skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Are NOAA getting that additional responsibility and associated funding?

Also, NASA's charter is much more broad than just space exploration.

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

"The original 1958 act charged the new Agency with conducting the aeronautical and space activities of the United States "so as to contribute materially to one or more of the following objectives:"

- The expansion of human knowledge of phenomena in the atmosphere and space;

- The improvement of the usefulness, performance, speed, safety, and efficiency of aeronautical and space vehicles;

- The development and operation of vehicles capable of carrying instruments, equipment, supplies and living organisms through space;

- The establishment of long-range studies of the potential benefits to be gained from, the opportunities for, and the problems involved in the utilization of aeronautical and space activities for peaceful and scientific purposes.

- The preservation of the role of the United States as a leader in aeronautical and space science and technology and in the application thereof to the conduct of peaceful activities within and outside the atmosphere.

- The making available to agencies directly concerned with national defenses of discoveries that have military value or significance, and the furnishing by such agencies, to the civilian agency established to direct and control nonmilitary aeronautical and space activities, of information as to discoveries which have value or significance to that agency;

- Cooperation by the United States with other nations and groups of nations in work done pursuant to this Act and in the peaceful application of the results, thereof; and

- The most effective utilization of the scientific and engineering resources of the United States, with close cooperation among all interested agencies of the United States in order to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort, facilities, and equipment.

In 2012, a ninth objective was added: "The preservation of the United States preeminent position in aeronautics and space through research and technology development related to associated manufacturing processes."
> Alexa, light up the kitchen.

Alexa turns the gas stove directly to 'high', and waits.
Mac addresses? Under what scenario does any provider (ISP even) end up with your mac address? (Am I missing something here that I don't know about?)

Understand that your router has your mac address and in theory your ISP could end up with it by getting it there if they wanted to but don't know of cases where they legally actually do this or have any need for the info. True?
I don't think we need to postulate about aliens to come to a similar scenario. If someone in primary school, an undergraduate, or a practitioner asks me a question and I continue to lose them because I am unwilling to revise my explanation to something suitable for them, then, yes, I am elitist. That's not to say that I can't write something incredibly high level that only specialists in my field will readily understand. Frankly, I don't start my papers by telling the readers that we will be using Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory before going off and proving something about differential equations even though I likely depend on these results in order to get things like the real numbers. However, I don't think that's where the frustration is. I believe the frustration is that there is a dismissive attitude toward others when they don't understand the results. This is elitism. I also think there's a general unwillingness to self-reflect and consider that maybe the problem isn't that everyone else isn't educated enough to understand the results and maybe I'm just a terrible writer.

For me, I'm about a decade out from my PhD and I've been working in my chosen field for almost two decades. As I've matured in my understanding of the material I actually write quite a bit more because I realize more closely that there are lots of little details that are really important and it's highly unlikely that only outside of a select few will pick up on that. Now, that is my choice and others can choose differently, but just because someone masters a field doesn't automatically mean that they can just skip the details.
I really enjoy and strongly prefer going to places where you order at a counter and eat in the dining room at your leisure. I can really relax at those places without feeling hustled and hounded.

I, too, am trying to avoid full service restaurants for the most part.
Module global variables, I think we can agree, are less than ideal.

But I was thinking of class fields. I don't really want my compiler to hold my hand with respect to "nullable", if I know for a fact that, by the time the code gets there, it can't possibly be null.

Think of it this way: It's not a compile error to access an int from multiple threads, right? It doesn't require that !! syntax if you're just accessing a mutable class field or variable? So if I test an int for a value and then do something that assumes the value is still the same, I'm writing something that could crash just as easily as the null reference -- and array out-of-bounds, or a flag that says it's OK to do something but that flag changes after I check it, because I didn't grab a mutex.

So why does it add an error condition if you're accessing a mutable variable that's available in multiple threads just because it's nullable? Seems like extra busy work for no clear benefit for what is, as you say, a rather rare situation.

If we're going to share data across threads, I'd rather the language not present a false sense of security as a result of the !! operator.
Ask HN: Is there an (nonspying) alternative to the android Google keyboard?
I mistakenly upgraded the google keyboard app in my lowend Android phone and ended up with GBoard. The thing is reading all what I write, suggesting unsolicited searches and it is almost as heavy as Chrome.
Does anyone knows better? any suggestions are welcome :D
The short answer is to skip TensorFlow entirely and use/learn Keras for a high-level overview; then you can learn top-down if you need to use/look at TF code directly.

