skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's about 5% of the final velocity, but that's way more than 5% fuel savings because you don't have to suspend million of pounds against gravity for a minute and also don't have to accelerate that fuel.

For example Saturn V used 40% of its total fuel to get up to this speed. That's a huge savings.

Unless I am reading the data incorrectly:

http://www.braeunig.us/apollo/SaturnV.pdf
This got me thinking, how does a police officer tell a self driving vehicle to pull over? Or do they have to pull out the road strips? Does the car just keep going when it's been disabled? Do they have to do a bump turn?

How do they react and get out of the way of an emergency vehicle?
My understanding is that the first version of Lisp with true GC was Scheme. Which was, not coincidentally, the first version of Lisp with lexical scope and closures.

The first implementation of Lisp used reference counting.
And one declined to seek re-election because he knew he would lose, making it 5 of 8, 62.5%.
Yep, OP is comparing apples to oranges, and there's several strange things with the example code, but a direct translation of the original Java code provided into C# is:

public class Square {
public double Side { get; private set; }

public Square(double s) {
Side = s;
}

public double Area {
get { return Side * Side; }
}
}

TLDR: C# doesn't actually need those ceremonial getters/setters that Java still uses, but there was no real need for that to be a public property anyway, although I have kept it that way to match the original.
If you're 50 (edit: and have 20+ years of experience) and interviewing for low level tech jobs, I have to think you just haven't given a fuck for the last 10-20 years of your career. Like why aren't you either

1. Retired

2. A principal dev

3. Managing

4. Doing your own thing

5. Raising kids

If you say "I just like to code," fuck off. I'm growing a business, not "Just coding."

If you say "I have super powers," I say you're probably delusional. I'll get someone who has 15 years' experience who isn't delusional.

If you're still writing ifttt code at 50, yeah, I can find someone with literally 15 year's experience to do the same thing who is more than qualified for the job, but who won't either die or fail to grow with the role. I'm sorry if that's a shitty thing to say, but let's embrace reality.

If I can't find anyone else, I'll take a chance on you, but I want to hire people who will grow with the role, not people biding their time doing service-level code work.

If you think that's cruel, try getting a job in law.

Edit: p.s. If you're 50 and just starting out in programming, none of this applies. I'm interested. It's not age that concerns me, it's failure to grow.
If you're interested in this sort of thing as a lay person (as I am), I would recommend the PBS Space Time YouTube channel. Be sure to stick around for the end of each video, as he often calls out comments on earlier videos that contain corrections or clarifications (in many cases, from _very_ highly qualified physicists and other subject matter experts).

Here's their recent episode on pilot wave theory:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlXdsyctD50
The New Scientist article writer is who is confusing you.

Verlinde does not build on MOND. An explanation and some extracts from his paper are in an earlier comment of mine:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13198573

(specifically at the paragraph half-way along in the comment, starting with "Sure Milgrom", if you want to zoom right in.)
Moreover, a Universal Turing Machine is not described in itself. The classic one (read-write head with infinite tape) is certainly not described using a read-write head with infinite tape; it's described in plain language plus math notation.

If you write a JS interpreter in JS, a heck of a lot of work is in fact done for you.

That's why every teenager and his dog has a transpiler from something (resembling JS or not) to JavaScript.
AFAIK all the self-driving cars currently on the road still have a human at the wheel to take over in cases like these.
The Author is a transit consultant. He is constantly talking to cities/towns about optimizing their transit networks.

I would guess he is hearing it from politicians and other parties in the areas he is talking to. They will say "Why should we spend $x on a new bus system when uber/driverless cars will solve the problem"
People fail fizz buzz all the time.
Depends on how you count. If you look at the metropolitan area, it's the 7th densest.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_cities_b...
> Are you suggesting that quick iterations facilitated by proximity to that which you are testing and direct observation, especially at an early stage of development, is a bad thing??

