skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The game consists of 2 mechanics:
1) Collect everything
2) Battle gyms for arbitrary cred

at the moment, both oppose each other because the maps people make to make #1 easier, make it easier for a subset of people to dominate #2 easier. By removing the maps that make #2 so unbalanced, #1 becomes a repetitive chore.

There's literally nothing more to the game than those two mechanics. There's no end goal like the other pokemon games. There's no higher goal to work towards from capturing gyms and holding areas.

It's no surprise that the game is dying. Either you collect the 80% that are easy to find and then it just becomes a huge chore without the necessary tools to find the last 20%, or you powerlevel up to fight in gyms for a bit and then... what exactly?

Niantic should've taken another 3-6 months of heavy dev time to really polish it and add more depth to it. Create a higher purpose for holding gyms. Create a more compelling search mechanism that doesn't allow maps but then doesn't make the last 20% of the search such a huge, completely random-chance chore.

There needs to be more to the game than those two mechanics and every moment it's released but there's not, it just withers. No amount of patching in an IV% calculator by visiting your 'trainer' will help that, because it still just relies on those two very broken pillars.
Have you checked out my codeless github package?
I've been pondering a similar idea. It is more about optimization and failure tolerance.

Highly optimized systems are great, until they aren't. F1 race cars are notoriously touchy and require a team of specialists to keep running, while a 1950's pickup truck I happen to know of may be slow, uncomfortable and horribly polluting, but has been in operation for pushing 70 years and is currently maintained by a single person who doesn't have to do much to it.

Just in time inventory control is great for margins, until, for instance, the bulk of the hard drive production capacity in the world is flooded.

Optimization and resilience frequently sit in tension, if not outright opposition.
I've got two questions:

- Has there been any consulting with Marco about this acquisition? It being his brainchild.

- The blog post mentions some concrete ways on how your Instapaper mad skills can/will be used to make Pinterest more useful. In what concrete ways will Instapaper be made more useful and/or stable because of Pinterest?

Myself, I'm concerned. I've found Pinterest to be user-hostile in a way that seems opposite to the Instapaper philosophy: it's naggy (notification-wise for starters) and aimed at hooking me into their ecosystem. It's in-your-face instead of hands-off.

Edit: added a question, and also I'd be remiss not to use this opportunity to thank you for the great service! It's the only 'bookmarking' service I use, after many years of trying many sorts.
This is something of a nitpick, but they really ought to refer to it as a nuclear bunker, not a fallout shelter. A fallout shelter is just something that can shield people from fallout radiation. You need thickish walls but nothing too special. Some places in the US you can still see the "fallout shelter" sign on schools and such. However, it doesn't offer much protection from a nuclear blast. The intent is that the survivors of a near miss would stay in fallout shelters for a few days after the explosion to wait out the worst of the radiation.

It sounds like this thing is a purpose-built bunker built to withstand a nuclear explosion, so much more robust than the title would imply, at least to me.
One of my favorite ACM papers was an analysis on how the asymptotic runtime behaviors of various sort algorithms didn't tell the full story, and that the faster algorithms took a pretty big data set before they even broke even with some of the other sort algorithms. In fact I think at even 10,000 records it was still about 30% slower than a 'worse' algorithm and you had to get up to sorting a considerable amount of data before it was 'best'.

I don't know about you, but I don't sort 100k records in a single batch, and if I am it's because I messed up. But I might sort different batches of 100 records 1000 times a minute.
Every "Learn More" button on the homepage goes to Google Cloud :/
If the alt text contains the data then all you've done is make life slightly inconvenient for scrapers.
Writing a C interpreter isn't that bad, especially considering you can co-opt Clang's frontend and use it to do all the syntax and semantic analysis.
To be fair, many companies which take anti-scraping seriously will also take inputs like geographic origin of a request into consideration when applying request throttling and filtering.
I was surprised to not see Scrapy listed, but then I saw there were some comments about it - but seriously, doing by hand what Scrapy has spent years perfecting is highly suboptimal.

