skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You know, I get accused a great deal of being too long winded. But long experience tells me that shortening it too much means I am not going to actually be understood. So, perhaps he has reasons other than Blow-Hard-itis for thinking that all those words were actually necessary.
My army can beat your army.

That army that you keep on claiming is yours is closer politically to libertarian than you are to the army.
I would feel bad for anyone who had to come back and maintain that down the line.

So much autogenerated code, so many complicated stacks/libraries, so many annotation and magical things that happen without you knowing.
I don't think top pros view it that way. He is of a new generation that play thousands of games over the internet; that study the game socially, while Lee is much more a loner. Whether Ke Jie will dominate as much as Lee did will say more about the strength of his competitors than his strength vs Lee.
This makes me wonder if Haxe will ever have official LLVM support within it's own compiler, it already gets translated into numerous languages (Haxe technically is never compiled, but always translated as far as I'm aware), why not LLVM's own IR? I found a couple of projects attempting this, but it would be interesting to see it happen officially.
for anyone interested in learning Scala, i highly recommend this set of (~15 or so) blog posts. i started working through them in early 2013 as they were posted. The posts on path-dependent types and the post on type classes are particularly good. The author clearly has a deep understanding of the key parts of the language.
This interview with Snowden has been broadcasted tonight in Spain. Ended just minutes ago.

http://www.lasexta.com/programas/el-objetivo/noticias/entrev...
What we really neednis DNSCurve. CRypt is full of problems from what I hear. All hail djb.
Would there be a first amendment (freedom of speech) argument against such an outlawing? If you are not allowed to say things which the government doesn't understand, then your speech isn't free.
Politics Invades Hollywood
I don't think that's true at all. If you use gmail your data is pretty safe. Unless you tell me your password I'm going to have a pretty hard time reading your mail. It's encrypted at rest on Google's disks. It's encrypted in transmission over the internet. Google's network is protected with various forms of encryption and security that makes it hard for an unauthorized party to get into.

But Google itself can access and read your email. It does so in an automated fashion to target ads at you.

So is your gmail encrypted? Well...kind of.

It's not binary.
> Now that I have some years of experience in the industry, I realize that 80% of the "puzzles" I face at work are bullshit.

Amen, brother. Just four years of work experience here, but I can totally confirm that. The actual product is built in a week, then it's multiple months of "this department over there needs a special case implemented pronto".
EC2 is blocked
Good for a laugh.
freebase?
I think it shows that they have an excellent understanding of their authorizing legislation.

It also reflects that unlike other types of warrants the court can request revisions or additional information before making a decision and requests can be withdrawn before a formal rejection can take place.

Some estimates put the reject/withdrawal rate closer to 25%

Some more information: https://newrepublic.com/article/115257/fisa-warrants-court-t...

https://web.archive.org/web/20140402093319/http://www.uscour...
Link to github repo: https://github.com/bovard/raid
I think what it takes is a visible critical mass gathering with "pitchforks" and all the relatively-awake people in society would join in. Nobody wants to be part of the 10 or 100 or 1000 person "movement" that gets squashed and futures ruined. But if it seemed like most of (active) society was going to pile on too, people would.

However, most of society is simply not active. Most of society would never pick up any pitchforks one way or the other, without things getting REALLY bad. At some point a highly motivated minority of the population (but still a lot of people) basically needs to make the change for everyone. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, just saying what seems to be the case.
But the voters are being purposefully misinformed by that very same government. It's literally circular reasoning.

Your argument would hold more weight if the people voting were actually well informed and educated about what the implications of their votes would be. If the government came out and said "everything you do, say, click and load will be saved for latter analysis" do you think they would vote the same way?
If they are not harnessing big data for writing speeches then the White House is less savvy than Netflix and House of Cards writer, Beau Willimon.
Well I certainly don't trust you and your private army's oversight of me, and I'm sure you don't trust me and my army's oversight of you.

So we make an agreement and build a third-party that has oversight over both of us.

Or do you expect me to trust you?
I hold it to a standard of how to organize your code. The organization of the source is superb.

Even without much documentation, you can go through and read it while understanding what is happening.
That's entirely antithetical to a system of checks a balances. Distrust has always been a key part of the framework.
I strongly disagree. As human beings, we have a moral obligation to make life good as it can be, and the only way we can do that is to understand people"s basic motives and try to use them to motivate good behavior. Do you really disagree?

Parfit's solution of a single absolute moral principle is simply not workable as a way of getting people to behave well. Again, do you really disagree? The reason he tries for it is he has a greatly distorted view of human nature. As the article say, he thinks that the human moral evalution that cruelty is wrong is "just a psychological fact—flimsy, contingent, apt to be forgotten." No, the prohibition against cruelty is a permanent part of human nature, the problem is that we have many other drives, and circumstances may favor them.

