skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think you should use an example that actually ended up becoming successful in the long term (which is pretty rare).

My observation with ANY type of crowdfunding campaigns is: because the founders has invested much less (both financially, socially, emotionally, etc.) in their projects, they tend to: 1. give up easily; 2. make bad decisions because they don't have much to lose 3. The fundraising is not really thought out, which results in most of them running out of money quickly and not meeting the deadlines.

Imagine you're starting a company and instead of crowdfunding you decided to self-fund it until you get to product market fit. You would be extremely careful in projecting runway, and you would have done much more research before even jumping into the project. That's not the case with crowdfunding campaigns.

Most crowdfunding projects are people who just throw up a web landing page with a video, hoping that it will go viral. Most of them don't even have any intention of building the thing if it doesn't go viral. This is why most campaigns are not well thought out and never make deadlines and most of them end up mediocre products, or better yet, not even ship. I can understand why there used to be regulations around this. I doubt anyone involved in these projects start out thinking they're going to con people, they start out with good intention but they bring down everyone along with them. Also because they think it's not that much of a deal for each investor (I mean, they only lose like $100 each, so what?) they can give up easily. Compare this to giving up on a company where you raised millions of dollars from your family, friends and institutional investors. You actually have responsibility to make something happen since it's not a matter of $100 investment each.
I modded you up, not because I agree with everything you wrote, but because I want people to post counterpoints instead of brigading you. I think you're mistaken about Google not being able to index Flash; they've had that capability for about eight years to my knowledge.

I do agree with you that Google's security model is broken in many ways, both on the web and in Android.
Network equipment will most likely not support it. Same as SCTP, so it is only workable if you get custom firmware.
Keyboard lights were pretty useful for debuging back in Turbo Pascal days.

XT had only 640K memory. Borland managed to fit IDE into this memory with code assistant and interactive debugger. But if your program consumed too much memory, IDE would not fit and you had to use other means for debugging; there was speaker, printer and keyboard lights.
Fyi, the animation showing evolution of Latin alphabet: http://terpconnect.umd.edu/~rfradkin/latin.html
I can add a few more data points. First regarding CakeML:

- CakeML is written in HOL4, which is using ML.

- SML, unlike Ocaml has a well-defined semantics and so there is a good starting point for a verified compiler.

Second, regarding Ocaml, the easiest reason for choosing Ocaml over ML is because there is only one implementation of the language that everybody is using. This makes it a lot more likely that the ocaml compiler will still be around a few decades from now. There are several modern ML compilers, most of which are more or less unmaintained. PolyML, which everybody seems to be using these days, is substantially developed by a single person.
You could join Google :)
http://oeis.org/A003328: Numbers that are the sum of 5 positive cubes

5, 12, 19, 26, 31, 33, 38, 40, 45, 52, 57, 59, 64, 68, 71, 75, 78, 82, 83, 89, 90, 94, 96, 97, 101, 108, 109, 115, 116, 120, 127, 129, 131, 134, 135, 136, 138, 143, 145, 146, 150, 152, 153, 155, 157, 162, 164, 169, 171, 172, 176, 181, 183, 188, 190, 192, 194

It seems this is fairly common (1757 is the 1000th such number), but of course that says nothing.

Reading http://mathworld.wolfram.com/CubicNumber.html, it is true that every sufficiently large integer is a sum of no more than 7 positive cubes.

It also states ”the only integers requiring nine positive cubes are 23 and 239. Wieferich proved that only 15 integers require eight cubes: 15, 22, 50, 114, 167, 175, 186, 212, 231, 238, 303, 364, 420, 428, and 454 (OEIS A018889).”

Even stronger (same page): ”Deshouillers et al. (2000) conjectured that 7373170279850 is the largest integer that cannot be expressed as the sum of four nonnegative cubes” (nice title for a paper: ”7 373 170 279 850.”. See http://www.ams.org/journals/mcom/2000-69-229/S0025-5718-99-0...)

If that is true, it is indeed common that 5 cubes is enough (since 4 almost always would be sufficient)
I get the same feeling when I see him talk at his rallies.
Blender's UX may be unconventional, but there are some really good ideas in there.

