skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I got hit by this several times a week for over a year and then it suddenly stopped a month ago. I was always confused how they were allowed to spoof phone numbers with my area code and first 3 digits.
>>4) The cargo ship hit the destroyer from an acute angle, almost from behind. On that heading rules of navigation say it was on the cargo ship to give way to the destroyer, it's possible the crew thought they would.

how do you come to this conclusion? The destroyer's damage is on the starboard side- it's not on or near the stern.

https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/2017/06/18/fitzgerald-...

The right of way rule is: "A boat approaching from your starboard (right) side has right of way."

Damage on the right side of the destroyer means the cargo ship had right of way. It suggests the crew manning the ~$1bn destroyer failed to yield.
You must live in a terrible, sad world where only brutal strength has value. I'm sorry.
I don't see at all. You're just putting the word 'conscious' in italics. What I said was not only about language, language the reason we have words like 'conscious' and 'experience'. Why do we have the experience? It doesn't make sense to me to suggest that we wouldn't. Dynamic processing of internal representations and input is what intelligent systems do, ants, bats, chimps, and deep neural networks do it. Those processes obviously exist, and you call your own process your subjective conscious experience.
Hmmm, I now wish Douglas Adams had chosen 56.

Meaning = 7

of = 2

Life = 4
A guy on hackaday.io ygdes IIRC (https://hackaday.io/whygee) does a lot of these, even changing designs (somehow having async memory access at the arch level)

IIUC he worked in the cpu business in the past but is too idealist to enjoy doing it now.
> Today I was around a group of people who play this game called 'dick swinging'

I haven't had this experience since I was in college with a bunch of rich, entitled douchebags who went on to work at Wall Street. Perhaps they matured later on. I don't know.

My point is that it's possible never to be in this environment. Maybe if you're in SV, NYC, or one of the big tech companies, you can't avoid it -- I don't know. But I'm not in any of those places and only work with people (across the country and in Canada) who are humble and mature (or at least know enough to pretend they're mature).
Seriously? Not to be negative but this is even more pedantic than I would expect from hacker news, and thats saying alot.
* I was replying to someone who assumed some arrogant naval captain was playing chicken with a merchant vessel*

Odd, because when I go back to the OP, I don't see any indication that suggests he thinks the captain made an active decision to be reckless.

Maybe they edited after you replied?

Or is it the quotes around "accident" in this sentence that lead you to interpret their comments this way?

There is absolutely no reason a modern warship should have an "accident" like this.

If so, I read this differently. In my view, an accident is something that occurs due to unexpected changes in a situation. For example, if a car crash occurred because a deer jumped across the road and lead a vehicle to swerve, I'd use the word "accident".

But in cases of negligence, I find the word "accident" makes it far too easy to blame the situation rather than the people. In this case, in my view these two ships colliding was no "accident" in that there must have been clear, conscious human decisions that lead to the event, even if those decisions were simply "I'm going to have a nap now (and thus be negligent in my duties)".

Incidentally, I think we're far too willing to refer to car crashes as "accidents", and for this same reason.
This is more realistic. But it begs the question, why didn't the destroyer out-run it? The freighter was approaching from it's back side, and should have given way, but once you realize it's not going to you have 100,000 horsepower to accelerate away with.

And standing orders were to wake the captain whenever another ship gets within a minimum distance. So the watch had to not only decide to play chicken with the freighter, but not wake the captain when it breached minimum safe distance.
unless the regulations required that it be a firetrap it wasn't due to the regulations.
Seems like I read a different take on CTOs / VPEs every week or two. I've been a VPE several times, and as a cofounder. I, personally, think that a company should never have a CTO until you split the role into two; a CTO & a VPE working alongside each other. In that situation, the VPE manages the team, makes sure things get done, etc. While the CTO is working with other "C-staff" planning the longer (year+ out) roadmap of the company, with a focus on Engineering.

