skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The chance of a random fight against police accomplishing anything good is 0%. The chance it makes things worse is 100%.

And organizing violence is not particularly easy. For something like civil forfeiture, it would be much easier to just follow the democratic process.

So collect signatures, call representatives, state legislators, and stage protests at city halls. A lot less painful for all parties, and a greater chance of success.
Well it's very unlikely the judge directly works his son's cases due to that obvious conflict. Rather, the judge works a random set of cases brought in East Texas and works them favorably for trolls. So many troll cases get brought in that district, hoping for this judge or other friendly judges.

It's obviously rotten but that one-step removed corruption is probably not explicitly codified as wrong anywhere. Hopefully the legal system finds a way to root it out.
They're called threads. Overlapped I/O on Windows is based on a thread pool, which is why you can't cancel and destroy your handle whenever you want--a thread from the pool might be performing the _blocking_ I/O operation, and in that critical section there's no way to wake it up to tell it to cancel. Just... like... on... Unix.

The difference between Windows Overlapped I/O and POSIX AIO is that on Windows it's a black box, so people can pretend it's magical. Whereas on Linux there hasn't been interest (AFAIK) to merge patches that provide a kernel-side pool of threads for doing I/O, and the decades-long debates have spilled out onto the streets. If you view userspace code as somehow inelegant or fundamentally slow, then of course all the blackbox Windows API and kernel components look appealing. What has held Linux back regarding AIO is that Linux (and Unix people in general) have historically preferred to keep as much in userspace as possible.

This is why NT has syscalls taking 11 parameters. In the Unix world you don't design _kernel_ APIs that way, or any APIs, generally. In the Unix world you prefer simple APIs that compose well. read/write/poll compose much better than overlapped I/O, though which model is most elegant and useful in practice is highly context-dependent. As an example, just think how you'd abstract overlapped I/O in your favorite programming language. C# exposes overlapped I/O directly in the language, but doing so required committing to very specific constructs in the language.

As for performance, both Linux and FreeBSD support zero-copy into and out over userspace buffers. The missing piece is special kernel scheduling hints (e.g. like Apple's Grand Central Dispatch) to optimize the number of threads dedicated per-process and globally to I/O thread pools. But at least not too long ago the Linux kernel was much more efficient at handling thousands of threads than Windows, so it wasn't really an issue. That's another thing Linux prefers--optimizing the heck out of simpler interfaces (e.g. fork), rather than creating 11-argument kernel syscalls. IOW words, make the operation fast in all or most cases so you don't need more complex interfaces.
R? Everyone doing most anything interesting has been using Python for a while.
> If I'm just some keyboard puncher, I could give a fuck about what is best for the company.

Exactly. The one-sided sense of loyalty implicitly demanded in this article is astounding. Fuck that shit.
Through a layer of lucerne. Mixture of inheriting poor soil quality, seeds drifting in and passages where it's been let go (while overseas, etc) and weeds have developed seed heads.

Thistles are a real pain here (South Australia), as are soursobs (oxalis). I have an entire catalogue of weeds.

I might try some black plastic on one bed.
I think the primary issue is that when you start redlining, everyone has their workflow and the side that's in the "position of power" will use what they feel like using.

"Oh check out this contract at FooBarContracts"

(counterparty opens link, copies text into word doc, edits)

"Here's the latest DOCX with my revisions."
This happened to me. I developed a computer vision technique that achieved a well known result but without the same constraints. Although it never surpassed the other technique for most images, it worked in a wide variety of cases that the previous technique did not.

My major professor diluted the paper and added other content consistent with the previous method. Not just adding prior art to the introduction, but changing the meat of the paper so that it didn't seem like a departure.

He assured me that this would make it easier to publish, and publishing was all that mattered. There were no bonus points for publishing a novel technique, and there would certainly be extra work having to deal with referees.

I'm very glad to be out of that environment now. I noped out of academia and happily dealing with corporate B.S.
Ok, and, again, in this case, the person had pro bono lawyers available to take the case.
Somebody needs to create a FUPA for anti-patent trolling
This is pretty much what DNSimple is doing (great service btw).
I was struck by that too. Most people actually know how to do their jobs, and what they need to run them.

I worked with some guys a few years ago that do vertical market software like this. They have like $12M in sales and 6 employees. Most sales is via referral, trade shows and partnerships with other vendors.

Not sexy stuff, but lucrative.
Yeah, what is it with people using front page designs like that these days.
I found switching from channels to plain ol' queues to be an enormous performance improvement in a program sending hundreds of millions of messages, though I do agree in general that most programmers won't need to care about it.

The program was a financial model backtesting framework which I ended up rewriting in Rust because Go was simply too slow for what I wanted to do.
People live lives. Companies create products.

