skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's not raw power, although the responsiveness of the OS is a factor. It's the combination of a nice screen, good keyboard, best touchpad (crazy gap to #2), good battery life, and durability. All in a decently small/light package.

edit: Surface book might be okay.

I tried one of those razor laptops last year, it was okay. Not as good as the macbook, but not bad.
Yes the original post has been edited.
The temperature range. The atmosphere held in by the natural magnetic field. The liquid water.
Whenever I see this figure reported on a numerically literate site like HN, I always wonder how many readers know whether the thermal forcing due to CO2 is (a) exponential, (b) logarithmic, or (c) linear as a function of the ppm.

Upvote if you didn't know the answer and had to Google it? Downvote if everybody knows the answer and it's a stupid question?
To substantiate this comment a bit, David MacKay wrote a good book on this matter: https://www.withouthotair.com/c24/page_161.shtml
Ewwww. I'm not a big fan of that name. It might grow on me but my initial reaction is...
Where are we putting waste from all the coal firing plants? Directly into the air!
Crowdfunded fellowship to report on Peter Thiel's companies breaks $5,000
Three words: oil industry lobbyists.
> Obviously falling off onto a cushion is easier.

The whole notions of cushion and spikes is relative too. For some having a roof above your head might sound like a blessing. I will probably hang myself (metaphorically speaking) than go back and stay with my parents thought I will get a house and food twice a day.

Large mass of those so called "privileged" people perhaps have to take equal amount of stress even though in absolute terms we might think they are better off.
Looks very interesting. Great work porting it over.
I haven't downloaded the image recognition code, but where is it getting the list of potential category names from? And where's the related training set for the puppy for example.
It's extremely funny that German atheists are so desperate to feel like they're persecuted by stupid, provincial Americans that they've completely failed to control their experiment.
Lobbying.
Even if all the plants and animals die, there is still an atmosphere, magnetic field, liquid water.
Interestingly, from the 1970s forward, a vast reforestation of North America has been taking place[1]. The problem is more in places like the Amazon rain forest that is being deforested and stripped at alarming and unsustainable rates.

1. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/11/061113-fores...
First, Last, Invert, and Play: a technique for animations using CSS transforms
85% of wizards are educated at Hogwarts.
"Harry Potter" book.
That neural network technology is all fine and good for compressing images of lighthouses and dogs - but what about other things?
Show HN: Serverless WebSocket chat
Silliness. We're not hurting the earth. We're just making it a bit less hospitable for us. It's bad, but it's not the apocalypse that some will have you believe.
IBM, Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon Form Enormous AI Partnership – ExtremeT
GHEdit: a better way to browse, search and edit GitHub repos
The point being, of course, that it's gotten fairly difficult. It's all very well and good to treat the Internet as an abstraction, but those "physical laws and resources" are critically important for any service that wants to be useful in the real world -- where physical laws and resources are very important.
According to the courts, it makes it legal.
IMHO if you need to move stuff between appvms often, that suggests the compartments are inappropriate and you should rethink them.
Policy makers are "put in office" by those that would pay these taxes.
It's like Climate Change has been engineered to play on our worst behavioral tendencies. It's the ultimate behavioral science problem. As a species, we tend to want to deal with things "tomorrow", and have a hard time identifying non-immediate, gradual, threats.
Trees are only sequestering the CO2, not removing it, so this seems like a bad solution at solving our removal of CO2. Also, for a densely populated area, where do you propose people go to plant said trees where they can survive without major care? What is the mortality rate of these trees over time considering weeds, water, bugs etc.
And (as I often argue here[1]) that's still a mispurposed argument when used against plea bargaining per se, rather than against the forces that give prosecutors so much disproportionate leverage that people take them.

It's not even a case where removing an option can have good global effects; if you remove plea bargaining but change nothing else, all that accomplishes is that disadvantaged people get railroaded harder, and choke up the courts even longer as they play out their lopsided trials.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12465613
It isn't that simple when there isn't a global agreement on taxing emission, look at what is happening in Ontario:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-electricity-pl...
Sigh...this conversation is pointless.
If everybody murdered someone else, that would help a lot. More would be better.

Also helpful: don't have children, don't drive, don't fly, don't eat meat. Plant trees. Erect solar panels.
Google GSuite
Don't we have plenty of old coal mines? They seem like a natural place to sequester carbon in, given that that's where a lot of it came from in the first place...
Gigster (YC S15) is looking for an Engineering Manager
I think Manhattan project efforts are useful when there's a goal where there's a clear engineering hypothesis, i.e. how do we achieve a nuclear chain reaction, or send a rocket to the moon.

But when there's a much much much broader research space to explore, such as methods to capture carbon, I don't think that such focused projects are as useful.

We already have the technology to get completely off of carbon, it's the industrial scale-up that's the issue. At current prices, energy costs would increase no more than 3-4x, at the very very worst, and double in a more likely scenario.

