skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I doubt it, a 1070 is still better performance per dollar with the power consumption figured in
"Surprisingly, native FP16 operations are not currently exposed to OpenCL"

Given that these cards have potential to crash the price/perf of current deep learning solutions, this is more than regrettable.
Its not "officially" released, and has no announcement. This is a link to the version in the package manager so everything can be tested and 3rd party libraries which depend on it can update and be ready for the offical release.

Which looks like 18th Sept https://twitter.com/OpenAtMicrosoft/status/89496719717666406...
It's the opposite. You can't be sure that a self-published journal has editors and reviewers do a first check. This means you need to confirm and audit their practices.

Compare this to a publication in nature. There, by virtue of the name, you know the article is worth more. (Note that in practice, Nature apparently has quite a few sham publications)
Yes, there is also this book from 1999, which talks about a Pascal to C 'transpiler' around as early as 1989.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=vKQSBwAAQBAJ&pg=PR8&lpg=...
The Jersey Pug's Funeral
Yes. Check out JetBrain's Project Rider for an IDE.
Poncho weather service picks up $2.4M from Lightspeed Venture Partners
GoDaddy dumps white supremacist site 'Daily Stormer'
Serializing data for IPC is often undesirable (copies kill) which leads to multi process shared memory. Sharing memory across process boundaries safely is a problem you avoid entirely with threading. You still need to lock your data (or use immutable data), but the machinery is built into your implementation (and hopefully trustworthy).
English grammar is too simple :-) Elaborate grammar gives you a lot of substance to play with. I root for German :-)
Apparently you haven't read a ToS/AUP before, choosing GoDaddy for anything the least bit controversial was a mistake.
If the acoustic is hard to play, get it "setup" buy someone that knows what they are doing. Usually the action is high (which forces you to grip harder), which can be fixed. If there is a bit of buzz in the neck, there should a be a truss rod in the neck to adjust, or raise the action just a bit. If you have an old guitar that hasn't been adjusted in a long time, you might need to do it again. Kind of like getting a piano tuned once a year.
Were you running on Windows or Linux? It's my understanding that multiple processes doesn't have a big performance penalty on Linux compared to multiple threads.
No.

You should never, ever, ever return a 2xx status code with an error payload. The 2xx series means "Success" and you're abusing HTTP to use it to mean anything else.

With regard to application layer vs transport layer, the 404 Not Found, 406 Not Acceptable, 409 Conflict, and many others errors are specifically application layer codes. If you can't get a more specific code, 400 Bad Request with an expressive payload is useful. The 500 codes are generally transport layer.

The reason that APIs are getting easier and easier to understand and use is because we're using the same design patterns consistently and repeatedly. Therefore, the understanding you gain from the Twilio API can be applied to Stripe. If you use existing tools in new and "innovative" ways that are contrary to - instead of in addition to - to their intention, you're setting back adoption and making your users re-figure out basic things. Don't.

Or worse, people don't realize how you're misusing the tools and build flawed systems.

(The one exception I'd give you is 202 Accepted which is generally used for "we've accepted this for now but processing and final validation may occur later" - it's a tentative success message.)
> 3) Encrypt or cryptographically hash portions of the state. But by definition, this portion of the state cannot be acted upon by smart contracts.

This will change once homomorphic encryption is feasible.
One could cynically say that the fake news spreading in this election on Facebook could have been a preliminary test of their algorithm for crowd control. Is such a theory really that far fetched, given news like this?
Is the issue that individual donations are unpredictable (and therefore difficult to use as justification for such a large scope increase)?
Would you consider setting up something akin to a Patreon to allow individuals to commit to recurring monthly support for the project?
HBO Hacker Leaks Message from HBO Offering $250,000 ‘Bounty Payment’
Did you investigate the multiprocessing library?

Also this kind of thing should be relatively light on the GIL if done correctly. The bzip2 module releases the GIL (I assume?), as does file IO, which is most of the workload in your use case?
Also, without paying high interest rates and warrants (i.e. Venture debt) you'll be stuck with a personal guarantee before you hit ~$25M in revenue.
I think you are reading in too much the criticism of how grammars work. Ultimately the leading compiler uses the Perl 6 grammar engine and tooling to implement the language compiler! So if your needs are substantially less complex than needing to implement your own programming language, say parse some XML or something. Then the grammar engine is more than competent. The authors criticism of how to handle errors during parse and making a really advanced robust parser is definitely fair. However, the technology for doing this in a deep way does exist. It's already found in the grammar debugger module from one of the core devs (https://github.com/jnthn/grammar-debugger). There just isn't perhaps a nicer "user" level API for you handling parsing in a flexible way when something goes wrong. There are mechanisms for making your grammar flexible though such as proto rules/tokens/regexes https://docs.perl6.org/language/grammars#Protoregexes here when different options are encountered you can trigger different code to handle whats being parsed.
Also 5B - to the extent there is innovation outside "pure tech," it is probably being sold as a tech play. Ag-Tech, Fin-Tech, etc ... Consumer-tech is already just tech, as is enterprise-tech, industrial-tech. With the disintermediation of vertical supply chains, any supplier of technical innovation is a "tech" company. Tech companies operate in nearly all industries.
At the end of that article, the writer directly thanked the Symantec team for fixing these problems quickly.

