skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Dear Fellow Rejects - did any of you go back and take a look at your application and find questions added that were not on the application that you submitted? I was ultra scrupulous in double checking before I submitted. Look in 'Progress' section. There is a forced choice question 'Which of the following best describes your progress?' which offered a couple of answer options. My post rejection application review shows the next question as 'When will you have a prototype or beta? that is not completed because I do not remember it being on the application template. Just a little further down, there is a question 'Do you have revenue?' to which I answered 'No'. But then there are 6 additional questions that I do not remember seeing on the pre-submission application. The first is 'What was your revenue last month? (Please use USD. If none, enter '0'). If that question was there on my pre submission application I certainly would have entered '0', but it appears empty on the post rejection review. Worse, if the application processor could not find a '0' in that space, it might have rejected the whole application as 'incomplete'. Even worse, the next 5 questions 'Your revenue 2,3,4,5,6 months ago?' would have also registered incomplete. But I don't think these questions were on the my pre-submission application form. Also take a look in the equity section. The first question is 'have you incorporated....' which I answered 'No'. I did not answer nor remember seeing the next 3 questions:'What kind of entity and in what state...', 'Please describe the breakdown of the equity ownership...', 'List any investments your company has received..."

Please check your post rejection applications - do you see these questions? Did you answer these questions, or does it look like they were added after submission? If I am wrong or misunderstand, I apologize. I submitted my application on 3/22.
Artificial Intelligence Could Build New Drugs Faster Than Any Human Team
this has to be a money laundering scam, right?
16 char passwords provide around 30 bits of entropy while 30 char passwords give you 46 bits of entropy according to old NIST pdf [0].

[0]: http://csrc.nist.gov/archive/pki-twg/y2003/presentations/twg...
Note how OP says DevOps will become obsolete in the future, while you say it is not obsolete right now.
> I'm talking about Jewish ancestry (i.e., genetics), not Jewish faith

This has nothing to do with genetics. If genetics was at play, you would have had Jews inventing and discovering prior to 20th century too. That is not the case (at least not comparable to amount of discoveries/inventions that happened in the 20th/21st century). This was because the Jews had a level playing field. The section of Wikipedia you quote also confirms the same: "In those societies where they have been free to enter any profession, they have a record of high occupational achievement, entering professions and fields of commerce where higher education is required". The important part is "free to enter any profession". Were Indians "free to enter any profession" during the 19th-20th century?

The Jews have been migrating to the West for centuries (since at least the 17th century). Indians have been doing so only for the past 40-50 years. Those Indians who were lucky enough to get to travel to the West for education opted to become Barristers to fight the British Colonial rule legally (studying Science/Technology was the last priority for most Indians during that time). Formal education was also denied to majority of Indians during the British Raj (which wasn't the case for Jews in the West). It wasn't as easy for Indians to migrate to the West as it was for the Jews (as wealth, language barrier and travel risks played a huge role). Getting access to quality education was pretty much impossible for Indians until we gained Independence from the British Raj in 1947. I can actually turn around and say that it is quite astonishing that Indians have been so successful considering we gained freedom only 70 years ago.

I'm sure our future generations (2-3 centuries from now) would be studying about Indians in the same way as we are studying about Ashkenazi Jews today. I'm hoping they wouldn't label it as genetics and instead simply attribute it to access to quality education, wealth, prosperity, freedom and liberty.
Wow, this could be huge. Autoimmune diseases are legion.
IPV6 solves this, plus even without you don't need anything close to this amount of IPs to do what you're describing. It's a fairly niche case to need that many public IPs and it seems a little crazy to hold that many just in case some researcher might want to use them.

Even your comment about streaming, seems like mainly nostalgia vs reality as you kind of admit. Any modern streaming infrastructure works from behind a NAT since most people are behind one these days.
There is no chronological view
You have either:
'Most recent' = filtered
or
'Top stories' = heavily filtered
Thanks! That was very helpful.

edit: From wikipedia:

"Unicode comprises 1,114,112 code points in the range 0x0 to 0x10FFFF. The Unicode code space is divided into seventeen planes (the basic multilingual plane, and 16 supplementary planes), each with 65,536 (= 216) code points."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_point
Also it's not that Nepal shut it down.

It's one of the telecom companies which was offering free access to Wikipedia and Twitter ended it citing low spending customers.
I checked the date, but nope, it's not April Fool's today.

So apparently, yes, FaceBook is working on devices that will allow you to type with your brain.

In return, FaceBook will need from you only access to your thoughts, and maybe your moods and emotions too?

Rest assured, advertisers will happily pay for them.
German submarine warfare upset the US because they sank some US shipping at considerable loss of life, rather than because of any inherent moral flaw. Had they steered clear of civilian shipping (trickier than it sounds because some military ships disguised themselves as merchant marine vessels) or at least avoided sinking anything that was likely to belong to the US, things might have turned out very differently.

