skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I don't believe it's unreasonable to expect your computer to boot reliably and in a known amount of time.

How long do you think it would take for people to abandon a Linux distribution if it started auto-updating and locking people out randomly in the process? Of course Linux systems don't tend to have this problem because they can update while running.

Because this is Windows, users are left helpless while they lose time watching progress bars. The only reason this is accepted at all is through vendor lock in via the various MS ecosystems (Office, VS etc.), and because savy MS-centered developers can go through some pains to disable it on their own systems, after paying the freedom tax (the Enterprise license).
> Picking and choosing where your taxes go a terrible idea, because government isn't à la carte

And why not ?
Our current system stems from a different age, when there were no technological means of communication and collaboration similar to what we have today.
Democracy (majority wins, regardless of competence) was the best tech people could come up with in those circumstances.

But this is no longer the case.

If we could start over, how would we build SocietyOS today ?

Laws ? Why not write them in a special programming language, which can then be executed against facts from reality (coming from sensors and human input) - no judges, lawyers and lawmakers - input facts, click and get the judgement.

Use collaboration and communication tools like Github to write the laws. Let citizens submit pull requests.

Let citizens have the "Society" app on their phones and let them up/down vote serious things too, not just pictures of cats.

Log the public opinion and gather feedback in real time.

Use advanced reputation systems, in which people's opinions have different weights in various domains.
And so on.

Many many ways in which we can use today's technology to create a 'better', 'fairer' society - we just have to let go of the old system.

I think this will inevitably happen 'naturally' some time in the future, but the weight of the 'old' makes it very difficult to move forward now..
I don't know about Rust; but in ML family, everything in top level is a binding. Whether it's a variable, function, type or structure.

SML is explicit about it and its syntax makes it clear what type of binding is going on.

val x = 5

fun f = fn x => x * x

datatype weekend = Sat | Sun

So while on top level not everything is an expression, everything on the RHS is an expression.
LOL... because you idiots DON'T work in security, and never seem to leave anyone in security without a giant pile of your shit to clean up.

you're all symbiotic morons.
As someone who doesn't follow the BSD development nor the LLVM, I don't know whether to take this as a sarcastic comment or a serious one.
> > Now see, that's much clearer.

> From the perspective of someone who knows Lisp, perhaps.

For what it's worth, as a perpetual novice programmer who knows Lisp a little and Nim not at all, I also found qwertyuiop924 (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12617350 )'s example much clearer. (EDIT: Of course it's totally anecdotal, but I thought that it might be worthwhile to have a data point from someone who is not an expert in either language.)
In overlapping models we store probabilities for NxN blocks of colors/tiles. In non-overlapping models we store probabilities for individual colors/tiles.
I do some HTML-to-PDF conversion with Word every now and then, and all of a sudden, Word now offers two different ways to convert, and I have no idea which conforms to the former feature.

I also had a Jekyll site break, because GitHub Pages updated its github-pages gem remotely.

I totally get the advantage of auto-updates, but it's really hard to rely on any software to work the same way for a few years.
Everybody enjoys free (as in "freedom") software. Turns out, even quality-wise free software is often much better than non-free, closed-source software. On the other hand, it may be hard to really understand the rationale behind it. The idea goes against the principles of capitalism (based on property rights). Also, if it is completely OK for hardware design to be proprietary, why should it not be OK for software? What is so special about it? The arguments put forward by proponents of free software do not seem very convincing, and sometimes their personalities do not help attracting people to their cause. Often, this ideal becomes a nuisance even in the world of open source. If you want to use Debian, for instance, you are pretty much forced to use "non-free" repositories (or a "non-free" Debian re-distribution) for your setup to be useful.
Does your code use CUDA drivers/GPU or just CPU?
Real Programmers Don't Use PASCAL
Every single nimrod out there thinks his way is better, and that they're improving the tooling. What if the assumption is wrong, the tooling is just fine, and the problem is in the nimrod?
I'm not so sure that's justice in this case, or in general. If someone has already spent time in jail and has a felony on their record, erasing the possibility of utilizing their law degree, do we need to punish them further? What does "paying one's debt to society" mean?
Oh wow, I can't believe that Rome is #2! That's one of my all-time favorite shows and I've only ever known 1 other person who has even heard of it. I really do recommend it to anyone who likes historical drama with spare-no-expense sets, costumes and visual effects.
Entirely possible that this is a leaked PR spin being used to try and cast a more favorable light on the accident by placing blame on an uncontrollable third party and not SpaceX.
"So I focussed on building tools as well, automated reverse engineering and static analysis tools."

