skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A single A15 core at around 1Ghz has more Gflops of power than deep blue had across it's whole system (11.38Gflops).

1920 CPUs (a 4-core haswell from 2013 is around 170Gflops). 280 GPUs (previous gen Nvidia K series peaks at around 5200GFLOPS). That's 1,782,400Gflops or around 150,000x more processing power. If they were running latest-gen hardware, then the would be closer to 200,000x faster.

Given that Moore's law is slowing down and the size of the system, we're a long way from considering putting that in a smartphone.
I was a big fan of Meteor early on, but the decision to go Mongo and only Mongo killed my interest. I can't think of anything that I can do on Meteor that I can't do faster and better with a set of tools that I assemble myself.
Some things, like dissemination of knowledge, are truly in the interest of all humanity. It seems criminal that a few hundred people at the publishing houses should benefit at the expense of billions' welfare.
Yes, but that's a fault in Java the language. Keeping Java bad doesn't solve that problem.
I am still willing to pay for a high-quality printed version of research journals, but for the online access I think we should simply give away because research knowledge should belong in the public domain when you choose to publish the knowledge with a research journal. You are not publishing a paper within your 4x4 walled intrnaet.

But I get it. There is a business cost behind running a journal / magazine (although not all reputable one charge fees!). So here is the radical question: why the fuck do we need 100+ CS-related journal publishers out there? All we need is one.
I think UBI is different in that everyone is given a certain amount of money as a basic human right, and then people can be paid market rate for the work they do.

You're right about the security that UBI offers though, and I think that removing the minimum wage would go well with introducing UBI. In some developed countries without a minimum wage, unions set the pay rate for specific jobs, a similar arrangement happens in Australia, where people are paid according to industry agreements on the value of a worker.
Apple computers aren't more secure than Windows. They're just attacked less
That % 63 at the end is integer division, that's horribly slow. Literally any other sensible approach will beat it, including a naive LUT.
5 marketing trends surfacing at SXSW 2016
Very much so. Many modern, "civilized" humans are assholes, and now we've got global audiences for it!
Except that incentive doesn't work anyway. For example, last I heard Steam is shipping am ancient, known-vulnerable version of Chromium with sandboxing disabled. The biggest issue with open source security is the same as the biggest issue with closed source security: end users have no idea how secure the software is and can't really do much about it even if they did know.
He's the President who forms part of the apparatus that decides the laws that govern the nation.

Everything he does involves telling people what to do.
I've recently switched from Macbook Air 11", running Linux, to XPS 13. They are practically same size, XPS is a bit bulkier, its plastic attracts fingerpints like crazy unlike Mac's aluminium, and I absolutely hate it that Fn and Ctrl positions are swapped and there's absolutely no way to override that. But beside all this, it's a very nice machine technically and I'm quite happy with it.
US bill would train law enforcement to fight online harassment
I wonder if Lee Sedol were to start as white again, and follow the exact same starting sequences, would AlphaGo's algorithms follow the exact same moves as it did before?
And Obama is the reason to vote for Trump: Obama is a demonstration that it doesn't matter who people vote for.
I got hooked on Subterrania on Sega Genesis for several months back in 94, then didn't play for 15 years. Then I decided to look for it on eBay. Found a system and the game for only $35 and now I play it several times a week.
Looks like its $11 a year now. Seems super reasonable for something you get a lot of use out of.
It seems obvious that It is impossible to spy on so many people in the physical world with the same efficiency as in digital.
No, the West did what they could to make Ukraine a NATO member / EU member without the intention to actually move forward with this because of the situation with Russia if Russia would object in any meaningful way. And they did (surprise!). (The EU was never fully united on getting Ukraine to join anyway, it was just power politics and division being sown, see also: Turkey.)

The time for restraint was before making promises that would not be kept. It's not as if we haven't seen this kind of behavior before either.

There was a time when Ukraine could have been made a memberstate of the EU and a full NATO member, but since then the times have changed and that window has closed. Part of this was the EU wasting time they didn't have and part of it was Ukraine internal politics. If Yanukovich would have played ball in 2010 it might have gone off without a hitch but all the delays and the new nationalism wave in Russia (and the Russian destabilization of the Crimea in response to that very bid) made this a plan that was bound to fail.

Note that that was a democratic and (eventually) uncontested election and that 'the people of Ukraine' did not exactly sat there and held their hands in joint misery. They simply decided that at the time.

See: http://www.bbc.com/news/10229626 if you don't believe me.

Tymoshenko messed that up royally.

Which is a pity because it would have been a good thing to get this behind us but you can't make a move like that on half-baked plans and promises, it would have taken some considerable risk taking and contingency planning to do in the first place and with the Russians - belatedly - figuring out what was at stake it was a little late to do this half-assed.

