skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I left Android because I use it mostly while driving by plugging from the headphone jack to the input on the radio. This prompts Android to turn the volume down to a level that is too low even with the radio volume cranked. If Android would stop doing that, I'd ditch my iPhone in a heartbeat.
Started to build UI for Quartz Scheduler but never had time to finish it. You can see general idea at http://www.quartzdashboard.com/

i think its ready to get adopted :)
Interesting. Generally, it's the man that gets raked over the coals and every cent in his pocket vacuumed out, restraining orders taken out, family court, loss of access to children, etc, etc, ad nauseum.
That's a little scary if that is what happens. (The article suggests May will enact article 50 in Jan without significant trade concessions from the EU). Maybe time to sell up and short the FTSE.
> DRAM or PCIe

Well, that's also a better example for my point. the sppeds they achieve require some research
I need money to validate my product, and a validated product to raise money
Other than bootstrapping and begging family members for cash, what are some funding hacks I can do to grow my company?
What point are you trying to get at here? Every stupid thing that a drug can make you do has also been done by someone sober at some point.
I thought Apple was the one company pretty good at it because of their support for Bluetooth -- recently I was able to download pictures off of one of the old flip-phones (a really old phone) to my Macbook Air just using Bluetooth connectivity. I think the first scenario of the OP could've been accomplished using Bluetooth connectivity.
I can't even begin to imagine your pain. It's inadequate, but I'm so sorry for your loss.
Tor Onion Services as Anti-DDoS Protection
I read some into this and could certainly be wrong:

The possessor is determined by the gun being found by local law enforcement finding an individual, A, in posession of the gun in question.

A trace request is submitted. The gun (in police custody after being found in A's possession) is associated with a form 4473. That 4473 is found, and the original purchaser is indicated to be A.

The quotes excerpted in this article seem to be missing a lot of context and to have come from longer discussions that are noted to be emotional in many cases. I am interpreting that quote as part of a longer conversation where the speaker is jumping around a lot.

The whiteboard section clearly indicates that Charlie does not necessarily express his thoughts linearly and in an easy-for-the-author-to-follow manner.
People are so overly sensitive.
It is the events loss.
I agree that those terms are clearly meant in a networking context, where they also have a long history. Interpreting it as slut-shaming seems like somebody who has zero interest or knowledge about technology or networking started listening to talks to try and find something that could be twisted into meaning something sexist.

I would hope that everybody with a genuine interest in technology finds these people ridiculous, and their constant demands to kick people out of things for nonsensical reasons more offense than anything that was supposedly said.
Irrational numbers are also "fundamentally inaccessible" in the exact same (infinite limit) sense that statistical convergence is. It's not a useless concept at all, it's actually the fundamental concept.

What your real world example describes is something different entirely. That's just pragmatically choosing the wrong model due to computational or human tractability. That's not fundamental to statistics, that's just a cheat you made because it's good enough.

Statistics is about acknowledging that cheat and quantifying how much it hurts you; fundamentally such a thing is not possible if truth doesn't exist.
Policeman Spiderman on BLUE BUS and Sportbike
Why are Software Development world has such a naive world view? Why are we not a bit more enlightened about Nation-States and nature of power? I really do not know. As a person who enjoys Geopolitical articles and newsletters, I find HN discussions on Geopolitics range from naive to nauseating.
> This is not punishment, it is a direct consequence of respecting the UK's wishes.

Exactly: I wish both brexiteers and EU citizens disappointed by the UK's decision would actually start understanding this: losing EU's benefits is not punishment, is just a consequence of abandoning the EU.

Getting access to the market is a benefit to a national economy which the EU has made contingent to an essential individual freedom - which is not necessarily beneficial to the economy - namely freedom of movement, because, well, not everything in life is economy.

The UK wants one without the other, and this would first of all damage individual freedoms, and second put the economies which are committed to sustain freedom of movement eventually at a disadvantage. The EU can not allow such a state of a affairs.
> implementations installed by default on every device

That's not a trivial ask. Security experts might wonder, "Wait, what new entry point are you mandating on my devices? To solve which problem?"

They'd caution that several subsets of this problem are already solved, lowering its urgency. You own both devices and have wifi? Dropbox. You have internet access? Email or other messaging services / file lockers. Both devices are the same ecosystem? Bluetooth / AirDrop / WifiDirect / Beam. You are near a gas station or in a house with a junk drawer? $1 USB stick. You didn't forget your cable? Cable. You are both developers? You may already have some arcane solution, depending on the platforms...

So, while it'd be nice to ensure two unacquainted technophobes who meet in the woods have the ability to move some file from one's mp3 player to the other's digital camera, despite never having installed any software or brought any drives or cables to help, we're slicing off thinner and thinner portions of salami here.

