skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm glad you are losing weight (if that's what you are trying to do). However, when you change your diet comprehensively it is easy to overlook changes. For example, did you seriously measure your caloric intake before and after you changed your diet? Are you sure that you did not overlook sources of calories?

I helped a friend of mine lose weight once. His original diet consisted of a single muffin and coffee for breakfast, a subway sandwich with iced tea and one of those tiny bags of potato chips that come with the meal, and for dinner some salad and spaghetti or something. It sounds reasonable, but for the life of him he couldn't get under 220 lbs.

We went through the numbers. The muffin he was eating was 500 calories! The chips, 150 calories. The salad dressing he was eating on his salad was over 100 calories. The ice tea was 180 calories. So that's 930 calories, or nearly 1/2 of his daily requirements in just those 4 items of food.

We made a few minor substitutions to his diet (which actually increased the volume of food he was eating) and he started running 2 miles a day with me at lunch (which is worth about 200 calories a day). He was down to 160 pounds in no time. Our biggest problem was trying to make sure he didn't lose more than 2 lbs a week because that can be hard on your liver.

The thing is, if he had gone on a no carb diet and found alternatives in his diet he probably would have had the same result. No muffin. No potato chips. No ice tea. Probably substitute the salad for something with more protein.

Like I said, I'm happy if its working for you. I know a lot of people on low carb diets. Every single one of them is overweight. I have yet to meet even a single person in real life for who this strategy has worked. Mostly I see people change their diet, lose some weight when they eat more healthily and then gain it back when they mistakenly think that as long as they keep out the dreaded carbs, then they can eat whatever the heck they like without consequences.
Ssh does a fingerprint verification and establishes a secure channel before it does the password exchange. Avoiding replay attacks can be a challeng as well. Putting strong authentication in a single packet is deceptively nontrivial. It can be done, but at that point you'd be reimplementing Fwknopd. Additionally, Fwknop can protect more than just ssh, and do fancy things like providing access to a machine without a public IP address.

Disclaimer: I'm one of the Fwknop devs. =)
Try it with conemu instead of the regular command prompt.
Reader Personality Influences Reactions to Written Errors in Email Messages
> Isn't it better to have robot armies face each other than human armies?

You should watch the documentary series "Terminator".
Abandoning unit tests was a thing many companies were proud to tell me while I was interviewing earlier this year. I always thought that was ridiculous - but i suppose their products didn't have so many users, or thought they could tolerate some bad behavior. I'm happy I ended up at a place where we're big on tests and even have SDETs embedded in within our team. Besides being useful, I often use a unit test as my main method of completing a feature. I also believe it's a code smell when it's hard to write a test. Maybe it's a regional thing - I've heard it said that here in nyc were much more strict with testing (a carryover from financial roots).
I hope there is a way to patch this remotely. TrustZone is on quite a few devices today.[1]

If it's not, well, uhh, yeah this is kind of a problem.

1. http://www.arm.com/products/processors/technologies/trustzon...
When someone asks if you're a (security) god, say NO!

(... unless you are one)
What would the implications of this be?

Does it just mean that people can root all devices using this chipset? Or something worse?

(sorry if this is obvious, I'm just not in the know)
They worry about food more than crime
"I've seen a static version of this project on github, but I forgot the name of the original project. It is his static version of the dashboard turned into a configurable service that spits out HTML & JSON."

