skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I've been using rooftop solar for many years; I live in an RV (for a total of about 7 years, spread across two different RVs, both with solar on the roof). I currently have a 400W system. It makes extremely good economic sense in my case, because it enables me to live comfortably off-grid for weeks or months at a time; which can save hundreds of dollars a month in RV park fees, when I'm traveling.

But, the talk of powering water heater, heating, AC, etc. from a little DIY solar system is extremely optimistic. I've done the math, and I couldn't run my AC from the number of solar panels that I could fit on my roof. I can fit 900 watts worth, an additional couple hundred watts on the truck, if I really wanted to get extreme and was willing to connect/disconnect them every time I drove the truck away from the RV. That's just not enough. It could power a small window unit as long as the sun is up, but overnights would kill a small battery bank dead (like dead dead, not just discharged, as repeatedly discharging below about 50% reduces the life of lead acid batteries by a huge amount) in short order.

With a big enough inverter and a bigger battery bank, you can run microwave or toaster oven for short periods of time (I do). But any big amperage device that runs for extended periods of time (like heating, AC, and water heater) is not in the cards for small solar systems.

Battery replacement also needs to be taken into account. In my experience, you get about 3 good years, and another year of limping along, from this kind of workload on this kind of battery. He's being more kind to his batteries than I am to my batteries (I usually end up running down to about 60% each day when off grid), so he might get another good year. But they probably won't even be limping along after five years.

But, the good news is that solar panels are extremely durable. They're often warrantied for 25+ years! And, the expected output after that length of time is still pretty good. So, if batteries get better, our systems today will get better just by replacing one component, because everything else is gonna keep working forever (well, cheap charge controllers die sometimes, but the panels are practically forever parts).
I am not a lawyer, but is there a line between truthful disparagement and untruthful disparagement? Similar to how we adjudicate slander and libel claims?
First, there are no hurricanes or tornadoes in that area.

So, you can work out max wind via historical data, but 85MPH is not going to be enough to move it over that lip. The skin effect around a building drastically reduces the forces involved.
The best startup CEOs I know overpay their key people BC they know that losing their best people hurts so much more than the same people helping whatever company they might join next
Well, okay, you and I are agreeing that velocity is nice to have, but why is it the most important goal?

I can make the exact same argument about automated regression tests. As the size of your codebase grows and the number of customers (i.e., people triggering edge cases) grows, unless you take conscious steps to make sure that every build doesn't regress previous bugs, all your effort will get sucked into diagnosing and fixing things that you've fixed before. And all your developers will be fixing bugs but you won't be fixing new bugs and certainly not shipping features.

In particular, if you want to refactor / rewrite parts of your code to improve development velocity, you'll suffer from the well-documented problem (see e.g. https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-... ) of losing all the knowledge of the weird edge cases you've fixed along the way. So, testing is strictly more important than development velocity!

I can make the same argument about a half-dozen other development best practices, and I'll have actual citations to back them up. Why is development speed the most important goal, why is formal process the enemy of speed (instead of its friend, because it makes sure work doesn't get duplicated or wasted!), and what is your evidence for these claims?

In particular, if your claim is true, we would not expect to see as much feature development / new products from old, large companies (I'm thinking of Oracle, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, etc.) as we do. We would expect to see these companies grind to a halt and perform poorly in the markets (investors really want to see growth, not just continuing to be as good as you were last year), and that's not what's happening.
Could someone explain the implications of this? If locality is broken, would that mean that sending a message faster than light would be possible (theoretically)?
This would make sense if there was naturally 'cheap' housing and 'expensive' housing. There isn't. It's just housing.

So luxury condos and basic apartments either don't exist, or are identical to each other?
... simplicity is to hide complexity
In reverse chronological order: Third Reich, Napoleon's Empire, Holy Roman Empire, Western Roman Empire, Roman Empire
It's meaningless alone. It'll need to be higher at roles with a lower base salary or can be lower at roles with a high base salary. Total annual compensation is what you should pay attention to.
Launch HN: D-ID (YC S17) – Protecting Identities from Face Recognition Tech
Hi all,

We are D-ID, part of the YC S17 batch, and we protect identities from face recognition technologies.
We’ve just launched on TechCrunch and signed our first pilot, so here’s some info about us :)

With the advancements of face recognition technologies (both in accuracy and their growing use), the data in face images must be protected, because unlike passwords- you can’t change your face.

Our product processes face images in a way that denies automated face recognition, while keeping them similar to the human eye.
This helps companies which handle images (cloud storage or even just profile pictures of their employees/users) to comply with privacy regulations, such as the GDPR, in a revolutionary method in terms of data protection, technology and risk management.
In addition, it helps them promote their brand reputation for caring for the privacy of their clients/employees.
We also enable security agencies and governments to protect their citizens and employees.

