skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
If you make $50k/yr (as a freelance headshot photographer in a small town) using Photoshop, a $1000 license plus a $500 upgrade every two years is worth your while. (I'm not up to date on the current subscription pricing but assume it's analagous.) Many people make much more than that per year using such software.

In my current job at a small business, there are things we spend $10k/mo on to make $1M/mo in revenue. Even if we were only making $100k/mo, those costs would not be prohibitive (though we might be looking at reducing them further).

Basically, you have to spend money to make money. If what you spend will allow you to make more than you're spending (and more than you'd make without it), it's worth it. The term many use for that sort of spending is "investment".
The industry standard tool is probably Apache Lucene [1]. It uses a well documented mechanism and is open source so it would make a good place to start research.

Good luck.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Lucene
Yes, but it's not as obvious as it sounds. For example let's say we have dev A and dev B and we give them same task. Dev A solves the task in such way that we don't need to come back to the solution at all, it "just works". While dev B solves it in such way that now we need 1+ devs maintaining a solution full time. Any solution that needs to be maintained full time is a form of job security. Sometimes it is needed (like placing a small team on devops), sometimes it is not (like in-house full time development of dashboard frameworks).
And, some of the best products ever created were written without agile. How did we ever manage. I don't like it when people tell an engineer they're wasting the company time because they implemented something no one asked for. Usually, the customer or client needed that and didn't realize it. And, it bites them in the ass later if they don't.
Imagine an Uber run co-operatively by their drivers, collectively controlling their futures, with profits shared or re-invested... subsidizing rides from their own pockets
Why is it so difficult to count dead people?
> Further, you are also asking a corporation to admit that it's not as good at deploying capital as the smaller company. That's may be true but is a tough position to take.

That's literally what they're saying by acquiring though. They're saying "We could use this money internally to build a clone but your company is operating at a discount to what we can do ourselves"

And yes, certainly, capital is good either way :)
The links are dead on the site, FYI.
What aboutism is an attempt to draw a moral equivalence. The thrust of the article is that China's ambition to become a "science superpower" whatever that means is severely impeded by this fraud, which is not a moral question and does not stand up to comparison of the misaligned incentives and bad science in extant "science superpowers."
Taking notes on paper can help you retain more:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-learning-secret...

http://www.npr.org/2016/04/17/474525392/attention-students-p...

If I don't have paper nearby, I write in the margins and dogear the pages, and then refer back to the book to extract the information later. I keep a few pens and pencils in my pocket at all times.
That's what I was told about 0.4 -> 0.5 last year.
To run a ride share co-op? Sure, you can run it without any of that technology. To run an _efficient_ ride sharing service? That's where all of this technology matters. Think of competition between companies that are efficient vs inefficient. The one that is efficient will eat the other for breakfast.
good grief can we not have even a rudimentary CSS file to make this look at least a little bit readable?
To argue that the legal context is exactly the same for self-driving cars as for normal cars seems unjustified.

I'm not arguing that it is insurmountable. I'm just saying that it's too early. Most of these things have not been worked out, which seems unnecessary.
I'm imagining it wouldn't be so popular sans the VC subsidies.
Good articles in Wikipedia
is there a way to identify a MPLS router aside from just analyzing the traceroute? Would be nice if the hostnames had an identifier in them for that.
How many of you are familiar with the history of Kodi?
I used a local minicab company once to get to the airport to catch an early morning flight from Stansted. Found their website using Google, booked and paid online. Called the office the day before travel just to confirm the booking and they said it's all good.

The next morning I get a call from a rather rude operator - just minutes before they were scheduled to pick me up - telling me that I haven't paid the full amount for the ride. I told them that I booked using their website and paid online with PayPal. He replied that he doesn't know why the website didn't show the correct amount but if I don't pay an additional £30 to the driver they won't give me a ride. I agreed because I just wanted to get to the airport asap and not deal with finding another company.

