skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Presumably you can corrupt a couple of small networks on which bitcoin nodes are running and that wouldn't disrupt time for the entire chain and clients relying on it...
Motion Computing for the Web
> budgets aren't unlimited, but not having to be profitable makes a huge difference in which actions can be taken.

Profits are still required for gov't spending, but they are just made by someone else in the country and transferred to the gov't via taxation. Even deficit spending is just the choice to spend money today that will be obtained from taxation at a later date.
HP Promises Fix for Time Bombing Unofficial Ink Cartridges in Its Printers
Here's a measurement of "change" that really doesn't seem to have such dastardly motivations: body mass. I.e., if a species is much larger than its ancestors, it has changed a bunch. If not, it hasn't. On which horn of your dilemma will you try to catch me?
I would have been nice to see the trends compared to states without any legalisation, but other than that it's a good analysis.
And that argument should be supported by something other than pure conjecture
>I know that Fedex is mostly an express service

This was true in the past, but FedEx and UPS are practically identical in their service offerings for the last 15 years.
This is really interesting in light of the current political discussions:

"Until 1913 marijuana was legal throughout the United States under both state and federal law. Beginning with California in 1913 and Utah in 1914, however, states began outlawing marijuana, and by 1930, 30 states had adopted marijuana prohibition. Those state-level prohibitions stemmed largely from anti-immigrant sentiment and in particular racial prejudice against Mexican migrant workers, who were often associated with use of the drug. Prohibition advocates attributed terrible crimes to marijuana and the Mexicans who smoked it, creating a stigma around marijuana and its purported “vices.”"

One century later, the prejudices haven't changed.
I'm probably going to be downvoted to oblivion, but I would actually be more at ease in general if most people would defer critical judgments to a reliable and open-sourced AI. For example in terms of driving, my discomfort about how an AI would handle being Kobayashi Maru'd is far less significant than my discomfort about encountering a teenage driver.
I had a monitor that needed you be delivered on time for a project falsely marked as an attempted delivery by ups. I was persistent and obtained the phone number if the local ups depot. I called them and made it clear that I knew they were bullshiting. The driver was sent out to make the delivery and, thinking i wasn't home, threw the monitor on the ground, stomped it, and drop kicked it onto my front steps. Yay for well designed packaging.

The real lesson here is that Amazon's SLA should have given them the positioning data it takes to catch ups in a lie like this. I should not have had to pursue it. Amazon should have been penalizing then by an amount that stings AND having the driver out late.
There are many skilled professions which are highly unionized; e.g., the various TV and film production unions. Which professions are and aren't unionized is, to a large extent, just a quirk of historical circumstance.
As tradition, Apple will come in mid-hype and do it "right"
That works... before the ipo. After that relentless success is the expectation - delegation has built in risk so is very hard to justify.
It sounds like you operate how I usually do; the communication cost outweighs the benefits of collaboration, and it ends up being a tiring and frustrating experience.

I've seen pair teams working correctly, though. Each of them bounces ideas off the other one, and they progress faster than either would've alone. It's like racing two algorithms against each other, each searching a different part of the problem space, and using the first result that's returned. It lets them move on to the next problem quicker.

I don't usually do that very well, but I can't deny that if you've got the right pair of developers, it's a very powerful technique.
>The trick is to have a way for developers to power down somewhat. I'm not sure how you would do that. I never got the chance to figure it out.

When it's time to change pace one of the things I think helps "power down" is to let team members work on things they are interested in or find important. Instead of priorities coming from up high it lets their minds breathe and explore something on their own. The difficulty is in managing to find the time for it.
Yea, historically FB is for demand generation and Google for capturing intent. There wasn't really a good solution for iOS. Adwords weren't terribly effective on iOS but Android may be a different story. So I'm sure FB isn't shaking in their boots or anything but I do think there are sizable budgets dedicated to FB bc that was the only truly scalable method of user acquisition on iOS.
D-Wave Systems Previews 2000-Qubit Quantum System
Seems so based on LeCun and others' posts on Facebook -https://www.facebook.com/yann.lecun/posts/10153847670912143

"Finally we announced the Partnership on AI to benefit people and society!