Moral arguments in political speeches should not be taken at face value, since their inclusion is for emotional arousal rather than reasoned analysis.
Here is a video of said character: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I14b-C67EXY&t=12s
If you've only got a gig of RAM available seems unlikely you could make any decent use of high bandwidth situations (or if you are, your cache is going to pretty much constantly evicted).

But still, you can hop on an m4.xlarge for only 150 a month. Get 14GB of available cache on 4 cores with high networking.

FWIW, redis is maybe an outlier here, but it's pretty stark. The prices are just so far out of reasonable range it feels like. Their postgres pricing seems more in line (assuming heroku's support is good, I have no experience with such).
The problem is "web developer" is a junior role now. Nobody hires web developers with 10 years of experience unless they know the underlying "software engineer" stuff to go along with it. The market is flooded with bootcamp devs that are now doing what was considered 'software engineer only' territory 10 years ago. Some designers are also getting wise and realizing that HTML/CSS and javascript aren't beyond their ability to learn.
Valley invested $120M in a $400 juicer that works as well as your hands
For the uninitiated, can someone give a brief explanation of what that means?
Actually, as I've seen it used, it usually is an alternate way of saying "that person is a job-hopper." The actual work on the resume is less relevant to a person using this phrase, usually, in my experience, than that they have had "sticking power" to stay with a given project through multiple phases (development, maintenance, etc.).
Switch is much more than a glorified if
Yeah and it really lacks the soul that Wunderlist had. It was the right visual presentation of the right features. I'll miss it. :(
What you're saying sounds reasonable but I think it is completely wrong.

I strongly believe that startups very rarely fail because they have chosen to build on a particular immature technology. Some fail or stall because they cannot bring themselves to stop redesigning and rebuilding on the next new technology or design philosophy every couple of months.

But these are completely different issues (related by psychology for sure but not by necessity)

My opinion is you should choose what you find coolest and most exciting now and then stick with it!

Of course the technology you choose should have some traction but don't choose technologies of the past! Whatever you choose will be the past soon enough and that is when you must find the strength to stick with it and get on with creating value for users.
What kind of hardware?

Working on machinery control, power, lighting, or communication systems (just to name a few) are all going to require different areas of focus.
Time for occlumency training...
A student ran an IRC server (necromancy.poly.edu) that anyone could connect to from outside the network, if they used their student VPN. I love that that was possible.

There were so many cool projects that their network facilitated. I went to this exhibition, after the network "upgrade", and spoke to a student who's wearable device gets sensor readings from itself using HTTP to a node.js server hosted on a VPS. He was having latency issues.
Even prepending... One would have to touch every sibling to update the index. So prepends are now a linear operation on the count of siblings. Prepend a few hundred items to a node, and I'm sure one would see the pain in profiling.

Now, whether that's a realistic use case is another question. But at the same time, you know someone on the Internet is doing it that way...
That's too bad. I think universities should make these resources that they've been granted available to students and researchers.

They are... indirectly. MIT can do far more to assist students and researchers using the money they raise by selling off IP addresses than they can by holding on to the addresses in case 16 million students all decide that they want to host their own podcasts.
The figure is simply how much I feel is motivating enough to give up my free time. That's the minimum amount and often times it can be quite higher (see my other post). The opportunities largely don't exist and mostly because people don't want to pay that much for my time. Cash is not a priority for me and I'm not really needing of more of it. [0, tangent]

For some people it could be $5 because they need some money to buy some food to eat. For others it might be $30 to spend at the bar on Friday night. Others charge more - I know a contractor who won't settle for any less than $10,000 for 40 hours of their time (comes out to $250/hr). Some people value their time above all else, refusing any monetary incentive. You simply can't buy their time.

If you think $40/hr is worth your time, do it. If you think $2/hr is worth your time, do it. The value is yours to set - it can fluctuate and change. But learning to value your time is worthwhile. You only get so much of it, so be sure you're happy with how you're spending it.

[0] I've been told that's terrible future planning, because I may need more cash in the future. I prefer to live in the now and worry about possible futures when it becomes the now. There are just so many futures to worry about and plan for. What if I worked harder to store away more money just to die of a heart attack without ever being able to enjoy my life? To avoid stress and simplify my life I don't worry about possible futures.
Thanks. And sure, consumer IOT is bullshit. But industrial IOT is very valuable.
An advertising company wants mainline access to my brain and vital signs. What could go wrong?

