skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
HN denizens and tech-heads do not represent all Americans either.

Seriously, there are very few traits that I can think of which really represent all Americans; we're much too diverse for that, and we're growing farther and farther apart. The lifestyles and attitudes in rural areas are extremely different from those in urban centers, and it's becoming more and more divergent (for instance, Millennials are abandoning car ownership).

So any time you see someone say something like "Americans think..." you have to take it with a grain of salt, and at best realize that they're talking about some sizeable demographic, which probably is not an absolute majority, but is large enough to make it a valid statement, unless you want to quibble about what qualifies such a statement, as if you demand that it apply to a clear majority (say, over 60%), then no such statement will probably ever be true of Americans, except things that are also true of people in many other places (for instance: "Americans like smartphones" -- not at all unique to Americans).

Pro-authoritarian boards do indeed represent a sizeable swath of Americans, like it or not. Just look at how popular the alt-right is these days.
JSON schema validation in Go
I have my phone running right next to my laptop. It still doesn't handle things right (Signal does). If one is offline for a bit then sometimes it syncs, sometimes it leaves unread indicators.
* A nice kitchen set. Probably the anodized aluminum or something. Non-stick, all the required sizes, but no extras (I hate storing extra stuff in the kitchen), matching. Handles attached well.

* The ability to sharpen things to "scary sharp." Mostly hand tools like chisels and planes.

* A stack of hardwood.

* A riding lawnmower. You try mowing ~2 hilly acres with a push mower (not even self-propelled!)

* Time to complete some programming courses or books. I'm becoming numb to programming; my work isn't very interesting, and so none of the programming I do is particularly exciting. The courses would give me some ideas to apply to my work, at least.
I have to concur with this.

Starting with a 'team of 3' and building a fairly fancy system with a lot of open-source 3rd party solutions ... making all kinds of assumptions about cost, scale etc. - this is worrying.

In finance and banking, I think that 'simplicity' 'reliability' etc. are the key issues, and it probably should feel boring. I can't imagine that the 'cost of servers' is going to be the key issue, especially since these things are pretty cheap these days.

When you look at how much a startup invests in various things ... I'm not sure that server cost is an issue for anything but entities like Netflix etc. wherein you have serious scale.

Messaging startups like Kik have 200M users and I don't think they are that fancy, granted, it's not messaging.
> [W]e quickly sent you a DMCA takedown requests and waited patiently

That makes it sound like the DMCA takedown was the first response -- I'm surprised that a gently worded e-mail wasn't tried first. "Hey guys, it looks like you are using this ... I'm sure it was unintentional, but .... "
To some extent this is true. But built in datatypes that are performant are more likely to be used so thats an advantage some of the higher level languages have.

Truly optimized C code will be faster than perl/python/php. But given the same problem the perl/pyhton/php programs will tend to use hashed data types (dictionaries in python, arrays is php) and end up with fast code. Sometimes faster than C code because the writing/using hashing in C is more difficult and its not always used.
Slack has screen sharing through Screenhero
Delivery of page faults is, handling of them isn't (although the kernel does abstract the exact mechanism, into message delivery).
The PRU compiler (clpru) is a TI proprietary compiler, free but licensed. It is pre-installed on BeagleBones. There's also a gcc compiler‡, but I don't know anything about it.

‡ https://github.com/dinuxbg/gnupru
I wonder how they propose to solve the issue of people driving their vehicles through Washington without the use of I-5. Am I expected to hire a self-driving truck to haul me and my vehicle through the state in order to reach Canada? Seems like a government-backed money making scheme by Amazon/Microsoft to me.
Yup, you can sign up with Stripe as a US business if you're based in Puerto Rico. You can get in touch with me at edwin.wee@stripe.com if you need help getting started!
One thing that really surprised me was when I did the math on how long Steve Jobs was at NeXT.
The people who build the power plant pay for MW of solar panels. The people who buy the energy from the power plant pay for kWh. Notice that this an interesting article because the plant is going to have a power purchase agreement price of under 2.5 cents per kWh. We don't know what the equipment costs per Watt.
I would not be so sure. How much did the NSA pay for this, one way or another?
A major question that isn't covered in the article:

The leaves may be produced in Bolivia legally but used elsewhere illegally. For instance:

How many leaves are smuggled through the Bolivia / Peru border?

If the plants are produced in Bolivia legally, but then smuggled out illegally, who is at fault? How do they know? And does that just move the violence away from Bolivia and into Peru, where the paste is made?
Yes, even the .exe is still called Lync
"The vulnerability is due to insufficient condition checks in the part of the code that handles IKEv1 security negotiation requests. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted IKEv1 packet to an affected device configured to accept IKEv1 security negotiation requests. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to retrieve memory contents, which could lead to the disclosure of confidential information."

