skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The absurdity of this is not explained very well in the article because of a lack of context. The Zumwalt is not meant to be an "anti-air" ship, it was meant to be a replacement for battleships in the role of shelling land targets from sea. One of the reasons why it is meant to be stealthy is so that it can go close to the shore.

The program has been cut down because of problems, though not with the guns. Except that now there are much fewer ships and the rounds will be so expensive the navy won't buy them. They can use old rounds but they won't work better then the cheaper old rounds on the cheaper old ships using cheaper guns.

And the point of the ship is .. what?

If you are a US taxpayer you should weep.
The fbx exporter can be tricky... Make sure you have your whole model selected before exporting and also switch from cycles rendering to Blender engine before export.

I found those two things fix missing stuff in exports of all kinds =)
Found a photo of me working on my R6

https://www.instagram.com/p/o4XZ5_hVSR/
It's still not clear whether this is actually true or whether we'll just be writing javascript from C. It really depends on the quality of APIs available.
Sad.

It's probably not even a legal issue, so much as an insurance thing.

I wonder if there could be a special law passed for such things, i.e. you participate and you 'waive your right to sue' kind of thing?
Patrick McKenzie, prolific HN user and developer/entrepreneur:
https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=patio11
> The brains of, say, gazelles,

General consensus is that this is hard-wired genetic behavior. It's mildly impressive, but nothing that we think we couldn't do on a computer with enough time and effort.

> In short, babies learn to speak without ever hearing what we would consider enough language.

All known humans who were deprived of social contact during early development were unable to learn speech later on. Babies get a ton of language stimulus; I'm not sure where you're getting "what we would consider enough".

> In a thousand years, with completely different computers, maybe.

We're only a few orders of magnitude off from standard COTS computer equipment being able to match the throughput you would expect from a human brain doing one "useful" thing per neuron at several kHz (which is probably a gross overestimation). Even if we decided to do a full neurophysiological simulation for every neuron in the brain, that only adds a few more orders of magnitude required compute power.

We expect to hit $1/(TFLOP/s) over the next 20 years or so, and there's physically no way the brain is doing more than a (PFLOP/s), unless neurons are doing some insane amount of work at a sub-neuronal level (which, I admit, is possible, but quite unlikely).

I would propose a long-term bet, but I'm not sure what the conditions would be.
Oh, so we're talking about different things (not exactly with you, but in the conversation)

I was thinking about the number of interactions (or any other tunable parameter) in the same algorithm, like Scrypt or bcrypt or PBKDF2.

Of course, you're completely right on your example: change one for another that increases time just in browser doesn't give any gain. It must be harder to the attacker...
Where I'm from - Farmers leave veggies at a stand on the side of the road, you take what you want and leave money in the bucket.

No kidding, bucket of money by the side of the road.

Seeing that re-invigorated my faith in humanity.
On a similar note, Zork I had a textual description of a sunset (being a text adventure) that, for whatever reason, I found massively peaceful.
Show HN: Just Read – Reader Extension for Chrome
Two points:

1. I can think there are things wrong with food safety and advocate for new things being done safely at the same time. To some degree, you have to make changes where there's the political will to improve, even if it's not perfect.

2. The rate of mutation and deployment of new cultivars is really the concerning aspect, not the mechanism. I think we should have to label and clone cultivars (while checking for drift) these days, which still isn't perfect but better.

I want to make wider changes, but there's no reason not to start with limited changes at the start, particularly if we can do it for the method that's likely to be the long-term winner.

GMOs have the economic advantage of precision and control, while they also have the political will around them to effect regulation. So you can effect long-term broad legislation by targetting GMOs at this early stage.

So let me ask you this, if I were broadly concerned by food as widely practiced, unregulated pharmacy, why wouldn't I target regulation on a politically hot portion of the market as the wedge for wider reform?
Try SpinaliS Canada Chair for Free
GBPUSD: Bear Threat Sets in on Loss of Upside Momentum
How is this "tragedy of the commons"? The only "common" they are using is the RF spectrum, which they are presumably not polluting too badly or the FCC would start smashing down doors.

