skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Mattress
Before the value scares you off, grasp this that the pad can leave you breathless. you may get what you're paying for. the standard of froth and different materials is what makes this pad the final word comfort bomb! although the longevity of pledge is a smaller amount compared to Memory and dearer than Memory foams however the sweetness of Tuft and needle pad is that it’s strictly their own accomplishment. they'll give you with the very best level of comfort. Understanding utterly what the purchasers ar longing for. creating it therefore snug that whichever sleeping pattern a client can select, it'll desire heaven.
If you want to know please click this linik
http://topmattressreviews.com/
All else being equal, sure, but this shortener throws up a branded redirect page for a second instead of just doing an HTTP 301 redirect. IMO, every character would have to count a lot to make up for the bad user experience.

Plus, they can't keep it this short for long. They can only shorten 3,844 URLs before they get up to 8 characters, and only 238,328 before they get up to 9, at which point it's only 3 characters shorter than j.mp. Getting popular will actually hurt their advantage.
Somewhat tangential, but I absolutely pay attention to the "Best Seller" tag - just not for books. It's relevant for many other products, like electronics or kitchen appliances, for example.
I didn't look at all of them, but the size of these sets seems pretty trivial... like you could put them all in S3 for a few dollars a month
If he could get the drive eject button to unmount the SD card, this would actually be more functional that current tech.

It bugs me that unmounting SD cards / USB drives and physically removing it are two seperate actions. It's a regression in usability after floppies and CD-ROMs.
This confirms my worst fears. We just added a large wave of new email addresses to one of our routine emails, taking it from 2k per day to 17k per day.

We currently expect to pay approximately $75 to $100 USD per month with this volume of email.

With the new "MailChimp pricing", this will cost us $150 for a MailChimp account with enough subscribers, then between $270 and $400 USD per month in data packs.

So from about $75 to $100 USD we get forced up to $420-$550

About a 5x price rise.

Nice going MailChimp...

Clearly this is an attempt to squeeze more profit out of Mandrill. Was there a management change at MailChimp or something?
Do you really need to get a dumbphone to avoid all this nonsense, though—or do you just need to get everyone to treat you as if you have a dumbphone? Which you might easily do by, say, telling them that you have a dumbphone, whether you do or not. If nobody thinks they can reach you over all these notification protocols, then you don't have to manage the notifications—even if you are, secretly, reachable over those protocols.
>That smart contract was written by a person and they should realize that there might be legal repercussions in the US at least.

Satoshi Nakamoto created the world's most powerful cryptocurrency and nobody knows anything about that person or group, remember.
There are also others, such as Appshare which I have built
Rancher is the perfect blend between tutum and kubernetes.

I highly recommend you check it out before going down the long winding road that is kubernetes.
The author created an account to post this "french houdini". Maybe it was Satoshi!
I would have done exactly what Ms Mayer did which is take the cash and run. What a scam.
I have seen this specific complaint on HN several times lately. It's a figure of speech. It means "frankly." Your refusal to pick up on English language idioms -- illogical as they may be -- is, frankly, not interesting. Can we stop?
Not really a new phenomenon. I sold 4 comics and was second only to Neil Gaiman's Sandman. https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2013/08/how-to-crack-amazons-kindle...

It's an even less useful a heuristic than "As Seem On TV!"
AT&T is basically a full voluntary partner in the surveillance state.
Learning lisp syntax requires just a very short introduction.
In SICP, it is said that they never formally taught lisp at class. The students just pick Lisp up in a matter of weeks.
I would call Scala a functional language. In the sense that object-orientation and FP are not eachothers opposite. Imperative and FP are.
I guess awkwardness is in the eye of the beholder. I think it's an elegant language with which it is a joy to develop large code bases.
I was asking for the names of the experts allegedly behind Erlang.

As for listing companies that use Erlang, plenty of companies use PHP and COBOL too. This doesn't say anything about whether these languages are the most adequate for the task and whether these projects wouldn't be in a better shape if written in a different language.
Just to clarify, the efficiency is 100% minus 5-6, or ~95%. (I know that's what you meant, just in case anyone is confused.)
“Our model uses only 377 MB, which even fits into the memory of a smartphone”

Okay. But wouldn't this be more useful as a web service?
> One aspect of it is that it is used more of an infrastructure language

Ah yes, the "dark matter" argument. It's out there but nobody can see it. You'll just have to trust me.
More think of you're bidding on a contract with General Electric and the guy across the table has been listening in on all of your conference calls and reading all of your confidential documents courtesy of your competitors mole at the FBI. And so he knows what your go no go point is to the penny.
Why You Don't Admit Your Mistakes and How Confirmation Bias Ruins Your Morals
What a great point.