EDIT:

I think he gave proper credits.
Duck tape. Sometimes a simpler solution is a better one.
Ask HN: What do you think about the current education system?
Is it good, bad? What can be done better? What problems do you identify? Is it upsetting? are you used to it?
someone please tell me that "open set" has the topological meaning here
Do Americans really consider 1941 to be the brink of WWII? I've always considered that it started on September 3, 1939, with the first declaration of war between major powers.
Big thumbs up to cookiecutter-flask. I've built several mid-size Flask apps with it over the past year or so, and I find that it lays a great foundation, for what is in my case a typical setup (e.g. Bootstrap based UI, SQLAlchemy based back-end, simple user accounts). It's well-maintained at the moment, too. When building a new app, first:

cookiecutter https://github.com/sloria/cookiecutter-flask.git

Then customise all you want.
I found this to be fairly interesting content. I knew most of it so useful as a refresher and one can really argue not game specific in many ways though certainly slanted in that direction. Anything with real-time performance considerations like control/embedded system programming can also use the advise. I found Alexandresu's Modern C++ Design valuable many years ago for similar advise. I used Loki and its allocators and smart pointer strategies in a lot of code over the years due to control over data locality.

I found the next posts/chapters on Marshalling and Encoding even more interesting with comparison and pros/cons of different encoding techniques. I was not aware of the FlatBuffers library and see why the author likes it and may have to look into using in future projects.
I'm currently at a phase where I'm just not as worried about TDD or Unit testing. I've realized that most of my buggy code is in integration points.

For example, I'm working on an internal project that creates VMs with some provider (be it Virtual Box, AWS, etc) and then deploys a user defined set of docker container to it. I've found that I don't have bugs in situations I would typically test using mocking/stubbing/etc in traditional unit tests. I usually need to have the real AWS service with the docker service running to get any value out of the test. And at that point it's more work to mock anything else than it is to just start up the app embedded and do functional testing that way.

I'm becoming more of a fan of verifying my code with some good functional tests in areas that feel like high risk and then some contract testing for APIs other apps consume. Then if I find myself breaking areas or manually testing areas often I fill those in with automated tests.
Generous like this table from your article?

cost(2013$) riders(thousand) cost/rider
O-Train (lrt)	27M$ 14 1901$

...

If you don't understand why your table is extremely flawed then you should pull this article. If you do understand then you are being disingenuous not generous.
Studying the traits that successful people have is pointless without also studying the traits of unsuccessful people.

If you identify that 56% of successful people have Trait X you have no idea if Trait X is associated with success unless you also discover how many unsuccessful people have Trait X. Trait X can be "belonging to a given subculture".

Taking the entire population and subtracting the successful people does not leave you with the unsuccessful people. Unless you are prepared to define someone who is in the process of attempting something as unsuccessful.
That's apart from the pointlessness of defining "success" for a large population of individuals (happiness? wealth? freedom? connectedness?).
The work I'm thinking about (revocable biotokens) is a bit like a hash, so Facelesscorp never gets access to your raw biometric. The only thing Facelesscorp can see is an opaque blob that they can only use to verify a cooperative subject's identity; it's not useful for anything else.
The beginning of the essay discusses traditional bottom-up programming to top-down programming (using object orientation).

I have written a very large amount of Java code in my career, but after having spent a lot of (personal) time on a Common Lisp project (web application) I can safely say it's still possible to build modern applications using a bottom-up approach. I recommend people try it, it can be quite refreshing.
And those who damaged their retinas always claimed they checked to see if there was light first. You obviously can't see either 1310nm or 1550nm which is why every one of our fiber benches had a phosphorescent "target" that you could check a fiber against.
Not sure what you mean about storing the mold. I just do the fiberglass and resin directly on the broken part to repair things (after cutting away some of the plastic). It's sort of like gluing it, but when you need more strength.

