skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
So, let's say the U.S. tech sector compromises. Who outside of the U.S. is ever going to use software, hardware or services developed by the U.S. again?

Second, I completely agree with others that, well, the government has brought this on itself.
You seem to be ignoring the tens of millions of people who actually died and countless more who were actually oppressed at the hands of governments in the last century.
10 Famous Women in Tech History
Data Science RSS Feed – Do you have enough data about your data
I would like future competitions between AIs and humans to have a "power budget" for training and during gameplay. For example, a chess grandmaster that has played for 20 years would have spent X amount of energy training. The AI should get an equivalent budget to train with. During gameplay, the AI would get the same 20 watts [1] that a human has. This would drive the development of more efficient hardware instead of throwing power at the problem :)

[1] http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2009-11/neuron-comp...
Starting from scratch, they first need to get a head. This takes 2 tosses on average (1 with 50% probability, 2 with 25% probability, 3 with 12.5% probability, etc.). At that point, both Alice and Bob have 50% chance of getting the target sequence with one additional toss.

In the case of failure, Alice still has 50% chance of success in each subsequent toss. On average she will need two additional tosses to get a tail and the answer is 2+2=4.

In the case of failure, Bob has to start again. If we call the answer x, we can write x=2+0.5 1+0.5 (1+x) and solving the equation we get x=6.
Unbreakable encryption exists. Trying to legislate it away is like trying to stuff the genie back in the bottle.

There is no way to prevent "bad guys" from writing encryption software and installing it on programmable devices; you can find the code for AES in under one minute, written for any language you desire. It takes an undergrad level of programming ability to create a functioning app that does basic AES encryption. So ISIS just needs one programmer with this ability -- and somehow I doubt that person is going to give a copy of the master private key to law enforcement.

To the extent that governments prevent unfettered use of encryption in mainstream devices, "bad guys" will just use rasbperry pi's, custom ASICs they get fabricated, etc. Programmable devices capable of running strong ciphers and communicating over the internet are absurdly cheap now.

Limiting the use of cryptography would therefore only harm stupid and non-resourceful criminals, and regular people with something to hide. Which is everyone, kind of.
Damn couldn't they be used for mesh internet in cities?
I think one part of the reason is "good" developers almost never apply for jobs to work on such projects. These projects are not cool or cutting edge, and you won't learn anything new. Also the reason why a lot of outsourcing, which is boring, and tedious 'business software' type work ends up being of average to below average quality.

It happens elsewhere too. Like how poor people get public defenders who are overworked, underpaid and not as good as private lawyers.
The Making of a Modern British Soldier
I guess it's sort of brave for him to come out and say this, since Wilson's livelihood depends in part on his relationship with the tech industry, which is on this issue as he describes it.

But it's just not enough to point out that the people are entitled to every person's evidence. For that principle to have any sound control over engineering, we need a means for evidence to be produced in court cases but not coughed up to extralegal procedures by the DoD or other countries. Nobody knows how to do that right now.

I'm unlike virtually all of HN in that I think both Obama and Wilson are raising a valid point, as are the "Going Dark" campaigners. But just because the argument is valid doesn't mean that we should build weaker security. We may have to live with real, meaningful challenges to law enforcement for years or decades while we work out a response to the problem.
The one negative that is 100% real, and is slowing language adoption, is the problems with its community. Everything else is pretty easy to fix IMO.

There are a variety of 'factions' in the Scala community, with very different agendas. They disagree about which parts of the language are useful, and which ones to outright cut out. Research language focus, vs practical use in the enterprise. From easy to learn to (here, to learn Scala, first learn category theory and Haskell). From wanting a large language with batteries included, to wanting a really tiny standard library. And many in those groups not only hate each other's guts, but will very happily claim that whatever other groups are doing is not worth using under any circumstances.

With a situation like that, it's very easy to find criticism about every single piece of the language, and every single company that has supported Scala in any way. Twitter Scala, Scalaz scala and Typesafe Scala are all different: I have never seen this level of division outside of the olden days of LISP. So of course everyone complains about it becoming too big: If you cut some features of the language, entire factions disappear. The complaints are purely political.

So it's very easy to get ideas of doom and gloom from Scala, when it's being used in production in a lot of places, to solve very real problems. Akka, Scalding, Kafka and Spark power a lot of things, but the infighting has to end, and that will take a lot of attitude changes everywhere.
The idea of "going dark" is laughable if one extends the time line previous to say the late 90's,
I discovered i3 and the concept of tiling window managers a few years ago and have never looked back. A new terminal or browser window is always a keystroke away, as is swapping between "pages" of windows. It's all navigable completely by keyboard, so my vim/i3/dmenu editing environment has me very rarely touching the mouse. As an added bonus I get to use every part of the screen by default. No wasted space.

