skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Sometimes you don't want to update all of your dependencies (isn't that the whole point of Docker), you might want to just apply security updates. Just putting "FROM whatever:latest" is a bad idea, because you don't know whether the "latest" will suddenly break your image.

The point of zypper-docker is to quickly roll out security fixes with essentially no downtime. zypper-docker also allows you to quickly check the health of all of the images and containers on your servers, so you can figure out which ones need updating. Also, zypper-docker allows you to apply RPM patches (something that's quite crucial for enterprises).

So no, it's not pointless. In fact it solves a problem that not many people have been working on solving: updating containers.
The text is grey instead of black. It probably looks fine on most monitors, but I can see how it might exacerbate readability issues. It's become some kind of received wisdom that body text shouldn't be black anymore, I just don't understand it.
Oh sure I know about the logistic curve, I just wasn't sure about black phosphorus.
You can try to build a CPU and have your factory run programs? I bet there are a lot of tricky solutions to be used (I tried for a bit, but didn't explore very far)
In your run of the mill webapp you rarely have state outside the db and caches. What little you have can often be modeled with a single agent or atom. So no need for refs.

What you do have in webapps is synchronization between concurrent processes. For that the STM primitives don't offer much. The core.async on the other hand is a great fit.
A Windows 10 license is about $50. What is the other $50?
Free Business Analytics Content to Help You Understand #BigData – Part 4
That's a bit misleading though, since above F350 isn't really considered "consumer" level but commercial work trucks.

If you want a big truck while still technically being a pickup, you might as well go for the F750:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/600x315/71/c4/11/71c411...

http://www.ford.com/resources/ford/f-650-750/2016/homepage/c...

That said, I wish the US had a better selection of small cars. They're either absolute bottom of the line crap or extremely expensive sports cars, there's no mid range small coupe anymore.
To get a bit more into detail on this issue: In German, nouns referring to occupations generally are all gendered, where the base word is male, and the suffix "in" changes that to female. In cases of mixed groups, or where the gender doesn't matter, the suffix is not used:

Singular:
Studentin = student (female)
Student = student (male, or unspecified)
Plural:
Studentinnen = students (all female*)
Studenten = students (at least one male, or unspecified)

Feminists (correctly) identified this imbalance as an issue of sexist language. The problem is, there isn't an easy fix. The common solutions nowadays are to use phrases like "Studenten and Studentinnen" (creating the new issue of which gender to name first) or in written form "StudentInnen". That's kind of clunky, creating a desire to use ungendered words where possible. So then people come up with constructs like this because they happen to be ungendered (but horrible in other ways).

I think in Austria, using the female form even for mixed/unknown groups is relatively common nowadays. But I'm just a very occasional visitor there and I'm not certain about the details. (Do they throw dice to determine which to use? Or did they just switch to the female, which then could be interpreted to be sexist against men.)
> The suspicion is that since AlphaGo plays purely for probability of long-term victory rather than playing for points [snip]

I wonder how many handicap stones do Lee Sedol, or Ke Jie for that matter, need to have a shot at winning even one game.
There is a strong connection between SAT, spin models and inference in graphical probabilistic models. All can be seen as instances of markov random fields.

They can all be solved with the same algorithms that are very fast for most practical problems.

- With backtracking: https://www.jair.org/media/2648/live-2648-4340-jair.pdf

- With belief propagation: http://web.stanford.edu/~montanar/TEACHING/Stat319/papers/ye...
>Customers, by and large, decided we'd rather have an endless supply of cheap than we would a few precious pieces and the market has followed.

Wouldn't it be a travesty if a bunch of developers in ivory towers decided that the customer is wrong and that he actually needs expensive, carefully-engineered apps with features that he doesn't want? There's thankfully no Software Developer's Guild, so the real outcome of this approach is that no one buys your apps and your competitors eat your lunch.