I have struggled with these roles and names, similar to Bryan Helmig, the author of this post. I have consulted with some former bosses, that now lead engineering teams at some of the larger companies here in the bay area, and have come to the conclusion that most CTOs are really VPEs, just using the wrong title, but in the end, the title does not really matter. Since it is extremely flexible in definition.
In fairness the London Underground is from the 1860s, Singapores if from the 1980s.
That said, London's system was designed for coal, so imagine how bad the air must have been back then.
This "all leaks are bad" mentality is fascist bullshit. If someone commits a crime and you know about, you have a moral obligation to report it.

Some leaks are benifical and others are detrimental. Some leakers are heros, some are traitors, and others are somewhere in between. It's not black and white.
Fred Terman and Electronic Warfare During WWII
Stuxnet was surely a weapon, right?
I believe the GP is saying, like some other commenters have, that cargo ship was not on a perpendicular course, but rather hit something like this:

|

| \
OP's comment smacks of propaganda.
I think Amazon calls it Apology Based Computing or something like that. You're better off at scale writing out a transaction log, then seeing if actions were successful and compensating otherwise.
Of course, "the debate" is an abstraction and it's actually a million different debates in a million different places.
The Us vs Them of this day and age is Democratic societies vs Not. The "Free" vs the "Oppressed".

And of course there's also the terrorists. They're a strong Them used to excuse all sorts of policies.

Ethnocentrism, yeah we care less about that than we used to. We find a different Us vs Them these days. Mostly around ideas you hold to be true.
What facilities are those at? What is their current status? We have a defect report; what is the case number?
As someone with a few years experience at sea, I've never experienced this culture.

I have come across ships at sea where the bridge crew were clearly asleep - I think that's a much more likely scenario.
Fwiw I think the logo looks great
Landing the second stage is gonna be Hard. That's Hard in the sense that landing the first stage was Easy.

There were a lot of complex challenges about landing the first stage, but nothing that seemed impossible. Figuring out how to control a spent first stage with almost-empty fuel tanks while falling through the atmosphere at supersonic speed and firing a rocket backwards was surely tough. Getting the control systems right to land that stage lightly on a ship when you're almost out of fuel and have too much thrust to hover is also tough. There's no reason to think that either one should be insurmountable though. If you have the budget and the will to run some experiments and trash some hardware, you should be able to figure it out, and SpaceX had and did.

Now for the second stage, there's a fundamentally harder problem of how to slow down the second stage from orbital velocity without making it so heavy to defeat the purpose. I haven't heard any good ideas on that yet.

SpaceX has rather different economics from most of the rest of the aerospace industry - they aren't getting any super-lucrative Government contracts, and depend on making a profit on fixed-price launches to stay alive. They don't need a ton of good PR or political will, as they're depending on the size of their invoices for launches compared to the competition doing their work for them. If I was them, I'd focus like 90% of my spare engineering effort on optimizing the first-stage recovery and relaunch process as much as possible for now. They've proven it can work, and now they gotta make it fast and cheap. This will bring in boatloads of cash to get the company in better shape and help them corner the launch market. Once they've optimized the first-stage reuse process, then they can really focus effort on looking for a way to recover second stages.
Wow! TIL: Minuette in G Major was not written by Bach.

I agree there is plenty of charming music written by Bach.

https://youtu.be/TYjqnlc7MRw
https://youtu.be/KyWOIKCtjiw
"Unless everyone on both ships was asleep, this statement doesn't have to be true. If anything, it seems eminently plausible the destroyer's crew was playing chicken with the freighter thinking they were playing against a human opponent, when in fact they were dealing with an automated system."

Interesting you should mention this because, IIRC, the book has an aside about ships that (unknowingly) play chicken with lighthouses.
Practically all ships above a certain size have at least two radars solely for anticollision/navigation.
> 2) The destroyer was running without transponder on, as per typical Navy behavior so it couldn't be tracked by unfriendly powers. This meant the automated navigation system on the cargo ship didn't see it.

