skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Those features are already present in human-driven taxis.
The parallels are greater than even those you described. I'm helping a startup focused on bringing out an integrated research environment to help fix many of the issues presented in the comments here and the article. Happy to chat with anyone who would like to see a demo. Email Lane (at) MyIRE dot com.
http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/wg14/www/docs/n1124.pdf, section 7.20.3.2 "The free function":

"The free function causes the space pointed to by ptr to be deallocated, that is, made available for further allocation. If ptr is a null pointer, no action occurs."
I don't know, if yoms has a different meaning, maybe father has, too.

I propose, children would be given responsibilities early on, they had to start soon. So, maybe being a father at figure 65 months means teaching a brother or cousin or other newborn and leaving the adults care for the food. They would form trust for one another while the resentment from biological parents towards their children, as shown with gods fury over adam and eve, would be mutual. "Alter" (older) in german can mean big brother, or father, but generally any subjectively old one.

Of course I mainly agree to the story aspect, but I don't know any other mysticism about the mentioned figures.
Ask HN: Actions I can take against a company wanting to clone my SAAS-Website
I just found a post on freelancer dot com, asking for 1:1 clone of my companies SAAS-Webservice. (The really refer to our domain in the posting)

Though it is flattering, that somebody thinks it is good enough to make a clone of it, and that they thouroughly undeerstimate the complexity of the product, I do fear loosing some of the hard work and money invested.

Any advice or experience on how to go about this?

Update:
As I am quite certain by now, that the company posting, is located in our vicinty, the one thing I'd really like to know is who they are. Anybody got experience in getting a name from freelancer dot com?
The big difference is that LXD can run, in an unprivileged fashion, a systemd based distro without issue, and with a sensible view of /proc.

Docker can't currently do that, largely because running a distro in a container isn't an important goal for them.
Watch a team of 17-gram microrobots pull a full-sized car
In a lot of circles, especially where web developers are involved, you'll get called out for premature optimization for spending any mental energy worrying about memory usage or bandwidth. The idea is that computers are fast, so we can just do whatever we want, and worry about it if it becomes a problem. The result is that it becomes a problem, then gets patched up to meet whatever bare minimum performance standards the company has (or the deadline arrives and it's released unoptimized) and we end up with the absurdly heavy and resource-greedy software we see today.
Here's what is coming in the next few days:

- More examples that you can look at

- Templates with data population mechanism

- Better Readme file (how to use babel etc.)

- Other system improvements
NetDeploy: use any command line program as a threaded socket server
Windows 10 Store Will Continue to Support Bitcoin – Official Statement
I've been fooling around with caffeine medicinally as a decongestant when I have a cold. Psuedoephedrine being strangely hard to acquire in these meth days. I've had excellent results. I believe my tolerance from tea drinking lets my brain sleep but the stimulant effects none the less let my sinuses clear.

Aside from jittery feelings, I am actually physically jittery if I drink too much caffeine so some hobbies involving couple square mm surface mount components have to be scheduled with tea or energy drink consumption. Two cups of nice black tea and I'm not hand soldering 0402 components that day, although its easy when I'm "sober".
Show HN: Turn NPM installs into a Space Invaders style game in your terminal
A very old joke (circa 1997, when Clippy was introduced):

Two engineers are arguing: a mechanical engineer and a software engineer.

The software engineer brags:

If we were the ones making cars, they'd go twice as fast as they do now and they'd use half the fuel!

The mechanical engineer replies:

Yes, but if you'd want to break in case of an emergency you'd get a pop-up saying: Are you sure you want to break? Yes/No/Cancel.
Works fine for me with noscript, with the 'temporarily allow top-level domains' option set.
My friend has a Tesla, and he said it's the same as cruise-control. Basically, it's an assistive feature, but you are still 100% totally responsible for anything your car does while you're at the helm. I don't know if you count that as driving itself or not, since you still have to do most of the things you do as a driver (i.e., pay attention, react to situations.)
If it were positioned as an article about writing thoughtful code then I doubt the comments would be as focused on the claim in the headline. Knuth's point was that even thoughtful programmers could get caught up in pursuing performance in areas where it ultimately didn't matter, and even more critically, that even thoughtful programmers could be guilty of discarding a clear, comprehensible piece of code in favor of something terser, and less accessible due to a perceived performance benefit.
But presumably Amazon benefits (saves money) from making more use of hardware resources. It has to have some spare, but not as much spare as a comparable group of non-AWS users would have in total....

Also, presumably, not all the AWS users are awake at the same time ;-)
Nice of you to call this out. I think everyone understands that not all of the people involved will get mentioned by name in a Wired article. A project like this clearly isn't a four person operation, and hopefully most people realize there are always a bunch of people working behind the scenes.

