skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Have you spent much time in Tokyo, Seoul, Hong Kong, Singapore, Shanghai, or Taipei? In all of these cities, public transit doesn't just "have its uses," its the primary way of getting around the city for the vast majority of residents. This isn't about social policy. These cities span the entire range of social policies.

All it takes is a government dedicated to building a comprehensive, functional, and intelligently designed transit system. There are still crazy people on the subway in Shanghai. But because its the best way to get around the city, everyone takes the subway. So maybe you see a beggar or a homeless person every couple of days, much like you would when you're out walking around.

The problem we get in most American cities is that the transit systems are terrible, so anyone who can afford to drive takes their car, and transit systems end up existing only for people who don't have any other options.

So you decide to take the bus one day, and everyone else on the bus is either homeless or crazy, and the bus has to take some ridiculous route to pick up enough people to justify its continued existence. So you never take the bus again, because it was unpleasant and wasted your time. Now we've gotten into a vicious cycle where the awfulness of the system ensures that it will continue to get ever worse.

This was a long rant, but what I'm trying to say is that public transit isn't inevitably broken, as many of the world's most successful cities demonstrate. It just can't be half-assed, and it feels like we've half-assed it in most of the US.
Use of prototypes, excessive falsy values, function scope, for each loping over object properties vs. arrays, and undefined vs. null are just a few things that will confuse people who see Java-like name and syntax and expect Java-like behavior. Maybe if you learn JavaScript first, it makes sense, but for everybody coming from other languages with C-like syntax, it is just too surprising.
The impression I have of pilot wave theories is that when you look closely at them, the pilot waves are doing basically all the work with the particles just along for the ride. At that point it's tempting to delete the particles and see what happens, and then when you give the result a fresh paint job it turns out to be isomorphic to the many worlds interpretation (or the Copenhagen interpretation if you take the computational step of not following branches that can no longer be significant to currently observed results). Am I missing something?
Time to get A VPN, i had been using PureVPN since 2 years and now its time to renew it
Apartheid is specifically a policy of racial segregation, which has nothing to do with this.

I do advocate a system of segregation from other people's urine, not exactly a protected class (who opposes the use of toilets?), and from each other more generally... what are apartments for, after all, if not to keep us apart? I'm proud to say that I voted in this election for as much apart-ness (i.e. as many apartments) as possible. In fact, since I consider this to be a step towards ending homelessness (by building enough housing for everyone) you could say I am even an agent of the eradication of an entire social group!

EDIT: Yeah, that's a bit flippant. But I do believe people are entitled to choose the company they keep. That applies at rest: everyone should be able to have their own apartment, a space where they decide who gets to come in and who doesn't. It also applies in transit: personal vehicles are best (though bicycles, motorcycles, and scooters are probably better than cars, at least in the Bay Area, because the climate is hospitable and space is at a premium). On public transit, we have an obligation to minimize unwanted interaction: uninvited conversation, physical contact, eye contact, and phone speaker music are all (rightly) taboo. Public transit systems should strive to provide everyone with a forward facing seat so that they are not touching or staring at anyone else.

When people do not follow these rules, and instead insert their presence loudly (i.e. by smell), I do think it's better to go around the problem by taking other forms of transportation, than to muddle through and develop resentment, or grow supportive of police violence to shove the problem away (I've been catching myself sympathizing with this). Abandoning public transit seems like the least shitty approach to the people who make it intolerable.
Have a read of the rust release notes [0] to see why the ? operator actually improves code readability.

It's not obvious from the simple example given the original article, but as the release notes mention it makes things like the following:

try!(try!(try!(foo()).bar()).baz())

much more readable:

foo()?.bar()?.baz()?

If the main concern is readability of code, the latter wins hand down.

0: https://blog.rust-lang.org/2016/11/10/Rust-1.13.html
Might want to debug that in safari...
> I love Linq, but it can be awfully slow.

You might like this post I wrote http://mattwarren.org/2016/09/29/Optimising-LINQ/, it talks about LINQ
RSA – The RSA Encryption Algorithm Implemented in Common Lisp
The American Leader in the Islamic State
Why was the bill banned before any of the new bills were ready to hand out? Also, I'm not sure I buy this "secret media campaign" hypothesis. Hyperinflation does not end well.
Wait - looks the same in firefox, maybe just my internet sorry :)
You never get the best if you roll your own. The problem is that there are many broad classes of attack that cover wide ranges of knowledge. If OpenSSL can't get TLS right, how do you expect to get your home-rolled crypto right?

If you choose to roll your own, you will almost certainly have more vulnerabilities that are easier to find. Your gamble is that agencies like the NSA are already holding vulnerabilities to the common libraries, and that it's more expensive for them to break your weaker crypto (it will be weaker even if you are world class) because they have to take time to break it.

