skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Get Ready for Skyscrapers Made of Wood
that the IMEI wasn't prefilled in Verizon's database and they wouldn't add it because we didn't buy it there.

FWIW, This filter applies at the point of activating a SIM card, not moving a SIM from a phone they would activate to one that "doesn't work" on their network.
Hehe. If you can't imagine that then you have a sheltered and probably very happy life. I don't care if it speaks ethernet, arcnet, twinax, X.25 or nothing at all, we'll find a way. By the time you can start sending UDP packets you are already on very solid footing.

Be happy if your dev environment does not include an emulated version of the real hardware that mysteriously does not seem to be 100% representative of the real thing.
The link you posted, did you read past the top comment? There are a lot of people still playing and many of those that are are still heavily involved. I can't say I've ever played every day or every time I get my phone out, but I know enough people that play often that I still keep it around and play once in a while especially if there is an event.

Of course there was a spike at first release, like every other game. Less press after a year is hardly indicative of the game being only hype. If you can name a game that didn't get less press a year after release I'd love to hear it.

> but it looks like the game has become a lot more harder to play without spending money on it

I'd love to hear why you think this is true other than someone mentioning it with no explanation in the top comment of that link. The only thing I can think of is a slight hit to pokeball drop rates which - while annoying - only affects those in rural areas who don't have access to many pokestops. This game (like Ingress) has always been geared toward urban areas and ignored rural players. This was an issue day 1 and it hasn't changed unfortunately, but this is not a recent development.

Honestly, the game is pretty hollow and is hardly something I'd recommend everyone pick up, but to say that it was only hype and things aren't looking good now is uninformed.
I've been encouraging a 5% philosophy for organizations that replace software that had license fees with free software:

Just donate 5% of the previous annual license fee to the project you're now using, each year. You still save 95% on license fees and developers get to eat.
In addition to donations and selling t-shirts (which is why having a proper name and logo is key), one way of monetizing is selling support and training related stuff. e.g: writing a book and selling it.
Yea that did seem weird. Also as far as collision avoidance, shouldn't the car come to a complete stop if a van pulls out in front of it instead of just trying to move around it? What would happen if the van kept going?

I hope this is an early prototype.
Startup growth
I thought Rubin's other new product, Lighthouse, a security camera which uses an AI backend to analyze video for anything "suspicious" and notify you on your phone was much more interesting & promising.
Apparently it's too soon for criticism? I'm not sure what fads have to do with it, other than fads being convenient to minimize or dismiss; this piece of elegant sandpaper is for example six years old:

http://exiledonline.com/david-foster-wallace-portrait-of-an-...
Yes. We have a curated database of protein functions - so we have some idea of the function of new designs. Any designs submitted for manufacture are further screened - both the customer and the design - by both us and the DNA synthesizer.
First-world problem: what business to start when you have too much money and no really good ideas.

- Private space program? Everybody's done that.

- Sports team? Not into sports enough.

- Museum? Boring.

- Supercar company? IC engines are so last-cen and electrics mean competing with Elon.

- Super high end phone? Yeah!
That's a good one, I will definitely steal that. Thank you!
If you sleep only 6 hours or less, productivity drop is sooner unless you do something easy and repetitive - sleep deprivation kicks sooner then overwork.
Perhaps also by a clever rebate scheme.

Product price is $180. Rebate is $40. Applying for and getting the rebate necessitates signing of a 'contract' which prohibits certain action. [1]

[1] May not hold up in advanced legal cases but enough of a leg to stand on to get the ball rolling.
> Better for my ego to believe I'm a unique genius due to my own efforts and inherent superiority; than to believe I'm a replaceable cog

Other than your own projection going on in the first part, I'm not sure what you're actually saying. The fact there are not gatekeepers makes us more replaceable - some guy can take a bootcamp, work on some projects, and bam, he's competition. Programmers are acutely aware of this, and are constantly leveling up as a consequence. (And on that note, if there were gatekeepers, we'd probably be a lot more stagnant as an industry).

Also, I mean, common sense, it's constantly changing what tech and abilities companies require, so how is a gatekeeper system even going to work. I've gone from Rails to JS to TensorFlow, professionally, all in the last 3 years.
7/10 would have been more appropriate. ;)
It took me two or three "false starts" before I worked up enough inertia to make it all the way through. You need to get about 200 pages in before it "clicks". It's also a very different kind of reading. You read to absorb, not to comprehend.

