skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If the model is autoregressive you can only forecast N steps ahead. Any further forecasting will be based on these generated near-future forecasts. In English, no. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJ-O3hk1vRw#t=01h16m
I said none of things
I also have the same question. And I take some actions to change it. Studying and exercising...that're the two things I do ...
A US airline has unveiled the most complicated boarding system of all time
iOS Arsenal | The ultimate iOS developer newsletter
Net Promoter Score
> That even a layman would find it nonsensical is exactly my point.

I have a degree in economics and both my parents are professors of economics, so I have some perspective on this. Economics as a discipline has never really been confused about risk in the way you describe.
Its very simple to use Yoghurt, just upload the data and rest it does automatically.
24 data points is less to make any accurate prediction. You need more data points.
However, Yoghurt currently supports 1 week prediction only and very soon we will be adding prediction upto 1 Month and plus.
The author is stuck on building a better horse.

Not to beat this analogy dead, but the reason Alan Kay et al. are so quick to discuss alternative computing methods should be quite obvious to anyone who doesn't limit their worldview to concepts that humans are already using.

Right now most processors are ridiculously general. They take a handful (ok, a couple thousand or so) instructions and they do their best to parallelize the instructions both on a single loop (core) and multiple cores. These instructions are of the "add, multiple, load, store" variety, with a few additional instructions for machine learning[1] and whatever HP wants[2].

This is it. This is the state of computing. How do bees work? Why can spiders hunt? When did crows start using tools? What makes us different than bonobos? How are all of these creatures so capable, yet so energy efficient?

We are taking a single solution, RISC/CISC architecture, and brute-forcing the hell out of it. Rather than build adaptive or purpose-built hardware, we're stuck on this concept of compile everything to x86/ARM and shrink the transistors (or try and offload parallel number crunching to the GPU).

What the author fails to realize is that computers are just fancy looping mechanisms. We use "HLLs" to compile abstract loops into instructions that run on general purpose machines. That's it.

The "apparently credible" people see the world in this light. They understand that the solution we've chosen is subpar, but the physics will make it work for some time.

A few other commenters have mentioned FPGAs. I'm not here to pitch a future on FPGAs; the die is still flat, the gates can only be reprogrammed so many times and they're generally "expensive."

I will say that we need better tools. FPGAs are a good start. Intel knows this[3]. Microsoft knows this[4].

With an FPGA you can dynamically program the exact logic a given operation will need. Whether it's real-time signal analysis, AI-built logic, or memcached, your logic will run exactly as specified.

Using purpose-built logic to run functions "natively" will drastically improve the efficiency of computation; both in time and energy.

It's really hard to build a horse that will fly to the moon. It's a lot easier to build a spaceship that can carry a horse to the moon.

[1]http://lemire.me/blog/2016/10/14/intel-will-add-deep-learnin...

[2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IA-64

[3]https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-01/intel-buy...

[4]https://www.wired.com/2016/09/microsoft-bets-future-chip-rep...
I like this answer the best but the only snag with this one is you'll probably lose clients that would otherwise be reliable.
There's a disconnect when I look at the price of good furniture compared to products that are insanely more complicated (laptops, smartphones), heavier than furniture (motorbikes, snowblowers, lawnmowers), as bulky as flatpack bookcases (big screen TVs), and need to be shipped even greater distances than furniture (all my examples would be coming to the U.S. from Asia).

Furthermore, furniture has much less regulation than electronics and motorized things (so it should be cheaper), furniture needs much less capital (a new TV manufacturing facility would cost hundreds of millions of dollars), and designing a new piece of furniture needs a tiny fraction of the engineers and programmers that any new laptop, TV, or smartphone would require.

I think that good furniture in general is still grossly expensive and I don't understand where the money is going.