So what we really need is political will to cause the market to make these existing technologies efficient on the industrial scale. We need a stiff carbon price. And we also need a way to incentive pulling carbon out of the air, perhaps direct transfer of the carbon tax to those that are able to securely sequester carbon without the possibility of it escaping into the atmosphere. That way, if somebody wants to burn natural gas, that's fine as long as they also pay the cost of taking the carbon out of the atmosphere at the same time

With those two things, we could be off carbon in a few decades, worldwide, economically efficiently. All it takes is the political will, and the investment of a tiny fraction of our global GDP.

Most of all, we need to never, ever, vote for politicians who deny reality and live in a fantasy land on important issues like this. It's affected an entire political party in the US, and the disease is practically contained within them. They have politicized the science, have led large chunks of the US to believe these lies. And they have a huge persecution/inferiority complex so if you even mention that the Republicans are bad on this issue, they get defensive and dig deeper into their lies. There are a few respectable Republicans on this issue, such as Arnold Schwarzenegger, but they are the exception, and the rest of the Republicans ostracize them them for it.

The technology and science is practically there for a solution, it's the politics that needs fixing right now.
"This land doesn't belong to anyone; the U.S. government can therefore claim it as its own."
> At least it's good for the plants.

There are plants (for example hop and wheat [1]) that cannot grow well at high CO2 concentrations.

[1] http://science.sciencemag.org/content/328/5980/899.abstract
I get that it's a successful game, but what's wrong with a bigger success?

Especially a success that they went out of their way to avoid by creating a new battle system instead of using what's already there.
The US government's investments in both solar power and clean coal have been either failures or ended up costs wayyy more and taking twice as long. Typical of modern government projects but still bad enough where just saying "throw tax dollars at green tech" isn't as straight-forward solution as it seems.

Why not reduce taxes for corporations building green tech? And provide R&D credit to pay the salaries of engineers working on the problem? Reduce capital gains taxes on investments in green tech? Make it easier for really smart immigrants to come to the US to work on the problem? Create a commission who's job is to review and simplify/eliminate/modernize regulations to reduce barriers to entry in the marketplace? etc.

There are lots of ways to incentivize industry to solve this problem instead of adding more taxes and hoping the government works as a good VC.

The Canadian government tried (and is trying) the angel investor/VC thing here and it hasn't worked at all well. They do stuff like matching investments of other angels or giving loans to entrepreneurs. I'd much rather they made it easier for me to start and run a company by reducing the stuff they are already doing instead of doing more things... like pretending they are private investors. For example, they recently announced a Startup Founder Visa which I think is a great idea and a step in the right direction: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/business/start-up/
No I wasn't aware of that, so thanks. I literally had just typed in the first example in the tute. :)

Working through more of it today.
Those ones (along with Google and Microsoft that are arguable hard tech) were founded prior to web 2.0. Since about 2002 no hard tech software startups achieved any scale- they are sort of all "moving up the stack". When they emerged (Android Inc) they are promptly swallowed. In the mid-2000s there were Yelp (from the software perspective, a simple website with Lucene backend and Youtube - a simple website with Flash player and ffmpeg transcoding command). It's probably a sign of consolidation of the industry.
"Also forests make the Earth's surface darker, thus decreasing albedo and potentially increasing global warming."

Obligatory:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albino_redwood
Wheres the ACTUAL study?
Or did the author just call up 5 rich dudes?

Seriously are we taking this number as legitimate.. simply because it comes from a BOOK?

Is that how low our scientific standards have become?

Frickin Pixar verified that talking cars exist. Good enough for me!
Worth reposting: What can a technologist do about climate change? http://worrydream.com/ClimateChange/ (2015)
Disagree with the premise. The purpose of Demeter isn't to prevent one class from mucking up the internal state of another, that's a side-effect. Its purpose is to prevent one class from being coupled to the internal structure of another so that if you change one, you don't have to change the other. It stops code updates, not state updates, from rippling out.

This is why the original formulation of the LoD didn't talk about instances, it talked about classes. You were only allowed to know about the surface-level structure of your neighbours, but anything else of the same class as your neighbours was fair game. So in the `player.Position.X` example, we actually don't have enough information to know if it's a violation or not: we don't know what class `player.Position` is, and we don't know whether it's a legitimate neighbour class. If there's another `Position` field somewhere in scope that's legit, `player.Position.X` is allowed, because we're already coupled to that structure, and getting to it via the `player` object doesn't add any coupling that wasn't there already.
Now I understand why you didn't suffer from the slow ranking issue. In my test case, text is longer and triggers the TOAST management code.
"Research team and 5 years" != "Two [1] grad students and 2.5 years".

Dropbox, BTW, was 4-5 engineers and 1.5 years.