>Others will continue to rage against the pop-ificiation of the App Store. There'll be more tweets and more editorials about what Apple has done wrong or should be doing better, on how developers "gouge" even while "racing to the bottom", and how customers are cheap, entitled, and, often, assholes. And I'll be joining them.

The customer is always right. If you need his money, the customer gets to be as much of an asshole as he wants. If the customer can get a more primitive, but sufficient, alternative cheaper from your competitor, he probably will. If BigTechCompany can make a competing app and sell it for less than indie devs, then it looks like the invisible hand found a more efficient way to produce the product, good! Anyone who thinks it should be otherwise, is it not they who are acting entitled to the customer's money and interest?
That's sort of like saying civilisation can't work because humans will want to make as much money as possible. No, in practice humans tend to want to make as much money as possible within lots of other very complex constraints, like law, morality, how much time they have available, how enjoyable the available processes of making money are, whether they feel they already have sufficient money for their own needs, etc.
How to send an 'E mail' – Database (1984)
Shameless plug coming up:

This is why I built https://appapp.io , so it would be possible to search for apps in the App Store (it's IOS only at the moment) while filtering out those with in-app purchases. I'd like to also make filters for advertising models too, but structured data for that is much harder to come by.

I don't think smarter search will entirely solve the problem, but I think it's one piece of the jigsaw to help solve the problems of the App Store.
Strictly speaking, "just" because Alphago finally won, that doesnt mean it was right when claiming being ahead already.
Nor Maven or Spring Boot is a module system. OSGi is.
So this is a wrapper around a wrapper around a wrapper around linux containers? Is there any level at which this ever becomes user friendly?
I mean, like actually passing the Turing test.
One good (very good) thing about React is that you can learn it very quickly - at least all the basics. This is also because it only covers the "view" part of a framework.

In the past I tried many times to use some spare time to learn Angular, but it always felt too overengineered to me (also because it does much more than React) and I always stopped at the beginning. With React, just a few hours were enough to appreciate the concepts and get started.

Then of course you can add Redux and that will take more time, but you can almost just as well use React components with any state manager you like.
"Satisfying human values through friendship and ponies."
Three leaders from Latin America call for decriminalizing drug use
DIY DoS: Uncontrollable table growth
>> What would you consider to be "true AI"? At what point are you willing to say,
"Okay, that's it, computers are just plain smarter than we are?"

Look, there's no doubt that computers can outperform humans in specific tasks.
There's no doubt that AlphaGo is intelligent when it comes to Go, but on the
other hand it would be completely incapable of tackling a different congitive
task- say, language, or vision, or discriminating between say two species of animal [Edit, since there seems to be confusion on this: you'd need different training data and another training session to perform well at a different task].

That's a limitation of our current systems. They generalise badly, or they don't
model their domain very well. You have to train them again for each different
task that you want them to undertake and their high performance in one task does
not necessarily translate in high performance in another task.

Humans on the other hand are good at generalising, which does seem to be necessary for general intelligence. If we learn to play a board game, we can take the
lessons from it and apply them in, I don't know, business. If we learn maths, we
can then use the knowledge [Edit: of what constitutes a well-formed theory] to tackle physics and chemistry. And so on.

So, let's say that "true AI" is something that can show an ability to generalise
from one domain to another, like humans do, and can be trained in multiple
cognitive tasks at the same time. If we can do that, then computers will already be super-human, because they can already outperform us in terms of speed and precision.
Clay Sculptures of Archivists Show the Human Face of Big Data
"simply pass a law forbidding the sale of such devices in the USA"

1. They can't even restrict sale of guns, let alone ban them.
2. Banning the iPhone would make the issue headline news.
3. There'd be riots on the streets.
4. if they did, it'd back to the prohibition era, more crime, violence etc.
I dont know if AlphaGo is "beyond" all human players.