Would he really need to print more parts? I mean, it could break again, but this seems like a one-off fix.
Copied from end: In summary:
• Keep regression tests around for up to a year — but most of
those will be system-level tests rather than unit tests.
• Keep unit tests that test key algorithms for which there is a
broad, formal, independent oracle of correctness, and for
which there is ascribable business value.
• Except for the preceding case, if X has business value and you can test X with either a system test or a unit test, use a system
test — context is everything.
• Design a test with more care than you design the code.
• Turn most unit tests into assertions.
• Throw away tests that haven’t failed in a year.
• Testing can’t replace good development: a high test failure
rate suggests you should shorten development intervals,
perhaps radically, and make sure your architecture and design
regimens have teeth
• If you find that individual functions being tested are trivial,
double-check the way you incentivize developers’
performance. Rewarding coverage or other meaningless
metrics can lead to rapid architecture decay.
• Be humble about what tests can achieve. Tests don’t improve
quality: developers do.
Oh. That could be it!
I appreciate it but I'm not all that new to linux. I'm not a huge fan of Manjaro because they are downstream of Arch, and therefore any security updates are in the hads of the few maintainers. I ran arch for about a year and that was probably the best experience I've had with linux on the desktop. I just feel like in 2016 the desktop should be a solved problem but I just keep getting disappointed haha. I'll probably change my mind again next week but oh well
I'm in no way an expert, but I've pretty much seen the gamut: private preschool, public elementary school, charter middle school, inner-city public middle-school, elite private boarding school, magnet public high-school . . .
I think the public education system is a travesty, but I know it also doesn't make sense to talk about "the system" as if there's anything approaching uniformity. Detroit Public Schools and Bloomfield Hills public schools are worlds apart.

And even still, today's education system might be the best there's ever been . . . most people learn how to read . . .

This doesn't address higher-education, which is a whole 'nother shit-show . . .
I am actually, no email address in your profile tho
Am I correct that you invoke a social contract as a justification for involuntary actions?

1) You are forced into this contract without your consent.

2) You can't quit this contract with your property intact.

This conditions wouldn't be enforceable if they were between ordinary parties, especially when there is inequality of bargaining power, why do they hold between a state and a person?
How does a bike stay upright?
Why would they design it such that the human hand goes into the mechanized hand? Because then if something causes failure, say by lifting something too heavy, the human hand is also injured. I would want to see a design that keeps the human operator safe.
Same comment on many existing exoskeleton designs.
<shameless_plug>
Check out fwknop, https://www.cipherdyne.org/fwknop/
It's one solution to this problem. Instead of answering with garbage, it allows for keeping the firewall closed/default drop stance. It's port knocking, but with real cryptography instead of just relying on hitting port numbers, and does it with just a single packet.
</shameless_plug>
Full disclosure: I'm one of the Fwknop devs.
Is it possible to do TDD without unit tests? I ask because a place where I interviewed had no concepts of mocking, injecting, and would just test the whole chain of classes. But dev leads would insist on TDD. Hmm?
This seems pretty likely to be placebo effect, at least in the human trials which are the only parts of the paper I read. The paper cited [0] pre-registered on clinicaltrials.gov [1] -- which is great and everyone in the field should do so. However, looking at what they pre-registered, we have:

- Two different diet treatment regimes: fasting-like for 3 months followed by Mediterranean diet (FMD), and ketogenic diet (KD).

- Control diet was simply telling people to eat the same way as usual. So there's no real accounting for how well a placebo would do here.

- Measurements included a 54-question survey, adverse event counts, and various lab measurements. These measurements were taken at start, 1-month, 3-month, and 6-month intervals.

The problem then is that what was report was:

- Results of the first half of the first treatment (fasting-like for 3 months) for a subset of the measurements. What if things only worked in the second half? Or if things worked only for KD? So many implicit comparisons here.

- Comparison against the control group at 3 months, with reported p-values. Even though one of the reported measurements was the overall survey results, all of the values reported are p-values without any mention, that I can find, of multiple hypothesis testing across all measurements. This comes despite the fact that for all of the mouse results, they explicitly state they used Bonferroni correction.

- Baseline performance which involved no placebo. How many people would have improved if simply given some bullshit diet? Or if they had simply been given a diet that was vegetarian, or something that gave them the impression it was a treatment? Especially in surveys, placebo effect is a huge thing to look out for. Their more hard metrics like lab results show a more mixed bag with WBC dropping for fasting subjects. Sure, it returns once the 3 months is over, but then the supposed quality of life scores drop; so you can't have it both ways, though their writing makes it sound that way.

