skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> Listen closely at meetings, and repeat unacknowledged good ideas, giving the person who first had the idea credit.

yeah? is this really a good thing? getting idea credit in meetings?
I think there's a definitional mismatch problem in this debate.

You're talking about meaningfulness at the individual level, and I completely agree, nobody should be judged for how they find meaning and edification in their work, as long as they're not a hitman or something involving a similar level of individual amorality.

But I also agree with gp and others that there is a difference between doing ad tech and rocket science. It's not that ad tech should be demonized, but I can't deny that there's something more meaningful about space exploration, and here I mean "potentially meaningful to much/all of humanity". And for some, this broader sense of meaningfulness overlaps significantly with their individual sense of meaningfulness, in which case they probably would have a hard time finding ad tech work meaningful.
The also own Tumblr, you know, the site that pretty much killed deviantArt in the first place.
I've had 32 gigs of memory in my desktop rig for more than a decade. Needless to say, no swap. Some decent points about mitigation like memory priority in the article. Good read.
There are more alternatives out there and some of them are cool too.
Give it some time. ML improves with usage and training data.
Until I saw that this was posted from Github, I honestly assumed that this was a cute way of describing thirst. The reality is so much stranger.
I get the sense that this person wrote a sarcastic, vaguely entertaining piece that drew lots of views. Hoping for lightning to strike twice, they did this again because who doesn't love traffic? That seems to be the entire motivation behind this post, from what I can tell.

There's just not a ton of substantiated content here. It's mostly really lousy anecdata like:

> Sadly, I am not aware of any serious companies than run on Ubuntu.

I am troubled by the direction of Docker and there are serious issues, some of which were raised in this post. However, whatever signal there is in this post is lost in a sea of noisy ranting.

My advice to anyone who doesn't already have strong opinions:

* Complement any reading that you do with your own research.

* Don't try to invent your own container orchestration system.

* If you aren't sure how to best do something, ask someone!

And for the love of everything holy:

* Don't run stateful systems on Docker if you can't handle failure or data loss!

Docker and orchestration systems like Kubernetes can be an excellent pairing. It's going to require research, a change in how you develop, build, test, and deploy systems, and a gradual building of operational experience. It will not be a quick process, and it's not for every org. But for some orgs and usage cases, it's an excellent way to go!
You might want to investigate Mumps:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUMPS

Setting data in memory is the same as setting data on disk, the only difference is the name of the variable:

s X=1 ; store 1 in variable named X, in memory.

s ^X=X ; store 1 in variable named X, on disk.

s X=^X ; load disk to memory
> Doesn't the PDF on their site pretty much prove they can do both of these - at least, in a way? They were able to change the color without impacting the contents of the PDF and get the same SHA1.

I think they prepared both PDFs and then tweaked with bits in both of them. This is much easier than tampering with only one PDF.

So I think it's still very hard to generated a CA cert where you can just copy the signature of an existing cert.

But maybe you can predict exactly what parts from your signing request and what timestamp and serial number and so on the CA will use, then you can maybe precompute a signing request that will result in a cert where you can replace some parts with other, evil, precomputed ones.
2.48 BTC, valued at 2800 USD at the moment.
I haven't invested in the infrastructure because electricity is not my business.

If it were my business, I would still be at the mercy of giant incumbent competitors, and any dollar I spent on common infrastructure would benefit them more than me. They could then use that advantage to slowly force me out of the business.

The largest firms have the most to gain from improvements in the industry's infrastructure. So the onus is largely upon them to make such improvements. In many cases, there is only one firm with significant pricing power--the natural monopolist--and everyone else in their territory has to dance to their tune. They're the only ones capable of improving infrastructure, aside from a government.

The pricing power is the only way for a firm to afford projects that are neither profitable nor a competitive advantage. The only point for everyone else in the market to having firms with pricing power is so they can undertake those projects that benefit everyone in the long run.

If you're not going to improve the industry, there is no advantage for everyone else to allow you to remain as the natural monopolist. The logical thing for them to do is to seize your capital by force and transfer it to someone who might do more with it (but might do less).

A natural monopoly does not mean the same firm will always have pricing power, but that the modal situation is that only one firm has it at a time. When natural monopolists are protected as de jure protected monopolies, yes it does prevent redundant investment, but it also puts no competitive pressure on the monopolist to remain the monopolist.

I would guess that electric utilities would make wiser decisions about infrastructure if they were less protected from competition. That introduces the risk that a particular market might not be adequately served in an economic dominance war that wipes out both incumbent and challenger, but I think those crises would be very temporary, and would likely invoke a government intervention less costly than protecting the monopoly in the first place.
All of those elderly people with their github repositories?
Tesla is not only a car company anymore.

