skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Sure, you can say, the tool isn't really the problem, it's how you use it, and if you're using a tool the wrong way, it's not going to be as effective. But on the other hand, tools exist to solve problems, and if it is not clear how to use it effectively, then it is not a well-designed tool. The tool should be designed so that the easiest way to use it is the right way; the design should guide the user. If most of the users of the tool are using it wrong, the design has failed.
Thanks for doing this – it's very exciting news. I've avoided FB Messenger for years and now downloaded it today due to this.
Visualization of urban bike mobility in NYC, Berlin and London
I think it's fair to say that haskell.org is the "official" website that has the involvement and implicit backing of the old-timers. Also the GHC compiler is hosted on haskell.org. haskell-lang.org is the upstart. Whether it will last is an open question.
That is possible yes, e.g. if they kept it for in-house usage (with GPL as example) they would not have have been obligated to open source it, provide the source.
>I strongly believe that every person can make a living doing something they love. And often enough, it’s more of a mindset to become happy with your work. Often it’s not the work that sucks, but how we see it.

>I remember, many years ago I asked a “Waste Collector” on the street what happened that he has to work in this job? (notice how my question was with negative assumptions in the first place)

>With a smile on his face he replied. “I’ve been working as a Garbage Guy for more than 20 years now, I love this job and would never trade it for anything else.”

This is a pleasant idea, but not everyone can convince themselves that they love being a garbage man.
I wouldn't say the "writers" are endorsing the old website, or not endorsing the new one, but whois is pretty telling:

$ whois haskell-lang.org | grep ' Name:'
Domain Name: HASKELL-LANG.ORG
Registrant Name: FP Complete Corporation
Admin Name: FP Complete Corporation
Tech Name: FP Complete Corporation

$ whois haskell.org | grep ' Name:'
Domain Name: HASKELL.ORG
Registrant Name: YaleUniversityComputer Science Department Haskell Group
Admin Name: Galois Hostmaster
Tech Name: Galois Hostmaster
End to end means that your computer is the only one that can read your gmail email, because the key is stored on your computer and not in the cloud. The whole reason we all moved to webmail from pop3 is to have access to our mailboxes on any device. If you put the key in the cloud and make it decryptable by some user-known data (like a password), there's very little point in having the key - brute forcing a user's key becomes very simple. Also, any legitimate service provider is going to provide a backup way to "recover your password", which means they have a shortcut to decrypting your data. So you can have one or the other, not both. Either you have simple, easy access to your data from multiple devices, or you have secure end to end encryption.
Show HN: Apache Mesos metrics collector for the Snap telemetry framework
I don't understand why this wouldn't treated like a field sobriety test - if it's positive, just bring in the suspect and the sample. If, after subjecting it to a more accurate and rigorous test like the mass spectrometer mentioned in the article, it's negative, the suspect should be free to go.

How something like this isn't happening long before a plea bargain or trial enters the picture is just beyond me.
SSL 101: What Does a SSL Certificate Do?
The article mentions that the company's current governance structure may prevent the board from terminating Holmes. Does that mean she is the majority shareholder?
Besides the fact that this is a very contrived example, and that this is not how I would go about managing firewall rules (why wouldn't you use ports / services? You trust the security of your PC on just the name of the application?), this is not true in many cases. To pick one: Eclipse (A Java app) does not identify itself as "java.exe".
If this is why they are pushing me away from using messenger in the mobile browser, I'm suddenly way less upset.
Perhaps that not everyone is writing long-running services using Python?

PyPy 5.3.0 is twice as slow as Python 3.5.0 for some work I regularly deal with (1.1s for PyPy, 0.6s for CPython). Another project it is ~40% slower (7.7s vs 5.6s).

Additionally, PyPy just released an alpha containing compatibility with Python 3.3 (which was released four years ago). There are some nice additions to the language in 3.4 and 3.5.
The Fully Self-Driving Car Is Still Years Away
> Saks has used Uber in more than 60 cities; in Vancouver he paid a private driver $1,000 to ferry him around.

Then he is an utter idiot. How many of those 60 cities do you suppose had perfectly workable public transit systems he could have used? I'd bet quite a few of them.

Uber is great because it allows you to be lazy. Turn up in a city you've never been to, hit a button, go. That doesn't mean they should have carte blanche to do whatever they want, wherever they want.

When I'm in Vancouver I either use the (pretty good) public transport options, or an app I found to reserve a taxi, which works just fine. Or (gasp) walk around the beautiful city.
Your quote removed the qualifiers from what I said. What I said, in full: "I think it's possible Holmes fits your description - she was in over her head, never set out to scam anyone, and slid down a very bad path without ever intending to. I don't know this is the case, but I believe it's possible."