I hope this behavior is changed during peace to prevent unnecessary human fatalities.
Somehow I don't think even the Captain Queeg would lay asleep in his bunk while playing 'chicken' with another large ship.

As the article points out, the one explanation that matches the tracks and observations is that everyone was asleep and the two ships were on autopilot.

And it is considered "impossible" by many that discipline on a Navy ship would have broken down so much that the entire watch conspired to ignore and not report their fellow sailors dereliction of duty.

As a result 'well understood' is not a good description of this event :-)
The crew are not allowed to be asleep. In practice - it happens.
Everybody's responsible for avoiding an accident. Thinking in terms of right of way is exactly how this kind of accident happens. That's what makes you think you're right to proceed towards what looks like a certain collision.

(It's the same on the road; you have to take it as an article of faith that other people will respect your right of way, but at the same time, it makes sense not to go past junctions with waiting cars too quickly, just in case they don't see you. If you get hit, it might not be your fault, but that's little consolation if you're injured or killed.)
I always wonder the same. I don't need 7nm, even 14nm, but having a way to craft just a bunch of chips, with zero cruft (not too much legacy, simple design ala RISC, a bit of GPU inst, crypt), as foundation for something like redox, or hurd .. would be very nice.

ps: these days, on another scale, I look at flexible PCB and even conductive cellulose (<= for the material is 10m from any windows)
I wonder if a slow torpedo could also avoid detection
It doesn't support "stones" (st?) either. I tried "20 st -> kg" (Game of Thrones uses stones as units of mass) but it didn't work.
I'd never say "don't waste your money in college"! College is fantastic.

MBAs are not college. They're not about an education. They're bullshit.

Many people I know in tech consider them to be negative signals, and I've seen internal job listings instructing recruiters not to hire MBAs. I've known investors who won't invest in someone with an MBA.
Have you seen EOS.io? Here's what the white paper says it is:

> The EOS.IO software introduces a new blockchain architecture designed to enable vertical and horizontal scaling of decentralized applications. This is achieved by creating an operating system-like construct upon which applications can be built. The software provides accounts, authentication, databases, asynchronous communication and the scheduling of applications across hundreds of CPU cores or clusters. The resulting technology is a blockchain architecture that scales to millions of transactions per second, eliminates user fees, and allows for quick and easy deployment of decentralized applications.

No, that doesn’t end "and a pony."

Sounds great! So I buy some tokens, and I get ... from the FAQ:

> The EOS Tokens do not have any rights, uses, purpose, attributes, functionalities or features, express or implied, including, without limitation, any uses, purpose, attributes, functionalities or features on the EOS Platform.

The legal EOS Token Purchase Agreement is a frankly amazing document that you need to read all 15 pages of. US citizens or residents are not to buy the tokens (though EOS is sure they don’t constitute a security, honest SEC); the tokens are defined as not being useful in any manner; forty-eight hours after the end of the distribution period, the tokens will no longer be transferable; the buyer is not buying them for speculation or investment.

https://eos.io/purchaseagreement/EOS%20Token%20Purchase%20Ag...

They're doing one billion tokens, dribbled out slowly over a year, at a price of "how much money do you have to throw at us". Really, that's the price.

'Coiners are still lining up to buy them. "Whatever these people do, I'm going all in. Nuff said." https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1904415.0
Microsoft says no known ransomware runs on Windows 10 S, so we tried to hack it
Nope. Autopilot, like cruise control, relieves you of the burden of driving but not of the responsibility of watch [1]. The Crystal Bay also must have had radar and an alarm should have gone off. Yeah, the Crystal Bay was a drone ship but the Navy is the freaking Navy; moreover they were sailing dark in a crowded sea lane. It's impossible not to fault the crew starting with the captain.

ColRegs Rule 5

Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision.

