skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There is a 3 part hash going on. There is an Origin ID hash, a URL hash and then an MD5 on the actual payload. When a new asset is registered on the mesh the Edgemesh backplane downloads the asset direct to confirm the MD5. If it doesn't match it won't allow the asset to register. On a replication the destination node receives the asset and calc's the MD5 again. If the MD5 doesn't match - it signals Edgemesh who then takes that node (source) out of the mesh. E.g. if you modify an asset and attempt to replicate it - the receiving party will invalidate the object and signal back to Edgemesh. Replication directions are from the Edgemesh backplane. PM me if you'd like to go into this in more detail.
It's probably actually mjpeg - at least that's what I would use.
But `we` won't eat gmo food?
[GET] WSO- Niche Doodle Video Profits
Sales page-
http://www.warriorforum.com/warrior-special-offers/1284712-how-i-generate-over-184-813-buyers-traffic-visitors-per-month-clickbank-amazon-free.html

Download link-
https://www.dropbox.com/s/4rhdcoh3cy6e9wn/Niche-Doodle-Video-Profits.rar?dl=0
I started with an acer c720 2GBram. Everything was pretty good until you filled up the ram and it just force closed a bunch of tabs. Used that as my primary personal laptop for 1 year. It's not a little linux terminal for my daughter as it didn't get android apps, and OS support is about over.

I moved to a Lenovo 13 Chromebook with 8GB ram and an i5 and 64 gb SSD, and the 1080 p screen. That's my primary laptop now.

I also have a acer r11 which is pretty solid. I'd love to use that but it has a small screen. That gets used around the house by the rest of the family for various tasks and is in a stock state.

I may look to move to acers next 11 in. They have been really solid but I need 1080 and usb C charging for anything else I buy. Not buying more chargers.
I disagree. The spectrum is owned by the public which is managed by an elected government of the people. If a protest were to be judged by elected officials, or those appointed by them, to be in danger of harming citizens then taking actions like blocking access to the wireless spectrum for communication and organization purposes would be within the public good. I should think they would explain why this decision was made.

Because these are elected officials or appointed by these elected officials, if the public found their judgement to be wrong or unfair, they can elect someone else to judge it.
This stance that there has been some sort of dilution would make more sense in a world where Locke's formulation of rights was a) unique and b) widely accepted as canonical.

As neither are true, it begs the question.
I just want to point out that this view isn't necessarily wrong, but it's one-sided and reads like talking points from an ISP lobbyist.

You can view Google and Netflix as "capitalizing on ISPs". You could also view it as the ISPs customers demanding more bandwidth from their ISP that they pay.

ISPs like to talk about their "innovations", but what does that even mean? Personally, I want them to provide me with a high bandwidth link to the internet at low cost. The less they do, the happier I'll be.

What innovations do you expect to happen if net neutrality is rolled back? I expect that every ISP will threaten to deprioritize traffic from every content provider unless they pay up. I believe it'll lead to a worse internet experience overall for internet users and raise barriers for new content providers to be able to compete on the internet. That's not the kind of innovation I want.

It's been well established that terrible service and high costs are related to how much of a monopoly the ISP has in the area. Many areas of the US only have 1 or 2 choices of ISP. This shouldn't come as a surprise to any free market capitalist. Why would an ISP upgrade a network or lower prices when it has no competition? Low competition means that consumers lose. When Google Fiber wants to expand to an area, the established ISPs fight hard to make sure they can't compete. If they do reach an area, that area immediately experiences network upgrades and reductions in prices.

A company doesn't just "pass their costs to consumers" and tack on a set percentage for their own profits. A company's job is to increase the profits for it's shareholders. If a CEO is not doing everything legally within his power to increase the profits for shareholders, he can be replaced. Prices for services and money spent on maintenance are set based on what they've determined will net them the maximum amount of profit. If they managed to extract even more money from content providers, what motive do they have to lower prices or upgrade service for customers in a monopoly area? None. None whatsoever.

Sometimes the government has to intervene in a market (like anti-trust laws) in order to create a fair market for companies to compete. And that's OK and every free-market conservative should recognize that fact and agree that it's a good idea if they just think about it for a while.
Using a Customized Cost Function to Deal with Unbalanced Data
The canonical new book about stream processing
Or via a procedure that complies with the requirements of that IRB :)
The description of the "Alexa, Open Cortana" or "Cortana, open Alexa" voice commands as "awkward" makes it sound like this evolve over time.