My favorite is the space bar menu. Hit space bar almost anywhere and a menu pops up. Type in a search, e.g. "cube" and it will fuzzy find "add a cube". Almost all actions are available this way.

When I have been using SketchUp, an app widely considered easy to use and approachable, I always get lost in the menus. You never know if something is behind the right click menu or the top menu bar. I'd much rather press the space bar and type in a search.

Blender's biggest issue is that it is very different from the more established 3d modelling apps. It makes migration more difficult.

I use SketchUp for woodworking plans, because it handles real world measurements and has smart snapping features. For more artistic modelling, I go with Blender.
Something about me does not want to trust a webmail host who has an ad running on their front page reading "date rape appreciation station." This appalling lack of professionalism makes the entire service suspect to me.

edit: I would like to thank all the misogynists in this thread voting this down. Thanks for keeping tech a welcoming place for women and victims of assault!
Wrongful convictions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosecutor's_fallacy

Don't understand what your STD test really means: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_positive_paradox

Correlation/causation conflation.
Could you expand on the significance of the first, for those of us not familiar with formal verification?

Is this is a first because it is is theoretically difficult to do, or because it requires a lot of implementation time? What are some key points to read up and understand in order to properly appreciate this result, past the Wikipedia article on formal verification [1]?

Thank you in advance for any elaboration.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_verification
>pretty sure K&R C is a subset of ANSI C,

Not so, AFAICT. For one thing, K&R function declarations looked like this:

int main(argc, argv)
int argc, char **argv
{
...
}

Ever wonder where 1TBS came from?

Also, in K&R, function prototypes didn't list args.
How to reverse engineer android phone battery uC?
The receiver now has to figure out what is missing from a stream of data of which anything could be missing. That's equivalent to dealing with missing packets only on a byte level. If anything, that's harder and less efficient to deal with.
Go into the compiler explorer [0] and type the following

val num = 10

Then take a look at the x86 generation.

What is all of that. It doesn't look like executable data needed. Is that just implicit functions or something baked into the language? If it is, why isn't it being tree-shook?
If you are making a new language, the easy way to fix this is make formatting a property of your strings, not a runtime function. Ie. instead of having "foo {bar}".format(bar=bar), have "foo {bar}" be equivalent to "foo "+bar.

This sidesteps the problem because only literal strings are formatted.
Why does unsupervised deep learning work?
> Your downvotes are ridiculous.

This is often true, but do you seriously think "Wow, man. How have I not heard of this software sooner?!" is worth registering an account for and posting? You don't even say thanks to the submitter.

It's a useless post for anyone who doesn't come to HN to read about what software you are personally un/aware of.

Posts like "+1" or "Thanks" or "this" or "woah" (without any other content) are probably better expressed by just upvoting the post you're grateful for/agree with.

Since you complained about downvotes, your post is now one the most upvoted in the thread with 10+ karma. That's ridiculous.
There's really no coming back for Lavabit. Nobody can trust them anymore, and this isn't just about Lavabit, but about e-mail. If a person is privacy-conscious enough not to use Google, they know not to use anyone else either.
End-to-end encryption. Only the users have the keys.
No, it's definitely unpleasant because it makes 90% of programmers look like arrogant assholes and talks about "our little programmer" in a patronizing way. The final sentence touches upon some correct things, but as far as I can tell many programmers aren't arrogant; rather the opposite, they have imposter syndrome, caused by the fact that by nature, programming involves spending hours on something that turned out to be trivial in the end.

I myself am not a developer, just a hobbyist; don't assume everyone on HN is a developer
> apparently it makes more sense in 2016 to sync a song with uploading it to an other computer (teh cloud™) then download it back instead of copying it locally within 1m of proximity.

From the original post.

Been there done that, waiting in a full sport gear in the room for a playlist to sync going around the fucking planet while being 1m apart.
You lost me at AES512...
Said person is also quoting from /g/. Why would you expect anything else?