The lesson I learned here was: I don't trust minicab companies to be able to deal with the tech behind something like Uber. Of course, this was just one bad experience with a single company but it did leave a bad taste in my mouth.
So they still do indie bundles, they still do pay what you want pricing, they still do DRM free, they still have support for charities.

But on top of that they've added a lot of sales that breaks any of those principles.

I think they did well to keep the core of the platform there but at the same time offering other things less noble that keeps them afloat.
Maybe in Greek, but English doesn't have the /x/ sound.
I assumed Microsoft EdgeML was related to Microsoft Edge browser...it is not. It sounds like and “edge device” refers to an IoT device.
Hi, I'm the author of this Python parsing library: https://github.com/erezsh/lark

I would like to port it (or parts of it) to Rust, for fun and speed. Since the grammars are EBNF, it means the same grammars can work in both Rust and Python (I already support some interoperability with Javascript).

However, I'm very new to Rust, and its type system and memory management mechanics seem a bit intimidating. Do you think anyone would be interested in mentoring me or even in actively helping me to port it? And if so, where/who should I ask? Thanks
Indeed, and having someone suggest it with a platform like his brings it a lot closer to being implemented.
Who would bear the risk? Who would bear the losses?

Also, what would happen to bad drivers on the system, would they get fired like Uber fires them? What if a ride is in a spot they don’t want to go to, what happens if they don’t go? What happens when a driver takes a bad route for extra fare? What happens if they get told their car smells bad or is unsafe or they’re driving aggressively or are using the phone to talk to some random person during the trip?

The first time I got in an Uber the driver gave me candy and a bottle of water, charged my phone. Will the taxi co op do that?

Uber is so much more than just an app to order a taxi. It created a new economy with new incentives around ride sharing. It’s not just better because it’s an app, and it’s not just better because it’s private. It also forces drivers to do things taxis don’t want to when it’s netter for the customer.

Does anyone seriously think a co-operative Uber would be able to compete with Uber without making Uber illegal?
Show HN: Ship Tunes – A list of tunes for makers to listen while shipping
If I recall, the original iteration of Hailo was indeed founded by London cab drivers. But needed VC funding in order to compete when Uber and the like came to town, which ultimately ruined them.

That's a problem you see again and again, I think. No matter what your intentions, it's incredibly difficult to compete when a company with huge pockets comes to town and subsidises rides.
Geezer.io
But in this scenario isn't it basically better for everyone (except Uber) to reorganize everything into a co-op?

This is a great example of capitalism not being able to generate the best solution. In an alternate universe there would be a regulated exchange with ~0 cut of the profits, instead making sure drivers get the money since they're doing most of the work. Uber does handle pricing, but even then it has "cheated" to get a bigger slice of the pie.

Imagine the NYSE taking even 5% of trades.
Is it better? It occurs to me that one of the reasons that cab drivers are relatively rude is because they’re insulated from grinding feedback. Uber drivers, in contrast, are terrified of reprisal from Uber. They’re paid like independent contractors, but under the microscope and can be “fired” like employees.

Is that really the desired end game? Everyone being micro-optimied under threats of losing their jobs, like Wal-Mart and Amazon employees?
It’s funny. I’ve heard the “Disagree but commit” from a lot of managers lately; usually used to shut peons up. Ironic that it’s original usage (at least where these managers heard it from) speaks to the opposite direction: leadership should trust their teams.
What is an Edge device??
The same could be argued about the Dreamcast where there SDK was concerned but that has been emulated. Not perfectly but pretty well.
I have read it was not just interest in the console but the GPU.
Your table is wrong. When there is a dominant and a recessive allele, in the simple case you see only the effect of the dominant one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominance_(genetics)

I'll try to fix your table, but I prefer to use white as the "default" color.

I'm not sure about anemones. One possibility is that the color depend only of one gene that has three variants (alleles).