Instead of coming up with useless principles, what we need to do is understand in detail why people behave in good or bad ways. That is what, for instance, Aristotle did in his Ethics, and Smith in his Theory of Moral Sentiments. Let me add that Parfit is such a profoundly odd person that I am pretty sure his understanding of human nature is quite poor, and so he is simply the wrong sort of person for this job.
If You Don't Ask, You Don't Get
I don't believe that Obama himself has an blunt understanding of this issue, but I can't know what is truly in his heart or head and the view promoted in his statements here is utterly oversimplified and purposely lacking in nuance. Glossing over the impossibility of providing security only against "bad guys" while leaving you open to "good guys" is an intentionally low resolution view of the issue intended to make refutations based on that impossibility sound like nerds nitpicking the implementation details.
> Capitalism has been hijacked by a lucrative surveillance project that subverts the “normal” evolutionary mechanisms associated with its historical success and corrupts the unity of supply and demand that has for centuries, however imperfectly, tethered capitalism to the genuine needs of its populations and societies, thus enabling the fruitful expansion of market democracy.

> genuine needs

Capitalism reflects genuine greed, not genuine need.
1. Data is collected without a court order, by an otherwise trustworthy government (for the sake of argument).

2. Time passes and government policies change

3. Information that was previously inadmissible, and which should have never been collected in the first place, is now admissible.

When we talk about law, we can't just consider how the current government will use it. We need to restrict how a future government could abuse it. You see the same pattern all the time in software: Some assumption is made in an earlier version. The basis of that assumption becomes invalid after further development. Now the thing that didn't matter before gets a bug added to your queue.
>But without a valid court order, the evidence collected by the NSA cannot be used against a defendant in a trial.

Ostensibly, but in reality the FBI or local agency will use parallel construction to find another way to introduce evidence without even mentioning the NSA.
Depends on what people use their tablets for. Most of them, browsing, emailing, and some small texts or spreadsheets. For that, a tablet may be more than enough with lots of advantages over a laptop (more lightweight, easy to handle and carry, always on.)

If your work involves many hours of typing, or programming, a keyboard is better, period. I spent many hours programming in the virtual keyboard of the iPad, and it's not so productive.

Not having a proper multitask environment is also a big turndown for high productivity demands. (But again, most people just need to take care of the mail, not much more)

For media, I feel the form factor of a tablet is perfect. You can use it in more situations and positions than a laptop. Just borrow one and try..
The argument would also carry more weight if the voters actually had a chance to vote on this issue orthogonally to everything else, rather than picking a candidate and hoping.

(Not that I'd accept building a backdoor just because 50%+1 people wanted access to my users' data, either, but at least then the argument made in the post you replied to would have any meaning at all.)
Coincidence. Commenter SwimAway had a more likely argument that it is polarizing language.
I had the same feeling about LLVM until a few weeks ago, when I started tinkering with it during a school project.
It let me the time to implement a simple array which can be sliced and copied, through the functions I created :

https://gist.github.com/piroux/a856aa31525ca23238be

It can directly run with lli:

$ lli basics_array.ll

Note: I called it DynArray because I wanted it to grow itself when its nominal capacity would have been reached, but I never took the time to implement this feature ...

For instance, the prototype of the function adding an element could be :

define void @DynArrayI__add(%DynArrayI* %dynarray, i64 %elt)

You might need to add a capacity field to the type of DynArrayI and update others functions, to take it into account.

But according to me it is doable, even for a beginner, because the code is entirely written in LLVM.

So feel free to try !
If people were openly doing drugs on the streets of my parents' stuffy suburb, the homeowners association would have a conniption. Way bigger deal than identity theft.
In the contracting world these types of contracts have more risk but are more profitable. The key is to get you ducks in a row beforehand. Your project management has to be very good. There is some type of work fixed price isn't suited for, obviously, but lots of work where fixed price makes a lot of sense.
There are tons of freely available models based on copyrighted works. Are you sure this is true?

But in order to use the movies for training you would need to buy the thousand and thousands of DVD's
I'm not sure you're disagreeing with the person you're responding to. Just because the skills involved are very specific doesn't imply that the people with those skills only are capable of obtaining said skill.

What the person you're responding to means is that if they have the mental capacity (and also discipline) to play the game at such a high level, they could probably also excel in other professions if their goal was to make money instead of doing something they loved.

Of course we can debate whether they would achieve such success if they were doing something they didn't enjoy as much, but I think most people would argue that most chess or go champions could make more money or in other words do more "lucrative" activities if they chose to do them instead of dedicated all their time to the game.
Thanks a lot for the detailed answer.

