skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I thought of that same exchange when I read this post but remembered it more as a lament that JSON doesn't support namespaces - so JSON is always context dependent.
>90% of the world lives outside the United States
Absolutely interesting. I'd change the title from "IPython from Peter Norvig" to "IPython Notebooks by Peter Norvig", though.
I didn't know YouTube operational expenses exceeded Ad revenue. Interesting.
That was pretty much my point. An SRE or DevOps person who's any good is basically a Software Engineer + SysAdmin in one person, vs two people, so paying them $11k/yr less is kind of ridiculous.
I am by no means an expert on blockchain technology so I could be wrong on this, but I think your assumption that the user would have to pay for a tweet is wrong.

I think posting and reading tweets could be handled off-chain.
The HTML for my blog is generated by applying an XSLT stylesheet to its feed.

You can see the stylesheet here: http://news.dieweltistgarnichtso.net/posts/atom2html.xsl

You can see the resulting web page here: http://news.dieweltistgarnichtso.net/posts/
I use XML for a combination of features that I consider very important but are also perceived as "overkill": A source syntax that has already handled text escaping and encoding, lets me add some abstract structure, and lets me encode the text in a way that lets me nest different parsing modes for various kinds of structured data.

The first two are easy enough to get with your pick of JSON or S-Expressions. For a lot of things even CSV is enough, although CSV has the downside of being so simple that people opt to write an incorrect toolchain for it themselves instead of adding a dependency.

But it's the last feature that really produces the complexity. Once you get into "I want the inner structure to contain a different and unambiguous semantic meaning from the outer structure" you have a pretty substantial engineering problem. Less structured approaches like JSON or S-Expr's drop the problem on the floor by declaring one universal semantic, making the programmer deal with adding anything else on top. XML's compromises to achieve a more detailed representation of data involve the angle bracket tax, schema languages, etc.

If you want a guarantee that a rich data source can be processed correctly through an n-tier architecture that emits various radically different outputs, these compromises become compelling. I'm a big fan of DocBook, for example, and its canonical toolchain is an XSLT style sheet: The workflow I end up with is initial writing in a light syntax of choice, compile to DocBook XML, add additional formatting and styling in the XML, and then emit the final document in whatever forms needed - HTML, PDF, etc. It's extremely flexible, and you wouldn't get the same quality of result with a less extensive treatment.

For ordinary data serialization problems and one-offs, it is considerably less interesting.
...I thought it was going to be an article on England.
You don't need a computer to turn on a light in the same room. you don't even need digital electronics.
But the prices aren't actually lower than what can be had elsewhere even with the dividend you get back each year. The primary benefits of REI is how easy it is to return products you don't like or don't have a need for and the fact that you can get a product the same day if you live near one.
nice feature, very useful in some scenario
Simple answer - knowledge share. Many more people know and are familiar with Linux than FreeBSD. Throw in companies like Red Hat, etc. and that makes it more compelling for those wanting some sort of support backing.

Personally, I've been running FreeBSD (including some commercial installs -- years ago) for about 16-17 years.
I'm not going to defend all defense spending (and I don't know much about healthcare, though I expect it's similar), but much of the cause of huge expense for defense projects is that they're buying standard deviations. A lot of the stuff is manufactured to shockingly small tolerances. Same reason you spend $10000 for a PLC with less functionality than a $35 RBPi.
Ask HN: Are there any tech interview prep courses?
These days, tech interviews are almost as important to developers as standardized tests. Are there any online courses or training camps, where developers can learn to pass coding interviews? What do hiring managers think of candidates who use prep programs?
In my head I consider "computer simulations" to be monte carlo. What types of simulations are you thinking of?
That's the scarcity model in a nutshell, and it has run its course. We won't get to a Culture style future by nickel-and-diming each other; we'll get there by developing better mechanisms of communication, fostering low-overhead group decision-making, which will allow us to collect, share, and distribute resources without having to run everything through the enervating meat-grinder that is commerce. Capitalism got us where we are, but we have to build something better if we want to go further.

The best parts of my life are already voluntary, cooperative, and social - people working together to make things better for each other. I want more of this, not less. Micropayments just drag the old way into the new. Why waste our time on that? Let's build the future we actually want to live in.
Ticket to ride, King of Tokyo, forbidden desert, carcassonne, patchwork, Stone Age, Colt express (great programming type game).

Also see this post:
https://boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/198483/numbers-bgg-1
I would recommend looking at the Popular games on that list.
I didn't count the 5 entries in that period with 3 deaths.

They use the new (since 2014) definition of 3 deaths. Here's the relevant law: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/540B .

You are correct - the Mother Jones table does include the killer, if the killer also died. I checked the killings with 4 deaths. The suspected coffee shop police killer was killed by police at another time, and the Alturas tribal shooting killer was arrested. The killings with 5 and 6 deaths were all done by a single person.

