skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Interview with Ouyang Kang on Contemporary Capitalism (2003) [pdf]
What diffirentiates your product from the thousands of other similar products? Is it the ruggedness? The temperature range the hardware can operate in? Is it all open source code?

The IoT board/industrial computer market is pretty saturated. I work in this space, solving some problems professionally. It was tempting to turn our hardware/software stack into a product in addition to the actual problem we were solving, but after doing some market research, it was clear that without significant differentiation from products already on the market we would be Yet Another IoT Industrial Grade Controller.

Especially with AWS GreenGrass/IoT and similar efforts from Microsoft, Intel, Samsung, Dell and many others. There are already a ton of IoT/Industrial PCs on the market.

There is also Phoenix Contact, AdvancedTec, Siemens, ABB, Moxa, MPL...
You sound like you know a lot of this. But educate me how ㄓㄨㄣ is supposed to better describe 準 as two syllables? Both looks like three syllables to me, with zh/u/n or ㄓ/ㄨ/ㄣ.

In fact why is that word even two syllables? From what I understand, if two vowels are together (in English), it counts as one syllable only.
"... more outgoing"

does that happen with people taking them? i felt when I took oxycodone I wanted to be left alone. it could have also been I was physically unwell, but it felt like the 'wanting to be alone' was a symptom and wasnt in pain
He may not have been willing or capable to be a long-term asset. It was possible and probable he would have been revealed. He may have had scruples as to how far to betray his country. He may not even have had access to an ongoing stream of documents to justify the risk.

You just made all of these up to explain away his behaviour which is generally not that consistent with "Russian spy". For the simpler version - "he probably wasn't a Russian spy" you don't have to propose any of these (really strange) things. Can you think of any spy who behaved like that? Did Kim Philby give interviews on his way to Moscow? You don't have to believe Snowden is a saint or hasn't lied about or obfuscated his motives to think there is little evidence he's a Russian agent because there really isn't any, so far.
Care to expand on the faults of pinyin, and how they are more erroneous than say the German spelling reform?

My experience with pinyin is that it is very robust, and I don't remember ever encountering pinyin that was ambiguous about how it is read (unlike written English or romanized Japanese). I have also never heard of standard Chinese syllables that are lacking a clear mapping onto pinyin.

To me that is very impressive.
Hey, nice to see some robotics stuff here.

First the page seems pretty vague on actual HW, which is important for potential customers, as that is what actually does the work for them (otherwise I did not understand the product), so you might give more information there, in particular the "Products" category is sparse, and the "Register" button does nothing.

Secondly, people hesitate (rightly so) to connect their robot (or IoT, etc.) to the cloud, as security in this area has a catastrophic record. Why not sell the platform/products as offline stuff, i.e. HW that includes the OS (e.g. ROS might a good start), etc. and control the stuff inside the LAN. Obviously the drawback is that you now do "on-premise", but I think in this area it doesn't make sense at the moment to go cloud, as too many questions about security do not have a stable solution, however it could be a specific selling point.
The single most important point of something like this would be: Update strategy. How do you do security updates? I feel like this should be literally point #1 on your hero page, because this is the biggest problem you have today if you do the "slap Linux/BSD on a SBC and put it on the internet" dance.
Maybe it's a misspelling of supercentenarians?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercentenarian
Do you have any evidence for this at all? I'm by no means a Maoist, but this is a McCarthyist "sinister Commie plot" level of conspiracy theory.