Every company has vulnerabilities. How they respond when told about these vulnerabilities is much more important, and, at least by this account, Symantec is pretty responsible when it comes to responding to the discovery of these vulnerabilities.

And, to be clear, in the past year so, Symantec has been investing heavily into their own security. You can say "They should have done it before" all you want, but the fact that they're doing it speaks to, at the very least, the current leadership's competence.

Especially with the purchase of Blue Coat, they seem to want to bolster their offerings in a more meaningful way than "we give you virus definitions". Given Blue Coat CAS did and continues to use third party virus engines, even post purchase by Symantec, that would imply that Symantec is trying harder to improve their product.

EDIT: Full disclosure, I work heavily with Symantec products, but I do not work for them directly. It's my job to provide _support_ for Symantec products, not to sell them to people.
We've been running a very large production PyPy deployment across pretty much all our Python apps for about... 4 years now. Saves us a ton of money for essentially no real downside.
Why the Dow Isn’t Really the Stock Market
Read the writer's bio before sharing your hot take on the article.

"Kristen R. Ghodsee, a professor of Russian and East European studies at the University of Pennsylvania, is the author of numerous books on European Communism and its aftermath, including, most recently, “Red Hangover: Legacies of 20th-Century Communism.”

This is an essay in the series Red Century, about the history and legacy of Communism 100 years after the Russian Revolution."

Edit: formatting
> Killing a mother while she was breastfeeding her infant baby? Even animals don't do that.

Er... not sure what animals you're referring to?

Predators in general seem to be quite happy to chow down on prey regardless of what activity it's involved in at the time.
The evolutionary pressure is just people or programs detecting certain strains (it would generate lots of strains randomly).

I think the only real issue to plausibility here is I'm not sure brute force is enough to make enough plausible behavioral branches, at least with current computing power/internet bandwidth. A reasonably efficient self-modification mechanism (in terms of viable strain per transmission) is probably extremely large, I'd say at least 1GB. Not unlike deep learning systems, this would consist of a large functional composition of heuristics, codifying how to write code that can embedded itself in other programs and write modifications to itself that are likely to work.

Note that we haven't yet gotten a good neural-generated code modifications, even using large networks, GPU training and large computing time. Best examples I could find:

http://karpathy.github.io/2015/05/21/rnn-effectiveness/#linu...

https://arxiv.org/abs/1611.01989

So we're not yet at a point this could be plausible (as it couldn't hide itself in small programs), but eventually it will be --
once there is enough headroom on most GPUs and certain types of software are large enough it could hide it's network inside, and generally enough internet bandwidth to spread it's >GB-scale code. I'd imagine something like a game, which usually has networking -- it would be using GPUs partially to generate and spread new strains of it trying to infect other games and such.

Note there are biological viruses with tiny genomes however -- the smallest are on the order of ~1kbyte. But as you cite they had billions of years, producing maybe quadrillions of viruses every year, giving this tiny efficient and specialized weapon. Interestingly, they rely on other cells machinery to even replicate their genome -- analogous to using the compiler here.

http://www.lehigh.edu/~jas0/viralgenomes.html

If everyone could send >10^18 different small self-replicating viruses over your network, it seems likely some would exploit bugs in certain kinds of hardware/software, evolving through this selective pressure.
Well, as I've read on this, there is good news and bad news. The good news is that the best predictors of how you're going to vote are already public. Wait, maybe that's the bad news. Either way, as you say one can already do very granular advertising through FB already, but having more data is not necessarily equivalent to having better information, and you're not necessarily trying to market optimally to every potentially identifiable segment. If you knew that peanut-related political ads played really well with left-handed leftist lecturers in LA, you might still not consider that worth taking action on. For most people things like age, income, education, party registration, and parent's party registration are sufficiently predictive.
I'm not sure if it should be plural when referring to the technology in general. "Powered by blockchains technology" doesn't seem correct to me.

I do hope you'll read the article regardless!
In my five years of python I've run up against this boundary at least once. In your list I would

* take out #2. if something can make use of multiple nodes it can usually make even better use of multi-core parallelization (which affects both computational and memory bandwidth performance). multi-node comes with a much higher communications overhead, so there's a relatively wide range of applications that scale well on multi-core but not multi-node.

