skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You can click on any of the several links in this thread to see that you forgot more than Instagram.

I don't have any affection for Sacca, don't know him, don't care about him, etc. But he's factually been an incredible investor and it's just weird to see concerted effort to dispute that for no reason. He could be all sorts of negative things but he was a hell of a seed investor and that's in the books and he's got the receipts.
Mine was suspended for spam and I was falsely accused by Mailgun of have compromised servers. Initially I freaked out and then discovered that my servers were fine, but my account at Mailgun was hacked and used to send thousands of spam emails. This happened a couple of times. I asked to see the IP addresses of the senders and Mailgun said they didn't track that/could not tell me. And then they had the audacity to bill me for sending spam that was sent as result of their system being compromised.
Putting together UI test automation and TDD – an alternative opinion
Clients have no way to indicate what CAs they trust, so my infrastructure has to just present a certificate and say "Here I am"

So now if Google go ahead and distrust Symantec CAs, I need to duplicate that infrstructure (or at least the configuration at load balancers, etc) - this leads to all sorts of complexity.
I will bet that most of the comments in this thread are from people who have never lived in rural India.

I have, and will tell you the real reason. It has little to do with literacy or education. It is because (warning, this is going ironic) Indian people are incredibly disgusted about shit and want to not think about dealing with it.

I'm Indian myself. For example, we think toilet paper is a horrible idea. You just clean your shit with...paper...and just leave it like that? That would not fly, even in any of the villages you mention. They have to have water to clean their shit, usually supplied in a small bucket or vessel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lota_(vessel)

Now think about temperatures. The current temperature at many places in India is more than a 100 degrees Fahrenheit. Your average restroom or shovel pit or whatever is going to smell incredibly bad and be full of flies and a horrible smell. That is why some people prefer the river, and don't use the toilets that are built for them (links elsewhere in this thread).

Solutions? It's a usability problem. Bidets for poop washing that can be filled up instead of using piped water, super hydrophobic coatings, really large pits (so you don't smell the waste) –- things like that are going to be the solution. Unfortunately, no one approaches it in that way, and prefers to go the route of "Let's teach these uneducated savages not to shit where they eat." This is very unfortunate and I hope it will change in the future.
They are. I've been running mail professionally since the early 90s; not to brag, but I know what I'm doing.
A Cure for One of America’s Most Difficult Workplaces: Meditation
I was just making light of the fact that he included the quote author's name in quotes :-)

I agree with the quote.
> The reason for this is that, as much as I know, that a compiler does type checking for every single file. So if you spawn 200 processes of Swift compilers, it needs to 200x check all the other files and make sure that you're using the correct types.

I'm a bit baffled by that. Is the Swift compiler that naive?

Surely you know how to assess the number of processors/cores on your system and you spawn threads in a way that doesn't lead to diminishing returns. You use a bounded thread pool and you stay within these bounds.

Seeing such a speed up from simply merging text files is really puzzling to me. You have to type check the code anyway, surely the overhead of opening a new file is completely negligible compared to running this type checker on the same file? Especially since all these instances of the type checkers have to share a lot of data anyway.

Swift is very cool and I'm excited to see it and Kotlin become our next generation languages for mobile, front end and back end alike, but it seems to me the Swift compiler is still very immature.
Short Interview with Professor Wolfgang Streeck
What you said. Why would anyone not set up a real account and use their app? I think Scottrade, which is the entry-level broker, only has a $500 minimum balance and they provide real tools as well as educational resources.
Talk to anyone who works at helping the homeless or impoverished, they will tell you that the vast majority of panhandlers are substance abusers looking for just enough money to get high. They are not doing it to eat (community kitchens are free) and they are not doing it to save up for something less bad.
It cost one large bank in Australia $1 Billion over 5 years to convert their system. That's 2-3% of their annual profit over 5 years to fix the problem, so we can assume the costs of running the current system are probably some small multiple of that. And they would still need to pay to run the new system, and most likely both systems at the same time towards the end of the transition.
Interview with Lance Fortnow
There's a lot you can learn from scouts!

http://www.usscouts.org/advance/boyscout/bsoathlaw.asp
This code is running on a dedicated Zynq SoC on the miner, where it's treated more as "firmware". Any capability based system running on this SoC would be designed by Bitmain, so they could just backdoor it as well. In addition, the software is required to make outgoing connections, for the stratum mining protocol.
There are many good points here, but I'm dismayed at the complete lack of discussion (heck, no mention even!) of stellarators. It seems to me that computing power has made them quite viable (as shown by the German Wendelstein Stellarator), while the Tokamak design is basically an extremely old Russian design that has never performed to expectations.