OTOH, the guy does genuinely go to great lengths to protect the security of his site (and of the mail of his users), and seems to know what he's doing. So I'm not to down on him for the unprofessionalism.
Protonmail looks interesting. They do not store keys. They can only handover encrypted data. It is open source software. - https://protonmail.com/blog/switzerland/
1) you created an account simply to express surprise that you haven't heard of an extremely popular software project.

2) complaining about downvotes is incredibly lame
And SMTP 571: 'Delivery not authorized' for anyone that sends a plain text message.
Don't try, make it happen :)
The problem with optimizing compilers is that you're changing what the user expects to come out. This is very dangerious because you need to be able to prove that what you've generated will work as the non-optimized version.

I know of a few programs that when compiled with -O2 work fine but break with -O3. This is because some optimizations that are applied are just not what the programmer expected or in the older days just broken working code.

Formally verifying the output is difficult because you need to prove the same operation is happening both times even if they are extremely different in what they are doing. I'm assuming that's where the difficulty comes in.
Playing pro-sports is not at all what they are talking about. Pro-sports puts demands on the body way beyond what a good exercise routine would be for a typical person.
Here are 17 facts about 2017 in 2:17 from Matt Parker:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6jMU-AwX34

(Some repeats, but plenty of non-prime facts as well (plus Matt's excellent dry humor))
AES512? Is there some 512-bit symmetric key cipher?

They could encrypt with two(or more) 256bits keys, but I think just 256bits key is enough for at least next 5years.
Economic Efficiency versus Democracy
If you think AES512 isn't secure enough for your data you should not be hosting your mail server out of your network.....

Also, if you have a way to break AES512 I know some people who'd pay a killing to get that information. No litterally there's people who'd kill for that.
Pybind11 v2.0.0 released
The latest release wraps up ~5 months of work and includes support for PyPy, multiple inheritance, and extensive C++ bindings for NumPy arrays.

A detailed changelog is available here: http://pybind11.readthedocs.io/en/stable/changelog.html
I think the best takeaway there is 'Yeah, I too used to be a perfectionist. Now I ship.'
> If you want to see what happens when a person like Putin starts to say that the last peace agreements are bad and borders need to be changed then look at the second world war and the Polish history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeasement

So is that a fear in Poland? That peace with russia would involve handing over parts of your country to Russia?
That's very interesting, thank you for sharing this; I'll give it a try, too.
I think ideally you don't what a set reveal date for all of your personal emails. 5 years is very short term to wait for some good email data.
I am planning to start my own startup & leave my current job as a computer scientist.
Have you thought it through? People will sell organs if they think that is the best possible opportunity for them. You want to come in and deny them that resource, which means you want to force poor people to make a choice that they believe is worse of.

Either you hate the poor and want them to be worse of (I don't believe this) or you think you know that persons situation better than they do. We tried a system of tell people what to buy and sell and what to make. It was called the Soviet Union and it was demonstrately worse.
The Motorola Moto X 2017 Is a Upcoming Moto X Series Smartphones
From earlier today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13295094
Also, maybe you don't want quite this much heat at your email provider: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3367044/Maine-colleg...
I'm sure his service is just great, but, in the future, if you ever wonder why women don't go into tech (it seems so easy to, where are they?)- remember this. Tacit support of actors in the community like this make tech seem like a hostile place, or, at the very least, a boy's club of people okay with rape jokes.

It's not a sustainable atmosphere to maintain
Without any details on why this time the service is secure and won't be able to hand over actual user data, it is hard to get excited about the relaunch. Also, nice marketing ploy with re-launching on Inauguration Day.
There is a standard, and the fact that it's not universally adopted is more of a social problem than technical.
AES512 isn't a thing. AES uses 128, 192 or 256-bit keys.
The problem with verifying realistic compilers is scale. We have known how to do it in principle since forever, and verification of toy compilers is part of textbooks on verification, such as [1], see also [2]. Realistic compilers are very complicated and Leroy's verification of CompCert took several man years for one of the world's leading compiler and verification guys. The purpose of research like CompCert and CakeML is twofold:

- Provide a verified software toolchain for programmers with a minimal trusted computing base.