Given AlphaGo has learned all played games from a database, its more like AlphaGo is the essence or the sum of all experience gained from those games played. AlphaGo is better than every player (perhaps), but it has not pushed the game further by itself.
I thought the "Microsoft tax" was effectively negative these days, i.e that Microsoft wanted Dell to sell Windows machines so OEM licenses are very cheap, but more importantly that the crapware bundlers were also paying the manufacturers to have the trial of their particular AV software pre installed.

That's why I'm surprised the Ubuntu isn't more expensive than the Windows version even if a Windows license itself would add to the cost.
Maybe you can wrap it again to make it user friendly?
Your advantage as an indie company is that you can move fast, experiment with app ideas on all-new platforms. When the App Store was new, indie companies had to compete against other indie companies, where everyone came from about the same background.

Larger companies have the advantage of doing everything at scale. Once an app or platform seems to be proven, they can move in and do what they are best at: carpet-bomb the battlefield.

On the App Store today you will compete against CandyCrushes, who can buy out a massive amount of ad inventory, making CPIs super-cheap. You can still win with an all-new app idea, but it gets increasingly difficult to come up with something totally new that others can't copy in a week.

Or you can do what you as an indie company are best at: experiment with app ideas on all-new platforms.
Seems somewhat of a poor man's peewee, which in turn is a poor man's sqlalchemy. (Author of peewee here)
Actually, Microsoft has provided a patent grant[1][2][3] to anybody who implements a FAT driver for the purpose of booting UEFI. Which is actually a reason why FAT is still in the Linux kernel even though people argue that Microsoft will sue one day.

But IMO we should be all switching to CoreBoot (or LibreBoot). It's much less fucked up than UEFI, the only negative being that you have to flash it yourself (unless you buy a $1000 5-year-old Thinkpad).

[1]: http://download.microsoft.com/download/1/6/1/161ba512-40e2-4...
Whenever hacking in perl, this comes to mind...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPkTGm4RtVM
There may exist some non-crap trackpad with buttons but I have never used one. The buttonless trackpad on my current Dell precision is just as good as the one on my 2011 MBP.

I'd actively avoid a laptop if the trackpad had buttons now I think.
The German word for “staple” is »Tacker«, which is onomatopoeic.

If you wanted to say that two cars crashed, you could use:

»Zwei Autos (prallten|krachten) gegeneinander.«

Both »prallen« and »krachen« are onomatopoeic.

Onomatopoeia is common in German as well.
There is plenty of weaponry that is restricted despite the second amendment. The US public gets pretty antsy when smallarms get restricted, but they don't say much when states start banning civilian-owned things like tanks, landmines, maces, or even brass knuckles.

Hell, the US even invaded Iraq for the official reason that 'Iraq had weapons you weren't supposed to have' (chemical weapons). Yes, Iraq is not subject to the US constitution, but the concept of 'some weapons are okay, others are not' is still there.
I'm afraid I don't understand the point you're making with "computer says no".

> Genetic algorithms have designed circuitry that we failed to even understand at first but that did work.

This is an excellent example of what I think of as not machine intelligence. If humans can't understand it then it's something entirely different that we need a different word for - an "artefact", perhaps. Meaningfully contributing to the state of the art of human knowledge requires being built upon. If these genetic algorithms can explain how they can be incorporated into the design process by humans, that's intelligence. If they are similar to being able to evolve a mantis shrimp by fiddling with DNA, that is marvellous but not what I would regard as intelligence.

We apply the same standard to human intelligence: someone who can multiply numbers very fast but not explain how they can do it is a savant; someone who can discover and teach other people a faster way of multiplication is intelligent.
Italian is similarly gendered (and actually lacks a neuter): consider the translation of “all”: “tutti” (male) and “tutte”, a particularly ironic case that amuses me as an attempt to be all-inclusive can inadvertently become exclusive when applied to groups of people.