I guess the distinction is between whether one wants to just "toy around" or run the spider for-real.
Get a good espresso machine. Then get hooked on caffeine. Then wake up looking forward to your first hit of the day. Before you know it, you're getting shit done.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12340222
Despite your opinions hundreds of millions of people are being entertained by free to play games right at this moment. Most of them for free. Braid was a good puzzle game but its reach is tiny in comparison. You can blame it on abusing psychology or marketing dollars, or you can meet and talk with the people that play and enjoy these games every day.
The high end cars have only been "profitable" recently. If you taken into account R&D and the production build up, the model s still in debt.
I really recommend the video in the article for anyone that wants to learn about some V8 internals, how they got to this point, and where it is headed.

They are replacing 3 JITs with an interpreter and a JIT which should improve speed, memory usage, and allow them to add new features faster, but the climb to that point really looks like a tough one.

Watching that talk it really sounds like they painted themselves into a corner with the complexity of fullcodegen, crankshaft, and turbofan. And the path they are taking out is really interesting. By introducing ignition they are adding on MORE complexity, but eventually when turbofan is well rounded enough and ignition is battle tested and improved, they are planning to drop fullcodegen and crankshaft and hook ignition straight to turboshaft making everything simpler, and hopefully faster!
That's a terrible analogy. Your home is private, websites are not. The fact is that websites are posted online for all to see, so it's more like saying certain people at a park may take pictures while others are not allowed. That's unfair. If everyone could take pictures, it would be fair. Yes, someone with an old bright bulb camera might be annoying people, but nobody said "fair" meant all players would be nice or that having a "fair" policy would somehow be more beneficial to the website owner. It's not, that's why site owners are selective. So they have a double standard, but it's for their benefit, not that of the site visitors (be they human or bot).
The biggest gains of JIT is that you can use knowledge gained at runtime to generate specialized code and skip lots of the runtime checks that are typical of dynamic languages. You can't get rid of these checks if you compile the source language to C so from this point of view compiling to C is going to be just as slow as writing a traditional interpreter in C.
Except that individuals do have a lot of power in academia. Gross's papers will be published because he is who he is. The papers of the unknown kid who comes up with a better explanation will not get published because they disagree with the establishment, even though the establishment know they're probably wrong.

I'm not involved, but it seems to me a more intellectually honest approach would be to start actively helping the unknown kids with weird but plausible explanations get some attention.

I'd have more respect for academia if it could collectively say "OK, super-symmetry didn't pan out. Who's got a better idea?" and start looking at the weird ideas. One of those weird ideas is going to be the next orthodoxy.
I don't think breaking down someone's reply into bite sized snippets and responding to each out of context is a great way to do a rebuttal. Anyway,

'No one gets to bend the rules of a game' is the basic principle of fair play and sportsmanship. You dont have time so you want to circumvent progress quicker because you enjoy it more is not within the bounds of fair play.

The GPS spoofing is certainly bending the rules, but the game allowed you to do that without penalty. Ask most players though and they will say it's unfair as it's a shortcut to success. Now that Niantic has come down on those GPS hacks, do I feel sorry for those people caught out, of course not.

The maps issue is no different. It's like an athlete complaining that his favourite performance enhancing drug has recently be banned, well forgive me if I don't leap to his defence.

Its not like the game is unforgiving to new players, it's very easy to level up in early stages and make good progress.
Wish this article was not paywalled.

I believe I am "ADD" (not hyperactive) myself, and so is my 8 year old daughter, at least so far.

But I do not want her to get that label, and for the school system to label her that way, because the last thing I want is for them to demand that we medicate her.

When we are talking 5% or 10% of the population, from my perspective "disorder" starts being the wrong word to use. That is a significant enough of a percentage of the population that the classroom/workplace should adjust to _them_ not the other way around.