Of course propaganda is one of the motivations behind higher literacy. But I do not think it was the main motivation. I will grant that perhaps my cynicism for your idea stems from the fact that I am a Communist.
So I will ask my boss on Monday if he minds that we revisit all our projects, and refactor for the 0.01% of hipsters?
With the 6 year old you are creating a situation where there is an (x != 0)% probability they screw up and accidentally die. When taking explosives on a plane there is an (effectively) 0% probability you screw up and accidentally blow up the plane. Very difference circumstance.
He may be talking about NTP -- that is core infrastructure code that had been poorly maintained for many years, and he's been involved in the rescue effort. Points off for not saying so, though; without context, your reaction is pretty natural.
@virmundi, In what state do you live?
To my understanding each state has the option to set up it's own State Healthcare Marketplace or use the Federal Marketplace. Different states have more or fewer healthcare providers to choose from, so the state you live in makes a big difference.
> SELinux is (very) complex and people (myself included) have a very hard time groking its base concepts.

I wonder what a clean slate OS design would look like. One that satisfied the same requirements without any concerns about backward compatibility with POSIX history.

Does anyone know an OS with vaguely this goal?
So the "solution" on offer for our "problem" of having to insure diabetes sufferers is that if you have Type 1 diabetes but don't have a nice job, you should just die quietly?
I doubt that very much. He wouldn't be fighting the city, he would be fighting the legal system... via the legal system.

That won't end well. Small claims court will tell him to continue following the system, and reject his claim.

There are processes he has to follow in order to get his money back. If he doesn't follow them, too bad. There are process that the court is supposed follow. If the court doesn't follow them, too bad.

Notice any problems with this approach? No one in the court system is held responsible. The people in the court system don't even have to obey the law. Where there are legal requirements for a speedy trial, or for him to get his money back, those laws are ignored with impunity by the people in the system.

In contrast, for the average person, "ignorance of the law is no excuse".

The courts must not only be impartial (justice is blind), they must be perceived to be impartial. Stories like the OP show that justice is often bigoted, and quite potentially illegal.
Python 3 has arguably one of the best built-in string implementations around.

In Python 2, "unicode" was a type whose codepoint width depended on the interpreter build - 2 bytes on "narrow" builds and 4 bytes on "wide" builds. Since most builds were "narrow", in practice non-BMP codepoints were a real challenge to use.

Furthermore, most languages with a "wide" string type use a fixed 2 bytes per codepoint (Java, C#, C++, ...), which wastes space when you're dealing with ASCII a lot, and is a pain to work with if you have non-BMP codepoints, since now indexing requires scanning the string from start to end.

In Python 3, with PEP 393, strings now have a flexible internal representation which can use 1, 2, or 4 bytes per codepoint depending on the largest codepoint in the string. This saves both space and processing time (in most common situations) since common string operations like indexing and slicing are constant time. This representation also allows it to scale from ASCII to astral codepoints with ease.

Python 3 is worth the switch. Correct, strict separation of 'bytes' (bucket of octets) and 'str' (sequence of codepoints) is really the only way to preserve sanity and interoperability with today's encoding-rife reality.
Client rendering doesn't have to be so bad... I actually did do it as an optimization back in the dialup days. React is pretty nice, and if you really want to reduce payload, you can build against inferno or preact for similar results at a smaller payload, but since React packaged JS is usually less than a single moderately sized image, it's really less of an issue.

Although that doesn't mean to go ahead and throw in lodash + underscore + ramda + jquery + jquery extensions all on top of react/redux. Just because you're using a modern framework, doesn't mean it needs to be huge. You can build a basic app with preact and min+gz hitting a total size around 20-30kb.

Yes, that's more than server-rendered simple AMP-style html... on the flip side, you don't have to round trip for every screen either. It's also a LOT smaller than some of the behemoths out there, and even then, a lot of the time Images are the biggest hit in bandwidth.
Could a blockchain really prevent malware in the Internet of Things?
> Taking away permissiveness from a programming language just leads to developers not upgrade.

The longer I do this, the more I see non-permissiveness in data validation as a feature and am actively happy to upgrade to get it. Ruby fixed their strings in 1.9 and it was one of the main reasons I was excited to upgrade our codebase to it. It was a pain to upgrade, but we found some real bugs, and were very happy with it after the fact. That the Python community has not embraced this yet completely mystifies me.

