skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I didn't mean to suggest the government invented seat belts. It did mandate them, not only wearing them, but circa 1964 their very availability in cars. The industry, and a fair number of car buyers, didn't want buyers to be reminded that cars could be dangerous.

Heroic? No, but what government is heroic? That seat belts and seat belt laws save lives every year is indisputable. Perhaps to you that's an impermissible curtailment on your right to die in a crash. It might help to remember also benefit indirectly through lower insurance premiums.

(In answer down thread to why I posted my reply, apologies. I meant to reply to another question about why the article mentioned electric cars, but clicked the wrong link.)
Subaru has the best overall value with their Eyesight system when considered with the rest of the car IMHO. It's why I bought my Forester (not in the price range of the Civic). Definitely not self driving, but adaptive cruise control works in steady traffic- it has a tendency to "rubber-band" when traffic changes speeds- and has saved my bacon by preventing a collision when the car in front of me stopped. The only downside is that it is fully camera based and has no radar at all, and on a road trip heading west this winter the setting sun killed the Eyesight system and the cruise control completely disengaged and I had to manually control my speed for about an hour.
I just bought the 2016 Civic Touring last week and it came with this. It certainly seems to be getting ahead of things to say it's self-driving. Your description is accurate, it's more of a helper than truly autonomous. I will say I was concerned, because there was a Car and Driver review where they seemed to indicate it had issues thinking you were drifting and trying to correct when you were fine, but I haven't had a problem. It detects the lane very well, and the cruise control works like a champ.

I am glad to see features like this coming to less expensive vehicles.
With so many contenders stirring up the pot, this is an exciting time in the world of Linux Containers!

I would love to see an LXD container driver for Mesos.

Do any of you know if LXD is APPC-spec compliant?
NIH'ed package management such that we now have yet another broken scheme for managing packages ..
This matches my belief as well. It's currently scheduled for 2017, but since it's slipped once already and since Intel isn't facing a lot of high end competition, who knows what will actually happen.

The naming scheme is terrible, because although "Skylake Xeon" is what many sources are referring to, this turns out not to mean all chips from the Skylake Generation that are marketed as Xeon. Rather, it means something like "Skylake that's actually designed for servers" rather "Current Skylake for which we didn't disable ECC".

So despite what others are reporting, I probably should have said that AVX512 is expected to come with "Skylake Purley", which is expected to be marketed as "Skylake Xeon" for the server market: http://wccftech.com/intel-skylake-purley-platform-upto-28-co...
That $4bn could go a fair way towards developing a longer-lasting highway paint, then restriping the interstates with it.
I think you missed my statements several times that I am not a supporter of gun control, but asking why those that are in favour of gun control don't go after ammunition rather than guns.

As for the second amendment it has basically been totally gutted long ago since people have no access to true arms.
The 'undue burden' is bot just the time to do it. Apple clearly argues this in their testemony before the justice commity and Im sure WhatsApp feels the same. The burde is the breaking of user expectation and trust in the security and trust of the companies products.
Pi Day: Western Digital Releases 314GB Hard Drive Just for the Raspberry Pi
Excedrin worked for me before I quit coffee.

Also, since starting a low-carb keto diet two years ago, I haven't had a single migraine (I used to get 2-3 per month, both painful ones and visual auras). When I was a pediatric neurology prof a few years ago, a keto diet was standard of care for the kids, and the department was starting research into keto for chronic migraines. Give it a try!
> First and foremost, you really ought to understand what order of magnitude matters for each line of code you write.

And that is: amount of time that will ever be spent in it across all deployments and execution instances, versus how long it takes to develop, taking into the cost of that CPU time and development time.

You could spend, say, $100 of development time such that the total CPU time saved over the entire installed base of the code over its lifetime is worth $5.

Secondly, even if the saving is greater than $100, that means nothing if it's not recouped! That is to say, suppose you spend $100 to optimize something, and the entire user base saves $200 worth of CPU time over the next 25 years, when the last installation of the program is shelved. Only, oops, the users never paid a single penny more for the improvement. Moreover, suppose the improvement was only marginal and in some relatively obscure function, so that it didn't help to sell more of the program to more users. So in the end, you're just out $100.

> Mostly this quip is used defend sloppy decision-making, or to justify the indefinite deferral of decision-making.

Here is the thing. An program optimized for performance is "bad" because it's hard to change its organization later (for instance when it needs to be optimized). It's harder to debug, too.

We consciously avoid optimizing code in order to have the code in a state that is easier to work with.

But we must ensure that we actually achieve this. In effect, we should be actively optimizing for good program organization, rather than just focusing on a negative: not optimizing for performance.

Or optimizing something other than performance, and good program organization.

A really bad approach is, for example, "optimizing for the minimum amount of time I ever have to spend learning effective use of my programming language, libraries, and existing frameworks in my project".