(Note: You know you're getting old when you start to get concerned about the privacy of these things. If you'd told me when I started in tech that people would be voluntarily buying always-on microphones sold by advertising companies and putting them in their houses, I would've called you insane. Who knows, maybe this will work).
Just like [year] warnings are for people offended by dates! Damn sissies, right?
Notes on 'Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction'
Yuhong, is there a bug filed for the x64 SpiderMonkey JIT issues? What is the side effect of not following the x86-64 ABI for JIT code?
Not my post, just wanted to share.
Not clear how they will make a non invasive optical brain interface...
Ask HN: Cryptographically Anonymous Authentication?
I've been thinking about the possibility of creating a scheme where a user is authenticated against a system, but can be certain that the system does not know the individual identify of each user.

I started thinking about this because my university recently published a university-wide poll where you can leave feedback and review the university. They claim that you are anonymous, but you can only access the form from an authenticated page, and the link contains some unique token that authenticates me with the form.

I did some quick Google searches and found this paper:
https://eprint.iacr.org/2014/073.pdf, but didn't really understand if this would be applicable to something like this. Does anyone know if there's anything like what I'm describing published?
> Web developers don't typically deal with the sort of algorithmic problems that software engineers tend to deal with.

Software Engineers rarely deal with the sort of algorithmic problems you're thinking of. Engineering isn't about the basic fundamentals of CS. It's about thinking in systems. A person developing an individual component of a system may deal with algorithmic problems, but unless they're also contributing to the architecture and design of the system as a whole they aren't doing engineering, either.
The UK Government introduces measures to prevent general election being hacked
Having read a lot of books on the lead-up to WWI, and a few more on the conduct of WWI myself, I must say that the entire thesis comes across as rather forced.

First off, it's rather well-known that Germany's fear of a two-front war and encirclement led to much of its preliminary war plan. On the other hand, the circumstances that led up to such a scenario were not preordained from its construction. It was largely a result of the early 20th century Germany managing to piss off just about everybody else with amazingly inept foreign diplomacy. In particular, Germany decided to give up its relationship with Russia, which France eagerly took advantage of and bound the two countries fairly close together. Germany's naval race with Britain also did much to antagonize it for no real gain.

Also, Alsace-Lorraine is much oversold as a cause of war. It's true that France did want Alsace-Lorraine back. But many in France were not prepared to go to war to actually achieve that aim. Instead, the situation in France post-Franco-Prussian War was to try to find allies that could help divert German attention, and their allies were the Russians who needed lots of help to even minimally qualify for that role and the British who went to rather great lengths to try to avoid actually fulfilling their commitment when August 1914 came around (Germany marching through Belgium gave Britain the political cover to actually commit).

As for whether or not Germany could win, that's a difficult what-if to answer. The Schlieffen Plan was, in the abstract, a masterpiece of precision planning and timetabling. But the plan also had very little room for change if things didn't work out. Belgium put up an unexpectedly fierce resistance, Austria-Hungary had a surprisingly hard time in Serbia, and Russia was doing better at first than Germany expected. In the end, the German momentum and logistics chain was incapable of carrying them to Paris, which completely ruined their plans and any hope of a quick end to the war. And Germany was completely unprepared for that scenario (to be fair, no one else was).
> Presentation hasn't changed in 15 years

Craiglist presentation hasn't changed either.

I don't think this point is relevant if the UI is good enough or have been this way for so long that people are used to it. Changing it would be weird.

> No innovation.

You want to innovate an online encyclopedia? How exactly do you do that? And without sacrificing integrity?

> It's just a matter of time.

What is this time to event thing that you speak of?
Congrats, you just invented the modern tech company.
That's a very good point that I did not think about. Even if they would be able to hit the right buttons in my mind to keep me browsing, I might find the overall experience dissatisfying and quit the whole thing. Like does anybody really feel "good" after spending one hour browsing Facebook or imgur?
Abstracts are short enough that they can be inlined into a hackernews comment directly:

> A critical analysis of the feasibility of reversible computing is performed. The key question is: Is it possible to build a completely reversible computer? A closer look into the internal aspects of the reversible computing as well as the external constraints such as the second law of thermodynamics has demonstrated that several difficulties would have to be solved before reversible computer is being built. It is shown that a conventional reversible computer would require energy for setting up the reversible inputs from irreversible signals, for the reading out of the reversible outputs, for the transport of the information between logic elements and finally for the control signals that will require more energy dissipating into the environment. A loose bound on the minimum amount of energy required to be dissipated during the physical implementation of a reversible computer is obtained and a generalization of the principles for reversible computing is provided.

It can save readers a click in deciding if they want to go for the whole paper or not. Think of the abstract as an upper bound on whether the paper is interesting or not. A paper could possibly be less interesting than its abstract, it is much less likely that it is more interesting than its abstract unless the author really messed up.
If that's the case, then say it. We don't believe in diverse work environments. We don't care if every employee is a white male. They asked for diversity, this is how you get it.

