skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> If this is true, and my browser can follow a link to a Blogger page, displaying the intended document using universal browser features, then the Web is not broken.

Your second premise doesn't hold for all browsers: links cannot display Blogger pages; Firefox with NoScript cannot display Blogger pages; the Tor Browser with high security cannot display Blogger pages.

The Web is, fundamentally, about resources — documents — and their state, not about behaviour.

> JS _is_ the Web just as much as HTML because all browsers support it.

No. They. Don't. eww doesn't. w3m doesn't. lynx doesn't. links doesn't. elinks doesn't. Firefox with NoScript doesn't. The Tor Browser with high security doesn't. That is the reality.

The reality is also that allowing JavaScript exposes users to severe privacy and security threats. Disabling JavaScript is the only way to control those threats.

Every site which requires JavaScript to function is like a serpent tempting a user into giving up his privacy and security. That is the reality.
All Ethereum contracts halt. Performing operations requires spending ether (which is paid to miners) and there's a maximum amount of ether which can be spent per transaction. The more operations your contract performs, the more you have to pay. If you try to perform too many operations, the miner will bail.
so all the paypal buttons point to a screen where you apply for credit for your purchase with a new mastercard, amex or discover.
I thought you guys were calling yourselves "Czechia" now.
This has some similarity to the rowhammer vulnerability. There, if you access some DRAM chips repeatedly in a specific way, some digital elements no longer behave in the idealized way that's expected, and there's cross-coupling between things that aren't supposed to be connected. This allows changing RAM to which you don't have access. That was accidental, rather than being designed in.

This new attack is deliberate, rather than accidental, and very explicit, being wired to to the protected-mode bit. It points the way to even more subtle attacks, perhaps something that misbehaves slightly as power management is bringing some part of the CPU up or down. Maybe slightly more capacitance somewhere, so that right after a core comes out of power save, for the first few cycles some part of the protection hardware doesn't work right.
I've found that that Walmart "Great Value" brand 8.5 W, 800 lumen, 2700K, 20000 hour bulbs are nearly indistinguishable from the 60 W incandescent bulbs I had before, except that these LEDs are not dimmable.

They are nominally about $2 each, although they frequently drop the price to an astounding $0.17 each. I'm not sure if these price drops are due to some sort of automatic at-the-register rebate from the local power company, or just an internal Walmart effort to promote efficient lighting.
3 possibilities (and probably many more):

1) go all-in with their own Symbian/Qt/MeeGo strategy

2) go all-in with Google Android

3) go all-in with a Nokia fork of Google Android (a nonstarter today, but back in 2011, with Nokia's considerable heft and before Google started rolling so much of Android into non-open Google Play Services, things could have played out differently)

In terms of Nokia's performance as a phone company, it is more or less impossible for any of these options to have done any worse than Nokia did with Windows Phone.

HOWEVER, for Nokia as a company, Windows Phone "worked out" in the sense that they had a willing buyer for an asset that was long-term uncompetitive against Asian players in a commodity market. (then again that too has a counter-argument that the phone division would have been worth more than $7 billion had it not dedicated itself to the losing proposition of Windows Phone)
Perfect software versus economic reality (2014)
Yeah, but who the fuck cares? Ultimately it's an infusion made from roasted beans. I made my own coffee for years and was perfectly happy with the simple french press method. No doubt a skilled barista would do far better, just as a skilled chef cooks better than I do. But the gourmet market isn't big enough to drive the rest of the economy. We are not headed fora future where people have amazing jobs as amazing baristas and then go to be gourmet consumers of something else when they quit work, such that everyone is simultaneously an employee and an epicurean. For a tiny few, being a barista may approach the heights of being a sommelier in a top-rated French restaurant, but for the majority they'll be slinging coffee, just as most people who serve wine in a restaurant are just waiters, and none of these people will enjoy the fabulous life when their shift ends, just some discounts (official or otherwise) on the same product they serve to the customers.
1) I'm a huge fan of Frances Arnold - in particular I love her admonition that "you get what you select for" when you do selections (vs screening)

2) The press release is scant on details. Is this prize for doing work in directed evolution in general? Or some specific techinque that Arnold created? Or sort of a "lifetime achievement".
> rendering front ends with javascript shouldn't be considered breaking the web.

If you want to serve an empty, broken page as a first impression, you can. I strongly recommend against it because it makes your site look half-finished, poorly designed, and generally unprofessional.

> available in the browser

That isn't always true. You don't know anything about the browser a priori.

> make a better experience

Of course. Javascript can add nice features, which is why you progressively enhance the page to add features when the underlying requirements are available. Do you skip the check for NULL when calling fopen(1)? Checking for errors is always important. On the web, this means you should gracefully handle problems like missing javascript (intentionally or otherwise) or other resources.