You get code that isn't performance optimized, avoiding the "root of all evil", but it's garbage in other ways.
As this is so well known won't spammers just remove the "+word" portion and optionally the period marks too.
> Your argument is somewhat like suggesting every program be written in assembly because the theoretical upper limit of code performance is paramount to everything. It's a trade-off between convenience and performance, and PHP7 performance is radically improved.

No, please show me where I said that? Every program has a developer productivity factor, a library support factor, and yes a runtime speed factor. From everything I know about PHP, while not being a PHP programmer, it has both low productivity AND low performance. Many other languages offer some combo of productivity and performance that are much better.

> The amount of effort described to migrate is orders less than rewriting millions of lines of production code.

Sure, and that is why you should think very carefully about what language to write in BEFORE You write 3 million or even 100 lines of code.

> Regarding development speed, I don't know much about Ruby but I believe you're conflating speed on Rails (a framework) with Ruby vs PHP (languages).

Ruby is rails, there is no ruby without rails, there is no rails without ruby. I see almost nothing being written in straight ruby (why would you).
I think there are a lot of people that would say yes any time it would save them $5 or $10 without costing them much time.

I agree there are also lots of people that won't set the car to prompt them with questions about picking someone else up.
> In order for any AI to handle any situation, it must first be programmed to do so. If that situation was an unknown, you get undefined behavior.

No, that's not how AI nor computers work. It's quite trivial to have a default behavior like "brake", the notion that a new situation will confuse the computer is just you watching too many movies.
I had not heard of these before. But they look really interesting. I think they are pretty similar as it is a common pattern, and straight forward solution to many problems.
Lawsuit filed in death of Texas jail inmate refused medication
The gut constitutes about 70% of your immune system. I don't have cancer (though, as noted in a different comment of mine here, many of my relatives have had cancer) but I do have a genetic disorder that significantly impacts gut function. I have done a lot of reading and self-experimentation in this area. I also have a relative who was Patient Zero in a cancer study and another relative who was interviewed on tape for two hours by a doctor and whose views and practices changed the way two different cancer clinics dealt with certain issues for their patients.

The path forward here is to come to a completely different understanding of the problem space. Allopathic meds have their uses, but it comes at a known high cost. This is why medications routinely have a long fold-out of warnings, provisos and explanations of the side effects.

We know that chemo can permanently impair brain function as well. We know that it does all kinds of bad things to the body. We also know that overuse of antibiotics both harms the gut function and promotes antibiotic resistant infections.

I think a first step in the right direction would be for conventional medicine to counteract the drug side effects after therapy is done. I have never had a doctor tell me that I should consume yogurt after being on antibiotics, though that is common knowledge in some circles. We just issue drugs and even when the side effects are known and some fairly easy counter to the side effects is also pretty well established, few doctors tell their patients "You need to undo the damage the drugs do to you and here is how."

If we at least did that much, we could ameliorate some of this. That approach is totally within reach and essentially ignored.
This is cool!

I'm curious about which perceptual hashing algorithm is being used. The README says it's "invariant to scaling and rotation" but the approach described in the linked paper is highly rotation-sensitive. (EDIT: it looks like the implementation can handle multiples of 90 degrees, which is a bit better than I thought at first)
Now, train the network jointly over the game sequence. Or even better, when given a chance to take action rollout on each action and learn jointly on that rest of gameplay.

Reinforcement learning is very hard. Especially when you create meaningful games and then don't use the fact that a whole game is a one long chain of events, and instead force learning on windowed sequence.

Neural network has enough parameters to remember much of these windows and will clearly perform well, but the training last too long given the fact that no structured information is used.
Why have neural networks become synonymous with backprop networks? Is it because those are the most successful? What happened to bidirectional associatve memory and Kohonen maps? Does anyone take the biological inspiration of neural networks seriously anymore?
I recommend you check out https://mosh.mit.edu/ to speed up the felt latency of the connection.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if these are the same people who call the picture on their desktop their "screensaver."
This is fucking ridiculous. Surely all drivers have to change lanes at some point to get where they're going; why do they all actively attempt to thwart other drivers from getting into the lanes they need?
Cutesy copy written from pigeon perspective: "So don’t worry, we love flying, we’re pigeons after all." But serious copy about needing bicyclists as beta testers -- is the pigeon deal a publicity stunt, or a real situation?
I think what we really need is basically exactly what Google has in terms of search technology, except that it needs to be open and explicit, instead of it being Google's secret proprietary data on me that I can never access and that they get to sell to advertisers to my detriment.

I (like many other people on HN) use Google constantly when programming, and it's impossible to overstate the convenience and power of Google's almost creepy ability to guess exactly what the language and context of my search query is. It cuts precious seconds off of each query (when I am routinely make hundreds of queries per day), and more importantly cuts out the interruption of mental flow as you try to re-word your query into a format that the search engine will understand. This can potentially add up to hours of saved time per day, depending on how you calculate the impact of these features.