I am so paranoid now about removing USB drives after I accidentally removed one while it was still writing to the drive (which I had no idea because there was no LED on the drive) and it bricked the entire device.

I generally wait until my computer has shutdown completely now before removing any important drives, just to be sure.
That would be amusing, but I do hope the author has taken a lot of care to keep him/her/themselves hidden. Angry bankers are not toys you want to play with.

I have always wondered if the NSA knows who Satoshi is.
I am sorry that this came across this way. I did not intend to say bad things about GlusterFS but carve out where the technical differences are in the big picture.

Also I actually tried not to make any valuing statements. I am using the term split brain safety as technical term, ie. the P in CAP. My understanding is that GlusterFS does not have this in its system model and you and the documentation seem to support this: "This prevents most cases of "split brain" which result from conflicting writes to different bricks."

Quobyte generally (and XtreemFS only for files) does quorum replication based on Paxos, where split brain is part of the system model. They are CP and hence data is not always available but is always consistent for reads if the quorum is there. Like Ceph.

I am sorry that I missed the progress on placement. It seems like I need to catch up on what happened after the volume types.
Isn't this limited to binary options because binary options have a set price and payout?

Regular puts and calls have a potentially unlimited payout which means the seller would have to put up some serious collateral and/or hedge their exposure. If nothing else, I'd figure that would add some complexity and/or counterparty risk.

I'm not well versed in these matters, so perhaps you could enlighten me.
> if you ignore the digital nature of things

That is a gigantic "if"
Sure, but his reasoning of "single neutron is unstable implies a bound state containing neutrons is also unstable" is not necessarily sound.
Thank you for the post, it is always great reading performance reports they make you think twice next time you develop software and question if you got any "code smells" to work on in your own code as well.
http://erlang.se/publications/ericsson_review_axd301_1998012...

erlang was literally developed for telephone switches
What about the neutrons in a neutron star -- do they also decay into protons? Aren't neutron stars long-lived?
> that is exactly how most families operate.

Do you have non-anecdotal evidence for that? Among my own friends and family, there are some images that only exist on one device or account, but most of the stuff likely to draw interest ends up somewhere else (a shared Dropbox account, e-mail attachments, on Facebook, copied onto some form of external storage).

There are likely some demographic groups that are more likely to behave one way than the other, and that could perhaps account for our differing experiences.

On second though, it is the easiest way to use the account (each person having an account on each device). I wonder what percentage of people that would benefit from it actually use the Family Sharing option?
This is so cool. Hopefully the UX ends up avoiding the pitfalls suffered by PGP.

I would love to ask clients to "sign here" on a blockchain-enforced contract before they decide not to pay just because they feel like they can, despite perfect delivery to their own satisfaction.
That I'm aware of, nobody wants to pay the price for that. Much like with high assurance systems in general. Demos, prototypes, and so on available with no uptake due to tradeoffs involved. Or maybe I.P. issues, too.
That was the reason Erlang was created in the first place: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erlang_%28programming_language...
> Who are they, besides Joe? Can you at least provide their names?

One of them is here on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=rvirding
Playing on the population's fear of terrorism is just a tool used to consolidate power. The will to power of the government is not evil, but it must be constrained by an educated population.

The intent of the 4th amendment was to guarantee privacy in our personal lives. This protection has obviously been eroded as the the information of our lives has become digitally interconnected.

I think the real question is what do we do from here?

The same technology that binds us together could be used to create a true democratic system. It's time for us to evolve past the American democratic process, which was designed to protect against the "tyranny of the majority."
What you're describing reads to me as "abuse of the flagging feature".

Is the point of the flagging feature to be a nuclear downvote when you disagree with something?
I've also gone with Spark, after looking into the bunches of iOS mail clients. But I'm jaded now. Sparrow was independent, and good, and got bought and shuttered. Mailbox was independent and good, and got bought and shuttered. Spark is independent, and very nice, but it's free, and it'll get bought...and shuttered. :(

I like Google Inbox a LOT, but it doesn't have a unified mail interface, and if a million people don't use it every day, it'll probably get shuttered like Google Health and Reader did...

I'm just saying, don't get too attached to your email client, especially if it's not a profit center for the company making it.

Server-side access is what's needed in order to do push-notification based email updates, which is an important feature for me, and having written that code once or twice, I'm totally okay with that.
Haven't used Soulseek in years. Mac client... Love it.
The developers knew of Linux but did not necessarily design with any intention of a port or plans in regard to the Linux VFS or kernel design. When it was a Solaris kernel feature, it was clearly not derived from Linux.

The modifications to make this driver to run on Linux caused a derivative work its original source (Solaris) and maybe of Linux itself. The 2003 thread implies that in such a case these modifications may not be derivative of Linux. That some kernel developers feel that the headers are factual and thus not copyrightable.