- Investigate how the cost (in a general sense) of formal verification in general and compiler verification in particular can be lowered, ideally to the point that normal programmers can routinely use formal verification.

The advance that CakeML makes over CompCert is bootstrapping: CakeML can compile itself, while CompCert (being a C compiler written in Ocaml) can't. Simplifying a bit, bootstrapping lowers the trusted computing base.

Maybe Leroy's [3, 4] are good starting point for learning about this field.

[1] T. Nipkow, G. Klein, Concrete Semantics. http://www.concrete-semantics.org/

[2] A. Chlipala, A verified compiler for an impure functional language. http://adam.chlipala.net/papers/ImpurePOPL10

[3] X. Leroy, Verifying a compiler:
Why? How? How far? http://www.cgo.org/cgo2011/Xavier_Leroy.pdf

[4] X. Leroy, Formal verification of a realistic compiler. http://gallium.inria.fr/~xleroy/publi/compcert-CACM.pdf
You can read Cal Newport's books like Deep Work. You can even subscribe to his blog. It helped me a lot to grow my business.
What do you lose by trusting and giving your people more responsibilities?
From StackOverflow [0]:

"We can't implement "AES 512 key size" because AES is defined for key sizes k∈{128,192,256} bits only; much like we can't make a bicycle with 3 wheels."

[0] http://crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/20253/why-we-cant-...
If you don't have an idea, you can work to improve what you did last year.
It seems you need to add a semi-colon after the line (the AST was empty). A minimal program is simply "();", and compiles into something even more complex. A big part of it looks like runtime setup/cleanup code, common for all programs.
Then sadly you don't have security.

Understanding the threat model is fundamental: If you don't know what this protects against, it might as well protect against nothing at all; My ISP received my emails in plaintext, so I have to assume that they've got a plaintext backup of those emails.
TiSA, Trade in Services Agreement
Since there is no such thing as AES512, 'breaking' it isn't that hard...
it's a 20-year-old piece of software.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blender_(software)

People have been making cool movies with it for years:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRsGyueVLvQ

There's no need to exclaim about finding out that you didn't know about a popular piece of software:

https://hn.algolia.com/?query=blender&sort=byPopularity&pref...
VIPER: The Versatile Intermediate Pulsed Energy Reactor [pdf]
Oh shit, is it the current year already? But yeah, it's clearly labeled as a pdf link, and if you don't like your browser's default handling of pdfs, you can just change it. I don't like opening Youtube links in the browser, but I'm not gonna ask people to not post them, it'd be weird.
And it is pretty user friendly too
Or for the manila envelope cartel.
You're right, and I totally agree with you on what you're saying about the interview/job obtaining process, and that replacing the way this is done with something far more effective for interviews would be ideal. I also agree that actual experience using these types of things seems much more important than seeing if someone has drilled on quiz questions.

The question then for me is, how does one assess if someone can use these things in practice to make a difference for the business? I don't have a good answer for that right now. If anyone here knows a nice approach to use to assess this type of skill, I'd like to know more (to stop perpetuating the usual 'algorithms gauntlet' approach).
If you believe all that spending makes computer secure, you are fooling yourself. It is an incredibly complex environment - much more complex than the code for sending rockets into space, for example. And rockets still explode.

Besides, I don't think Trump will be using couriers all the time. Also, these days, email is not the only way to send digital messages.
Some middleboxes try to "understand" TCP, and by that I mean they strip out TCP options [0]. Ditto with IP [1]. Options are just not a reliable mechanism for critical protocol features, these days.

[0] http://conferences.sigcomm.org/imc/2011/docs/p181.pdf

[1] https://www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/TechRpts/2005/EECS-2005-...
Hey team, it'd be nice if the landing page actually explained what the software is, not just the benefits of it. Is it an embeddable video player (and if so what am I being asked to download) or is it a desktop video player (and if so how is it different from VLC?).