If it gets a bunch of people killed, yes.
I think you're suffering from selection bias.
Apparently this fix is only available for Sierra 10.12.2

A nice big finger from Apple to those of us that won't upgrade.
Tesla introduces fee for lazy owners who leave their cars at charger stations
idiot culture of engineering bureaucracy

And here we get to the heart of the difference between what is called "software engineering" and what is, in every other field, called "engineering".

There's a reason why Canadian engineers get the iron ring and legend says the first ones were made from the ruins of a bridge that collapsed (due to poor design). There's a reason why people describe aviation as a field where every regulation is written in blood.

Uber is moving into a field where no amount of "don't bring politics into this" can hide the fact that a "bug" in their product will potentially directly kill humans. Requiring people to A) actually be fucking careful and B) actually prove it is how this world works, and I don't think Uber's going to manage to skirt it with their usual regulatory arbitrage technique. The sooner they grow up and start acting like real engineers, the better.
Even at 25 I wasn't interested in the new tech. Uh oh. Oh well. Anybody up for some hacking around with bits?
Seems like a big gap to getting them live on the road.
That might not meet some expectations behind the word "properly".
By ignoring them.

If a few people get killed, Uber won't care, and neither will their defenders, any more than they care about hiring drivers who are medically unfit to drive, hiring rapists, or anything else Uber do.
I like your explanation using rings, and I'd say there is a ring 3 which is new acquaintances. For instance, someone who you're introduced to by a ring 1 or 2, and end up hanging out with for the remainder of a night out. They're not as much a stranger as someone you pass on the sidewalk, but you only know about them based on what they've told you during this first extended encounter.
Thats great to hear but Im not a fan of the idea of clear cutting forests in place of solar.
Cities in the US are less dense than cities elsewhere [0] because of the large extent to which US cities are designed around cars [1] (including SF, which is #104! Even our more dense cities aren't very dense relative to the world).

[0] http://www.citymayors.com/statistics/largest-cities-density-...

[1] http://www.autolife.umd.umich.edu/Environment/E_Casestudy/E_...
> $100k in SF = $70k in London = £55k in London - is that what you're saying?

Yes.

You're right that European developers (even at the big 4) make far less. My comparison was more with SF/NYC salaries, where big 4 developers will easily break $200k and reach $250k without excessive effort.
I don't think it is targeted at complete beginners. Most of the topics are quite advanced and require some background knowledge.

On a related note, what do you mean by "lexical scope" in HTML? Unless I'm misunderstanding, I don't really see the parallel with HTML since it doesn't have variables.

I agree about teaching DOM separately from JavaScript. As someone who learned the DOM and JavaScript simultaneously, it took me a good while to learn which parts of JavaScript really were DOM APIs.
The JVM does a lot of this, right? I know there is a ton of speculative compilation for C2 and grall but is it done for reflection?
Necessary for what? What is the end-game of Uber and does that really align with the best interests of their drivers and/or riders?

Uber is revenue unsustainable and driving for a monopoly status on delivery/taxi.

I don't think the ends justify the means here... especially if there's literally casualties involved.

I'd say reckless disregard for traffic laws is pretty universal - go read up comments on a story about texting while driving - 90% are screeds against those who text while driving, recklessly endangering others on the road.
AUR packages:
local/caddy-full-bin 0.9.3-12,
local/kakoune-git r4563.e441295-1,
local/kubectl-bin 1.5.1-1,
local/neofetch 2.0.2-1,
local/package-query 1.8-2,
local/tmuxp 1.2.2-1,
local/yaourt 1.8.1-1

They're all completely up-to-date (kakaoune might be an exception because it just builds HEAD since there are no releases).

I regularly observe AUR getting packages before the equivalent PPAs and before ubuntu packages are even updated. Even for security releases.

But you're certainly right, it depends on the given package maintainer. In the rare case that updates take more than a day or two, I just pull the PKGBUILD, edit it, makepkg, pacman -U and I'm done.

On the other hand, I could list hundreds of packages that are a version or two behind in Xenial that are update to date in Arch (not even AUR). Maybe not security fixes, but sometimes important bugfixes, etc. For example, Qemu in Xenial, can't make VHDs for Azure, which is constantly a thorn in my side (qemu takes a long time to build from source, even if you disable all non-x86).
A little off topic.. I've always wondered why NASA lunched rockets from Cape Canaveral (only 3 meters above sea level).