If we really wanted to do this we're in fact well over a decade late, back when Russia was internally very much in turmoil this would have been a much bigger possibility.

So no, the 'very restraint' that I'm advocating has nothing to do with making empty promises in the hope that it would all go without any backlash from Russia. Dumb.
The problem is that writing a good grammar requires understanding of parsers.

(Also, real parsers tend to be hand-written, judging from open source language implementations (some have actually migrated from generated parsers to recursive descent in the past). There must be a reason).
I think they should do something like that. The EFF fights political battles all the time, but can't recommend a "best" candidate for the issues they care about?

Because they aren't doing that is probably the reason why privacy/data protection is such a neglected issue during elections, and if it does get brought up is mainly from the perspective of "what other rights should Americans give away freely so the government can protect you".

The only reason it's been brought-up now is because of Apple, and even that is mostly spun in the government's favor in the media.
The problem is that guns are tangible. I can have a gun, and then have the gun taken away or banned by the government. This is easy for anyone to understand.

Encryption isn't so tangible. If certain forms of encryption were banned, we'd still have our computers and phones, and to the average end user, they'd be no different in their perception.
In the US this practice is known as redshirting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshirting_(academic)
Yes, I am aware of that, but I think he will appreciate more new opponents.
I agree with what you're saying, which is also why I think the title of the blog post should really be: "I work for only 3 hours a day, but everyday". It's less of a command or suggestion and more an expression of what works for him.
I think we _are_ living in memory constrained spaces on the desktop. For some time now I have found the impetus for upgrading to a new computer has been to gain more RAM. More RAM usually requires changing RAM/DIMM type which necessitates new Motherboard and therefore new CPU. It has been that way since I had a 8 Meg machine.

It boggles me that a machine that could hold six hundred uncompressed 1080p video frames is my most memory constrained computer.
This isn't a new term: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_Wars
You're right, it wasn't. However, people who propose a single, absolute moral principle generally believe, I think, that one will use it to freely overrule anything determinate that might be opposed.
It's actually less safe. People will think their data is secure, but it won't be.

The government always leaks keys. Sometimes literally.

http://www.wired.com/2015/09/lockpickers-3-d-print-tsa-lugga...

http://nypost.com/2015/09/20/the-8-key-that-can-open-new-yor...

Plus, any key that the government can use without your permission, they can illegally abuse. And if there's one thing we've seen proven recently, it's that such abuse will occur.
definitely. his warmth and humor are very much on display in "a puzzle about belief" as well:

http://www.uvm.edu/~lderosse/courses/lang/Kripke%281979%29.p...

(putnam is cited in this paper as well, by the by)
This definitely helps, thank you.

I suppose the main similarity is the chain of observables being a nervous system of sorts. In mercury the observers pass the update signal all the way back to root (and then needless re-renders are mitigated by vdom-thunks) , whereas w/ mobx the update signal is not passed up to root, just to the local component in question, and then that re-renders itself, so the rest of the app is not concerned

One cool thing about combining observables AND immutability as in mercury isyou get the equality checking via immutability, but you also get to deal w/ component updates locally. ...no dependence on a global event emitter or global event emitter abstraction like redux.

So 2 questions: w/ mobx + react how do you deal w/ events outside of a component?

And what, if anything, is lost from losing the uni-directionality?
hey, you guys using cheap chromebooks for linux. why do you bother with hacking your chromebook to use linux, while you can buy an old core2duo (or even an i3/i5) fully featured used laptop for about the same amount, often even less? i mean, these machines run linux as is, without any major issues, you can max up RAM to 8GB (4GB being the norm), install huge SSD or proper 1TB HDD. build quality is often better than of a chromebook. so is the keyboard. there are decent HP/lenovo/dell/apple high end 5 to 10 year old machines for anywhere between 100 and 250 USD which beat any lowend chromebook
I can not find it using google, but there was a Go champion who had stop playing go during one year to earn money playing mah jong.
It's a word from a democrat (thus a progressist) to people that defend privacy or freedom (so progressists too).

In that context, the word is pejorative and is related to marxism (more than freudism).

BTW I don't think Obama wrote his speech (according my knowledge of House of Cards :) ).
> Sure there is. We have a system of laws and courts that define the contract.

Isn't the point of discussing this that you actually don't have anything that defines that contract? In terms of the fourth amendment, it seems like there is quite the opposite contract in place already. Also, as an Apple product user outside the U.S., this supposed contract is not something that I ever agreed to.

> And besides, the existence of a contract or not isn't really my point. My point was that encryption isn't an all or nothing situation. You don't either have completely ironclad security where you and only you can access your data or nothing at all.

It is an all or nothing situation. That there is only one unauthorized party able to intercept my data using a back door doesn't change the fact that there is an unauthorized party able to intercept my data using a back door. Whether that is practical for you or not, again, depends on whether you consider the third back-dooring third party authorized.