Funny thought: isn't this how the plot for the movie "Her" goes? <spoiler>All of the AIs join together.</spoiler>
Yes, this doesn't exactly "print" a GIF, but it's still a cool use of hardware and tech, with a nice writeup of how it was all accomplished.
Let's be part of the solution instead of the problem.
Not so: this oversampling is mostly about generating distortion products without aliasing, so in the context I mean, the difference is obvious. But, it's a tradeoff- purer behavior under distortion, versus a dead quality that comes from extreme over-processing. I've never seen an audiophile talk about 384K+ sampling rate unless they mean DSD, and with that, it's for getting the known unstable HF behavior up and out of the audible range.

Oversampling in studio recording is mostly about eliminating aliasing in software that's producing distortion, and it's only relevant in that context: I don't think it's nearly so relevant on, say, an EQ.
I'm not sure what I understand what you mean. Could you explain how the illegality or rarity of bribery in the US led to the Ferguson scandal, or the death of Michael Brown?
Trump Cybersecurity Advisors Resign, Citing ‘Insufficient Attention’ to Threats
Genome-wide association study identifies 74 loci associated with educational attainment https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v533/n7604/full/nature...

We are beginning to identify genes that determine IQ. It's only a matter of time until we get a useful predictive model of genetics of intelligence.
Rights only make sense in the context of a society, because they can only govern the actions of fellow humans. Animals know nothing about rights. Non-living matter knows nothing at all, and so certainly nothing about rights.

Therefore, rights only exist to guide and constrain what humans do, and any group of humans living together is a society.
> How does net neutrality matter if what travels on a perfectly neutral net is controlled anyway, actually controlled much more effectively, by a very few with agenda that goes far beyond just greed for money?

Without Net Neutrality it becomes harder to choose platforms that don't censor or censor less. Especially since non-censoring platforms will tend to have less revenue to spend on access to customers due to presenting potential PR risks to traditional advertisers and business partners.
Yes, the article also mentions how 24/192 can be useful for production and editing.
GIF are a great example of a medium that succeeded specifically DUE to it's shortcoming/constraints. In fact most "gifs" on highly visited sites are mp4 videos (which can have audio and longer length). But they pretend to be gif in order to convey original set of affordances of gif format.
I would have said steam power.
Since germline manipulation requires IVF its likely to remain inaccessible for all but the rich for quite some time.
He will contribute the majority of his wealth to charitable foundations. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_%26_Melinda_Gates_Foundat... ). I believe this will allow him to avoid the taxes.

I don't have any objection to Bill and Warren choosing strenuously avoid giving their money to the government, and I don't object to what they are doing.

What I really object to is Warren advocating for other people's money to pay these taxes and presenting it as if it will affect him but he is such a great guy that he is all for it anyway. To me, he is the kid that is about to get in trouble and is frantically pointing at the other kid and mouthing he did it.
Pretty neat. Crazy it uses an adhoc wifi network to communicate between the camera and the cartridge. Seems overkill for a battery powered device when they are already plugged in to each other physically.
I was expecting a GIF flip book.
Just to be clear - when I eat Jell-o I use my toungue to force it out between my teeth and pretend I'm a whale.

Am I in danger of developing baleen?
Sure, words mean whatever the consensus is that they mean. My definition above is just the original one. If we decide it's this new, broader thing, then so be it.

But if "rights" encompass things that a perfectly just, well-intentioned society might very well _not be physically capable_ of providing, simply due to lack of resources, then what the hell is the point of calling something a "right" at all? What does that accomplish? What does that mean?

All I'm saying is that this new, pretty much meaningless definition we've given it of "stuff we want" is much less useful than the original.
More importantly, what will you save on shipping and how much more could you make by marking the t-shirt up as "made in America"? What are the long-term brand benefits of being American-made?
The Constitution already applies to what happens on the Internet.

That Article would be more relevant to countries with hate speech laws or blasphemy laws.
That's not a consensual view.
How the GDPR Will Disrupt Google and Facebook
Maybe people shouldn't use metaphors. And stairs. Metaphors and stairs are my least favorite things.
Not true.

In Net Present Value accounting terms genetic manipulation or screening has a reasonable chance of becoming mainstream in the medium term. Governments will start to do it to ease the health burden of some of the more costly diseases, and if we can simultaneously increase the strength, drive, and intelligence of our population at the same time why not throw it in for free?
I don't know what Spotify does. It's possible that they use compression on the "non high quality" media, it's also possible that you are hearing other differences that are the result of different encoding parameters.
It's only a problem if you're a tech pedant.
I case 3 you get get some real speedups, but you usually have to design the db layout for the use case. Step one is "How am I going to lookup this data" then design the data structures for that use case. Often(but not always) in these cases the NoSql db is just a lookup db with the system of record being a somewhere else and data is transformed into multiple data sets for lookup.

IMHO, most of the NoSQL hype was developers not wanting to learn sql/ddl along with a lot of resume padding. It is also important to note that NoSQL no longer means "No SQL" but really is now "Not Relational and/or ACID" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACID). The only thing worse than SQL is everything else created to replace it. Many "NoSQL" products use a limited SQL like syntax as their only query format.