Granted, it's a little tricky to transport rockets, but surely it would have made more sense to move the operations to a mountain near the equator?

How much fuel would be saved by lunching 3000 meters above sea level instead?
If you like 48+ core ARM servers, Cavium's ThunderX offering has been available for some time.
Legal executions are actually pretty notorious for being poorly done, so I think I can call it torture just fine when the procedure takes too long.

There's nothing "modern" about not hurting things. That is something a person understands on a fundamental level, because it can happen to them. People just rationalize and don't care and think they're above it. There were people who were against such things in all times, perhaps just not a lot of them.

Wonder what it says about genius and hard work if something so trivial was impossible for them despite all their accomplishments?
> Huh? The topic of the newscientist article is https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.03034 (it links to the PDF right at the bottom!) and in the preprint's references section is "Verlinde, E. P., 2016, preprint, (arXiv:1611.02269)", which is surely the "Verlinde's theory of Emergent Gravity" that Brouwer et al. mean.
The evidence in Brouwer et al. is shaky, and I am not a fan of Verlinde's paper (although it is interesting), but I don't see what it has to do with MOND. Indeed, in Brouwer et al., I can't even see a reference to MOND.

Yea, I'm well aware of all this. Brouwer et al. are jumping on the entropic gravity media bandwagon. However, as stated in the New Scientist article, and as I quoted in my original top-level comment you replied to, "Milgrom...points out that according to his own 2013 analysis of gravitational lensing data in galaxies, MOND produces similarly impressive results as Verlinde’s gravitational model does in Brouwer’s study."

So you really seem to be missing my point. I am well aware that entropic gravity tells a different and more complicated story than MOND proponents. But within the actual physical system being observed, they make indistinguishable predictions. Therefore, this experiment by Brouwer et al. does not actually support entropic gravity over MOND.

> Other than in the newscientist article, I think you can't really find anywhere that conflates MOND-like approaches with Verlinde's emergent gravity. They are very different theories

It's not a matter of conflation, it's that in many regimes (including the OP's) they have the very similar phenomenology. See, e.g., "Entropic-gravity derivation of MOND"

https://arxiv.org/abs/1201.4160
>For the nerds in the audience:

this line made me chuckle.
> side projects usually demonstrate that you have a passion for code outside of your work

In other industries, these are called "portfolios" or "writing samples". It's not just about showing a passion; it's your chance to make a piece of work that represents your best abilities and judgments.

When I interview candidates I find it easier and more constructive to ask design questions about the side projects than to contrive some hypothetical scenario.

IMHO the alternative, where you ask people to write code under the pressure of an interview setting, is far less informative.
If anyone is gonna break a lot of crypto, the NSA is. Who else has spent as much money, equipment and manpower on it? Who else has as many people working on it as they do?
Once I was not accepted for a job because I had very good side projects. They said I was a risk to them, because I could stole ideas, contracts or be a competitor. Today I have my own business, if we compete, it's just in hiring talent.
Public transit isn't profitable either. It's heavily subsidized by the taxpayer, so the author's logic isn't intellectually honest. Look at Amtrak as a good example. Or the MTA in New York.

Uber is subsidized by private investors, public transport is subsidized by everyone -- whether they want, need or use it or not.
Best Sketch Plugins I Used This Year (2016)
So if you have any other interests, such as rebuilding old cars, would that boss still have a problem with it? That is the thing I don't get, is how some companies see a big difference between regular hobbies and programing related hobbies.
"Prior to our work, Internet Explorer,
Chrome, Firefox, and Opera all accepted 512-bit primes,
whereas Safari allowed groups as small as 16 bits"

I wonder what the minimum are today! (Article was from 2015)
>I'm sure there's a better way to get the full size of the site than looking at all the requests and eyeballing the sum...

