skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> I'm sure we would have been running on at least 10x as many machines

Seeing the opposite trend.

Because your own machines are so expensive and annoying to manage, you only get 500GB memory 40 cores servers. You don't optimize and you run stuff randomly on whatever seem available.

Whereas in the cloud, you put VMs per role, with appropriate sizing. And when someone asks for 5 machines with 16 cores, you can be like, WTF are you running with all that power???
You may or may not need to reduce the capacitance: modern multi-layer ceramic capacitors have very high capacitance values, allowing replacement of many other types of capacitors. It used to be that a 10uF capacitor was something you'd definitely need an electrolytic for (if not a tantalum), but now you can get that in a small surface-mount MLCC ceramic capacitor. Ceramics aren't limited to the picofarad ranges any more by a long shot.
You mean make up stories like that Obama was born in Kenya? Or that Democrats ran a child sex ring in a DC pizza joint? Or that a terrorist attack occured in Bowling Green?

Also, any sentence starting with "major news organizations should be compelled to print" is, uh, pretty much the definition of non-free speech.

Come on. I expect more than that level of illogic on this forum, even from Trump apologists.
It is now. https://github.com/andrewstuart/helm-charts
there is a paper investment agreement signed with startup that says that certain shares are represented as a tokens in smart contract and whoever owns those tokens has shareholder rights (voting power, dividends) etc. so owning tokens is no different than owning shares.
this paper agreement has a corresponding smart contract agreement (they are linked via hash) and together they protect our investment both on blockchain and in so called off-chain world
Skype is probably one example where it took developers 10+ years to figure out how the app worked.
I feel almost paralyzed by choice looking at this site. Kind of like when trying to choose a font and you have 200 on your computer. But the grouping is nice and a lot of these look very interesting. Definitely bookmarking.
Open source license descriptions and metadata for GitHub repositories
From my understanding, the limitation is purely because of how Apple designed iTunes Connect validation, and not for technical reasons.
>I'm not sure what you mean by "Realistic" tests.

* Where possible, use the real thing - that is, use an actual database in preference to, e.g. mock objects representing an object that you use to interact with a database.

* Where you need to use a mock (when the real thing is too expensive to use), make it a realistic mock.

>Perhaps you mean integrated tests that exercise, say, the entire stack from handling the HTTP request down to the database, if we're talking about a REST API.

Exactly, but if, say, there was some algorithmic code in there that could be exercised realistically without using the HTTP stack then the HTTP stack is not necessarily necessary.

>If you don't care much about covering large portions of the state space

Code coverage is entirely orthogonal to the type of test you are doing.

>your tolerance for defects is high, then I'm sure your claim about improved productivity is true.

You appear to be fairly confused about the distinction between test coverage and modes of testing.

>My tolerance for defects is low

If you put no emphasis on test realism then I suspect that your tolerance will naturally have to be quite high.

>I've tried doing this with integrated tests, and found it to be very difficult to do in a timely manner.

I found this too sometimes. It's a tooling issue. Integration test tooling is more expensive to build initially but it tends to be much more reusable than unit test tooling. SMTP client stubs may be quicker to build but relatively useless in future projects that use different libraries (sometimes even different versions of the same library) whereas a mock SMTP server is useful forever.

>In an integrated test, I have to set up too much state and have the machine do too much irrelevant work just to verify this small portion of the code.

I have no problem with my tests chewing up 10,000% more CPU than yours and taking an extra 5 minutes if they've got even a 2% higher chance of finding bugs. CPU time is cheap, my time is expensive, bugs are expensive. Easy trade off.

>That leaves coupling and maintenance. This is a valid concern in the mockist style, but I haven't found it to be a limiting factor in maintaining my code.

Still means you're writing and maintaining more code. That means more bugs and more work.

> think it comes down to testing the right things. If you're using mocks to verify a contract between two objects, and you want to change that contract, naturally your tests for the contract will break.

Yup, and since changing the contracts between different subsystems is the most critical and important part of refactoring code, you've just tossed out a large chunk of the mainr benefit of having tests - safe refactoring. This is the worst aspect of unit testing IMO - it cements technical debt because refactoring changes contracts that will turn the tests red.
Close! It's Drift (drift.com), not Intercom.
Yet there are few people alive more qualified to comment on this type of work than Scott Aaronson. Plus, most of his criticism is only directed towards the misleading marketing, journalism, and presentations about D-Wave projects.
Blueprint for Armageddon, in particular, I cannot strongly enough recommend. Nothing else I've encountered has so thoroughly brought home the fashion in which World War I and surrounding events have determined the subsequent course of history.

All six episodes are still on the free feed, and will be for at least a little while longer. Anyone reading this could do a lot worse than to at least download them for later listening, if not to go ahead and get into the series now.
But that's "different" because they've built a $600bn company off it.
I agree with you, and I've got a question as well.