[1] Actually more like 4-5, Larry & Sergey had help.
Definitely, memory is probably the most important resource when running Qubes. My T420s has 8GB and it's just enough, I wouldn't go for less than 16GB in the next laptop.
Let me ask a question - what does your attitude benefit you? It seems mostly to make you bitter about things that were never in your control, which seems like an unvarnished negative. Maybe you've found something more helpful.
The Keyword – New central source for news and stories about Google
Sure, one counterpoint, or at least nuance, is when you give too much focus to the wrong users.

Then wrong users can oversteer your product. For example, BigCo wants Feature X and will pay $100k/year for it, you add it but it complicates the experience for others and delays the rest of your roadmap.

Another is knowing when your users are wrong, they request Feature Y, but really what they want is Benefit Z.

Of course there's also nuance around how exactly you define minimum viable product (i.e., the part built before you start exposing it to users). I've seen experienced non-startup business people describe an entire app with every feature that they envision, then claim that's the MVP. It can be a hard model to adjust to.
Chef Spotlight: Paul Nagan of Range in Denver, Colorado
This way I'll get emotional each time I open a new tab.
I also didn't know about Watsi before coming across your plugin, seems like a really interesting idea!

I also noticed that the "%" symbol is on the wrong side of the numbers.

Anyway, good luck with the addon. :)
It's a human problem, not a modern-day nor US-only one. It seems we're all intrinsically prone to the "Just World" hypothesis.

Consider the historical examples -- widely spread over cultures and times -- of where the wealthiest and most powerful people are assumed not just to be "good people", but God-approved or even proto-deities themselves.
Can't believe no one has mentioned buying your own domain, running a MTA to reroute mail from those addresses to your current gmail, and then setting your preferred address@yourdomain.com as a send-from address in gmail.
My two cents here from the industry I am in. Thesis: I can't see any nuclear reactor at the paper stage in 2016 beating the small modular reactors from westinghouse (III gen integral pwr) or ge-hitachi (IV gen PRISM sfr) to the 2030 race for the next coming innovative fleets in the Western World. Corollary: Elsewhere, China and Russia will probably risk more and do better at raising the bar of progress. Action: What can be done at YC level then imho? There may be a niche in standardising the design of the most critical components using data science methods, think of an Ikea for the nuclear island. Hard tech, reduced to the simplest problem with a customer, may be the for nuclear sector some critical process (a new material?) or some critical component (a one-fits-all vessel?), both economically affordable at the lab level and at the computer-powered engineering design.
Affirmative action is destructive. You are setting up people to fail by promoting them into positions they are not fit to take. Either they are qualified or they aren't. End of discussion. It's the same way with marks. Nobody is helped if a black person with bad marks gets into a college when they should not, and they end up not being able to handle the subjects and drop out later.

Not only that - affirmative action is disrespectful. Women can do as well as men. I believe in it. But that is precisely why affirmative action is obsolete. Only those who think women cannot handle the work and cannot perform on par with men favour affirmative actions based on gender. In the German language, there's already a word for women who were promoted into positions they cannot handle because there are certain quotas to fill as required by law. This is called "Quotenfrau" and is incredibly derogatory.
I come from an assembly background (but spent the last 20 years doing scripting languages), so this came as a shock to me.
Yeah, if your vectors are in TOAST, you really have a huge issue with ranking. There’s no simple way to get around that, except with customized solutions like Lucene/Solr/ES
Some ideas for positive action:

"What can a technologist do about climate change?" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10622615

(Spoiler: Be engaged, be influential, use your high-leverage superpowers)
Using Mathematics to Repair a Masterpiece
I can't find any images in that second link other than pointlessly small thumbnails. Am I missing something?
It's interesting, but his solar PV assumptions are pretty outdated in the book. He talks about utility scale solar being 10% efficient, where as it is around 17% now. Even at 10% efficiency, he says it's feasible, but too expensive. We are now at 2.42 cents per kWh unsubsidized for utility scale solar, in the best case. He says solar PV is 4x as expensive as conventional electricity production, which is clearly not true anymore. And the trend says PV will be 4x cheaper than coal within a couple of decades.
Only part of the equation.
You can convert the trees to biochar, then a large percentage won't decompose. You don't need to fertilize trees because they get their nutrients from microbial life[0], which is increased by fertilization with biochar.

[0] elane ingham, food web talk - https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=x2H60ritjag
My calculations assume a tree will sequester the carbon for 10 years. I'm sure we can do a lot better than that, but even with these assumptions, it's pretty cheap to sequester the CO2 on an ongoing basis.
Unfortunately this is glorifying a lot of terrible practices.

People who work in environments with, for example, "pressure -- lots of pressure" often end up not realizing there's another option that's actually a lot healthier for them, their coworkers, and their organization.