Somehow I've made that happen for my own life, with a lot of frustration. I just need to figure out how to make it work for my daughter.
Harvard's Bauhaus Collection
I agree that Googlebot is well behaved. When it detects your site is slowing down, it will back itself off. Unfortunately, this is often to your detriment.

In my experience, on a large site, Google will often slurp as much as you let it, upwards of hundreds of pages per second.
This was the problem with Niantic's earlier game Ingress. It was fun to play while levelling up, which masked some of the repetitive nature of the game, but once you reached the highest level, there was nothing else to do except keep doing what you were already doing.

The problem with all of these kinds of games (MMOs in particular) is that people consume content far faster than it can be created. It's quite difficult to create self-sustaining content.
It's not a few days a year in one room. Geothermal maintains a stable temperature throughout the year so it reduces the need for AC in summer and heating in the winter. While it doesn't do the whole job, it does enough that you can reduce your power needs significantly. As for break even, it does, when you consider the whole picture. Additionally, if you don't take on environmental needs as your own personal cause, then how can you expect others to.

Be the change you want to see in the world.
If you skip the P2P aspect of those networks, I'm not sure how much it really differs from distributing HTTP traffic over multiple domain names with possible anycast on IPs. You even get an automatic DNS split per region. What's the reason to go with IPFS / BT for distribution from only the endpoints that you control on the internet? (I do see good reasons for it in private networks)

Yes, it is non-trivial to setup, but if you need it, then automating this part may be more trivial than getting clients to switch to a new protocol.
That is very true.
The marriage of Microsoft and Linux
I'm always intrigued by any new development in the "serverless" space, but this website seems pretty undercooked and at the moment it doesn't do a good job of explaining what the heck OpenLambda actually is.

After a lot of poking around I read through the linked slides and discovered that OpenLambda aims to let anyone run their own lambda engine - i.e. run AWS Lambda on your local machine. The goal seems to be to let anyone research and innovate on serverless architectures, instead of just waiting to see what Amazon, Google, or Microsoft release. It doesn't really seem to be intended for production use, more just R&D. It also seems to be a student/educational project (?)

The "onboarding" meeting slides (found under the "Development" tab) give a decent overview of what the project is all about - http://www.open-lambda.org/resources/slides/ol-first-meeting...
Startup wages war on the $19b wasted each year on overpriced plane tickets
Weow, excellaent reply budday.
IBM is also doing opensource work [0] on this.

[0] https://github.com/openwhisk/openwhisk
The result is that when you iterate over contiguous memory, you can access it about as fast as the CPU can operate, because you will be streaming chunks of data into the L1 cache.

This is not true at all. You'll be able to access it about as fast as the memory can operate - it'll still be much faster than randomly chasing pointers all over the place - but the maximum processing speed of the CPU is an order of magnitude greater than that again.
Hell, let's go a step farther. If your software engineering begins and ends with jargon, you're likely doing a terrible job.

(the business people always pick the worse solution that sounds better unless you can explain why they should care, in english, meant for normal human beings, without sounding condescending about it)
It's not a simple rerouting of a packet. It's a complete L5 decode/proxy/recode, inherently supporting only a few protocols. Putting this kind of functionality into the network is exactly what the end to end principle was reacting against.
> "I have yet to encounter anyone who bemoaned 'political correctness' who were not in fact simply concerned about losing the privilege they have to treat other people poorly without feeling the guilt they should be feeling for treating other people poorly."

> As to the research itself, any self-respecting scientific study of gender's influence on anything needs to start with "Step One: in order to obtain a reasonable comparison, we need to dismantle the Patriarchy."

> This person's opinions are indeed tainted by the (objective) fact that xie is literally a sexist baboon with brains the size of a small, frozen pea.

