skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I would love to buy someone's side project if there is negligible work to maintain it (although then why would you sell it). But still if someone just wants something off their plate.
"And they know what NB means" ;-)
I'd be happy if their was just a decent linter for all configuration files. My test process right now is to spin up a vm and test something like an nginx reload or an ansible-playbook, then if it passes apply it to a distributed testing environment and then if it passes consider applying it to production.

This seems crazy to me when intelli-sense for many languages can seemingly read my mind but configuration is in many ways still a trial and error process..

Does anyone know of ways to parse many of the common configuration file formats? From linting to code completion to best practice (or worst practice) checks. IF not and somebody wants my money yesterday, theirs your startup.
New forum design that's quickly gaining traction
"I've spent the night reading Tandem tech reports and manuals."

Wow. Great, detailed write-up from a night. I've been waiting for one like this. You should look at the links to the hardware in the Tandem or NonStop wikipedia articles, though, as the tradeoffs made and techniques used were sometimes interesting.

" instead, it has to do with process naming, sequence numbers, and copying around memory space images between process pairs running on separate "CPUs", so that if one of them fails, the other one can pick up from the last checkpoint."

A bit reminiscient of the cache-coherence & other memory protocols in NUMA machines. Just for availability as much as scaling.

" they had a 300ms heartbeat from the beginning."

Costs money but works. :)

" I can find no trace of Alpha, PA-RISC, or i386. Also, I don't think the issue there was acquisitions;"

It's in the Wikipedia article along with some of those hardware details I referenced above:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tandem_Computers

They got acquired by DEC. Half-way through Itanium port, idiots in management forced them to switch it to Alpha. Then Compaq killed Alpha itself. Later, Intel started killing Itanium. NonStop ran into bad management and bad luck. I see no PA-RISC or vanilla x86. Actually, Itanium was a joint venture between Intel and HP to replace x86 and PA-RISC with something having benefits of both plus experimental stuff. Porting it to PA-RISC instead of Itanium would be downgrade.

"They claimed from the beginning that their hardware cost was comparable to competitors, but maybe they were lying."

IBM's prices are so inlfated that many mainframes competed on price. I read before Fujitsu's were 50-75% as cheap. Far as NonStop, it's around $120,000-$2.7million. Quotes I heard on IBM mainframes were much higher esp on high end.

http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/tandem-comp...
But that's the thing with AI. We make the context. In the case of AlphaGo, IBM's Watson, Self driving cars, we set the goal. There are different heuristics, but we always need to define what is "right" or what the "goal" is.

For AI to determine their own goals, well now you get into awareness ... consciousness. At a fundamental mathematical level, we still have no idea how these work.

We can see electrical signals in the brain using tools and know it's a combination of chemicals and pulses that somehow make us do what we do ... but we are still a long way from understanding how that process really works.
We started off nice: "Hey, you are disabling ads, please turn them on" etc. Then we offered an ad-free subscription (almost worthless). And I think we played with another idea or two, before finally going through with the blocking adblockers.
This is not sufficient. One known vector is to emulate a USB network device that provides a nameserver via DHCP, but no default route,allowing the attacker to MitM chosen connections. And of course you have a plethora of different USB device types with default drivers that probably contain exploitable bugs.
You could have clarified my point, yet chose to go in the other direction. Interesting. I'm curious why you interact with the world in this way.
People would probably stop embeding tweets if they had ads; unlike youtube, you can just take a screenshot of a tweet and insert it into your article.
Hmmm ... aren't there little stick sized computers (not the HDMI ones for media centers) that could be the brains of this and plug directly into the USB port without a cable/dongle ?

I would be very interested in that - a fully functional laptop whose brains are the size of a quarter or a pack of gum ...

Comments ?

EDIT: ahh, I see your picture of this running off of a pc stick: http://imgur.com/a/eTbtm that is very, very interesting.

However, the intel compute sticks male plug ("the plug") is HDMI ... are there any compute sticks like this whose plug is male USB and could be connected without a cable/dongle/adaptor ?
You don't need to break the strong encryption, when you can break the kneecaps of people using strong encryption.
What happens when you turn it off? Does that mean your child can say anything and receive anything from another user? Or is the incoming chat still filtered?
There is a weird belief-system in the ethereum/DAO chatter that I can't quite place my finger on. Not even sure if "libertarian" covers it.

I've heard it said that these folks are a form social-darwinists who have decreed (in their sandbox) that "code is law" and that, as such, any and all manipulation of the working code is perfectly acceptable without regard to external factors such as ethics, intent, and reasonable behavioral mores.

