skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You've clearly never been so depressed and anxious you couldn't eat because this is terrible "advice" that is not helpful.

"Your hunger should return in a few hours" after cutting out coffee is just plain wrong. Coffee is not the issue here though it may be a good idea to cut out potential appetite suppressants - but don't act like it's that simple. Nor does eating fatty food make food appealing to someone who has trouble eating due to anxiety. Nor does forcing yourself to eat in this situation make you "crash."

I've been there, too anxious and depressed to eat, couldn't taste food, puked it up if I tried to force myself to eat. I was able to eat again with the help of a medical doctor, which is what this person needs. This is not as simple as cutting out coffee and eating a pizza, this is a big deal and very, very difficult to get over.
I have no idea who's "right" here, but the idea that someone should have job prospects harmed for trying to get something that he believes is deserved is disgusting.

>regardless of the veracity of the allegations made.

So, even if he is actually entitled to the equity, he should be punished for making the claim? What the hell...
I hope that one of their solutions is the obvious one; make change control testing a closed loop instead of an open loop. (Watch for /success/ reported instead of failure notification.)
> Lack of evidence is not evidence of anything. The scientific method is good for eliminating the likelihood of a hypothesis being correct based on evidence...not the lack of evidence.

I agree completely! But the claim that Moses wrote the Torah doesn't hold any water either, as you just argued, due to ZERO contemporary evidence. The same problem applies to e.g. the figure Lykourgos forming the pugnacious culture of Sparta: he's called out a few places, including Plutarch via Aristotle, but no contemporary evidence of him exists. Most likely he (Lykourgos) is a myth.

> It always amazes me how many people have opinions about the Torah without studying the Talmud in it's entirety.

What does the Talmud have to do with the Pentateuch authorship? I was not commenting on the authorship beyond Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and Leviticus. The Talmud also wouldn't present any contemporary evidence as it dates to several centuries after the earliest Pentateuch fragments and ~1.5k years after Moses would have walked around.

I'm very open to arguments that the Talmud IS relevant (it'd be pretty exciting to me, I'm a big fan), but I don't see it off hand. The Rabbis had every reason to present a coherent narrative regardless of its accuracy, and they were certainly not in a position to verify it themselves. If they did, I'd love to see how.
They work better for non-sliding window queries. Triggers on sliding window queries are much more resource intensive, both for CPU and memory. Essentially, the trigger process has to keep track of tuples for each step in the window and combine them whenever any tuple is updated to get the new value.
Just a minor nitpick, vnoremap creates a mapping for select and visual modes. You should use xnoremap as that's restricted to visual mode only.

Select mode is used by snippet engines mostly, and you don't want this mapping to affect select mode.
The mid-list publishing industry has taken an enormous beating. There used to be a lot more people who made a living writing; now, the split between best seller or writing around a day job is much more pronounced.
>> Smart people don't settle if a claim is baseless. Baseless claims get thrown out quickly and easily.

Ok this is not remotely true. Baseless claims in court can go on for years - then they can be appealed and appealed again. It's often offensive to settle but that's why it's called "settling" since you don't have an optimal outcome. Are you just trolling?
I'm sorry, I didn't meant to say that anarcho capitalism specifically has historically end up in a feudal state. What I meant is that a lot of historical societies, and modern ones for that matter, end up with strongmen oppressing the majority of people so it's something to be very wary about.
Real Companies of Silicon Valley Season 2 episode 1
Show HN: An OBD App without the OBD. Modeled fuel economy and performance
Oh, wow. Pretty cool primer on algorithms
What if we shared all of our knowledge with them to fix the blank slate problem?

But you're right. A single human with no knowledge is not very intelligent. It's disconcerting if you think about it.
> Smart people don't settle if a claim is baseless. Baseless claims get thrown out quickly and easily.

That isn't true at all.

If you have a larger merger hanging in the balance or if the lawsuit would be expensive and long, it can make sense to settle even if you're "right." A lot of businesses settle for things which they may be innocent of because it makes financial sense (and there are a lot of smart lawyers around filing lawsuits every day knowing they're ultimately baseless but still cheaper to settle).

Mergers are a prime time for frivolous lawsuits because people know that the business will be under undue pressure to settle it so the merger can go through.

PS - This post isn't about this specific case, I don't know if it is frivolous or justified, I am talking more broadly.
The servers became unreachable, but the IPs weren't unreachable until all the servers were reconfigured.

My test should have caught this bug:

> In this event, the canary step correctly identified that the new configuration was unsafe. Crucially however, a second software bug in the management software did not propagate the canary step’s conclusion back to the push process, and thus the push system concluded that the new configuration was valid and began its progressive rollout.
Can anybody offer a TLDR of how this works (or point me to one)? It seems particularly well-suited for convolutional nets with many layers if I understand correctly, but I am curious as to whether e.g. recurrent nets may receive the same speed-ups from parallelization.
If a bug can kill millions then it's not "better than a human" though, right?
All pilots are trained to recover from a stall.