Sometimes what you build becomes bigger than you. If you want to quit, and everyone else wants to keep going why not let someone else run the show?

If you started a chess club, or even a chatroom, and had no time (as the guy says, he only has one life) to be an admin, would you just close down the whole thing and kick everyone out? Maybe. If they really were so passionate they'd pick up the pieces and start their own thing. Your old group might have a way to transfer the accumulated wealth to the new group. Instead of just losing it.

I remember writing an article about this a couple years ago called the Politics of Groups:

http://magarshak.com/blog/?p=135

Here is an excerpt:

If the individual - the risk is that the individual may have too much power over others who come to rely on the stream. They may suddenly stop publishing it, or cut off access to everyone, which would hurt many people. (I define hurt in terms of needs or strong expectations of people that form over time.)
No. Some have the benefit of proprietary modules (FPGA toolchains), some have large libraries of pre-entered and organized data (Mathematica), and some have early access to hardware (LabView, CUDA).

Programming languages, perhaps, are less vulnerable to these issues. And perhaps open source could beat these applications eventually, given perfect competition. But we're not in that world, unfortunately.
Good point. One solution I can think of would be to have a button or tab that would turn the longer running events on/off. You could also have the app only display the beginning and ending of an event when you zoom out past a certain point, say 3 days or so. In that situation, you could also use a vertical dotted line to connect the beginning and end, like with message board comments. Another thought would be to have those ongoing events snap to the top and bottom of the screen when you go into the individual day view.
Shock, no; sadden and drive me to other ventures yes.

My rule of thumb for pricing is that if someplace /makes you ask/ they aren't going to sell at a price you'd find worthwhile.
That's why demotion, or reassignments that amount to demotion, needs to be destigmatized and seen as a rational, practical realignment of skills and requirements instead of as a black mark of shame. Have you promoted an excellent worker past their level of competence? Simple-demote them! Everyone leaves happy.
It seems like the marketing was all wrong. If you're selling to big business, you need a big business sales process. If you can't afford that, you're just pissing in the wind. He was focused on product when he should have been focusing on his sales and on-boarding.

Patrick McKenzie has demonstrated that you can do high-touch corporate sales as a small organization or even as a single person. He just needed to figure out how.
He assumed that if he personally couldn't solve a problem in a few weeks of hard work, then nobody coudl. This is kind of naive or possibly arrogant. It also sounds weak to me, coming from academic research, in which people work very hard on problems for years, and sometimes even succeed at solving those problems (famous example: Fermat's Last Theorem).
I started with vanilla Bootstrap, but then it was iteration upon iteration of small UI changes. Here is how it looked in December 2015: https://twitter.com/EvNowAndForever/status/67842879978085171...
Why is this being downvoted? I guess a couple of you pay your employees in this manner?
A reliable builder
> I found that pretty much the only thing chickens wouldn't eat were peach pits.

Peach seeds (also apricot, cherry, apple seeds) contain cyanide and are poisonous. Maybe chicken are clever enough not to try and eat them.
This has been their performance:

2015: $60603.43
2014: $66765.31
2013: $48999.11
2012: $57854.88
2011: $42294.19
2010: $54501.15
2009: $32516.44
2008: $32318.46
2007: $19052.28

That's pretty damn good for such a cult game. I'm not sure there's really any better way to monetize it than rely on donations.
Seeing how Communicator 4.75 came out in Sept 2000, I guess this site is really making a go for authenticity, even on non-existent point releases in '99. [0]

Ok fine, I get what you were trying to say. :)

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netscape_(web_browser)#Release...
Humanoid Robot Video
Wow, 45 upvotes and no comments...

While I'm not entirely sure what the strategy is with this, I'm fairly surprised by the move. This is something that would have been unheard of from Microsoft even a decade ago. They've made a bunch of really huge strides in FLOSS, but they've all been centered around developer mindshare. I totally get open-sourcing your developer tooling, especially in consideration of their Azure ambitions, which isn't bad.

I really like VS Code, which has become my daily editor of choice, I keep meaning to try the integrated debugging, but haven't. The .Net core releases have me looking at C# again, in a fairly new light. The Linux Subsystem for Windows is impressive.

All of that said, this move still surprises me. I'm not sure if/how much it will benefit the larger developer community, but it is really nice to see a much more open MS. All I can say is that the next half decade will be particularly interesting in terms of software improvements as hardware has started to level off.
Deep learning is getting all the attention because it gets the best results- If you don't like this, you either have to provide (1) a different measure for results, or (2) give an objective mechanism for evaluating the "worth" of a technique that doesn't involve looking at results.