> Making UIs respond faster

Requiring two additional HTTP requests (one to load javascript, and another to load the actual page content) isn't making the page faster. After the first request your javascript will be available most of the time for partial loads in any case.

> interactive content

That is rarely a good idea, but it's your page so do what you want. Progressive enhancement doesn't affect this at all.
I cant believe it bro
I wanted to like this article, but it's not helpful to argue against assertions by making evidence-free counter-assertions.

> The end result may feel very “app-like” if you’re using an approved browser, but throwing the users of other web browsers under the bus is the very antithesis of what makes the web great.

1. The Polymer demo app is a _demo_ app - it's a tech preview, not a recommendation to drop support for any other way of delivering web content.
2. Who decided "what makes the web great"? One of the things that makes the web great is that people can build powerful app-like experiences using standardized tools. Some browsers don't (yet) support those standards, and some users opt-out of allowing these standard tools to run (Javascript), but that's not the fault of the web, is it? Is the argument that the lowest common denominator must be served before spending any time and effort on making something more advanced? Count me 'regressive', then.

> The inability to pinch-zoom in native apps is a bug

I disagree with this assertion, although I acknowledge that it does have accessibility costs. It's at best naive and at worst disingenuous to claim that disabling pinch-zoom on the web is "slavishly copy[ing] whatever native is doing" - rather, some web apps are choosing to make similar tradeoffs as native apps.

> To declare that _all_ users of _all_ websites will be confused by seeing a URL is so presumptuous and arrogant that it beggars belief.

This is laughably hyperbolic. The linked Chrome issue simply disables an automatic prompt on websites that are configured in a very specific way - it isn't making a universal statement about URLs or whether or not they confuse users. To declare that the Chrome issue does otherwise is so presumptuous and arrogant that it beggars belief.

The final complaint that Lighthouse (a Google application) has a different standard for "best practices" than the author doesn't actually help his argument. Lighthouse isn't _the_ reference point, it's _a_ reference point, and one thing that web developers learn very early in their careers is that when it comes to the web, there is no one right way of doing anything.
The Future of Humanity’s Food Supply Is in the Hands of AI
Show HN: All the news about Tesla Motors, in your inbox twice weekly
Mapping the spread of America's drug overdose epidemic
If you're looking at a white piece of paper with black text, you won't be able to tell the difference.

But if you're looking at color (flowers, a painting, human skin) then spectral shape becomes very important.

Look at all of the shades of color you're not seeing under a typical CFL: http://www.bealecorner.org/best/measure/cf-spectrum/spectrum...
Hah! Yeah. The last time I did it was on the phone after a low-level tech from the bank asked me to do it. I have her name and employee number, in case anything happens.
But yes, definitely.
I think Jeremy's post resonates with a lot of our team (Chrome, DevRel etc), we want all experiences to be responsive, accessible, content visible without JS being required and most of all solid design that takes advantage of good URLs.

The App Shell model has worked well for a first set of experiences that have shipped and I don't think that it is inherently mobile only, many sites work well on desktop, instead I think I think a lot of it is a matter of resourcing and staffing. After working with a number of developers who are building Progressive Web Apps, one thing that I have noticed is that many of the teams building sites are still split between a "mobile web team" and a "desktop web team" and that is one of the reasons why I think we are seeing some of the sites being accessible on mobile first.

The place we want to get to is one experience that works well for all users in all browsers.

Specifically wrt to Banner prompting our thoughts around this have always been consistent, when an site meets the criteria of something that could be experienced as an app the user would see a prompt to "install" it (after meeting some engagement criteria). The thought was that prompting is a powerful feature and one we don't want to see abused and thus the criteria is quite strict and our expectation is that the site when launched should launch like an app would on the system. The user can still add to homescreen, we just reserved the prompt.

Some interesting bugs for people to follow wrt to Propmting.

* https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/list?q=component... - prompting and add to homescreen bugs

* https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=604390 - Minimal UI mode for access to URL

* https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=601624 - Discussion on criteria for prompting

* https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=601337 - Mandating Offline to get banner.
The imagery in their demo is coming from Google Maps, but if you look at the copyright you can see what companies it is coming from. The USDA shoots, if I remember correctly, the whole country every 3 years, and that data is public domain. The commercial sites are constantly shooting new stuff, but it depends on how often Google wants to pay for it. With their purchase of Skybox though, they will likely start getting imagery updated on an extremely frequent basis.
My Cree Type A LED replacement bulbs are over 90 CRI.

Incidentally, is CRI a totally bullshit measurement, or does it mean something? I find it oddly coincidental that an incandescent supposedly has a CRI of 100 and matches daylight. How is this possible for such an old tech? Did they just get really lucky with the first lightbulb? Or have the gases and filament material improved over time to bring CRI up to 100? I have a hard time believing CRI was the ultimate goal of incandescent development, but I could be wrong.
But it's not true for any coloring, e.g. "red if a and b < 20, blue otherwise".
Okay, I just discovered all jokes are bad on HN. It would have been nice to discover that sooner.
Here is an interesting thread about color quality (something rarely brought up when LED gets mentioned).