Smart pivot. I mentioned that in my own comment. The tool building, if done right, can give you knowledge or code that can be reapplied to all kinds of use cases. Especially in static analysis since there's a few techniques and constructions that keep showing up in tools whether it's system, web, whatever. If you ever went for formal verification, the stuff you came up with might again be reusable on new problems.

Much higher payoff on tool building than just hunting and patching vulnerabilities.
Knowing what good technique is is a bit of a red herring I think--the bugbear of people who aren't that good yet, or the recently-good. I say this because I used to watch out for examples of poor guitar technique and be sort of critical of them but in doing so I noticed something--the moment poor technique got in the way of what they were doing they stopped doing it. Immediately, mid tune, no problem. I've seen this countless times--you can watch someone go from having their thumb on the top of the neck and their pinky on the soundboard and all sorts of little deficiencies and just watch each of them drop away and come back as the music requires it. This kind of malleability in the moment is the common element in the best musicians I think. As a matter of practice you'll certainly waste less time if someone points out poor technique early for you, but beyond the edge cases where poor technique is injurious that's about it (and I'd note, the vast majority of steel string guitar finger-style playing is of the injurious sort, but its just rarely played long and vigorously enough to become so). On the other hand, read this interview with Keith Frazer [1], whose slavish devotion to proper technique has left him irreparably damaged.

The fact is, at a certain level of playing, you stop asking "is this correct technique?" and you start asking, "does this make the music I am playing better? am i bringing attention to what i want to bring out of the piece? does it make it easier to play?" Preoccupation with correct technique as a separate existing thing from external authority becomes a hindrance. You want to learn about your art from those around you, and have them learn from you. If you don't feel ready or capable of being independent in this regard, that's fine. But not everyone is an amateur, and no one claims to ever stop learning, so what are they doing differently?

e: What most interests me about the article is that this comment section is filled entirely with people, like myself, who's opinion on the matter has not been changed one iota by the article

[1] http://www.keithfrazer.com/interview.htm
Mintbox Mini Pro
Theo is known to like to showboat.
Thanks for the feedback. Knowing precisely what threw you off is super valuable to know, and I will directly tell the team members in charge of marketing about it.
I can also tell you for sure that there was no intention to deceive or misrepresent. In fact, anyone at all who is in the NYC area is welcome to see and judge Volume for themselves at our Brooklyn lab. We have a 'library' set up exactly for that purpose - to let the public come see and play with it! :)

However, I also definitely see what you are saying (and I will push for the horse in particular to be changed or updated). If there are any other things that threw you off, please do post in reply.

For anyone interested to drop by the lab and see Volume for themselves feel free to email: future@lookingglassfactory.com (the lab is at the North tip of Greenpoint Brooklyn, across the bridge from the Vernon-Jackson stop on the 7 train)
Blindpad: help reduce bias in technical communication
In regards to the throughput degenerating it sounds like maybe they were hitting the limit of configured read/write tickets in the WiredTiger engine. This article talks about those settings as well as the cache settings:

http://www.developer.com/db/tips-for-mongodb-wiredtiger-perf...
Really? Some US soldiers in Iraq looked very young, maybe 20? How many years of training can you get before they deploy you, maybe two? Most professions require more training.
It's called rocket science for a reason. Looking into sabotage usually indicates that they have no clue what happenned and are looking into saving face.

Hopefully, Emdrive or a similar technology works out - otherwise, spacefaring is going to be a risky and overly complicated endeavour for a long time.
I transitioned from writing trading software to writing software to secure networks (with a brief startup co-founding stint.) Here's my biased, objective, and anecdotal opinion.

Security is just another knowledge domain. More than any other domain, security has a clear divide between understanding the math behind cryptography (primes, elliptic curves...), understanding how to implement correct and high-performance code (sse4, avx,simd..), and high-level use of crypto implementations to create secure protocols (diffie-hellman, tls...) On top of that there's a new category that's emerging in the field of what I would call embedded/root of trust security in the form of SGX and TPM.

If you stay with the mind-set of "use TLS and PGP" that's very commendable but probably not very challenging. Going all the way up and down the crypto stack is extremely challenging. Squeezing every last cycle out of CPUs is very lasting (we'll always need crypto )and very transferable (mobile devices, clients, servers, embedded, companies of any size, companies of any domain...) It's also political and philosophical at times. Basically it's a hacker's dream to work in security.
If I was any SpaceX competitor other than ULA I would definitely shoot from the ULA facilities. But I also don't think a trained sniper would be so obvious.
with HTTP configuration, Java Applet and your own Prism software supervision.
I'm not seeing how that's anti-competitive. Doesn't stopping ad blockers help other advertisers and networks just as much as it helps Google?
I must say it is the other way round for me. The latest Windows is the best release since Windows 7. Windows 8(.1) seemed like an alpha version of the current OS (I just say: power off button).
This is an oddly victimless crime though. If you know enough to do it, then you know the pad is clear.

