skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Great game and amazing series/match. This last one was absolutely nail biting. My hat off to the AlphaGo team and to Mr. Lee Sedol. Sedol showed incredible fighting spirit and stamina. Just imagine sitting through a 5 hour game like that last one, with full concentration all the time. And seeing the expression of exhaustion and disappointment on Sedol's face after last moves and his resignation. Phew... I bet that he came in rather confident into this last game, after beating AlphaGo in the fourth, figuring he had found a weakness. And he seemed to have a rather good start, securing a decent territory in the lower right corner.
We can all marvel at the machine/software the DeepMind team has built, but still I feel that the real marvel is the human brain. Will we learn anything from this series, about how it functions and evaluates game positions in a stratetgic games? The classic problem/mystery is how extremely good the human brain is at pruning game-trees. Whole branches are thrown out in split seconds and probably never explored. Currently taking a watt-for-watt comparison there is no question about whose "hardware" is superior -> Lee Sedol's brain. But I guess the DeepMind team and the community will take plenty of lessons from this and in a few years span, Lee Sedol's phone will beat him 100% of the time. At least I wouldn't be willing to bet against it, even though we are hitting the roof in Moore's law.
The Apple situation annoys me because it's no longer about the web. It's about breaking crypto on a device which is vendor-locked. The same thing as breaking homegrown crypto, or DVD crypto; easy and trivial. The fact that Apple doesn't use ephemeral keys and can't simply throw away the key in the event of an incident is worrisome enough.

Real crypto needs to be more compartmented than that. A bank is not secure because of the massive door - it's safe because it would take a thief weeks to empty every safety deposit box.

It's also made even safer when the key is (more or less) thrown away for periods of time and nobody can get it. Even with manual over-ride. Literally somebody could be dying inside the safe and nobody could save them.

In properly implemented crypto nobody should hear you scream.
> This doesn't mean toddlers are more dangerous than terrorists. It means there are more toddlers.

The article never made this point.

All it said is that they kill more people. In which case it would seem reasonable to ask, can we save more lives, more effectively with enhanced gun control then with enhanced anti-terrorism measures (I suspect governments are more interested in the later because it really is a power grab for global surveillance and other not-yet-legislated powers).

> a group of people would prefer to dominate their host with violence than to assimilate into the predominant culture.

I think 'dominate' is hardly the right word in this case, even relatively uneducated proponents of the ideology must know that such concept is totally fantastical. Rather it is more likely that assimilation is deemed (by some groups or ideologies) so completely impossible (with as you say the 'predominant culture' and I think this is important part to note, because as westerners we tend to forget that it is indeed predominant and forcefully so) that any form of destruction possible is considered preferable.

> Increasing terrorism is a sign of increasing difficulties assimilating. The ultimate worry is that in 50 years our countries will be split into separate warring tribes.

I really don't think any such worry is realistic, these people are marginalized and completely inconsequential to their nations GDP or the progress of civilization - even North Korea, which would seem the closest in this vein to have some kind of defense against as you put it 'assimilation' I think will ultimately mean very little in terms of global developments.

> I always thought terrorism was feared because it signalled that a group of people would prefer to dominate their host with violence than to assimilate into the predominant culture.

To sum it up, I always thought terrorism was feared because this is an emotion which the government and the media sell.
No. That's what a republic is: the government is not above law, and it is possible to push back against it.

Let me quote this piece of an anarchist pamphlet: "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed" - this means, amongst other things, that the governed do have the option to say "this is not okay anymore, stop."

What you seem to be saying is "you have a right to choose, once, and then just shut up and deal with it, the govt can do anything it wishes in the meantime." You're describing a dictatorship - "the State is always Right, by definition".
Seems rather silly to bet on a horse against Apple. Though Americans are largely uneducated and uninformed about signing keys and public private key encryption, in fact good ol Trump said some reactionary ignorant stuff about boycotting Apple..I wouldnt put it past Apple to include a pamphlet or some type of effort to educate people about how important private keys are. Trump and the durr people are all about us vs terrorists and villify Apple but most of it stems from ignorance. If the government wants to bet on that horse I hope it drags them though the mud for a lap or two
Yahoo rejects Microsoft's bid (2008)
"The price difference between desktop apps and tablet/mobile apps does not make any sense, but everybody pretends it does."