Another HN thread has good tutorials for simple uses of Tensorflow: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13464496

However, NNs are optimal for text/image data as they can learn the features. If your data features are already known, you don't necessarily need to use Tensorflow/Keras at all, and you'll have a easier time using conventional techniques like linear/logistic regression and xgboost.
Here is how you can interact with it: https://github.com/frnsys/hosny
That's not what I'm talking about. CUTE_INT is stupid, but maybe mylib_error makes sense. It depends on context.
How One of the World's Toughest Creatures Can Bring Itself Back to Life
How Cloudsploit made the whole company “serverless”
Arrow: better dates and times for Python
Dragon Ball GT Terror on Imecka Full Episode Season 1 – Episode 3 #DragonballTV
Telepresence: fast and realistic local development for Kubernetes services
Cool, but neither the article nor the paper (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.04416.pdf) mention just how much slower it is.
I do agree but I also remeber that Haskell is 27 years old. Newer Haskell-inspired languages like PureScript don't have a built-in list any more.

There's a lot of old stuff in Haskell, e.g. String which is a list of char. We have a number of new preludes (base, foundation, protolude, ..) that improve the situation a lot, so I'm not sure we really need a "python 3" moment.

We could definitely be more aggressive in pointing out that you need to use a new prelude though.
Two times in my life, I've gotten deeply excited about Mathematica. The first time I wanted to use it for economics homework as an undergraduate. (Don't worry, I did it on paper first.) The second time, I wanted to use it for machine learning, especially NLP. Mainly the knowledge base Mathematica hooks into is what drew me.

The problem in the end is that the customizability of Mathematica ends right where things get interesting. If you want to show people cool little examples, Mathematica is clean and fast, but you can't build anything serious with it. And by "serious", I guess I mean something with few enough constraints to have an identity of its own, rather than being "a thing you can do with Mathematica."

Another limitation is the data input. Someone needs to rethink it.

I could be wrong. I actually want to be wrong, because of the simplicity and power of Mathematica in its scope.

Programming languages/platforms are network goods. IMHO, Mathematica has tried to swim against this fact and has failed.
I'm a long-term vegetarian animal rights supporter and I support the publication of work like this, even though many people take it as a sort of anti-vegetarian propaganda, because I think this is how we make progress in understanding issues!

Very often in academic philosophy people write papers that say "relatively widespread position X seems to have weird consequence Y", which then provides possible evidence against X, possible evidence in favor of Y, or an opportunity to think about why the implication might be unsound. That helps clarify how we think about things. (Toby Ord wrote a similar paper about opposition to abortion where he pointed out that spontaneous abortion, especially before people are aware of the pregnancy, is much more common than induced abortion, so maybe many abortion opponents should be concerned with medical research on how to prevent it. While Ord seemingly thought the modus tollens side of this argument was stronger, ... maybe they should!)

Although I don't embrace the act/omissions symmetry that the theory here is based on, I support the modus ponens side of the argument that wild animals' suffering is a horrific thing that it would be good to find a way to mitigate. This has led to some pretty long flamewars in the past; I remember a particular incident when the "Tetrapod Zoology" blog discovered David Pearce, a transhumanist who sees it as urgent (and feasible) to re-engineer nature to eliminate all suffering. Fireworks ensued.

Overall, I don't think this argument is particularly new. I heard substantially the same point presented as an anti-vegetarian argument at least 15 years ago. At the time I thought "predators aren't moral agents, accidents aren't moral agents, there's no wrongdoing here, there's no problem". But now I think there is a problem after all, even if it isn't our "responsibility" or "obligation" to solve it.
Ha sorry I indeed failed to catch your irony... My bad too, then.

I'm actually quite interested in the fact that any equation can be "sanity checked" by solving it for units only (without values). It's always handy to make sure I didn't forget some exponent here or there. And knowing extended units as a composition of fundamentals (some variation of mksa) is kind of entertaining intellectually.(e.g. Newton = m.kg/s^2, which really makes sense when you think about it). Going down to Planck units and their significance in this universe (discrete spacetime manifold? Is reality ultimately non-continuous?), and here I am wishing our conventional units (of time, distance, all) were integer multiples (e.g.
Decimal exponents) of Planck units. But I'm digressing, aren't I.

As far as fuel and efficiency goes, I'm not much of a car person. I didn't know that mpg was used outside the US, that's an interesting historical artefact.
This overenthusiastic reaction is rather typical.

We had a case in Germany some time ago where police caught a child porn seller and wanted to find the buyers.

The reaction in the usual circles was predictable: "All credit card users in Germany are under suspicion! Everyone is investigated!". Even lawyers close to certain political parties participated in that disinformation campaign.

What did the court order actually allow?

SELECT * FROM transactions WHERE recipient==$seller

The credit card company was ordered to give a list of people to the police who got charged a specific amount of money(!) by the known seller.