As for relational DB overhead, there is no reason for it be more then NoSQL(see sqlite) unless you are willing to give up part of ACID. Special cases like this are another use case for NoSQL but you probably want ACID unless you have data/throughput to make it nonviable. Otherwise you have it just ignore issues (normally what happens) or code for them in your app.
How many people can realistically grasp those? Or even be worker drones in those industries? ~30% of people are unable to grasp material beyond Gr 8 math. There is a huge problem looming on the horizon - human obsolescence.
You don't have a right as an individual to force another individual to give you material goods.

You do have a right to food, shelter, and physical security, and if you don't have those, then yes, your rights are being violated and the government is failing in it's responsibilities.
> states and other administrations are supposed to guarantee human rights and they can pay for that work.

States cannot pay until they have a value to pay with, and the value a state can dispose of is created by individuals.
> by lack of sweatshops but by corrupt government

I think this is a false contrast. Stable government and reliable infrastructure are the standard requirements for building factories (sweatshop or otherwise) in a country. So a lack of industrialization is frequently a consequence of bad governance.

Notably, corruption itself isn't an issue. China, for instance, has plenty of corrupt and autocratic governance. But it has predictable, tolerable corruption and a basically-stable political structure, however the specifics may change. What's important is that the situation was predictable; everyone was willing to skim a percentage and leave the basic structures of government intact. If investors were worried that the government might take 100% of an investment, or fall completely, the situation would look pretty different.
YouTube has a new look and, for the first time, a new logo
Shame. I biked up to one of the last glaciers in Colombia. Got to see them before they are gone.
very neat! I was expecting a hologram print where you move side ways to see image animate. Something like this - https://images.britcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Ubersn...
The UDHR emerged from WWII, just as did the Geneva Conventions and the U.N. and the Nuremberg war crimes trials. They're not useless. And they diluted nothing. Human beings learned something. But somehow from then to now failed to figure out a way to broaden the consensus, and hold partners accountable.

It's hardly any different than a family member who has a gambling problem, or drug addiction. Do you kick them to the curb? Or do you persist in making the best of a crappy situation? In most families it's a back and forth between making the best and punishing them in a persistent passive aggressive struggle.

And global politics is no different, no less messy. But having ethical standards is still not useless.
I wonder if this becomes more feasible if instead of drawing exclusion circles based on speed of light in fiber, you would use a graph of network links. For example the location and length of submarine cables is well known, and there is also somewhat decent information on the location and speed of other backbone links. If a RTT is 500ms, you can walk this graph of known links up to a distance of 250ms, and draw circles around every branching point equivalent to the remaining RTT budget in order to account for unknown links to consumers. That way you end up with a bunch of circles that combined contain all possible locations of the target.

You could even take it a step further with empirical measurements of real delays and variance (based on time of day) between known locations to map unmapped parts of the network and to make educated guesses about the used links based on experienced RTT variance.

I guess it's still hard to get better than an IP database unless the target uses top-notch networking equipment, given that a single ms means 300km difference. But maybe variance of RTT could give enough clues to rule out multiple links, giving you a way to enhance the location estimate from the IP database in some cases.
> My definition above is just the original one.

And outdated and not accepted one. Don't be a prescriptivist, words don't have a single fixed meaning, just because Lock defined right to mean something long long ago doesn't mean that's what people mean when they use the word.

> If we decide it's this new, broader thing, then so be it.

That was decided by the masses long ago. Language evolves. This is not "new" nor is it meaningless. Rights means stuff we as a majority agree everyone should have, it's not less useful, and it's what rights have always actually meant. Anyone arguing about natural rights vs whatever is having a meaningless semantic argument with no one who matters. There are no natural rights, the concept is frankly silly; rights are inherently social in nature and have always been simply what people agree on.
Right of using facebook, Right of selling your data to Silicon Valley VCs. Market is getting saturated, emerging markets are new targets.
This is the implementation of java.math.BigDecimal from JDK 1.6.0_45

private transient String stringCache;

public String toString() {
String sc = stringCache;
if (sc == null)
stringCache = sc = layoutChars(true);
return sc;
}

Within a thread that sees "sc == null" the assignment of stringCache and sc to the result of layoutChars(true); will be legitimate (they will see a valid, fully-formed, correct String).

Another thread calling toString() may or may not see sc, or stringCache, assigned to a legitimate String instance, due to the Java Memory Model (happens-before, memory barriers, CPU implementation details, cache levels, etc.).

The data within the String created by layoutChars will be consistent to anybody who has established a happens-before relationship with respect to stringCache (either the thread who created it, or if stringCache was volatile, or if stringCache was final, or if a memory-barrier (synchronized, atomic primitive, etc.) has been erected around it.

