skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Category theory has served mathematicians well, but only because they had a great mass of concrete detail which needed to be abstracted away.

An abstract framework like category theory can actually be harmful where there isn't that much concrete detail to begin with. A personal example I faced was being overwhelmed by category theory jargon when starting to learn Haskell a couple of years back. My confidence returned only when I realized that there was just one category in play with types as the objects and functions as the arrows. The jargon was unnecessary. Today Haskellers discuss so many interesting issues about the language and its implementation which do not fit into the category theoretic framework at all.
OK, Today I Learned.

This diagram in particular (from your URL) shows that though there is a spring in the brake-shoe application mechanism, its action is to release the brake.

I hadn't know this (and had never found a good diagram of railroad brake design). This isn't what my understanding had been.

NB: this isn't my area of expertise, and my understanding had been the incorrect idea that spring-pressure held brake shoes in place.

Which makes me wonder why this design was chosen over a spring-driven shoe.

Thanks for sharing that. And brickbats to the hive-minders who've (at this point) downvoted your earlier comment in this thread.
I was aware of brake failure as a factor in the Lac-Megantic disaster, but not that this was the specific cause.
You have vastly oversimplified the matter.

In common-law jurisdictions, contract law pertains only to agreements which are made with the intent to contract, i.e., with the intent that the agreement should be enforced by law. In the case of agreements made without that intent, and particularly when an agreement explicitly stipulates that legal enforcement should not apply, common-law tradition says (with some major caveats) that a judge should dismiss suits related to the enforcement of the provisions of the agreement.

Further, even in the case that a so-called "smart contract" is deemed to be subject to contract law (whether because the parties made that intention clear, or because their intention was vague and a judge consequently rules that to be the case), it is reasonable to argue that the intention of the parties was to be bound by the rules of the system in which they chose to express their agreement, e.g., within a system in which it is broadly understood that "the code is the contract", and that the execution of the code according to the parameters of the execution environment at the time of the agreement should dictate the outcome of the agreement. In other words, it is perfectly plausible from a legal point of view that a judge could find that the primary intent of the parties was to be governed by the rules of the system in which they chose to execute the agreement (e.g., Ethereum under its pre-fork consensus rules), rather than ruling on their intent at the lower level of the code expressing the contract itself. Such an interpretation would go little further than the already well established legal precedents of allowing contracting parties to bind themselves to the decision of an arbiter other than a court of law, or of one court acceding to the jurisdiction of another as stipulated by the contract itself.

A judge might therefore plausibly rule in a way that enhances rather than degrades the promise of immutability in a technically enforced consensus system. That is, a judge might reasonably find that changing the rules of the game halfway though (e.g., with an unanticipated hard fork that changes the system's state or execution parameters) is contrary to the intent of the contracting parties, and that therefore the agreement should be interpreted under the rules of the status quo ante (pre-fork).

One of the basic philosophical foundations of contract law, dating to Adam Smith, is that free people should have the power to bind themselves in enforceable agreements. There are many qualifications to this idea, but it an important justification for the existence of contract law and for the way it has evolved over the centuries: the whole point is that contract law should empower parties to make agreements and to be bound by those agreements, and (within some bounds) that includes the power to decide how disputes about the terms of those agreements are adjudicated. Choosing a mechanism of enforcement de machina rather than de jure fits into this philosophical framework just fine.
Slightly OT, but I'm allergic to bee stings and a former(!) beekeeper. I'd have no problem with my neighbour keeping bees, and I'm in the UK where plots are tiny. Unless you're right next to the hive, most bees aren't going to bother you. A fence is enough to keep them away: they fly up and over it, then most of them will fly right over your garden. A few will stop to pollinate your plants for free. Bees aren't like wasps: they don't sting unless you're threatening the hive or about to crush them. Don't fear the bees!
NB: it's really annoying to see HNers downvoting factually accurate and well-intentioned comments.

Particularly when they're correcting errors or omissions in other comments. Such as those in mine above to which Animats is replying.
WikiLeaks information about corrupt DNC
But did you ever drive the car?
Well, that shows the review boards have benefits.

You can't determine if they're justified until you've also looked at their costs.
Refueling time and storage equipment seems like major differences between hydrogen and battery. They both have slightly different use-cases that make different bets on future technology. Maybe one will win out or maybe both will play a role. I'm personally waiting for the Nucleon to come back.
The data showing that moderate drinkers had a lower risk of cardiovascular disease was flawed. In the study the abstainers had more CVD risk factors than the drinkers, making any comparisons that were made invalid.
Is this the normal sort of practice for layoffs in a startup?
Thanks for the reply.