Edit: stacking multiple hash functions naively is a bad idea as well. As a thought experiment, let's say that I have a hash function that is effectively (because the NSA broke it) as useful as converting the input to all zeroes. Stacking more hashes on top of that hash won't help you, because it will still be trivial to find collisions.
Wow !! weekend of study and a great score in GRE. Any tips for someone like me who is trying to come up with a preparation plan ?
Yes, let's! Dumping to undermine competitors is one of the oldest tricks in the book, and it's always dirty - there's no way the company is going to sustain such prices long term, and they'll want to recoup losses, so once competitors are driven out, the prices inevitably end up being higher than what those competitors offered before.
The article specifically says Bitcoin is thought to be too transparent for terrorists to use seriously, and that the gov't is more worried about the possibility of new, les traceable cryptocurrencies being developed.
> There is no defensible set of priorities and principles by which invading Iraq can be supported as not "stupid"

I like how the word "defensible" here makes this entire claim take on subjective meaning instead of being readily testable. It is quite easy to find a set of priorities, principles, and (I would add) core values that makes GWB's actions make perfect sense in the context of the time and without hindsight bias. But whether such a position is "defensible" is up to your own prejudices.
Kumpulan Iklan Video Minion Lucu
> If you roll your own crypto, you're liable to have the guy down the street spot an issue in your custom implementation and walk out with all the goods before you realize what happened.

Isn't it quite obvious that you can have multiple layers of crypto? Like your own on top of a standard one? Why do you (and a lot of people, not just you) set up a silly strawman argument whenever talk of rolling your own crypto comes up in any online forum?
The JVM uses something called 'inflation' to make reflection faster.

See https://blogs.oracle.com/buck/entry/inflation_system_propert... and http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10082523/java-what-is-jit... for more info
> All of that costs money.

They have money

http://money.cnn.com/2015/05/11/technology/overseas-cash-tech/

(Your other points may or may not be valid)
You were close in your conclusion that someone else could do the same thing by properly disclosing their role in the distribution. You just didn't read the case that the only problem was the lying under oath.

The consequences are that the defense will see through it very fast and won't settle so quickly, making the whole business model fail by a war of attrition.
Actual headline: "Sounding the Alarm about Uber’s Impacts on Transit, and on Cities"

Current HN headline: "Uber's predatory pricing is undermining public transit and density"

The article barely mentions predatory pricing.

It also pins much on whether or not Uber is profitable, citing conflicting reports. But at 30% take rates it's pretty easy to see that it would be quite profitable on a gross margin basis.
Awe, the Small Self, and Prosocial Behavior [pdf]
The most recent example of this was Android Things.

Brillo was supposed to have key Android frameworks made available in C++, as explained at set of Linux Embedded talks.

Instead what happened was they brought in the Android Java frameworks and renamed it to Android Things.
>> I would totally roll my own crypto on top of an existing cryptosystem [...] That way I would get the best of both.

> You never get the best if you roll your own.

Did you even read my comment? I'm not talking about my own crypto on its own, I'm talking about my own crypto on top of an existing one. Two layers is at least as secure as a single one of either layer. It's as simple as that. There's just no argument to be made for your side here.

-------------

EDIT: since you added an edit:

> stacking multiple hash functions naively is a bad idea as well

Really now? Reading on, though, you say:

> Stacking more hashes on top of that hash won't help you

Oh, I thought you said it's "bad"? Now you're just saying it "won't help". But that's neither a fact, nor the question in the first place. The question is whether it will hurt, and the answer is that it does not. Again, this is common sense. There's no argument to be made for your side against it.
> Unfortunately I think the .NET JIT isn't dynamic (might be mistaken, not an expert on .NET) so can't do speculative optimisations.

You're right. The .Net JIT will only compile a method once, so unfortunately it can't do tricks like this
> It's by far the worst of the interpretations

True that.
From what I understand, the JVM uses 'inflation' to make reflection faster. See https://blogs.oracle.com/buck/entry/inflation_system_propert... and http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10082523/java-what-is-jit... for more info
So far Venezuela continues to follow the hyperinflation playbook with depressing obedience.
Thanks, glad you like them and find them useful!
eh, loads perfect in chrome, but this is what I'm seeing in safari / firefox: http://imgur.com/a/reN2K
>So yeah if after 15 days you still have bill leftover you pretty much were into corruption, drugs, money laundering, smuggling

First off, money laundering shouldn't be a crime or on that list.

Second, there's no need to force a recall of notes except to exert more government influence and potentially "steal" money from people.
There is no spooky action at a distance. When you measure one member of an EPR pair, nothing actually happens to the other member.