I'm wondering how long does it take to execute the ES refresh on a search query when the Shard was marked as dirty?

If the search requests are mostly real time, I suspect this is really short, but if the Shard ingest new messages for a while (let's say 50 minutes) and it's marked as dirty, a search query would ask ES to refresh 50 minutes worth of documents before running the actual query.

As it shown to be a problem? Is the refreshing time growing along with the number of documents inserted since the last refresh?
Obrigado! :)

On my specific case it is more weekend programming, mainly focused on graphics and multimedia, so I can bare the ocasional pain for reading image files, being called as a service or interacting with the network related hardware.

Just wanted to have some heads up on other possibilities that I could be missing, from people that do it professionally.
Speculating Futures
It depends on how probative the specific evidence is. If you had a database of everyone's DNA, and wanted to figure out whose blood was on the murder weapon. Your prior is highly uninformative, but the DNA evidence is so highly probative that the resulting identification is probably quite reliable.
> Because medically, that's a complicated question.

That fine, but with all the misdirection around sat/trans fats, and the current global obesity epidemic, I find it hard to believe the industry is solely concerned about reducing consumer confusion (IIRC, that's their stated reasoning) around a % DV for sugar.

That is, we need some kind of yard stick for sugar, because what we have now is not sufficient for the problems our society has. It may not be % DV, but off the top of my head, say relative sugar ratio to other food products in the same category. But that can be gamed as well since there're only a handful of independent companies in the industry.
Repeal of the Daylight Saving Time Act in California (bill)
Thanks for the enthusiasm!

I think a lot of your questions can be answered here (including the other pages that these pages link to):
http://www.openphilanthropy.org/research/our-process
and
http://www.givewell.org/how-we-work/process

Because our fund managers are all GiveWell and Open Philanthropy staff, we inherit their methodology. If in the future we move beyond GiveWell and Open Philanthropy fund managers, we'll need to have pages on their process too (and how it potentially differs from GW / OP).

A more accessible introduction to how to assess which problem area is most important is here:
https://80000hours.org/career-guide/most-pressing-problems/
It doesn't get better. It is a truly awful book, I think I only finished it because I was in a train-wreck fascination mode with the author's insecurity.
> the per-user ID write bottleneck

The basics is to have less machines but more powerful. It helps to handle the targeted bursts.

The advanced is to have a layer of queuing before the ingestion, where you can do magic with distribution rules, rate limiting and dropping peak traffic.
French hoverboard inventor banned from flying in France
> [Google] are required to keep records that brick and mortar businesses do not

What records are Google required to keep that e.g. DuckDuckGo are not?
If you can avoid using a dylib on iOS, I would do it. It effects startup performance time. Just make a static version and compile it into the binary?
Sift Science (YC S11) offers machine learning powered services for preventing fake account signups and promotion abuse. (Disclaimer: I work for Sift Science)

https://siftscience.com/products/account-abuse

https://siftscience.com/products/promo-abuse
Knight Capital lost $440 million dollars due to a bug and went out of business.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/08/09/technology/knight-expensive-...
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2013/34-70694.pdf?page=...
Americans Don’t Miss Manufacturing – They Miss Unions (2016)
I want this to be funny, but even the simplest of LISP is foreign to me.
So I'm kinda like an English only speaking expat at a Hong-Kong Bar, where a local guy tells me a (dirty?) joke and I laugh, even though I didn't quite get all the details.

Well done?
Reminds me of when app developers found the private API of the Pokemon GO app and used it to create their own Pokemon locater apps. Many of them made it to the top free charts and would have raked in hundreds of thousands of downloads, if not millions.
This might sound a bit extreme, but contrary to most FRR pieces this is garbage advice. Startups should focus first on getting their product-market fit before trying to future-proof themselves from a future that doesn't yet exist.
Harrison Bergeron comes to mind...
I came here expecting someone to recommend 'make' - and some others to link to interesting make resources. I'm kind of surprised no one has.

Make is a utility that's seemed super useful to put into use for non-programming tasks. In my case: take a LaTeX file, create a PDF from it, run tex2html on it and ftp the results up to some web server, run pandoc on it to create a dated epub, etc. But my initial forays into learning make were frustrating and I gave up. Is anyone using make to automate workflow processes, or is that wishful thinking?
I'm making a general statement, not specific to UC Berkeley. Even if you don't consider UCB a business, most of its income does not actually come from taxes and its spending isn't going to be all that different from a private university. Clearly, their decision here was not to spend, but to delete instead. That was the economical thing to do.

You're also missing the point completely. Whether a business wants to do something depends on whether it is expected to be profitable. If the laws make it unprofitable, then it doesn't want to do it.