A failed autopilot could look like all sorts of things, from just automatically disconnecting itself (usually with a loud warning alert) to issuing incorrect instructions (which is why the pilots are supposed to be awake and alert while it's engaged, watching the instruments).
If you can't help then you can't help. It's not your problem.

If you want to make it your problem then take a long hard look at all the things you want to accomplish & see if you can fit this one in. Possibly spend 10 years in that part of the world & maybe you'll have a chance to change something.
Note that you need Vim compiled with +clipboard for this to work (or +xterm_clipboard if you are using X11)
>> Heaven forbid, we would pay the Canadians for what they have that is already proven to work well and efficiently...

Yep. Came here to suggest that. The problem is the old system is surely being maintained by someone and a purchase of a new system will mean less spending in some congress persons district. This is an explanation of course, not a justification.
I think the bigger worry is not the perfection part: It is the uniformity part. Considering software will be replicated (ignoring the ML ways of driving for now), updated and refreshed en masse, the impact is going to be very severe. A single nut case shoots up one school or his neighbors. The whole world turning into nut cases is going to be a walking dead scenario.

We see this ALL the time with ALL the big companies including the ones I have worked for in the past. I am very interested in possible solutions people are cooking up here.
A bunch of that's in-place already, eg. all Google servers have health checks that run basic smoke tests on a configuration, and if a large number of replicas become unhealthy after a config change, the rollout process automatically aborts and rolls back to the last known good conversion.

The problem here was that there was a bug in the health check that masked the problem by assigning the last-good configuration, and then there was a bug in that code that had saved "nothing" as the last-good configuration. So rather than failing and having the error caught at the top level, it failed and buggy failure-recovery code made the problem worse.
>People will be opportunistic when it's most opportune.

It cuts both ways. Plenty of founders make promises of equity in the early going that never materializes.
You also get access to the whole world of GUI applications.

Watching video and editing pictures is not much fun with only ncurses... (ascii video hardly took the world by storm).
Late last year I upgraded from a kindle 3 (keyboard) to the Voyage. I like the Voyage quite a bit and the cover flipping over the top rather than to the side is more usable than the case for the paperwhite.

As others have said, additional battery life isn't an issue for me.
I think part of the problem is that Sam isn't able to talk about the tactics that Jeremy might be using, such as "pay me or I screw up the merger."

I think Sam probably should have realized that he couldn't explain why he is so upset and therefore should have just not said anything.

I do agree on one thing though, calling the guy out by name like absolutely reeks. "I'm going to destroy you for attacking one of my investments!!" Please. I think it would have been much better if he never used his name, which of course is now going to show up in Google Searches.
I have been in similar situations, with competent legal advice, and was not advised to make the described arrangements (token compensation, etc.) I certainly did not think of it on my own. Luckily for me my company failed so I did not have to deal with anything like this.

Perhaps I was given other advice that was unique to my lawyers. That would be nice, because when somebody got caught out because their lawyers did not give similar guidance, I could congratulate myself on having done the obvious.
I can second this, I really enjoyed this book and it was an excellent starting point for me.
Yes, for sure--Kyle should absolutely have done that.
Internet drama
> Most startups will not result in a meaningful financial outcome, so it sort of makes sense waiting to go through this mess until it's clear that it's going to matter because there's money on the table.

That's not how it works. We have great, special-built instruments for this purpose, commonly known as stock options. They come in many flavors, but all of them share the important feature of defining terms of ownership before it's obvious what the final value of a company will be. These tools exist for the express purpose of avoiding shadow claims and massive litigation every time a company is bought or sold.
I can't imagine being in her shoes. Kind of sorry for her, she was supposed to be an inspiration for women everywhere.

On the other hand, she is an excellent example of how not to be disconnected from reality for founders.
California Rejects Bill Requiring iPhone Decryption
Zuckerberg wants the Facebook Messenger platform to replace iOS and Android
Facebook's Messenger platform could help enterprises engage with their customers on mobile devices in app-like interactions that most are under-resourced to deliver
You're making my point for me :-)

It is vital to consider higher-order effects and unintended consequences if you want to make good public policy. And not just "prove there are negative consequences:" it is incumbent on policy makers to understand these effects before enacting policy.

Consider price controls, such as rent control. Problem: prices are too high. Solution: legislate lower prices. First-order effect: prices go down. Hooray! Second-order effect: shortages. Third-order effect: decline in investment and maintenance. End result after many years can be disastrous. You get Venezuela.
As long as the cost of acquisition is lower than the lifetime value of your customer, then you're on the right path.
Show HN: How to build 8th Grade Math Worksheets in a few clicks
>Smart people don't settle if a claim is baseless. Baseless claims get thrown out quickly and easily.