See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEaecUuEqfc or http://www.flownet.com/ron/QM.pdf for a detailed explanation.
I even ran away when Oracle acquired our main partner (BEA). My colleagues didn't understand (ramblings of a paranoid CTO or whatever) but sure enough Oracle basically cut all deals we had and made our business worthless after all that investment. A few (techies) got out in time and they managed to pivot after that successfully. I left Java completely; never used it after that.
Nix has a different approach to the problem, with its own set of benefits and drawbacks: packages do not specify version ranges of their dependencies at all; instead they reference them via variables (most commonly -- more generally they can be any arbitrary expression). For example if I'm writing a python package which depends on flask, I might list `flask` as a dependency of my package, or perhaps `flask11` or something.

# pseudocode
my_package = buildPythonPackage {
name = "my_package";
source = ./path/to/source;
dependencies = [flask];
};

Whatever that variable resolves to is the thing which will be built (and is itself defined in a similar way), so "version resolution" is replaced with a pure computation, the evaluation of an expression.

This approach offers a great deal of advantages, including very fast (roughly linear) calculation of what to build, full determinism in what gets built, and the ability to specify any arbitrary nix expression as a dependency, say some C library or a command-line tool, rather than being limited just to specifying packages written for your particular language.

However, of course, it does come with some drawbacks. Among them is the requirement that you often can't simply use nix out-of-the-box to build your code; depending on how developed the nix ecosystem is for a particular language, you might have to figure out for language X how packages are built, tested, installed, and linked together, and write the appropriate abstractions in nix. It also means that you won't automatically pick up later versions of a dependency when you (re)build it, which means you might miss out on updates. However, this latter drawback is arguably a benefit, because by the same token you won't accidentally pull in regressions due to an update in a dependency.
That said, thanks for the site, looks like something I probably need to read :)
The main point of the article seems to be that anonymous cryptocurrencies pose a threat to US national security since the US Governmeent can't just cut off access to funding for terrorists which supposedly was very effective so far.

Ignoring all the BS in the article, is this argument valid?
Economic recovery following the 2000 stock market crash.
Yeah that's just to illustrate it's doing a lot of work compared to calling the property without reflection (which isn't even a method call as its inlined)
I was thinking the same.

I'm a man an being recently made more aware of how some females friend perceive some so called "un-harmful cheesy jokes" I often advocate to my boss or college that they shouldn't make such jokes because you can never now how they are perceived.

However to escalate the problem up to the HR you need at least some ground. At some point she said than HR asked here to explain what she found was offensive. And she suggest that asking what was offensive was itself offensive. This is pretty meta.

I don't see how HR acted badly they needed to known exactly what happened in order to act. I mean you cannot pretend to be a whistleblower but kept being shy or vague about words used. And you can't say it was edited by the press, it's a blog.

So if OP is here please be clear did the manager say something like:
"Guys please don't be to hard on my sweet little girl, you know she can't handle it"

And then colleges could have gone "Hey here come the boss's bitch!"

This I can understand, not vague and redacted sentences. Because unless you are precise (and sometimes graphic) sincere skeptical people will always wonder if it was your colleagues attitude or you perception that was flawed.
> rearranging your message's payload at the protocol level

Do you have an example of how you might do that? Something like (real basic example) reversing a json payload?

{"key": {}} becomes {{}: "yek"}

Or is that too simplistic?
Cool, Dynamics.NET look like a cool library, I'd not heard of it before, thanks
I wonder if a good way to go would be to implement standard encryption (AES in most cases), and then take that encrypted payload and encrypt it with your custom code that you designed.

So even if it's actually true, and that you shouldn't roll your own encryption in practice, even if they do break yours they'll still have to get through the AES as well. So it's a no risk addition.
Following this rule, maybe it's time to add a shorthand for std::unique_ptr<> to c++ already. I'm not really a fan of asterixes or ampersands either but 17 characters, 5 of them requiring shift modifier, for something you write that often quickly becomes annoying.
Hetzner started building a data center in Finland
Three minutes with Hans Rosling will change your mind about the world
I'm not a subscriber to the many-worlds interpretation so I'm not the right person to defend it, partly for this very reason: the question of when one universe "splits off" doesn't actually have an answer, for the same reason that the question of "when does a measurement actually happen?" doesn't actually have an answer. Many-worlds and Copenhagen both have this rhetorical problem: they want to draw a sharp line when something "happens" (collapse, universe-split) and there is no such sharp line. The transition from quantum to classical is gradual, not abrupt. It typically happens very fast (picosecods or femtoseconds to get to the point where the state of the system is no longer distinguishable from a classical state) which is why it appears to be an abrupt transition, but it's not. This is one of the many reasons that I find the QIT/zero-worlds interpretation to be the most satisfactory. It and decoherence are the only ones that don't have this problem. But decoherence is too mathy :-)
I grew up in Columbus, OH. It is just as moody in Seattle. Rain, overcast.