It's also pretty trivial to get some nice window arrangements so that I can quickly move to relevant parts of the code for whatever I'm working on.

I guess the major trade-off is that there aren't any menus for accessing functionality, but I personally consider that a win because I end up being forced to learn how to manage everything at the lowest config level, usually editing text files. This makes it vastly easier to script things when I realize I've been making the same changes over and over.

So if you like tmux and you're on Linux, I'd strongly recommend giving i3, awesome, or some other TWM a try.
Ooyala has only 3 data scientists. All have PhDs and come from a math/statistics/com sci background.
Kueski only has 1!
I am always about 3 years behind the times in JavaScript.. means by the time I finally switched from ProtoType.js to JQuery, it was pretty sure it was a safe bet :)

I think meteor was too short of a blip to ever land in my land..
Are you sure? Article had nothing to do with SOMA from RigVeda. Maybe I am missing something.
> There are social rules that you are ignoring...

That right there is the problem.

Government actors -people in positions of power- are known to ignore rules -social and legal- to further their own agenda. From NSA analysts listening to other people's phone sex for personal titillation, to a sitting President who orders the harassment of disfavored groups, then orders some guys to break, enter, and destroy records to cover it up, there are people in positions of power who will do Bad Things that are very much violations of applicable rules, social or otherwise.
At the moment, you need at least read access to the repo to use Zube but we're working on allowing email only login for non-technical people to use tickets and view the Zube board. We're aiming to have that out in a few weeks.
Same problem here. Sign-in with github was very nice. Then drops me into the dashboard. Open tasks are 0. Its a UX dead end.
"There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses."
-- Bjarne Stroustrup

I've seen many programming languages become popular (or fail to) over the years and this quote has always seemed to hold true.

With Scala there was the first wave of people working in it that claimed that it was a grand panacea for all the problems in software (as is always the case with new languages).

However, it wasn't until people started to really claim that the language was certainly doomed that it clearly was a success.

In general I have found that Stroustrups quote is, counter-intuitively, a good way to determine whether the next hot new language will really stick or not. Furthermore, I have to admit that even some of my favorite programming languages fail this test and honestly these languages are extremely unlikely to ever achieve mainstream success.

And if you really think about it, it's not so counter-intuitive. Programming languages don't show their real limitations until you are very deep in a large complicated project. The frustrations of the beginner are never the same as the frustrations of an expert and only an expert can really feel that a language is "doomed". This sense of "doom" is often just the realization of the once language X zealot who now sees that this new language is not a true panacea. But this moment of disillusionment is also the moment an idealized programming language has proven itself a practical one. The more people that feel this loss of faith in their favorite new language, the more people are building large, practical, real-world software projects with it.
Awesome! We'd love to know what you think!
> See, the problem right here."Go designers know better than everybody else". No they don't.

The Go designers know the problem area that they're trying to solve better than (almost) everybody else.
My take is twofold:
1) Law enforcement wants their job to be easy. Sorry, it's not. They see criminals in everyone because they're immersed in it day in and day out. People aren't bad; they don't need constant surveillance.

2) Politicians have to have some way of making themselves look "strong" in the eyes of U.S. Citizens. It's just steeped in our blood at this point. "The War on Terrorism" (tm) is a really easy way for them to look strong even though there's NOT a terrorism issue in the U.S.
If American technology is generally back-doored for access by US government agencies, nobody elsewhere on the planet will want to touch it.

Heck, the contract cancellation-zilla that already started with the Snowden affair will just start snowballing.

With technology pretty much permeating everything, it means that it may no longer be possible to export almost anything to other countries. Get used to widespread rampant poverty now already, when international trade will be mostly gone.

The FBI say that all they want is to protect the United States, and indeed that will become much easier to do when there will be pretty much nothing left to protect! ;-)
At some point, neovim is going to have every feature of emacs, only with fewer decades of testing and written in a worse language.
The bans of armor piercing bullets have their own reasoning behind them. Banning all bullets would ensure any arguments presented would amount to banning of armaments.

It would be akin to banning cars by banning the sale of wheels. You will be hard pressed to say your intent is to stop people getting run over by stopping wheels from running people over. It is patently obvious your goal is to stop cars from being used. Even if you ban wheels with spikes on them that obviously only ever get used to destroy other cars, that doesn't mean that it is ok to ban all wheels using the same logic.