I would still like to hear what the author of the post recommends as a course of action- Maybe he can write a followup post that provides these details to clarify this.
You won't get a $250k salary as a "proficient JavaScript engineer" living in the Midwest. For that much money one could hire 3-5 reasonable developers a year in the Midwest. Developers in the Bay Area earn six figures because the cost of living is so darn high. If you jump jobs make sure it's for a 20% increase INCLUDING the cost of living difference otherwise you might be losing money (unless you just want a situation change that badly).

In order to earn that much you have to actually prove that you can provide a multiple of that value. That most likely means moving into management in some fashion.

Investments won't help make you money immediately, it's much more a "twenty years later" type of deal.
I dunno', I don't remember everyone I reply to, certainly not over a year ago.
So he's upset that something successful is happening in computer vision, at long last?
If we're going with the whole human centered design approach here the writing doesn't sound as though you were thorough enough in the research, analysis, and synthesis.

There should have been some guideposts here: who were the power users? what did they love? who were the huge detractors? what was their big issue? how did ContractBeast fit into the ideal world? how were people splitting their work between the old system and ContractBeast? were there network effects for the old system?

Yeah we can look at some sort of short term win and long term gain framework, but it's pretty reductionist to a) only depend on that framework and b) not be able to come up with any solutions to fulfill short term wins.
Can't you just charge them $2.99 for each contract, and go with volume?
the horribly over used Ford quote:

> if i'dve asked people what they wanted, they'd have said faster horses.

is applicable here, much more so than in the battlecries of every company making something no one wants for some hypothetical market that doesn't exist.

While I don't understand the author's biz/space enough to comment situationally, this is a key insight. People almost always miss this. Users want to get to places much faster, and much more confortably in the Ford example. They speak in solutions and it is an entrepreneurs job to translate this into problems, rank them, and provide actionable responses.

The flaw I believe in your example, could be a few things. possibly if you are paid by a customer directly & are more a consultant/contractor than a SaaS provider, well, that's how you get paid. However, generalizing about a feature, especially without behavioural feedback is dangerous. if it is very easy to do, of course do it. However, the risk of a feature is some subset of:

* value to customer

* conviction/data in that value prop. & feedback

* difficulty to achieve

* is it replicable. how valuable is this to all my customers? is it very valuable to a few, or semi-valuable to many/all.

This is again, highest level, even in the last point above you can see the thread fan out.

So, again, i am bot super familiar with the authors company but I agree wholeheartedly with his process of decision making. Consider it is possible that either etsy was a big client, thus worth retaining for markwt goodwill & rev, or that it was quite easy to open an endpoint to data you already had, and thus doesn't discount this methodology
Indeed, he's got a talk at Black Hat this year about Bash on Windows on Linux, too :-)
Among the friends I knew the body count is

Prescription Drugs: 2
Alcohol: 3
Heroin: 0
Methamphetamine: 0
Cannabis: 0

Two people I know. Their brothers both died from Oxycontin(tm). Specifically pulmonary talcosis. You get pulmonary talcosis from the talc government made the manufacturer add specifically to kill junkies.
Hmmm, interesting choice to opensource just the WebGL engine without the rest of the browser's layout engine.
Anything that breaks DKIM so the signature coming from your SMTPd is no longer valid, not matching the public key published in your DNS records, will make your mail MUCH more likely to be flagged as spam.
Decentralized Web Summit – Live from the Internet Archive [video]
CV seemed stalled out before deep learning, at least in the late 90s. By that I mean classifiers had hit performance limits and weren't improving, and so on. As a non researcher, I'm glad to see it moving again.
Except I never made the claim that nominal mileage objectively indicates vehicle wear. All I'm claiming, is that mileage is the largest factor. It doesn't matter if your driving wears out a car in 300,000 miles and my driving burns out a car at 80,000 miles. Your miles are your miles and my miles are my miles.

If we somehow manage to magically share a car, it's not going to last a lot longer than if we're wearing out our own cars at our respective rates (mine faster than yours).

But you reinforce the point that the car sitting in the parking lot or garage is not simply an over-provisioned resource by reason of being idle. If your usage patterns are so different than mine it's unrealistic to expect a configuration where we would be able to share a car.

Car-sharing has many benefits, but a car is still worth more than two half-cars.
Ntdll is similar to VDSO in the sense that it is loaded into the memory space of every userspace process. Even that I think might have exceptions on the Linux side. Either way, unlike VDSO, Ntdll actually does export functions potentially useful when called from the program. Here is an interesting read. http://undocumented.ntinternals.net/
Asynchronous processing. Service Broker has a queue-based metaphor and it can execute stored procedures asynchronously when new messages arrive. I gnash my teeth every time I see problems "solved" by the "we'll just poll the database periodically for changes" pattern that could be better-served by Service Broker.

Service Broker performs store-and-forward reliably message delivery inside a single SQL Server instance and between instances (on the same machine or over a network). The inter-instance delivery is particularly nice insofar as that it can use certificates for authentication (which is very nice when you have disparate Active Directory environments in play).