I haven't looked in detail at the library, and probalby don't have the chops to identify good or bad features. But the mechanisms described and my understanding of the origins of the concept of "fail safe" seemed at odds, and I wanted to raise the point.
I don't think it's so much to find common ground. I think it's because it works. AIUI scientists have studied the metaphysical (miracles, remote viewing, psychics, ESP, telekinesis, out of body experiences, etc.) and found no evidence any of them exist beyond the obvious physical explanations.
Ancient Poop Sticks Prove the Silk Road Spread Disease
> In other words, it is perfectly plausible from a legal point of view that a judge could find that the primary intent of the parties was to be governed by the rules of the system in which they chose to execute the agreement, e.g., Ethereum under its pre-fork consensus rules. A judge might therefore plausibly rule in a way that enhances rather than degrades the promise of immutability oven by a technically enforced consensus system.

Yeah, that could happen. A judge could also invalidate an Ethereum contract. But if a judge makes a ruling on an Ethereum contract, no matter what that ruling might be, that would prove that Ethereum contracts are subject to the jurisdiction of a judge in the legal system, just like other contracts, which proves my point.
> Today gmail offers more account security than a typical bank. Why can I get two factor authentication, device recognition and alerts on a free email account but not on a bank account?

I have all of those things with a standard checking account from Chase. I do wish that I could use Google Authenticator/TOTP for 2FA rather than texts/emails, though.
This may be true, but ---

When I encounter comments like these, a common theme is something like ~"OpenBSD didn't even set out to be a secure system. They forked NetBSD intending to audit the codebase and write clean, simple code going forwards. That such a system ended up being relatively secure is just a bonus."

To which I reply, this doesn't seem like a terrible downside. I like clean and simple code. There may be other options which offer more technical security features (something with ACLs, for instance), but none come even close to OpenBSD's simplicity.
seems to be more geared towards reporting, so reinvented 'oracle forms' probably.
I meant that calling a gender irrational is different from calling a belief system irrational, regardless of whether either claim is true.
You can install typings (npm install -g typings) and then search for type definitions. For hapijs, it would be `typings search hapi`. Then you can install using `typings install dt~hapi --global --save`.
While I'm in agreement with everything you've said, I'd like to try and play devil's advocate:

You could expand this to say that not wearing a seat-belt should be made legal or that all drugs should be made legal or many other things where informed consent should be made legal. The problem is that not only many people are less responsible or intelligent than you might be, their irresponsibility can lead to harming other people. Suppose the effects of a person experimenting on themselves might cause some temporary loss of focus or control as a direct result and this would happen while they were driving or operating heavy machinery etc. There is a certain balance between personal freedom and laws that limit it, and sometimes this balance is not in favor of a minority that don't need the law, but it has to apply to all.

Again, I don't agree with the above argument - just think one should be ready for it when it is given.
Of course, Tesla is totally impartial in this matter.
If it is easy, it'd be nice to edit this the title to be not in all caps.
1. Think and grow rich: Thought me about goal setting, opened my eyes to the fact that a man can rise from his humble beginnings to any height he want's to attain if he is willing to work for it.

2. PHP for dummies: My first exposure to the world of programming, since then I've never looked back.

3. Rich Dad, Poor Dad: Changed my thinking about finance, I don't know how I would have handled my finances if I hadn't come across this book as a teenager, I feel so lucky to have read this book. I would have been stuck in society's harmful way of handling finance.
> If a single user is the only one accessing a given name, then that naming system has basically been made irrelevant.

No. It's not irrelevant at all. It's how you "execute" that specific software. It serves the same purpose as a filename for a binary on a filesystem.

> If a user controls updates to the code and (in theory) audits it, then the primary purpose of the sandbox (executing random third-party specified code) is gone.

No. An audit is never perfect and that even assumes you perform one. While I frequently modify the software I utilize, I almost never audit the entire codebase, so a sandbox is quite useful.

> if you were designing a Free calculator app and wanted to show a friend, would you send them the files you're editing and they'd set it up on their own httpd to try it out, or would you end up sending them a URL to your server and thereby undermine their freedom?

I did just that. I sent them a URL. Here's the rub, it's a purely front-end only web app. No backend. That means their browser downloads the entire codebase instantly. The codebase is easily accessed, saved, and modified by them, if they want to.

The calculator was possible over a decade ago. With some of the stuff hitting JavaScript within the last few years, you can literally build anything you want in that fashion. Games, communication apps, etc.
Wikipedia seems to fulfill a fair amount of your requirements. Add in Project Gutenberg...
Official Telegram for MacOS logs every pasted message to syslog
How does this compare with Trend Micro Deep Security for Web Apps? We're using it now but it does not seem effective - not catching much in its scans. So we're looking at alternatives...
Well, if we are talking about not-yet-invented stuff, we might also someday have feasible artificial hydrocarbons or corn-fuel farms run with electric combines. Nether one of those would require a fundamental change in car design.
Personally, I agree with you. I'm not really of the opinion that immutability offers any advantages, and I'm not using Ethereum myself.