You'll probably want to ask a lawyer the legal situations behind your proposal. They'll be better able to elaborate. But in talking to some lawyer friends in the past, they note judges are really good at sniffing out attempts to work around the spirit or intent of a law.
Firefly hacker SBC reloads with sandwich style design
Didn't know about biofilms (bacterial or other) earlier. The basic idea is intuitive (which is why I gargle with salt water regularly), but googled biofilm now and found a lot of info - it is complex. Thanks for mentioning it!

Saw this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biofilm#Biofilms_and_infectiou...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biofilm#Dental_plaque

The article says:

"Biofilms have been found to be involved in a wide variety of microbial infections in the body, by one estimate 80% of all infections"
> This just doesn't make any sense. None of this is nice. It's all ugly and complicated. There's no beauty to these tools. There are no fundamental tools either. Everything is evolving too quickly. You've a choice of 25 frameworks, libraries, tools that change every day and break between versions. The complexity is growing and the ecosystem is getting extremely fragmented.

Yah, it's like XML all over again, when you describe it that way.
This is a terrible complaint, should we not celebrate the victories of those who survived tragedy and made it through?

No, because for people like Leguelere, success via capitalism is a bad thing. It shouldn't even be reported. Only the failures of capitalism should be reported, then Leguelere and his ilk will be happy.
El Ninos have been occurring for (thousands? millions? billions?) of years, yet nothing like February ever happened before.
We were pushing over a terabit of data transfer at peak, so 4-5PB per day.
In the TV show "Project Runway" they pit a bunch of fashion designers against each other. At the end they judge the clothes that they've made. One of the more positive they can say about a piece is "It looks expensive". The trained eye can quickly ascertain things like that (the material, the cut, the stitching). One of my friends (she works in fashion) says she can immediately tell if a guy is wearing high-street brands (H&M and the like).
Business of Software Conference EU Moving to Ireland
People say this a lot, but I'm not sure what it's supposed to mean. Ok, Snowden demonstrated that giving the USG centralized access to communications is dangerous. People don't trust the government. Now what? What's the effective policy response to this?

Crypto advocates (I am one of those) eventually need to stop pretending that there isn't a meaningful tradeoff here. In 10-20 years, everything is going to be encrypted: every phone call, every hard drive, every email, every photograph. That is going to pose real problems for the kinds of law enforcement cases that everyone cares about.

That doesn't mean key escrow is a good idea, or that we should prohibit encryption. But saying "that's not going to be a problem" is just not an argument. You have to do better.
That is a really fun little puzzle and you're right, it seemed completely counter intuitive at first sight.
Part of the issue is that the dragnet activity the NSA/FBI have been conducting -- and their new moves to share this data with local law enforcement in violation of previous promises -- has destroyed anyone's trust in the social contract. People rightfully do not trust that any powers granted to government via any form of key escrow or backdoor system would be used only in conformance with the law.

Obama himself has acted in such a way as to destroy anyone's trust in him. He promised to be on the side of 'transparency,' but as near as I can see he's no better than Bush II in this regard. He has no credibility on this issue at all.

... and it's also important to note that we in Western democracies are developing and deploying tech that is going to be used in far less liberal countries with far less rule of law. Any backdoor/escrow system that we create is also going to be made available to dictators who want to persecute and kill. If it's bad for us, it's going to be deadly to the unlucky souls who live under much less civilized regimes.
How Australia’s Ruslan Kogan Built an Off-Brand Online Retail Empire
I started up in college. 5 years on, here’s what I’ve learnt
Anonymous FasTrak account
On the other had, the exact same comparisons hold true for threads vs. green threads. They are extremely similar, they perform almost identically to threads in many languages, and yet, green threads have their own name, as they are a different thing. I can understand that Erlang is built around calling them just "processes", but that's, in my opinion, a bad idea. To me, the fact that Erlang developers insist on co-opting the name "process" seems arrogant.
It would still be interesting if it holds for all primes rather than just the first ones, as it imposes fundamental structure on the distribution of primes. The base 3 calculation is simply the form that structure takes.
I'm not sure if supervised learning is such a narrow term but I'll take your word for it. As for recognizing faces

I think we have that pretty much baked in the hardware. Faces are recognized immediately and not just by humans, also animals. I think people who lost ability to see faces, can't re-learn it.
If there is truly economic value to be had in filtering papers, we would expect an eventual growth in service businesses to help sift through the glut of openly published papers. Since we're currently in a long transitional period from closed to open publishing, there's plenty of time to evolve these third-party filters - from both the business and community sides - without incurring a chaotic "filter vacuum" period.