We've built a couple of system that use it and have been very pleased with the results. I can't figure out why it's so obscure. The documentation isn't terrible but it's definitely got a steep learning curve.
Research paper needs more creativity than improvement.
But it's quite difficult to come up with an innovative method, especially when the field is more explored and developed compared to decades before, and nowadays people need to publish a paper every few months.
Municipalities had to find ways to recoup costs from slashed state and federal budgets

When was the last time you saw any gov't budget go down? I'd say never.

The gov't has more than enough money. The problem is where and how they spend it.
Another Benefit to Being Tall: Increased Productivity
>every evidence that it comes from the staggering complexity of the brain.

Yes, based on the rest of science, that seems likely. My point is that I have no idea how that can possibly work, on a fundamental level. I have no idea what kind of physical system could exist inside the brain to cause my conscious experience to occur.

The only way I can conceive of a system to explain it is adding a new rule that says "When X pattern occurs, it experiences conciousness".
It's been a few years since studying in this area, but one approach we used to use for modelling and control of manipulators (mostly industrial robotic arms) was Screw Theory.

Here's a recent paper using one of these approaches: http://www.intechopen.com/books/international_journal_of_adv...

One approach that could be used for a system like Big Dog would be a feed-forward control loop with kinematic/dynamic modelling of the robot. These approaches use knowledge of the system dynamics to predict the output based on changing inputs or disturbances.
I disagree with the subscription model helping in the long run, because with a flat fee model, you at least have a chance of keeping the old version running. If I like something and the developers add new features, I'll buy the upgrades to get new features; that's how developer incentives can align with mine.
Not really true anymore. I believe Wyoming is better for taxes these days. It's more about there being a good body of relevant established case law in Delaware.
I think Microsoft should do what Apple did with BSD Unix aka Nextstep and merge it with their old OS.

Microsoft should take the Windows GUI and put it over Linux as a desktop manager. Microsoft could sell the Windows GUI for Linux users that want to run Windows apps.
And their rule of thumb is that you aren't worth the sale. Bespoke software is not a bulk commodity. They have a free product. If you're going to be a cheapskate, use it.

The notion of charging by byte, as if software were content farming, shows that you are obviously not a professional.
The severance package was described as spectacular. A spectacular severance can be life-changing. I understand, the details are important, and can't be shared, but if it truly is as good as described, she's probably way way better off than if she'd stayed at Netflix.

If all she did with that severance was go back to school and finish a four-year degree, then she'd absolutely kill it in the job market with her track record. Very possibly double her salary.
It gets the best results for what? Maybe for classification and recognition.

But the point of the article is that there is more to computer vision. Stereo, optical flow, geometry, and physics can only be aided by deep learning so much.

Another point not mentioned is the computational power required for deep learning. Consider programming the physics for a ball rolling down an incline. You could use (1) the math itself, vs. (2) a neural net. It's clear that the direct math approach could be orders of magnitude faster than neural nets. I wouldn't be surprised if directly coding the physics would achieve 1,000x the performance of a neural net.
Oh man, seeing UNIX people use WaitForMultipleObjects() as if it were select() (or, gasp, trying to use it for socket server stuff) just kills me.

It's actually a really sophisticated multi-semaphore behind the scenes; but that sophistication comes at an inevitable performance penalty, because the wait blocks are in a linked list and it's generally expensive (in comparison to say, a completion packet being queued to a port) to satisfy that wait (the kernel needs to check lots of things and do locking and unlocking and linked list manipulation).
Might be a strategy to get the public to become more active on social issues. I know I'd use gamification as one method if it were up to me.
I suspect you would get killed here. You are trying to change user behavior and as noted they don't have short term benefits. This pricing model disincentivises a company because it costs them money up front each time they try it and not showing and value.

Essentially they need to add an extra step to their routine & pay for the lack of convenience. This was likened to ecercise by the author. However, if you expect anyone without a top down authority (also mentioned) to do something that is harder & more expensive, they won't. It's why gym memberships bought on Jan 1 are rarely renewed in Feb or March

edit: so you are correct, paying for what you use is logical especially vs the value. Here it sounded like the customer has high value, but we discount it steeply for lack of immeadiacy.
It looks very old, kind of like from windows 95 or something. Everyone else described the actual content but that is what stood out to me.

Edit: Clickable link that doesn't download: https://www.dropbox.com/s/okt34fulaoxg3b7/Screenshot%202016-...
Just noticed my typo, but its too late to fix. I was torn between "almost all cases" and "most cases" and wound up with "almost cases" lol.
Embrace, extend, extinguish. I'm constantly surprised at how quickly people forget the lessons of the 90s...
Make any Python program a one-liner [video]