I'm not really into gaming, so I may have missed this, but I wasn't aware you could play games like Fallout 4 on an iPad.

The reason I use adblockers on my browsers has less to do with jus not wanting to see ads but the fact that ad servers cause terrible site performance--the responsiveness of many sites speeds up considerably when you suppress the ads.
> For reference, we haven't spent any time trying to optimize the react website for perf.

That's probably true of every slow site on the web. Part of the purpose of AMP is that it forces your site to be fast. Of course you can optimize a regular HTML page and make it faster, but you can't pass AMP validation with a slow site.
Using line breaks between member function calls is an interesting syntax style I haven't seen before:

ezl::rise(readFile<string>
(argv[1]).rowSeparator('s').colSeparator(""))

.reduce<1>(ezl::count(), 0).dump()

.run();
I saw 'local delivery' through surgically added path ways (basically planting metal tubes through your skin into the tumor or organ). A bit violent for tissue but I bet a whole lot better for the overall system. I'm still surprised medicine didn't find a way to craft this kind of thing in a more organic way so they can interact with the tumor as locally as possible without requiring such barbary.
poor mouse support

Well, not to be too snarky but you _are_ running screen/tmux in a terminal window.

And I hope I'm not the only person who considers having to move my hand off the keyboard and onto the mouse a UX bug.

every command you send to it has to first be announced
with a prefix keystroke

A friend of mine revolutionized my life when he showed me how he'd remapped GNU screen's command key from Control-A to backquote (`). Using screen went from being moderately annoying---especially to a die-hard Emacs user like myself---to being an essential part of every Unix/Linux server install I have done since. To be honest I don't understand why screen and tmux don't default to backquote instead of Control-A/Control-B, but maybe that's just the twenty-plus years of Unix-induced brain damage talking. :)
Why would an AI want to make war with humans, in the first place?
Since you brought up NSL....

The legality of the NSL (which does not require oversight- the FBI can self-sign them) hinges on the idea that the persons on whom the information is being gathered have/had "no reasonable expectation" of privacy of the information.

That said, if these back doors were to be instituted, could the argument then be made that we now have "no reasonable expectation" of privacy of anything on our cell phones? Could this set a precedent of unholy proportions?
Einstein was born on 14 March.
It doesn't mean individual toddlers are more dangerous than individual terrorists. But it is largely irrelevant to us given that we don't have an easy way to influence the relative numbers.

> Do people react to terrorism solely because of the perception of present danger?

Of course not. Which is why it is worth making the point that the degree of our response to terrorism is totally out of proportion, and that the terror should not be our focus.

> I always thought terrorism was feared because it signalled that a group of people would prefer to dominate their host with violence than to assimilate into the predominant culture.

This is a very odd way of looking at it to me. They are not nearly the only two choices.

> Increasing terrorism is a sign of increasing difficulties assimilating.

Is terrorism increasing? I'm not saying it's not. I genuinely haven't looked at the numbers.

What I do know is that in Europe, for example, a long range of terrorist groups that were active in the 60's, 70's, 80's and/or 90's either does not exist any longer or have stopped carrying out attacks. New ones have appeared, but it's not clear to me whether over the longer term are seeing more or less terror. Whether that's true or not probably depends a great deal on what time-frame you look at, and what geographical region you choose to look at.
And the result has been, so far..."no we won't." Politicians tend to say stupid shit - for some of them, that's practically the job description.
I don't think the internal logic of the argument works anyway. Do people react to terrorism solely because of the perception of present danger? I always thought terrorism was feared because it signalled that a group of people would prefer to dominate their host with violence than to assimilate into the predominant culture.