[1] https://www.navcen.uscg.gov/pdf/navrules/navrules.pdf
If millions of years of evolution have reinforced "us vs them" pathways, it's probably a mistake to dismiss them out of hand as a Bad Thing. This article repeatedly implies that snap judgments are bad, presumably because they aren't subject to the rational part of our brain. I think this is part of a broader trend of devaluing the unarticulated aspects of consciousness and promoting rationality as the only valid mode of thought.

Also, any discussion of Us vs. Them should reference this article: http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything...
This is exactly what I'm talking about. Look at you. You think your government is bad? Look at russia. Look at china. You have the privilege of being in one of the least corrupt, most democratic country out there, yet you hate the country and its government more than the people in worse countries. A russian civilian has 10 times more reasons than you to hate the government. It's a fact. But he's also much more loyal to his country than you. Corruption or not, he won't hurt his country as much as your leaks are doing right now. The only reasonable conclusion is that it has nothing at all to do with the quality of the government, and everything to do with the loyalty of its people.
Worse is better, yet again.
I get that part, but if the whole lot of them went to sleep, they must have been very confident that nothing happens or that they will be awoken before anything happens.

I'm wondering why they would be that confident.
I think you're trolling but in case you aren't: structured logging, distributed cache, heterogenous analytics.

You might prefer other solutions to each just as I prefer technologies other than Perl, but "no purpose" is incorrect.
Soulver does it (Mac/iPhone), it just uses 'as' instead of '->'

E.g. "6Mbit/s * 1.5h as GB"

I've been using it for a while now and I can't imagine going back to a traditional calculator
Actually it is related to the air conditioning. Prior to AC, the subway and its platforms were cooler than the outside. Still not pleasant on a 100 degree day, but certainly not as it is today: the platform will be significantly hotter than outside. Just gotta survive long enough to board the train.

https://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/08/complaints-abo...
Why would you expect an agent to be carrying one of these things? The typical vector ous some innocent local with poor security hygiene.
Is "atlasobscura" anything more than nonsensical clickbait? The formula is always:

"[How/Why] a (Insert Random Thing) (VERB) to (TRANSITIVE VERB) that (Absurdity or Ridiculous Claim)"
We have not yet figured out the tools to fight this new war. Using the old model of war will not work when your enemy uses no bullets and doesn't kill anyone, at least not directly.
"But that's the problem, because that understanding doesn't imply anything that resembles consciousness.."

- For any given information processing system, it is reasonable to expect that the thing could distinguish kinds of memory. A cpu can read main memory or it can read. Whether data originates internally is almost certainly going to be a "big deal" for any such system. Thus if an information system is self-representing, "reading from a port is different from reading from main memory" and reasonably other distinctions are possible.
Humans are social beings, we use language socially but an equivalent statement "internal experience is different sensory input" also seems clearly true.

Human share language, take inputs of language and process these internally apparently creating internal representations and possibly comparing these representation to their non-linguistic experiences. A fox in the world, a sensation of a fox, a memory of a fox, and someone's description of a fox or use of the word "fox" are different but we OK with combining them most of the time (seen a fox in the wild once in my life but I feel OK with the concept, expecting this would an instance of the category/species fox).

Human language of course, allows ambiguity and violation of selectional restriction - you can ask for the color of ideas and so-forth. In this context, creating a thing that "resembles consciousness" is elided to "mean" creating an internal sensation that resembles the sensation distinguishing internal and external input. But it is easy to imagine any given system naturally reject creating such an sensation unless it was "real".

So it's easy to imagine a person who takes in input and claims "none of this resembles consciousness".
"As someone with a few years experience at sea, I've never experienced this culture."

I encourage you to read the book - it makes the case that among very large ships there is indeed such a culture.

My personal experience as a sailor in the US Navy neither bolsters nor diminishes what is described in the book but I do believe that a culture of machismo and egomania can permeate the ranks.