But since the database engine touches every record in the database it "logically" follows that everybody was searched...
Square Service Outage
How Discord Indexes Billions of Messages Using Elasticsearch
I wasn't responding to the headline, but to the article. The headline is inaccurate, but that is not something that should surprise any of us.

The 'much more specific' is that they theorize that such a search query must exist. If they had a suspect they would have raided that persons computer, if the computer was encrypted or erased they they could have used google's search data + the IP address they already had to confirm (not discover) that such a search had indeed been made which would serve as corroborating evidence absent the search history on the computer.

Essentially the police is looking for something that they hope exists and will implicate someone who is currently not on their radar and who could very well be innocent.

This case is one of the ones I have studied in a bit more detail:

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

It shows clearly how much damage LE can do with the best of intentions if you give them too much power.

Now imagine the target would not have been a lawyer.
I might be a minority here, but can someone please update me on there state of Rust on iOS? I develop C++ cross platform iOS/Android apps and would love to use Rust if possible.

The last time I checked Rust didn't support .frameworks creation, didn't support Bitcode and calling the main thread from Rust wasn't easy.

I would love to hear if these issues have been resolved.
I mentioned it because it is the bottom of the slippery slope.

Once search data is open game for any law enforcement purpose, why not preemptively tag searches that are common before a crime takes place?

That said, I'm a bit confused as to how a "happy ending" would invalidate moral concerns raised by an illustrative story.

Also FWIW, leading with "Have you?" reduces the chance I might read what you had to say with an open mind.
This was recently mentioned on HN, but I haven't really looked into it (apparently requires training your own models, but provides prepared scripts to do that for some common datasets): https://github.com/mozilla/DeepSpeech
> Except for here in the states 25% of the taxpayer money is going to military, intelligence and debt from past wars we know to have been bad ideas and knew all along were bad ideas.

I don't disagree with your point (about wasteful spending on the military), but your number is substantially inflated and you're wrong on the financial conclusion.

The federal + state spending is $6.x trillion, soon to be $7 trillion. Closer to 10% of tax payer money is going to the military + intelligence. Federal debt service is closer to 5%-6% of the US Government's revenue year to year; less than half of that net cost is due to war.

Entitlements are by far the largest budget problem the US has, there isn't anything else even remotely close at this point. Within ten years those entitlements will balloon the US budget deficit back above $1 trillion, the military spending increases - which I disagree with - are comical next to the entitlement costs inbound. Unless you're planning to abolish the entire US military, you're not going to be able to financially resolve the truly epic entitlements funding shortfall just through military reduction. Even slashing the US military in half won't come close to fixing the problem (~$300 billion versus an inbound $1 trillion annual entitlement shortfall).
For everyone replying

I understand that Japanese has 3 fonts, what I am pointing out here is that the second question is using what appears to be the more complicated font or it just happens to be using characters that require many more strokes than in the other two questions.

Compare the average number of strokes per character between question 2 and the other questions to see what I mean.

My question is whether this is due to some historical or cultural reason, or just happens to be coincidence
How do you get his podcasts into overcast, since they're paid? I couldn't figure it out. Only thing stopping me from subscribing. (I can't bear 1x audio, since I read so much faster)
It's a niche topic, so there aren't any other sites that discuss my topic (except news articles).

If there are other sites, I can't find them! :)
It's a definition. Philosophers label stuff all of the time.
Is the last line in your failed function example supposed to read:

(++ counter)

?
The simplest one might be to convince a company to reserve 3 years worth of AWS resources and paying upfront. I am in this situation right now, but and it's a tough pill to swallow.

I decided that all of my personal projects will be GCE. It is much more cost efficient already and Google will soon allow me to commit to future usage and pay my commitment as I go (Right now AWS forces you to pay upfront to get the same discount (~50%))
Some comparison with the mozjpeg encoder here: https://github.com/google/guetzli/issues/10

TLDR:

> We didn't do a full human rater study between guetzli and mozjpeg, but a few samples indicated that mozjpeg is closer to libjpeg than guetzli in human viewing.
If some bird is killed by a crocodile it is not my concern.
If I eat a chicken it is.
You do not know my son at all. His situation does not begin to get summed up in a few paragraphs on a forum.