My only disappointment is that by trying to set a PR friendly narrative, Dropbox greatly compressed the time spent on the project from inception to completion, and that erases a lot of people's involvement. As someone who worked on MP when it actually was a four person project, it's a little frustrating to finally be able to talk about it after all this time while at the same time the public perception is that the project began after I left the company.
Yes, let's ignore the fundamental law and the right to asylum - the most logical solution - and cite the most far fetched reasons.

You are entiteld to apply for asylum. And until a judge (not some guy on the internet) says no, you are allowed to stay in the country.

In the first step, your origin does not matter, just look at case of Andre Sheperd (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/André_Shepherd).

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the german law allows people to seek asylum. That people who are denied are not getting deported, that is another matter. However even here are a lot of restraints.

Please do not turn a complicated matter in a polemic "do this one thing to solve all your problems" snakeoil thing.

And, to be fair, a lot of the problems with people failing to integrate into society are because Germany ignored the immigrants in the 60s and 70s and hoped that they will get away. Turns out that not "wasting" money on education bites you in the long run.
That's referring to fully-autonomous cars. With systems like the one in this article, the driver is still the human, not the car.
They cant spell dioxide, and theyre not measuring pm2.5 theres a site at heathrow that does measure pm2.5 http://www.heathrowairwatch.org.uk/data/graphs
I noticed the same thing, and my guess is that the WSJ is generally dismissive of climate change risk, and against government incentives to combat climate change, and wanted to frame this article as what the government should be doing instead of encouraging hybrid/electric vehicles.
I'm curious about whether this is going to be a net win or lose for safety.

If users treat these automated cruise systems as a "magic self-driving device" when it can potentially make mistakes or hand back control when it's confused, drivers are going to die.

If people "really want to look at their cell phones", and they take this as the tool that lets them pay no attention to the road, it better be up to that task.
Nice work!

It would be cool if there were pointers to recommended videos/courses from other organizations (Stanford, MIT, etcetera) for further learning.

PS: I would have wished my college classes had such relaxing background music :)
"Safety and justice" are abstract concepts. Referencing them without discussing specific situations can only lead one to the conclusion that more is better.

I brought things closer to specifics, while needing to stay general, by asserting that any real crime must have real-world physical involvement, which can always be investigated and policed.

It's always been possible to execute the "perfect murder", although few manage to accomplish it. I don't see how that could possibly change with the addition of bicycles for the mind, unless they lead to psionic powers.

What we're actually "debating" here is law enforcement getting a temporary boost due to criminals' misunderstanding of technology, and now fighting tooth and nail to hold onto the transient. Nobody was breaking out of jail and then posting about it on facialbook in 1950, so in 2050 when someone breaks out of jail and posts on e2e socialnet, police will simply have to use the same classic investigative techniques they've always had.
I will update the readme to show how to transpile DOM99 to ES5
Well, if you have an inference engine or something, and there's a situation that it hasn't encountered before, but there are sufficient rules to derive a solution, it may do pretty well. But if it's a completely novel situation, AIs of any flavor tend to fail pretty spectacularly.

Humans also can fail spectacularly. But they also can just try something, realize quickly that it isn't working, and switch to trying something else. An AI could do the same, of course. But humans are better (at the moment at least) at eyeballing the situation and realizing that the current approach isn't working. (Or so it seems to me.)
“convert X: /fs:ntfs” convert harddrive filesystem
Consider a hypothetical situation where we have to print a lot of currency to repay our debts. Foreign debt-holders realize that they are effectively getting robbed by our monetary policy and complain to their governments. Those governments decide to threaten with military power, to convince us to change our monetary policy or to take some of our assets.

In that situation, our balance sheet would be ok, but our country would be in very bad straits. So we would be stuck in a real sense, if not in an economic sense.

His lecturer probably (naively) believes that America will be dominant for so long that we won't have to worry about pesky things like the threat of war from other countries on economic grounds.
Idk about bloodletting, but Acupuncture and most if not all of TCM in general is frowned upon not because it lacks modern theory on why it works. These things are frowned upon because evidence suggests its all placebo effect and not medicine.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect
What’s New for Designers, March 2016
> Optimization often involves making code less clear, more
> brittle, or with a more pasta-like organization.
> Frequently optimization requires writing code that if
> looked at out of context, doesn't make sense or might
> even look wrong.

I agree so much with this. It's better to write a sub-optimal implementation for a component which is clear & can be replaced with a more performant version later, when the bottlenecks have been identified + the interface is well-defined and -tested, and the team can accept the maintenance burden of non-obvious code.

This does mean you can't skimp on good design, making your project a collection of modular, replaceable components.
"If it were positioned as an article about writing thoughtful code then I doubt the comments would be as focused on the claim in the headline."