So if I were stuck with his assumption that fusion = tokamak, then yes, he'd be completely right. But if stellarators achieve their promises, then he's missing the answer completely (and given the Germans success with the Wendelstein, I have a strong confidence that tokamaks will be shuttered within a decade; abandoned to the better technology of the stellarator).
Are you saying it isn't worth spoofing your user agent?
Boost ASIO makes signal handling pretty painless in C++. It handles the signal and calls a callback in which you can use any function, not just signal safe functions.

http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_64_0/doc/html/boost_asio/ref...
It was imported from the UK legal system in an ill considered way. It is rather nuanced though. Ironically it has led to solicitors choosing not to attend interviews to avoid the possibility of the special caution requirement occurring.

https://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/publications/benchbks/criminal...

http://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/police-want-fur...

http://www.legalaid.nsw.gov.au/publications/factsheets-and-r...
Haha I love that one, and of course it's very relevant.
Needs a much better explanation of what it is, probably some examples, because I have no idea and this is meaningless:

> Ladder is a simple and small program that is used to autoscale things, when we mean things we are talking about any kind of stuff that can increase or decrease, for example, docker containers, AWS instances, simple binnary processes, files…
There exists already mechanical drop and tilt sensors, such as [1], which are commonly used for this purpose. A search for "shipment data logger" results in some electronic devices which do what you propose, though most of them are more expensive and seem intended for reuse e.g. when shipping machinery to a location for installation.

[1]: https://www.uline.com/Grp_332/Damage-Indicators
You have api.mysite.com which serves both an embedded device as well as your site. To allow the site to be viewed in Chrome, you need a new cert for your API, and so you now have to either update your site to point to a different endpoint, or update your devices to accept the new cert. Sure it might be easier to do the former for some companies, but either way there's certainly a cost.
> The point of the law is to discourage behaviour that we have agreed as a society should be discouraged.

That's the principle that underlies our current system, yes. But it's not the only possible principle on which to base a legal system. The alternate principle I am proposing is basically that the point of the law is to make clear exactly what actions cause harm and will cause those perpetrating them to suffer penalties.

> Lets say someone is rich/powerful, would the rules apply the same to them in your scenario?

Sure, why not?
I think that's a fair argument, but from the quote above

> "Last March, AlphaGo, a program created by Google DeepMind, was able to beat a world-champion human player of Go, but only after it had trained on a database of thirty million moves, running on approximately a million watts. (Its opponent’s brain, by contrast, would have been about fifty thousand times more energy-thrifty, consuming twenty watts.)"

Let's say alphaGo trained for a year, that would be 1 MWyr energy consumed. And lets assume that Lee Se-dol's brain consumed 20W over 34 years of his live doing nothing but working on Go, that would be 640 Wyr, still a factor 1000-ish smaller.
As a web developer, I would urge you to focus your efforts on the mobile experience. On any given day, more smartphones and tablets are purchased than laptops or desktop PCs. The trend is more and more towards mobile -- soon it will make up 50% of all web users in the US, and in the the eastern hemisphere mobile is already the majority. It's a web app; the web is increasingly mobile; therefore you need mobile users. Don't wait!
Adding perturbations is a common technique in machine learning. For example, the evolution strategies approach [https://blog.openai.com/evolution-strategies/] makes 100s of randomly tweaked policies, evaluates them against the task, and recombines them with weights proportional to their performance.

Another approach is to train several different neural networks (an ensemble) on a task, and then train a final neural network based on the average of the ensemble. [https://arxiv.org/pdf/1503.02531v1.pdf]

So you can probably replicate the useful features of flawed copying between humans.
So what? No one is claiming that prehistoric people couldn't build anything. But without agriculture you can't have dense cities or anything like civilization. The population that can be supported by hunting and gathering alone is tiny.

That site isn't pre agriculture anyway.
> There's no theoretical limit for temperature

I suppose when the particles reach lightspeed?
I worked in telecoms at the time. It was a huge pain in the ass, but in the end it was fixable. The company I worked for actually made a nice chunk providing the HLR (home location register) updates needed to get it to work.
I agree with your criticisms. It doesn't seem clear that these rocks were used for what they claim. I recently found what I believed was an arrowhead. It is symmetrical and sharp on both edges, but it is not an arrowhead. It is a rock that looks like an arrowhead and my wishful thinking pushed it the rest of the way. If I were that researcher I would have claimed that I found the real thing.
> 16. Safety is a characteristic of systems and not of their components.

> 18. Failure-free operations require experience with failure (Cook 1998).

These two things in particular caught my eye, especially as I'm not in system design.

So with 16, you can't just slap together components with sufficient -ility rating, you have to study and design the safety of the system as a whole. Those components, in two different designs, are exposed to different stresses in different ways, and live within different monitoring and mitigation systems.