Amazon, Google/DeepMind, Facebook, IBM, and Microsoft will collaborate to advance understanding of AI and discuss best practices on challenging issues such as ethics and trust. The five companies are founding the initiative, but everybody is invited to join.

Representatives are Eric Horvitz (Microsoft), Yann LeCun (Facebook), Mustafa Suleyman (DeepMind), Ralf Herbrich (Amazon), and myself from IBM.
More info at www.partnershiponai.org

Looking forward to start working together on this exciting initiative!"

"A picture of the co-founders of the Partnership on AI, at the IBM Watson Headquarters in NYC (on Astor Place, across the street from my Facebook office!).
With Eric Horvitz, Francesca Rossi, me and Mustafa Suleyman.
Ralf Herbrich joined us by phone from Germany."
Unions are a collective bargaining mechanism.

> unskilled

http://www.alpa.org/about-alpa/what-we-do

> necessary

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2015/01/15/415m-settlement-...
I am not saying that this is not a bug, just that this isn't the problem that the author is making. If you have local access, you probably can do other things if your only objective is to do a DoS.
I never understood that mentality, frankly. I see so much in common between programmers and craftsmen, and it would be hilarious for e.g. a carpenter to refuse a specialized tool because they ONLY USE PHILLIPS HEAD SCREWDRIVERS. I would think programmers take pride in having a bigger "mental toolbox." (To deflate my own point however I've seen some interesting debates in construction; e.g. plastic or copper piping for plumbing is still apparently a contentious topic?)
The first. It's very easy to show species with similar body mass that anyone sane would characterize as being very different from each other.

What analysis will benefit by treating all similarly-massed descendant species of some clade as equivalent to each other, while those with different mass are different?
Pair Programming is just another tool to add to the set. It works very well with the right environment and the right situation, the same as every other tool/methodology works in its own environment.

The trick is getting the combination right for your team/technology/problem.

So why does the author feel the need to bring things to extremes? Professing that peer programming only work for the minority and supporting it with anecdotal evidence reeks of confirmation bias to me.

There is such thing as a middle ground.
Implementing and Using GraphQL at GitHub
I am on the Looking Glass team on Volume. I can answer you.

As far as resolution: each slice is about 104px high resolution in it's current state, the width is about 1500px in resolution.
The current depth resolution is 10. Because Volume currently has 10 slices. We do use some tricks to reduce the apparently low depth resolution, for example we allow a dev to set settings to 'overdraw' the slice so slices draw parts of their sister slices, which are then blended/interpolated with shaders. It helps a lot, and in fact our tests with more slices don't seem to do much other than increase the quality and viability of wider viewing angles. At near straight on viewing angles (within 15 degrees of the center), more slices don't seem to affect the quality of the display much (interestingly).

As an additive display, you are correct, a dim object in front of a light one wont show well... it really does look a lot like 'princess leia' in the 'obi-wan come help me' scene.

There are 2 ways we found to mitigate this.
1) We allow devs to set a 'black point' which adds the desired value to all geometry, thereby having a way to distinguish 'black' from 'void'.
2) Certain applications benefit a lot from not rendering slices at all but drawing everything as a normal 3D scene and then using a shader reading the depth buffer to determine the slice of a particular pixel - hence anything in front of something else causes a 'shadow' in subsequent slices (so it -CAN- occlude in this way, but by sacrificing the view from the back side). Things like scanned human heads look very good with this method... they honestly look like ghost heads suspended in space inside Volume.