* add that #3 comes up as soon as you have complex data structures to share. Serializing and Deserializing (by default with pickle) is a huge overhead for anything a bit more involved. If you design for this from the start you can be fine, but often these things grow and eat up bigger and bigger usecases until you run against the GIL. This basically happens with anything that has enough data and users and need - hey I heard your scheduler tool works well for the cafeteria, I'm sure it can handle our global operations right?

* about #4 - see the previous point.
Scratch is another solution for this problem

https://scratch.mit.edu/
Vim literally uses the same autocompletion library that VSCode uses. Omnisharp.
With threading, all of your threads can refer to the same objects. Multiprocessing means you have multiple interpreters running. That means no shared memory, and communication over pretty slow queues. I've definitely wanted to have multithreaded Python programs where all threads referred to the same large read-only data structure. But I can't do this because of the GIL. I mean, I can, but it's pointless. I can't do this with multiprocessing because of the limitations on shared memory with multiprocessing.

Edit: I realize I'm contradicting myself here. No shared memory is a first approximation. You can have shared memory with multiprocessing, but most objects can't be shared.
This is what the domain name was created for IIRC.
Back in the day when my status as Person Who Knows Computers meant being frequently called on to (re)install computers and get rid of malware and what not, my little stance for free software was refusing to install pirated software. And once people saw what a Microsoft Office license actually costs, suddenly OpenOffice looked very attractive.
Uber already is one of the grand slams, so it would make sense to take action to protect that success (I'm not saying Benchmark is definitely doing that, but I'm sure they think so). Even if you don't agree with what Benchmark is doing, I think it's hard to see this as anything other than a fight between billionaires. If you're just starting out, deciding to hold a grudge against them over this is getting way ahead of yourself.
No dead CPU time in well-designed software. If you care about I/O performance then you are managing that in user space asynchronously. No thread is waiting for I/O to complete or anything like that unless there is literally nothing else to do (in which case more threads won't help).

There is no performance benefit to adding more threads, they would increase CPU state/cache thrashing which will slow things down. The main benefit of using a lot of threads is that more programmers know how to design software that way because it was taught for so many years; it isn't good for performance on modern hardware.
The basis for the headline:

A comparative sociological study of East and West Germans conducted after reunification in 1990 found that Eastern women had twice as many orgasms as Western women.
What issue do you refer to in context of Signal protocol?
This comment is hilarious and I would make a joke about how bizarre it is to be so offended by something that happened ca 800 years ago but apparently that's too soon, too soon.
agreed... especially because it is an error and if i return a 2xx then the frontend code will then have error logic in the success logic why have two checks when i can have one..
It's just a bunch of tiny little details. It's like riding a bicycle, or typing. Once you figure it out, it's easy and effortless. Keep trying!

What I find harder for beginning guitarists than fretting, is moving from one chord to another. Once you can finger a couple of musically related chords (pairs I recommend learning - G and C, G and D, D and A, A and E), learn to move back and forth between the chords without stopping. Don't "correct" yourself. Keep your strumming rhythm going, uninterrupted, even if you miss a chord!

It is better to play the wrong note at the right time, than play the right note at the wrong time. Always.

The true sound of a beginning guitarist is the sound of a song stopping for two seconds while they fumble to the "right" chord, because they played something wrong. Don't do that. I recommend playing along to records, because records won't stop just because you did. They'll teach you to keep going.
There most certainly is a difference. Have you been to China? These "turbo-capitalists" are all Communist Party connected scumbags that literally would rather see people die and make a yaun than worry about safety.

Parts of China is pure filth. There is no quality control until bad PR surfaces. Then it's all about saving face.
okay. stop throwing a tantrum because you were wrong
I can't tell what you mean by the last paragraph there, but oftentimes PyPy's speedups come exactly from inlining stuff like what you refer to there -- Python's not fundamentally slower, it's those kinds of stuff that you can speed up.

(And yeah the CPython API is still a pain point if you've got a library that uses it, although some stuff will still work using PyPy's emulation layer. It'd be great if people stopped using it though.)
That doesn't count honey, that wasn't real socialism
Oh that's great. I'll do it there now. They really should link straight to that page instead of the Click2Pledge...
Totally. I ran into this just recently. A friend of mine's girlfriend is starting to learn. Someone gave her an acoustic to learn with. It had: mile high action, old strings, shitty tuners, and the fretwork was awful. There is no way she's going to learn or stick with it. Not with that piece of crap.
> .Net standard isn't really the same as Ruby or Python specs, not that it isn't welcome but you can't just brush the complexity under the carpet like that.

That's exactly what it is, actually. It has several versions, so does a lot of language like Java or C++. If it has more complexity than that, I would welcome you to give concrete exemple of what it contains that isn't in other language's specs.