None of that is present in this implementation of BigDecimal.toString(), which is why stringCache (and the vars used in layoutChars()) is not a valid publication in the Java Memory Model.

It has nothing to do with whether String is correct, and it's not a defect in the JRE implementation. No safe publication was established with respect to stringCache, therefore the data that other threads see is undefined.
While I agree with the conclusion that the problems are left to fester, I don't think that those two camps has really existed like that for a long while now. Both camps are in desperate need to have close connection with big businesses during election time, so what they do is employing different tactics to siphon private money into politics.

One camp does this by back rooms deal and government contracts, positioning companies to stay ahead of the competition. Big businesses have to pay or the competition will do it.

The other camp does this through removing rules which otherwise would allow competition to grow into a threat. The methods of the first camp get describe by the second as threats, and big businesses have to pay to remove both.

No one is paying to deal with next crisis.
I believe the way you presented your two arguments shows them as non mutually exclusive. Couldn't healthcare or economic security be something that society is obligated to not take _away_ from you, while also not being something that a society should provide?

For the record, I'm not advocating for calling any of those things rights. Simply posing a question regarding the above statements.
I was fully expecting that object coming out of the camera to be something like a stack of post-it notes with images printed on them. Very misleading title.
Hérault en force :D
21 fucking years ago.

> In 1996, Dobbertin announced a collision of the compression function of MD5 (Dobbertin, 1996). While this was not an attack on the full MD5 hash function, it was close enough for cryptographers to recommend switching to a replacement, such as SHA-1 or RIPEMD-160.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MD5#History_and_cryptanalysis
What's so progressive about censorship and why are you glorifying it?
>The premise is that Eric Schmidt's displeasure lead to some people getting fired. I don't know how else you could make that argument without blaming Google when the entire argument is about blaming Google.

I'm not saying Google is not culpable. I'm saying they're no more culpable than the folks at the think tank who are dependent on Google.

If I run a business where I take in huge chunks of money from a company every year, and adjust my spending and budgets to rely on said money, then I stopped being independent.

In the business world, no one would have any sympathy for me if the company I relied on suddenly decided to stop supporting me. I put myself into this hole. Why is it any different here?

The think tank stopped being independent long before any of this happened. They are equal partners, and deserve an equal amount of blame. They are definitely not the victims here.

The problem isn't that Google is making negative overtures to them with an implied threat of defunding them in the future. The problem is that they shouldn't have been funding them in the first place. As such, it can easily be argued that dropping funding is the right thing to do.
> Existing securities laws didn't develop in a vacuum - they were a response to real problems in capital markets

They were still developed in a vacuum. US securities laws are 90% promulgated by the SEC unilaterally, for quite some time, and even when Congress is involved the SEC still spends years warping the intent and implementation of the law. The SEC's public comment periods are a total farce and their decision is unilateral, doesn't provide more confidence in the markets, hampers interstate commerce, usually increases transaction costs and the cost of capital, and doesn't prevent scams.

There are alternatives now.
You meant cabbage.
> Is a judge a human right abuser if he takes away internet access from a sex offender?

Yes.
> The approach of generating source code and exec()ing it, is a cool demonstration of Python's expressive power

This sentence is very surprising to me. If the best way to implement something is to literally build a string of source code and pass it to the interpreter, to me it means the user is unable to really express what they want in the language.

As a (terrible) example, imagine a language whose number addition operator only works on literals.

1 + 2
=> 3

a = 1
b = 2
a + b
=> ERROR!

It does, however, have a string concatenation operator that also works on variables and a way to read user-provided numbers into a variable, as well as some kind of eval function. What would you do to add two user-provided numbers? Something like the following:

foo = read number!
bar = read number!
baz = concatenate x, ' + ', y
quux = eval baz

The same thing could be stated about this language...

> The approach of generating source code and eval-ing it, is a cool demonstration of <this language>'s expressive power.

...but it clearly wouldn't make sense. Functions like exec and eval are an escape hatch for when there is no sensible way of expressing something in the language.
There's one anti-corporate idea that I've always thought was interesting but AFAIK isn't discussed by anyone: small-corporation libertarianism. In general libertarians are too concerned with government but almost all of them (plus neoliberals and many financially conservative folks) can agree that competition is at least one of their most important economic tenants. Competition is balanced against economies of scale etc. but those are totally level after you're making millions of a product.

It's just weird that there aren't at least some voices arguing strongly that super-large companies (not even conglomerates) like google or apple should be split up for economic growth.
http://web.archive.org/web/20070303040640/http://simile.mit....

I remember using this with xvfb to achieve headless Firefox. The rendered text could then be accessed via localhost with a text-only browser or tcp client e.g. netcat.