EDIT: I have an example: I have a Sharp 60-inch TV, bought in 2011 for $1319.99, and weighs 92.6 pounds or 42 kg according to the spec sheet. I also have a dining room table bought the same year for ~$1200 and which weighs less than the TV. Considering that the TV is literally a million times more complicated than the table and that the raw materials of the TV (sand->silicon->ICs, petroleum->plastics) have undergone vastly greater transformation than a table (wood, glue, iron->nails), why isn't the TV much more expensive or the table much cheaper? Both are commodities and both are made on assembly lines.
For the select few with the right citizenship. Everybody else queues up to talk to immigration. During busy time it can take 2h. The self serve kiosks are not the norm.
Yeah, probably we will see progressively cases of people having anxiety and panics attacks because VR experiences, of course also the opposite, the "this is not my kind of game" will become a more serious statement.
Self-driving cars in the browser
I do wonder why they didn't special-case std::less for floats. They already did it for pointers - operator< for pointers isn't even defined, much less a strict weak order, if the operands do not point to the same object (region of storage). This is in order to facilitate non-flat addressing schemes. std::less, however, is explicitly specified to work with any pair of pointers.
The idea that this was ever downvoted at all is very strange. What is happening to HN?
Doesn't matter! You'll still be asked to write perfect code, with awesome variable names, on a whiteboard, with eyes closed.

Don't forget to do handstands to stand out from the crowd.
SIMPLE WAYS TO FIND FOCUS AND GET MORE DONE
Yes, partly that. But more the part where he dredged through her Strava and found a random entry where the cadence and heart rate data looked odd compared to her description of the activity. That wasn't even for a race, just her training log.
Not so, regular engineers should write, it's a question of what they write. I'm a regular engineer, my colleagues are as regular boring folks as possible, yet we're writing stuff from time to time.

Look, here's an example, which emerged this morning as a pure coincidence:

I have a almost-finished blog post draft in front of my eyes my colleagues and I have been writing some time now. It outlines a problem we've stumbled, and, we believe, many other engineers have stumbled or will stumble upon quite soon (while migrating their code from Go 1.3 to 1.6 and further). The problem is exceptionally boring and stupid. We took extremely boring un-brilliant way to solve it.

The engineer who first encountered could've just written something like 'go memory management sucks', or 'how go moves forward and breaks my stuff in production', a million-and-first post about minor opinion. This is what I call useless noise, and, when used for self-promotion, quickly becomes click-bait out of desperation to get at least some attention.

Instead, we've fixed the issue, and in spare time have been slowly adding detail, reproducing cases and generating isolated statistics exactly for this case, and it grew into useful piece of knowledge for regular engineers (like we are) not to repeat the stupid mistakes we've done.

It is not as immediately rewarding, to sit on it longer until your writing has at least some utility for others, and will pay them off for the time and attention and context switch they've invested into you. This is what matters, not the "exceptionality" of engineers who are writing this.
Kansas shooting: GoFundMe Raises nearly $ million for Family victims
I'm willing to believe that the skids could be greased for a some papers, based on the trendiness of the topic or the authors' reputations. I'm also willing to believe that this is hard for people without the relevant expertise to detect.

However, I think describing peer review, generally, as "a blanket pass" is going much too far. If anything, I wish it were harder on actual methodological errors while being much, much more permissive of (openly-disclosed) ambiguities in the data or gaps in the theories. Right now, people tend to 'write around' issues in their data, lest a reviewer argue that this invalidates the entire experiment. Looking at papers from the 1980s and 1990s, it's amazing to me how much more frank the authors were.
Ask HN: Would it be feasible to send a Curiosity-like rover to an exoplanet?
I know exoplanets are a long way from earth (nearest is 4.2 light years away). Would we be able to build a rover like mission that would get there in say 50 years time? Assuming we're using all the technology we currently have, so not excluding nuclear energy.
Same when travelling by ferry across the Channel.
شرکت مهندسی شهران سازه آفاق – ایده های طراحی جالب توجه حوضچه حیاط خلوت+ عکس
> But C Standard mandates IEEE 754 , too!