With 18 ... I wonder what the value would be to a promising new engineer who opted to not take the big offer from Google or Apple, and instead worked down among the unwashed for awhile, gathering experience. There's probably a lot of value in having experienced failures in a system that has no relevant mitigation, and you have to figure out what to do next, as the first person to have seen it.

Luxurious to work at Google, where if it hits the fan, there's lots of systems and experience to handle it. Character building if you alone had to figure out how to keep the ship from sinking, from an "iceberg" that no one had thought of and planned for.
Its always nice when the private sector figures out a way to solve a problem that should be solved by government, but government is incapable or unwilling to do so.
The 100x faster scenario is not really clear to me. Computers already "think" orders of magnitude faster for some things and orders of magnitude slower in other things. I am not sure this will be all that much more useful than the status quo. Unless they modeling a human brain than I see 100x faster being a useful thing to measure. Otherwise, I don't see speed increases being all that critical to making a superhuman AI.

I think networks of AI can become super powerful even without being nearly as smart as individual humans. AI will only need to approach certain aspects of humans IQ. It can still be much dumb than us in most ways. Most of human progress has been build up because of vague interactions and feedback loops via markets, religions, and nations.
Unless your software is running on a 30 year old embedded system, located in a submarine, 5KM below the ocean, guarded by tigers, and stuck there for the next decade, it's hard to muster sympathy about how hard updating your software is. If the cost to a company to deploy an update their software is really greater than the cost to just allowing the software fail, then maybe they should just let the software fail and prepare a great story for their users--I'd love to hear it.
Visualization of all the money in the world
would simply refusing to recognize NEW symantec certificates issued after a certain date in the near future be a sufficient compromise? it won't affect institutions that have pre-existing certificates, which will eventually expire by themselves.
...and there he talks about IDE crashes? didn't catch any mention of react.
Can signalfd be fixed? I think it can, if we explicitly tie
signalfd into the signal-disposition mechanism. If signalfd
could claim responsibility for signal delivery, instead of
requiring that signals be masked or ignored in addition to
using signalfd, this would solve both problems.

If you're going to fix signalfd, fix it right. BSD's kqueue EVFILT_SIGNAL event behaves precisely as you'd want in most situations: an event is triggered regardless of signal disposition. Similarly, and again unlike signalfd, an event will be triggered for each listener. This means different components of a process can react to signals without having to cooperate explicitly or implicitly, whether or not they're using a handler or kqueue.

Basically all Linux needs to do is copy BSD. But that will _never_ happen, because that would be too sane.

There's no way to fix the issue with coalescing. The kernel cannot buffer an unlimited number of events--memory is finite. If your process doesn't loop on wait4 it's fundamentally broken.

The pipe trick doesn't help because you can overflow the pipe buffer, too. On a large, heavily loaded system, receiving several thousand signals before any can be processed could easily happen. In the context of a mechanism like signals where there's no way to throttle the sender with back-pressure, coalescing is the best and correct answer.

The same issue pops up with inotify, which specifies the IN_Q_OVERFLOW event for the same reason. The kernel simply can't buffer an unlimited number of events. Nor can it block file operations when the buffer is full. It can't coalesce events, either, because they could all be from different files, and in any event I think inotify tries to preserve ordering.

Unsurprisingly, with EVFILT_VNODE kqueue implements file notification events only for open file descriptors. That is, you can only listen for events on files for which you have an open reference. File events are then coalesced into a buffer associated with this open reference. Events can never be lost, though ordering can be lost. Which means that compared to inotify, it's much easier to write _correct_ software that doesn't accidentally fail because you forgot to handle the rare overflow scenario, or handled it incorrectly.

Of course, inotify is much more convenient than EVFILT_VNODE. It also uses fewer resources for the common case. Which is a classic distinction between Linux and everybody else: Linux makes the common things blazingly fast and easy but makes it difficult to write resilient software, or to implement novel solutions not conceived of originally.
What bothers me is that nowhere in both articles I read do they once mention: "what if it wasn't what we are postulating it is." That tact of reasoning is never explored. The entirety of their position is foregone conclusion. I'm not saying they are wrong or right, but first of all, it seems entirely unlikely due to everything we already know. Second of all there are no human remains, just some rocks that _kind_of_ resemble tools and some broken bones that they can date. It is closer to flight of fantasy that proven fact. I wish they would approach it as such while chasing their hypothesis. I would feel much easier about it. But I suppose people who don't brandish brazen egos are much less likely to get the front-page stories.....
Since I've complained about the free tier reputation issue elsewhere, I will say that Mailgun gives you a great set of management tools and a very nice API. Those are things you're going to have to build/assemble yourself (or do without) if you just go the "postfix on an EC2 instance" route.
Will an iOS engineer never consider a binary search tree to store sorted data?
Take from the rich to give to the poor to give back to the rich. Brazenly named.
> For example Swift uses a lot of modern concepts around type safety, closures, parallelism, synchronization, etc.