Not trying to be sarcastic, but your argument assumes a meritocracy.

Companies hire the best college graduates. Colleges take the best high schoolers. The best high schools are in rich, mostly white areas. Who's to blame?

Most CEO's, founders, and senators are white men. Either it's not a meritocracy or white supremacy is real.

I believe it's not a meritocracy. More opportunity for minorities is one step in fixing this.
I'm only an amateur historian but I'd say you're very wrong. I'll be surprised and happy if we avoid a major international war in the next 5 years. I will be astonished if we avoid one over the next 20.
Yes, exactly. After setting a cookie server usually cannot check if it is secure or not but using this prefix on modern browsers guarantees to server that the cookie is certainly secure. Of course it works only in modern browsers but it's part of defense in depth.
If you use ++ in a sizeof expression...you're probably getting what you deserve. C may not be your friend, but it is fair.
The need for Germany to secure their left flank to avoid a two-front war and France's realization that it has nothing to gain from war with Germany also led to the creation of the European union in response.
The idea was to deeply intertwine their economies so neither nation would benefit from war with each other.

As for the US, their only objective is to prevent the rise of a dominant european power that can compete with them. e.g. WWI prevent germany from capturing france, WWII prevent germany from occupying russia (lend-lease) and then enter the war to prevent russia from occupying europe.
Heroku did it 10 years ago
> Agreed, but did they have any reason to believe it would be shorter than the Franco-Prussian War?

Yes. Germany came within spitting distance of Paris thanks to the Shlieffen plan, and was only hobbled at the eleventh hour by overextended supply lines.

Meanwhile, the Entente was counting on the Russian juggernaut, with its millions of men to overrun East Germany. The Russians saw great successes against Austrian forces, but met a complete disaster when they engaged the Germans. As it turned out, the Russian empire was a paper tiger - completely unprepared to fight a war.
They're "high" relative to some (most) jobs and not others. It sounds like you may be implying something like "programmers make enough already". Perhaps true on a moral plane, has nothing to do with economics though. Why is gold so expensive? Because it's demanded. There is no inherent correct price to anything absent a market.

> The fact is that they could offer $1,000,000 starting salaries tomorrow and the pool of 'qualified' applicants would not change because salary is not the determining factor here.

OK. I think this is the core of the matter. Let's assume the number of "qualified" programmers is fixed over the short term.

The market is made of actors/companies. If a company wants more of the qualified programmers, and they pay $1M starting salary, that company will get them. And then the market price will rise. The fact that it hasn't risen to $1M implies the companies don't really want them that badly.

And in the long term, a price raise would encourage more programmers to become qualified and the problem would be rectified. But if what you are saying is true, and they really only want Stanford grads or equivalents, why would they care about H1Bs? It's not. They want to keep the price down.

Even if we assumed the number of qualified programmers were constant, there would be no more of a "shortage" than there is a shortage of gold. We don't say there's a gold shortage even though its quantity is "fixed" and presumably everyone would like more of it if it were cheaper.

I think people make a stronger argument for a shortage in the labor market WRT doctors. In that case there is a cartel (the AMA) keeping the quantity artificially low. There is no such phenomenon in programming. There's nothing stopping a university hiring all top-notch CS profs and becoming the next CMU/Stanford, and charging students a bundle...if the price were right.
Which is not the same as direct ownership. It's similar to the dynamic of democracy at work in the US at federal level vs. local municipal level. If large-scale federal level democracy doesn't work too well, we're not immediately dismissing democracy outright, right?
I still don't get how Franco-Prussian war was the cause for WW-I after nearly 45 years. Sure, French were pissed off with Prussia in 1870 but then almost two generations passed by before WW-I. The whole article talks about France and Germany as if they are each single person fighting with other and waiting for 45 years to take revenge. Lots of things changes during two generations - governments, art, politics, economies... So connecting dots like this doesn't make any sense.
Electrolysis has been enabled by default since Firefox 48. Source: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Electrolysis#Schedule.
Darwin at work.
My slogan about startups:

> Startups don't create new technology, they create new technology-dependent business models.

I wouldn't say this is 100% true, but it is probably 95% true.
Electrolysis isn't enabled by default

It is enabled by default, you just may have a plugin installed that is blocking it. The plugin(s) could be multiprocess compatible but unmaintained and missing the multiprocess=true flag in its package.json.

You can go to about:support to see if multiprocess is truly enabled. If not, go to about:addons and start disabling extensions until it does work.
Welcome April 2017
Who needs relevant facts when it would just distract from this perfectly good preconceived opinion I have right here?
I kept reading the title as "Facebook and the CAST of Monopoly" - needless to say, the article made no sense since I was looking for Uncle Moneybags.