The reason why terrorism works is because of the media bias for extraordinary events becoming familiar events, not solely because a subgroup wanted to be dangerous.

Violence by terrorist groups does not accomplish political objectives and often encourages governments to take a hardline approach rather than accede to any political demands that they may have, provoking state-actors to go to war or enact security policies contrary to civil liberties.

Increasing terrorism is a sign of increasing difficulties assimilating. The ultimate worry is that in 100 years our countries will be split into separate warring tribes.

Suppose muslim terrorists keep doing what they do. Tit for tat, you got people fearful of terrorists, becoming fearful of Muslims beyond justification.

Muslims become more discriminated as alienation went up, encouraging more Muslim youth to join terrorist groups to act out their alienation.
The Effects of Accumulating Complexity on Your Project's Deadline
It's very common when chaining lots of operations, each of which transforms the result of the previous one (functional style). I've seen tons of Scala code do it. Writing it all in one line would be quite the unreadable mess.
This is how Java 20 will look like:
http://turnoff.us/geek/java20-predictions/
:)
Passes the tab unfocus test. Many HTML metronome goes out of sync if you change tab. I still you http://www.metronomeonline.com/legacy (flash based) because of reasons.
And then build that fence all along the border so that no world-version phones get in (see how well it worked for other illegal imports). Plus, you haven't solved the problem at all: you just say "okay, let's make only US phones vulnerable to foreign hacking." Should I enumerate why that's a bad thing?
The FBI is part of the executive branch which is democratically elected.
>I guess that for me "beautiful code" invents some abstractions that transform a problem that initially seems dauntingly difficult into something that is easy to reason about.

Well then, look no further than any RDBMS.

Seriously, for as much as people sometimes rag on the relation model, it is amazing for its power and relative simplicity.
No, it means that you should keep your guns away from toddlers.
There's no doubt that with further refinement, we'll soon see AI play Go at a level well beyond human

No doubt? Seriously? What kind of knowledge do you have to make such statements? There are plenty of examples where technology has rapidly advanced to some remarkable level, but then almost completely plateaued. For example, space travel or Tesla's work on applications of electromagnetism. Heck, even other areas of AI research.

I really don't see why people here readily assume that this particular approach to computers playing Go is easily improvable. Neither do I see why everyone assumes there will be no discoveries of anti-AI strategies that will work well against it.

With neural networks involved, it's hard to say. And all we have so far is information about about, what, 15 games? Some of which were won by people. Mind you, those people never played AlphaGo before, while the bot benefited from a myriad of training samples, as well as from Go expertise of some of its creators.

I'm also tired of all the statements about "accelerating progress". It's not like all the AI research of the past was useless until DNNs came along. That's the narrative I often get from the media, but it misrepresents the history of the field. There was no shortage of working ML/AI algorithms in the past decades. The main problem was always at applying them to real-world things in useful ways. And in that sense, AlphaGo isn't much different from Deep Blue.

One big shift in the field is that these days a lot of AI research is done by corporations rather than universities. Corporations are much better at selling whatever they do as "useful", which isn't such a good thing in the long run. We're redefining progress as we go and moving goalposts for every new development.
Encryption Everywhere: Symantec Announce Free DV SSL Certs
Doesn't this make the FBI's case weaker with the public and the court, given there would then be more points of attack for hackers?

Comey went on record saying the tool should be secure in Apple's hands because Apple knows what it is doing [1]

And, he didn't even think of this tactic until Darrell Issa suggested it at the Congressional hearing [2].

> Issa: Did you receive the source code from Apple? Did you demand the source code?

> Comey: Did we ask Apple for their source code? Not that I'm aware of

It seems like the FBI is grasping at straws here. Does anyone buy this charade? The PR on the DOJ's side is atrocious. From the beginning, "just about one phone" was obviously a lie, and it's all been downhill since then.