I will be sure the take the discussion on RSA encryption with PKCS1v1.5 padding the next time I see those guys. Probably without mentioning ISIS..
I agree with everyone else about the physical hobbies, but I find you need something else to fill the evenings when you don't necessarily want to go outside, or when you just want to spend half an hour doing something that's not coding and not reading.

Music does that for me. If you're at all interested, check out justinguitar.com (no affiliation, just love what the guy does) and try it out. There's something about the meditative aspects of playing music that really works for me.
Aside from the potential problem with regards to copyright, it should also be noted that subtitles in general are not transcripts of dialogue. The subtitlers often have to shorten down sentences of speech so that viewers have time to read before the next couple of subtitles appear on screen.
It's a little confusing view about bugging them to learn programming and you mention making more. Lately on HN, the general view of our community seems to programming is a fairly low rent blue collar position and all the salaries will be driven down to the third; it's weird fore to see that and also the "everybodyish should learn to program" view. In a way, it kind of speaks to this glorification of work in this article .... what's really the point engrossing one's self, in very unhealthy way by looks of the sons of these comments, a "professional" and complex field when it is barreling toward a "blue collar" status ? If that's even the case, I dunno.
A was a big fan of 'Meaning and the Moral Sciences.'
I was a big fan of 'Meaning and the Moral Sciences.'
The existence of the FISA Court has never been a secret. It was created by FISA in 1978 and is right there in the text of the statute. Even the members of the FISA Court are publicly disclosed (they're all existing Federal judges who are appointed to temporary terms).

What is secret about the FISA Court is its decisions, not its existence (and that should change slightly as a result of the USA Freedom Act's requirement to release "significant" opinions).
> Scientific studies have shown that skills in abstract strategy games are so specific to the game that they do not transfer to other tasks

Do you have a reference for that please? I'm interested in the subject.
How is the "Brain in a vat" version different from the Descartes version?
I'm giving Bernie Sanders one last chance. But if he is elected and also reneges on his promises, I will probably stop caring about politics permanently.

edit: Whoops! Shouldn't have revealed I'm a Bernie supporter. Forgot that HN is a libertarian paradise!
What scientific studies are you referring to?

Of course chess grandmasters aren't all-around geniuses, but many traits that are prerequisites for a successful chess player certainly are translatable into careers in other fields, and correlate with above average brainpower (good memory, discipline, long attention span, spatial intelligence etc.)

Botvinnik was an accomplished engineer, Euwe had PhD in mathematics, Anatoly Karpov is a millionaire, interestingly enough a lot of recognized chess players had careers in music (like Taimanov or Smyslov)...

Being a grandmaster surely requires an above average intellect, there is no such thing as a chess savant. While it's an urban legend that Kasparov's (arguably the greatest chess player ever) IQ was in the ballpark of 190, he did clock at 135. Such a result is not unheard of, yet still placing him in top 1% or so.
I have ADHD, never did anything about it (was diagnosed as a kid, my parents felt that drugs weren't the solution). About 4 years ago i decided to do something about it and actually went to a psychiatrist.

Since then i've gotten married, tripled my salary, lost a bunch of weight, gave up drinking and smoking, and basically turned my whole life around.

ADHD sucks, especially as an adult. But shit, its 2016. you can do something about it.
Sure, but I think a strategy like that only avoids constitutional issues because it's not a general attack on the efficacy of firearms. Anything that has the effect of making guns less effective en masse would probably run afoul of the Second Amendment.
I think Washington has changed Obama more than Obama changed Washington. He's spent seven years in the craziest bubble in America surrounded by people being paid millions to distort his worldview one way or another.

A while back he advised some kids in College to never type anything into a computer if they want it to remain private. For him, it probably seems completely reasonable. I doubt he's touched a keyboard since he became president. His daughters are the only teenagers in America who've never been near Snapchat (the Secret Service will keep it that way). And he's literally surrounded by security officers and spooks everywhere he goes. They manage every interaction he has so you can imagine their worldview is going to affect him.

I'm not trying to make excuses for him. He's so completely off the deep end nowadays (between this and TPP) that it's heartbreaking as a long time supporter. I hope he leaves the presidency, leaves Washington and spends a few years thinking about what went wrong before writing his memoirs. It would be an amazing insight into the corrosive influence of Washington on a person's integrity.
Even if you don't think the code itself is very nice, the API is pretty well-designed.
It's mix between who has the most data, who can pose the problem best, who can wield the largest computers and who can handle the most complex algorithms
What exactly are they being "purposefully misinformed" about?
We're going to fight hard so our grandchildren have really secure email in a world where everything they do and every word they say is uploaded to the internet, transcribed and annotated in realtime by swarms of drones controlled by other kids that, only 50 years earlier, would have been at home doxxing people on Twitter.