* White (recessive): "w"
* Red (dominant): "R"
* Purple (dominant): "P"

The table is:

| Genes | Result |
| ww | WHITE |
| wR or RR | RED |
| wP or PP | PURPLE |
| RP | PINKISH |

Other possibility is that there are two genes that produce the color. Each one has a dominant variant that produce the color and a recessive variant without effect.

* White: default color, no gene for this
* Red: "Y"es (dominant) -or- "n"o (recesive)
* Purple: "Y"es (dominant) -or- "n"o (recesive)

The table is:

| Red | Purple | Result |
| nn | nn | WHITE |
| nY or YY | nn | RED |
| nn | nY or YY | PURPLE |
| nY or YY | nY or YY | PINKISH |

Another possibility is the opposite case, that there are two genes that produce the color. Each one has a recessive variant that produce the color and a dominant variant without effect.

* White: default color, no gene for this
* Red: "y"es (recessive) or "N"o (dominant)
* Purple: "y"es (recessive) or "N"o (dominant)

The table is:

| Red | Purple | Result |
| yN or NN | yN or NN | WHITE |
| yy | yN or NN | RED |
| yN or NN | yy | PURPLE |
| yy | yy | PINKISH |

Or there can be one gene that has a dominant allele that produce color and other gene that has a recessive gen that produce color. Or two genes with three alleles, or more genes, or more alleles, or ...

But in any of these cases, the sentence in the article makes any sense.
English doesn't have umlaute either. That never prevented typesetters from using them.
That’s a bit of spin right there. Taxi companies could never “invent something like Uber.” Meter and fare regulations precluded the use of smart phones instead of approved meters, and surge pricing (which allows Uber to offer cheaper rides most of the time and make up for it during periods of high demand). Huge amounts of VC money and ignoring taxi regulations allowed Uber to “invent something like Uber.”
>ensure that your team is creating a working, tested, and "shippable" update every ~2 weeks.

If you think about this, it falls down a bit because there is no way you can code and do a full regression test in 2 weeks on any substantial product. You might be able to run some automated tests, but would you ever ship a product without eyes on the screen testing? Heck no.

Before the agile thing, we did 4 releases a year, 2 majors and 2 minors, so you are looking at a 3 month cycle.
Show HN: React-Native UI-Kit from Trixie
India Trials a Power Grid on the Blockchain to Incentivize Sustainable Energy
Did you mean to say 'easier'? I don't think I understand the point unless that should be 'harder'. Maybe I'm guilty of the bias you're talking about.
I'm picturing a single employee per shift whose job is to keep a simple GIS updated with a generalized map of demand density. Add markers for relevant info like major events that will affect demand. This individual could also be one of the CSR's jobs.

I'm picturing this service being unique per region, so the co-opers are all locals who grok their region.

Give the drivers these data and they will naturally find balance. They're intelligent people who are motivated by efficiency. You just need an organizational core to supply the right data and infrastructure.

I feel frustrated by this idea that we need to replace the best source of wisdom we have: our drivers, with expensive technologies. It makes a simple problem complex. Feels like silicon valley is putting my juice in a bag to squeeze.
I intentionally said minicabs, not taxis, to head off this exact sort of argument.
Yesm yes, you are so smart and all us sheep who don't understand anything.

...

if you knew even the first thing...
It’s just another example of bike shedding. Everyone has an opinion about icons, and feels qualified enough to offer up that opinion.
Regulatory filings suggest SpaceX plans November launch with mystery payload
They could have been changing these regulations years ago, instead they behave like a vegetable which is now being eaten.
Free software does not extend from socialist thought.

Stallman's initial realisation was a reaction to crony capitalism: he could not modify the printer due to IP rules. Essentially, a deal is done between government and big business (the manufacturer and possibly the university), at the expense of hackers (individuals).

The justifications for copyright are rooted in common-good
arguments. The state limits individual freedom, claiming that it should because of (undemonstrated) common-good advantages. Hayek explores this, and takes a position against IP in _The Fatal Conceit: The Errors of Socialism_.