Maybe you're right about permissiveness if you're talking about syntax, but even then, I hate permissive syntax that increases ambiguity.
I've been working on https://elyxel.com since last May and launched a private beta this week. The biggest takeaway for me so far is that even if it doesn't get much traction I actually finished a long standing side project before jumping to something else. Plus I got the benefit of learning elixir and Phoenix.
This confirms my own experience. I discovered that programs written in (or use) dynamic languages like Lisp are surprisingly reliable (Emacs in particular).

Type safety won't protect us from broken software. Quote: "The most common bugs caught by static typing are also the least critical sort of bug."

Source: http://www.drmaciver.com/2016/10/static-typing-will-not-save...

Static typing helps a lot to catch basic type errors but it is surely not the "Messiah" of code safety. In big systems the good old way of testing still seems to be the best practical way.

Haskell's claim "If it runs then it's likely correct" is a deception because no compiler can catch logical errors. This was also Ada's problem in the Ariane disaster, although Ada has probably the strongest type system beside Haskell. You need special verification tools like FramaC, and even those tools don't catch all errors. Haskell's safety is even more questionable in face of the underlying libraries which are written in C. Finally, the still unresolved Cabal hell speaks for itself. Stack works only because it is an isolated repository where the maintainers have to take a lot of attention to make sure that new code doesn't break other code.
I totally agree. For about 30 years I usually set my cap at 32 hours/week, which worked well for me. Now that I am in my 60s, I set the cap at about 20 hours a week, and actually prefer 15 hours a week.

The 'extra' time allowed me to write a lot of books (a fun activity) and spend more time with friends and family.
How do you conclude that speed limits are arbitrary? Speed limits depend on the circumstances, and in combination with all the other traffic measures orchestrate the use of roads for drivers and pedestrians. If there's a certain speed limit on a road, people expect the other users of the road to obey them limits, and behave accordingly. It's like in an orchestra, everyone depends on everyone else, if one player is out of sync, the whole piece sounds off.
My last four insurance companies have gone under since the ACA. I get fewer worse choice every year. My plan is now 5 times the cost as it was before the ACA. Entrepreneurs are clearly hurt worse than the largest companies who werr hit by ACA later. The subsidies are unsustainable and will end soon.
> So it would probably save lives, and while 1 or 2% doesn't seem like much, the parents of those childs would beg to differ.

Not sure if an appeal to emotion is going to work too well on HN. While I certainly sympathize with those parents this is the absolute wrong way to go about implementing policy or law.
Most of US law that has eroded our rights over the years has been enacted by similar emotional arguments. I prefer my policymakers to be sober dispassionate people who look at raw data to make as an informed decision as possible.
> Nor are they inherently less efficient.

"Less efficient" is actually a nonsensical term to economists[0], but monopsonies are inherently inefficient, and it's rather straightforward to demonstrate that economically, the same way it's straightforward to demonstrate that a monopoly is always inefficient, even in cases of so-called "natural monopolies".

> Are you familiar with the impact Medicare Part D had on prescription drug prices? It "substantially lowered the average price and increased the total utilization of prescription drugs by Medicare recipients

You can't use Medicare Part D as an example of the impact that negotiating power would or would not have, because Medicare doesn't "negotiate" (read: unilaterally determine by fiat) the prices it pays for drugs, which it does do for providers.

> Are you familiar with the many estimates of the cost of a single payer program in the US? [2]

Yes, and most of those (including the ones you linked) are based on Medicare's reimbursements as a baseline. But that's totally baseless, because according to Medicare's own financial reports, they pay below-sustainable reimbursement rates to providers[1], which means that they are essentially subsidized by the premiums paid by privately insured patients. If Medicare were expanded to include everyone, they would have to massively increase their reimbursement rates, because the private insurance market wouldn't exist.

[0] Efficiency is best explained to a non-economist as a binary property; there does not exist a total (or even partial) ordering of inefficient states.