Are you sure? I can't find it in the standard, specifically not in [1] page 28., section 5.2.4.2.2.

[1] (the final draft of C1X, dated 12 April 2011) http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1570.pdf
Or you could just read the tags hanging on every piece in the IKEA store, the product description does say what materials they used to make it.
This would be non-trivial. Consider this paper on marijuana usage where the researchers had to group statistics by adjacent counties in Oregon and Washington in order to control the tests.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers2.cfm?abstract_id=2841267
For many, that standardization is a feature rather than bug. I really like that I can mix and match anything and have it look visually consistent. I am a big fan of the products although I build them slightly nonstandard (extra lag screws, wood glue on all surfaces, VHB tape to affix to wall).
Ubertesters Platform Integrates into HPE Mobile Center
In [1], Bill Gates recounts an anecdote about Buffett (with a picture): Remember the laugh we had when we traveled together to Hong Kong and decided to get lunch at McDonald’s? You offered to pay, dug into your pocket, and pulled out…coupons!

[1] https://www.gatesnotes.com/2017-Annual-Letter
Wait until you see art... There is no regulation, it comes with probably no return policy. It requires one person to do -- art doesn't need capital to start at all. Yet art is insanely expensive. Do you rather be a programmer, an engineer, a fashion designer, a woodworker, or an artist? I don't have a good answer for your question, but I think the idea here is everyone needs a living.

Also, you don't need to purchase a new bookcase every year like you do with, say, your smartphone.
sounds good - my bad then. I think they are awesome and not very well utilized.

It might be positioning - Operators vs Helm for example (even though the blog post tries to differentiate)
Comparison of Hosted Continuous Integration Products
ارخص شركة نقل عفش بجدة
This is so great!

I've been using CasualImpact by Google [0] for months. This seems pretty straightforward.

[0] https://google.github.io/CausalImpact/CausalImpact.html
Yes, that's the default. It's configurable up and down, though (from SHA-1 to SHA-3).
I think some of the ensuing discussion here says clearly why UDP in the browser (at least as in giving developers access to firing off random UDP packets from a browser) is a bad idea: people don't understand network protocols, yet they feel they have something to contribute to the discussion.
Why would this end psychology?

It might make it better, but we're nowhere near being able to describe (e.g.) group behavior from first principles or ion channel kinetics. Despite your link, there is a lot of solid psych research. There are (obviously) discredited theories and cranks too, but psychologists characterized rods and cones way before the biologists found them, for one example.
A human is not a component for the car - the car itself is not smarter than a knife or a gun - it's how you use it that defines the responsibility here.

Or to put it in other words - if I run a red light by accident, then that's what it is - an accident. I'm still responsible for causing a crash if one happens, but there's nothing more I can do to improve my perception of surroundings(and we already do ban humans who are unfit for driving).

If a self driving car runs a red light, because its sensor is only 99% accurate, then I'm pretty sure the company making it will be sued to oblivion, because they released something that does not work all of the time(and I am talking about normal operating conditions, not sensor malfunctioning).
Offtopic, but the site is super annoying - auto playing video, and even when you pause it, it restarts automatically on scroll. Shouldn't fortune.com know better?
Yes, but Seattle has no tsunami risk.
Again, what was so horribly offensive and insulting about my post? I don't see it. Sure, I wasn't sugar coating. But all I'm getting here is: “You're not polite, because <insert inapt analogy>”.
"Edit: this is for non US citizens. US citizens don't need to answer any questions at entry, but be prepared to be taken aside for screening"

Also be prepared to answer questions about your religion... regardless of if you're a citizen or not. we finally have a religious test to enter the country..

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/26/muhamm...

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/13/us/citizen-nasa-engineer-detai...
It's just scale. Only a really really good designer can make furniture good enough to look and function better than mass produced. It takes time and their production runs are typically limited to at most double digits a year. These people will not work for a pittance and being intelligent and motivated would move on to other work if they can't earn well. All this conspires to make a market where few people are good enough, can earn enough and find the few clients that can afford it.