Anyway, I hope it answers your questions.
(I am the main tools dev).
Spotify is reportedly in talks to acquire SoundCloud
I've updated my original comment with some URLs.
Why do you say that it's a poor approach to good work? If you set up standards for how to communicate during the exercise then you will likely find it an enjoyable experience.
Doing the safe-and-effective testing the FDA requires is incredibly expensive. But the cocktail is formed from off the shelf cheap components. So why should a company pay half a billion for testing when anyone could then make the drug? (The article didn't say it was under patent, and the tone of it suggests it wouldn't be patentable.)

This is the flip side of the good intentions of FDA's mandate.
Exactly, it would be odd if early humans were less creative than today. The main difference seems to be infrastructure and they didn't have the positive feedback englightment loops the developed world does today.
I picked up the CVS habit almost exactly 20 years ago (1996) from someone in the banking & finance industry -- hardly a bastion of radical adoption. By then, CVS was 10 years old. We used RCS extensively to manage config files.

To the earlier parent who mentioned process isolation: You're thinking too much about the consumer/desktop world. The entire enterprise world was used to it and demanded it, be it on (hey, humor here) SCO UNIX (yes, they really did make a useful product before they turned evil), SunOS, VAX/VMS, MVS, BSD UNIX, etc.

The desktop world was far behind the state of the art in commercial systems in those days. Even in the 80s, you were quite possibly running your enterprise with an Oracle database, on fully memory-protected hardware. Heck - you may have even been running some of your stuff in a VM on an IBM mainframe. We took some big jumps backwards in pursuit of making computers cost-effective enough for mass adoption, and it took a while before the consumer side of things jumped forward to become the same platforms used for enterprise use.

Kids these days. ;)
http://www.reddit.com/r/veganketo
Hold on a sec. This article basically says that we need to wait until a plan makes sense. Well a trip to Mars will never make sense financially and it's easy to find fault in all plans. Planning a trip to the Mojave desert makes better sense. It's cheaper, no one will die and we know there's life there.

A trip to Mars is a stretch goal that we need to start as a species. We know that our lifetime as a species is limited on earth so the sooner we start figuring out how to get off the planet the better. Yes, we might fail but then we'll have to try again and again.

Musk has made himself the spokesman for that task. No one else seems to want the job. Yes, he's a dreamer and might be overselling the task but that's what we need. We need to start. I can tell you that if we never try it will never happen.

My hope is that he becomes so rich that he owns all of Mar's resources. Yes, he'll own them for a bit but it means mankind has made a large step forward. Go Musk!
ArXiv paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/1609.08144

(Not yet on Arxiv Sanity Preserver, but should be added soon I guess)
As long as you ignore the whole tax revenue part.
Many waterproof phones are offered with headphone jack. Dont blame the lack of that on the fact that the iphone is now waterproof.
It might be all about design. Control and the royalties that need to be paid to them to use the lightning port of course I bet is something that was also discussed extensively in their decision.
The cost of living should be considered along with their income tax rate. It varies from canton (province) to canton, but hovers around 10%.

That's a great deal compared to most any other European country. In neighboring Germany for instance, if you earn €55k, your tax rate is about 44% (including solidarity surcharge). In Zurich it's about 11% (canton plus federal tax). The top rates are 47% and 16%, respectively.

So it's not much surprise that people want to live there, despite the high cost of living.
I could do pair programming occasionally, if a problem is particularly vexing, but my flow depends on getting in the zone and being "one" with my thoughts, and even tuning out and doing something else for 10 minutes or so. Going on a drive, etc. I'm not sure my partner would appreciate that.
Can we please stop comparing AngularJS to React?

"As you can see, React.js is better established now and does not involve learning a new template syntax like in Angular."

When React first came out, did it not require learning a new way of doing things?

You understand AJS2 has been out of beta for just a few weeks, right?

Github stars - 16k vs 49k - right - weeks out of beta. React has been around much longer.

Size - 776k vs 151k - AJS is an MVC, React is just the view. Of course AJS will be bigger.

Learning Curve - Medium vs Low - according to who? I find React very difficult to learn compared to AJS. With React, theres a million different ways to build a site / app. Every single article out there does it a different way and reading multiple articles or tutorials is almost impossible cause of that. At least with AJS, I get a good, solid foundation to start with and a clear learning path.