In a completely-unrelated comparison, there's a line from John Scalzi's Old Man's War that rings true when reading Infinite Jest: "The secret, I found, was to stop fighting it or attempt to organize the information the way I was used to getting it, in discrete chunks of verbal speech. Just accept you're drinking from the fire hose and open wide."
We are currently using MySQL on RDS for most of our work. We're very tempted to move to Aurora on AWS for the benefits it has around write scaling, disk size scaling, table size limits and its claims around improved performance. I assume you're watching these developments, what is your take? Do you plan to compete, mirror or simply go another direction with MySQL?
I have found this study after reading this great New Yorker article:
THE SECRET LIFE OF SECRETS
By Alan Burdick
http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/the-secret-life-of-se...
Yay, hopefully this will translate into a non-crazy ink refill situation which will translate into a much reduced price in ink cartridges. My hope is that the following will occur;

1) People who sell re-filled cartridges, and offer to refill your existing cartridges will no longer suffer malicious lawsuits from HP & Lexmark.

2) That will increase the supply and create a price competition between re-fillers. Making it possible to easily find ink cartridges at 1/2 to 1/3 the price that the printer manufacturer sells it for.

3) The manufacturers will reduce prices on their ink cartridges in order to support their revenue stream.

I also expect more counter measures like ink cartridge chips that 'self destruct' when the cartridge is exhausted to prevent refilling. And aggressive prosecuting under the DMCA people who reverse engineer cartridge chips to create work alike versions.
This case sounds similar to the ruling back in the 1980's (I think) that came from a suit by the makers of Warn winches against a North Texas trailer maker/seller.

From flawed memory, the trailer sales business offered the Warn product line at prices well below those of other Warn dealers and below the suggested retail prices from Warn. He was sued by the manufacturer in an attempt to get him to raise the prices and he prevailed I think based on first sale doctrine since the court ruled that Warn had already been paid for the product and that ownership and control of the winches passed to the trailer manufacturer who was thus free to advertise and sell them at any price he desired even if it meant he took a loss on each one sold. They belonged to him and he could do as he pleased with them. He had been using them as a kind of loss leader where one of the incentives of buying a trailer allowed you to purchase a winch at a large discount.

EDIT: The case was not Warn winches, it was Ramsey winches and the ruling was:

(http://openjurist.org/753/f2d/416/pierce-v-ramsey-winch-comp...)

Briefly - I have a bad memory. The case was a lot more involved since Ramsey tried to terminate the distributor agreement and was thus sued by Pierce Sales. Pierce was a high-volume winch dealer and due to the high volume of sales he was able to buy the winches from Ramsey at the lowest price available to dealers. He then used that buying power to advertise the lowest prices for the winches and even offered other dealers the opportunity to buy hard-to-find winches directly from his stock at prices lower than they could buy directly from Ramsey if that particular winch was even available from Ramsey stock. Pierce alleged price-fixing by Ramsey and ultimately won the case.

I remembered the court case but almost none of the pertinent details.

Sorry.
The reason there has been no such disruption is that the current pricing model (with the bulk of the costs in the toner/ink) effectively price discriminates between low volume users and high volume users.

If toner/ink were sold at cost, then all of the profit would have to be made in the printer sale. This would cause printer manufacturers to choose the profit-maximizing price, which would be much higher than the current price. At this high price, many light-usage customers would choose not to purchase the printer, and very heavy-usage customers would enjoy a greater consumer surplus (because they would have been willing to pay much more for their high-volume printing).

So it's not that there's anything broken about the current business model — it's just the way that manufacturers can reach as many potential customers as possible. The reason that lawsuits like this one crop up is that third-party cartridge refillers are trying to undercut the printer manufacture on the cost of refills. This makes sense, and eventually we'll find an equilibrium price where third party refills cost somewhat less than "official" refills (which will instead carry more of a guarantee of effectiveness/warranty).
I run an open source project (turtlapp.com). I want to monetize. I have people who tell me fairly often they want to pay for it.

There are two things that hold me back. First is never quite feeling like it's ready to charge for (perfect being the enemy of good). Second is I don't know how much time I can devote to supporting it.

Both are stupid reasons. I know this. I'm hoping to launch a premium service soon, and we'll see where it goes. If I spend 5 hours a day supporting it, I'll probably just shut it all off and prioritize my Turtl emails a bit lower like I do now. If I end up spending an hour or two a day on it and make some money, I'll kick myself for not doing it earlier.
I've found that physical activities multitask really well, while primarily mental activities don't - I miss too much book when I do that.
Did you honestly feel this was a reasonable response to the question that was asked?
There are still plenty of people who regularly play in a casual way. I regularly play and have a number of friends who do.

The people who played and quit with the hype weren't the people paying money in the first place. The people who were throwing money at the game are still playing and still paying money. And they now have corporate sponsorships rolling now as well. For example, I just saw an event this past weekend that clearly paid to have lures up at all stops in the area.

I don't think that things "aren't looking so well" yet. It doesn't have the peak playerbase anymore, but its certainly still making good money.
How can you understand object orientation and complex data structures until you've learned what a pointer or structure is (C code, yeah)?