That said, I think the main idea is that no matter what a judge argues, nobody can modify the original contract in the Ethereum blockchain (That's the theory at least, as we've seen that's not the case). That's not to say something else couldn't be done, but as far as Ethereum is concerned the judge saying it is invalid means squat because that has no ramifications on the blockchain.

You raise a good point though that in the end a judge could make any number of decisions outside of Ethereum, so Ethereum only provides so much "protection". Clearly, what a judge decides means much more then "squat" because it has actual ramifications on the people involved, even if it has no ramifications on the Ethereum blockchain itself.
What Do Driverless Cars Mean for Road Design?
> The tool’s scores put it at the 52nd percentile in the category of business software, which isn’t bad for an academic research project. But the scores for Microsoft’s Access database program are much worse — around the sixth percentile

It is apparently more useable than Access, which is damning by faint praise.
In my book, doing something of bad taste counts as wrong. I have no idea what kind of definition you're trying to use for "wrong".

If you really think walking into someone's room and taking a secret document on their desk without their permission and publicizing it to fuck them up so you can gain profit from it is NOT wrong, I have nothing more to say.
In [1] Ron Wilson examines two models almost in the same terms ("Internal security" and "Guarding the perimeter"), but the third is different

> That brings us to our third—and today, still experimental—alternative: deep learning. Connect the critical state variables of the system to a deep-learning neural network. Train the network with a blend of normal operation, known attacks, and randomly injected faults. You may never know how the resulting network operates, and you can’t prove that the network is sufficient or even correct. But in complex systems it is likely to out-perform human-devised rule lists

[1] http://systemdesign.altera.com/system-security-a-model-from-...
> Is there a more detailed comparison?

There's nothing more detailed that I know of. Is there a particular feature area/comparison you're curious about? I can add a bit more detail.

> It's not apparent to me what the advantage of either interface is. In both situations I have to define a "lambda"

What I meant by this bit is that the user experience is different. Failsafe can be used with method references or lambda expressions [1], which are a nice, concise way of wrapping executable logic with some failure handling strategy. You cannot do this with Hystrix since all logic must be wrapped in a HystrixCommand impl, which cannot be implemented as a lambda.

> either seems acceptable.

Like anything, it just depends on what you want. If retries and general purpose failure handling, consider Failsafe. If request collapsing, thread pool management and monitoring, consider Hystrix.

[1]: https://github.com/jhalterman/failsafe#synchronous-retries
"Know when to stop" <== This really cracked me up because it's not only true but also put in such an eloquent expression.
All of the relevant examples from that link are about experiments performed on people other than the experimenter. That is a pretty big difference from what is being discussed.
What does alcohol do to your body and brain?
http://qz.com/696693/what-does-alcohol-actually-do-to-your-b...
Cheater Cheater
The problem with this is that if a judge determines an Ethereum contract is unenforceable, but the blockchain does not change, then the blockchain no longer represents the state of affairs in the real world. If that happens, what is the blockchain good for? How can anyone be confident in it, or base decisions or future contracts on it, if it diverges from reality in such a way?
I read through your 2010 post three or four times - but it doesn't really seem to be as relevant to 2016 OpenBSD. 2016 OpenBSD assumes that there will be errors in the code, and furthermore, there will be errors that have downstream security effects that the authors can't envision today. A lot of the thinking around pledge (2) is that behavior that an SElinux MAC audit would record, and therefore allow moving forward, should not be allowed. The entire operating systems seems to be designed in the belief that there is no way to write bug-free applications, so at every level, the operating system, and kernel, should be designed with the expectation that an attacker has broken applications in a manner not envisioned by the application writers of the time.

As such, a number of attack/bugs found in other operating systems, don't impact OpenBSD because they were forward looking.

I'm wondering if you've had a chance to review the change in thinking that the OpenBSD organization has had in the last 6 years, and how it might impact your original 2010 post?
Code will always be written
It's unbelievable that they were not able to capitalize on all those Android devices that are still running very old versions of Android. Given that Google and the device manufacturers basically disowned those devices, I was expecting (or rather hoping) that someone will fill in that gap/need. I guess its more complicated than it seems, but I do wonder how.
As someone who formally studied abstract algebra.

One of the most applicable use-case I remember being constantly mentioned about category theory was classification of some viruses.

Category theory makes sense when your business is large enough and you are looking to make everything streamlined. You could use some Category theory to rearrange everything from employee, customers and products into better types.