For once, the fear, uncertainty and doubt tactics of the government are not working. I'm happy about that but concerned for our future when law enforcement blames technologists for not handing over data to phones. We need to continue educating each other on these issues regardless of what the courts say, and regardless of what ultimately comes out of Congress.

[1] https://youtu.be/g1GgnbN9oNw?t=2h43m12s

[2] https://youtu.be/g1GgnbN9oNw?t=1h21m33s
The ultimate worry is that in 100 years our countries will be split into separate warring tribes.

The ultimate worry is that there won't be a 100 years. Some demagogues and dogmas attract ruthless followers. It only takes one well-supplied psychopath (with access) to cause a huge amount of damage. It might be an idiot with a bomb in his underwear, or it might be a North Korean nuclear submarine captain.
Korea shifting to cashless society
Terrorism is like a mosquito in a room. Hearing its buzz will drive people nuts but the actual harm caused is negligible.

But right now people are pretty much ready to throw their basic rights and freedom away in the hope it will make the buzz go away.

The worst part is that attacks like the Paris attacks are pretty much impossible to prevent unless we transform our democracy into a totalitarian state...
farm and easy life - in reality often famine and extremely oppressive regimes. wtf are you writing about?
It's fair to expect too - these days AI can't exist without human beings, so I guess if someone is extrapolating AI in the future, it's instinct to use the present as baseline.
Today I woke up to this message on my Windows 8.1:
http://i.imgur.com/4jvC8Q0.png

They are not asking if I want to upgrade anymore, they are asking when I want to upgrade :/
This $30, 300GB Hard Drive Was Designed Especially for Raspberry Pi
This is why web performance needs to be something you actively and seriously measure: if you have a solid low-latency connection, you may have a completely different experience from someone with a high latency or packet loss connection which really amplifies the delay for each resource. This is compounded by developers almost always having the sites they work on cached and upgrading their hardware much faster than average, so it's easy to forget how painful all of that code is for e.g. an Android user on an average network when you mostly use an iPhone 6S over LTE / fiber.

Here's Medium with a 10s load-time over a simulated cellular connection:

http://www.webpagetest.org/result/160315_FY_c1dc544bfe0add32...

5s over a simulated mediocre (i.e. Comcast median) cable connection:

http://www.webpagetest.org/result/160315_HH_a6ed41e9bd201183...
Google announces Analytics 360 Suite for enterprise marketers
Possibly because the clicking sound sounds like a failed hard drive?
Ghastly would have been a wiser choice of word, but the meaning remains the same.
From the comments:

PiDrive? 314 GB? Are you sure its not 314,159,265,359 bytes? Even the price is $31.42 and it was announced on 3/14.
Which is such a great idea, because proper encryption is undistinguishable from random data: so, if you have a drive, any drive, good luck convincing anyone that it does not contain any encrypted content, and that whatever is in the empty sectors is just garbage. Guilty until proven innocent.
> I'm not really into gaming, so I may have missed this, but I wasn't aware you could play games like Fallout 4 on an iPad.

Yet games for handheld consoles like the 3DS and Vita, which are less powerful than modern phones (much less tablets!), sell for $30 and upwards. I have maybe a dozen 3DS games and shelled out over $200 for them. And that's somehow okay because they are Real Games™ (supposedly, I wasn't too impressed by most…). If you tell someone you spent $200 on, say, Android apps, you're going to get funny looks.

It's circular reasoning at its finest: Paying that much money for mobile games is unreasonable, therefore you only get garbage games, therefore paying that much money for mobile games is unreasonable.
Music streaming has a nearly undetectable fraud problem
What are the best programming fonts?
Have you perhaps considered that the treatment of terrorism is "purely sensationalistic" as well? The argument against terrorism shouldn't be "cheapened", but it should have far less value than it currently does.

There are far more pressing issues, some of which will actually decrease the threat of terrorism. (for example: global access to education and healthcare, as well as moderate, tolerant leadership will decrease the ability for extremism to forment in the first place).