This. I also don't understand why he never signed a separation agreement.
>Who are you to say what is or is not tolerated in SV?

What makes it even more funny is that these are actual Silicon Valley people. From 10,000 feet, this is a very Silicon Valley-type story.
Project showing possible auth flow using React, Redux, React-Router, and JWT
Sam's a leader. Reminds me of one of the recent Hubspot founders LinkedIn post. We need more leaders like Sam!
Only for serious transgression -- violence in the workplace, theft of company property, repeatedly showing up drunk/high.

Otherwise, lots of things can be going on in someone's life that can cause them to suck at their jobs for a while.

And long before actually firing them, it's better to see if maybe they fit better somewhere else in the company. Possibly at a lower pay rate.

And if even that doesn't work -- they should be advised that their job is in jeopardy and given an opportunity, on company time, to seek other employment (it's easier to get a job if you already have one).

Be kind.

You never know when the toes you step on today are attached to the ass you have to kiss a decade hence.
Here you go: http://bloomberg.github.io/bucklescript/js-demo/
> And so I’ve decided to say something before the lawyers can stop me.

I hate when people say things like this. Maybe he meant that other people's lawyers will prevent him from saying something, but often people are referring to their own lawyers. Your lawyer can't stop you from doing anything. Your lawyer can only encourage you to not say anything which might damage your case. And people often take that advice in the interest of self-preservation or greed or damage control instead of speaking candidly. They then blame the lawyers as if the lawyers are the reason they can't talk.
Thanks, I'm working on it full-time. If you are an everyday Linux user (especially not Ubuntu) and willing to test and/or answer to some questions please reach me out on unknownliveid@hotmail.com.
Also, http://www.flexboxdefense.com/ is more like an actual game.

It did get me to check out webflow though, which I'm guessing was part of the goal.
I'm sure you're right, but I think it would also be difficult for them to enforce if they couldn't produce a signed contract. If I were planning on, say, using trade secrets from my current employer to start a direct competitor stealing their biggest customers, then yeah I'm sure it wouldn't hold up in court - but I'm not going to do that. It's more a way for me to be able to honestly tell my next employer - who might be in the same ballpark industry, but probably not a direct competitor of my current employer - 'no, I did not sign a non-compete contract with them.'
I'm one of the co-founders of Educative (interactive courses for software developers).

We forked Cormen's and KhanAcademy course to add more interactivity, add challenges in multiple languages etc.

Here are more details. https://www.educative.io/collection/page/10370001/760001/162...

Happy to answer any questions.
Yep, on the stuff it recognizes. It recognized a picture I tested taken from the Grand Tetons as "a lake with a mountain in the background", which was quite correct, but also kind of generic.

On the other hand, it described a picture of Grand Prismatic Springs in Yellowstone as "a train with smoke coming out of the water." Which also is kind of like the crazy things kids sometimes say when they see something new.

http://imgur.com/JBlpJvQ
Just like planes.

I'll have to point that this is necessary, but not sufficient for enabling an ever improving, extremely safe activity.

Aviation also have a just right amount of blame running in the system that is hard to replicate on any other area.
> Still, it’s important to the way Silicon Valley works that such behavior not be tolerated.

All I meant was to express my view there, but you're right, I don't like the way that reads either. I'm going to update it.

> Kyle made an extremely generous offer to settle this claim by offering to give Jeremy a lot of his own money.

I think that happens in nearly all of these cases, which is part of why I find them so upsetting. People know that you can pressure people under extraordinary circumstances, like an acquisition closing, to give you something.

>To re-iterate, I still think this Jeremy guy is most likely full of crap. But I am not a big fan of the attitude and public shaming of YC here. What this tells me is as follows: if I have anything to do with a successful YC company in the future and I get involved in a legal claim that looks unfavorable, some popular top investor could write a blog post shaming me and ruining my reputation for other startups. Not professional if you ask me.

We tried every non-public method we knew of first. When it came time for the seal to be lifted, I wanted people to know how hard Kyle tried to settle. My original plan was to write a general post about this problem with no specifics after this settled, which I didn't like but thought was 95% likely to happen.
Your analogy helps focus the crux of the problem. How many malls have all their stores branded as the mall?

Amazon have been so successful integrating stores into their site that customers don't realise who they're buying from.
If we were being 100% generous to Jeremy, one possible explanation is that he legitimately believed he held stock in the company, and wasn't made aware of the fact that he didn't until he inquired about it prior to the merger. It's not like it's typical to be in physical possession of stock certificates or anything like that.

In any case, it's just more evidence that getting something in writing re: ownership is worth it from the first conversation you ever have about a potential startup. If these two guys did something simple and standard like 50/50 with vesting, this wouldn't have been a problem.
Direct link to DiRT => http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=2371516

I remember my founder (ex Googler) telling us about fault injection at Google. We were pretty amazed by the idea. Thanks for the link @nostrademons.
I did make you a beautiful logo, didn't I ;) Yes, it's been a while.