A better political analogy for free software is a conflict from early US history: between landowner and state rights advocates (Jefferson) vs big-business visions (Hamilton).
One man acting in his own best interest is a conspiracy now? Oooook...
They would not be able to subsidize rides nor run loses that long.

That being said, there is zero guarantee collective ownership would lead to better behaved company. Collective ownership can be quite ugly.
Uber already is illegal in most places it operates, so... yes?
Well, yeah. Balancing your entire tech org around one guy is a ridiculously bad plan. What does management do if not plan and organize?

But it's also this guy's fault for not being enough of a leader to avert the crisis.

I'm not sure how people read my post and say, "This is a story about how Rick was good or right."
Because they don't raise their hands when asked to.
IF you run in to this again, Adafruit gives away an app for Arduino that can easily display data and control I/O. It's pretty neat!

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/adafruit-bluefruit-le-connec...
They just reported a second quarter 2017 loss of $645 million.
You’ve confused radius and mass. 10x mass = 10x gravity, and then radius is a totally separate issue. Mass and surface gravity are proportional, while radius depends on issues of composition.
People should watch Guy Steele CMS talk, he goes into the variations of mathematical notation (grouping, lambdas, etc)
Street view, no. Google Earth Pro, yes. And that's free.
I think the issue is that there aren't any profits, just billions in losses.

I think where a co-op would fail is that it would have to charge higher prices as the drivers wouldn't want to sustain (and pay for) losses for many years. If the co-op owned company charged 20-80% more than Uber, but offered drivers ownership and/or other benefits, would it bleed enough drivers from Uber or would enough drivers stick with Uber that it would be a viable and cheaper alternative for riders?

This isn't a new idea. Juno planned to have drivers own 50% of equity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juno_(company)) and someone tried to create a driver-owned Uber named Swift (https://www.dailydot.com/debug/swift-uber-lyft-driver-app/). However, given the costs associated with effectively competing are high - especially as Uber subsidizes rides.

In the long run, there won't be drivers and Uber has mentioned a bleak future for its company if it doesn't get to driver-less cars sooner rather than later. A solution with drivers won't compete against a driver-less solution regardless of ownership.

Even in the medium term where Uber will be using drivers, they have a large pile of money to use as a weapon against alternatives - and there are more driver-focused alternatives. Fasten has launched in two cities and takes $1 per ride rather than 20-30% of the fare. But Uber has a lot of money to encourage riders to use Uber and encourage drivers they might worry about switching.

Corbyn is taking the attitude that a company like Uber is making all the money while the workers aren't getting their fair share. But Uber isn't profitable and it's unclear how much of that is expansion into new markets and how much of that is the marketing and subsidies needed to keep the business rolling in current markets. Would ridership decline significantly with 20% higher fares? Would you be able to retain enough drivers without the constant marketing to get new drivers? Uber launched in 2009 during the peak in unemployment. Today, unemployment is near all-time lows which makes recruiting and retaining drivers much more challenging.

Ultimately, a driver-owned co-op sounds great, but where would the money come from? Would drivers be willing to take home less for share of the company? Would riders be willing to pay more knowing that it was a "good" company?
I bet if you asked Corbyn to pump up the cash for Uber's losses over the past few years he'll put his tail between his legs and head for a hasty retreat.

Taxi drivers had years to do what uber did. They didn't, they were often horrible - all manner of dirty tricks to keep prices artificially high whilst sneering at customers who didn't go on a long enough journey. You'd book a Minicab and be told they're '2 minutes away' and still find yourself waiting after 30 minutes.

Co-operatives can be trusted to look after their own interests - to an extent that might even pass the definition of racketeering. They can't be relied upon to make a compelling proposition to customers.

Not saying private companies like uber are the answer either, but it's hard to judge which is worse.
> This is the growth phase of the industry. Any regulations at this time will just slow them down and hurt society at large.