I love my billy shelves. I also have a dining table that cost 4 figures that I'll have for life and is unlikely to be seen in another house so it lends my home a personal touch. Which humans like :)
I think it is a great idea for new devices. Hopefully someone is able to make it viable commercially.
Out of curiosity, do you know if competitors (like Google Drive) are doing similar things like injecting code into Finder?
Ya, sure it's one way. I'm not sure how my comment was interpreted as meaning anything else.
Show HN: Txtnish – a client for the microblogging platform twtxt
Low Sexual Desire of Yours Is Contributed by 5 Things
Why Cloudbleed and not Cloudburst? Seems like a missed opportunity (though I understand it's a reference to Heartbleed.)
How to Detect Negative SEO
Where? UK is 0-10% of taxable pay depending on how much you earn.
Not to insult this important work, but the headline makes this sound a lot more important than it is, although "math proof" should have clued me in otherwise.

I was expecting something that'd actually explain why our planet's core is still hot, without using the thermonuclear crutch, given how it is nearly solid iron (not liquid) at such temperatures; such as properly integrating plasma physics (ie, Birkeland currents) into the math.
Opaque Financial Contracting and Toxic Term Sheets in Venture Capital [pdf]
IBM, VELCO join forces to create smart energy solutions firm Utopus
If you stick to App Store (sandboxed) apps on the Mac, you're safe from this. Those apps only have access to files explicitly opened by the user (through the system open file dialog, drag & drop, etc)
"Borders are under control of the legal system and policing them is a right that's granted to the Federal government by the constitution"

Barely. Apparently the US constitution gets suspended at the border (and a 100 mile radius around the border)

https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone
No.

From a traveling point of view, sending a probe to Pluton (New Horizons) took us 10 years and the probe had a nice pull from Jupiter. The closest exoplanet is 6 700 times farer than Pluton.

From a communication point of view, the probe/rover would not be able to send us back any kind of signal. Even if we were able to communicate, a round-trip message would take 8 years.

And remember, we are not always successful when sending a probe/rover to Mars, which is the closest planet to Earth.
Each tab runs in its own thread, a page consumes CPU and RAM.
I'm not sure why it's a bad thing that a web browser has a task manager. Especially since one of the powerful things about the web is that no extra software is required for debugging / development.

It's totally possible today to create a filter that will scan for JS and remove it from sites with one of those man-in-the-middle corporate proxies.

But it'll break pretty much every site.
If you're talking about a company, that's as conductive to security as mandating weekly password changes requiring no repetition, symbols, lower + upper case and 15 characters.

Users will find ways around it. Like bringing unmanaged devices to browse the internet.

In terms of broken websites, corporate users don't have the influence as they did in years past.

Since we're trending towards pretty much every person in more economically developed countries having smart phones.

If a website doesn't work for a business's users I don't see how site owners will care.

On the development of web browsers becoming an OS of their own. Sure there's work to be done to improve security. For example, fingerprinting needs to be properly mitigated [1].

The web is open. Anyone can implement a web browser. Chrome, Safari, Firefox, Edge are trending towards writing one webpage/app and having it run everywhere.

Windows, OSX, Linux, Intel, ARM, Desktop/Laptop, Mobile/Tablet. Aren't a concern past display/formatting.

[1] https://panopticlick.eff.org/
Keep on downvoting, friends; as long as it makes you feel better :)

Look, I'm sorry if I stepped on any ego toes; but I truly think most of the current practice is a mess of bad ideas and duct tape, and I have plenty of experience to back that up. Disagreeing is one thing, shooting messengers at any cost is counter-productive. I'm sharing ideas, you're arguing definitions.
"From various incidents that have come out it seems as if it's the Wild West where whatever the idiot harassing you decides, with little recourse if you disagree"

you're right to a large extent.

https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone
The Faces of Obamacare
Git should have been written with pluggable hashes, right. Also, SHA1 could have been invented stronger against collisions in the first place.