One could legally blackbox recreate the necessary header files and guarantee that their kernel module was not a derivative binary, so I believe that creating a proprietary kernel module should be legal in principal.

On the matter of linking, the FSF claims that dynamic linking can violate the license, but this is constituted under their understanding of a "derived work". Yet, the US code[1] clarifies that new copies and "adaptations" of a work do not constitute an infringement when created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program[2]. The term "adaptation" is not defined but because this section is notwithstanding the author's "exclusive right... to prepare derivative works" implies that "adaptations" and "derivative works"[3] are not equal. This would strengthen a position stating that no derivative works are created by simply running, linking, or loading applications.

[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/chapter-1 (read 101, 106, 117)
[2] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/117
[3] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/101
Any links got fasthttp?
I meant the therapist wasn't asking the patient to predict the future by asking if she was sure, as the author suggests (by thinking 'absolutely' meant in case of any event, or under any circumstances, even if the apocalypse happened). I'm just illustrating the logic behind 'absolutely sure'.
I think the therapist's question is logically sound, even under scrutiny because "sure" is basically a subjective perspective, therefore it is possible to be absolutely sure, because you can search within you to see if that absoluteness exists. That's why I thought the author of the article was stretching it a bit much, and her premise of "being too academic" doesn't hold for me in that example. I get what she means, but I guess those were bad examples, and exemplify that she probably has English as a second language, rather than her thinking being too academic. I guess I'm not convinced because if anything, being too academic should give you the tools to completely dissect someone else's message, rather than not understanding it properly.
One way to think about it:

They do decay into protons and electrons, and then are immediately squished back into neutrons by the immense pressure. (There is a missing neutrino to wonder about though.)

Another way to think about it:

They are unable to decay into protons plus electrons because there isn't enough "room" for the two particles to exist in the space formerly taken up by one particle. See: Electron degeneracy pressure.

Basically all particles decay, unless there is something stopping them - for example there is nothing lighter for them to decay into.

You could ask why don't the neutrons in nucleus's decay into protons? It's because it's not energetically favorable for them to do so.

That's basically all decay is: Is it energetically favorable to be something else. The more energy is involved the "faster" it decays (sort of, it's more like the more energy relative to the barrier).
Functional programming is a programming paradigm that treats computation as the evaluation of mathematical functions. A function is a rule that assigns, to every element of its domain, a unique element of its codomain.

Note that the above definition says nothing about how functions are to be evaluated: strictly, lazily, memoizing previously computed results, or using magic. No general-purpose programming paradigm can make such decisions for the programmer.
I would add technology to your list of things we need to save this planet. And I'd say it's useful to know that making things that burn fossil fuel more efficient is not a viable solution to the problem of global warming.

We are now beginning to have good products on the market that are sustainable: electric and solar. Making internal combustion engines more efficient seems a dead end. Or worse - making them more efficient may delay the move to what is actually sustainable.

Side note: I regret adding my comment about downvotes. But I will leave it to preserve sense of thread and to remind me not to go there again.
Not saying nonsense (“Lisp is just axioms”) is part of being civil.
If only make_unique (and make_shared) worked with uniform initialization...

struct Foo {
int i;
float f;
bool b;

// No constructor
};

std::make_unique<Foo>(1, 2.3f, true);

Doesn't compile, since make_unique requires an appropriate constructor (see https://isocpp.org/files/papers/n3588.txt for the rationale).

It also doesn't work when Foo's constructor is private, even when called from a function that would have access to this private constructor.

And this is my beef with C++: Yes it's powerful, and I quite like it, but you sooner or later hit these speed bumps that unnecessarily complicate things.
Transparency would show how people are using the feature and we could have an honest discussion about the appropriateness based on that.

Instead we have to draw our own conclusions which incentivizes a cynical spiral that "the other guys are abusing it so I should too".
>Nobody actually thinks the US government will suddenly implement martial law, extrajudicial detention, or unsanctioned executions.

The US government already does these things. It has even done some of those things to US citizens, although obviously the vast majority of the people extrajudicially executed or detained are foreigners.

In terms of public opinion you are probably right though. You aren't going to change the opinion of American voters by talking about how foreign children get executed by the US government based on dragnet surveillance.
Unraveling the Long Thread of the Sony Attack [pdf]
I can't seem to get into the game of fully automated deployments to production. It definitely interests me but a few things always hold me back.

The first issue is that I've probably set up 10 or 15 app development and deployment "systems" if you will. I've found that it's very beneficial to automate the simple stuff but it quickly reaches a point of diminishing returns. A super-custom system always works great for a while until some big change or library upgrade or refactor or whatever comes down the pipe. Then we spend a ton of time resetting up everything. We have to keep the build system components up to date so it doesn't turn into an ancient mystery box. Sometimes an upgrade breaks the whole thing and then we're on stack exchange all day debugging a parser library or some other thing that we don't care about. Basically spending hours and days and weeks on the build system so we can have that sweet one-click (or fully automated) deploy.