I'm not saying it isn't a great result from a bio standpoint. I'm sure the Cell reviewers found the mouse model results compelling. I just don't see any way to conclude the broad sweeping title of the article from the actual content of the paper, and it's unethical to do so without strong evidence.

[0] http://www.cell.com/cell-reports/pdfExtended/S2211-1247(16)3...

[1] https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01538355?term=NCT0153...
Someone's trying to gut America's strongest biometric privacy law
Exactly, they preselect themselves out. But what happens when they don't? Someone has to preselect them out, correct?
Since we're discussing the notional programming practices of a race of sentient equiinoids, I might advance a counterpoint; the reason we're served so well by transience is that humanity has spent its 50-odd years of serious computing history mostly getting things wrong, but that shouldn't disabuse us of the notion that things can be gotten right. There's nothing inherent about computing (or technology in general) that says that there isn't (say) an ideal OS kernel design, such that once it was written and widely adopted no one would have reason to replace it. The same logic might need to be re-implemented for new hardware, new interfaces and capabilities might need to be placed on top of it, etc, but Houyhnhnm systems seem to allow for that sort of cosmetic change (and we might expect graceful extensibility to be a quality the perfect kernel would have.) What that ideal kernel would be is beyond our scientific and engineering knowledge, but give humanity a break- we've been at this for less than a century.

The author starts out the first chapter by explicitly comparing the development of the human computing ecosystem to evolution, and the entire thrust of the series seems to be the nature of systems designed by creatures capable of seeing the Rational Way To Do Things and unencumbered by our historical human foibles. Which is a developer's wish-fulfillment fantasy, to be sure, but science fiction about ideal worlds can help to reorient our priorities on this messy planet.
One comment: The “dragging a slider to the right” math is assuming all players that pay $25/month are playing the entire month non-stop. In reality it goes in waves. Using the "22.7 hours a week" from WoW, that's only 0.13/user/month. Cloud computing capitalizes on this by renting per hour to capture the waves. This means a 25$/month user is only costing $2.5 for server usage which seems right.
I'm probably classified as intermediate in 3d design and printing. It takes a while to get it right, there are so many factors that influence the outcome, so initially it might seem like the failures are random.

Thingiverse models frequently have issues, but you get used to opening them up, checking dimensions and fixing errors in the STLs.

When designing, at some point you get used to the fact that it takes two or three iterations to get it right. I frequently print partial models nowadays (or smaller versions of the final), featuring whatever needs to fit and then going back into the design software and completing the model.

Then there's the whole "what's the printer up to" thing, is the PLA not too old, is my printer properly calibrated, did the slicer do its job properly. That just takes time to understand as well (having a quality printer here helps as well).

Just keep going at it and eventually it all starts falling into place and you get faster and faster at designing as well as incorporating others STLs into your own designs and printing them.
à la the power loader in Aliens: http://orig14.deviantart.net/5716/f/2009/065/0/c/aliens__pow...
There are things that a machine can do in a much better and reliable way than a human. Comparing lists of items is one of them (e.g: outputs of functions to be verified against expected results). And that's the entire point of using computers in the first place. Otherwise we can go back to pen and paper and process forms by hand.

Does it make more sense for a human to do all the aspects of the testing by hand? Of course not. Nobody has budget for that. It's much better to automate as much testing as possible so testers can focus in higher level tasks. Like the risk assessment involved in marking a build as releasable.

Then, unit testing encourages people to construct their software for verification. This software construction paradigm in itself is enough of a benefit even if unit tests are absent.

Construction for verification diminishes coupling, and encourages developers to separate deterministic logic from logic depending on unreliable processes that require error handling. Doing this frequently trains you to become a better developer.