[1] They pay below COGS, which means that even if all doctors, nurses, and staff worked for free, they would still make a loss on Medicare patients in the aggregate, if they were not able to charge the difference to private insurers. Incidentally, that's why uninsured patients see such high bills - those are the prices that are used as a starting point when negotiating with insurers, and they're massively inflated to cover the gap.
I don't know about that... even well before Python 3 was released, there were urgent warnings to programmers to STOP thinking of byte arrays as strings. Joel Spolsky's Unicode essay predates Python 3 by five years, for instance: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2003/10/08/the-absolute-minim...

That shift in thinking was overdue in 2003 and it's way overdue now in 2017.
A vulnerability you know of and choose to ignore IS a backdoor. All the rest is fancy talk.
A 40ish% increase in risk cannot simply be handwaved away. That's huge.
In 1999 with a BTCellnet brick and WAP, I agree, but at no point in the almost 20 years since then, has it been as slow as dial up in any country I have visited. Maybe I am just lucky but it seems far fetched.
But that's the home deduction. Apartment buildings, for example, are investment property for which mortgage interest is a deductible expense. https://www.irs.gov/publications/p527/ch01.html
It is indeed a problem for any language that reuses another language's symbols and attempts to jam them into place to fit the phonology of its own.

When a language adopts the symbols of others of a nearby language relative, the fit can sometimes turn out ok, but of course you'll still have some bumps.

But the poor suit is especially apparent when, for example, you try to throw the Latin alphabet into a tonal Sino-Tibetan language.

I'd much rather learn 400 new unique phonetic symbols (or one set of IPA) than have to learn 26 alternate pronunciations whose sounds will compete with the pronunciations that fire off in my brain due to knowing the German, French, Spanish, English and Hungarian varieties of pronunciations of that same letter.
>tape drives are still an order of magnitude cheaper

Are they though? I just searched on Amazon and the cheapest LTO6 drive was	$1,619.56.

Even just the tapes are $25 or so for "(2.5TB) native to (6.25TB) compressed" whatever that means which I guess is cheaper per TB if you don't worry about the drive.

https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Ultrium-6-Drive-Height-Intern...

https://www.amazon.com/Sony-Linear-0-85-Inch-Internal-LTX250...
Show HN: MyIP.rest – A simple rest interface for IP lookup
Is an 11% cut really an "empty talking point"?
I've been feeling the same way for the past several months. So I decided to build a community that reflects that. Just started inviting a few friends and co-workers to a private beta. There's a little more info over at https://www.elyxel.com
Not if they get pre-approval in a rate case. Well and like the OP mentions it's often done by overlooking efficiency gains.
Be very happy that HN has an undownvote button.
> There has been studies stating that (on the highway) a speeding driver is usually safer than someone driving under the speed limit.

I doubt that would be true if no one was speeding. I also doubt that self driving cars will be speeding (considering liability) so it would be interesting to se how the result of such studies change once self driving vehicles are commonplace.
I think the existence of speed cameras and red light cameras are because it was the problem that could be automated easily. Automatically detecting a car failing to yield to pedestrians, backing up on freeways, etc, until recently was too difficult of a problem to automate at scale. I think that has probably changed. If someone is breaking one of these things it is a proxy for other dangerous driving behavior.

The flip side to this is instead of being used to give tickets this technology will be used to drive the car. On the other hand, now drivers are being invisibly ticketed in the form of higher insurance rates by their car insurance companies collecting data on their driving behavior, and they don't even know it.

If you run down the street waving a gun at people, there is a high chance the police are just going to shoot you. Yet, if you have a car and pedestrians or bicyclists didn't get hit because they dodged you, it is considered normal behavior. It isn't.
WhatsApp backdoor? What is wrong in the last claims?
Your comments have bordered on bullying or character assassination, rather than simply focusing on facts and data.

It's this style of argumentation that makes your position seem less convincing.

