skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There were other points too. Our airports are older...like much of our crumbling infrastructure, we don't spend enough to keep them modern and the financing maze between Federal, State and local government makes finding the money to modernize airports more difficult than it has to be. And the airlines oppose increasing the fee added to ticket prices, so improvements can't be financed by travelers.

But yeah, the dingy and cramped gate areas are just the final insult added to the TSA's already-ruined travel experience.
Lightening doesn't often strike twice. One success out of many doesn't mean people shouldn't do their homework. Entering the car market is not the same as entering the world of medicine where the results from a test Theranos conducts could result in endangering a life. Elon Musk surrounded himself with domain experts.

Case in point, http://www.theverge.com/2016/5/13/11674590/tesla-vehicle-pro...
Interesting they couldn't even user other peoples machines

"A person familiar with the matter said the Arizona lab performed the blood-coagulation tests with a traditional machine from Siemens AG that was programmed to the wrong settings by Theranos.

The Arizona lab also failed several tests to gauge the purity of the water it uses in its Siemens machines, which could affect the accuracy of some blood tests run on the devices, the person said."
Explanation for the wife beating comment: http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/212706/on-using-phra...
I'm so sick of having to take off my shoes at US airports. WHY? This has ought to be the most useless security measure ever.

Now that I'm a Nexus Pass holder (US/CAN border) and eligible for TSA pre-check it's not such a big deal but damn US airports are way overdone.
"Signal is probably the only one that has a chance of relevance 5 years from now"

Which is exactly why I, even though I don't care much for drama (infosec drama especially), find myself "complaining" about Signal from time to time. Because we are going to have to live with it. If I could go back and "complain" about PGP, before that became the preferred "just use" argument, I would.
> Founding fathers apparently failed in their inability to predict we'd be able to amazingly fly through the air one day.

I think a traditional interpretation of the constitution is that unenumerated rights are reserved for the people, so this shouldn't be an issue, as designed. In reality, we can't even seem to maintain the rights that are explicitly reserved for the people (cough4th amendmentcough).
The key difference though, is Elon Musk brought in people that did have domain expertise to fill in the gaps. The overall vision is Elon Musk's, but he was smart enough to bring in industry veterans to help execute on that vision.

Theranos, on the other hand, appeared to not have done that. Or at least not on a scale necessary to succeed, especially in something like healthcare.
Nope, I am not going to pay to solve a problem artificially created, let alone already payed for in the ticket.
EaseUS Data Recovery Wizard Professional 10.2 Free Download
The biggest problem with any Google cloud services nowadays is you don't know if it was/will blocked in China, of course it is okay if you don't care the users in China.
We can't say if Rust is a suitable replacement unless a a team tries to write a kernel in Rust, and then comes up with a comparative result.

Right now C is only the tried and true solution. The rest are possibilities only.
It's mainly a question of volume. ASICs have a big economy of scale, so the cost-per-chip goes down considerably once you go over a certain number of chips. Plus, there's all the NRE costs of an ASIC design over an FPGA design. Google probably figured they could use enough chips to make the cost of manufacturing ASICs worthwhile.

I don't think FPGAs are going to be beat out by ASICs for low volume applications anytime soon.
I've always wondered if there's some elements of the birthday paradox with DNA testing?
That really depends what you mean by Chinese. It's an issue in Taiwanese identity politics and electoral politics. Taiwan is officially the Republic of China, but that name is a legacy of World War II. Taiwan has many citizens who speak Mandarin or various dialects of Chinese; many of them consider themselves Chinese, but also many do not. There are Taiwanese whose ancestors moved there from China as early as the 1600s. Besides, they also have a sizeable population of aboriginal people with totally non-Chinese cultural practices and who speak a language that isn't even loosely related to Chinese.

And meanwhile, the country has been in a sort of cold war with the PRC since the late 1940s, and was a Japanese colony for the 50 years prior to that. The last government to have military control over all of Mainland China and Taiwan (plus Mongolia) was the Qing Dynasty.

Saying that "Taiwan is Chinese" is basically true in an imprecise way, but once you drill down into the details a little, it gets complicated.
Agreed, I've lived at probably 8 different complexes in my life and none of them would have allowed this. I've had managers bitch at me for taking down vertical blinds and only having curtains.
Unfortunately, it seems unlikely there's a public and open tip-line for general corporate malfeasance (that anyone's paying attention to anyhow).

Fortunately, I think the feds are already on the case.
20% urban: https://www.kcet.org/commentary/drought-by-the-numbers-where...

(that's residential + business + government). For residential, "Landscaping accounts for nearly half of all residential water use."

Notably, most of the restrictions were on watering lawns, which isn't crazy as one part of a bigger picture water conservation strategy. It's not going to work miracles, but it could conceivably cut total statewide water use by 1-2%.