Poe's Law applies here, because I honestly can't tell if you're serious or trolling.
Uh no. It doesn't disappear because it was caught.
The case you're referring to is an entirely different set of circumstances. From the text:

"The panel held that the defendant, a former employee
whose computer access credentials were revoked, acted
“without authorization” in violation of the CFAA when he or his former employee co-conspirators used the login
credentials of a current employee to gain access to computer data owned by the former employer and to circumvent the revocation of access. "

I think that case is unambiguous - this guy was using someone else's credentials to access secured systems after having been explicitly told that he could not. I was referring to the MySpace case.

I don't think these two cases are in conflict; IMO they are very different. Additionally, for our purposes in this comment thread, we're talking about scraping of publicly available websites by outside parties, not by former employees whose access has been explicitly revoked. That is different than either of these cases.
This would be better than the "just-in-case" trope research I've been doing via piles and piles of books.
am in my early 40's and didn't experience ageism so far. yeah, it's pretty much a silicon valley thing
Twitter Makes Total Sense If You Understand It Properly
>Integers are not monoids. As I stated in GP, the combination (Integer, +, 0) defines a monoid

This is simply being pedantic. We're all well aware of the meaning of what I said, as it is how it is almost always said.

>Both of these approaches are workarounds for the problem that typeclass instances

That's not a problem, it is the point. That is what typeclasses were intended to be.
"The good news about computers is that they do what you tell them to do. The bad news is that they do what you tell them to do."

Short of super-intelligent general AI writing programs for us yadda yadda, I believe the answer will be to adopt formal methods more widely: Bake the intended semantics of your software with regards to some formal system into the program itself and have it only be valid if you or the computer can prove that it meets that specification (and have the specification be complete and correct of course (which can be difficult when you consider what e.g. cryptographic strength or "real-time properties" actually mean); if proof is not feasible, add in checks that make it fail gracefully at least or generate tests).

Where today the "engineering mindset" is more prevalent (Look, I can do things with it! And it does them correctly I hope.), there needs to be a shift to a more mathematical view on computation (Your program is an instance of a certain calculus and claiming to fulfill a formal specification, which needs proof), if the software complexity mentioned is to be managed better (there's a whole zoo of specification techniques and low-level formal systems available, which doesn't make this any easier).

Unfortunately support for any of this is severely lacking in popular tools (yes, there's a lot going on in academia, but I don't feel this has spilled over yet): Languages lacking a formal spec and changing frequently, compilers not proven correct, programs running on buggy processors, operating systems with unclear semantics, written in (from a type-system PoV) weakly-expressive languages using meaningless types (void, ugh), black-box peripherals. In that light I'm amazed my computer does anything at all, but clearly most of the time these things don't matter.

Then again, I'm not aware of a fully-featured and usable (comparatively to today's personal computers) formally-specified (whatever this would mean here, surely there's more than one way to define an OS for instance) and proven computing system that goes from high-level language to operating system and application ecosystem to whatever machinery is used at the bottom.

Coq and co. to the rescue (see e.g. http://compcert.inria.fr/)?
Several principles suggest not. The Jevons Paradox, White's Law (after Leslie White), and the Darwin-Lotka Power Law.

These seem to reflect strong underlying tendencies of complex evolving systems. In particular that higher levels of organisation and complexity very powerfully tied to greater rates of energy and resource use, overall if not individually.

If humans manage to defeat this tendency it would be a singular exception.
Oh yes, it works now. It was probably HN's hug of death.
It's not minimalistic in its capabilities or implementation, but it's minimalistic in its interface. Its a tool that emulates various hardware, and provides a CLI interface that's no more complex than necessary to operate its conceptually narrow functionality.
I've done quite a lot of C/C++ work. In my experience, getting JS up and running is more exhausting. You might have webpack running, which runs babel, and sass, and a few hundred node processes. It's just bloody insane today. And none of it plays nice at all.
FINALLY!!!!!
Media.net acquired for $900m in mega adtech deal
>I wasn't under the impression we should be limiting this to frameworks

The discussion is entirely and solely about frameworks..