Also consider other approaches. More ubiquitous (functioning) internet solves all of the above, along with several other problems.

Absent that, foresight would have prevented a few of the test cases. Foresight isn't trivial, I know, but that opens up other approaches. Like maybe an alarm on a device that rings if the device gets too far away from some other little chip, which you can stick on a cable you want to never forget. A shim to friend and create a temporary shared Dropbox directory with strangers nearby would require advanced installation, but might be useful.

I don't mean to diminish the frustration of these situations. If you were talking about developing some software to help local area sharing, I'd say go for it. But putting the bar at mandatory interconnection in all devices... it's a high bar. The mere fact that legacy devices exist makes it impossible to meet those constraints.

If you relax your constraints just a little, though, I suspect a few opportunities for interesting work open up.
Is knowledge of French required for following this course?
Isn't it ridiculously slow?
This is the dumbest article I've ever read. I feel like this isn't about Crockford, this is about being able to police people.
Here in Oslo I was in a startup where we had a British CEO. He argued about me keeping my pay rise secret. I said there's no such thing. We all know what we earn. It's public.

He was shocked. Then next day decided to tell everyone it was a fireable offence to disclose your salary.

Which we then said. That the action of making it a fireable offence is actually illegal and a fireable offence.

(He quit a number of months later)
I'm not sure what your link is trying to say. Naturalisation in Japan requires giving up your existing passport, and the only privilege it gives you is voting in elections. It also says a slim majority supports increased immigration (while a slim majority in the UK supports reduced immigration).
Has she claimed this anywhere in testimony? The reason I heard given was she needed a way to send emails of a personal nature.

That reason and the one you've given sound like a dodge.

Fact is, if she even tangentially admitted to knowingly transmitting information _marked_ confidential off State networks (which she did), she'd be guilty of multiple crimes and none of her friends could save her. She would be frog-marched off to the hoosegow. Hence, the endless excuses, waving-off, and feigned ignorance.

The drip, drip, drip of damning evidence will continue and to save her skin all she can do is shrug absent-mindedly.
I agree with everything but your final two paragraphs; I suspect that a government-mandated solution would be horrible in all sorts of ways (poor security, a mandated backdoor &c.).

My hope is that the propellerheads in those companies are able to figure out a way to sneak this killer feature past their respective marketing people.
‏ستلايت الكويت 55050048‏
The article makes the case that the county has a large drug-abuse problem, and also that the justice system is responding to this problem with very severe policing/sentencing policies, in a way that severely punishes not just Minority offenders, but also White offenders. In this regard, any one of the 4 spins can be reasonably made, given the facts presented in the article.

You seem to think that just because I pointed out the spin in the headline, I'm attacking the article in some way - that's a vast misunderstanding of what I said. Let me clarify this further: there is no concise headline that can possibly describe the article in a spin-free manner. No matter what concise headline anyone comes up with, it will be biased in one direction or another.

I certainly hope people read the article regardless, but I also hope that people will read the article while being mindful of how the wording used will bias them towards certain directions.
If it wasn't freedom of movement, it would be technological change (how many people will self-driving lorries put out of work?). The real problem is no one has thought about the long term where a lot of people either won't be able to work or won't need to work. In the UK we still have politicians who genuinely think a less than minimum wage job packing training shoes in a warehouse is morally better than someone being unemployed.
RFtap bridges the gap between SDR and packet analysis
Apologies for the tone in my previous comment. I guess it came off pretty harsh. Good work on creating and releasing something to the public. Upon looking again today, I like the overall approach you've taken and it seems very reasonable.

The `container-side` thing just feels very opinionated to me. I'm not sure it belongs in a framework, but that's totally your call.
I think you are thinking of cash in general rathe than vending machines in particular.

(But you can obtain receipts for cash transactions, which enable to legal recourse.)

And I agree with your point, and I've been using cash more often in my daily life for exactly this reason (anonymity and lack of data collection by credit card co's).
Why would they? Timing and the fact that it has happened before make it seem likely.
Rust took affine substructural types and integrated them into a language that looks as similar to C and C++ as possible, to make it not seem foreign to your average programmer. You can think of Rust as a focused version of ATS2 with less features for practical reasons.

Rust is for building lower-level code which you would have written in C or C++ before. The comfort features and type system plus compiler support make it more amenable to writing application code as well, which would have been written in Java, C++ or Python out of comfort, so it's used for that, too.

OCaml is still relevant and they complement each other. Rust is decidedly not a functional programming language, so its type system isn't going to magically support expressing the kind of constraints and abstractions (for more maintainable and less bug-prone code) you're able to in OCaml, Haskell, or even ATS2. It's not Rust vs OCaml but Rust and OCaml.

The selling point of Rust over ATS2 or OCaml is the popularity and resulting ecosystem around it, just like the JVM.