Its like they've taken the WORST aspects of the real financial systems such as money begetting money, rampant speculation, intractably complex and arbitrary rules, etc and jacked it up to the Nth degree for their monopoly-money world and are now taking it dead seriously (and getting offended when people suggest that their "coins" aren't _really_ worth what they think they're worth-- because, yep, conversion to REAL money is a problem for them).

I like the concept of a crypto currency as a way to exchange goods, services (and possibly contracts), but the players thus far leave me completely turned off.
Except, the safe in your house can be cracked on a judge's order. Your encrypted machine, on the other hand, does not listen to judges.

Ergo, the FBI-unlocking-dead-guy's-iPhone thing, and the key-disclosure thing.
Wow! This is super-nerdy! Love it.
I have often wondered whether the reason why 'AI' has struggled with human language is because most programs are not embodied. If you cannot jump when you hear the word joy, and cannot cry when you hear the word death and feel the other sensations that go with them, you cannot truly understand the word. The lack of additional visual cues and context will continue to severely hamper the ability for machines to correctly understand the semantics of human language. I know the language guys like to work with their strings of characters, but humans can only communicate with those because we have already built our semantic framework by being active agents in the world.
> Ah, hardcore libertarians. You're all completely mad, but I won't deny you're consistent.

The key point is that while laws may be minimally, moderately, or highly flawed, the rule of law is the idea that we should have a proper way of changing them to prevent future events, not just decree one person an evil hacker and a group of other people victims.

The hard fork is like if a no parking sign was installed on a street and tickets were issued to everyone who had parked there the previous year, before the sign was in place.

Putting up the sign is not a problem, nor is enforcing the rule post-sign, the problem is making a decree that impacts what happened in the past.

A ban on ex post facto law is such a core concept in Western civilization that it's pretty shocking anyone would actually think such a rule is a good idea.

I suppose one thing that is a universal among humans is the strong desire to form corrupt groups to extract wealth from human systems.
It's important to remember that Facebook usage is entirely optional. I won't miss it when I get fed up and leave.
Yeah. If you don't hurry up to change the world, then the world changes you.

http://www.sylvialiuland.com/2012/01/mafalda-classic-cartoon...
Thanks. This is an interesting approach to get the needed.
Probably, thanks to Greg Law's talk which featured here on HN, which I linked to in the post.

But this is often the case with Linux kernel and GNU tool features: they don't appear to have any marketing or sales professionals telling everyone about new features (unlike commercial offerings), which leaves us with many "hidden gems" (as people would say) in Linux + GNU. ftrace is another example.
Beer and wine are available in NH from supermarkets.
I am using Joylent for 4 months now, for breakfast and sometimes dinner. I had no problem so far.
Giving a third party access to my email makes me uneasy.
Plus marking spam in gmail now also gives you an option (though not always) to unsubscribe from the link too.
Building fast.com
Yes, math is not like gravity and can be overturned by legislation. Really now?
Clickable link: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/andromium/the-superbook...
Good idea in theory but not sure how it pans out in practice. Defining the wrong place would require some configuration would could as easily be mis-configured.

Abstracting the problem to another layer isn't always the answer.
I do not follow.

The fourth amendment establishes that "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated"

Roe v Wade literally invented the legal right to privacy in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade#Right_to_privacy
Thanks, I'll add it to the article.
I was stickin' to Python :)

That's a cool alternative though, thanks.
Personally, I felt that the omission was rather important. When the first year's worth of many statistics programs can be condensed into one beautiful theorem, which is centuries old, I feel it's disrespectful to one's forebears to ignore it.

However, I get the impression that once the meme sensor goes off, any links remain unvisited and reading comprehension may suffer. So I learned something here, too.

I'd edit the original to remove the meme, but since I can't do that at this point, readers will have to try and control their Internet Police tendencies and read a few sentences.

Or not. Rather a shame, hopefully the author of the piece will fix it and this will all be superfluous.
> Myers-Briggs

That's pseudoscience at its best.
Looks like a good take. Your readme would benefit from an example of what luxem looks like, ideally the first thing I'd see, below a short tagline, rather than having to read a lot of text and try to picture what you're describing.
a) I don't want to comment on that intercept piece because there is clear bias there and I don't have all the facts.

b) I think actually the FBI is mainly talking about the defaults in software, like how Apple enabled strong encryption for any user. Defaults matter when you consider the 95% of people who would not otherwise use encryption, including all kinds of criminals. I think everyone realizes you can't remove encryption from the face of the earth, it's just not doable and not worthy of discussion and that's not what I'm talking about. The FBI is doing this because they try to reverse the Apple defaults and don't really have any other way. The next step is to "have the debate" but as we can see that is incredibly difficult.