The standard politically correct solution is to use both “tutti e tutte”, but of late a trend is to use the asterisk next to remedy this (“tutt*”), which irks my regex-informed sensibilities no end because it might also match “tutto” (“everything”), though in context is fairly clear.
Fabulous new solid titanium mechanical pencils released. Great for a gift
Restriction of free thought has been extremely effective. Politically and economically the US is practically a monoculture. Encryption could only make it more so, through the chilling effect of forcing dissenters to think more than twice about what they communicate, who they communicate it with, and how they do it.

It makes mainstream dissent like Occupy very much harder - and that's not even thinking about how it would have influenced historical dissent like the Civil Rights or Anti-War Movements.

Commercially it also guarantees that the US has access to corporate secrets. If encryption is de facto illegal, how do you communicate commercially sensitive information?
Dell tax on options, I'd wager. If you look at the cost on everything that isn't the base, laptop manufacturers generally add an extra 100% on the retail price of these parts. 200% if you're Apple.
previous

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11266796
It's just one data point, but a few months ago we had to choose the tools which we should use in our next bigger projects for front-end development, one where we had to start from scratch with a completely new and pretty junior team, and one where we had to progressively consolidate and refactor a fairly complicated SPA written with CoffeeScript and jQuery (both front ends are on top of a Rails backend and integrate with some non-SPA Rails frontend).

We did some pretty extensive research and comparisons back then. What we came out matches 90% what the OP proposes, and we're very satisfied with the results so far.
I think this is a good guess. 280 GPUs in a single Desktop. It will take at least 10 years.

Perhaps longer given the restrictions (and huge problems) in further down scaling of the known silicon technology. GPUs are now at 28nm and the newest Intel CPUs on 14nm.
Show HN: numLaunchpad – a WebAudio-based drum pad
Which all-new platforms would you currently recommend?
Now make a laptop with a keyboard and touchpad that justifies me stopping frankensteining my old machines to keep them alive.

That chiclet keyboard and phone-sized pad nonsense is very limiting.
Some probably pretentious thoughts about Sapiens and software dev methodologies
Are these available in Australia yet? I can only ever find reference to the US store
It's a cognitive load, a burden. The paradox of choice, anxiety etc.
What is the point? What a few years and you can get an equivalent AI on your home computer. Play as many games as you want.

Of course, you can change rules as much as you want and generate new marketing events. Personally, I would like a match where the AI is only allowed the energy a human uses. I guess, AlphaGo would lose with only 2000 kcal (2.3 kWh). Not sure about chess.
Is it possible that all of AlphaGo's strength is in these baffling moves? If humans played enough games against AlphaGo and discovered how to counter the baffling moves, is it plausible that AlphaGo's strength would be lost?
Vote?
I wasn't talking about the implementation, but about the problem space.

Anyway Marazan already pointed that out, but any computer system is a state machine, with 2^N states where N is the number of bits the machine can flip anywhere in its system (RAM, registries, disk, etc.).
Superintelligent AIs, like all computer programs, will do exactly as they're programmed to do. The problem is that computers do what you say, not what you mean. (Hence bugs.) So if you were to try to program a computer to "make human lives the best and most comfortable they can be", or something like that, it would be very difficult to actually specify that correctly. (Especially since it's a way more complicated, nuanced, controversial objective than "win at Go".)

That's why e.g. the Future of Life Institute's open AI letter is so important: http://futureoflife.org/ai-open-letter/ We need to be thinking in advance about how to solve the "value loading" problem for future AIs, and how to architect them so they can be deployed to solve big problems without being undermined by subtle but catastrophic bugs.
I don't mind taking the conversation in a different direction, but I just want to make it clear that nothing you said has anything to do with what I said.

> ...for all practical purposes impossible to actually ban strong encryption...

They learned their lesson after the first attempt to do so. Just jumble those words up a little and you'll see the current strategy: actually ban practical encryption. The state doesn't care about gnupg, or any other software that requires more than an hour's worth reading to safely use - because 99% of people won't. So they only have to target the stuff that is easy to use or on by default... unless they can depend on corporate cooperation (Apple up until recently, Microsoft, AT&T, etc).