"Again, as you can see, it is important to remember that Angular is by Google and React is by Facebook. Now, let’s take a more in depth look at the attributes:"

Why is this important? Given that Facebook killed parse.com, right now, I'd say your better off choosing a framework NOT developed by Facebook in fear they'll kill it off eventually too.
What? Amazon lists dozens of types of potassium supplements.
Wouldn't they have to store that information so you can redownload/refund apps and restore the in-app purchases?
I have a tip for companies like HP that prevent cloned ink cartridges from working in their printers: You should secretly sell your own official cartridges as cloned cartridges at a discount price -- as well as continuing to sell the official cartridges at the rip off prices.

That way, you'll capture the high profit on those people who pay for the official cartridges as well making some money on the "cloned" cartridges.

It would be a little embarrassing for them it was discovered, but it wouldn't be the first time a company had wildly different pricing depending on the marketing channel.
The main problem with pair programming to me never seems to be brought up - the simple fact that it's massively intrusive micro-management.

I want to be given a task and do it how I think best, or how I feel at the time, or at a minimum without someone staring over my shoulder.

Not having that freedom is a huge problem for some, like me.

I could flip burgers with more freedom and enjoy it more as a result.
> revenue stream isn't based on mining your personal information and communications

Oh, it is! Not only that, but their revenue stream is mining that data and handing it over to the government:
http://www.atl.external.lmco.com/business/ATL10.php
So, pretty much exactly the same as Google Search.
Exactly. By skipping over the huge $$$ profits this article reveals itself to be pretty disingenuous.
I 100% agree that programmers are craftsman, I'd go so far as to say we are a trade/profession and not a "science." Despite this, unlike many other professions programmers show a trait very different to other professionals. We have huge ass egos.

We think we are right all the time and there is no compromise.
I expect you were missing electrolytes, not carbs. That's what the Gatorade helped with.
It's solid taken in isolation. The problem is the context: from his previous post, R_haterade appears to think that journalists covering homophobic oppression is "US imperialist foreign policy"--that a free and honest press should be expected to ignore human rights abuses if they're against groups he doesn't like. That makes his later, more cogent points seem like a mere smokescreen.
Without having given it a first thought either.
Supermarkets are probably one of the least usable markets in existence though. It's almost impossible to go into a supermarket without an understanding of what you need and leave better off. You have to go in with expert knowledge of everything you need. Hardly a role model for marketplace design.
Whether right or wrong, I think it's good to keep in mind that Apple has, by far the highest quarterly profit and total asset value, compared to any of these companies - it really is a giant among giants. Alphabet certainly has an excellent future outlook (reflected in the markets), but its current financial state still pales in comparison to Apple.

Taking this into account, I figure Apple thinks twice and thrice before joining industry consortiums and partnerships that they didn't initiate themselves. This would be straightforward posturing/strategizing on their part, and probably doesn't reveal too much about the current state of their R&D in Machine Learning. It's unfortunate that things are this way, but nothing unusual from a "game theory" perspective.
Hm, now I want my order email to include a (nonce) barcode that I print out and leave on my door, and the USPS worker has to scan that before they can claim anything was delivered.
Computer Program for Simulating Time Travel and a Solution to Grandfather Paradox
They’re Not Coming Back: The Religiously Unaffiliated and the Post-Religious Era
Psychic who predicted Hillary falling and her health issues
I think finance spends more on security than health or retail, but I don't think their outcome scales linearly with that investment.
Infographic made with 1.404 pieces of wood
If you really think that security and privacy are off-topic in a discussion about wanting a phone with a focus on useful productivity functions rather than entertainment apps, I think you're missing one of the main reasons for smartphone fatigue. camelNotation themselves mentioned the desire for high security, right there in the top comment that started this thread.
Honestly, what is your issue with the Koch Brothers?
And "the process of transporting" is transportation (or transport). The reason "sort" can't easily replace "sortation" is because it's only one syllable. The two meanings of "transport" are distinguished by pronunciation: TRANSport vs. transPORT
[HEADS-UP] 11.0-RELEASE status update
What sort of value add do you provide on top of what the open source frameworks provide?
> The fact that I’m very accomplished and skilled proves that pair programming is not necessary. Pair programming is absolutely not necessary to increase developer productivity or produce the very best product. It would have the opposite effect with me.