Let's not start claiming the internet itself somehow qualifies as a "common", because with common ownership rationally comes common censorship (as with the FCC and public broadcasts).
I use OBS with the NVEC codec - the one that is installed with the NVIDIA driver, and if you are recording anything, regardless of 3D or 2D, it is your best bet.

It's especially nice compared to normal H.264, and has the option of light compression with nominal CPU usage if you don't like large lossless files. It outputs normal MP4/H.264 files that I can then work with in Linux (as opposed to say Fraps) but uses the fact your GPU is already rendering the scene to then output it in H.264.
Don't $&@~ it up this time Sega.
Why would using /opt/homebrew/bin stop these sorts of attacks?
Don't really freelance anymore, but when I did, $75/hour (mostly in Rails and ColdFusion) was typical. I do some mentoring (codementor.io) at $80-120/hour (they take 20%). (My rates would be higher if it was my fulltime gig)
Ask HN: Quick question about your professional relationships
Just want to get hackers, makers and operators opinion on this.

- Are you maintaining your professional relationships? Why?

- How hard is it to maintain your professional relationships?
It's easy to decide that things you don't understand enough to have reasonable opinions on are unreasonable, but it's not terribly useful to actually exploring the real-world problems.

I admit, I am assuming you don't know much, if anything, about building modern high-precision ammunition for guns meant to mount on warships.
Wow this is really interesting, I did not know that, and it explains their choices. And C's function pointer types are indeed written in a bizarre way.

I definitely think of (int * i) as (i :: Ptr Integer) and (* i) in an expression like 42 + * i as (* :: Ptr Integer -> Integer).
> Even without patent issues, multiple codecs are a security, maintenance, and implementation quality nightmare that could only be sustained by the maniacs working on ffmpeg.

Only as insecure as your browser's intersection with the video codec.

> And there's no use case, because almost everything only has historical value.

You talk as if historical value is low. I'd argue it's higher than supporting 4k or whatever's used to sell TVs these days. Not much point if we just throw out our existing content!

> You need multiple implementations of something for it to be a standard, and just try reimplementing SSA subtitles in Matroska and getting any of it right.

It's not about standardness or getting it right, it's about being able to play my video file on any level. Really, anything other than current behavior would be hugely preferable. iOS has more support for autoplaying me ads without my asking than it does for my own damn home movies.
For Canada:

In Quebec, the 24 hour clock is the norm.

Outside of Quebec, the 12 hour clock is the majority but a significant minority use the 24 hour clock. Everyone understands the 24 hour clock in my experience though.
> It can also be redundant, since the USDA’s organic label already excludes GMOs

Quick, what's the logical fallacy here?
i use a gui for two things:

1. gitk is the handiest way to undo the occasional accidental commit ("reset index, leave working tree untouched"). yes, i know there's bound to be a CLI way; no, i can't be bothered to look it up and remember it when i have gitk right there and it's not a mainstream use case.

2. git-cola does interactive commits way better than the console interface does.
Keep in mind that on the 1st of each month there's an HN post where it's kosher to advertise your freelance services.
Good ol' hunter2, I use it for all my logins
All diet choices amount to beta testing with your health. There is no (known) correct way to eat, so we choose the best we can based culture/health class/news stories/diet gurus/doctors. It is very hard to make the case that eating Soylent (never tried it myself), is meaningfully different from choosing to go macrobiotic, or paleo, or following the food pyramid.
Try "The Witness".
This is all I want, a label I'm happy to ignore. Then this silly debate can go away.
http://www.sysadminsoftware.com
I made this tool like 5 years ago, to scratch my own itch as a I was a sysadmin in charge of securing thousands of machines. Those days are gone now and I currently have no time for this. The tool still works.
To be honest I have not advertised it at all. I made sales only from people landing on the website through google search.
> In practice, it turns out that composed types don't seem to be that hard.

Depends on what you mean by hard. Hard to read or hard to reason about?