(With a goal to cut statewide water use by 20%, that's not actually an insignificant amount. Obviously, there's a ton of agricultural use remaining to be reduced.)

The Palo Alto restrictions, for example:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/473...

Several of these make sense:
2. Flooding or runoff is prohibited.
3. A shut-off valve is required for hoses used to wash vehicles, buildings, etc.
4. Applying water to driveways and sidewalks is prohibited, except where necessary to address an
immediate health and safety need or to comply with a term or condition in a permit issued by a
state or federal agency.
5. Water in fountains or other decorative water feature must be recirculated.
6. Irrigating outdoors is prohibited during and within 48 hours after a measurable rainfall.
9. Irrigation of ornamental turf on public street medians is prohibited.
10. Landscape irrigation for new development must comply with state and local building codes.
11. Leaks must be fixed as soon as possible.

Some are fairly stupid:
7. Restaurants and other food service operations shall serve water to customers only upon
request.
Where can I read more about this Eastern European hacking scene? A few months ago I listened to a talk by the CEO of Palantir who mentioned that in the Paypal days they unsuccessfully hired PhDs in a battle against the scammers, saying "it turns out you can't outsmart the Russan mob, they're very technical." (the solution was to hire lots of lower skill people and give them some tools to fight the battle)
Sorry but No. The phone line has DC to power the old-style carbon microphone and AC to ring the bell. If you try to draw appreciable current, the system thinks your phone is "off hook", so the phone is out of service.

You can draw a tiny current without triggering the "off hook" detector, but that is miniscule.
The road to Discourse is paved with well intended incremental improvements.
> Stop saying "don't write C", that's just childish. Rather, what about "let's write better, less security flaw prone C."

A consistent theme throughout the article is that he's actually more interested in teaching people to write C well than fight with pedants. He's not torching his book, he's updating it and removing the contentious chapter. "let's write better, less security flaw prone C." is exactly what he's trying to say - the "don't write C" bit at the end is more about it being a dinosaur than a childish huff, though there is a little of that in that comment.
>> In fact, in Linux we did try C++ once already, back in 1992.

Wow, I didn't know they had computers back then!!!
http://halonewstza.blogspot.com/2016/05/nato-risks-nuclear-w...
According to this [1] about 10%. Their goal was to reduce urban use by 25%, meaning a total reduction of 2.5%.

[1] http://www.ppic.org/main/publication_show.asp?i=1108
Just email them and introduce yourself. Professors are people too. But just like people, they may be too busy or might not get back to you, or they may be very happy to hear from someone young who is interested in their work. You have nothing to lose but a few minutes of your time writing an email and maybe a little disappointment. Good Luck,
There are two ways to interpret your post. The first is "there's no kernel written in Rust that is as complete as Linux". The second is "Rust is unsuitable for a kernel". The first interpretation is obvious and completely uninteresting; the second is something you haven't supported at all.
They lose more money per quarter than they spend in R&D per quarter, so your statement is wrong. They have insane cash burn. You also have to consider they are subsidized, without those subsidies they run an even deeper loss.
Being passionate about things and having opinions can mean that you eventually burn out on something and for the sake of your own mental health have to move on.

I don't think Zed's doing anything wrong. He's saying what he thinks needs to be said, he's challenging the complacent, and he's not pulling any punches. If you don't like his attitude there's plenty of other people to listen to. I appreciate that he's out there making noise, getting people to re-think their assumptions about programming.

If you live life by particular principles sometimes you have to take the hard road. You can't argue it hasn't been an interesting path.
Been watching Plan9 and its ilk for a while; some fantastic OS-level ideas that really deserve more traction.
Inflammation, Not Acid, Cause of GERD, Study Suggests
What was your design flow? Did you use the standard cadence, Synopsys toolset to build this? How did you achieve basic design and JIT(or whatever it is you call the machine code part of the Python VM ) together?

Rrally interested to know how this was managed...
I'm curious where you are writing from. In Silicon Valley it seems like there's a demand for CS Phds so long as they can pitch themselves as data scientists. Google, Microsoft and others hire lots of Phds too. It gets very thin elsewhere though.
Seems like the title sound be
"why do people hate airports outside of China" or maybe "why do people hate old airports"
USA doesn't have a monopoly on security theater, nor do they have a monopoly on long lines. Can our airports be better?absolutely but can so airports around the world.
Banning TSA would be a huge step in the right direction.
I swear two trips ago, I went through LAX and it was going through renovations. Then the most recent trip, the security procedure and wait was longer than before. I hope that they were renovating areas other than the security process!

In Australia, the wait times seem like they're generally due to low staffing at peak times rather than process or infrastructure.
I think zymhan meant prototyping on an FPGA to see if you could actually see an improvement by mapping parts of your algorithm to custom hardware. This would be a sensible first step before committing to a full ASIC run. I'm sure Google did do this initially.