Mostly I just found the landing page confusing. It took a bit to see that the page wasn't scrolled down you just have half a screenshot, "video player that loves the internet" doesn't really tell me anything, and nope, that play button doesn't do anything either that's just part of the logo. =/
Pro-sports is an entirely different level of exercise. The seasons are very long and demanding to the point where players never have enough rest.

Remember that workouts is not when a person gets stronger, but the rest period between. Not getting enough rest is terrible for all sorts of reasons.
As a 1-week user of the iPhone 7, 3D touch has been the only new thing I really like. The apps I use seem to have made good use of it to improve UX, even though the rest of iOS seems is bulky and slow now.
And yet Proton mail doesn't seem to offer 2FA? That seem like a fail. How can you sell yourself as a "secure service" without that.
To summarize:

+ An autoencoder is a stabilizer of the input f: it maps it to itself.

+ Imagine that the space of autoencoders forms a group.

+ Learning stops as soon as a stabilizer is found.

+ If the search is a Markov chain, the bigger the stabilizer the sooner it will be hit.

+ The group structure implies that this big stabilizer corresponds to a small orbit.

+ The orbit of an element x in X is the set of elements x can be moved to by the elements of G (the group).

+ The stabilizer is the set of group actions that map x to itself.

+ Blog post explaining fundamentals: https://gowers.wordpress.com/2011/11/09/group-actions-ii-the...

+ Reconstruction in deep NNs is often guided by an l2 distance. If there are competing feature sets, gradient descent moves the configuration to one of the stabilizers.

- Note. Is this indeed the case? Is there a WTA mechanism at play? Is this preferable?

- Note. In this view a NN is a MCMC that is stopped prematurely.

+ The probability that a network "discovers" a stabilizer for the signals f_i depends on the volume of the stabilizer.

- Would we be able to construct a PDF by running an MCMC till we are in a high probability region? Or does this only work if we're interested in modes?

+ A neural network operation is not a group action but can be seen as a "shadow group" in some auxiliary space (theorem 4.1, 4.2).

+ The size of the stabilizers is preserved in the original space (theorem 4.3).

+ Next levels exhibit again symmetry, generalized edges lead to figures like trapezoids, triangles, and butterflies.

Most important take-away: representations that exhibit a lot of symmetries are the ones that are easiest/fastest to find.
Why is 2017 an interesting number
For their web client, the encryption is really only useful as long as you can guarantee that the JavaScript code has not been tampered with. Once a court orders them to hand over the private key of their TLS certificates (as has happened in the Lavabit case), it's game over for anyone able to man-in-the-middle the connection to Protonmail, or for anyone who's able to compromise their web server directly. It really isn't any better than Lavabit if exposed to that threat model.
> They do not store keys

They say they do not store keys.

> They can only handover encrypted data.

Nonsense. They could using additional installed software[1] or even their upstream ISPs could netflow/tcpdump the SMTP traffic. If the data is unencrypted coming in the door, you should assume it is always unencrypted.

I would not advise anyone to use these kinds of solutions -- they cannot offer any actual security guarantees and it is akin to walking around with a bullseye on your chest.

[1]: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-yahoo-nsa-exclusive-idUSKC...
Hacker News: 2016 Top Stories
I wonder if they will attempt to use a 'canary' system, where each day they post a message to say they have not had to hand over any data to law enforcement. Then if they do get an order that says they cannot discuss, they just don't post the canary.You can't force someone to say something in the US can you?
Fine, AES1024 then! Pedants.
And the drone manufacturer DJI is already using something akin to a deep-learning ASIC in its Phantom 4 drone, which uses a special visual-processing chip made by California-based Movidius to recognize obstructions. (Movidius is yet another neural-network company recently acquired by Intel.)

Wow, this is just so wrong. The Movidius Myriad chip that's used by DJI is not an ASIC. It's a programmable vision co-processor. It was not designed for running neural nets. Movidius is based in Ireland, not California. They are not a "neural network company".

WTH is a "neural network company" anyway?
I will work on my programming.
Totally. It's really relieving to have this approach.
Looks cool but not doesn't provide much insight. I would highly recommend the Observatory of Economic Complexity. Unsexy 2d block visualizations but conveys relevant data very well:

http://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/