I only lived there for a year, and I got suckered in: the very first time I visited was in the summer. I had never been so far north before. There were friends I met up there who took me to the ferry to Bainbridge. It was beautiful. That day, the sky was clear. From sea-level, I could see the summit of Mt. Rainier looming over, floating above the horizon.

I had been living in Atlanta for five years (another city I missed). I traveled across country in a car to move to Seattle. When I got there, it was dark and dreary -- but not that much different from where I grew up. I found an apartment in the Capitol Hills neighborhood and walked everywhere -- something you couldn't really do in Atlanta unless you were living in Midtown. It was awesome. Although the weather is cooler, the humidity is so high and the temperature variability so low, that it doesn't feel cold. (Unlike the high desert of northern Arizona where you get much bigger extremes in temperature within a single day). There are all these hidden pedestrian pathways in between buildings, both in downtown and in Capitol Hill. There is a obstacle course built just for mountain bikes at a park underneath a highway.

And the people! I didn't realize how much I didn't fit into Atlanta until I showed up in Atlanta. First, there were a lot more Asians. Second, the subtle, subconscious racism that I blew off in Atlanta just wasn't present. But mostly, people wore a lot of the kinds of clothes I wear: outdoor gear, ready to go hiking somewhere.

Seattle has a lot of micro-cultures. The vibe in Capitol Hill is different from Queen Anne, Fremont, downtown -- at least, those are the places I visited the most. It shares a lot with San Francisco, but people feel a lot more welcoming. The food is as awesome as the places I've explored in Atlanta and San Francisco, as is the micro-brews.

I have talked to folks who say that Seattle people are standoffish, but that's never been my experience. Maybe it is because I was moving from Atlanta, or maybe because I moved to a city where I already knew people.
What industry is that?
Song style transfer using AI test
I'm not arguing that the NSA is ineffective. I'm just saying that I haven't heard of much on the purely defensive side. Or at least, that's what I get from Bamford and the Snowden stuff. Maybe their defense is just unreported.
3 Amazing Life Hacks with Battery Must Watch
This was exactly my reason for writing it :-)
Well it wouldnt be exactly magic to make blockchain based voting machines.
Laws are not something that corporations or citizens have to agree with. They apply regardless.

This is the equivalent of Uber deciding not to pay its federal taxes. Sure, it could concoct a theory that the corporate income tax "doesn't apply to Uber", and in theory there's a possibility that the IRS might somehow agree. In practice, however, there is none.

The major difference here is simply that the penalties for failing to pay taxes are well-defined and severe, while the penalties for failing to obtain a state permit for autonomous vehicle testing are not. Uber is betting on the eventual penalties for their (flagrant and straightforward) violation of these laws will end up being something they prefer over making the relevant disclosures required by the permit.
No, it is a big difference making a prototype to write a paper about it, and making something that is actually viable to be used in production while following industry standards and device integration procedures.
If we could have knowledge of such things, maybe.

But what if it turns out this is a simulation by some extremist party, who want to see how to stack people against each other using religion? In that case we would owe it to the people there in the real world that we don't ...

Plus you can rest assured that that the sim master himself lives in a simulated universe, somebody else will hold his big button. Buttons all the way down.

From the pit of unknowable things, people can dredge up any coherent story. They might believe it themselves or convince others. Fine when it offers some kind of solace or perspective on life. Not fine when it costs people their freedom or their live.
Has anyone done any reverse engineering to figure out what infrastructure this is running on?
The earth is bathed in radiation from GPS transmitters and these clever satellites are using doppler radar techniques to see how those signals are being reflected from ocean waves. From the doppler shift you can infer wind fields. Consumer GPS receivers only compute position from these signals, but there is a lot of interesting science you can do from the raw signals with a hacked GPS receiver.
Yeah I wondered about all these points as well. I think the real danger would appear only if people in the real world started actually accepting or desiring payment in these anonymous forms in lieu of actual money...?

[edit] like especially normal people and not just Terrorists or Criminals
Our problems aren't much more difficult because we are so diverse they are so difficult because we are shortsighted, greedy, and stupid.

Americans privileged by circumstances and by virtue of excellent resources material and financial are no longer good at much other tech and war.

Signed,
An American
Mobile apps can use cloud storage, web apps must use cloud storage (IndexDB and friends aren't really good enough).