It'll say the total in the bottom left corner of the network tab. 42 requests | 782 KB transferred.
I don't believe there is any particular standard for this at the moment, and it likely on a list of special cases where the human "observer" takes over.

In general though, I don't think this is something that automated vehicles will have trouble with. Picking out strobing lights is pretty trivial for computer vision, and a couple of external microphones located on opposite sides of the vehicle would have an easy time localizing the direction of sirens even before the EV is in line-of-sight. I suspect eventually there will be some sort of preemption signal that EVs will be able to transmit that communicates their intended route to vehicles in their path.

I look forward to the day that I have a big ol' "get out of my way" button on the dashboard of my ambulance...
It's not a throw up your hands reaction. The Linux stacks, from kernel to key apps, have had boatloads of vulnerabilities since they accept insecure code written in languages easy to screw up by people who arent security engineers. Such a stack has no business being used in anything designed to resist well-funded or determined attackers. Federal government's own criteria rates Linux at EAL4: "can protect against causual or inadvertant attempts to breach security." Whereas, even trying to stop nation-states requires very-rigorous developmenf plus review of vastly simpler systems. Systems done like that resisted NSA penetration during evaluation.

So, the trick for FOSS is to do their stacks like that. They refuse. Genode is at least architecturally doing it right. Muen and seL4 are separation kernels that might be turned into the foundation. The pieces are there and could be turned into a usable system with a tiny amount of effort compared to what's going into Linux right now. It can even run Linux apps user-mode. Commercial implementations already exist for these (eg Turaya Desktop, Dell SCC) while FOSS just ignores it like most high-security techniques.

Google Nizza Secure Systems architecture pdf for an example from CompSci. Genode evolved from it but basis could be done in other projects.
If he's hearing it from politicians/public officials then he should name who made such comments. Since it's the base of his argument that Uber is killing transit, it's important to cite where he heard it.
Exactly. The biggest impediment is going to be insurance and liability. What do you think it will cost to insure a robotic driving vehicle? On whom does the liability fall in the case of an accident – the owner, or the manufacturer?
Not much at all. Low earth orbit is ~200km so the mountain is only helping by 1.5% of the needed altitude.

Altitude is not even the most difficult part of getting to orbit. Getting to the necessary horizontal speed to stay in space takes a hell of a lot more fuel than going straight up.
Ruby is even better as a shell script replacement. It has things like backtics for command execution, built-in regex operators, string interpolation, and other nice shortcuts. Python is a bit too rigid/dogmatic.
Your profile says "Ask me about Tcl".

How?
I wouldn't assume too much about a CS degree. If I relied solely upon what I was taught in college, I wouldn't be able to get a job. It was sheer providence that some of my profs were so bad that self-directed study was an obvious necessity.

Best advice I could give to any professional is to ACTUALLY READ the great books of the field. Everyone wants the distillation and the cliff's notes versions, and a lot gets lost in translation. There are a lot of threads on HN where people recommend their favorite programming books.

The other thing would be the old "harder you work, the better you'll get" adage. Book learning can only take you so far.
I don't believe that. I'd really like a 21st century study showing that devs with > 3 years of experience fail fizz buzz, and that failure is predictive of being a bad developer (and not being a shitty interviewer)
I've built a ton of side projects.

No one has ever shown anything more than a nodding interest in them, as they lead me to a whiteboard and ask me to regurgitate a couple of pages from Crack the Coding Interview.
When you declare an element (or attribute) in an XML instance that isn't already defined as a body of the primary document or root schema this declared entity is available only to a limited scope. That limited scope is the element of declaration and its descendant nodes. Typically such declarations occur as the result of referencing a foreign artifact against a namespace.

You don't really see this capability in the common forms of HTML, but you can if you run the HTML as an XML serialization (regardless of the HTML doctype in the document). The execution context can be changed in many cases by sending a document with an XML specific media type or in some cases by changing the file extension from .html to .xhtml.
Hasn't this been essentially known for a long time? I'm not sure why that paper was even referenced. There's no breakthrough or new info here, people have speculated about this theoretical attack since forever.
That would be great. You should work with the Chakra guys. I've created a engine agnostic API for C++ here: https://github.com/CauldronDevelopmentLLC/cbang/tree/master/... It currently works with v8 and Chakra.