* -> * and * -> * -> * are easy to read and reason about, i.e. Int -> Char -> Int. But what about types of types?

(* -> * ) -> * is confusing to reason about IMO. i.e. Applicative Functors:

(<$>) :: Functor f => (a -> b) -> f a -> f b

Not really intuitive at all, the only reason I can understand it is that I know what functors and Monads are.
There are plenty of devices without HEVC hardware decode, though, which is basically a prerequisite to 4K. And software decoding is god-awful for anything besides South Park.

(It's not actually required, but the efficiency loss between H.264 and HEVC for 4K is pretty massive.)
My grandfather was born on a farm, but started a lumber yard and was eventually very wealthy.

He grew all his own vegetables and probably did not know what 'organic' meant.

He made solar panels to heat the water in his store, but 'green' was just a colour to him.

He made preserves every year, but wouldn't know what the word 'hipster' meant.

He was pretty 'minimalist' and probably had never even heard the word in his life.

I think he would have called himself 'frugal' if you really pushed him to, that said, he was just the same as everyone else around him ...
I'm not sure why you are getting downvoted. People shouldn't even be giving away food that was mixed in a facility that has rats running around.
BI is still there because it has a wealth of functionality that Cycles doesn't yet, and because it's really fast by comparison.
Hey; honest question for you (don't mean this in the pejorative sense)

How much does that cost you on a month to month basis? I have no point of reference due to living out in the burbs but my knee jerk is "jesus that must cost so much overhead" and I'd like to see if that's a false assumption or not.

For level playing field/full disclosure, my list looks something like:
1. Car costs: ~40$/month for gas (mostly bus), 20k amortized over 10 years of ownership ~160$/month (assuming no major maitanance, given how little I drive)
2. Clothes: ~20$/month (assuming I spend <100$ yearly on clothes which is probably accurate, probably avg. 1 pair of shoes + one full outfit a year, and that's likely a high estimate)
3. Washer/dryer: This one is hard since it's merged with the water/power bill, but as a point of reference I pay about 100$ water and 120$ power monthly for a 3b2b house.
4. See above re: utilities, food probably comes to ~200$ per month buying at costco (two trips monthly of ~150-200 each for the wife and I)
5. Cleaning: "free" (time isn't free yadda yadda)

All together probably between 650-700$ monthly on non-mortgage necessities, the largest portions of which are car+utilities+groceries in relatively even thirds, which is a hard bar to push lower for me so I'm looking for ways to be creative. :)
Apparently it works for poison ivy: http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2757/what-poisons-c...
3d ARTWORK. Not 3d work.

Do you know any artists who work in BRL-CAD?
Thanks so much! Without homebrew I'd probably end up going back to Linux.
What's in a Brand Name?
Zumwalt's more of a technology demonstrator.

And note, that they do plan to fit rail guns to the Zumwalt class later on, which is possible thanks to their increased electrical capacity. They're not useless.
Open Source Softare Contest Awards Winner $2,000. Ends Nov. 11, 2016
Although only tangentially related to this article, the big thing I see missing from discussions of voting systems in the US (and UK) is the fact that you are only allowed to express a single top preference for one candidate.

What is the Buchanan supporter to do in 2000? Vote for their top preference in the knowledge that they have no chance of getting elected (given that he is well behind in third or worse place in the polls), or vote for their least worst candidate from the two front runners.

If instead, the voter was allowed rank their candidates in order of preference, with their vote going to their #2 preference after Buchanan is eliminated, their voting intent could be clearly recorded.

Imagine if there was no need for republican or democrat primaries, as each party could field multiple candidates, as e.g. all republican votes would still end up going to the top republican candidate after less popular (to the public) republican candidates are eliminated.

The system I'm most familiar with which implements this is Single Transferrable Vote [1] and isn't a pipe dream but is used effectively in multiple countries (albeit not in a presidential vote that I know of).