You're posing a false dilemma with "it's more important that those persons be allowed to participate in society than it is for a business to make money". If society wants participation, society should pay for it, not just business. It's just really easy for the government to use people with disabilities, because opposing such legislation is unpopular.

Who decides what's reasonable, anyway? If you're a small business, building some ramp can easily break your budget. If you're McDonalds, it make no difference. Are you going to treat both companies equally? If so, you're sponsoring big corporate.
Volcanic explosion on Mount Etna injures 10 people
> I asked him if he did it, and he said, 'I shot the clerk'. I asked him again, and again he said 'I shot the clerk".
For people living 500 years ago, modern society would be a singularity. Much of the things we can do with technological would be considered magic or witchcraft. Our scientific understanding has revised our picture of the world in pretty radical ways.
Starting a Startup Within a Scaleup
Yes, that's a good one :)

There are zillions more such that can be done in Unix, of course, if one puts one's mind to it and experiments, even without spending a lot of time. Another simple one I use some is to define some environment variables to the value of long directory names to which I need to go often as part of some project. Then I can just do:

cd $short_name_for_that_dir

A shell alias can also be used instead.
Heart for micro:bit and Processing
بث مباشر مباراة روما وليون اليوم بث حي ومباشر يوتيوب يلا شوت
900+ Free Responsive Email Templates to Help You Start with EmailDesign
"With Amazon you have so many options when it comes to storage, compute power, load balancing..."

It used to be different, but today their most important offerings have open source equivalents. They are essentially off the shelf, because for your own projects there is no need to care about abuse or noisy neighbors. Most importantly, though, it's going to be cheaper and you still will be able to use cloud where it shines.
The More You Comment Online, the Dumber Your Comments Become
OpenEMR: Electronic Medical Records and Medical Practice Management Software
I had that happen to me once. A candidate (college hire) chose to code in Haskell, which I had a passing familiarity with. We offered him the job, and he was definitely a strong hire, and we used Java mostly.
Was discussing this with a friend, why Patreon seems so much more difficult than Kickstarter. Kickstarter has as its premise, "Make this cool thing happen." It's a specific product (usually) with a specific outcome, and contributors may feel invested in achieving that outcome.

Patreon has as its premise, "Support this artist" (in many cases). It's more abstract, not tied to a particular product necessarily, and contributors may feel more like they're donating to someone's rent money rather than bringing a product into reality.

What do you think? Would there be some way for Patreon to tie donations more directly to product creation, or would that undermine the people who are using Patreon?
Their app database fields got leaked back in Dec when a former exec sued them and he included the info in his court filings. You can look for yourself...Funny thing I noticed is every account seems to have a Grey Balls flag.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3227535-Spangenberg-...
Short answer: NO.

This question seems to come up every time there's a discussion like this about low-voltage power. The whole reason we use high voltages in the first place is to reduce resistive losses. Ohm's Law (V=IR) plus the formula for power(P=VI) tell you everything you need to know, which is that power is related to current and resistance by the equation P=R*I^2. So for a given amount of power, if you increase the voltage by a factor of 2, you then decrease the current by a factor of 2, and you reduce the resistance by a factor of 4, so the power lost in transmission is 1/4 as much.

If you tried putting 5V USB ports in your house, you wouldn't be able to use wire to connect them to the central power supply; you'd need to use massively-thick copper bus bars. The cost would be astronomical, and you'd need huge channels on the walls to hold them.
Maybe you're just a better person than them.
If you pull out a corporate finance textbook, matching assets to liabilities will be covered. Matching cash flows will be covered. That is why I am elevating beyond being a rule of thumb.

Using debt for appreciating assets vs consumables will not be mentioned. As an example, a car doesn't appreciate, but a loan for it is fine.
We used a time-based release schedule; each minor version comes out every six weeks. We believe this approach is better for a number of reasons, including quality.
> Do you have an example of someone being executed because they intentionally sold a faulty product?

If a pharmacist decides she really hates Bob and is going to swap his medicine for poison, she goes down for murder. That obviously doesn't happen very often because the penalty for murder is high and serves as a very effective deterrent to intentional killings like that.

> We have laws against negligence as well. You absolutely can deter people from accidentally getting people killed to some extent, or at least our laws seem to think we can.

It's not that you can't deter some of them, it's that you can't deter enough of them, because they aren't doing it on purpose.

> If making sellers responsible for accidental death and injury would destroy individuals and small businesses, this just reinforces my point that regulations protect sellers as much as buyers.

The problem is regulations often do the same thing. Many regulatory compliance costs are fixed -- they cost the same million dollars whether you have a billion customers or just three.
I think that's exactly wrong, I'm afraid.