This right here is the arrogance I am talking about. You think you know better than I do what my nearly 30 year old son needs. Now why on earth would you think that? That is incredibly contemptuous.
The law tries to make this distinction by specifying that copies have to be fixed into a tangible medium to be infringing. The problem is that the "RAM copy doctrine", as it's known, states that RAM is a sufficiently fixed copy into a sufficiently tangible medium to qualify. This doctrine has been used against scrapers repeatedly, as in Ticketmaster LLC v. RMG Technologies, Inc. (https://casetext.com/case/ticketmaster-llc-v-rmg-technologie...) :

> The copies of webpages stored automatically in a computer's cache or
> random access memory ("RAM") upon a viewing of the webpage fall within
> the Copyright Act's definition of "copy." See, e.g., MAI Systems Corp.
> v. Peak Computer, Inc., 991 F.2d 511, 519 (9th Cir. 1993) ("We recognize
> that these authorities are somewhat troubling since they do not specify
> that a copy is created regardless of whether the software is loaded into
> the RAM, the hard disk or the read only memory (`ROM'). However, since
> we find that the copy created in the RAM can be `perceived, reproduced,
> or otherwise communicated,' we hold that the loading of software into
> the RAM creates a copy under the Copyright Act.") See also Twentieth
> Century Fox Film Corp. v. Cablevision Systems Corp., 478 F.Supp. 2d 607,
> 621 (S.D.N.Y. 2007) (agreeing with the "numerous courts [that] have held
> that the transmission of information through a computer's random access
> memory or RAM . . . creates a `copy' for purposes of the Copyright Act,"
> and citing cases.) Thus, copies of ticketmaster.com webpages
> automatically stored on a viewer's computer are "copies" within the
> meaning of the Copyright Act.
I disagree - I think you are well-served to compile on your own unless you know you don't need it, e.g. if you are just trying it out to learn how it works.

The standard build uses a "least common denominator" Intel instruction set (SSE4), but the odds are extremely high that the machine on which you're running tensorflow supports 4.2. Building from source allows you to use the most up-to-date instruction set (the default configuration script at https://www.tensorflow.org will do it automatically).

I've seen dramatic (>50%) reductions in processing time on test scripts by building from source. Note that those tests were built primarily for my own education, not for benchmarking. But the speedup was so dramatic that I couldn't help but notice and probe a little deeper. YMMV depending on the particular application, whether you are using GPU computing (I am not), etc.
>as I read it the police are asking for people who searched for pictures that were used in the fraud.

Yes. This is the crux of why I'm uncomfortable with the court order. If the police don't have the criminal and files in custody, there's no way for them to know how the criminal got the image. If they do, how the criminal got the image is immaterial, since google image search is a legal way to obtain images. Maybe they got it from a source before Google indexed it for search. Maybe they got it from a file directory at work, or from someone else's computer, etc. Or from GIS, which is the only thing the police are searching. Without more information than is presented in the article, all the police will be able to definitively say is "These IPs from our region are a small subset of the people who had access to this image."

I'm harping on this thread a bit, both because I think the subpoena won't result in meaningful information, and because no judge should have given de jure authority to such a poorly thought out request which breaches privacy. Long-term, the victim of this case might be everyone affected by the legal precedent of granting broad, unnecessary subpoenas for private information. That kind of cost is well over the $28k the victim lost.
I find it more integrated in Debian than in most other distributions (even including the BSDs, once you get outside their base systems and into the wild west of ports). It's not just that they ship other software in the package manager, but that it's heavily customized to fit into the "Debian way" of doing things. This is partly emphasized by the lack of a distinction between "base" and "ports"; every package, from libc to your mailserver, is a Debian package, and is supposed to follow policy and work how users expect a Debian package to work.

It does vary package to package, but on average there's a fairly substantial amount of work that goes into "Debianizing" a package so it's integrated into the OS coherently, vs. the more lightweight build-scripts that you find with systems like Slackware or FreeBSD ports, that typically ship something closer to upstream. I would compare it more to maybe halfway towards how FreeBSD adapts third-party software into its base system. FreeBSD base is full of third-party patched stuff, too, like ZFS, LLVM, OpenSSH, and sendmail, which is periodically synced with upstream. But they put enough effort into customizing it and making it work together coherently, that I think it's fair to call the base FreeBSD install an "operating system".

I do think Debian as an OS may get less true with systemd, though. SystemD is really going all-in on the idea that there is a specifically Linux way of integrating an operating system, which is closely tied to the kernel, and Debian increasingly finds it difficult to avoid getting pulled in 100% to that path, since the amount of divergence you need to avoid doing things the "systemd way" is growing rapidly. In which case the end game is that there's a Linux/SystemD core OS, of which Debian is just one distribution. While until now Debian has aimed at being a "universal operating system" not tied to any specific kernel.
It's also incredibly shortsighted. The military and insurance industry are both well aware of the implications of unmitigated climate change. Likewise with the public health implications from increased pollution. These are tangible impacts that will cost us more than the "savings" proposed in this budget. It's like skipping oil changes on a car to save money....

NPR is also reporting that the Army Corp of Engineers has a proposed -16% cut (http://www.npr.org/2017/03/16/520305293/trump-to-unveil-hard...). Are they not responsible for mitigating the natural hazards that are expected to increase due to climate change?
WhatsApp security problem leaves millions of users exposed to hackers