If such a system were in place in the US I believe it would reduce the extreme polarisation that is obvious to me in U.S politics and also I think could enable a third major party to grow slowly over the course of multiple election cycles, or indeed make it conceivable that e.g. (current election) a major pro-immigration faction within the Republican Party could split to form a new party without the prospect of electoral annihilation, which I believe is why that is inconceivable.

There are degrees of democracy and for me the STV system is just vastly more democratic, more akin to how people initially express their ideal position at the start of a debate, but then still get a say as the debate progresses and they realise they need to compromise and support the next best outcome of their first preference is untenable to a majority of others.

[edit]
To get back to the point of the article, I think that entering '1', '2', '3' beside candidates names is a lot clearer than the traditional tick or 'X' (which could be reasonably interpreted to mean NOT this candidate!). Filling up every space with a number is a great way to ensure someone can't easily modify/spoil your vote by e.g. adding an extra 'x' in one of the remaining empty spaces.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_transferable_vote
Hayek the Dangerous
voice acting is not strictly about reading the script

This review is a good example, Ross gives "The Chosen: Well of Souls" a _legendary bad voice acting_ badge: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-5AGFf_IOg
I do web development for $25/hour, HTML/CSS, JavaScript, and some basic things on server, Apache, MySQL, Python. I'm in China, so it's good for me. If you have any project needs help, feel free to contact me, tarvos21 at gmail.com
Admittedly I am now interested and, I apologize in advance if this is in the thread already and missed it (thanks poor vision!) but, would you happen to have a link or explainer as to this incident? Sounds very intriguing.

Edit: Sorry everyone! I just saw it! Thank you! For those who see this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris_worm & this: https://www.cs.cornell.edu/courses/cs1110/2009sp/assignments...
Security concerns are what keep me on Triton/SmartOS. Not to mention security is much easier to manage, having been built into the subsystem from the origin of the OS.

FWIW scaling an existing Triton instance is nearly immediate, so my practice is to have a couple smaller containers with my running apps that I can scale up rather than having to deploy in order to start scaling. Then depending on the load I can add more instances after that. Different use case than AWS Lambda-style scaling, but works for 99% of the real world cases I've encountered.

I find the CPU is better than AWS instances, but can be a little bursty due to the way SmartOS shares resources between tenants.
Make Money Online Free Course 2016 – 2017
I dunno if it's that much of a bargain. A Tomahawk carries a 1000 lbs. warhead. These shells weigh a total of like 225 lbs., of which 25 lbs. or so is explosives.
Or Firewatch.
Soo... Vi has no UI?
Here's another example of a simple shell script I use to do this: https://github.com/spinningarrow/up/blob/master/up
Everything Elon Musk. Even the good stuff (power wall) is over hyped, he's a walking hype machine.
This is a precision weapon (take out a building or a bunker) so a massive warhead is not the point. Its for Marine support
You make a good point. I know I can't remember the last time I finished a recent big console game but my reason is that many of them take so damn long to finish. According to http://howlongtobeat.com/ many of these games take hundreds of hours to complete. For example in 2004 Half-Life 2 took 19 hours to complete while the recent Witcher 3 takes 165. Skyrim takes 215 hours. I don't think there is anything that can hold my attention for 215 hours.
Ha ha - you remind me of myself back in the day. Almost.

You're not a 'minimalist' - you're 'lazy'. Ha - sorry, I'm kidding. A 'Millenialminimal' ... ha.

You will one day (soon) discover that food is part of life, and you'll enjoy making it, and having it around. Eating and preparing food is as old as time, it's part of what living is for, many cultures revolve around that. I think it's embedded in our nature, so my bet is that you'll feel that pull within a couple of years.

What you're doing is related to - but not quite - 'minimalism' - you should invent a word for it :).
But then he puts rockets into space. So not just hype?
Well, I am all for food inspection laws, but the picture painted by the article does not indicate this was intended to be a business. It is more like if you ate at a friend's house and helped cover the cost of the meal because the friend was poor.

We don't have to declare taxes if we make less than $600 on some activity. It isn't considered a real business if you only occasionally make a few bucks here and there. This "sting" operation targeting a pot luck group seems ridiculous.