So that doesn't explain the discrepancy.

The editorial author believes the new definition was done for political reasons, and prefers to use the older one. See http://nypost.com/2014/10/12/the-fbis-bogus-report-on-mass-s... for another op-ed by the same author.

You'll note that the author has "data on [US] mass public shootings from 1977 to 1999." Why, I wonder, did the author only report on a 7 year baseline, rather than 40 years? That longer baseline would help with the regression to the mean problem intrinsic to this analysis. He's had years to do that.

His NY Post piece even chides the FBI for using a too-short baseline since the early 2000s had a fewer than average number of killing.

Going back to your "notoriously anti-gun" description. Why does it matter? Mother Jones gave all of their data, with links to the primary source for verification. My cursory spot check found no discrepancies.

Since the editorial author appears to be "notoriously" pro-gun, given his book and op-ed pieces, but doesn't give the full data or explain the choice of baseline - and does a poor job of interpreting the numbers - shouldn't those conclusions be even more suspect?
In the linked notebook http://nbviewer.jupyter.org/url/norvig.com/ipython/Countdown... when he says

>because there are 2 ways to make 27 with the numbers (10, 9, 8), namely, ((10+9)+8) and (10+(9+8))

why not also (10+9+8)?
Yeah, I acknowledge that bit.

But I also think the various schema definition languages (DFDs, XSD, whatever) turned out to be either not expressive enough (DFDs), or a complete PIA (XSD) and in the end, they weren't used very often.

Still, it's nice to have them when you need them and when they aren't there it hurts.
I'll weigh in; papers aren't necessarily worded to convey new information in an ideal manner (especially to newbies). They are worded so that expert researchers are able to reproduce them, especially the parts that constitute whatever their contribution is to the field.

As for textbooks, I imagine that the field is moving too fast; half the stuff I use has only existed for the past year or two.
Actually, they have a control in place in the study itself and they could additionally have compared against the results from the 1988 study where all the experimenters hands were free.

Sometimes the experimenter had their hands free and other times they did not. When the experimenter had their hands free and tapped the box with their forehead, the babies imitated the head action over 60% of the time. When the experimenter had their hands bound, the babies imitated the head action only 20% of the time.

To me that's a big enough difference that the babies didn't just accidentally tap without specific intent.

Actual write-up in Nature (which was linked to in the article): http://www.nature.com/articles/415755a.epdf
I guess that you would agree with Richard Feynman

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tWr39Q9vBgo

> ... how easy it is to make mistake and fool yourself ...
They provide services.

A "product" is when someone identifies that a repeatable solution exists for many customers. This is not as common as one-off solutions for a particular customer.
I still can't quite put my finger on the security risk for others, can you help explain what makes it one?

Here's the only scenario I can think of:

Say you are a web developer and you use mybusiness.local.computer for developing your client's website. You use it every day, you are used to loading up the URL and seeing your website.

One day I, owner of local.computer turn the dark side. I decide that I want to attack you, this one person who I know uses mybusiness.local.computer, and change mybusiness.local.computer to redirect to my nefarious server.

When I do that, when you come to work, you load up mybusiness.local.computer and expect to see the site you've been working on.

Because I know my victim, I know exactly what website to spoof, so I have my spoof up and running on my nefarious server.

Then, when the victim goes to visit mybusiness.local.computer, thinking they are visiting a copy of their website, it's actually being served from my server.

Hopefully, you then input some information, like their username and password, which I then capture in my spoof website.

This is the only way I can imagine using this domain against someone.

It involves quite a few assumptions:

- The one in control of DNS is the attacker.
- The attacker has one specific victim in mind, because they can only spoof one website.
- The attacker already knows what site the victim is expecting to load at a .local.computer domain. This requires personal knowledge of the victim's site because the DNS for .local.computer goes straight to 127.0.0.1. Requests are not proxied or logged. (Ok, after writing this, I realize I could change the local.computer to go through my servers then redirect the user to 127.0.0.1 enabling me to at least learn what subdomains are being requested. Still, I have no idea what that site is supposed to be.)
- The attacker is able to spoof that website well enough that the victim (a developer of the website) is able to be fooled into giving up information.

Is there another way this could be abused? I seriously would like to know.

Thanks!
> and it comes across as a brave and interesting move

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hush_(Buffy_the_Vampire_Slayer...
Some reasons I could think:

- It's easier and cheaper to find Linux sysadmins than BSD ones

- There's more commercial software supported on Linux

- There's more companies offering support for Linux

- Linux is more portable than BSD

- Linux is one of the standard server OS offered by providers, BSD isn't
sorry for the late reply:

I was talking this over with a couple vet friends of mine and both mentioned cases where they were paid in some kind of scrip (usually in combat zones where bringing in cash was dangerous) or in dollars in cases where dollars weren't accepted on the local economy making it effectively the same.

http://www.robertsworldmoney.com/banknotedetail.php?id=7597&...
> Here's the relevant law

Not sure if they're using that for "mass shootings" as it refers to what they will consider a "serial killing."