We're excited to offer companies a way to keep using images but without the responsibility of protecting the sensitive data they carry.

We’d love to hear feedback from the HN community!

Will be glad of course to answer any questions you may have.
(http://d-id.com/)
Cheers,
I just got paid $6784 working off my laptop this month. And if you think that's cool, my divorced friend has twin toddlers and made over $9k her first month. It feels so good making so much money when other people have to work for so much less. This is what I do,http://www.joinmate2.Com
Whoever cracks ... programming will be someone who ... is willing throw away the vast vast majority of modern programming language-y control structures.
A darned lot of them. SF is very much a low-rise city, vast swaths of the city are no more than 2-3 stories. Part of why there is such a housing crunch...
I believe the consensus among mathematicians is that Fermat either didn't have a proof or had an incorrect proof.

Any statement of the modern proof would require hundreds of pages and results not available to Fermat. So it's likely Wiles didn't rediscover the proof but simply discovered it.
This is just a fancy way to say that there is yet another Bell test experiment that confirms the Bell inequality[1]. The technology behind that is amazing, both in terms of practical immediately useful engineering and in terms of fundamental physics, but the title is just a pretentious obfuscated way to phrase it.

[1]: To be precise, it says that the chance that the Bell inequality is violated is very small.
Flat roof, low profile, is very different from even an 1/8th inch gap on a slanted roof.
They dont get welfare.

Farms are heavily dependent on immigrants, mostly illegal immigrants from mexico (90% are foreign born) for crop workers. They work on our farms for very little pay (but probably more than they would have in mexico), work here for 10 years or so saving as much as possible, then go back to mexico. They may travel from CA > WA through the season; or on the east: FL > OH > ME (this prolongs their work season). They're on average very poor, with little education (6th grade is the average).

With the more recent restrictions on the flow of illegal migrants, many are finding it's impossible to come back to the us (or they choose not to come back). Disrupting the flow of illegal migrants that the farms depend on.

That is the source of the labor shortage that the farms are now complaining about.

Essentially for years they have taken advantage of illegal immigrants to depress wages in their industry. And now they have been cut off, and theyre finding it difficult to adjust their wages to appropriate levels so they can compete in the domestic labor market.

Farmers deserve no sympathy for the labor shortage.. it's an exploitative arrangement. They should automate as much as possible, and for everything else they should pay market rates (whatever those may be... even if it's $100/hr or more (remember its short term hard labor, 2nd most dangerous work in the US)).

This shortage is actually a great thing, if it lasts. Whatever workers are left, might finally get paid a livable reasonable wage.

Edit: if your curious about their conditions, here's the National Agriculture Workers Survey that covers all of this:
https://www.doleta.gov/agworker/pdf/NAWS_Research_Report_12_...

It's currently "offline for maintenance", so here's google's cache:
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:HiRr7h...
In a word, no. They do now tack on a monthly minimum fee that only applies if, over the course of a year, you use less than the sum of the monthly minimums. So, if you install a project so large that it zeros out your bill, you'll end up paying $100 or so per year to be tied to the grid. Otherwise, the rates are the same as you would pay without solar.
Cars are much easer to move than a heavy panel flat to the ground.

And I am being serious here, if you notice to car rotated and got slightly lifted but not flipped into the air or moved very far. But most importantly, the wind is much stronger a few feet in the air vs 1 inch from the ground.
If you head to settle.network you have examples available using the command line until also available.
I agree, if they did not address the concerns it would become unworkable.
This is what I wonder every time someone brings this topic up. I've seen friends that have so many tabs open that each tab is barely an edge in the screen without a title or icon to identify it. It's also weird how defensive people get when you point out that those tabs might as well be closed, because they don't even know what's in them.
I was skimming through the article when I read that line then I assumed the author might be someone important so started reading the rest of the article with more focus.
My first job out of college was porting the interpreter from Macintosh Pascal (the predecessor to Lightspeed/THINK Pascal, sold by Apple) from the Macintosh back to the Apple II (as "Apple II Instant Pascal", also sold by Apple). Boy, was that fun. Had to tuck the interpreter into a 4K "fold" of the Apple II memory map -- a block of address space that was normally mapped to ROM could be switched to point to the corresponding RAM in the language card that would otherwise be inaccessible.

[Edit: to be clear, neither of these were the UCSD Pascal referenced in the original article; I had that on my Apple II in college, and demoed a baseball statistics program I wrote in it to the THINK people as part of my job interview.]
People are applying to dozens or hundreds of jobs at once? How is that possible? I'm generally only considering 1 new employer at a time, and the most I've ever done concurrently was applying to two companies in CA at the same time.