.NET Standard does neither specify a programming language, there is for example the C# specification for that, nor the runtime environment, where there is the Common Language Infrastructure (CLI) specification with specifications for the Common Type System (CTS), Virtual Execution System (VES), Common Intermediate Language (CIL), and a few other things like meta data formats. The CLI specification also contains a specification for basic class libraries, among them the Base Class Library (BCL). I am not really sure about the exact way .NET Standard and the class library specifications in the CLI specification interact, but .NET Standard essentially defines sets of APIs that must be available in the class library of a conforming implementations.
Cool to see a guitar post on the front page of HN, I suppose it makes sense since many of the programmers I know are also musicians.

I'm a guitar player as well, been playing for about 20 years. Completely agree with all your points, especially that it's a "deep instrument". Many people think there's a progress bar for learning it which maxes out, but that progress bar's max is ever increasing (or it should be if you're doing it right).

Shameless plug for my guitar videos: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFFBlI__po2CBLrtynTNbIA
Why El Paso
Yeah, a better analogy would be if someone were to remark that, "legalized interracial marriage makes it more challenging to keep the Scandinavian bloodline pure."
> the only thing saving you from existential despair might be that some ancestor's violence and cruelty was only offset by their utter forgettability in the flow of history.

I think you're forgetting about the fact that in all human history, Genghis stands out as one of the cruelest and most violent rulers. As far as I know, Iranians (Persians) never did the same thing to other nations, not even for revenge. I guess that's the main reason saving Iranians from "existential despair".
And that is wrong AFAICT. PoW is what achieves Byzantine fault tolerance, not the blockchain.

What blockchain achieves is proof of history given only the latest block's hash. This might or might not have a PoW on top of it to achieve BFT.

Practical example:

An authoritative server which responds only with the latest block's hash (this is cheap, think microcontroller cheap) is another way to make a blockchain useful with no BFT. This way blockchain distribution can be offloaded to untrusted peers while the actual agreement is not distributed (and thus no DFT is involved).

EDIT:

Off the top of my head I can see a few applications of such an scheme: imagine a very low-power device taking mission-critical measurements. This device would periodically distribute a message consisting of (current block of measurements + previous message's hash) to untrusted high-power-large-storage clients. In case of any client desynchronizing it can request from its peers the measurement chain, and only has to receive the latest message from the low-power device to ensure the chain he got has not been tampered with.

That is not BFT because the source of truth is just an authoritative server. There is no distributed consensus even if there is distributed storage.
There is nothing much to explain. The principles I am describing here are of classic Eastern philosophy applied to the Evolution process.

The notions of numbers, counting in general and the related concert of time required an observer to be established and formulated. These notions cannot emerge by accident in a purely mechanical perturbations the way life originated. There were no observer, leave alone designer.

This means that life could only use "concrete" phisical structures against which it does exact pattern matching, which is how DNA or RNA translation and protein sintesis works.

Message passing between the cells and triggering of gates and pumps are done by exact pattern matching for the very same reasons - there is no other way in principle. That is why there is no counters or clocks in the nature except human made ones.
HN in the last year pretty much turned into a purveyor of lifestyle news with a cadre a moderators that kick off any opinion not aligned to NYTimes and friends.
Yes, I read it in the mid-80s and loved it, and own multiple copies. Steven Levy's _Hackers_ is a similarly good book.

I found out years later that one of the moderators on a discussion site I frequent is Tom West's daughter, and I sold her a laptop at one point.. Isn't it weird how "small" the world can be?
>So what all these guys need is a separate FOSS organisation exclusively dedicated to fund-raising.

Not sure if totally FOSS, but non-commercial and tranparent: https://opencollective.com/
In gmail i have 200+ filters that archive content based on senders. Twitter, facebook and linkeding are all going directly to archived. I use the email+junk@gmail.com trick when on dodgy websites. Sometimes they refuse this kind of email though.
I rarely bother to unsub with the link, making a filter is faster.
As a web app dev, I did implement a one click usub, but some noob users clicked it by mistake. Because emailing is essential in my app (it's the entry point to the shop), I did a slightly more complicated unsub workflow to avoid mistakes.
>$5k though? That still seems a bit much.

Maybe. As someone who has done quite a bit of editing of relatively technical material and coordinated review and rework cycles, I wouldn't be surprised if you're looking at a couple of days of work for a paper. Certainly a lot more than for a quick copyedit of an online article. So you're into the more than $1K range pretty quickly.
Colonizations, almost all of my friends from international communities had their countries colonized by Western powers. A lot of them still blame colonization for current problems in their countries.
The era of populism – seasonal fluctuation or permanent change?
What is involved in getting your guitar "set up" anyway? I'm looking to get back into learning the guitar I bought a few years ago, and I mean it sounded fine to me when I brought it out to check on it, after a tuning, of course.
Music Rights