One of the key advantages of my API is that by using a "sink" interface it can be very efficient because the implementation calls the engine's API directly with out creating intermediate data. As I mentioned this is in C++ but it could easily be translated into a C API.

Let me know if you would like help with this.
How I hacked Google Daydream controller
I wonder if the number of cores and threaded will now follow a similar law to Mores Law. 18 months seems too quick, maybe doubling every 8 years...
I thought well of Levandowski, whom I've met, until this.

This is typical of Uber's "blame the driver and avoid liability" approach. If Uber signs up for DMV's testing program, Uber posts a $5M bond and accepts liability. With Uber's plan, the driver has to pay, if they're not an employee. Uber's manuvering here is probably so they can have contractors drive their self-driving cars without Uber taking on liability.
Uber already tries to dump as much liability as possible on the driver.[1]

Tesla doesn't sell "autopilot" any more.[2] The original system was way under-sensored and responsible for at least four major crashes. (I've posted links to the videos before.) Newer Tesla cars come with better sensors, but without the software to use them. Tesla hopes to return with full self-driving, but so far, they're still testing and issuing press releases. Tesla's crashes are still in litigation in several countries, and an NTSB investigation is in progress.

[1] https://www.hg.org/article.asp?id=37714
[2] http://www.businessinsider.com/musk-tesla-remove-some-autopi...
Relevant:

https://weakdh.org/
Please forgive my ignorance, but how would this be useful? I am not familiar with compilers or what having bindings in Python to a compiler would help.
Interesting, thanks. I wonder at what altitude GPS becomes ineffective? What then? We'll likely need some positioning satellites further out at some point? maybe at L4, L5 Lagrangian points?
Honest question as I have never worked with MS-SQL: in which use-cases would it be a better fit than PostgreSQL?
> and would fall into one of those people where "coding is a Craft".

Dude(ette), you're still in college. You don't even know what it's like to have a real engineering job yet.

Do me a favor, save this post and look at it in 5 years.
JavaScript's OO problem was never syntax or verbosity, it was that it's a prototype-oriented language. Any language like that will invite conflicting ways of doing OO. The new ES6 class stuff adds yet another way -- but one that at least corrals developers into following a single official convention. The underlying object model is, for better or worse, the same.

Ada and Dylan are good arguments against the notion that verbosity is harmful.
The error-chain [0] crate helps to reduce this boilerplate. I usually don't like macro magic like this, but the code is so straightforward that you can trust the macro to work as expected.

[0]: https://github.com/brson/error-chain
Confessions of a Front-End Dev: Women and the Ignorance of Men
From Blog Post to Book Deal in 12 Months
Why can't the jit inline the generated code?
Uber is roughly breaking even in the US: https://www.google.com/amp/www.breitbart.com/california/2016...

Anyone hoping Uber is going to run out of VC money and lose favor after being forced to raise prices in cities where it is already popular is going to be sorely disappointed. Uber is profitable in those cities. The more plausible failure scenario is that it doesn't succeed in new markets and therefore ends up being worth less than its current valuation.
The long view
Actually, there have been recent development on this.[1] I'm not brave enough to try it though.

[1] http://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/317290-filevault-2/
Well, in Europe, the best is London, and the best in London is either consulting (easy and awesomely low taxes) or finance (hard).

In the USA, obviously SF against NYC, you need to get information from Americans. I can't help you.

In case anyone wonders: inter-continental comparison are worthless so don't bother. It's [almost] impossible for Europeans to get VISA to work in the USA, and even if they get one they won't have the leverage to get the top range salaries.
> and no technology worth speaking of?

Seriously!? You really need to educate yourself if you believe that.
Moore's law states transistor count doubles approx every two years. So if that keeps up either you'll see more shrinking of computer size, utilization of the new transistors per square inch, or both.
My disillusionment with Clojure and Lisps