So basically heartbleed for Cisco VPN's.
How do you build a compelling story around the $100K MRR milestone mentioned? Why should people care?
My dream is to buy up the Commodore / Amiga IP and make a "true" successor (as I have stated in the past several times!).

People are growing increasingly jaded with OSX and Windows, both of which lack a passionate visionary and are becoming increasingly bloated and making weird UX choices.

I do not mean making a retro device, or even playing off of some modern variant of AmigaOS, I mean rethinking/resurrecting the brand the same way Jobs did when he returned to Apple.

It would not necessarily mean completely reinventing hardware or software. Apple's switch to a BSD-based OS and Intel chips was an example of how you can build a great computer on top of existing hardware and software.

The Mac has no "real" competitors - that is, companies which manufacture both their own hardware and software to produce desktops (other than consoles, which are not really desktop replacements).

Anyhow, it is obviously no small undertaking, but I refuse to believe there should only be two mainstream choices out there for desktops, or that the space for innovation is dead (more so on the software/coding/UX side).
Search for shadow brokers in the disclosure. That's how Cisco's been crediting them.
As I sit here trying to figure out the difference
> I'm not sure how useful they are for reasoning about an arbitrary snippet of JS taken from the wild.

Probably not much, indeed.

> One problem stated in the article is we can't even rely on things like variable substitution to be effect-free

I have no idea how to make sense of this. The presence or absence of effects is an object language notion. Variable substitution is an operation on the syntax of this object language, and syntax necessarily lives in a metalanguage (e.g., the language in which a compiler or interpreter is written).

EDIT: Forgot about explicit substitutions, which make substitution an explicit reduction step in the object language. Even then, I don't see how substitution can be effectful by itself.

> For example, in your "map" definition, the value of "f" called at the head of the list may differ from the value of "f" passed to the recursive call.

At least in a call-by-value language, this is should never the case. Funny things can happen if lexical environments are first-class objects, of course.
Skype on multiple devices has been in ruins for years. I'm not sure why, but being 'active' on two different products causes absolute meltdowns. Calls you can't answer, no sound or no video, the second device ringing endlessly after the first picks up, and anything else I can think of.
It's an old unverified post on reddit being reviewed by republicans in the House of Representatives. Has everyone gone mad? We are literally paying our representatives to waste time reading Reddit based on a tenuous connection and some miniscule hope that it some how someday leads to FINALLY exposing the CORRUPT Hillary, or even better, hurting her chances of winning the presidency. Even if this were illegal, everything could be done with the best intentions and primarily legal concordance just like the email scandal, and STILL House Republicans would investigate it as if it were a war crime. Taxpayer money is being wasted on this bullshit, and yet these dipwads keep being reelected. THAT is the fire.

In this period of great economic uncertainty, a billionaire real estate tycoon and media mogul with no political experience, inflammatory rhetoric, and awful, authoritarian policy proposals is a serious contender for the most powerful office in the world, I'd say we have bigger problems to worry about tHan anything Hillary may have done. Our economy, livelihood, and potentially our freedom is at stake under this threat. Trump is a true menace to society and we are treating any little flaw shown by Hillary as villainy in the highest order. It's baffling, and terrifying.

In short, I'd take Crooked Hillary over Tyrant Trump any day.
Since the author cares about a few cycles per check by using the interrupt instead of directly reading the PWM register, they should look up how to access the constants table (4.4.1.1).

The compiler can be coaxed, with some rather ridiculous clpru compiler-specific variable definitions, into referencing addresses from the constant table by a C number rather than loading up a general purpose register.

It is in the clpru compiler documentation under section 5.14.4
It is also discussed in some TI slides (flash required) in part 18
http://software-dl.ti.com/public/hpmp/software/pru_compiler_...
PDF slides: http://software-dl.ti.com/public/hpmp/software/pru_compiler_... (PDF page 28)

TI states in their slides that this constant register table access "Barely counts as C code." I think they're right. It is, however, slightly faster. When trying to do cycle-perfect timing, such micro optimizations start to actually matter.
If a team is dysfunctional enough, just keeping them around can be bad for morale.
Except that you signed a contract when you bought the property.
IoT isn't really target for these things. Language or spec-level security is more important. I agree with you there. Isolation mechanisms are still important for many embedded devices, though, if security is a concern. Here's a few I've seen in various products or academic programs:

1. Device driver isolation. Wacky drivers can take down the system. Better to take down and restart the driver. QNX was first I know of that did this with excellent reliability benefits. Many of them do now in RTOS space. MINIX 3 takes it to desktops and servers.

2. Monitors like in Copilot system or for recovery-oriented computing that expects input to crash or subvert main process. So, outside process is necessary for detection of anomalous behavior and recovery. Periodic restarts are another trick used in that field to clear out subtle errors that build up over time or persistent malware. Best to be in different address spaces.