Ada. [0]

It's been around since before '83 (when it became an ANSI standard), and was developed for the DOD, to replace the hodge podge of languages they were using, with an emphasis on safety.

It has all the above, whilst focusing on being plain English.

Ada also has a few things that are considered to be fairly modern, and has had them for a long time. Such as:

* No Primitive Data Types

* Type Contracts

* Subtyping, operator overloading

The more languages change... The more they stay the same.

These concepts aren't new.

[0] http://www.adacore.com/adaanswers/about/ada
I don't think it will have heightened measurable intelligence. It will be dramatically more powerful, unpredictable and innovative.
The Swift compiler has some serious issues with the way it does type inference. Try compiling code with a line of basic arithmetic on a few numeric literals.
Retrieve Deleted Text Messages from LG Phone
If I'm not mistaken trading (commissions) is not where they make their money, which is why most of them offer free trades now in some capacity to compete. If they don't you call them up and tell you are going to someone else and they will give you free trades. They make their money by having your money in their account. This gives them credit with other banks and allows them to trade on margin or borrow or lend and charge interest.
What about a node based file system? Where you have pieces connected to each other with relationships, instead of trees flowing outwards?
Same reason why culture matters more than individual IQ. Most of human progress is cause because there are many people learn from each other and making millions of tiny improvements over time.
While I agree, these were 2 FBI agents in a town of 100,000 people. And my mother knew the son of one of them. To me, it seemed like the person who scammed me had some law enforcement connections and they did it as a favor.

Certainly some agents are extremely bright, and if you are involved or connected to a serious crime, there's likely to be agents interviewing you trained in deception.
I guess I'm confused as to why this is only a problem for women and girls. Are there toilets that the men use that they don't let the women use? Or is it that Indian men don't have a problem with themselves defecating anywhere?
So basically you give up an unstated x% ahead of time for access to Google+Intertrust's portfolio. A few thoughts.

First, this only provides access to the patent portfolio. It doesn't pay the (considerable) litigation bills.

Second, this portfolio is already available. If Alice sues Bob, Bob can negotiate just in time with Intertrust or IBM or ... for access to a defensive/offensive portfolio. This acquisition of patents during litigation is common practice.

Third, just as Intertrust is going to do their due diligence on you, you are taking a risk that their portfolio is a good match for your risk. You need to do your due diligence on them and on their portfolio.

I might go for this, but it would be at a pretty low percentage, like less than a percent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_temperature
A lot of startups get sued by Non Practicing Entities (trolls) that have no operating business to speak of. That provides the slimmest counterattack surface - so not sure how useful it is to have a portfolio to hit back.

I think a better defense mechanism would be a legal defense fund that would force the trolls to make their case at trial, to go through discovery, to bring expert witnesses.

Because the law firms that represent them work on contingency, this would effectively cut into the potential licensing fees, and make trolling less profitable (and less likely).

Also, a lot of trolls extract patent licensing fees out of startups for patents that should have never been granted, and that deserve to be invalidated (e.g with prior art), but the process of getting a patent thrown out is expensive, so having a fund would greatly help.

The other strategy that could work is to get all the startups that get sued by a troll for a specific infringement and make a sort of "reverse class action" - making it possible for the startups to re-use the same lines of argument, evidence, etc in their cases.
Google is taking a leaf out of the Mafia playbook here. Classy. Nice start-up you have there. Would be a shame if one of these pesky trolls sued you. But if you join our organization as a partner you will be protected.
>What changed ~15k years ago ... and why did it take 185k years to happen?

~15k years ago coincides about the with ice retreating at the end of the last glacial period. A large part of human history was too cold to farm.

The last glacial period, popularly known as the Ice Age, was the most recent glacial period, which occurred from c. 110,000 – c. 11,700 years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_glacial_period
Can I just call mmap instead of anything requiring userspace coordination beyond function scope if I need dynamic memory in a signal handler?

How easy is it to fuck up the signalfd thing and end up not responding to SIGINT in a timely manner, because I'm being silly and doing some blocking work in the signalfd loop for some reason? Does that happen to people at all?

What kinda usecases are there for handling SIGSEGV? I'm not the kind of person to write on-demand-paging systems so I'm not really sure what that involves and when I need that sort of thing.
How is it being done now?
hey sergiored. My co-founder/CTO can use some help for a little bit. Can't pay Send me some projects. You like sports?
Yeah, you really need to see where the cuts are for it to make sense. Here is a better version (without fictitious ocean): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fuller_projection_rotated...
There's definitely a link between where it's economical to place a panel and panel efficiency. As the technology matures it will make sense to place it more places. I think at some point, ultimately, it will be in the paint of cars/buildings.
Main thing about ffffound I liked was that using h/j/k/l to skim through the site actually worked.