Speaking as someone who has spent considerable time in front of first-year college CS classes, attended SIGCSE conferences, and applied this in practice: trivially. Your "pointers-first" bias has long, long been debunked. Brown, Stanford, VT, and other CS departments have had fantastic programs teaching via OO-first methods for going on twenty years now. Studies of students taught this way have determined that they learn stronger design skills earlier, and have a greater focus on the problem to be solved rather than the machine being built. (At first: this is emphasis only on which skills are taught first.) Anecdotally, giving students a framework in which to understand why they're doing what they're doing early is hugely important. Then, a few semesters in, they do the deep dive into the minutiae that C, assembly, etc. afford.

This, in turn, is really no different than the era of pre-C++ CS instruction. Prior to C++'s big wave of popularity in the 90's, C was largely considered to have too many sharp edges for first-year CS instruction. Languages like Pascal, Modula-2, and even some Lisps were preferred to get basic algorithmic and data structures concepts across, with C generally relegated to the third semester or so. I'd call the common theme here "algorithmics and abstraction first" pedagogy.

C++'s burgeoning industry appeal eventually became a siren-song for many CS departments, who dropped the "not C first" pedagogical approaches and threw students into C++ right from the start. The result was generally disastrous. C++ is a terrible teaching language, with all of the sharp edges of C, with more in the OO/templates part. For contrast, Brown's program of that era used OO Pascal with a custom-built graphics library designed to be accessible to first-years, yet useful through senior project work.
How did this post show ignorance on my part? If anything, it proved what I said before. Client is either cheap or not funded well enough to produce a good software, so they compromise on a terrible result for the user. I will take an educated guess that their software project will not change the world, "disrupt", <insert any other "hip" startup bullshit promise>.

I am not ignorant of these cases; I just don't want them. The software world is teeming in mediocrity and below. I just rather small startups that can't do better to not do anything, rather than churn garbage software just to survive for a few more months then die out anyway (or be bought for unknown reasons - but result is still the same, garbage software is still abandoned).

This is not limited to mobile apps, of course, but seems like that's where most of the churn is these days. Desktop has its own fair share of that with the Electron nonsense, but mobile seems to get it worst.

Don't confuse ignorance with intolerance. I understand this place is startup oriented, but anyone who is willing to compromise on software quality for the sake of payday need to look at the big picture. Spoiler: it's not about your potential payday.
It's pretty surprising students think they can get away with this. If there's any class you'd get caught in, it'd be a CS class. In the CS classes I took in undergrad and grad school, the professors would tell everyone they would be using automated plagiarism detectors, and even explain a bit about how they worked and explicitly say they were smart enough to detect the "rename-the-variables" trick.

That said, I've got to imagine that claims that "as many as 20 percent of the students in one 2015 computer science course were flagged for possible cheating" are a misrepresentation or a misunderstanding, on the part of the journalist. I mean, sure, if you set the threshold for the plagiarism detector at a low level, you can flag 20%, 50%, or however many students you want for "possible cheating", but it's not necessarily a real thing.
During peak performance? Plus it would not count as reading the way article talks about it.
On my oasis I can just tap on a footnote reference and it'll take me to it, then tap back to bring me to the main text once I've read it... Am I missing something, did this process use to be harder (I think my first was a paper white which I vaguely remember as having the same feature)?

I find that easier than flipping through a massive book, at least...
Infix PDF Editor Pro 7.1.4 Portable Full Crack with Key Free
> You can not do so because Turing machines are universal.

Just because Turing machines are universal making it possible to write a program that asks a question about another type of Turning machine doesn't mean that question is decidable.
Like any other subculture / virtue signal which gains in popularity, there's a strong group for DFW and a strong backlash against from both sides. One side rejects the signal due to its popularity ("only dilettante freshman losers love DFW, REAL enthusiasts love REAL lit") and the other rejects the signal due to its accessibility ("these hipsters think they're cool just because they've read something, anyone could buy the book and do that!").

We see it in programming, too - "only newbie idiots love Ruby, Rust 4ever" plus "this damn hipster Rust brigade is ruining programming, Java is still just fine!"
I haven't seen this. The employers I've talked to seem to assume you wouldn't be happy if you were paid less and therefore they nope out pretty quickly.
D mixin templates/mixins are another alternative:
You can include arbitrary strings from functions running at compile time.
Theoretically they're more powerful than C macros, but type safety(template parameters) makes some constructs awkward - unless you create and parse strings as tokens manually(basically reading/writing many strings to achieve what C preprocessor does with symbolic token composition).
https://dlang.org/mixin.html
https://dlang.org/spec/template-mixin.html
Templates can also include mixins:
template liter(String s){mixin(s);}
I don't understand the assumption that a software developer should study computer science to prepare for a career in designing, writing, and delivering computer software.