3. Dedicated process, as in Nizza and Turaya, for containing application secrets where external processes can call to have random numbers generated, signatures performed, etc but not actually access the internals.

4. Same thing for logging purposes where interface between main app and logging component is write-only. Prevents accidental or malicious elimination of audit trail. I did that myself many times. Shapiro et al did it for repo security.

5. Finally, separation kernels like INTEGRITY-178B can ensure predictability of certain operations and statically enforce a scheduling policy. That's important in real-time systems where a number of tasks are running where one can screw with the other. So, they use things like ARINC schedulers with fixed-sized partitions operating in fixed intervals. Watchdog timers are also popular here. Also is a strategy for eliminating covert, timing channels at partition level for select few that need that.
>When we speak about the Fibonacci sequence, it's nonsensical to talk about f("pie").

Indeed it is, but I think you are taking his example literally. That problem can appear in more subtle ways.

Consider some other examples:

f(string)

Does f works for every string? What if it's unicode. What if it's an empty string? What if it's a sequence type(like an iterator over a stream) that returns the letters of a string?

mean(numbers)

What is the biggest number I can pass? If I pass a list of integers does it return a float or an integer? If I pass an empty list, does it return 0, -1, null, undefined?

There are several situations on which you can encounter similar situations. I do not disagree that all that type information has a cost, your type signature can become more complicated, your cognitive load can be increased, your code can be less flexible, it can be harder to integrate with existing technologies, but since the problem still exists I think it's very reasonable that the author is trying to keep that discussion alive.
This is a pretty common vulnerability. We found the same bug in nginx not long before Heartbleed. Cisco in particular has a history with these kinds of bugs (IIRC FX sort of famously dumped a whole image of a Cisco router in the early 2000s with one).
E2E encryption. So whatsapp and FaceTime.
At first I thought you were making up a super funny and clever thing, but by god, you're only referencing a pre-existing funny thing [1]. Although funny in a different way.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_Regulation_(EC)_No....
It's pretty apparent, really, that the iPhone was in no way inspired by the LG Prada, given that the iPhone was announced less than a month after the Prada was announced.

Maybe you could argue that all the slab devices were inspired by the Prada, despite the Prada 2 itself backing away from the form factor and adding a keyboard?

I didn't claim Apple doesn't steal features from others. In fact, Jobs himself has been very vocal about his feature theft.

My only argument is that the iPhone form factor, despite its dominance today, was never "obvious." The iPhone is what created a world in which it's nearly impossible to buy a phone outside of that form factor.
Wire, maybe. I haven't used it much, but it's supposed to be end-to-end encrypted and supports audio/video/text. No phone requirement either. Still a centralized service, though, so they get access to metadata.
We're not Developers Anymore
Vue is really nice with simple examples. It does everything how you'd expect, quickly, and with little code. When you start building more advanced things you'll need to completely buy into the framework and that's when Vue gets a lot less pretty. I think React and Angular 2 are far better framework to learn and commit to.

So yes Vue is the new jQuery in that you can built smalls things nicely but good luck wiring up a large app.
Naval Swords (2009)
Yeah, I still don't know why Lars wouldn't let them have the existing front-end code. I understand that maybe it wasn't pretty under the hood, but who cares? It worked great for many years and was extremely useful. It could always be cleaned up and refactored a bit at a time.

Now they're having to reinvent the wheel. And while I shan't presume to tell them how to do it (especially since it's at their expense), I wonder if the infrastructure they're cooking up will be as future-proof. It certainly won't be as simple to reimplement if Gmane changes hands again someday, and it won't be conducive to setting up other instances of Gmane on a smaller scale.
Tourism.

I lived near a small historic town with many buildings standing since the 1850s. Tourism is a HUGE industry that brings in dollars to local businesses. It's in the town's interest to preserve that income, so they mandate color and style codes for new buildings as well as restoring older buildings. This is complemented with many folksy festivals and re-enactments as part of drawing in tourist dollars.

When people balk at these codes, and they do all the time, there are several other larger and modern cities nearby where they aren't restricted in any design sense.
It's funny because my friends who are musicians or work with art and such all have a process to get creative. That don't sit around waiting for it, they strive towards it. I've heard and read the same from both books and online that most creative people have a process which they use to become inspired.

Which is not to say that you can't just suddenly have a moment of sudden inspiration, just that they are far more rare than the creativity you work for.
A question for Patrick, or for anyone else with experience implementing A/B testing from the early stages of a service/product:

When and where do you start? If you start too early, you don't have enough traffic to be statistically significant.

In the article, Patrick said that he started with the trial signup form in his 3rd year.