So, to answer your question, I don't know, which I clearly said. However, I think it is possible that Holmes was not intentionally running a scam, but allowed herself to be deluded by her own story. Again, to be clear, I do not know this is the case. I think it is possibly true. To me, this is different from Madoff, where we know he knowingly ran a scam.
Regarding overhead of H.264 and VP9, using Intel's QuickSync or AMD's VCE would make sense in a production version, in order to have a fast implementation. That's VAAPI (and maybe VDPAU) on Linux and BSD. The encoders' output will look good enough for video streaming.
Uber has a great PR team to get articles like this planted.
Java has an implementation of Futures, but it's not very good. In the JVM, however, we have Scala Futures, which IMO are far better than Javascript promises. And on top, you have a lot more flexibility deciding how to run those futures, as far as threading goes, because they run on top of Java's very sturdy ExecutorService. There are a variety of executor services for pretty much anything you want.

JVM concurrency is best in class. It's just the Java language itself that moves at a snail's pace.
I love my Wifi lifx bulbs. Amazing output, low latency, and the standby usage is 0.7w when off. My biggest complaint is there is no physical switch to turn them on and off. Using my phone is slower than a switch, and if I switch them off they won't be able to come back on with my phone or IFTTT schedule. 0.7w seems low to me for standby.
That is not the point. Money is just a mean. Read http://www.artificialbrains.com/google http://bigdata-madesimple.com/12-famous-quotes-on-artificial... http://mashable.com/2015/05/12/elon-musk-fears-larry-page/#1... http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2460571,00.asp .
Thanks for the recommendation, just ordered a copy.
Pennsylvania man claims Apple infringes upon his patent for web carousels
Want to give up on gmail search too ?
I've once done a bigger project with Visual Composer and hated every part of it. I bet the WP Community will rejoice if they get a better solution for this.
I honestly find this centralization as worrying as mass surveillance itself. I'm as afraid of the Facebooks of this world as I am of any government, and I don't want all my communication locked in with one company.

This is why I will not use or recommend Signal. Moxie's anti-federation stance is unacceptable to me. It's replacing one problem with another.
I've read the whole thread and I'm surprised that nobody mentionned how easy it would be for Facebook to store the secret keys.

Page 10 of the white paper mentions that there is a remote key stored on Facebook servers which can be used to decrypt the local key. If Facebook still is to be trusted, I don't see what's the deal here.

I think that as soon as you put the words "end-to-end" encryption on a marketing material, you have to be ready to open-source your client. This is the cost that companies aiming to be credible can't escape.

End-to-end encryption without open-source has no value. It is a waste of energy for the company doing that too - or perhaps a marketing cost.
> The same reason Gmail can't work with end-to-end encryption--they want to advertise at you based on message content.

Facebook can do fine without that information: they have more information than they can develop ad services for at the moment; they could use a lot more engineers though. The goodwill from the dev community in allowing appropriate targeting is far more important to them.

Two good examples being location and language: you can advertise for people in a certain place or who speak a certain language, but there are many unserved combinations, like tourists, language minorities and commuters. In my case, I’d love to see ads on learning Swedish: Facebook can see some of my friends speak it, and this is new.

Source: worked for Fb, but in Engagement, not the Ads team; offered a lot of targeting suggestions, but most where “presumably not the biggest opportunities (they) could work on”. At Facebook’s scale, we are talking really big numbers.
Dupe and discussion already taking place here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12055492
Shouldn't his be a "reversible debugger" ? or a time-travel debugger as the Elm debugger is called?
I'll rebut your anecdotal evidence with some of my own. Multiple Vancouverites I met when I visited complained about the lack of Uber.
> Everyone is capable of deluding themselves into believing their current, morally questionable actions will be seen as justified in the future

This is dissonance, defined. Seeing one's actions as maybe being justified later is just rationalizing using other's feelings or thoughts. It's not cool to speak for others and if one is not careful, they can burn their entire life down around themselves.
Never a Hippie, Always a Freak
Yes, I'm afraid it's true. I mean I don't think Obama lives in fear of being pulled over for a broken tail light - so if you wanted to you could invalidate everything I said because you can falsify it with one observation. Then you could believe that everything is okay and that it will be fixed soon.

Chris Rock was talking about how the very rich like him live in a completely different world. But he hasn't forgotten what the situation is.

It is perfectly normal for middle class African American parents to tell their children to keep the hell away from police. Innocence means nothing.

There are plenty of stories of upper class blacks being arrested and even beaten and killed without cause. Surely you are aware of this.

I am honestly surprised you aren't aware of how widespread this problem is. It's been going on since the days of slavery.