Regarding your last point. Sure, that's one way to talk about it, but if it is the case that it's all about power, then why do we even have governments? All the trust is broken and we are essentially asking to be left alone to solve crimes that happen in our neighborhoods. The government and the FBI / others are supposed to work FOR us, for society as a whole, based on the laws we vote for/lobby for. They aren't meant to have their own will and goals like "power". Only private corporations and individuals want power, that's what the whole point of this government thing was in the first place.
San Jose's Google Fiber rollout is delayed to explores alternatives
How to Grid Search Hyperparameters for Deep Learning Models in Python with Keras
Apple, as do countless other companies, also store personal data and use it for personal gain.
Fake QR code app gets hacker into luxury airport lounges for free
The Decision Memorandum
Depending on how you choose to play it, Papers Please can be that game.
RAF helicopter fire on Snowdonia peak after technical issue
10+ Best Free Google Amp Wordpress Plugins
...and that's how we prove that white-light holograms aren't holograms. (Credit-card holograms function just like scratch-holograms, and their 3D image is not created via diffraction.)

[Are these REALLY holograms?](http://amasci.com/amateur/holo3.html)
The ETH camp still defends the "code is law" principle. The point in which ETH and ETC proponents differ is how that principle should be prioritized relative to "the majority is always right" principle.
Beyond Bitcoin – Part II: Blockchain-based systems without mining [pdf]
> What did people agree to when they committed to letting these words on a page curtail their democratic prerogatives?

This is a strong point, and probably the best I have heard it put.
If you have nginx installed, you can test nginx configurations like so:
$ nginx -t -c <configuration file>
Isn't DNS cached at some level on the users machines such that if a particular hostname went down clients which cached that hostname will still be directed to it?

FWIW I'm making it a thing today to read up on DNS as this post made me woefully aware of how little I understand it. So feel free to skip this question and I'll probably answer it myself tonight.
> Deep learning has succeeded tremendously with perception in domains that tolerate lots of noise (audio/visual). Will those successes continue with perception in domains that are not noisy (language)

I wonder if it's just a different kind of "noise". Higher level, more structured.

> My guess is we may need a fundamental breakthrough in a newfangled hierarchical learning system that is better suited for language to “solve” NLP.

It seems fairly evident that there are many hierarchies inside the brain, each level working with outputs from lower-level processing units. In a sense, something like AlphaGo is hierarchy-poor - it has a few networks loosely correlated with a decision mechanism.

But the brain probably implements a "networks upon networks" model, that may also include hierarchical loops and other types of feedback.

I think, to have truly human level NLP, we'd have to simulate reasonably close the whole hierarchy of meaning, which in turn is given by the whole hierarchy of neural aggregates.
But more money is always better - if you don't need it, donate it to an animal shelter or something.

What do you think happens to money that you leave on the table? Someone else takes it, and they might spend it less responsibly than you would. So if it's there take it and then at least you can control it.
While people didn't want to put it in our post, I like describing this as "5 cores for the price of 1". Myself and a great team of other folks have worked a lot over the last year to improve utilization, produce a more predictable behavior and tune the system to refund people as much as possible (if we shoot you early on, you've lost the least amount of work and we don't bill you for it).
Okay: Will you opensource you app?

On a related note, will you have a well-defined API for other apps to have first-class support for this thing?

I think that's everything... ooh! ooh! No it isn't!

You said that the superbook would be suitable for coding. so will you provide any of:

1: A terminal emulator

2: An X Server

3: Emacs

Thank you for your time.
Summer reading suggestions from scientist Harold Varmus
No one would ever imagine that locking a baby in a featureless room with a giant stack of books would give them general intelligence. I don't understand why AI researchers think it will work for AIs. They need bodies that are biologically connected with the rest of the biosphere, with an intrinsic biological imperative, if they are ever to understand the world. I'm not saying they have to be exactly like us, but they will only be able to understand us to the extent that they have body parts and social experiences that are analogous to ours.

This isn't an engineering problem, it's a philosophical problem: We are blind to most things. We can only see what we can relate to personally. We can use language and other symbol systems to expand our understanding by permuting and recombining our personal experiences, but everything is grounded in our interactive developmental trajectory.

The kitten-in-a-cart experiment demonstrates this clearly: http://io9.gizmodo.com/the-seriously-creepy-two-kitten-exper... Interaction is crucial for perception. Sensation is not experience.

And here's the rub: Once you give an AI an animal-like personal developmental trajectory to use for grounding the semantics of their symbol systems, you end up with something which is not particularly different or better than a human cyborg.
This is the sort of project where it might be better to gauge interest with a small prototype than a question. I mean at first blush it sounds interesting. But then I realized that almost all of the black and white prints I have were deliberately shot in black and white. So I realized that my primary interest would be in passing intellectual curiosity to see the results of the algorithm and not so much as a service I would use to accomplish some other purpose.