It's almost exactly the type of stupid Putin might go in for if it felt deniable.

Conversely there have been telescope lenses that needed to be bullet proofed in transit to stop idiots shooting at them too.
On Netflix there is a documentary on the engines it's quite interesting.

The engines were built just as the USSR was collapsing. The engines use a better grade materials and it uses a more efficient combined pumping system 20% better.

The engines were supposed to be scrapped but one of the guys in management diverted them to a warehouse.
I've been doing this in my installable app for a bit now. Online training while effectively running blind has been a bit difficult...

Machine learning is definitely going to make devs more productive in this kind of way.
Shen Trick Shots – LambdaConf 2016
Print-on-demand bone could quickly mend major injuries
https://daks2k3a4ib2z.cloudfront.net/54a5a40be53a05f34703dd1... on the left, it feels far enough muscles for a developer, why would you need more muscles? that consumes more calories :) and are pretty useless, except for our stupidly wrong society's standards
It seems like the author approached crypto (and security) from a perspective of breaking things. Sure, that's a fundamental part of both fields, but the harder (and IMO) more fun part is building secure systems.

That's the entire reason you have proofs of security in crypto: to show that breaks are unlikely. I don't quite see why crypto should be "blindly result-oriented", and whether that's even a good thing; when public key crypto was invented it was wildly impractical.

The vast majority of crypto is usually not about breaks.
lol copyright.
On violent criminal offenses, sure.

On drug charges, I would love to see some data backing up that stereotype because I don't believe it's true for a second. All kinds of rich people do all kinds of drugs. Hell, at Columbia University an entire fraternity was shut down for running an LSD selling ring.

My point was not that she turned out to be innocent. My point is that she actually got fair treatment in the US justice system and support from her local police department. The doctrine of "innocent until proven guilty", combined with the equal-protection clause, ought to ensure that all US citizens get those two things. The fact is that if you are non-white, or poor, or heaven forbid both of those things at once, you simply don't have access to those same things. It has nothing to do with probability of guilt, because by law it shouldn't.
Yahoo Data Breach may have affected over 1B users
Hackers Guide to gaining muscle: Trenbolone
Generally you should get a basic feel from looking at the bug trackers and other community resources. Bad documentation you should be able to spot by looking at it or notice early when trying to follow it.

Do they have clear instructions on how to get started, run tests etc? How's the tone? What are discussions on PRs like, is there good feedback or are PRs from non-core people just ignored?

IMHO that's something you have to judge yourself, if you feel comfortable with a project and what kind of resources you need. (E.g. for me, many javascript projects are hard to contribute to because I have little experience with common tooling. But at the same time I know that in the JS community, most people are familiar with them and would not see this as a hurdle, and I would not necessarily fault the project for it.)

Some projects explicitly mark issues as "beginner friendly", "good first project" etc.

And try to pick something you use or care about: It's a lot harder to stay motivated if you don't really care about the end result.
The drug war is what gives these type of police the justification for their actions. The drug war will be our undoing.
This is a great answer, honestly, and you're not alone.

FWIW, here's how. Since stash only captures uncommitted changes, I assume you're working on master and want to create a feature branch, and you've already made some changes for the branch.

git checkout -b myFeature

That's it. Uncommitted changes aren't in a branch yet, so they don't have to be stashed before you make a new one. You can always start a branch from wherever you are, and switch to it, and your changes will be right there. Now you can commit, and your commit will be on the branch myFeature.

BTW, you can switch branches without stashing too. Git will prevent you from messing up your uncommitted changes. If that happens, then you can commit or stash first. The safest course of action is always to commit any changes first before you do anything.

It's also easy to build your feature branch if you have both committed and uncommitted changes already, or if you want to base your feature branch off a different branch than the one you're working in. I'm already spamming you, so just say so if you'd like me to outline those.
Low speed is not a problem. Compared to missiles, all publicly known manned aircraft are really really slow. Even the SR-71 was kind of slow, and it no longer flies.

Radar profile is a minor issue. Normally, the A-10 would be facing unguided and perhaps IR-guided threats. The A-10 has flares and chaff.