Why would it be logical to not fear the police ?
I remember hearing Guido comment that CPython is much easier to hack on compared to PyPy. I think this reason alone is why other Python implementations will remain separate from the 'reference' CPython.
OpenPOWER Developer Challenge
FWIW, here's another way to characterize the difference between ethics and morality:

Ethics is a set of rules about what one person can do to another person. Is this act harmful to another person?

Morality is a set of rules about what a person can do to their own self. Is this act harmful to me?
It's more that it's the overwhelming number of users on Voat.co, and the annoying minority on reddit (and they typically stay to their own subreddits because they're usually downvoted everywhere else).
Thank you, 1990s!
Imminent: likely to occur at any moment; impending; ready to take place.

Active: producing or involving movement; being in physical motion.

These terms only refer to the present and future, not the past. They do not apply to the cornered suspect.
utilitarian legal frameworks would allow torturing a suspected terrorist to find out if he actually knows the codes to disarm the ticking time bomb.

is that something you actually support, or am I misinterpreting?
> PyPy 5.3.0 is twice as slow as Python 3.5.0 for some work I regularly deal with

Is this because you are using ctypes or a C extension written against the CPython API? If not, have you filed a bug report?
But they can. I doubt they do, because it's just not practical, but they do have the ability to
Golang and Reddit API Tutorial
Kudos to the iPython / Jupyter team for spearheading such an important dev-productivity tool. I use your software all the time. I also appreciate the effort to migrate everybody to Python3.
Plea bargaining needs to go, it's letting evidence that wouldn't stand up in court send people to prison.
My take on this: https://github.com/tinspin/rupy/wiki/Process
> Jobs's skill in negotiating was such that there was a standing order at Sun that no contract could be finalized with Apple, While Steve Jobs physically present in the room.

wow. if true, that's the strongest evidence i've ever heard in favor of jobs' negotiating skills.

have you got a source for that? not that i don't believe it, i'd just like to read more about it, in context.
Ask HN: Best iOS app analytics to understand the demographic
If an attacker pwns your host they can do anything you can do. If you can access the smartcard, then the attacker can too. As soon as you plug the card in, the card is just as compromised as the host.

This is the reason that the SC4-HSM has a built-in display and user inputs. These serve the same purpose as the display on a PoS terminal, except that because they are a part of the HSM itself, they can't be compromised by an attacker who pwns the host that the HSM is plugged in to.

An attacker can still attempt a phishing attack, but this will be much, much harder. And for really mission-critical applications, an attacker would have to control every possible means of computing a secure hash on the host machine.

I should probably write a paper about this.
Sure, but those assumptions are implicit in the statement I replied to Multi-millions of FB messages must be sent every day, brute-forcing encryption on all of these is probably not possible. A small % marked as 'secret conversation'? Much easier.

If you don't trust Facebook, you don't need to evaluate the quality of their implementation of secret messaging, you just shouldn't use it.
This is why studying marginal effects -- like when the Emerald Ash Borer invaded county-by-county and caused a discrete time-series event that you can analyze before-and-after, as mentioned in the article -- is so critical.
I'm coming from the Java world, but as a consultant for enterprise customers, I'll say that they only understand two kinds of ongoing maintenance:
1. Dollars over time (e.g. licenses)
2. Purpose-specific hire (i.e. hire a guy to do nothing but support this new thing between now and forever)

In other words, they understand continuous maintenance, but not continual maintenance. Anything else is either too awkward to write on a budget. If you suggest that it needs periodic review, they'll think you just need to "do it right the first time, so this isn't an issue going forward", whether or not that makes any sense.
Great, I hope it works for you!
"brute-forcing encryption on all of these is probably not possible. A small % marked as 'secret conversation'? Much easier."

They probably wouldn't have to brute-force them. Backdooring's still quite possible - the NSA are perfectly capable of compelling Facebook to install a keylogger in their app.
Symantec's Bad Week
I watched the press conference, it was heavily implied that the man was threatening them with IEDs. Who's to say that they weren't sure if he had an explosive vest on? Listen I'm all for due process and bringing people in alive, but I am not for putting the lives of law enforcement in danger unless it's for the greater good.
Go's parallelism model is fundamentally different than the other languages you mentioned. Even if you never write any concurrent Go yourself, you could write single threaded routes and let the webserver handle the parallelism (this is more efficient than spinning up an OS thread per request). With Python, you also have to configure uwsgi or some such to deploy your application to each thread; with Go, the runtime handles this for you completely transparently--just run the binary and you're all set. Go isn't perfect, but using Python the way you are is just leaving money on the table.
Cyph's solution for this, last I saw it, is a Rube Goldberg machine of rolling HPKP pins used in attempt to keep the application from reloading itself from its own servers. It's incredibly complicated. And no matter how much asm.js you use, it's still crypto running in a browser instance. There are other very significant problems with browser crypto --- problems that even affect Chrome Applications.
>Maybe in the future we'll see them strap some C4 to the drone to take out suspects.