OCaml's existing multicore story is practical with async and friends, but they're about to land the low-level framework that allows one to build various concurrency abstractions on top. That one's based on KC's research and is pretty cool, actually.
> By the way, all of the above examples are not hypothetical.

Then you have some citations?
It's in English.
Seems like an eminently sensible proposition. It baffles me why the United States makes it so difficult for high-quality, educated immigrants to get over here, be productive, and become citizens, when there are tens of millions of illegals. Particularly baffling for all the international students that study at our elite universities, then upon graduation, get a swift boot to the behind and told to go home.
Also interesting is Data Structures and Functional Programming [0] using OCaml.

[0] http://www.cs.cornell.edu/Courses/cs3110/2016fa/
Intelligence testing is considered to be illegal. On the other hand, figuring out how to game a personality test is, in a sense, a test of critical thinking
Well right, but that's not what I'm asking. The claim is that collating lots of small data sets together can cause harm to a person. That's what I'm asking about.
It appears I didn't know everything about the Dawkins incident - disregard my comment.
i think command and control management structures have a lot of benefits at scale. Maybe at scale a company's competitive edge is essentially about executing on information, and information asymmetry, which is why things like trust and politics are more important than shipping efficiently. Just an idea.
> the lessons of history apply all around you.

You're right, but that's one of those realizations a person probably has to come to on their own. I doubt it matters what combination of words you use to express it.
you're completely reaching without any data.
Read Real World OCaml and you'll find plenty use of S-Expressions for serialization and configuration due to Core libs by Jane Street :).
I do also care about the correctness issues. It's hard to write correct software on top of a foundation that will happily tell you that 130 + 130 = 4. There's a fundamental mismatch between what people think the operation means, and what it really means, and that's never a good thing.
I think you need to read my comment again because you're misrepresenting what it says.
Very curious why some disagree with a factual description of the history of a particular genre of game..
The theory behind the LHC experiment that led to the discovery of the Higgs Boson is based on the unanimously-accepted concept that particles are just quantized localizations of fields. Even in quantum mechanics, problems are solved by assuming that it is impossible to tell the difference between two or more of the same particle - which suggests that they are somehow the same thing. They are different parts of the same field.
its possible to use force without killing someone you know.
Demonstrably untrue: http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_576d0aa3e4b08d2c5638fc17

And in Trump's case (describing immigrants as "rapists" and "murderers") it is also demonstrably false http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-mythical-connection-between-...
I'm trying to imagine an alternative timeline in which Nodevember, after having announced Crockford as a speaker and then receiving pushback on Twitter, privately discusses things with Crockford and mutually agree that they should part ways, but come up with a plausible explanation that would minimize the loss of face for both parties.

(for the sake of argument, let's say we agree that conferences have the unilateral right to invite and reject whomever they want for any reason that doesn't violate current federal laws)

1) What would that public and plausible explanation be? e.g. "Due to scheduling conflicts, we regret to say that Mr. Crockford cannot give the keynote speech but will be attending etc.etc."

2) How much time would it take (in days) to plan and then move on this?

3) Is Crockford the type to take this graciously and quietly and, even though he's justified in feeling wronged, doesn't feel the need to retaliate now or in the future?

edit: I think that Nodevember can do what it wants, but that it seriously fucked up for not vetting Mr. Crockford before inviting him and then really fucked up by throwing him under the bus. But that's been thoroughly discussed in last night's thread
This story took me a moment to process as an American, because here you'd get that bill regardless of whether you complained, and they wouldn't be joking about it!
He said a few things that feel like promoting a non inclusive environment. Which is bad, especially from someone like him, because many people look up to him and probably think it is okay to say such things.

Edit: Also interesting that the HN crowd always confirms the accusations they receive.
I am close to someone in your exact situation who was able to switch to medical marijuana from fentynal and other opioids after dealing with near fatal withdrawal effects. By no means hate fentynal, but perhaps save a bit of hate for regulators who criminalize or perpetuate the criminalization of non-addictive, inexpensive alternatives to opioids to protect pharmaceutical company profits.
> It's also not enough to prove the property.

Errr, yes, you're right. I noticed I messed up after I posted my comment, then edited it accordingly. I don't see why I need to perform induction on the program counter, though.

I posit that, no matter how you interleave your processes, there is some distinguished index i such that x[i] is written by process i before it is read by process `(i+1) mod N`. To prove this, I use induction on N:

(0) If N = 1, then i = 0.

(1) If N = M + 1, inductively assume that we have a collection of M processes with distinguished index i. Now consider the effect of adding one more process, respecting the interleaving of the original processes:

(1.a) If the new process is added at any index other than `i+1`, then the original processes i and `(i+1) mod M` still have contiguous indices in the new collection, and the former still writes to the common variable before the latter reads it.