I don't think modern radar-guided AAA is much of an issue given the use case. The radar gets taken out, either by the A-10 itself or by something high and stealthy or even by a cruise missile. The larger systems are not easy to move and hide. For the smaller systems, the A-10 can withstand 50mm shells hitting the cockpit armor.
One Proven Habit That Physically Changes Your Brain
Yes, you can now buy gold like you buy bitcoin.

No, a rise in gold demand is not implied by this, gold is already much easier to buy than bitcoin.
http://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#copyright:

"The LLVM project does not require copyright assignments, which means that the copyright for the code in the project is held by its respective contributors who have each agreed to release their contributed code under the terms of the LLVM License.

An implication of this is that the LLVM license is unlikely to ever change: changing it would require tracking down all the contributors to LLVM and getting them to agree that a license change is acceptable for their contribution. Since there are no plans to change the license, this is not a cause for concern.

As a contributor to the project, this means that you (or your company) retain ownership of the code you contribute, that it cannot be used in a way that contradicts the license (which is a liberal BSD-style license), and that the license for your contributions won’t change without your approval in the future."

OOPS.
Though I'm not taking it as ultimate truth, I'm glad this article exists. Most foobar-advice sites just copy-paste some material without bothering to note readers that it is not backed by anything except similar googled bs.

Btw, is anyone aware of "engineer's guide to xyz" aggregator?
Yet another object oriented language? No, no, no, enough!

We already have (persistent) objects: they're called files.

Object oriented programming in the 21st century, in times of ANSI Common LISP and functional, stateless programming? Wow. No!!!
Unsurprisingly, there is what looks like a paywall / call-to-spam at the end of the 2nd page.

For those who want a non-engineer's guide, I cannot recommend strengtheory.com enough. Greg Nuckols is legitimately strong and legitimately up to date with the research.

I'm also struck the idiosyncratic exercise selection. For most beginners a boring group of barbell exercises and a flourish of bicep curls and pullups will get them started. Typically in less time, with less equipment.

Take the dumbbell RDL, for example. Most people can't get the barbell variant even vaguely right and it has an entire bar to cue you about what path to follow.

Hand grippers? Right out of the gate? The good ones aren't cheap. Or you could just wait until grip strength is a limiting factor.
Author here. More than happy to spend the next few hours answering any questions if the admins find that appropriate. I will do my best to cite evidence/research for my responses.
> But they will continue to "trust individual existing certificates" if they had been published to Certificate Transparency logs by September 19th.

This seems even more sensible than Mozilla's existing proposal to trust the certificate notBefore date until proof of further backdated certificates.
Give everyone:
1. Food
2. Clean, safe and warm shelter, doesn't need to be fancy
3. A little money to spend (just a little! There still needs to be incentive to go out and work!)
4. Free and good quality education

And legalise drugs.

No more need for warrior cops.
The opposite is true.

There's no discipline in computer science that is more about breaks than cryptography. The whole field is refined down to the tension between performance and vulnerabilities. What you can do in a cryptosystem is defined by breaks; progress in the field is punctuated by breaks.

For what it's worth: Thomas Dullien is a cryptographer by training; he was one of Dobbertin's doctoral students.
What principle of capitalism is being violated? If anything, the freedom to set a price, even $0 if you so choose, sounds like the free market at work.
Looks like you are correct, for some reason I felt it was introduced in the mid 2000's.

I'm actually surprised that they managed to produce a cost effective and functional DVR in 1999.

How was the quality? the earliest DVR's I can remember are the Samsung DirectTV ones from the mid 2000's.

But then again it seems that the 90's and early 2000's are a blur to me, I was surprised to "discover" today that The Mask of Zoro came out in 2005 the same year as Serenity I had surely pegged it to be considerably older.
"I would predict the outcome would be a court opinion that any contributor has the right to change the license"

You think Microsoft, who has put tens of thousands of lines into Linux, has a right to change the license of Linux away from GPL? Is that really what you're positing?
Do they?

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.adblockplu...

I don't use Android (nor any Google product besides search) but I'm pretty sure you can get ad blockers on Android.
> I encourage you to read the free chapter of Nim In Action as the author does a good job explaining why.

Links: https://www.manning.com/books/nim-in-action and (for the free chapter) https://manning-content.s3.amazonaws.com/download/1/f2a2c55-... .
This is good advice but I would caution engineers who sit at their desk all day. Don't just lift heavy weight without spending almost an equal amount of time on core strength and flexibility.
What's hypocritical about recognizing that people can have different values? And wanting to live among people who generally share my values, while others can do the same with theirs?
not to confound with Toblerone