The commenter above is right on this one and it is not a subjective statement. This is a fact.
> guaranteed rate of return

> We have the technology to help mitigate renewable variability and could deploy it if we wanted to.

Then build a company if you think its so easy. From my view: its clear that there are risks entailed and that the technology is far too expensive for widescale deployment.

But its a free country. If you really think that building a Lithium Ion energy-storage plant is free money, then build a Lithium Ion energy-storage center. There's no reason to blame other people for not seeing the world the same way as you.

EDIT: If building such companies isn't in your interest, then buy stocks in those companies that are working on energy storage. Like buy stock in ABB or something. Or maybe TSLA if you really think their Lithium Ion technology really is taking over the electric grid.
1085 WATER BOTTLE FLIPS IN a ROW (WORLD RECORD)
But you still need a symbol for the equality operator, so not choosing "=" for that seems rather absurd. It's comparable to making the choice to use + for string concatenation and ++ for (numeric) addition.
I don't think the meter needs to be that smart. First off, I'm using the existing day-ahead markets that many of the independent system operators are already using to predict demand. These markets clear once per hour, for the price of energy 24hr in advance in one hour windows. They also account for somewhat fine-grained regional variation (ie, power line usage). There are additional markets that clear only 15 min in advance (the "spot" price for power) and these can have much more volatility.

So, if I were king of the electric market, I would only expose retail customers to the day-ahead price. This way, existing web-scale publishing tech can tell people what their price will be up to 24hr in advance. Retail customers' price gets fixed at that time, and they pay a small energy premium for reducing their volatility exposure. Now, the meters only need to record a list of {kWh, hour-of-day} pairs, one for each hour between the last reading and today. So if the local electric utility reads off the consumption once a month, then you only store ~700 entries or so. That's much cheaper than needing a reliable Internet connection to the meter.
Some relevant numbers: one of the article's statistics is that of American women in science, engineering, and tech, 27% feel stalled and 32% are likely to quit within a year.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if these are higher than the male numbers, but I'm disappointed the source doesn't have any male numbers. It's pretty well established that software companies are bad offering raises that match job-change gains, and consequently have lots of turnover. I'd love to know what that that produces across genders in terms of feeling stalled or odds or quitting.
Drew Houston on How to Build the Future [video]
I disagree that medical school makes anyone more of an expert on my body than me. Not to discount years of experience and training physicians have, but it's just one leg of the stool. By over-weighting it, you become just another patient who is not staying informed and involved with their own treatment. Doctors know a lot, but you can ask any doctor if they know everything about the human body, and they'll sure tell you they don't.

I think sensible people can choose to procure FDA approved treatments through conventional providers. It's a jump to assume that, just because alternative treatments are available, everybody will be lining up to purchase them.
I did 10lbs in 5 days so I don't see why not. Obviously you have to start high enough that you can continue to lose.

From memory, we had oatmeal and coffee for breakfast, a bunch of salami throughout the day, and freeze-dried camp meals for dinner. Couldn't have been more than 2k calories/day. I'm not saying this is sustainable for more than a week, but I don't remember feeling particularly hungry. It's really hard to carry enough food to eat a huge amount of calories.
I can hardly stand Reddit any more -- so many people seem to have agendas that drown out most authentic conversation. Which reminds me of a quote from the book "Schitt Happened":

> So, social media is less and less about "an authentic conversation with real people" and more "prospect-powered advertising." And in an environment where anyone can be a shill, and their financial motives aren't known, credibility disappears.

> Which leads me to my bold prediction: that in the next decade we're going to see paid, conventional advertising in big-name venues become the most credible source of information, and word-of-mouth the least credible.
A lot of the commenters are trying to come up with technical solutions to the issue. It belies their incomplete study of the 'softer' sciences and the difficulty of biological studies. Tech solutions won't work, bureaucratic solutions wont work, more data wont work.

Guys, the bio side of things is incredibly complicated and trying to set controls that are achievable in your time and budget is the heart of these fields. The thing you are trying to study in the bio side of science is actually alive and trying to study you right on back. If you are going to kill the thingys, they really do want to kill you too. Look at this diagram of mitochondrial phospholipid gene/protein interactions (https://www.frontiersin.org/files/Articles/128067/fgene-06-0...). That is very complicated and that is for one of the best studied organelles in the Animalia family. There are an uncountable and evolving set of other proteins that then interact with that diagram in different ways depending on the cell-type, species, and developmental history of the organelle (to start with). All of which are totally unknown to you and will likely forever remain unknown to you up until your death. Hell, we are still figuring out the shapes of organs in our own bodies. People that have studied areas for decades spending untold millions of dollars on some of the most central questions of life have essentially nothing to say for themselves and the money spent('We dream because we get sleepy'). Trying to tease out a system that has been evolving for 4.5 billion years and makes a new generation (on average) every 20 minutes is going to be just insanely difficult.