The other thing is that we release frequently but we tend to double check everything before it goes to production. Our staging server is auto-deployed except DB changes which we do manually. Right now it's about 2-3 clicks for us to deploy to production and it works fine. We still do DB changes manually though. It takes a minute or two to deploy. I feel like the process encourages that final check that everything is cool.

I guess I'm nervous to set up something that deploys to production simply by adding a tag to a slack message or the git commit message. Should I get over myself? If I change my thinking is it possible that deployment to prod could be a non-event?
I know that. The last I heard was that Erlang decided to stop developing with Erlang, causing Armstrong and others to leave. I see they've reverses that decision and there are mentions of use at various mobile companies, so that's cool.
Corporations can sue you, whereas governments can do a lot more.
I have no idea what you're talking about.

You can see which link has been posted. Hover over the link. All common web browsers show the link.

What kind of "link checker" do you mean? That term is usually used in connection with link rot. But all HN submissions are fresh. And what does the submission page have to do with it?
That's a product from the late nineties. I have no idea how broadly it's used today.
I can see why you would think that. But neutrons really are distinct particles.

A neutron has 3 quarks in it, not 3 quarks plus an electron.

That down quark that became an up quark: An up quark is not a down quark plus an electron.
> probably the first language to seriously compete with C++

How about Object Pascal? I think Object Pascal is a better C++ than C++. It's too bad it isn't more widely used. Here are a couple of interesting perspectives from people who have done some recent development with Object Pascal:

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11005203 (see also https://github.com/whatwg/wattsi)

2. http://ziotom78.blogspot.com/2015/01/lfi-data-analysis-with-...
How do you define functional such that the only way to identify it is to work there?
I've been searching for a music player app that does volume normalization for years, without luck. I would like to be able to listen to normalized classical music, for example, because the volume varies a lot in this kind of audio from quiet passages to loud ones. When listening in car or on the phone while outside it becomes hard to hear the quiet passages because of all the surrounding noise, so, normally, I'd raise the volume, but then comes the loud part and my ears bleed. Normalized audio also plays nice with listening to music on the feeble phone speakers. I kind of find it nostalgic to listen on such tiny speakers, like the transistor radios from a few decades ago.

What I am talking about is raising the volume of the quiet parts, not making all the parts of the track louder. I would listen at normal volume but be able to hear at a sane volume throughout the track. I think this can be achieved offline with the compand effect on sox.

Another listening experience improvement could be to compare the relative volume of noise outside (using the mic) with the volume of the music being played and slightly adjust the volume to keep it above the background noise.

In conclusion, it is necessary to consider the fact that listening on the phone and car happens in noisy environments and quiet passages are almost drowned if the user doesn't compensate. Why force the user with mess with the volume every few minutes when it can be achieved automatically?

Maybe a brave developer will champion this idea and release a music player or even better, an app to normalize over the whole OS so we could benefit from it while using other apps like YouTube.
robert virding, richard o'keefe, francisco cesarini, mike williams, joe armstrong, ulf wiger, brian troutwine, fred hebert, jose vadim, steve vinoski, serge aleynikov?
Did you try using hn.algolia.com? You can filter for whatever.
You're not being treated like an employee, employees get paid. You're being treated like a useful idiot.
Never mind, just found it https://github.com/valyala/fasthttp
Although this is not a useful "innovation", I had fun while watching it.
Whenever you hear about a violation of privacy by the US government, you can guarantee that GCHQ laughs at how much easier it is for them. We have no constitution to tie their hands, and the Human Rights Act is a hopelessly weak substitute. The public doesn't complain, because the government and media have managed to convince them that human rights are something only used by terrorists and paedophiles. There's no separation of legislative and executive branches either, and the Human Rights Act has no special status and can be repealed like any other act of Parliament. The one saving grace is that our Supreme Court is not political, so doesn't rule on partisan lines.
This is more than a agreement to not levy tariffs on each others trade. Since it includes a loss of sovereignty for the US government it should be directly incompatible with the US constitution..
ok, i just received a mail from mailchimp that the information provided to me by two of their service agents is indeed wrong. You really "just" need a monthly paid account, which still is pointless.
I expected something like the 3.5mm-to-cassette adapters that exist for older cars with tape decks.

http://www.amazon.com/Car-Cassette-Adapter-iPod-Sirius/dp/B0...
Thanks for sharing this. This looks like a really good alternative to flightaware, if the data is accurate.
correct, the information provided to me seems indeed to be wrong, since a third(!) support person contacted me, stating that you indeed "just" need a monthly account, no matter how big it is.