In the retrospect many decisions which might have simplified current moment's problems are obvious, but in reality of those decisions in the past they never are. This feeling (it's called the retrospective predictability) is not a function of current problem or previous wrong decisions, but the random reality of events in complex systems, open source software implementing fresh ideas in a new way is being random and complex enough for this.
Issue with that is we already addressed that during the MD5/cert collision era; the final cert, as delivered, would by definition contain additional data over the CSR (the signer reference and the start/end dates) but because that information was predictable, the collision could be generated for the expected emitted cert, rather than the input data. Same would apply to git; if you were building the submitted data block, you would know what type and length it was going to be, so could build it with that in mind while colliding.
> "It turns out that expert systems are just another way to program"

Yes I agree with this, if you are providing the expert system with premises, although not specific to a particular problem, then you are effectively programming it.

I wonder if we could discover and obtain premises through some automated system, then the deductive process could still apply, leaving us with an understanding of how the solution to a goal was reached via the deductive argument. Do you know if this has been attempted?
Eh...

When you call for everyone to scale their experiments up by sixfold, I think you also need to consider the logistics of doing that. I'm totally in favor of better, more rigorous experiments, but I know that we couldn't afford the time, space, or gear needed to do that right now.
Btw, 20k is less than living wage are you kidding??? 18k is Living wage.

Lots of my grad friends fro ma top UK university were offered in their high 20's to start. But added bonuses. So one was 28k+2k bonus in first year. After 3 years, moved to 40k+bonuses.

Only have one friend who made 40k as a junior, he's one of the best coders i've ever come across. Oh and he went to work in finance.
In 2006 I had an extra Nokia dumbphone in my backpack just for Bluetooth tethering. Unlimited GPRS was cheap and the web was not yet shitty. I only had to charge it once or twice a week even though I used it every day on the commute.

But for maps/navigation, you could just use a tablet or laptop with offline maps (e.g. maps.me).
Excuse my ignorance, but how does 1 week fit into the equation? Why does the time scale (x-axis) matter? I.E. if I pass 180 points of revenue (y-axis) does it matter if they were sampled each day or each hour in terms of forecasting?
Keeping the pipeline full for when projects end or go on hiatus.

The dumbest mistake I've made has been this.

That slack time in between paying gigs can really kill financial momentum. Also, If I'm idle for more than two weeks that wastes not only money but also mental bandwidth. I go from thinking about work to thinking about how to get work, and that is stressful.

Always be networking. Always take meetings even if you are fully booked. Stay visible.
> Yet art is insanely expensive.

That's not true. There are a billion people putting their art on the Internet every day: DeviantArt, Pinterest, Flickr, Shutterfly, and other sites with fan fiction, manuscripts of books, cartoons, millions of homemade videos, music sites. The average price of all of this art is zero. Only a very tiny fraction of people make money with art.
Most followed persons on Twitter. No. 6 and 9 are amazing
Google is killing off Spaces, its oddball messaging app
Presumably the keys are sent over HTTPS.
... This is odd considering that a disproportionate amount of terrorists are engineers.
From the same thread (Peter Gutmann, Fri Feb 24 00:42:36 EST 2017):

"After sitting through an endless flood of headless-chicken messages on multiple media about SHA-1 being fatally broken, I thought I'd do a quick writeup about what this actually means. In short:

Reports of SHA-1's demise are considerably exaggerated.

What CWI/Google have done is confirmed what we've known for a long time, that SHA-1 is shaky. Using a nation-state's worth of resources and a year of time (https://security.googleblog.com/2017/02/announcing-first-sha...), they've shown that, with a very carefully-crafted document, you can create a collision. Their presentation of the results is detailed and accurate, it's the panicked misinterpretation of those results that are the problem."

Continues here:
http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/2017-February...

[edit: typo]