Privacy will die, not because it's undesirable or a bad idea, it'll die like copyright and DRM - because it's technically and economically easy to defeat, and people will be motivated to do so. What's more, those people will be hard to catch - after all, the drones will be communicating over very strongly encrypted channels.

[Please refute - I genuinely have nightmares about this future]
It sounds like it'd be very easy for Netflix to put a stop to this - they just need to make their webpage / app / whatever check the IP their certain hostnames lookup to and if it's not the whitelisted addresses it refuses to work.

Or (much simpler) use actual IPs rather than hostnames. They can still dynamically change the IPs at will by updating their web code, so it's not hugely worse than using hostnames.
I'd be a bit surprised if anyone did. Git is powerful and flexible, but it is also complicated and difficult to use for people who aren't experts.

Beautiful software should make simple things simple, and hard things possible. Git leans strongly toward the latter, to the detriment of the former.

I need version control software that's mostly like a shovel and maybe sometimes like a backhoe. Git is like one of these:

http://earthfirstjournal.org/newswire/wp-content/uploads/sit...
The trick is deciding to want them wherever tex puts them.
Obama, the technology, sir, is absolutist. You can have it one way, with privacy, or another, complete lack of it. That's how things are, and you are, with all due respect, stupid for arguing otherwise.
I was diagnosed with ADHD as a kid in elementary school but I didn't want to take the medication (Or I may have just been being contrary...). and now as a junior in college I'm considering talking to a doctor to see whether medication might be able to help me focus. I find myself constantly unable to fin-
Except that this isn't correct in the face of parallel construction. You can't fight the evidence at trial if it either isn't presented, or its origins are misrepresented by the prosecution, which is what parallel construction leads to. (You use the stuff from the NSA to find other stuff, and build a plausible story about how you found the other stuff. The illegal search is never presented in court, so you can't fight it; the other stuff is, but is should be fruit of the poisonous tree, if the full truth were told.)
In the end, they are going to introduce laws that make it illegal to implement end-to-end encryption. This sucks, but it's going to happen. France is already moving to do it [1], and in the US, John McCain and others are also calling for similar laws [2]. They will all start off saying that it will be controlled carefully etc., as Obama keeps saying, and then it will be used with reckless abandonment.

What this essentially means is a move to Android for criminals, terrorists, and anyone that wants privacy (since Android allows installation of apps that have not been approved by a gatekeeper bound by the laws of the countries it operates in, whereas iOS does not by default). Open source Android apps with strong encryption will be built in countries without such laws. All of this will likely be the downfall of a few lazy drug dealers that don't want to give up their iPhones, but since the cat is out of the bag and apps with end-to-end encryption already exist and will continue to be built, the governments making these moves will not actually catch any reasonably intelligent terrorists that install and use these apps. They will, however, gain exactly what they want: the ability to conduct surveillance on most people in the world whenever they want.

[1] http://fortune.com/2016/03/04/french-law-apple-iphone-encryp...

[2] http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/senator-mccain-joins-...
Also asserting that your government has the right to certain powers over its citizens establishes the precedent that any government should have that right. If it's OK for the US or UK governments to have the keys to its citizens encryption, then it's ok for China, Russia, Iran, etc.

Interestingly, the encryption system underlying WhatsApp was developed by the US government for people in oppressive states to use to avoid surveillance and restrictions on access to information.
This Is Not the First Article Written by a Robot (Or Is It?)
cf post game 3 conference commentary : https://youtu.be/qUAmTYHEyM8?t=20639

(also during the actual game with more details, but I can not find the exact time again).
Edit : can not find game3 commentary but during game 4 he is coming back to it again with interesting details as for why this is a great opportunity to inspire human players : https://youtu.be/yCALyQRN3hw?t=7097

Basically, once in ancient Japan and more recently a Chinese origin player in Japan, both incredibly strong players, surprised everyone with never before seen moves that subsequently where integrated in modern game theory. The hope is that the same could happen here.
Apparently Doom 3:

http://kotaku.com/5975610/the-exceptional-beauty-of-doom-3s-...
Fecha-locales: Locales for internationization support in fecha.js
I know, but I read something like that and thought it might amuse. Cause going on the number of down votes I attract there is a distinct lack of same on here. Anyways, it is getting tedious round here so I'm off. Someone please do delete this account.
Would be nice to have English subtitles for the questions...
Oh, please delete this before more people see it and you're further embarrassed.

Or, you know, elaborate on how the federal government has infringed on any of your religious rights whatsoever.

Or, you know, your gun rights... at all...

Really easy to beat strawmen, come on. Have some self respect. Why did you press Enter on that comment? You and I both know that you were aware it was bullshit when you posted it. Did you think we're all just stupid?
meatier is this but less DIY.