If it were simply about facts and data, you would be able to rely on facts and data to demonstrate your point and convince your opponent and other readers.

Instead, you've used aggression and ridicule, and relied on multiple argumentative fallacies (most notably, appeal to authority and consensus fallacy) in your quest to win the argument.

The causes of good science and effective solutions for climate change - both of which I care a lot about - are harmed, not helped, by this style of debate.

I recently heard of the term "Steel man" argument, which is the opposite of "Straw man".

With a "Steel man" argument, you demonstrate your sincere commitment to finding truth by taking a charitable view of your opponent's position and arguing against the most formidable version of it.

If you were to try that on this topic, perhaps you might start by going through the list of scientists named on this Wikipedia page [1], and understanding the basis and the details of each of their reasons for skepticism (it varies a lot between them).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_th...
Yes. I am not commenting strictly in context of the article. But there are many documentaries stating that opiates are pushed to doctors.
> actual git workflow used by Linus for Linux

When I install Linux 2.4, that centralized version comes from somewhere.

I agree that svk could have made for a serviceable GitHub, but the fact that Git had such things natively supported is a big advantage.
Nice. Have been meaning to play around with ClojureScript but the tooling has always put me off.
Well, there are two options: notification option and confirmation option.

Moxie correctly assumes that confirmation option (require manual
confirmation to resend if key changes) should either be enabled for everyone or disabled for everyone, as its state can be determined passively by the server. But it depends on the notification option. His conclusion is that confirmation option should be disabled for everyone because if it is enabled, it is possible to leak notification option state. But it is wrong. More secure solution exists: enable notification option for everyone, and then enable confirmation option for everyone.

I was complaining about why notification should be an option. Even worse, disabled by default.

Wire [0] just shows "resend" button near message when it is not delivered and always shows notifications about key changes if you have verified devices. You can still ignore verification option if you want and get no notifications.

Signal blocks with a message when key changes.

Both solutions are secure, Wire's is more convenient, Signal is less error-prone. WhatsApp solution is simply insecure.

[0] https://wire.com/
It may be true that one of the issues with Python 3 strings is people not grokking them, thus littering their code with useless/redundant/wrong `.decode()` and `.encode()` calls. But I say this is a problem with Python 3 itself, since it obviously just replaced one set of problems with another.

I think the fundamental mistake of Python 3's approach to strings is assuming that programmers mostly meant "string" when they used strings in the past. This may be true in web circles, but in most other areas of application they actually meant (opaque) bytes. (`from __future__ import unicode_literals` makes more sense in this scenario, and I've been using it since forever.)

It's the changing of default behavior that confuses people!

Also, the standard library has a few places where the maintainers don't seem to grok strings either. Take the "json" module for example: Why does `json.dumps()` return an "str" and `json.loads()` doesn't accept "bytes" as input? (Hint: JSON is, by definition, UTF-8 encoded, so "dumps" should return "bytes" and "loads" should accept both.)

(I should mention that my native tongue uses characters outside of ASCII, so I it would seem that I should be asking for unicode everywhere.)
You can have a browser, you just can't use your own JS engine for it, only safari's, it also proxies everything through Opera, and delivers a better mobile representation.
This blog post may illuminate you (commenter is the author, IIRC):

http://lucumr.pocoo.org/2014/5/12/everything-about-unicode/
It's also arguably more aligned with the English pronunciation of the letters.
> The print statement is a little more convenient in the REPL.

IIRC ipython has a feature where you can prepend slash to any function (at the beginning of a line) to have parens inserted automatically, ie.

In [0]: /print "foo"

is executed as print("foo"). There - problem solved, and for all functions, not just one special case.

Honestly, the crazy `print >>fileobject, "foo"` syntax is enough of a reason for removing it (print statement) from the language. It was unpythonic and I'm surprised it lasted this long in the language.
Challenging Google’s Search Engine (2003)
111 years old would made him amongst the top 5 oldest men living on earth ... or at least yesterday, before he died