In traditional charity, the incentives that charities have are to do whatever is going to fundraise the most. So the charities that get biggest are those that are best at looking good, rather than doing good.

The solution is to have a set of donors who really care about funding whatever does the most good. That means that a charity's fundraising incentives line up with what's actually best for the world. And that set of impact-motivated donors is exactly what we're trying to create with the effective altruism movement.

New Incentives is a great example of that working. In just the same way that a startup will pivot if it thinks it could be working on something else that's more profitable, because of the existence of the EA community New Incentives is able to pivot to a different approach that it thinks will do more good per dollar and knows that, if it succeeds at doing that, it will be able to grow more.
More that the websites actually want to be found by someone.
I suppose asking about the applicant's past experience isn't the kind of thing that "scales" in some organizations, because then you've gone from a double blind experimental procedure to a freewheeling conversation between individual humans.
Some background: I have had 3 jobs (not including assistantships) till now - two were at the big companies mentioned below (MS/Amzn) and currently am at Snap for the past year or so. Before joining Snap I did interview around and had offers from the likes of FB/Twitter/Oracle as well - So I guess I have relevant and recent points here.

- Almost all the interviews followed the same pattern maligned a lot in HN.

- Almost in every one of those loops, I felt like my current experience building storage systems and replication wasn't examined very well.

- I had many other informationals where the company felt completely borgish (no one knew what the other parts were doing), where the recruiters were clueless, where they were trying to undercut me by 50% or so(We have the smartest!), under level me (We always under level outside hires!), where they had no real reason to hire me (We are always looking for smart people!), where they were just trying to prove that they are smarter and so on. All this when I had 5 odd offers in hand and actually told them that to see if they would have a productive conversation rather than wasting everyone's time.

But I do have different takeaways from these though:

- For every guy like me, there are a lot of other folk who can probably spend the whole hour with you and make you leave ambivalent. You will never know whether you hired him because you liked him or because of his skills.

- An actual (even a flawed one) datapoint is better than nothing.

- If the guys interviewing me are anything like me, They probably spend 5-10 hours a week on interviews already. This means custom tuning a process for each candidate is exorbitantly hard. I mean we do look at resumes and try to calibrate what we expect from a given candidate and we do assign certain folk to get information about their current positions - but a completely personalized loop is still in the zone of people who have been the top 1% of any company. If you aren't there, you gotta expect the rote process.

- I don't have a week to fully dedicate to each company. I currently have a hard job - and I prefer to prepare for a generic process rather than custom one.

- It isn't really hard to prepare for this anyway: In fact the rote process makes it so much easier. There are set concepts and websites. I built my own list, filled them in with actual notes, practiced a 100 problems to get into the mode and was in.

- At the end of the day, all these companies have great people in great teams solving great problems. It is very very hard to distinguish one from the other, There is a very high chance you will end up doing very similar work for one or other. So now the distinguishing factors become something else.

- The recruiters in general are just trying to meet a quota.
What is the current accuracy of read rate in machine vision
In the transportation sector there is lots of interest in using cameras to quantify origins, destinations and flows on different roads by recognising either vehicles by their size/shape or by reading their license plate and referencing a database.

Of course, there are issues: poor light conditions, partial image blockage etc.

I know Deepmind, other google projects and a whole branch of academia are working on this. What is the state of the art accuracy for either a. identifying vehicle type or b. identifying the license plate?

For example, Google say here[http://www.techworld.com/personal-tech/google-deepmind-what-is-it-how-it-works-should-you-be-scared-3615354/] their accuracy for static image recognition is ~95%. There is also tensorflow and other open source tools
single tax receipt (donating to one org instead of 3-4)

GiveWell offers this as well: https://secure.givewell.org/

You can donate to GiveWell for distribution to their to charities, and you can either choose the breakdown or ask them to allocate it as they think best.
Do lists have special status beyond syntactic sugar for their constructors?
Grrr. None of this (article or most of the comments) has much to do with Haskell. It applies to all languages, right? You implement an abstraction using an appropriate data structure, accounting for the frequency of various operation you plan to perform. Often a list will be the wrong data structure - no big surprise.

But if you'd like to implement a stack, perhaps with a lot of elements, then a singly linked list is a reasonable choice. But you need to think about the operations you need. If you're just pushing, popping, looking at the top element, checking for empty, then great!

If you need to check the length, then you'll need to keep a counter, otherwise you'll pay O(n) time. If you need to make a copy for read-only purposes, great, constant time. If you need to make a copy for destructive use, then you'll have to pay O(n) time. This is all Mom-n-apple pie.
Does product mistakes count?

Google : Social & Chat applications.

Google+, Hangouts, Allo, Duo

Other than core products, Google made lot of mistakes(both engineering & non-technical) in all the products.
Huginn is basic but very configurable for this