Just because it was the officer in charge and not the actual (sleeping) captain might not make much difference.
The Civic ICO struck me as a sincere attempt at using an ICO for actual not-intrinsically-fraudulent fundraising. Their product is still a weird misapplied but-with-blockchain idea that I can't see how it'll work, but the ICO itself didn't make me go "wtf".
Sound and Picture Restoration
Yes, you have to handle overselling for other reasons, but I don't see why that's a good reason to not protect against it when you can.
Jab Harry Met Sajal Songs Pk (2017) Movie Mp3 Song Album Download
http://songspk.desilyrics.in/download/jab-harry-met-sajal-mp...
What Is the Most Demanding Programming Language in 2017
Postgresql had never had a great story for sharding large datasets.
"The destroyer's captain was asleep"

I don't think it has to be the actual captain of the ship who could not, of course, be at the helm 24 hours per day. If this was indeed a manifestation of what is described in the book I refer to it could be anyone in command of the ship who has been led to believe that their ships size and/or status gives them universal right of way.
> I think people with actual need for eSATA have moved on to PCIe SSDs.

People that specifically needed their drives to be both fast and external moved to internal drives? I don't understand.
Thank you for the feedback. I'm not sure how to support this. I would probably have to call it "fluid_ounce" / "fl_oz" or "fl.oz." in order to distinguish it from the unit of mass.
There are better solutions to all of those use cases. Logging? ELK. Cache? Redis. Not sure what you mean by "heterogenous analytics" but that's usually a layer on top of whatever data store you choose, and we've established that MongoDB just isn't a good data store.
Was he asleep when he chose who to be on watch? Why are you fighting the captain's corner so hard in the face of good reasons for someone in a position of authority to take responsibility for a failure? It's refreshing, frankly - non-military life doesn't usually work that way.
Turning on transponders across the entire fleet is not a proportional response here. There are lots of military vessels out there and 99.99% of the time they don't crash into cargo ships. A lot of things went completely sideways for this to happen, and there are reasonable failsafes that can be enacted to prevent it in the future.
Had a friend who worked at Basho on Riak until the layoffs, didn't realize that there was a diaspora at VMware. Our next Boston Rust meetup happens to be at VMware, maybe I'll ask them how they think Rust compares to Erlang. :P
I understand even there are more quality information, the noise out there is probably even greater. And I still believe the more quality information, the better, to a point I think its the foundation for something greater (of course, this is from my answer seeking through all those years' experience living in two different systems, mostly in the "worse" one). I guess that's the main difference of how we look at the same thing from different angles.

Complex system is a nice model to think about all this. Ordinary individual's effect can vary in different state of the system. Hence, their feelings are different.
I share your cynicism.

I did a lot of work in healthcare IT and have also obsessed about voter privacy (protecting the secret ballot).

I've seen de-anonymization in practice. I also know there's a huge chasm between best available science (and practices) vs the real world. (Dumb example: mis-redacting PDFs with opaque boxes instead of removing the text.)

#1 At best, like crypto, differential privacy may offer temporary protection, to data re-used (shared, in transit), if given assumptions are preserved.

#2 Also, like crypto, I have no confidence that anyone, any where will implement DP correctly, or even be able to prove they've done it correctly.

#3 The original data is stored somewhere. There is no DP story for mitigating leaks.

Given my disappointment, I believe (but cannot prove) there's two worthwhile strategies worth exploring.

First, contracts to use case box and time box the data, stating how and when shared data may be used, and then a drop dead time when shared data must be destroyed. Part of this contract could be expanded to include parameters for differential privacy. One org I work with has these policies. Alas, Thatcherite "trust, but verify" is tough. We add fake data (honeypot-esque) and have caught cheaters.

Second, I'm keen to further explore translucent databases, where data in situ (at rest) is encrypted.

Lastly, I'm always looking to see who is working in this space, and what they're doing. I'd like to believe that someone will crack this nut.