I know this view is unpopular, but it is logical.
Funny how many 'stresses' trigger beneficial reactions.
Edit:
Posted to wrong article. My apologies.
"A free country's first commitment is to personal liberty"

Excellent.
On one hand, I can understand your statement. But on the other hand, without much insight into the country, the outside world would have a limited view of the country. These pictures shows how bleak and controlled life is in North Korea. For me, I am glad to have seen these pictures.
> You suspect someone of a crime, get a little evidence, get a warrant, then surveil them.

Everything the Obama administration has proposed includes all of the above.

For some reason, the libertarians like to ignore the fact that this would all be done under a court order.
Wrong article. You probably meant to reply to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11288841
Serving static, stripped down HTML under 65ms is not that hard.

You really don't need any AMP for this.
Why AlphaGo's victories are a big deal for humanity
Since this is today's gun argument thread, I'll just point out that the UK is currently commemorating the 20th anniversary of its first and last "mass shooting" incident, at a school in Dunblane, Scotland.

The ensuing total ban on handguns and further restriction on gun licensing mean that mass shootings are nonexistant, firearm murders are extremely rare (about one per year in a country of 60m), shooting of suspects by police is extremely rare (police are not routinely armed, except for anti-terrorist patrols at strategic points with MP5s), and of course firearm accidents and suicides are less common as well. Sadly suicide is a problem in the farming community; farmers often have shotguns for pest control purposes and deer culling.
Yes, my apologies. Too many tabs open.
The economic and security impacts of mandating a back doors in phones go far beyond what the President realizes.

Once he sees that he'll change his mind. However, a lot of damage has been done in that law enforcement believes they could get access to data if only us technology wizards would stop being lazy and do some work for them.

Aside from the compelled speech argument, on balance, we are not more secure with back doors, we are less secure.

So long as law enforcement does not understand this, they will not be effective at their jobs, and they will point the finger at technologists in future terrorist attacks. Even if law enforcement officers do not point the finger, they've already convinced so much of the public that it is the technologists' fault.

We need to continue educating each other on how technology works. Seek public figures and ask them to support our cause. This could go on for years, potentially coming up during every terrorist attack.
That +300ms looks like a roundtrip time for geographical difference.
Absolutely, and as terrifying as that possibility is I personally think they didn't go the NSL route because Apple is big enough to finally prove or disprove the constitutionality of NSL's; even bring the process to mainstream attention. That's something the DOJ would never want to see happen, because then everyone can come out of the shadows and tell their story.
> "Besides this, the overall load on the cluster fell below 50 percent thanks to Hyper-Threading technology, further contributing to the impressive results. In broad terms, when the load increases to over 50 percent, HT-engines, which aren’t as useful as physical engines, start working."

How did "overall load on the cluster fell below 50 percent thanks to Hyper-Threading technology"? Isn't HT simply exposing a virtual core for every physical core on the CPU?

When an HT CPU is monitored to be at 50%, it's actually at 100% or close to it, so it appears that what fell 50% was the reported values for CPU usage. I don't understand how there's a 50% decrease in load due to "when the load increases to over 50 percent, HT-engines, which aren’t as useful as physical engines, start working"
>Racket, on the other hand, much as I love it, when I go looking at it's internals most of the time it's practically unintelligible to me.

This is one of the reasons Racket never appealed to me. R5RS and R7RS are so simple that you can write most of the interpreter in about a page of code in the language. Although if you read SICP, you already know that :-).

Racket and R6RS, OTOH, are full to the brim with complex systems that all interact in a manner that's hard to wrap your head around. Custodians, Contracts, OOP, Delimited Continuations, all there by default... It's just too much. I also dislike syntax-case, but that's more of a personal issue than anything else.

I'd even prefer Common Lisp. Sure, it's about the same size at least, but it's not trying to make you use 5 paradigms at once. Sure, you COULD, but you don't HAVE to. But then, I suppose that is what lisp is about.