Good luck.
It's not about spoon-feeding, it's about civil procedure.

Unlike criminal procedure, where the court has an obligation and will discover evidence and other facts pertaining to the alleged crime sua sponte, in civil cases the court MUST NOT discover evidence by itself.

For example, an acquaintance of mine who was a judge at the time, told me about one of the cases he presided on, where the statute of limitations on the claim had long run out. But the defendant's [edit: correction] lawyer hadn't noticed it.

He went so far as to inquire several times when exactly the action had been (including nudges like "that was 2001, we have 2016 now, so it's been about fifteen years"), and even that was very much borderline.

The lawyer didn't realize that he only had to mutter the words "statute of limitations" and the case would have been thrown out seconds later, and so the plaintiff won.
Typically, with round robin DNS, the browser will try the other records if one fails. Its not perfect, but its good enough.

In a perfect world, you use short TTLs (30-60 seconds), and withdraw a record from being advertised as soon as your health checks are failing for it.
If you work with a particular technology than start a blog and start getting your name out there on things like Stackoverflow and Github. Once you start engaging in the community you will be surprised how many inquiries you will get. Once you have a couple of jobs, try use those relationships to get more jobs. Referrals and word of mouth are invaluable.
I'm not defending apple, I'm just saying we don't know what they collect, or how they use it. Google clearly has a business model that relies on gathering the most data and using it.
Quote from the FB newsroom post:

> When we asked people about why they used ad blocking software, the primary reason we heard was to stop annoying, disruptive ads.

The ads on FB are annoying and are disrupting regardless of how well targeted they are. Unless FB decides to completely change the advertising market and allow only a handful of nicer brands and ads (along with the drastic reduction in the amount of money it can make), nobody is going to believe that the ads are anything but annoying, intrusive and disruptive.

I'd be really interested in knowing how many Facebook employees use the platform from a desktop browser and resort to ad blockers to have a better experience. :)
> I have a pet theory that the discovery of sharp features and boolean programs might heavily rely on noise. If the error surface becomes too discrete, we basically need to backup to pure random optimization (i.e. trying any direction by random chance and keep it, if it is better). That allows us to skip down the energy surface even without the presence of a gradient.

Isn't that basically Monte Carlo?
I think you are missing the point. If the code isn't the law, then what is?

The beauty of a "code is law" system is that its behavior is not subject to human interpretation and human biases... we can run a simulation on a test instance of the VM to test whatever scenario we choose, and we may review code and decide whether or not to trust it.

Systems like this are inherently adversarial. The idea of a "code is law" sort of system is that code could be developed to deal with the myriad adversarial situations in far more efficient and predictable ways than the way humans have historically dealt with them.

Legal uncertainty is a transaction cost and an existential risk in all contracts. In order for Ethereum to avoid this added cost, it would reduce the unpredictability of a contract's outcome. If a hard fork might happen to nullify a transaction, then anyone who is expecting to depend on it must add some uncertainty to his/her portfolio.

There there would still be risk of code bugs in a code-is-law system, but over time contract code would be discovered to be trustworthy in the same way that apache's source code is considered largely to be devoid of major security holes.
If I'm going to build a giant greenhouse in Oklahoma, it's going to need to be weather resistant. A slack covering over a grid of 10-foot-tall supports won't work. If you consider the cost of structural supports will likely dwarf the tent covering, different architectures probably make more sense.

I would suggest a half-torus with major radius 0.25mi and minor radius 0.25 mi. The structural shell would be a tensegrity grid, with the covering affixed over it. That's 790 acres of covering over 502 acres of land. You're going to need a lot of steel cable, and a few truckloads of rigid 50' pipes. You will also need at least two types of pipe-to-cable junction.

Sprinklers under the apex ring (0.25mi above the ground) could easily irrigate the covered area from a fixed position, without rotating, and condensers above the apex ring could recycle water out of humid exhaust air and feed it right back into the sprinklers. There would be no moving parts at all, other than in the groundwater pump and sprinkler heads. You have one ring-shaped pipe (a gutter could work, if the sprinkler heads don't require pressure to operate) to supply the sprinklers that is 1.57mi long, and one pipe from ground to apex ring 0.39mi long.

But with center-pivot, you only need a well pump, 0.5mi of pipe, A-frame supports, and wheels. But then you lose water to evaporation and transpiration. So I think giant greenhouses could not appear until the aquifer dries up, and water costs skyrocket. Even then, I'm not sure it wouldn't be better to just put a bunch of mirrors and a collector tower up, and transmit the solar energy to a vertical farm that is closer to a cheaper, more reliable water source.