Any regulations? Can you explain what you mean by reducing fairness to help society at large?
Most ‘competing’ apps (like UGo) are awful pieces of tech and basically a horror to use; and that is only a small part. That is not thinking about a solid backend, payment etc. Sure it is not that hard it seems but to make something that works well enough so people rely on it is something else.
I think the key word is "formal," to me, meaning a strict process to be used at all times in all situations. Like anything in development, it makes better sense to use whatever process works best for whatever team is implementing whatever solution is needed.
... sounds expensive
I don't see what purpose this differentiation serves.

It's a problem for people that like the text editor enough in other aspects to still use it and it's a problem in that many people will not use it, due to the resource usage not weighing up with potential other advantages for them.

And I really would not think all too hard about the opinion that an open online community seems to have about a product of a bigger company.

It's gotta be beyond trivial for Microsoft's PR department to steer the mood in threads about their products by deploying vote bots and a few workers that write enthusiastic comments.
This was a fascinating historical article. We should all appreciate TeX more. Yes it's 80s technology, but it will be really hard to replace...

Interesting to note the TiKZ example uses spheres and not boxes — boxes look less good because TiKZ doesn't do perspective projections for the viewpoint, only isometric. This makes boxes look "weird" if you're used to 3D graphics from games and other 3D renderers.
I can't think of an example at this scale where that happened without the incentive of disruptive competition.
Check out ATX-Coop. http://www.atxcooptaxi.net/

Owned by the drivers. Has about 1/2 the traditional taxi drivers in Austin after launching which Uber/Lyft left.

They were trying to get an app built but without the deep pockets of the VCs they appear to have abandoned it. You call them and they dispatch. I miss the payment side more than the ordering side but I only use them to go to the airport of it isn't really the core case where Uber/Lyft excels.

There is a sense of pride and ownership among the drivers. Feels better than both Uber/Lyft and other taxi companies. Doesn't have that desperate feel about it.

Co-Ops do work. They have a different set of owners and thus a different set of incentives.
Biohacker changes his own genes with DIY CRISPR
"The trained models can be loaded onto edge devices such as IoT devices/sensors, and used to make fast and accurate predictions completely offline."

Then, from:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/resource-ef...

"Our objective is to develop a library of efficient machine learning algorithms that can run on severely resource-constrained edge and endpoint IoT devices ranging from the Arduino to the Raspberry Pi."
> Who would bear the risk? Who would bear the losses? Also, what would happen to bad drivers on the system, would they get fired like Uber fires them?

You're talking as if this were some bizarre new thought-experiment that no-one's properly thought through. Co-operative supermarkets exist. Co-operative department stores exist. Bad employees at Waitrose can get fired like at any other supermarket (though obviously they're generally better treated than at privately-owned ones).

You seem to be imagining a cooperative as a collection of free agents who have complete autonomy and can never be fired. That model probably exists, but that's not what people typically mean when they talk about cooperatives, especially in the context of the UK, as the politician in the OP is.

What they mean is a structure like the John Lewis Partnership (which has been around since 1929), wholly owned by a trust whose employees are its beneficiaries. Which means any profits are distributed among its employees, who also get a say in the running of the business. But it's still a limited company, so it's still run by its executive team (albeit one which is ultimately accountable to the employees), and risk, losses etc. all work as normal for a limited company.
Taxi companies could never “invent something like Uber.”

Of course they could. All the regulations you mentioned are only there because the Taxi companies lobbied hard for them. Had they lobbied half as hard to have the regulations loosened they could have gotten any regulations they wanted. The taxi companies bet big on using regulation to entrench their position and avoid competition rather than on improving their product. History will tell if it was a good bet or not, but so far it isn't looking too good.
Edge devices are what MS is calling IOT devices on cloud networks, I think:

https://blogs.microsoft.com/iot/2017/05/10/microsoft-azure-i...