I did find this interesting article about the varying definitions, though.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/26/we-ha...

> Going back to your "notoriously anti-gun" description. Why does it matter?

It matters to me because when I see them as a source, I know to do a little more legwork and check the sources before sharing the information that they have presented. Mother Jones is one of an unfortunately long list of websites that I don't trust very much. The bright side to that is that it's spurred me to dig further into topics.
It's kind of a virtuous cycle (or vicious cycle, if you prefer BSD): more people use Linux; more guides are written to help others, more software is readily available, and more testing is done by virtue of having a larger user base; so more people use Linux. I don't think there's much to say about qualitative comparisons between Linux and BSD that hasn't already been said to death, but I do think the two are borrowing from each other in healthy ways and approaching parity, at least in an "on paper" sense.
+ is an associative binary operator. You have to decide which pair to add first.
A JavaScript, Physically-Based Clock
This is also true, and I've found it to be kind of annoying. /the_donald was popping up on /all quite frequently, and I found myself banned from other subreddits for correcting misinformation that was posted. For the most part, they were subreddits that I would not have normally posted in or read anyway, but it still seemed a little silly for them to do such a thing.
Pretty much this this.

Linux (especially Debian-based distros), is usually the first UNIX flavour that people coming from Windows get in touch with. While FreeBSD has excellent documentation, Ubuntu and others simply have the larger newbie-friendly community.
Or just accept that in a divorce, things will be split more or less equally in the absence of a prenup.

I make more than my wife. If we got divorced, her getting half the assets would not be the biggest problem.
One of the main reason I like scythe is it can be played in less than 1.5 hours. I've played axis and allies in the past, but I don't really enjoy games that take that long to play.
I recommend searching "sharks eating the internet"so it can become part of your Google history. I searched and found some videos of sharks biting, and some people discounting it.
we can't afford bureaucrats prevaricating and ultimately doing nothing on the issue of climate change; they have to be removed from power such that we can effect a future where we survive.
Monopoly is rather complex for the relatively small dose of fun it provides. Poker is quite simple in its base form, so I'm not sure what to tell you there.
Codenames is quite good and is available from Target.
Love Letter is a modern classic of tight, simple design.
These are two examples of what I would consider gateway games for people who have only ever heard of Monopoly or Trivial Pursuit.
Immunotherapy Offers Hope to a Cancer Patient, but No Certainty
In my experience, the BSDs used to be trusted for their reliability and performance. Linux has come a long way in terms of reliability and configuration cost - though performance is harder to tune for. Docker has enabled a lot of trusted deployments. 6-8 years ago I remember the question "Why don't companies use Linux as much in production as FreeBSD?"

Maybe I'm sheltered.
> Uber practices active price discrimination to discover the highest price a rider will pay

Wait really? Has this been written about? That would be very interesting!
If they should use BSD, wouldn't OpenBSD actually be better? (Default to security)
One of the interesting things I learned teaching foreign languages is that people only remember things that they understand. That makes intuitive sense, but what I found most interesting is that if someone doesn't understand something, they will often forget that it ever happened.

For example, I once asked my students to bring in their textbook for the next class. I was speaking English (foreign language for the students). Not one student in the 30 brought their textbook the next day. The weird thing is that not one of the students even remembered me saying something that they didn't understand. I've done a seminar where I demonstrate this effect. I say something in Japanese to an English speaking audience. I even make a remark about it. 20 minutes later I ask if anyone remembers me saying something in Japanese. Most people do not. Even after only 20 minutes people completely filter out things that don't make sense to them. When I saw this happening, I immediately found some scientific papers describing the effect. Unfortunately I seem to have lost all my notes so I don't have links handy any more :-(

So, without knowing more, my guess is that the babies get confused with the foreign language and subsequently forget the whole episode.

BTW, knowing this dramatically improved my teaching. If you realise that students who don't understand something in class will actually forget the entire class, you realise how important it is to probe understanding for every person in the class.

And just to get a plug in because people often complain about the quality of education that their children get. I only taught for 5 years, but if there was one thing that I would concentrate on to improve education it's to reduce class sizes. I had classes of 43 (!) most of the time I was teaching. I had fifty minute classes. You can do the math to see how much time I had to help each student individually. In my last year, I restructured my classes reducing my "instruction" time (where I explain things) to 5 minutes a class. I spent the rest of the class probing and evaluating comprehension. Test scores improved dramatically across the board.
So, you mean like a web/mobile-development consulting/job-shop?