> There are degrees of technical protection.

I think that maybe the discussion here comes from the fact that you are indeed talking about "technical protection" in general and not encryption specifically. The point of encryption is that only eligible parties can decode the data. If others can decode the data it's not really encrypted, as a matter of definition.

For example, using Google as a mail provider may prove to be poor "technical protection", but the data is encrypted and the authorized parties are part of the terms of service. That the U.S. government can decode my encrypted data without permission may prove to be practical "technical protection", but in terms of encryption it really is a boolean situation.
This is why I strongly oppose the drone strikes. Nobody should be killed by the state (except I guess by soldiers in self defense). I especially so not like the idea of killing someone probably at home in pajamas eating Cheerios at five pm in the evening local time. I don't think there is any justification for that even if the person in question is a flight risk and has been the mastermind behind millions of death.

Such a killing with no attempt to detain runs afoul of my morals. This is worse than capital punishment which I also strongly oppose for any situation.
+this. Freely available data is a huge value to everyone. We use it in academia, and it's useful in companies big and small. (Even at Google -- I started exploring some of my research questions using MNIST and Imagenet because they're baselines that allow reproducibility, and because you don't have to deal with the privacy issues. For amusing anecdotes about this, consider what the Smart Reply team had to do: http://googleresearch.blogspot.com/2015/11/computer-respond-... It's much harder to train a network when you can't ever look at the training data!)

The best thing the assorted communities involved in this effort could do to accelerate the advance of open, accessible machine learning is to create good creative-commons datasets that anyone could use to train models that could be released open source. And as an academic, let me say that hundreds of researchers would figuratively kiss the ground you walk on for doing so. :)
Train Man and the Gender Politics of Japanese 'Otaku' Culture
The reason basically boils down to generated parsers being very brittle. If you need to tweak it slightly (for example, to handle errors on missing semicolons better), it's difficult or maybe even impossible to get the generated parser to do it well.
It's worth noting that in this case we're only talking about keys that are useful to someone in physical possession of a phone. So as long as I retain physical possession of my phone no one can get at it, keys or not.

That's still pretty safe.
> So here is the radical question: why the fuck do we need 100+ CS-related journal publishers out there? All we need is one.

I don't get it. You want it to be monopoly?
Vector and possibly string have that. The vast majority of STL structures do not.
Well said. I wasn't aware that Steam had continued to ship that Chromium version, what used it?
I feel especially strongly that papers that result from taxpayer-funded research should be free.
> Nobody paying attention uses their ISP's DNS servers.

Very few people, as a proportion of the population, are paying attention.
Something I'd like to see here: results published in research papers aggregated and released as open data.

There must be a lot of interesting meta-analyses that aren't getting done because the necessary data is locked away behind paywalls, and usually not in an easily machine readable format into the bargain.
> blind category error that Slashdotter types have been making for years about Linux

I think It's safe to call if "for decades" now. 1.85 decades is close enough to count.
Patents and Copyrights Should Be Repealed (2009)
I get that same ad on a Windows 2012 R2 RDS server. It's interesting having a user in a remote desktop environment log a ticket about a required upgrade to Windows 10.
And you presume that compromising the iPhones belonging to the men and women who do control the nuclear launch codes wouldn't serve to compromise everything they control, by extension? Either by using the data as a lever against the people, or directly snooping, this would be a very powerful opening, and your position seems to defy all common sense.
Iterators and Snapshots for LevelDB UWP
They can still plant bugs in offices, cars, homes, etc. That's specific and targeted and proportional, but expensive and hard.

There's no good reason they have to have access to electronic devices, they can install cameras and mics. It's just easier going straight to the phones and emails.

But they had that power and they abused it massively, and are now suffering the backlash, and why should privacy stop given they've demonstrated they can't be proportional in their surveillance?

They were not specific with what they got from the phones and emails, so they've demonstrated they're not responsible or measured and now strong encryption is necessary as government has clearly shown that secret courts === warrantless mass surveillance.

The other thing that's clear is that the US couldn't care less about privacy for anyone not in the US, so all us non-US citizen need this encryption to protect us from your peeping tom government.
Woah woah, hold up a second here. It sounds like you're saying that someone who has sufficient enough access to change the html code on the Android sub-section of the RPi official forums has intentionally broken the display rendering because they... just don't want to deal with it? or, are tired of people asking about Android on the Pi(s)?

Edit: by blindly clicking around I found a post from a Foundation member that said they were locking the forum. Dated mid-March 2015, so i guess the css wouldn't matter anyway
> Linux without a terminal wouldn't be GNU/Linux.