As for testing for correctness, ASIC designs are almost always tested in software simulation instead of on FPGAs. Mainly because RTL written for FPGAs can look quite different from RTL written for ASIC synthesis. There's also a lot incidental engineering work needed to get something working on an FPGA.
It works when the things are non essential pieces of computer code or entirely unmanned test vehicles e.g. SpaceX landing attempts.

In medicine, manned transport, etc. it's criminal.
Did you not catch the hint in DA where DA is set in the same universe as SC? It's just a few decades later.
Not only battery life but also durability, which lowers the lifetime cost of ownership. Feature phones last a long time, they're harder to break since they're usually not enclosed in edge-to-edge glass, and basically everything about them both hardware and software-wise is simple and battle-tested.
JavaScript has several mature, thoroughly scrutinized implementations. Ethereum has one brand new implementation.

To put it mildly: There will be blood.
I think fast aging will start to taste more and more like the defaults. There are ways to chemically alter wine to taste aged. The finest French chateaus turn their noses up on it, but most people can't tell the difference in a blind taste test.
When I fly internationally, I always try for SFO to "somewhere not US near destination". Since I mostly fly to Europe and use Star alliance; that is Frankfurt or Munich, usually -- LH or UA metal.

For transitioning, MUC is way better (smaller) than FRA.

On return, I find the hoops necessary at foreign airports imposed on US bound flights silly (extra questions, sometimes extra security, etc).

That said, with Global Entry, hitting the kiosk, handing over a slip and skipping a process that could be near 90min is gold.
Your source for 20% says that 20% is a "conventional estimate" and doesn't seem to provide a source for that estimate. It seems pretty high compared to other numbers I've seen.
The phone line is essentially "constant current". There's 48V before you draw current, but that quickly drops to zero when you lift the handset, because there's an exchange relay in series which senses when the phone is "off-hook"
FYI, this rant is from January 2015. Surprised to see it showing on HN today.

If anyone is interested in what he removed, you can find it here: https://web.archive.org/web/20150101224641/http://c.learncod...
> b. I wouldn't want to write a program in C now.

When all else fails... come back and say this again ! But for the time being ignorance be bliss.
Exactly. It's beyond my authority to change the language in use, but I would love to have alternatives to argue for. C isn't a terrible option, or is perhaps the least terrible option, but it's not leaving my corner of the corporate universe until a proven alternative establishes itself.
> They have people in their employ that know how to lobby the right regulatory bodies. Theranos had none of this.

No, I think they had plenty of that, look at the makeup of their board. Maybe not exactly from lab testing background, but plenty members with heaps of biotech, pharma, legal and government experience. What they were lacking was a workable product to lobby for. Which I guess is a silver lining to this - that even a $9 billion lobbying effort can't overcome straightup fraud, at least in the biotech sphere. Finance, on the other hand...
Shoes and belt. By the time I'm stuffing things back into my backpack, I'm walking bowlegged trying to stop my jeans falling down.
Biochar is a potential solution, although the technology isn't there yet (at an industrial scale).

If wood is heated in an oxygen free environment it will turn into a form of charcoal. At the same time it will release gases (like methane) that can be captured and used as a fuel separately.

Rather than burning the charcoal, it is put back into the soil which effectively traps the CO2. This also improves the condition of the soil and reduces the need for fertilisers.
I think due to how optics works the screen must be a little bit away from the face, most of the bulk is empty space.
What in particular makes Rust (or Go or Swift) unsuitable?
I'm ready for the hate, so here we go... C was not a well-designed language in 1978.

The fact that C arrays decay to pointers without any bounds is single-handedly responsible for a huge chunk, possibly even the majority, of all RCEs, worms, malware, and exploits. Ever. In the history of computing.

It was a bad design.

It was a bad design in 1978.

It was known to be a bad design in 1978.

Other languages knew that checking array bounds was important, including for security. The internet made the impact of using C much more devastating but people were exploiting buffer overflows in the 80s to great effect. Some of C's predecessors/contemporaries passed a length as the first part of an array so bounds-checking was possible, though that has the downside of not being able to pass slices of an array without copying.

C could have included an arrayref type that was a length + base pointer, and let array l-values decay to an arrayref instead of a pointer. Then taking a slice of an array would not require copying elements. You could still take the address of an individual element. This would not have required much work to implement, even in 1978! Maybe the first compilers didn't insert array bounds checks, but at least the entire design wouldn't preclude them. Let's say you even spell arrayref as []. It would mean sizeof() works on arrays passed to functions.

void wat(int[] values) {
for(int i = 0; i < sizeof(values); i++) {
printf("look ma, no buffer overflows! %d", values[i]);
}
}

(Yes, I know this is not K&R syntax)

Maybe you can forgive C for the stupid header compilation model (why let the compiler do what you can make the programmer do by hand?). You can understand why they might not have foreseen the need for namespaces. D&R didn't invent the macro system so that's not even their fault.