In order to duplicate this I don't think we can get around the need for "search profiles", which takes into account your location, interests, past searches, personal connections, etc, but it needs to be explicit and it needs to be my data. If I want to delete it or sell it, it really needs to be up to me. If we could figure out a secure way to do this, then we would have the framework necessary to compete with Google with an open platform. Until then, it's just not going to be worth it to switch for the vast majority of people.
I do not understand the question. In production we use an ELB hitting multiple routers, on multiple nodes. Not sure how hashring applies to load balancing.
Does anyone else see these self driving car technologies as a bad thing? I don't want some computer in control of my safety.
Don't forget "hacker":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_(term)#Hacker_definitio...
Just curious, what did you find difficult about NSQ?

I moved one large project from RabbitMQ to NSQ over a year ago and haven't looked back. It has just been wonderful to work with and build on top of.

Anything you didn't like about NSQ or pitfalls to watch out for from your experience?
One of the things you get from ACT is; if your mind can switch from "this is fun and interesting" to "this does not feel safe" then it can just as easily switch back.
I inadvertently quit coffee a while ago after a bad flu, and not drinking it for a week. What it helped me discover is that I was not getting ANYWHERE near enough sleep. I thought I was functioning fine on 5 hours, but when I didn't have coffee, I was hitting a wall after lunch. When I started getting 7-8 hours, I felt great without coffee, and I started making progress in the gym and losing more weight. Caffeine is supposed to help with those things, but it was actually masking bigger issues for me.
Because it's very easy, fun, and much cheaper. Any geek or hacker should find fermentation at home rewarding.
More Trouble in Bonds Backed by Peer-To-Peer Loans
tagging this thread for future reference
Amazon Underground, a New Kind of App Store, Is Blowin’ Up
But in the contexts of this argument, it depends how much of the operation of the brain is dependent on quantum mechanics, which is unknown (if any).
Rewritten: Keeping performance in mind when considering design alternatives is never premature.
Interestingly, I could accurately describe my experience of mania due to bipolar disorder using the exact same words / description as the author. The similarity of the subjective symptoms is overwhelming. And yet, the pathology seems very different.
Global Entrepreneurship Congress 2016 in Medellín
The funny thing is that if you asked people how much caffeine is in a cup of coffee vs a can of redbull I'd bet a lot of people would say the redbull. But a single cup of coffee actually has, on average, maybe twice as much caffeine. People don't realize how much caffeine coffee has, it's a ridiculous amount. Pretty much the only beverages you can get at starbucks that has significantly less caffeine than an 8oz redbull are the teas, hot chocolate, smoothies, and decaf.
FogCreek opens HyperWeb (web-dev tool) beta
Not only can a computer begin braking more promptly, it can brake more accurately. Many human drivers hit the brakes 100% when they sense danger, then the full force of braking startles them (no training), then they let off again. This can increase stopping distances dramatically.

Next up is per-wheel braking. Not just stability control, but actual directed thrust. The computer can control each wheel independently. Humans just have one brake pedal. Four wheel steering might even make a comeback.
>Consider a hypothetical situation where we have to print a lot of currency to repay our debts.

Why? The US government could pay off all of its debts tomorrow by printing money but the hypothetical situation where it would 'need' to simply won't arise.

Same for Japan. Or the UK. Or anybody. Inflation is the only real problem most governments need to concern themselves with (and is inflation too high in the US or Japan?).

>His lecturer probably (naively) believes that America will be dominant for so long

And I suppose Japan has managed to remain solvent with ~220% debt/gdp by being a superpower as well?

His lecturer wasn't being naive. The austerian economists who predicted hyperinflation in Japan in the late 90s for the exact same reasons you're proposing were being naive.
Also the $4b isn't for research, it's for regulation and testing, according to

http://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/self...
At a high level it's not that far off, in the sense that most mathematicians think nontrivial patterns in the primes are at least unusual, and they mostly behave randomly. But it's true that there is some structure, which is in jargon terms called a "conspiracy" among the primes when it's found or hypothesized. As Terence Tao summarizes it,

> We believe that the primes do not observe any significant
pattern beyond the obvious ones (e.g. mostly being odd),
but we are still a long way from making this belief
completely rigorous.