Unreliable processes can be mocked and error handling can be tested in a deterministic way.
My father needed to change the oil in his Toyota truck about 6 months ago, but unfortunately he couldn't find his oil filter wrench. I too thought I could be a hero, and show him that the money I spent on this 3d printer wasn't just for a lark, but it was a useful tool. I found a model of the exact tool needed on Thingiverse, printed the model out (it took about 3 and a half hours if my memory serves me correctly to print the part, all the while my dad was waiting).

Finally, being incredibly proud, I handed my dad the tool, and expected success along with much congratulations from my father for solving his problem.

It was about a millimeter too small to fit around the filter. I had failed. My printer had failed. He went and bought a new oil filter wrench at a car parts store.

One of the problems with STL's is that they're unit independent, they don't care if the part is measured in millimeters or inches. (they also ignore the internal structure of the part, but that's a rant for another time.) And one problem with the 3d printer community is that with all these different printers, there is a wide variety in the tolerances/accuracy of the printed parts. Even with well set-up printers, changing one setting, such as amount of infill, may change the size of the final part. And even if you have a precisely calibrated printer, the person who made the model you're about to print may not.

In this particular case, I don't believe the model was off, but rather to make the tool incredibly strong, I printed with ABS plastic and included extra support and extra shell layers, which I believe may have produced too much material and effectively over extruded plastic, making the part just a bit too small. But I took the part and slammed it into the driveway as hard as I could, and the part didn't even think about breaking, it was quite strong, even if it was useless.
I'm all for testing until it gets in the way of a proper solution. I've spent more time fixing tests because we changed something on purpose than I ever have because they caught something we missed. I've also spent time working with developers who cared more about their tests than their code or customers.

Like anything else, all things in moderation.
i use cygwin as well, but there is enough cruft around the edges that i would drop it in a heartbeat for something more polished and less hacky.

accidentally typing ls in a regular ol' windows command prompt leading to explosive crashes drives me slightly nuts from time to time for instance...
Matrix is interesting. I like where they're going and once their encryption-layer gets out of beta, I'll take a harder look.

Right now there seems to be a significant Axolotl/PEP/ratchet/OMEMO/olm schism[0] that I hope doesn't fracture decentralized IM any more than it is. App-store DRM v. Copy-left purism (not being derogatory) seem to be at the root. At least multiple parties are trying to work together here instead of forging ahead alone. I'm hopeful.

[0] https://github.com/anurodhp/Monal/issues/9#issuecomment-2080...
This breaks the security model of all affected devices using this chip.

Including all iPhones sold today. Bye bye secure enclave. Bye bye full disk encryption.
This set of takeaways seems quite solid to me.

In particular, I've pushed the "remove tests that haven't failed in years" before, but never had any traction. Are there teams that actually do this?
This is kind of fun for me being a 90s kid. I learned to code when imperative frowned upon (maybe it was never in style?) - and now OOP is falling from its pedestal (but still useful to understand). I'm looking forward to the next decade when people become disillusioned with functional programming. :-)
So far...

Flour	765 g, some white and some whole wheat

Yeast	18 g, probably too much

Water	611 g, eyeballed 600 ml in old glass measuring cup

After kneading	1408 g

After first rising	1416 g

After "punch down" and second rising	1406 g

Formed into loaves, waiting to rise before putting in oven

Edit: After baking, 1271 g

I'm using a creaky old Ohaus dual pan balance, surplus from an industrial lab. The process is not entirely "quantitative" in chemistry terms because there are some minor gains and losses. I have to flour the kneading cloth to prevent sticking, some dough may get lost on my bowl, and so forth.
iPhones secure enclave, full disk encryption, Touch ID, etc. likewise on android.
Made me think of Heinlein's story "Waldo" [1] which featured mechanical manipulators controlled by motions of the operator's hand and fingers. I thought, oho, this is where Heinlein got the idea! But no! "Waldo" was published in 1942. Perhaps inspiration ran the other way.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldo_(short_story)