One of the reasons I signed and took your $25 offer was because I wanted to live in a future where I didn't feel massively entitled to someone else's successes. At some point it makes sense to lock in your friendship with your friend-who-you-decided-to-maybe-cofound-with-but-stayed-in-Boston-instead and move on with your life, before money gets in the way.

That said, every story is different. Just because all I made for borski was a silly logo, doesn't mean that this Cruise fellow didn't make a more significant contribution. For better or worse, it looks like that story will play out rather publicly now.
Right, and I don't mean to 'victim blame.' Mostly, I put this here as a harbinger for other folks who may find themselves in a similar situation in the future.
I think they ran in stealth mode for as long as possible. I remember finding out about them and not seeing a lot of information other than a few job postings some time back. Seems like once they started their move into daylight, the Wall Street Journal has been on a mission to take them down.
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&e... Is like the second entry on Google Search. Great job, Sam. Boy I don't think i'd ever want to do business with you.
How does FireQOS/FireHOL handle dynamic behavior like interfaces coming/going? My problem isn't so much the tc/ip/iptables syntax or semantics, but stateful mismatch like 'ip route' disappearing when an interface goes down, while 'ip rule' sticks around. Once a config gets that complex it's nice to keep in one place rather than scattered through various files. The easiest hacks are to let rules build up, or to reload everything on any ifup, but ugh. Also, manually allocating numeric table/mark/prio/class numbers is annoying.
Medical research is in great need of a major shakeup, because I feel like current research models have seriously underperformed in recent years...

...but now that isn't going to happen, primarily because of this debacle.

It's so sad that the "keystone cops" at Theranos have done so much damage to the reputation of the medical startup community- Possibly, they've set medical research back by several years with their bad behavior.

Every time from now on when someone dares suggest that medical regulation is stifling innovation, they will be asked to defend Theranos, which appears indefensible.
Yeah. For me too. I've taken 2+ weeks to just go and re-do some of my build stuff in all of my repos. Trying to get to 0 failures in Travis Ci now. 2-3 repos still to go. Thanks for the comment.
No, LTS gets backports of the xorg/graphics stack and kernel. Which helps a lot.
>This show the incredible value of YC in general

Provided you're on the side that stands to benefit alongside YC. I don't think this Jeremy guy is finding much value.
>Who's "we"? If someone reaches a maximum of productivity using an editor made in the 70's, who is anyone else to tell them otherwise?

Unless they work for themselves, that "anyone" can be: colleagues, supervisors, bosses, teachers, and even clients, and also industry experts and seasoned pros telling best practices.

>Preferred tooling for reaching maximum productivity is an inherently personal thing - you may do your best in emacs, the other guy in vi, yet someone else in Sublime3 on Windows.

And yet tooling is regulated all the time in all kinds of companies.

And all kinds of people mistakenly think they are more productive with X, where they would be with Y. People make bad tooling decisions all the time. For those people it's perfectly OK for others to tell them what they should use.
Understanding Venture Capital
Testing doesn't detect failure, it only detects the failure of a test. Real failures happen more often than test failures, for the same test on the same code with the same input and output. The best systematic solution would detect real failures, not see what happens when you fail a test.
An interesting article and a fascinating perspective. What happens when the smarts in your "smart home" don't necessarily answer to you?
That's naively optimistic. Circumstances can change, and relationships can sour; often, it can happen through no fault of your own. It could a simple a disagreement in the face of mounting stress, somebody needing a quick exit due to life-changing events like an illness, or even just a deadlock over a key decision. Startups are stressful in general, and they usually move at high speed: things change, often quickly.

Shareholders' agreements and other contracts (such as those with early consultants and employees, like Jeremy Guillory with Cruise) are meant to protect against this uncertainty. Simply ensuring that there's a clear exit strategy for the founders can ease possible tensions before they arise just through the knowledge that they exist. And if things do go south, it ensures that an exit is as painless as possible for all involved.

If you assume things are going to go smoothly, at some point, you're going to be in for a very painful surprise. You should always figure out an exit strategy. Anything less is just dancing on the edge of the volcano.
The more I read about theranos the more apparent it is that there is something fundamentally wrong with it's core goals, leadership and technology. One easily identifiable red flag is the composition of its board. It's nearly all ex-military and government officials not veteran entrepreneurs and technologists. Just to name a few: George Shultz (former Secretary of State), Sam Nunn and Bill Frist (former U.S. Senators), James Mattis (General, USMC, retired) and Gary Roughead (Admiral, USN, retired) Henry Kissinger (former Secretary of State), William Perry (former Secretary of Defense)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theranos#Governance