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3757505
How billionaires can destroy journalism
I'm still pretty sure that the thing will be hacked before long, or will have critical bugs that will necessitate complex negotiations to fix.

It's not just the size of the code that is the problem, although that alone practically guarantees that there will be bugs. Ethereum has a couple of unique properties that can cause all sorts of chaos in ways that 'normal' language developers never need worry about.

First of all, code requires 'gas' to run. If there isn't enough gas, then the execution stops. But critically, some but not all of the code's actions are rolled back. Transfers from one party to another still take place. You can imagine a situation where an attacker runs a contract with just enough gas to make the code transfer some money but halt before it records the payout, allowing the withdrawal to be repeated.

Secondly, there's a stack limit for code, again triggering an exception and a partial rollback. Developers are used to having to reason about stack overflows in normal programming situations, e.g. a recursive algorithm. But Ethereum's stack has more problems. It allows attackers to control the available stack space before your code gets run. e.g. an evil-doer could use up almost all of the stack, then call your contract. If the stack runs out at a select inopportune moment, there is potential for abuse.
The manufacturing costs won't be too bad, I'd imagine. At least, in terms of the normal shocking costs of manufacturing. If the design is simple enough, that 300 layers may be just 75 repititions of four layers (no doubt not actually the case, but the machine spraying material onto the plates can adapt).

I'm a bit disappointed that the recipe wasn't included; I would have liked to see what the design entailed. All the layers are on dialectrics, and they're all oxides, so the process chambers won't be too hard to control. And I say that knowing full well some poor coater engineer is actually just going to have a devil of a time with it (or not! quarter wave filters are fairly standard stuff).

Most of all, the thing I'd be intersted in is how resistant to error is the design? It sure looks like it doesn't need to be too perfect per layer. For a pair of microscope lenses, precision is everything. In a lightbulb you can probably get away with a lot of error (per layer: as a whole you could easily make the color something goofy). Of course, if it's color swings wildly with minor errors in certain layers, well, that could hole the product up in R&D hell.
And I'm sure you have enough evidence to make a judgment of a randomer over the Internet.
> More surprisingly perhaps, if you colour the infinite subsets of the natural numbers red or blue, then there exist colourings for which there is no monochromatic subset.

Could you elaborate on this?
Amazon is not an antithesis at all, it's in my column! look, language is imprecise and none of us are writing encylopedias here that we reedit till they are perfect, so to keep it short:

Amazon is pursuing a long term strategy, and it's a public company, and it's getting funded, it's not getting starved for capital. i.e. the market is working, its strategy is being valued, there is no evidence of a market failure. (that is why I covered myself in my previous comment by saying "overemphasize" rather than simply saying emphasize.)

what would be your "antithesis" example would be other similar ideas that were floated and funding dried up because investors "stupidly" didn't get what a great long term idea it was. Of course, nobody can know what woulda coulda, and I'm not saying anybody can; what I'm saying is, if somebody thinks that markets don't properly weigh the long term over the short term, they are essentially saying that they want to sink more of their money into these (hypothetical) "losers" and I'm saying, please don't, it's a bad idea to assume that you know more than people actually in that industry.

I'm also not saying "don't think you have better ideas" and I'm not saying "don't pursue your good ideas" etc. I'm saying, don't think that financial markets are stupider than you. Don't think that the world is this hugely unfair place where all the people with money don't know a good idea when they hear about it, and that all these people with no money have all these great ideas that money seems to make people blind to (which is what "markets just don't get long term like I do" is saying)
http://www.wsj.com/articles/t-rowe-price-marks-down-most-of-...
Ask HN: How do you go about setting realistic project deadlines for yourself?
I agree.

Before the prevalence of JS you could simply download the text. But now, much of the text interpreted. So if you wish to get all the text, you must also do the interpretation step. Which essentially means running a headless browser to pipe it to you. And it's simply not practical to tell your text sources to avoid using so much interpreted text. They're using Web standards.
1. Well, it's a bit more complex- DAO investors give up direct ownership in ether when they participate in the DAO in exchange for DAO Tokens. You're right that there could be some maligned incentives, but they fall on both sides of the ether valuation to a certain degree.

2. While the non-professional voters have little ability to do proper diligence, they DO have a mechanism for hiring outside parties to do diligence.

3. What complexity? Here's the source code, it's pretty darn simple: (https://github.com/slockit/DAO/blob/master/DAO.sol) Also, I think the DAO solves two problems: First of all, VCs and VC lawyers and Hedge funds have enormous secondary costs that the DAO avoids entirely. Secondly, VCs and fund managers also have enormously maligned incentives which may affect their performance.