Linux without a terminal wouldn't be Python Foundation/Perl Foundation/SQLite/Xorg/OpenBSD Foundation/RedHat/GNU/Linux. GNU tools are only a few of many components of a Linux kernel-based operating system that people use every day. There are a myriad of entities that produce code that makes up a modern Linux system, not to mention the many Linux systems out there that don't use a GNU userland. Insisting on GNU/Linux is just petty and silly.
I used to think that Bush was bad and Obama was good... I'm really upset that I was wrong and that now Bush appears to be the better of the two.
> I can play some 1983 audio CDs just fine

"Some" is not acceptable for preservation.

> Btw. I can play some 1983 audio CDs just fine, multimedia CD-ROMs from 1990 and DVDs from 1996. Neither a hard disk nor flash-drive nor an internet service will last that long.

A hard drive is much easier to back up and transfer to fresh storage than a stack of CDs.
I agree. A little native support for wide-spread best practices would only be a good thing for Java.
Only if there's actual room to be much better. It's quite possible that 9p players are already pretty close to perfect play. Maybe a computer can get slightly closer still to that perfect play, but it's never going to be better than perfect play. There's not always room for improvement.
The Republicans aren't necessarily better, but they are anti-Obama which helps on this issue.
Obama used the word "fetishizing" for a reason. It's a pretty unusual word to use don't you think? It was carefully chosen though I'm sure.

Comments like this are exactly why he used it.
The important aspect of this and the Apple scenario is that the encryption requires a benevolent third party. Encryption that relies on Eve...well, she has three faces.
Is there a contemporary basin ripe for a catastrophic flood from the sea in the event of an earthquake?
It's A correct answer but not THE correct answer. The best answer would be clean code is just beautiful and that's why I strive for it.
I hope not all future languages will have regular expression, or Forth, syntax...
I guess I thought the drones were a joke or hyperbole in your post.

There are a lot of things that make me not concerned about your scenario. Firstly, cameras are easily defeated, especially by technology 50 years from now. You're presently a single curtain away from defeating them. In the future it might be some non-human visible light array that blinds a camera (these already exist today but aren't very common). Who knows.

Secondly, most people benefit from security and privacy through obscurity. No one cares about what 99% of people do. The other 1% will have easy means for protecting privacy, whether it be closing their curtains or some futuristic piece of technology.

Thirdly, I think expectations of privacy are going to naturally diminish a lot in the future. Sexuality will probably be a lot less stigmatized, and no one will care whether a state senator is jackin it to gay scat porn.

However advanced drones get, the technology to counter them bothering you will no doubt be a lot more advanced.
> Whenever you impose a disciplinary sanction, it's implicit that if the sanction is not respected, it will be replaced by an alternative, at least as harsh sanction, and eventually the alternative sanction will be violent.

Jesus fucking christ no it isn't. Your boss doesn't punch you for not filing your TPS reports; your spouse doesn't hit you for not doing the shopping.

Don't hit children. Learn how to parent.

The rest of your post shows a mind-boggling lack of knowledge of parenting methods. (EG: Time outs are not long - one minute per year of age. A 12 year old gets a 12 minute time out.)
Maybe you have information on your phone that KGB is interested in, but most people don't.

You have a very narrow view of what information is sensitive. Do you know how many Americans work either directly in, or in industries associated with, defense? How many of them use Apple products as part of their work?

Or let's take a more down-to-earth example: I work for a company in the health-care space. We have health records on thousands of people, and as we expand we'll have more health records on more people. With your approach, where should we draw the line? Would it be OK to use security bad enough that, say, an Eastern European organized-crime ring could break in? Or do we need to defend against them and not against the KGB? How do we figure out what level of tools to use to do that? How do we figure out whether what we have now will still be mafia-proof in five years?

Oh, and keep in mind that legally we have to protect that data, and improper access to it can not just shut down the company but send me and my co-workers to jail. How much would you be willing to compromise with that on the line? If the potential consequences to you were jail time, how much on the side of Obama and the FBI would you be? How much risk of that would you take on in order to make law enforcement's life a little bit easier?

And in case you think this is a red herring, remember the San Bernardino shooter... worked for a public-health department.
> 100% impregnable, and people maintain good OpSec

fortunately, that never happens. Even the strongest defenses consistently fall to human error
Million Web Stars
Programming is not by any means a "fairly low rent blue-collar position".

It has a very odd wage curve, though, where the vast majority of your salary increases will come in the first 5 years of your career, and the technologies that you became an expert in will be obsolete within 5-10 years. If you don't retrain, you'll be very much obsolete. That's behind most of the complaints on Hacker News; these were people who tasted glory once, and then fell off the technology curve into irrelevance and don't want to hop back on it.

Any profession where you can make $300-400K/year as an employee with ~5 years of experience, or over half a million as a consultant, would be considered fantastically lucrative by most of the world.