How could there even be dozens of companies that you'd want to work for at any given time?
I didn't know Ryan Hoover built product hunt as a side hustle. I always thought he worked on it full-time, blogging and sending email newsletters to organically build his audience.
So it sounds like they're paying over market, but not overpaying—they recognize the cost of these people leaving and provide a salary that takes said cost into account.
Personally, I keep generally 1 window per topic and multiple tabs in that window. They're kind of like medium-term bookmarks. For example, I'm shopping for a carseat, looking for a replacement for my front gate, working on a React project, a RaspberryPi project, and playing with Vagrant and Ansible for something else. I start something, but have to set it aside because of something is blocking me (I need to solder stuff together for rPi, verify my kid's hight/weight for the baby seat, talk to the wife about the gate, or I just get in the mood for switching projects).

After I finish a project (or abandon it) I can lose all of the tabs.

Unfortunately, this can end in 100s of tabs open at a time.

At work it's very similar. Especially, because a lot of things are interrupt driven and I'm jumping between short, medium, and long term projects.
Dwight Schrute said it best: “Would I ever leave this company? Look, I’m all about loyalty. In fact, I feel like part of what I’m being paid for here is my loyalty. But if there were somewhere else that valued loyalty more highly… I’m going wherever they value loyalty the most.”
Show HN: (Sukhoi) Webcrawler in python now with beautifulsoup4 support
There isn't two options, live down the street and see extended family everyday or live two hours away and see extended family only on Christmas and Thanksgiving on odd number years. There's a ton of in-between and it's totally disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

Yes, you don't get daily contact with extended family when you live two hours away (and usually not if you even live 2 minutes away) but we are talking about a case where it's at the expenses of not getting daily contact with a parent plus the marital strain that it probably causes. It's not like one is objectively worse than the other.

If your family is so nasty they basically write you off because you moved two hours away then they aren't really the kind of people you want to be close with anyways. You're basically laying out a scenario where your family only cares about you if you happen to be physically present.

Plus the people who think nothing of commuting four hours a day five days a week are not suddenly going to be extremely burdened by commuting four hours once a week.

Over a decade ago I moved 2.5 hours away from my home town but I have maintained very close relationships to the people that are there I wish to remain close with and we visit very regularly without anyone feeling burdened or imposing. It works very well if all the participants involved want it to work.
So what can you do with a deep-learning stick of truth?

EDIT: Looks like the explanation is in a linked article: https://techcrunch.com/2016/04/28/plug-the-fathom-neural-com...

How the Fathom Neural Compute Stick figures into this is that the algorithmic computing power of the learning system can be optimized and output (using the Fathom software framework) into a binary that can run on the Fathom stick itself. In this way, any device that the Fathom is plugged into can have instant access to complete neural network because a version of that network is running locally on the Fathom and thus the device.

This reminds me of Physics co-processors. Anyone remember AGEIA? They were touting "physics cards" similar to video cards. Had they not been acquired by Nvidia, they would've been steamrolled by consumer GPUs / CPUs since they were essentially designing their own.

The $79 price point is attractive. I wonder how much power can be packed into such a small form factor? It's surprising that a lot of power isn't necessary for deep learning applications.
Plenty of people don't have companies in mind, just jobs in mind.
The result from the experiment is not surprising and it has been done in less stringent fashion many times before. It is just a real-world realization of the though experiment behind Einstein's spooky action at a distance (look up Bell measurements / Bell experiment / EPR "paradox").

This gives you way more obfuscated information than you probably want: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_test_experiments

Basically, if you set up an experiment where two entangled particles are send far apart and you are not very careful with the derivations, it would look like you can communicate faster than light between the two entities holding the two particles. Turns out that it does not work, and while it does give fascinating insights about the weirdness of quantum mechanics it is not useful for FTL communication.

However, it is definitely useful for encrypting messages that can not be decrypted no matter how much computational power you have (even if you have fancy computational oracles).
Dirty secrets of DevOps
Does this really use advanced features of Homotopic Type Theory? Does it really require the Univalence Axiom? (Caveat: I don't yet properly understand either of those two things.)

It seems to me that the representation of cardinalities as "Univalent Types" could just as easily be done using Decidable Setoids (eg the number 3 is represented by a Setoid with a decidable equivalence relationship that divides its members into 3 equivalence classes).

There are only four things in this system that require a notion of equality and/or equivalence: tuples, cardinalities, relations (as functions from tuples to cardinalities) and queries (as functions from relations to relations).

I think this could all be done with in ordinary plain dependent type theory, without any HOTT or Univalence Axiom (for example, in Idris, which is apparently incompatible with the Univalence Axiom). Each of the four notions of equivalence would be represented by a corresponding type function.