I was a military wife. We needed to go through training to participate in certain things, like food sales as a means to raise funds. I never bothered to go through that training. It never prevented me from bringing a dish from home to a potluck meal at the unit.

As someone who gets food poisoning easily, I am all for there being strict laws concerning even small scale commercial food things. But this does not sound like it really was a commercial venture.

This is just ridiculous. Surely, we have more serious concerns for our cops to be attending to than trying to break a potluck ring. Sheesh.
I've been programming C++ for too long to really understand why people find pointers hard, but I do remember that I did too at the beginning, and I do remember my epiphany (reading on the train, funny how I remember such senseless details 15 years later yet can't memorize a 4-item shopping list): given a declaration of

struct Foo {
int a;
};
Foo* f;

, the following two are equivalent:

int b = f->a;

and

int b = (*f).a;

Never had it spelled out for me like this, probably because it's so obvious once you get it - thought I'd share in case it gives anyone else an 'aha' moment.
>And the point of the ship is .. what?

To funnel money into select pockets, in the name of "national security", to make politicians and some of their constituents happy, and to maintain the fiction that we require this ever-evolving arsenal in the face of threats which are decades behind us.

All while ignoring that China, Russia, and whoever else we fantasize about large-scale conflict with, have nuclear weapons just like us. It's nonsense, but there is so much money to be made from nonsense... just ask any successful religion.
one of the most pretentious, millennial comment sections I've ever seen here - please downvote me to minimize my karma or whatever it is you idiots overvalue
I was thinking of a situation where thread-aware but not fiber-aware code uses mutex to synchronize with itself, which breaks with fibers because they reuse the same thread, and the mutex is bound to that thread (so if another fiber tries to acquire that mutex, it's told that it already has it, and proceeds to stomp over shared data with impunity).

But upon further consideration, I realize that in this narrow scenario - where fibers are used in conjunction with callback-based APIs - this shouldn't apply, because you can't synchronize concurrent callback chains with plain mutexes, either.

Having said all that, are there any actual implementations that seamlessly marry fibers with callbacks? I don't recall seeing any real world code that pulled that off. Which seems to imply that there are other problems here.

Of note is that CLR tried to support fibers, and found it to be something that was actually fairly expensive. By extension, this also applies to any code running on top of that VM:

"If you call into managed code on a thread that was converted to a fiber, and then later switch fibers without involvement w/ the CLR, things will break badly. Our stack walks and exception propagation will rely on the wrong fiber’s stack, the GC will fail to find roots for stacks that aren’t live on threads, among many, many other things." (http://joeduffyblog.com/2006/11/09/fibers-and-the-clr/)

GC is a sticking point here, it seems - clearly it needs to be fiber-aware to properly handle roots in switched-out fibers.
We agree on general labeling; our disagreement is limited largely to if we should implement that on the part of the market where there is political will for it as a start.

The rest of our disagreement is on the role scientists had in public perception of their trade. I think scientists have earned the scepticism they face; you (and another commenter) seem to feel the benefits of rapidly deployed science outweigh the risks; I think you're falling prey to a common human error of underestimating long-tail risk (particularly that others pay), which science has a history of underestimating.

I also think you only address strawman versions of the other side, and much of their blanket rejection of your position stems from openly mocking and strawmanning theirs, which when pressed on technical details, you admit is a valid concern.

To some capacity, GMO proponents arent necessarily wrong, theyre just assholes.
That's new to me. I work for a company that doesn't work in metric, and the reasons we haven't switched are:

1. The customers use inches.

2. The expensive machines we use are configured in inches.

3. The code we use uses inches.
The United States government pissing our money away as usual.
They're useless and expensive, and utterly unproven in anything like combat. All of this, for what? Our next adventure in the Middle East against an adversary armed with Russian surplus from the 80's? To stay ahead of the arms we sell to other countries, or the fantasy that a major war between superpowers would be conventional, rather than proxy or nuclear?
Sure, join our slack channel https://slack.hyper.sh/, and DM me there @gnepzhao. See you around!