Sorry, I did not mean to delegitimize those points. I understand where they are coming from.
From the article: "as long as lane markings remain visible and another vehicle is in front of the car." That's more like platooning, which was demoed two decades ago in Demo 97 [1], than self-driving. Are there more details about how this works, especially about autopilot disconnect and user takeover? Tesla's system is known to have trouble with offramps.[2] (Tesla customers are very forgiving. "It's a beta", one says in their forum.)

Honda's follow-the-leader system avoids some of Tesla's problems. Radar systems for not rear-ending the car ahead are already pretty good, and many are already on the road. Lane following by lane markings isn't that reliable, but restricting it to following the car ahead handles traffic jams nicely while locking out most of the hard cases.

The deployment of self-driving systems which are much dumber than Google's is worrisome. I've written before of the "deadly valley" of automated driving. This is another "deadly valley" system. The deadly valley begins where the driver can take their hands off the wheel and tune out. It ends where the automated system can correctly handle more situations than a human driver.

Google is trying hard to get to the far side of the deadly valley. That's good. Look at the problems they're having. Their only known fender-bender in autonomous mode was when the vehicle was trying to deal with a drain blocked with sandbags and very slowly maneuvered around it, to be hit by a bus, while in a wide lane at a right turn, because the AI misjudged the likely behavior of the bus driver. Google's dealing with the hard edge cases. Cruise, on the other hand, ran into a parked car in San Francisco when the autopilot lost lane tracking, veered left, overcorrected right, and the driver took back control too late. That's a more basic failure.

It also shows the problem with semi-autonomous systems. Expecting the driver to compensate for failures of the automation will not work.

Volvo Car Group President and CEO Håkan Samuelsson says that the company will accept full liability whenever one of its cars is in autonomous mode.[3] He has it right. This needs to be a requirement before the "move fast and break things" crowd gets on the road.

nonmarked-ramp
[1] http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/.../pavements/...
[2] https://forums.teslamotors.com/de_DE/forum/forums/careful-wh...
[3] http://fortune.com/2015/10/07/volvo-liability-self-driving-c...
I am not pro-proprietary-software. I am pro-software. Software and technology are empowering and fascinating, especially to bright young kids.

Now, free software is more empowering than proprietary software. And kids need exposure to software they can tinker with. But if you meet a kid who is a little intimidated by the thought of learning coding, but loves playing Minecraft, then you're really going to tell them to stop playing Minecraft and use some weird GNU programs? Versus getting them going on Minecraft Portable Edition on a Raspberry Pi and working through some Python tutorials so that they can make something awesome?

That's making the perfect the enemy of the good. I'm all for software freedom, but you need to hook a fish before you can reel it in.
The Epic Story of Dropbox’s Exodus from the Amazon Cloud Empire
My brother purchased a 2016 Subaru Outback with Eyesight and his comments to me have largely been the same. The only complaint I've heard is that if it's snowing or the roads have snow cover many of the features are unreliable. His praise when the roads are clear, however, has convinced me to look into it when my current lease expires at the end of this year.
As I said, I do not carry my handgun on my person while in public. I do have one in my car because I travel some distance on a regular basis that is purely in the sticks for 60 or 70 miles. I'd hate to have a breakdown and have no way to defend myself, but it's never on my person out and about.

Well-regulated has yet to be defined, as it were, and it needs to remain somewhat amorphous. I'm opposed to firearms registration because it becomes a de facto list of gun owners to demonize down the road. A certain presidential candidate has already said they intend to pursue more heavy restrictions, especially registration. They have been heard to mention that handguns should be for the military and police only. These politicians all seem to be in love with Australian-style firearms registration. No, thank you.
I agree completely, but the very first thing they'd do would be figure out how to turn it off or muffle it. Bad drivers are not the type to take feedback well or let things like the rules get in the way.
Yes, this is where, in practice, I've seen the adage used incorrectly. Even when Knuth isn't quoted directly, the idea that "premature optimization" is inherently a bad thing has led many a web developer down the path of terrible architecture decisions. So I understand Duffy's point exactly.

It's not that all issues are preventable. It's that you can prevent a lot of them with just a little extra work up front.

It's a misuse of Knuth's original point, which has much more to do with how brittle and incomprehensible "optimized" code can become.
Understood everything about it, except this:

Could you please calculate what does it weigh minified in ready-to use ES5 state? I'd like to compare it to some other ready libraries and my own solution.
This simply isn't feasible.

Yes you can do key escrow via PGP (so you could, in theory, have a sound encryption algorithm at work) but you have multiple sets of issues with this idea.