Have I missed something?
> Just try to implement the following function in C without using the address-of operator:

Pascal had `var` arguments, i.e. call-by-reference, which can be used for similar purposes. Call-by-reference isn't a complete replacement for C pointers, of course, but it also avoided the whole host of memory safety issues arising from C's more general model and which plague C to this day.

> But once you've switched to C, the sheer verbosity of Pascal is bothersome. Instead of "{" and "}" Pascal uses "begin" and "end". It uses "procedure" or "function" to introduce a function.

That's entirely subjective, I think. As somebody who grew up with Pascal and learned C later, I found the C syntax to be comparatively hard to read. I do favor the Modula-2/Eiffel/Ada approach of having "end" terminators instead of "begin" / "end" blocks (which share the troubles that braces have), though.
Does the panel produce the same amount of energy every season?
I know that in most of Europe the production during summer months is way higher than during winter and that needs to be taken into account
I am tab hoarder. It's a serious problem. So many links that I want to read. But I don't feel like doing it right now. And I know for certain that if I put it into a bookmark, I will never ever look at it again. So they sit on my tab bar for months until I get around to it.

You are not alone.

I've never gotten to 100 tabs before. For entirely practical reasons, that Chrome can't handle it. It runs out of memory and grinds my computer to a halt.

Yep, been there before too. My "light" laptop only has 6GB of RAM, so Chrome starts to dog out pretty quick if I go tab crazy on it. It can handle about 25 tabs and then it starts freezing the entire system for minutes at a time.

Fortunately my "big" machine has 32GB of RAM and an i7 processor so it can handle 4 or 5 Chrome windows each with oodles of tabs, 2 or 3 Eclipse instances, and various server processes all running at the same time. I just can't bear carrying that thing around because it weighs a frickin' ton. :-(
Wade: Blazing fast, 1kb search for JavaScript
because they don't even know what's in them.

Doesn't matter. They're there for a reason. And there's still something a touch "different" about a tab, compared to a bookmark. It's hard to explain, but there really is a purpose to doing things that way.
This isn't true of Firefox though, and if you organize them well enough, you won't have any issue with recognizing what tab is what. I have 11 tab groups, some with around 4-5 tabs, others crossing 50 easily. I've also gone to nearly 1000 tabs, as long as they're in their group and organized well, you can access them.
To double down on the cynicism, you also need to be sure your employees value your options for this to be relevant.
Sure, and the left just takes that money and spends it on "entitlements" (quotes used on purpose). We could play this game for days if you wanted.
EaseUS Partition Master PRO 12.0 Crack Full Version Is Here
Add a '#' to further restrict the search to page titles.
I had an idea that I was going to turn into a side project related to this, but find myself too busy to work on it at the moment.

Imagine a simple ML engine that would allow an artist to pipe in a selection of "art", whether that is visual or aural. The engine would then build a network on top of that data. The next step would be for the ML engine to build pieces "inspired" by the artist's selections which would, in theory, inspire the artist.

I've seen a handful of projects posted that are similar to this, but have yet to take the step of allowing the user to select which pieces of music / art the engine should use for inspiration.

Of all the professions that exist today, I think artists have a special distinction in that they are probably some of the only people who will be immune to the possibility of ML "taking their jobs".
Faster than light communication would violate causation, meaning you could send a message that would arrive before it was sent. What happens if you instruct yourself to not send it in the first place? This is the paradox. So, how to get around that? Perhaps parallel universes? Other dimensions? Or maybe just that the quantum world is designed to violate locality in very precise ways that don't affect the macroscopic world, or break any causation rules. I always find it fascinating how a concept like entanglement — two particles that are connected by some faster-than-light phenomenon — can coexist with the macroscopic world, yet perfectly prevent messages from being sent between two points. Same with quantum teleportation. The science says that it can happen, but the no-cloning theorem prevents duplicates from being made through teleportation. As strange as the quantum world is, it somehow doesn't seem to ever break causation rules (yet).
Purely naively I would guess that it means during whatever audit they ran, no signs of insecurity were observed. Maybe it would be better to say that it didn't "fail" the audit?
Good to see that we don't fully disagree :)

Going back to the example of a doubly nested loop to determine if there are any two numbers in an array that sum to zero, it should take at most 1 minute for a smart engineer to figure out that it works. They don't have to speak before they've evaluated whether it works. The metric I use is: how long did they take to get to a solution that works, even if inefficient?
No Tests? No Excuses
Any company/CEO who wastes 45 x 2 minutes of my life on a commute is bound to get a quit notice.
Correction acknowledges!
Got that tshirt. (I'ze the shoulder shrugger)
Me neither, but I found it here:

https://aphextwin.warp.net