But the idea that you absolutely need to understand this stuff to get going does not make sense to me.
That is not what Steam hardware survey says, given the amount of Windows 10 installations plus XBox.
Seemed like an okay title to me. They summarized the article at a non-technical level. That's the same title I would have written to summarize it. Maybe I wouldn't have used the word "revolutionary", but I already ignore that word whenever I see it.
Improvements for smaller app downloads on Google Play
>what would it even mean for there to not be an arrow of time?

Thermaldynamic soup? Our universe has an entropy based arrow of time because it started in a low entropy state. If a hypothetical universe started in a high entropy state, than forward time would appear no more probable than backward time. Of course, such a universe would also not have eggshells; it would just be a thermodynamical soup.
Very cool. The right side of the article provides links to a video presentation of the tool and a SIGMOD paper reporting on the details. It is specifically compared against Access in a study on usability.

Link to the project page: http://people.csail.mit.edu/ebakke/sieuferd/
Something relevant https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/lantern-one-device-free-d...

Which sources content from https://outernet.is/
>Openly racist sexist
Calling names is not going to do anything
I think the problem with supporting "all those Android devices" is the long tail Android has [1] once you get past supporting Samsung/Motorolla/HTC devices.

[1] http://thenextweb.com/insider/2015/08/05/this-is-what-androi...

Samsung is bad enough. Take a look here [2]. Click "Tablets" and then choose "Galaxy Tabs" as the product.

I'm sure a lot of the devices are similar at a hardware level, but still, the sheer volume of them is ridiculous.

[2] http://www.samsung.com/us/support/downloads
Well, it was nice of him to send you a blog link, rather than telling you to buy his book, which mentions this exact trick :)

https://www.nostarch.com/gnumake
Typing doesn't get in the way of prototyping code. On the contrary it's essential. When you're starting out a new project the tendancy to refactor is very high. Everything is changing and in flux as you go from nothing to something. Having static typing makes refactoring quick, easy, and most of all safe. Developing new projects for myself in TypeScript vs JavaScript is exponentially faster.
> Layoffs reportedly came after a long executive retreat for the company's leaders and were conducted with no advanced notice. Employees who were not let go were told not to show up to work today. Those who did show up were the unlucky ones: they had generic human resources meetings rather ominously added to their calendars last night. So, everyone who arrived at Cyanogen Inc. in Seattle this morning did so to lose their job (aside from those conducting the layoffs). That's a bit grim.

It's like startups are looking to one-up each other in terms of "crappy ways to treat employees you're letting go."
Have you read the manual?
Like the other commenting on this video, I felt the topic is addressed with a bit of superficiality. The guy talks about blockchains as if they were some kind of novel technology which is able to solve pretty much any problem.

Still, I'd like to get deeper into understanding blockchains (I live in Switzerland and financial institutions around here are all excited around blockchains). The best technical resource I have found so far is this series of posts about understanding blockchains from a development perspective.

http://www.davidederosa.com/basic-blockchain-programming/

Do you know any other developer-related resource worth looking at?
Banks/Politicians have privilege; They will not be prosecuted; They can commit crimes in the name of serving the country; http://cnbc.com/id/43471561
Development cost? I've had huge development savings using typescript. The support for fast refactoring plus constant intellisense of any type errors has sped up my up my development significantly.
Turns out the Great Firewall had the side benefit of protecting China's nascent tech companies from foreign competition.
Mental Illness?
How exactly would one make money off abandoned android devices? This users would pay?

They seemed to be considering partnering with advertisers to integrate ads into the base OS. Question is, who would voluntarily sign up for such a thing?
Metal is and will always be exclusive to apple platforms.
Introduce new tools, not policies to your big co;
In fairness, the title of the original article is in ALL CAPS (due to text-transform: uppercase), so don't assume malice on the OP's part.
I find it funny that they bothered doing all caps for an article demonstrating a (sophisticated and well engineered) mostly boring architecture.
Yes, please, contributions are welcome!
Your point, it seemed to me, was that a judge's decision would trump the blockchain's. My point was that a judge might decide (a) that he has no say, or (b) that what the blockchain says goes. In either case, the law would effectively trump nothing.

If that proves your point, I suppose we might just as well say that the legal system is pointless, because physics gets a say, and what physics says goes—nevermind that the law does not purport to overrule physics.

In the same way that physics does not make law irrelevant, the law does not necessarily make the blockchain irrelevant: the law could well recognize the authority of the blockchain. Call it the compatibilist argument.
I think the world would be a much better place if we compromised so that US moves to SI and rest of the world gets rid of the decimal comma and starts to use the decimal point.

And as an icing to the cake, everyone could switch to ISO 8601 date formatting everywhere.