Consider the building trades. Employees in that industry don't study "Building Science". Architects study architecture. Engineers study engineering. Craftsmen in the various building trades study in apprenticeships.

Why not admit that computer scientists should study computer science (a valid and useful area of study in its own right) and instead develop a full-fledged degree program for the various skills involved in the software-development industry?
Odd is a transient state. Odd that is 'better' will become normal.
No. That's what SCOTUS is saying. Lexmark is trying to enforce a contract over an item that they do not control. Is like if you signed a contract with me that every time you handed someone a glass of water, you would require them to say "thank you" in a non-native language. I have no control (legal or otherwise) over your actions or the glass or the water, therefore the contract is not enforceable.

In the case, Lexmark relinquished its rights to the physical product in question when they sold it. Then on the basis of patent law (the idea that they own the rights to the "idea" of the toner), they tried to say that you may not sell it to anyone else. What SCOTUS is pointing out is that Lexmark's patent does not grant them control of a product they made and sold.

To be clear here, the patent prohibit others from making (and subsequently selling) these toners, but if Lexmark made the toner, all bets are off.
EDIT:

From Rabois' letter to the Stanford Daily regarding the incident:

> I don't necessarily hate homosexuals, but do believe in Jack Kemp's suggestion that they may not be the best teachers of young children in public schools and recognize that the spread of AIDS has a direct casual link back to their activity. I hate Democrats, not homosexuals; they're the ones that have hurt the country.

Well-sourced article on this:

http://gawker.com/the-free-speech-peter-thiel-will-defend-fa...

Also, I just learned, Rabois left square over allegations of sexual harassment.

https://techcrunch.com/2013/01/25/rabois-left-square-over-se...

Wonder why the so-called PC-police haven't taken his job yet...
Yesterday, HN was flush with posts on blockchain technologies. For employees holding mostly worthless options, it seems like joining a startup that is financed via token offering might be attractive.
If the project is maintained in someone's spare time, then the cost to monetize it, in time and effort, might exceed what they are willing to put into it.

In my own case, I have a silly JS library with 4,000 hits per month to the docs, but "monetizing" that just sounds like work, whereas working on the library itself is fun.
Theranos directors trusted Elizabeth Holmes more than their own eyes
Is that a fair comparison? Reddit has a ridiculous amount of data to search through. I feel like if improving search was so trivial, they would have done it already.
Too human-like and it's an Android. Not creature-like enough and it's just a machine.
How Uber is growth hacking in Spain despite regulatory roadblocks
> At some point employee's are going to realize that working for an early stage startup isn't a great idea.

I suspect it's always been the case that as one demographic of employees gets wise to this another comes pushing and shoving through the door to fill the seat.
Following the example of Sidekiq (with Sidekiq Pro), I'm in the process of launching a commercial offering for Kiba ETL (OSS Ruby ETL framework - http://www.kiba-etl.org), dubbed "Kiba Pro".

My take on this is that more developers could try to follow that path, but we lack a bit of guidance (I'm lucky Mike Perham provided some useful insights to guide me actually) to reduce the anxiety & uncertainty associated with such launches.

The hurdles can be numerous & blocking:

- IP - making sure your consulting contracts are IP-safe

- Proper pricing (how do you segment your offer? how to avoid pricing "ceiling" effect etc)

- Distribution (e.g. I'm using http://packagecloud.io for our "paid gem")

- Proper custom ToS

- Product related theory such as "how to create leads channels" etc

- Billing & invoicing

- etc

Personally, I've decided not to attempt to "monetize" the OSS part, but rather launch a paid counterpart covering more advanced uses or built-in components.
> What drives our economy? Scarcity... Some people view open source as being about a post-scarcity economy in which human labor isn't need, an economy based on abundance. That's bullshit though.

I don't think that is the case at all.

If I have a woodshop and a customer comes in and hands me wood and nails, and I spend a day banging together a table for them, at the end of the day there is one table. A scarce good - one table is created, no more.

If I spent a day coding an Android app, publish it on Google Play, and it takes off and Android's daily two billion users take to it, my day's worth of work is not used by one person or one family. It is used by two billion people. Perhaps my app is mostly based on gluing together open source Android libraries and non-Android-specific libraries for the open source Android OS.

There is a scarcity and labor needed for the creation of the table or the app. The difference in the case of the app which almost for free goes out to two billion people, is that it's virtually free to copy and distribute it. It's really not even a commodity any more.
Don't forget:

4) if HP & Lexmark are unable to use the DMCA to stop cartridge refillers, then the price of printers will go up, as the printer manufacturers won't be able to make any profit on cartridge sales. They'll instead have to make all their profit on the initial sale of the printer.