number one, if only because of ill-definedness) people to make computers smaller. Looking back at the sixty years since he began, it's been quite something.
Scientists do research paid for by institutions, universities, large charities and other scientific institutions. They write research papers and they have it published and those same institutions pay to get that information back. I can't think of any other area where such a crappy business model prevails.

The scientific community should reclaim their intellectual capital.
No difference in how you handle routing and history in a regular React app, those things are not related. Mobx (and mobx-react) just re-renders your component when data changes. You can check out performance tests here: https://www.mendix.com/tech-blog/making-react-reactive-pursu...
If you're lucky you get to give your money away. If you're unlucky then you die and somebody else takes it. Either way it's gone in not too many years.
Personally no, but I don't plan many events. Have you seen anyone ask for this type of stuff before? Like on a wedding forum has anyone said they've had this pain?

In other words, not just your pain. I say this because building a product doesn't mean people will come.
How is the situation with OpenZFS and Linux any different from Minecraft Server and Bukkit? It seems that the act of distributing a combined work is what causes problems, in that Spigot or zfs.ko binaries cannot be shared but one can freely build those things by oneself. No one's DMCAed BuildTools, for instance, even though CraftBukkit and Spigot binaries have been (and probably should be).
It is really time for Google, Apple, Microsoft to lawyer up and lobby, threaten and arm twist politicians into kicking ass of these telecom companies. At the end of the day Data-speeds are going to be bottleneck for their profits.

Google and others should have invested massive money to maintaining their political bitches. If they had we would have had better privacy today. If DoJ has to courage to ask Apple to hack their phones it is probably because in past companies like ATT complied without putting up a fight.
>bending over backwards to help people progress on things that they can't officially talk about by leaving the least subtle clues ever so that they can move the process forward

That sounds pretty interesting, where can I read more about it?
Bell Labs was spun off from AT&T into Lucent 20 years ago. A shell of its former self is now owned by Nokia, by way of a variety of mergers and acquisitions.
The world needs an integration of EXPLAIN + block io profiling.
In this case some poles are owned by AT&T and some are owned by the electric company.

I expect that this is common. The telephone system and the commercial electricity distribution system were developed at about the same time, and I believe that in many cities telephones were widely deployed before electricity. (I wonder if this is why the phone system provided its own power rather than relying on power being available at the customer premises?)