This stuff is hard, the fields know it, and we don't believe anything that someone else says, let alone what our 'facts' and experiments tell us. But we solider on because we love it and because we want to help the world.
Sure, and there's also a lot of data suggesting that young women are paid as much if not more than young men, see e.g. https://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/aug/29/women-in-20s-e...
The internet (by which I mean written text, like here) does not have voice tone. Your perception that my words are highly condescending and cold is your bias showing. My actual voice tone IRL is apparently pretty deferential, which is likely a contributing factor to the online friction I experience. The same words said with my actual voice often goes over just fine.

Having said that, I will note (in case you are not aware of it) that I appear to be the highest ranked openly female member of hn. I didn't get there by randomly being a bitch to #allmen. I have, in fact, gone to great lengths to put people at ease while continuing to participate anyway, in spite of being a woman.
1. I'm mostly regurgitating Patio11's mantras with my own experience of trying to sell my services on the basis of saving client's money on the cost of the services I provide.

2. When you exit beta and drop the free tier, you are almost certainly going to create ill-will. A lot of that will be by users who legitimately feel burned because they invested time and effort in your platform and helped debug the code. They will feel, not unreasonably, that their trust has been betrayed.

3. Beta should be validating the business too. If you can't really charge for what you're making, it is better to be realistic about that sooner rather than later. Having a free tier is often a way of pretending that people will pay. Facebook and Twitter and Google and StackOverflow and Github can be free because they build on network effects that happen in the real world. I don't see a similarity in your product.

http://venturebeat.com/2013/06/26/get-to-no-as-fast-as-you-c...
A good way to avoid this is using robots wherever possible.
It may be location-dependent. Here in Canada, I know that dev salary increase a little less than two-fold between the time you get hired after school and whenever you get to 7-10 years of experience. Of course, one needs to change job a few times as raises within a company rarely increases that much.

Starting salary is also a lot lower when freshly out of school here than what you could get in SV.
i dont think it is too surprising considering that wix is a public company with a market cap of $2.7B

https://www.google.com/finance?cid=353014528816355
Could this be a reflection of the increasing gulf between RAM speed and HD speed? Even with NVMe drives, which one probably shouldn't be swapping to anyway, RAM is orders of magnitude faster.
Awesome. This is a perfect excuse to delete my 10+ year old Deviant Art account.
It's a public company, so there are people paying for it.
> Is there any such thing as Continuous Reproducibility?

Only in principle. Most studies are episodic -- they have a beginning, an end, and publication of results only after the end. For continuous replication to exist, laboratories would have to be much more open about what they're working on, less competitive as to ideas and funding than they actually are.

> How prevalent is this in different branches of Science?

It's nonexistent everywhere but in "big" physics, where (because of the large number of people involved) people tend to know in advance what's being worked on. But I'm only saying physics opens the possibility for continuous replication, not that it actually exists, mostly because of cost.
> CoreOS is an operating that can only run Docker and is exclusively intended to run Docker.

This shows an astonishing level of ignorance for someone who claims to have done their research.

> First, the main benefit of Docker is to unify dev and production. Having a separate OS in production only for containers totally ruins this point.

What? This makes no sense. Your images will be the same between dev and prod, even if the host running the containers is different - which is really the whole point - if you build and run an image in dev, it should run identically in prod.

> If you like playing with fire, it looks like that’s the OS of choice.

We spent the last year+ running containers on Centos7 with no problems from the OS. Whatever issues we did encounter were either transient bugs with Docker or our own configuration. Perhaps we got super lucky, but we were running 120+ containers on 12 hosts, so I would've expected at least some evidence of significant problems within that timeframe if it were really such a risky setup.

> It’s not possible to build a stable product on a broken core, yet both Pivotal and RedHat are trying.

We've been running OpenShift Origin since March of last year, it's been very stable during that time - the few issues we did encounter were due to our own mistakes, and were usually fixed just by changing some configuration and restarting the host.

While there are undoubtedly problems with Docker, and likely many of the issues you brought up are very real, there are many teams like mine that use it successfully, and painlessly. Docker isn't the tire fire you want to make it out to be.
What exactly does "a lot" mean?
Replication needs more incentive, too: considered on par with, or even more significant than, publishing any new results in a field. The incentive should come on both sides (rewards for labs that reproduce results of other labs, and rewards for scientists that publish results that are paired with clear methods).