What is unforgivable is the horribly stupid design of C's arrays.

I actually think it would be beneficial if the standards committee added arrayref now. It won't fix all the busted C code but at least you could start improving the #1 problem. Compilers could eventually adopt a flag to prohibit arrays from decaying directly to pointers. You'd probably have to introduce lengthof() to avoid confusion and use some other syntax to declare one, maybe array(int) or something.
> and other chemicals

you mean "the chemicals" that came from nature in the first place ?
I'm not an expert on any of this, medicine is just a hobby of mine. I don't think actual Parkinson's is caused by drug abuse though, I think it's a separate disease (or maybe more than one) that ends up doing the same type of damage to the brain so the symptoms look similar. Wikipedia seems to agree, we're not sure how most people affected got it. That seems to be kind of a theme in medicine.

As far as caffeine goes, I don't think it affects dopamine that much, so it probably wouldn't have that effect on its own. I can't imagine long term heavy caffeine use would be good for you though, I just don't think it would be enough to do the same damage that drugs that directly release dopamine do. Or at least, it would do different kinds of damage - my guess is memory issues due to lack of quality sleep and high blood pressure.
In Canada, it's $50 for 5 years of Nexus which entitles someone to quicker security lines in the US and Canada, quicker border entry, and more.

At $10/year (for the amount I fly per year, it works out to roughly 25 cents per leg of travel), I can't really think of anything more cost efficient to save that much time, stress, etc.
I'd avoid conflating South/East Asia with China. The only airport the article cites in China is HK airport, and even that is ambiguous. In fact, actual Chinese airports are notorious for delay.
The contribution has to be pretty substantial. And it can't be just one piece of work. The standards around these parts are something like 4+ papers (around 1 paper per year for 5-6 years) preferably including one or two solid journal papers all in top-tier venues. Of course not everyone meets this standard but basically everyone gets close. That's a lot work. It's your full time effort for those 5-6 years, 6+ days per week, 10+ hours per day. What might not be clear above is that once you can do research on your own you're close to done, but to get there you have to do a lot of work.

Sure. Best way to get an idea is to just look up previous theses. They're basically all available online. "phd thesis cs" on google is a good place to start and just filter out the non-top-tier departments. Although these days many people just take their publications, reformat them, and that's their thesis (this is more common in the US and much less common in Europe). This saves a lot of time and makes people a lot more productive.
Definitely not. I recommend Signal as they have a desktop client as well and is open source. Also handles SMS on mobile. (https://whispersystems.org/)
I agree with where you're coming from. Another analogy that comes to mind is knob-and-tube wiring (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knob-and-tube_wiring).

It's an older home wiring technology that works fine for years if undisturbed, is still present and working OK in homes all over, was invented in the early days of electrified homes, requires considerable skill to install properly, tends to be unsafe if not handled skillfully, is expensive and delicate to modify, has no hidden components, allows interesting wiring layouts because conductors are separated, ...

One could go on with the obvious parallels. (I learned on a PDP-11.)
Temperature, like age, is one of many factors that determines when a spirit is ready, but it's a mistake to think that because rums are aged less that it's because of the climate. The congeners are also significantly different, just like those between bourbon and scotch, and the processes all vary in order to get the specific flavor profile the distiller wants.

Yes, there are 3 year rums that taste like 18 year scotch. And there are 18 year rums that taste like 8 year whisky.
> in the swamps

probably because theres not much O2 in the water compared to the atmosphere.
The specific section of his 'Learn C the Hard Way' book that he's referring to was mostly, as I recall, complaining that the C string functions defined in K&R will fail when you don't pass them valid data, and therefore, they're fundamentally broken.

Make of that what you will, but it seems to me that given all of the other ways that C can blow up due to programmer error, it seems reasonable to expect programmers to pass a valid string to a string function.
For someone concerned about privacy, it's baffling to me that we'd be forced into sharing our phone number in order to communicate.
From the latest 10-Q report [1]:

- gross profit was $252mn

- operating expenses were $182mn in R&D and $318mn in SG&A

Even if you remove completely the "research and development" expense, the gross profit is not enough currently to cover the "selling, general and administrative" expense.

[1] http://ir.teslamotors.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=1564590-16-...
Google’s CEO sums up his AI vision
San Jose is nicer in pretty much every way.
Good point, I really didn't complete my thought. Updating my comment to explain.
Goldman Sachs Research in this instance is a defined term that carries a whole lot more weight than research you or I would do to determine if we should invest in a stock.

Analysts are required to genuinely believe what they are saying, or at least aren't allowed to say one thing in public research reports, and another in private. Their research is considered Material Non-Public Information until it is published, and thus cannot share it with anyone in their firm that is outside the research department until they release it to the public.