That's from this set of slides on structure and randomness in the primes, which has some other relevant bits in it: https://terrytao.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/primes1.pdf

Especially relevant are slides 10-11 on treating the primes as a pseudorandom set, and then slides 14-15 on using pseudorandom models of the primes to rigorously (vs. heuristically) prove theorems. That's done by classifying and ruling out all possible ways nonrandom structure in the actual primes (the "conspiracies") could sink the specific theorem being proven.
Disappearing middle class needs better deal on trade
C will be used when many of the up-and-coming systems languages are long forgotten.
In cases like these, if a collision occurs, who is at fault? Presumably it is the "driver", especially in this case, right? But if/when this gets into the court system, when do people start going after the "self-driving" manufacturers, who have much, much deeper pockets than your average car owner.
That's not a good idea, for the same reason you don't want a shell script for /sbin/init.
Well, thankfully, it takes 2/3 repeal, so that likelihood, at least in our lifetimes, is not realistic.

I'm already disappointed that most of the Republicans in the House and Senate are actually RINOs. Just goes to show you that there is a difference between a Republican and a Conservative. No true Conservative will ever vote against gun ownership. We need an entire House and Senate full of guys like Jeff Sessions in order to undo the damage by liberals in this country.
Do you happen to have a link for that?

I've found a WD Blue 3.5" 320 GB for $22 [1], but am not seeing any 2.5" for less than $37. Those are SATA, so you'd need a USB to SATA adaptor. The PiDrive is USB already.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Western-Digital-Caviar-Drive-WD3200AAJ...
> Isn't the same thing true for the grocery stores?

Not nearly. Groceries stores have higher margins and vastly less competition.

I'm most familiar with North Brooklyn (Williamsburg/Bed-Stuy) where most bars and unfancy restaurants have dishes that will make a full meal for $10-16. My experience is that LES and East Village are a touch pricier, but not much.

My question to you is how much do you think a restaurant would have charged for your tortellini/processed chicken/watermelon meal? I mean no slight to your culinary abilities, but I suspect it wouldn't have passed muster at most restaurants.
Most real world microservice projects (I've worked on several) already have many single points of failure. Often there is one service that needs to be up for the system to be up (such as the one that processes your customers orders), you don't realise some VMs are sharing a physical disk or everything is dependent on a single router somewhere you've never heard of that will one day run out of memory and drop TCP connections. This is not to mention the risks posed to availability by third-party tracking software that push changes that break web forms (#1 cause of long outages in my experience).

Message brokers like RabbitMQ give you a lot of benefit and introduce only a small number of failure modes. You can obviate tricky service discovery boot orders, do RPC with without caring about whether about your server could be restarted and of course you get a good implementation of pub-sub too. If you stay away from poorly considered high availability schemes I am absolutely fine with recommending it for intra-service communication.
My thoughts exactly.

In fact I'd go so far as to say if you aren't using it for the attach/detach functionality why on earth would you bother? I'm not seeing how using tmux beats "Just open another terminal" which is the absolute minimum.

Surely anyone doing dev work is using an editor that supports tabbing and in-editor consoles a la emacs.
Actually the availabitly of data has massivly increased. They have access to far more thing then they ever had.

We have few ways to hide metadata and those are of major imprtance. Investigating crime is now far easier the it was at any time beore 1995 and the world did go to shit then.
In my experience failure occurs more frequently when you use more and more systems in more complex ways. e.g. using HAProxy for load balancing, with Consul for service discovery and Consul template for configuration. Each of these is a single point of failure as they are all required for the system to work.

If you define single point of failure, as any computer goes down takes the system with it, then RabbitMQ is not a single point of failure.

I am not sure how domain driven design helps solve this.
Awesome idea. Of course educational uses come to mind, but it seems like this could be a great framework for building many useful project as well.
That's really interesting. I did a CS degree in the UK and all exams were strictly supervised and we were never allowed computers.

The exception to this was programming exams for which the department would boot all the lab workstations into a locked-down mode with no internet & new homedir containing only the exam files. At the end of the exam everything got collected and marked by an automated test suite.

They went to quite some effort to ensure that no cheating could take place - http://pubs.doc.ic.ac.uk/Lexis/Lexis.pdf
Dropbox is clearly a cloud company to its users. Whether or not they use a generic cloud, or maintain their own systems, is an implementation detail to users of the service.
For those unaware: Excedrin's principal ingredients are acetaminophen (Tylenol) + aspirin + caffeine. Each pill contains about 65 mg of caffeine (roughly equivalent to a shot of espresso).
Pantera Capital: Ethereum Emerges, Bitcoin vs. “Bankchains”
That was suprisingly coherent and well stated. I don't think I understood the currency wars until now.
It's not sad, that kind of "thinking ahead" leads too oodles of junk in the code for "someday" features that never get implemented. If your programming style requires thinking ahead to make a feature possible later, then you're better off fixing your style and learning to program better so it costs the same to make the change when it's needed as it does now, then you can put off the change until it's actually needed.

Premature architecture is a code smell. Putting in scaffolding for later is a code smell.
Got an old phone? Make it into a home security camera
Chaos Llama – Testing Resiliency and Recoverability of AWS-Based Architectures