Most of the advice on A/B testing that I've found is understandably aimed at people with existing business/products that can massively benefit from it. Does anyone have any more material about how to get started from the early stages?
All this JS and TS churn and stress makes me want to just stick to HTML
Honest Tea’s influencer-driven sweepstakes uncaps uptick in social followers
Yeah, basically. From what I can tell given some work I've done in a related field, what's happened is that they found a new way to do the math in a theoretical model some long time ago, and it revealed some cool new predictions within a certain temperature range, as well as some equivalent of high-T superconductivity at some other temperature range.

Now they went to test it, which they did by supercooling potassium atoms while using lasers to force them into one place. (Conveniently you can also use lasers for refrigeration though I'm not sure if they did.) Then they switched the lasers to describe a big 2D standing wave which the potassium atoms spread out into, forming a square grid. These are called "optical lattices"; they're difficult to work with because you don't have anything small enough to really poke at individual atoms and even if you did you'd have to deal with how the lasers are blasting your poker left and right... so, you just have to kind of throw your hands up, "I am not going to care about any of these individual atoms." However, you get some nice bulk properties: for an easy example, if you just turn off the lasers and let stuff drift and then image it, they all basically started from the same place and drifted according to their velocity which is proportional to their momentum, so you can get an image of |ψ[p]|², the momentum-space distribution of the wavefunctions of the individual atoms. So that's cool. But basically you have this tiny little dot of well-arranged well-controlled particles, but you can only do bulk operations on them (including e.g. bulk entanglements by bringing pairs of rows closer together by messing with the lattice and cool stuff like that).

While I'm not clear what the theoretical predictions were, exactly, apparently when they pushed the system into the first temperature regime described above they discovered whatever their theoretical model predicted. Hooray! This has given them some small confidence that maybe their theoretical model is a plausible step forward for understanding high-T superconductivity.
They did. There's an Isabelle spec, a Haskell implementation, and a C implementation which I believe is mechanically generated from the Haskell implementation.
I think the key difference between founders vs. early employees is in risk tolerance. An early employee should be able to go to work reasonably confident that he will get paid for his time and his efforts will not be completely futile. The job description for "founder", however, involves finding a reason for the company to exist, and that inherently involves the risk that you could put in a lot of work and it'll still count for nothing.

Aston (presumably) made out with a lot more than the $300/400K a year that a Google/Facebook engineer tops out at. He also took on more risk, but the risk was largely technical risk: the possibility that him and his teammates couldn't deliver what 65,000 people said they wanted. That risk is largely under their control, while as a founder, the primary risk is that nobody wants your product or it can't be built economically.

I do think that the large amount of money in the funding ecosystem lately has distorted this bargain somewhat. In boom times, you get cases where the founders get funded on hope & pedigree and draw a salary immediately (meaning that their financial risk is more akin to an early employee's), and then they go and hire a bunch of naive employees at below-market rates before getting any validation that people want their product (meaning that the employee now takes on market risk that was previously reserved for the founder). This doesn't do either the company or the employee any good; these companies are significantly more likely to fail than ones who stay founder-only while they prove out the market, and they ruin more peoples' lives when they do. If you look at employee #1's who have actually made out well - eg. those at Google, DropBox, Thumbtack, AirBnB, SnapChat, etc. - all of those companies had validated demand, had raised funding, and in many cases were already in use by thousands of people when they hired their first employee.
The effort is focused where the money is. Car companies will sell these cars and make a profit. States have a hard time keeping dumb roads in good condition, they have no money to make roads smart or keep them repaired.
This seems suspiciously like government getting something right... with regards to a quickly-evolving new technology market...

has this ever happened before?
If Twitter had no loyalty to employees I figure they would have fired 3000 of them and become profitable by now.
The PRU is a proprietary TI architecture that is totally different from the Cortex M3. The PRU is a low-level deterministic real-time 32-bit microcontroller, while the Cortex M3 is a "real processor" with interrupts, memory management and so forth. The instruction sets and architectures have nothing in common.

Maybe you're thinking of the Cortex M3 that's on the chip for power management?
October 4th is many things...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_4
⌘+f
Also, give it a few years for the guiding lines to get nice and faded. Maybe some rainy weather to erase them from vision completely.

This intersection would definitely get safer because I would avoid it completely.
So you're saying we can use blind people for BTC mining? :3 Sorry I couldn't help myself.
Maybe there was a split test to see how many people noticed. :)
When Google's Moonshots Fall Back to Earth
It says nothing about encryption, so I assume it's not encrypted.
Exactly it's like someone said let's turn Lync into Skype. Rather than building something useful they added the Skype name and kept the same dodgy implementation. Pat on the backs all round...
The majority of regulations in the US are sensible.

But regulations that are computer-focused? Less so.