The major difference, however, would be that the research would be at least accessible to those who can't afford to pay the intermediary. That's what seems odious (to me, at least) about the current arrangement: if I want to access most of the research my taxes have funded, I have to pay again. This is on a moral par with being forced to pay for access to read laws and court decisions that should be a matter of public record, especially in an era where the marginal distribution cost is rapidly heading to zero, and I can't fathom an argument against having basic, immediate, and perpetually guaranteed access in either case.
Climate change and the 2016 election
I'm following this project closely: http://olafurpg.github.io/scalafmt/

It's just been released, but I like the idea of adopting a tool in the likes of gofmt. Coding style discussions are such a bike-shedding magnet, it's good if you can just not think about it (and are able to follow it anyway, regardless of IDE).
Are you talking about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RankBrain, a Google internal system?
It seems very unlikely that all those local anomolies coincidentally aligned and were so extreme that they resulted in this extreme, first-in-history, global event.
I came here to say the same. And me a vim user with high hopes for neovim. Maybe it's time to give evil-mode another try.
You can drag and drop from other web pages or copy and paste via Ctrl-v. Might be a useful one-step alternative.
Optimize Your Video Position and Size
I don't think so. This is why I primarily still use tmux, although I've recently been messing around with i3 and AwesomeWM on my linux box, which is superior to tmux. DTVM seems to be gaining ground, it's just not quite as feature rich as tmux.
No, I'm not a lawyer, and I'm deliberately simplifying my example to make an argument.

However, I have looked into 5a jurisprudence, and fully agree that there are some scenarios that are not so simple, e.g. if they really did have certain other evidence against you that specifically suggests what is in the cryptogram, and/or that it is pertinent, then you could very well end up in jail indefinitely for contempt of court.

In this instance, I strongly suspect that my simplification is justified because in the San Bernardino case and the myriad others that are on the FBI's short list, they are fishing in order to gain a general precedent that they do not currently have. They want to be able to compel you to release a password even when they don't have any evidence suggesting what is in the cryptogram, arguments for why it is pertinent, etc.
Would be great if I could just provide a hash of my e-mail address.
I mean simple things like deporting 11 million people, killing families of terrorists, legalizing torture, and closing the US to China imports, just for starters.
Did you even open it in Firefox? Because this is what I see in FF 45: http://i.imgur.com/S9A3CbG.png

Definitely not relaxing...
Why you should use Kanban for project management
Made my own as well when I was interning at an othodontist.

There is not really much tech required. You can simply cut apart the gypsum model tooth by tooth and align it perfectly with wax and add space for you gum. Finally create a mold and use medical grade silicone to make the tooth straightener.

Silicone also allows for more movement and gives you control of upper and lower teeth in relation to each other.

While this is not rocket science there are considerations about jaw alignment that would be difficult for the amature to get right the first time around in any but simple misalignments.
I really like general idea. I was thinking along the same lines. Essentially by splitting your work well, the skill that I have as experienced dev, you can get a lot of people working on it. It does require discipline from all involved.

Tasks available are not tempting at all, but I guess if you can get good devs to be present, this can became platform to do work.

I am not huge fan of the interface etc, but this is start, so this is OK.
The worst you can be imposed on you (outside an embargo situation) is balanced trade, paying for real imports with fx acquired through real exports.
Low impact journals may be significantly worse, but if fewer people look for defects fewer defects get found.
+Israel+and+Egypt:+Between+alliance+and+rivalry+-+Middle+East+-+Jerusalem+Post
Microsoft Will Bring Its SQL Server to Linux
This is actually not quite the reason that HT occurs before HH, and is called the Gambler's Fallacy [0].

The reason HT is likely to occur quicker is: after a failed win, HH needs two flips to win (1/4 chance), but HT can win in just one flip (1/2 chance).

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy
That was my reading too. This isn't a post for public consumption; this is a coded communication to the U.S. national security apparatus that Mr. Wilson is willing to play ball.

Of course, he could have just emailed anybody with the same message, and they would have gotten it...
Did picking us-west-1 over us-west-2 have a dramatic performance increase in your apps?
How to Detect Outliers Using Parametric and Non- Parametric Methods
What happened to Python?
I did not mean to have implied that I think there is anything magical about intelligence. Of course, it is based on physical phenomena. I am doing my PhD right now and I try to incorporate as much AI/ML into it as possible.

What I meant to say is that our ANNs are so ridiculously simplified versions of real neural networks that there might still be something to be learnt from the real brain. This shall not imply that to achieve intelligence, the solution necessarily has to mimic a biological brain.

(Thank you for your detailed response. I love to read about this stuff!)

edit: missing word
That's part of the fallacy to which I'm alluding.
Thank you. I've been trying to come up with a good way to describe privilege and 'having the option to fail' is an apt way to describe it.
I saw someone on Twitter call this the Democrats' version of climate science denial, but for encryption (encryption science denial). I think that's an interesting perspective.