> Guns are physical items that require physical ammunition. It is a completely different situation.

One can very easily manufacture a firearm using the same equipment that one would use to produce common consumer products like garden hose nozzles. The schematics are all available online. The state doesn't ban the means of production, they ban the stuff that makes it accessible to the common folk - like retail sale of firearms. You see where I'm going with this right? The state doesn't ban math, they ban the stuff that makes the math accessible to the common folk.

> ...where owning a gun is rare and completely undesirable for the vast majority...

lol, unlike encryption software? I'm not talking about the kind that lets you buy crap online that the state can easily circumvent, I'm talking about to kind of crypto that only terrorists, pedos and anarchists want to use... and that the state can't break.
Some explanations:

- works everywhere where standard Web Audio API is supported;

- based on Samples.js (https://gist.github.com/plugnburn/75ce136bea973d8767e0) and is a reference demo for it;

- supports loading custom 16-bit 44KHz WAV samples (or whatever format is supported in your particular browser).

Controls: numpad (1 to 9 digits) on PC, taps on touch devices.

Have fun!
I love the random Swedish word in an otherwise flawlessly English comment!
The day computers find their own power sockets and setup electric farms ?
> I fear we've moved into an era where pop — popular, light, snackable, mass-market — apps, not indie apps

This is some pretencious bullshit if I've ever seen some. "Uhh, you like them 'pop' apps, go back to your herd you sheeple". Like what the hell even is indie app? Based on this context it's anything that isn't doing so well or is "underground" that's not what indie means, it just means "independent" as in it's few guys/gals doing it on their free time.

And what is actually preventing author from giving money to indie app developers "I would if I could", bullshit, have you actually contacted the devs and asked if they would setup a paypal for monthly donations? I doubt it. Sure there are some people who develop apps just for fun and don't want to feel obligated to update the apps (i.e. they don't want paying customers), but I'm sure many on your "indie app list" would be willing to take your money if you just offered it.
How is it leaps and bounds better than a MBP? You say that but don't offer any reason.
I haven't seen a non-crap touchpad that didn't have buttons, likely because my definition of crap is different than yours and includes massive surfaces that feel awful and get in the way of using the keyboard, and hoping the proper amount of fingers hit the touchpad within the correct window of time (and weren't too close together and counted as a single finger) to perform the click I meant to.
But does it play Crysis?
The difference between being outdone by another human and being outdone by a computer is that the computer's efforts are nearly infinitely reproducible, given the processing power.

So a more apt analogy would be if there was someone inside every cellphone who could write books, papers, or symphonies better than you. That day is coming.
It's not so bad. You just pick the most popular thing or use the recommendations in articles like this one.
It's not just the discussion protocols, it's the topology upon which those protocols run.
How hard is it to import a European router to the US? Is that illegal? I would think as long as one operated it within the FCC's limits it would be legal to use it.
How the modules get loaded isn't specified either. All that's specified ATM are the syntax and static semantics. The loader spec probably has to be finished before any browser implements es6 modules.
How hard is it to import a European router to the US? Is that illegal? I would think as one operated it within the FCC's limits it would be legal to use it.
> the stark degree to which "AlphaGo output that move because the board will later be in a winning state" sometimes doesn't correlate with conventional Go goals like taking territory or being up on points

Minor quibbles: 1) taking territory or being up on points are the same thing, and 2) in go there are many other things to optimize for besides territory/points - influence, shape, efficiency, and sente being examples of this.
"HN comments needs an on-topic vs off-topic filter. Or a "yes we already know that" filter..."

They already do; if something doesn't positively contribute to the discussion, downvote it.
How do we know that it's not just that the AI dominates the later stages where the number of permutations has reduced to the point where AI can calculate optimal moves? In other words, how do we know that the computer has an edge on the early stages and isn't just breaking even until the later stages with less permutations arrive, at which point it dominates because there are still too many for humans to assess?