Senior professionals avoid all of that nonsense like the plague and would never glorify it. Senior people are professionals who work efficiently and effectively.
Thanks for the link. It's a great read.
(b) logarithmic

Good question to pose.
Engine (to me) also implies a monolithic process where something goes in one end, work is done, and something is produced. A compute engine computes things, a search engine searches things, a game engine does game computations, etc.
I really miss getting custom domains on Google Apps for free.

I've never found a good way to do email for cheapskates since then.
The problem with Darwinian evolution is that it takes a long long long time. Humanity has never faced climate change so quickly before.

So what will actually happen is that large chunks of the world will become unlivable. As in, if your plane crashes in that section of the planet, you will die. Mammals all have a very similar limit here, the idea that we will quickly evolve around that is ridiculous.

http://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/research/2010/100504HuberLimi...

We will adapt, and not in the Darwinian fashion, by becoming a much smaller population, living in very different parts of the world, farming in very different ways.

The economic destruction in such an adaptation will be immeasurable, even if we somehow do it without causing all sorts of wars and revolutions from resource shortages where people are dying of thirst and starvation.
There's still only one major PostgreSQL release per year. There were a few posts about cool stuff built on top of PostgreSQL, a few posts about progress of the 9.6 development (e.g. when the parallel query got committed) etc.
Firebase Authentication Module – Aangular.js
That's exactly what OP is trying to point out. It's easy to be "self-made" when you can get a million dollar loan from your dad to get your real-estate business off the ground. It's easy to be self-made when your dad works at Seattle's most prestigious law firm and can arrange an introduction with IBM's PC hardware division. It's significantly more difficult to be self-made when you have no connections and no capital.
What is the on-disk size of the table storing the plain text?
As far as your other concerns, they become a problem at scale. Which is what startups are all about solving, right?
NY Times Opinion Piece: “Trump? How Could We?”
While this is true, I think that there is much more to it. FinTech is taking business away from one of the strongest lobbies in the world, the financial sector, and the regulators all around the world seem to be embracing it, even bitcoin.
EC2 Reserved Instance Update – Convertible RIs and Regional Benefit
Chemical weapons in Syria: Will there be justice for a serial offender
Clouds or snow? Airbus uses machine learning to analyze satellite images
Have you ever tried the lavender scent? I can't handle most of their fragrances for daily use, either, but that one seems significantly easier on the nose and skin for some reason.
The tax subsidies were never meant to be a long term solution, so they don't need to be "sustainable," whatever you mean by that.
>"Trees are only sequestering the CO2, not removing it, so this seems like a bad solution at solving our removal of CO2"

I don't follow your logic here.

All of the atmospheric CO2 produced from fossil fuel combustion had been previously "sequestered" in the form of petroleum-based hydrocarbons before it was burned by humans.

Why do you feel that extracting atmospheric CO2 by building polysaccharide chains (aka wood) via photosynthesis in trees would be worse than having left it in its prior hydrocarbon form if we had never burned it in the first place?
AWS it will continue to be then.
Someone who can get hands on datasheets as well.
This "announcement" is full of buzzwords and useless marketing mumbo jumbo, but doesn't say if free accounts created years ago will remain free. Can anybody please confirm?
> For starters, it's using the word "anxiety" for completely different things.

I don't know what you're referring to, exactly. I have a cognitive mode where thoughts pool in my head and do not leave. This means I have a lot of pooled thoughts and they are resilient, in that I'm actively aware of them for a long time and it's easy to put them back in the pool. This also tends to leave to anxiety, because often to-dos sit in the pool just as well. But it helps me remember that I have to-dos.

Forgive me if I'm not too interested in the Wikipedia definition or the current psychology consensus. You are just trying to define anxiety as a tautologically negative thing while it's very tightly coupled to keeping track of things and assessing things. I can turn off my anxiety if I stop worrying about things, but if I stop worrying about things, they stop getting done.

It's like pain. Pain sucks, but if it's informing you about something cutting into your skin you'd probably like to know. At the same time, it can be used against you, be too much, and become its own bad thing. Anxiety is information of wrongness of state. Like anything else, it can be miscalibrated, and you seem to be just claiming that anxiety only exists in miscalibrated form, which is silly.

I can go into a lot more detail as to how this may work.

> And if anything, I'd say humans are happier when they are productive in a way.

Hence why I said what I said: humans were not necessarily meant to be happy. Human happiness is actually not relevant to this discussion. If anxiety helps you survive by making you avoid bad situations and pay your bills even if you become miserable in the process, it's done its job as far as evolution is concerned.

> You're not "either a warrior or a thinker", I see no basis for that dichotomy.

https://selfhacked.com/2014/12/24/worrier-warrior-explaining...

It's not a complete dichotomy, and obviously none of this is solidly proven, but I am not referring to stereotypes here.
Or just use the wood to build things! Has the added benefit of reducing the use of carbon intensive materials like concrete and steel.