I haven't come across any of those describing themselves as a "start-up", but I probably just don't get out enough...
Mad Max is a bad example. Max never spoke much after his family died in the first film.
The cypherpunk revolution
You'd probably just get a free Microsoft laptop with terrible firmware anyway.

Windows said an upgrade to Windows 10 was fine on my Dell Vostro, it was correct, until it installed a graphics driver that caused the screen to go blank. Turned out a BIOS update fixed it, but that's no good for a normal person. The next day they announced you couldn't turn off ads in Windows 10 Pro.
As the owner of local.computer, you are in a position to intercept anything a developer is sending to her server via HTTP request. This could be username/password, yes.

You also then know the public IP address and public domain of a development server, which may allow you to access the server and learn secrets, steal stack traces, etc.

It's a small security risk, but it's a non-zero risk with zero benefit. Just use fake, never-to-be-public domains. There's no downside. If you need to interact with something like Twilio (which you never need to do while developing), you can wait until you're ready to push to staging.
I'm confused by what you mean by "more portable." Do you mean that it runs on more CPU architectures and platforms? Or do you mean more driver support, etc.? BSD can run a rather diverse set of platforms: http://www.netbsd.org/ports/
To add on, I think he's writing from a Lisp perspective, not general math notation.
I agree and especially it should be noted that Ubuntu and RedHat had huge marketing budgets compared to pretty much everyone else for the last decade. Nobody really pushes for FreeBSD in business settings because there is no social capital that comes from doing so. All three require a lot of skill to manage but that skill seems lest costly for Red Hat and Ubuntu even though it's not necessarily true. That's the power of marketing.
> What I don't understand is why anyone thought using XML that way was a good idea, and why it still is popular in the enterprise. Bad habits are hard to break, I guess.

Namespaces, which then gives you easy answers for Internationalisation (xml:lang), a subject-predicate-object data structure (RDF), which can lead on to logical meaning/modelling of data (RDFS/OWL), which then lets you look at harder questions like trust/provenance.

There's also schema validation (XSD), transformation (XSLT), which then provides you tools like XPath.

Most of that is on the front page for the technology: https://www.w3.org/standards/xml/

The real problem is not syntax, its communication between groups with differing experiences and interests - how do I know your messages mean the same thing as what my system expects?

If you prove to be malicious, do I have to write a strict validator before I trust your input?

If you want to ensure your messages are well formed before they are sent, do you also have to write a validator?

How do I know our validators are checking the same things?

If you want to send a large document oriented data structure, but I only care about a specific section relating to my interests; do I have to understand where to look and what all of the surrounding material is; or can I query for the relevant bits?

On the more complicated RDF side of things - if you want to share identifiers with me, how do we both avoid calling everything record id=1?

If we are both talking about the same thing but know different parts of the story, how can I recognize your information as describing the same thing I know about?

If we both know about the same Thing, and know certain logical facts about that Thing, can we check those facts actually make sense against shared rules?

If we both know about the same Thing, and can see a logical inconsistency in data, can we reason about which data to Trust and why?

Unfortunately, communicating properly is hard even with all of the tools to help.

We tend to opt towards subjecting systems to an ongoing fuzzing test because we don't value many of the above things - we tend to work in organisations with a short attention span focused on the now and a narrow set of interests.
It just kind of works for the 80% of the time, so we move on.

Contrast that with something like a library or museum, and you see why ideas like Dublin Core really catch on there.
I'm not sure you're going to find one unifying answer, so I'll just contribute my own experience.

- FreeBSD lost the desktop battle to Linux. All joking aside about Linux on the desktop, if you want a *nix environment (and not Mac), Linux distributions are just a lot easier to set up and have traditionally enjoyed better packaging of proprietary software (graphics card drivers, RAID card drivers, applications, etc.). While FreeBSD has some very compelling advantages on the server, for those in my circle, it's not not so much better as to justify the cognitive overhead in switching between two similar, but different, OSes.

- FreeBSD wasn't a first class OS on EC2 for years. This allowed an entire ecosystem of devops tools to evolve with essentially Linux-only support.
How would you write that example while taking advantage of the XML features you're talking about?
And if you typed that comment on Windows 10, would Microsoft know what word you typed?
How is Linux more portable than BSD?! NetBSD has been ported to nearly every platform known to man, even toasters.

I'm surprised that more embedded devices don't run some sort of BSD because they wouldn't have to release code. The PS4's OS is FreeBSD, which they did release a lot of code in return, but they don't have to open source or release all their code (i.e. DRM and other "Security" based stuff) if they don't want to.
Why not just use Xeon 2697-v2 for the same price as the phi?

It's 12 core so performance in all-core situation would be about the same as this one. But on non-parallelized code it would be ~5x faster..