(Note: I am still a skeptic of the DAO and did not participate in the experiment)
"I don't think the failure is on Mayer; Yahoo was a walking zombie before she arrived."

So you're saying that no one can save Yahoo, not in the past three years, not now, and not in the future? The company is simply doomed? Sorry, I don't buy it... Mayer had a leadership position and she failed.
Upvote for your nice summary, almost went the other way for the undeserved criticism of the article.
Even if TheDAO "fails", we'll have learnt something very important. We'll have found a DAO configuration that doesn't work. That knowledge will mean that future DAOs will have a higher chance of "succeeding".
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11767613 and marked it off-topic.
What if people want AES-GCM on hardware with AESNI and CHACHA20-POLY1305 on all other hardware? Should those be two protocol versions that are both accepted by everyone and neither is planned to be deprecated? What about Ed25519 vs. Ed448?

What if something was deployed with (SHA256 P-256 ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM), which Google promised to support for a long time, and now people want to switch to djb-blessed X25519-Ed25519-AES256-GCM, will the older ciphersuite be an old protocol version that everyone keeps supporting for >10 years?
I believe http://lifecycle.io/#/ is doing this. You may want to check them out!
Forgive me, but the website of DAO reminds me a bit of this one -> http://zombo.com/ :)
The story of Nokia MeeGo: http://muropaketti.com/artikkelit/the-story-of-nokia-meego
1. If the DAO funded a huge startup and paid it out all at once, sure. But I suspect we'll see smaller projects funded and they'll get small recurring payouts.

2. Most of them, sure. Though the large holders are likely wealthy enough to be incentivized to perform due diligence / pay experts to do so.

3. I think the "problem" being solved is that DAOs provide a way for individuals to route around regulatory roadblocks such as accredited investor requirements.
Or just have a layer over it that goes opaque for a moment until the pic below develops. Would be weird, but way less annoying.
No, there's a page on Netflix listing the resolution limits per browser, I checked before I posted.
You're totally missing my point. It's not that I can't know, it's that I don't care. You can't secure a phone against nation-state actors, so don't try. Do enough security so that the random person who steals your phone to sell it doesn't also steal your personal photos and bank info, order stuff from Amazon, use your phone to call their Uber, etc. They're more likely to be who has your phone anyway.

Re-read the bottom of my other post, security is about balancing cost of mitigation against predicted impact of threat. State actors are very unlikely and very expensive to mitigate. Petty theft is more likely and cheaper.
>> They are considered toxic waste with special clean-up and disposal considerations.

>That isn't true, it's one of those urban myths that spread by email.

It can be hazardous waste, you can't categorically say that it isn't true. Both of you are technically wrong. While it's correct that low mercury bulbs can be disposed of in dumpsters according to EPA, some states have stricter rules with respect to even low mercury bulbs. I believe CA, WA, and VT all require specific recycling of low mercury bulbs, for example.

Beyond that, looking at bulbs that are NOT low mercury, those DO become regulated hazardous waste after they burn out according to federal laws. So those MUST be recycled properly to comply with federal and state laws.

In any case, 100% of fluorescent bulbs contain mercury, which is really bad for the environment. So even if you're legally allowed to throw them in dumpsters, it's really not something you should be doing if you care about the environment or the people in it.

Bottom line: Depending on the bulb and jurisdiction, a spent/broken bulb might be classified as hazardous waste legally requiring special cleanup considerations, or it might legally be able to be thrown in a dumpster. But regardless of the law you should properly recycle 100% of bulbs because they contain mercury (even if in small amounts).
Another figure to add to the hipster revolution: Youtubers and Twitch streamers. It could one of but a few ways to make money in the future (entertainment).

I hope you like playing with Play Doh!
Why processed foods may promote gut inflammation
Functional programming in Python: a little bit more
Most gas stations in the US have been that way for a long time. The main reason you have a human attendant is that it probably makes sense to have someone on-site to keep an eye on things/handle problems and their salary is presumably covered by the convenience store anyway. But it's often just the one person unless it's a larger store.

The main exception is the few states that don't let customers pump their own gas and the service stations that still exist.
Estelle Caswell breaks down rap music in a nerdy wonderful way
People buy iPhones. Robots don't. At some point, replacing your workers with robots becomes replacing your customers with robots, and the economy goes to hell. Are we there yet?
I know ethereum and "The DAO" sounds like a ton of mumbo-jumbo, but I assure you at its heart everything is actually very straight forward- For instance, the DAO is mainly just this small piece of computer code that is very readable: https://github.com/slockit/DAO/blob/master/DAO.sol

(Whether the DAO is good idea though is another matter entirely)