That's exactly what happened here.
So why do we have to add a special source repository to do "apt-get install" and why is there a mandatory interactive license approval?
First experimental campaign of  Wendelstein 7-X successfully completed [pdf]
I'm a Vancouver resident and the transit is great. The Skytrain is spotty in its coverage. No East/West travel, which I believe is what they're referring to.

Also after using Uber in Toronto, I am super jealous and want it here.
Full service sex escorts in Greece – escorts| athens escorts |call girls
African wildlife officials appalled as EU opposes a total ban on ivory trade
I used to think so.
I'm talking about the folks in college who managed to get hooked on computers without the gateway drug of video games. They were in it for the love of hacking
In particular "The success of the first experimental campaign exceeded our initial expectations."

The only problem is that the next stage is not occurring until late 2017.
It all depends on what time scale we're talking about since "very fast" is relative. High performance native systems don't use (in any meaningful manner) naive malloc/free, so that comparison is somewhat moot. I hear this argument quite often when Java vs C++/C is discussed, but it's not comparing idioms/techniques in actual use.

Also don't forget that when GC runs it trashes your d/i-caches; temporaries/garbage allocs reduce your d-cache efficacy; GC must suspend and resume the java threads, which is trips to the kernel scheduler; there are some pathologies with Java threads reaching/detecting safepoints.

GC store barriers (aka card marking) don't have anything to do with thread contention (apart from one thing, which I'll note later). This is a commonly used technique to record old->young gen references, and serves as a way to reduce the set of roots when doing young GC only (i.e. you don't need to scan the entire heap). So this isn't about thread contention, per say -- with the exception that you can get false sharing due to an implementation detail, such as in Oracle's Hotspot.

The card table is an array of bytes. Each heap object's address can be mapped into a byte in this array. Whenever a reference is assigned, Hotspot needs to mark the byte covering the referrer as dirty. The false sharing comes about when different threads end up executing stores where the objects requiring a mark end up mapping to bytes that are on the same cacheline - fairly nasty if you hit this problem as it's completely opaque. So Hotspot has a XX:+UseCondCardMark flag that tries to neutralize this by first checking if the card is already dirty, and if so, skips the mark; as you can imagine, this inserts an extra compare and branch into the existing card marking code - no free lunch.
Edited to say UAV specifically, since I hate the term "drone" since they're nearly never autonomous, and to clarify I meant the flying type.

Obviously a slow ground robot with C4 is a little disturbing, but having UAVs with C4 is a whole new level of concerning. Are we going to start seeing targeted bombings when the driver of a traffic stop is being uncooperative?

"The driver reached for his glove box and wasn't responding to police commands, so we launched a hellfire missile to help ensure officer safety"

(turns out driver was deaf and getting his insurance papers)
> Your reasoning is based on a premise that hasn't been established

The intention to commit further harm is evident from statements by the accused and the vile nature of the crimes. Given the potential for harm, that the negotiations failed, and threats of explosives this was the safest course of action. Whether or not the suspect was surrounded has little bearing on if the threat was reduced or increased.

> If there was time to repurpose the bomb-dispoal bot, were there not also non-lethal ways to apprehend the suspect?

That is a flawed argument in that it guesses a quantity of time to modify a robot and time to neutralize an armed suspect are equivalent. It is also flawed in that it presumes there is a choice to be made. Another flaw is that doesn't account for the fact that the robot might already have been modified earlier in case negotiations failed, and if so then the robot is already modified and immediately ready while the suspect isn't.
You seem to think you're disagreeing with me, but everything you said is consistent with my description.
Performance of Scala trait methods
It does not happen anywhere close to regularly.
I never paid much attention to the details of the Madoff case but I think people on the internet throw out the "sociopath" label way too freely.

Not much is gained from that label, in my opinion. And I certainly wouldn't apply it to Bernie Madoff or Holmes based on what I know of their situations.
The Haskell motto is "avoid success at all costs", usually clarified to "avoid 'success at all costs'".

In other words, "success" (popularity, widespread use in industry, teaching, etc.) is not a justification for "costs" such as limiting expressiveness, making things less safe, restricting research possibilities, etc. Haskell would prefer to be powerful, safe, efficient, obscure and niche; rather than popular, industry-standard, widely-known, highly compatible, unsafe, insecure, inefficient and restricted (besides, we have loads of languages of this sort!).

Crippling the language to make things easier for new users is not an option. However, there are many ways the language could be made easier without impacting any core values. For example, there are long-standing issues with strings, records, error messages, dependency handling, etc. which people are working on.

Also, for those who do want to learn Haskell, I've found the community to be very welcoming and tolerant of newbies. Just ignore some of the more math-heavy blog posts (for now, at least), or your head might explode :P