(1.b) If the new process is added at index `i+1`, then at least one of the two following things must happen:

(1.b.i) The original process i writes to x[i] before the new process reads it.

(1.b.ii) The new process writes to x[i+1] before the original process `(i+1) mod M` (now `(i+2) mod N`) reads it.

No analysis of the program counter was required, and as a result we get a far more beautiful proof. You used a sledgehammer, I used a sculptor's chisel.

> Properties that are easily checked by simple type systems like those of Haskell and SML can always be satisfied by much simpler programs (in fact, a FSM or, if polymorphic recursion is used, then a PDA).

I never claimed that I could delegate the entirety of the formal verification task to a type system like that of Haskell or SML. And, to be honest, I don't even think using computers to verify everything is such a good idea. What I want is automation for the boring and repetitive parts (the vast majority), so that I can concentrate exclusively on the hard ones. (Which isn't to say that I'm happy with the little amount of work Damas-Milner does for me. It's possible to do much better, without sacrificing automation.)
Introducing the Hipster PDA (2004)
Mr. Straw is part of the problem, imo.

There's a lawful vs chaotic dichotomy going on - Mr. Straw started out lawful conservative, but then found out about a different set of laws he could leverage into a position of power.

It's a similar but different power leverage being exercised elsewhere by a new generation. Feeling excluded by more usual measures like achievement or talent, they've taken to using social taboos and bullying to gain power.

It's vaguely annoying to watch, but it's best ignored. The very lack of talent that people who use social manoeuvres to get to the top means the groups they dominate won't be very important or effective, unless it's law making directly. I'll get worried then. I'm fairly sanguine about node.js conferences.
> By mid-1927, the new denaturing formulas included some notable poisons—kerosene and brucine (a plant alkaloid closely related to strychnine), gasoline, benzene, cadmium, iodine, zinc, mercury salts, nicotine, ether, formaldehyde, chloroform, camphor, carbolic acid, quinine, and acetone.

I don't think any of those are just natural byproducts of making high proof industrial alcohol. Or do you contest that claim?
this is buzzfeed. my guess is that this is a paid puff piece for uber and nothing else.
Most people I talked to were well informed. I think a lot of people were happy to stick it to big business, most of who pay less tax than a local chippy.

We felt Brexit was about control, we wanted more of it. When the USA told us off for wanting more freedom it felt a little weird... but, but, you're the land of the free. We just want to be able to control immigration. We want control from Brussels.
But honestly, why should we care about PG's brand of web startups? Yes, we're told that they're desireable for vague, inscrutable reasons, but if you dig any deeper than that you'll find that they're at best performing market arbitrage based on better information, and at worst destroying value.

Look at Uber. They're hemorrhaging money all so that they can artificially lower wages and run their competitors out of business before ultimately going belly-up from their unsustainable business model. And they're considered a success story.
This is why you should actually stop at stop signs and red lights, which nobody does.

It happens all the time to runners, especially when people roll up and through stop signs. The speeds often line up well. I had always attributed it to being in the pillar blindspot (and when the speeds match as described in the article, you stay in that blindspot the whole time). After reading the article, it makes more sense.

I can't count the number of drivers who have rolled up to a stop sign with no intent of actually stopping, taken one final look out their window as they go through and had a huge jump of fright to see me staring back at them through the window angrily, having stopped just in time to avoid getting run over.
They were gullible. They were told that NHS would be better funded after brexit than before, among other lies.
Are you talking about Kaggle?
This is my worry as well.
Much codec code was written years/decades ago with zero concern for security, so browsers have to have whitelists and private implementations.
One of my consulting projects includes doing programming for a relatively big millenials-dominated site. Users on that site know exactly what cards to play in what order to get people on staff and/or affiliates fired - it's Crybullying all the way. It doesn't even matter if the claims made are true or not, just the proclamation of being hurt or oppressed is sufficient. The site owners ultimately making these decisions do so because they live in absolute terror of what these people could do if they turned against the site itself or them personally.

We now live in a world where anything is done to appease you if you only cry loud enough. It always used to be the case in personal conflicts that whoever was better at mud slinging had a significant hand up as compared to someone who's less talented, but in combination with the new fad of Crybullying, this is a devastating tactic.
How it works: Compiler Explorer
Not really, a simple neural network which associates images with words could do the same thing.
Correct. I was an EMT, and I would have been in no legal jeopardy for driving by an accident instead of responding, if I was off duty or outside my response area. (However, I always did stop and help if other responders were not yet on scene or looked like they could use more hands.)
OTOH, my EMT license meant I was not protected by good samaritan laws. As DINKDINK pointed out, if I "helped" beyond the scope of my training, I could have been sued.