I’m afraid that research is starting to descend into a fight for a few measly dollars, at any cost. If the results don’t really matter, you start seeing far less important measurements like “number of publications” taking precedence, which is a huge problem. At some point, if your lifeline depends on bogus metrics and all the competing labs are publishing crap that no one reads and no one can reproduce, are you forced to also publish the hell out of everything you can think of just to “compete” and stay funded? And at some point, are you spending more time publishing useless papers and writing grants begging for money, than time spent doing useful research? It’s a race to the bottom that will harm the world’s library of scientific data.
I agree that there are other possible motivations, but they're beside the point given the article content.
You're right. My other comment was hopefully more informed thanks to the article you posted.
Michael Palin: How to stay married for 49 years
So what you're saying is science is dead and we're going back to mysticism and alchemy.
I was interested if just using standard hardware was feasible due to the flexibility it provides (same hardware to, e.g., forge SHA-1 collisions, bruteforce other hash functions, or run speech-to-text/train ML models on a pretty much unbounded dataset), though I agree anything that is required frequently and/or quickly would probably be moved to specialised hardware.
identical prefix, not chosen prefix. I was more interested in an SHA-1 collision ASIC.
From the paper:

PDFs with the same MD5 hash have previously been constructed by Gebhardt et al. [12] by exploiting so-called Indexed Color Tables and Color Transformation functions. However, this method is not effective for many common PDF viewers that lack support for these functionalities. Our PDFs rely on distinct parsings of JPEG images, similar to Gebhardt et al.’s TIFF technique [12] and Albertini et al.’s JPEG technique [1]. Yet we improved upon these basic techniques using very low-level “wizard” JPEG features such that these work in all common PDF viewers, and even allow very large JPEGs that can be used to craft multi-page PDFs.

Some details of our work will be made public later only when sufficient time to implement additional security measures has passed. This includes our improved JPEG technique and the source-code for our attack and cryptanalytic tools.
~$2860 USD. Fairly good payoff for probably setting up a Google Alert and a small amount of scripting.
IMHO, we should have increase nuclear power 20 years ago to avoid the current carbon pollution. Now, it is too late for nuclear. The future is solar power and it is quickly coming. The amount of available solar energy is enormous. In a further future, we may also have solar plants in orbit that would reduce weather problems.
Care to defend that seems kind of synonymous with actually AI which doesn't look like its coming soon.
Why does HN love click bait so much?
Part of me wonders how much better web programming could have been a decade ago if QT was the standard that browsers implemented, and we just shipped around QT frontends that ran sandboxed in the browser.
it never works for me on windows

it just slows my system down to a crawl, requiring me to force a reboot

it probably depends on your hardware

and if i disable the pagefile, windows update stops working and at 75% memory usage it starts panicing and closing programs
Moreover, how quickly we forget! An intelligence agency did in fact carry out such an attack on code signing certificates using an MD5 collision as part of the FLAME malware.
I think this is so true across the board.

One of my favorite hobbies is writing. But it's so easy to get stuck into overthinking it, reading about writing, reading how other people write, etc etc etc...

Instead, I've noticed the best feeling comes from staring at a blank page and just letting the mind work things out in real-time. Sometimes it sucks (maybe most of the time), but it seems like there's plenty of times where it also goes really well.
Probably just as easy. They used a fixed header for PDF and a tweakable middle. So just add the git blob header, as long as the tweakable middle is fixed size.
Emacs org-mode?
I have 32G in one machine, and 16G in another. I recently moved over to the 16G machine to do my dev work in, and I run a few VM's in it.

I've found myself wanting to upgrade it to 32G ram, but honestly that's about the only use case (besides production servers) where I would ever consider swap, and at that point I consider it a problem of not enough memory rather than swap being necessary.
Putting spinning-rust-backed swap on a 16G system is absurd. By the time such a system is into swap, it probably isn't trying to swap three or four megabytes, it's probably trying to swap three or four gigabytes, and that can literally take hours. Simply writing that much data to a hard drive can take a non-trivial amount of time, and swap doesn't generally just cleanly run out to the hard drive with nothing else interfering, it's a lot messier. Given the speeds of everything else involved, a 16GB RAM system trying to swap to a hard drive, even a good one to say nothing of those slow-writing SMR hard drives [1], is basically a system that has completely failed and it might as well just start OOM-killing things.

A system backed by an SSD does degrade more nicely, though. The system visibly slows down but doesn't go to outright unresponsive like it does on a hard drive. You can make a case for letting that happen and having human intervention select the processes to kill, rather than letting the kernel do it. So, even though it still isn't really useful as an extension of RAM, it can still be useful in recovering from systems that you've run yourself out of memory on. Since putting an SSD in my systems I've actually gone back to running with some swap space. Though the fact I like hibernation sometimes is also a reason I run with swap in Linux on my laptop.

[1]: Swap will almost certainly completely blow out the buffers on those things and you'll be stuck with the raw hardware write speeds pretty quickly.