First the way this escrow works is you encrypt the file system with a randomly generated key. This key is then encrypted by using this escrow key the manufacturer keeps along with another copy of the key being encrypted by some random, initial password which is kept in plaintext or somehow already known to the user (gotta be able to decrypt the encrypted filesystem when the user first gets the phone). At that point the default password is used, the user re-encrypted the key for the data using their own passcode. Now you have two keys that can unlock the phone. This ignores the whole issue of being able to access that data's initial key the entire time during transport but how else are you going to give the user the ability to decrypt the data key so they can even access the device?

Then what do you do with the keys? Phones are made in China so there would be zero stopping China from forcing all companies to provide this escrow key. But let's say you got around that, how do you respond to lawful requests for these keys? You either need to move them all to the United States or keep them in China; either way they're sitting somewhere, at least, where attackers could attempt to gain access to.

Second, and honestly the biggest issue here, is the UX of this flat out sucks. So now if you forget your password you either have to format the phone (thusly destroying the original escrow key) or the phone is simply bricked and there is no way to recover.

There is simply not a mathamatically way to provide multiple parties access to an encrypted piece of data / volume without decreasing its security.
I was having foot pain a few years ago and decided to give those a try before shelling out to see a podiatrist/get custom orthotics. My foot pain was gone within a week and only came back on one occasion; when I bought new shoes and forgot to put them in the new pair.

Still, I've wondered if I'm missing out by not getting custom inserts. It sounds like (at least in your case) there was no major difference?
How do you distinguish optimization from design?
It's a cost optimization. How much engineer time does it take to shave 0.2 seconds off of an action that's got a 0.3s animated transition anyway? How much engineering does it take to care about the memory footprint of a website users are going to close in 5 minutes anyway?

Most of the time, the answer is "Too much, not worth it". Some of the time the answer is "Let's do it". Knowing which situation you are in is key.

Ideally, I should write code for readability and maintainability and let the compiler and runtime worry about optimizations.
I can only really speak from the Roman Catholic perspective, but traditionally there are three pillars of Lent: fasting, prayer, and almsgiving. The requirements for fasting have varied over the centuries. The strictest fast is the Black Fast [1], which was regularly observed (I think) sometime around the Early or High Middle Ages. It's similar to the fast observed by the Orthodox, though it intensifies during Holy Week (only bread, salt, herbs, and water allowed). Up until the early twentieth century or so, Catholics were required to fast every day of Lent except Sundays [2] (i.e., take only one full meal a day with two small meals that cannot, combined, form a full meal).

In the modern Roman Catholic Church the fasting requirements have been substantially relaxed. The only requirements are fasting on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday and abstaining from meat on Fridays. The other days of Lent are still penitential days, but the bishops of the region have the authority to determine the form of the penance. In the United States the bishops have stated that it is acceptable to substitute fasting for some other form of penance determined by the individual.

My impression is that the Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic churches still observe a much more rigorous fast, more like the Roman Catholic Church used to a few centuries ago. As a side note, I've always been the most impressed with the Coptic Christians. They observe, by far, the most rigorous fasting schedule. They fast 210 days out of the year! [3]

[1]: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02590c.htm

[2]: Hence Lent is strictly speaking only 40 days (a more biblically significant number) because the Sundays are excluded from the fasting.

[3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fasting_and_abstinence_of_the_...
I just want to say, I have a similar vehicle system (Eyesight, rather than Honda Sensing) and I agree with everything you are saying. It isn't self-driving, it is just a bunch of really cool driver assist technology.

Unfortunately the reason why these systems fail on sharp turns is that the lane-line literally falls outside of the camera's vision. Aside from adding two more cameras (which I'd welcome) I cannot see them fixing it in software.

I totally would have purchased a 2016 Accord but no all-wheel-drive option. To me AWD, Blind Spot, Cross Traffic, and Eyesight made for one amazing overall safety package. The Accord has some nice unique features (e.g. Android Auto) but they need more than just Honda Sensing as OPTIONS.
> I am personally used to writing code where 100 CPU cycles matters.

Not me, bucko. I'm used to writing code that, if it needs to go fast, I buy more CPU time and run it in parallel.
Couldn't agree with this more.

One of the things that's not immediately apparent in an initiative like this is the huge amount of effort required to provision, deploy and manage a system of this scale, across a whole bunch of different teams. We couldn't have done any of this without a tremendous group of SREs with the wisdom to invest heavily in automation, in addition to all the hard work.

We'll follow up in a week or two with a blog post highlighting some of the work here. I think the framework for disk remediation (automatically detecting failures, re-provisioning, etc) is particularly interesting.
+1 to this. Used rabbit extensively in production but now #10 on the list. Nats is #1 as a transport message bus in my opinion.
It might take a while before self driving is widely available, but self stopping is here today. It's now standard equipment in all new Mercedes -- including cars selling for about $30k. I have an entry-level Mercedes and it includes blind spot radar, lane tracking, and collision avoidance that will stop your car automatically if you're distracted or incapacitated. These features are available widely from most automakers now.