>What's the difference between a framework and a library for the purpose of this discussion?

Wikipedia exists.

>See above

Above what? Nothing you said above answers my question.

>And I've been sticking with the same examples since the first comment. Why is this all of a sudden not making sense?

Because it has absolutely nothing to do with anything I said, like I clearly stated.
can you try it in julia?
I'd sleep a few minutes later :)
https://www.google.no/search?q=sunrise+for+trondheim+norway+...
Take a look at: https://gist.github.com/javiertury/bf71d37ff26643eca939c6642...

I've tried my best to illustrate why this is the correct solution in the url above.

Long story short:

Call S to the sum of all the numbers on the hats of every player. The sum of all the numbers a player can see will be less than S but the difference with S will be less than "n - 1". Also the difference between the largest guess(for the sum of all the hats) and S won't be larger than "n - 1".

There is now a problem, we want a set of guesses with a size no larger than "n" but in reality it can be as large as size "2(n - 1) + 1 = 2n - 1". Taking the set of possible rational guesses modulo "n" creates a collision, now some guesses will share the same remainder modulo n. However because no guess can be farther than "n - 1" with respect to S, the set of guesses modulo "n" won't create that collision for "S mod n". Any player that was told to make the remainder of the total sum mod n equal to "S mod n" will always have the correct answer.

If you want to think visually imagine the modular clock for "n" which has "S mod n" as the reference point. Because no other point can't be farther apart than "n - 1" distance from S, only S can give the remainder "S mod n". If there are "n" players and we assign each one a different remainder "mod n", one of them will have the correct answer for sure.
I'm very much in the early morning camp too. Most days I'm up at 3 or 4 to get through personal items, at the gym (a short walk) by 5, and am home and ready to cook breakfast for the family by 6:30. Getting up early is the only way to clear the deck for things I need to do.

This has come at a cost.

- I need to get 6 hours sleep, so a 3-4am wakeup requires a 9-10pm bedtime. If I don't plan for this, the worst thing happens, which is 2 hours of alarms as I don't get out of bed until 7.

- I can't survive after a drinking binge. No more than 2 or 3 drinks the night before, and ideally 0.

- It doesn't always jive with family who are night owls.

This isn't how I lived in my 20s, but it works for me now. In my 20s there was still a decent chance of good things happening at 1am. Now there is rarely anything that happens from 10pm to 1am that I miss. :-)
Lets add more classes that all inherit from each other!

Can't do that in Go.
I would do the same thing if I didn't have kids. With kids my time, sleep, and work schedules all have to be aligned to theirs.
Eight Levels of Communication Maturity
>In OCaml and ML, Functors represent parameterized modules

No, functors represent functions from a module to a module. Oh hey, that sounds just like the standard definition of a functor. As I said, the behavior is different because the languages are different, but both are named after the category theory functor, because they both emulate it.
Both of these are awesome. More so Zen mind.
I noticed something similar. A few years ago I tried for a few weeks to be in bed early and get up early. The result was that a) I had more trouble falling asleep because the world around me was a lot more active, b) I wouldn't actually be productive earlier than I would had I gotten up at a "normal" time, and c) I would feel miserable starting some time in the afternoon.

When I go to bed late and wake up late, however, there is no such "miserable" time period.

That said, if I go to bed later than 2-3AM, I'll feel tired the next day.
I see what you mean but that's partially true but not entirely correct. Yes maps were not part of the original design but neither was the current system. You see The beta users had a very good indication where Pokemon were. In fact they had a superior system to even the 3 step tracking. They had the distance away from a Pokemon displayed in METRES! That would have been amazing. So the audience Niantic designed and "playability tested" didn't have the piece of crap tracking we have today. Who needs a map if u got descent tracking. Dude WAKE UP from your delusion it had nothing to do with design and targeted audience. It was all about saving BAND WIDTH.