Argh, so close to acknowledging the existence of different personality types and seeing each of them as valuable, you know?
Cato is libertarian, but it's about as far from neocon as you can get. They opposed both Iraq wars.
> If I were forced into pair programming

There's the problem.

Don't get me wrong, I prefer coding away in a dark cave illuminated only by my wall of monitors as much as the next introvert, and prefer to "pair" with static analysis tools, unit tests, debuggers, etc. - they interrupt me less and don't disrupt my flow.

On the other hand, I've been part of 3+ person "mob" programming clusters a number of times - to tackle tough bugs as a quick rubber ducking session spiraled out of control and became "no you're right, that's really weird... could it be X? Let me look at Y..." (usually fluctuating back and forth between multiple people looking at the same debug session or code, and people splitting off to separately investigate different possibly related things on their own boxes)

Although perhaps this is more pair/mob debugging than pair/mob programming.

> (Frequent interruption is fundamental tenet of pair programming. How anyone can reach peak productivity or enter or stay in the zone for very long under pair programming conditions is beyond me.)

I think it really depends on how you're tackling a problem. On the one extreme, pair programming could be as bad as your manager forcibly interrupting your train of thought for a status update on something completely unrelated.

On the other extreme, both your unconscious stream of "wait, what about..."s and your coworker's voiced stream of "wait, what about..."s on the exact same topic merge rather gracefully into one, redirecting your train of thought more than interrupting it outright.

Where on the spectrum you'll end up depends partly on how well you mesh with the other programmer on a technical level, and partly on your communication skills. There's a lot of programmers out there where their approach is simply different enough that we're usually on different pages, and I'd rather handle them as asynchronous email/chat. It also helps that I've mastered the art of "one sec..." - mostly ignoring audio input until I've managed to finish or save my current thought, at least.
My experience is pair programming turns 2 similarly skilled programmers into 1 slightly better programmer. For tracking down really hard bugs it's 100% worth it, especially if the bug crosses code they are both familiar with. But, that's about it.

In the case of large skill gaps it's not really pair programming so much as training etc.
I don't find it surprising at all that people with an agenda can still look at things objectively.

Especially since we all have agendas, and I like to think I'm fairly objective.
Calc is programming.
So that you (or other interested parties) can verify the correct operation of the centralized authority, and so that the central authority can prove that they aren't hiding anything.

For example, in the case of certificate transparency, that the CAs aren't mis-issuing certificates, and further that the logs aren't conspiring to hide entries (such as via split views).
I was at a conference in NYC and I was met an AWS person and yesterday I mentioned to him that Amazon was a logistics company with the Amazon Robotics subsidiary running their warehouses and leasing of airplanes for airfreight and how it would compete with UPS.

I have had problems with Fedex delivering for Amazon and with Same Day Service in Manhattan twice.

Amazon also has these pickup boxes in the local drug store -- they do think of things.

A lot of the stores seem to run out of items in NYC and I'm hoping Amazon would run the warehouses/logistics for these stores chains (e.g., CVS, Duane Reed).

RE: USPS. I don't like it when they delivery last mile.
I think he's a bit too "binary" in his estimation of others opinions on the matter. Personally I like pair/group programming about 1/4 of the time. Usually during the beginnings of a big project.

Its great for going "wide" but it sucks for going "deep". Use it when you need it. Don't when you don't.

Now I'll grant you that when you have a manager who likes the buzzword and insists on it dogmatically, you might have a problem on your hands.