skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Converting in game assets back to real world currency is a bad idea in my opinion because you can't really do it in Eve. You can buy game time which is like that but not the same thing.

You can easily make >1b a week in Eve without too much effort so losing 22B while not fun isn't equal to losing $1000 for most people that have that much in game currency.

I've lost ships worth over $300 by this thinking without blinking because its just in-game currency and apparently have over $3000 worth of in game assets but its not real and I can't just go cash it out at that rate. Best case is I never pay for the game again.
Let me preface by saying that I don't want to overstate what I think is really a rather modest difference of interpretation that you and I have.

I have read the paper, and much of their basic biology seems sound. They show convincingly that pancreatic ductal cancer cell proliferation does not differ between glucose and fructose at a variety of concentrations (figure 1).

They then compare pancreatic tumor to hepatic tumor to normal-ish tissues and show a series of metabolic differences when grown in glucose-containing vs fructose-containing media (figure 2). These changes include transketolase activity, ribose synthesis, and release of C13-labeled lactate into the media. Here, I have a bit of an issue. Nobody is claiming that our high-fructose diet causes us to have a glucose-free plasma, so it's totally non-physiologic to compare just glucose vs just fructose (which some of the panels appear to be doing in this figure, while others are comparing glucose vs fructose+glucose, which is a stronger comparison IMHO).

There are other figures; they are fine. I like their data. Where they lose me is with the claims that they make from their data. They show in figure 1 that there is no proliferative difference in Panc-1 cells between a glucose vs a fructose "diet" at all concentrations, but then based on data in figure 4 they claim that the TK-inhibitor oxythiamine reduces "fructose-induced Panc-1 cell proliferation." Well, which is it: does fructose induce Panc-1 cell proliferation, or does it not? Your answer will depend upon whether you like figure 1 better or figure 4. While these claims appear to be contradictory to me, it's also possible that I didn't read the paper carefully enough so please correct me if I missed something.

At any rate, just because this paper cited other work showing human studies (which it did), that certainly does not mean that this paper itself has policy implications. The human studies that it cited might have policy implications.

Especially given figure 1, which shows no difference in proliferation between cancer cells given fructose and those given glucose, I would have a hard time justifying policy claims with this paper.
Snapr, a new service for sharing geo-tagged photos
People who can't program are usually very poor at judging programmer quality and ability.
Disqus. Didn't know of the others. Disqus do a great job with the UI, threaded comments, liking, etc.
Ask HN: Your lawyer investing in your series A round?
While educating myself I've seen that startup lawyers sometimes invest in angel or series A rounds. I was wondering what people thought of this. To me it seems a little disadvantageous as it means your lawyer's interests are now aligned with the other investors, instead of remaining independent. As a founder, would you be second guessing advice given to you by your lawyer after the event, or would you trust that the advice they give continues to be the best for the company, even if 'best for the company' sometimes needs to be divergent from the best interests of the investors?
Destroyed because the virtual cargo ship they were being transported in was attacked by other players.

The ship exploded and all cargo (worth a supposed $1000 USD) was lost.
Buying is as much a emotional decision as it is a financial one.

You have to take into account not only the how much you can afford and how much you want/would like your money to grow but what kind of lifestyle you desire. If the lifestyle that owning one's home affords is more important than the increased returns then perhaps you should buy. On the other hand if you are happy to rent for a decade or two you will likely end up richer.

I am currently of two minds, I love the idea of being able to do what I like to my own home. But at the same time real estate isn't necessarily the best investment, though where I am (Melbourne, Australia) we've had massive growth in housing prices (somewhere in the order of 20%+pa off the top of my head) though it is slowing down now.

One of my favourite bloggers Ramit Sethi has some strong opinions on the issue http://www.iwillteachyoutoberich.com/buying-a-house/
In order to automate human creativity one must understand its nature at least.
I was on EVE last night when someone in the corp channel shared the link to the kill page. I'm rather pleasantly surprised to see something like this make it to HN. Are there other EVE players here?
Bill Gates: Forget university, the web is the future for education
Ah, that is not how those "barriers" work. Roughly, the relativization barrier goes like this: Say you have a proof that P!=NP. Does it also prove that P^A != NP^A for any oracle A? If it does, then the proof is flawed, because there <i>does</i> exist an oracle A such that P^A = NP^A!

Such proofs are said to relativize -- i.e., they are still valid relative to any oracle.
Also see "the Plan", recently proposed by Charles Murray. The welfare state is entirely done away with; in its place every adult gets $10k/year for life.

http://www.radicalmiddle.com/x_murray.htm
> All humans have on average the same intelligence. Why do you assume that there will be a few who will be able to keep up with the pace of retraining oneself.

I think you do not quite understand the concept of an 'average'. When one is hiring for a job, does one hire 'humanity' with its average, or an individual human who can be arbitrarily above or below the average?
The reason the bug took so long to surface is that it is only triggered by an edge case. Most users will not experience issues. After two reports of missing data, the whole team focussed on getting to the bottom of it. This is because we take data integrity seriously.
Or the sand in the desert!
The Status of the P versus NP Problem
That's what happened last time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_computer
Heh. I've often wondered how my son (now 2 years old) is going to view media and electronics as he grows up. "What do you mean you can't watch LoTR on your phone?" or "You have do put in a different disc for every movie?"

Man. I need to get out of this rocking chair and chase those kids off my lawn.
NY Times put out this exact same calculator in 2007. Is this one any different? Have they updated some data or how the calculations are done?
Starting to grow tired of all this "how is this relevant" stuff lately. If you don't like it, flag or ignore it and get on with your lives.
How to build your own CDN using BIND, GeoIP, Nginx, Varnish
I've noticed that you can get tea that's not horrible a lot of places now. I wonder if that's cause or effect (or both).
I think that article may have seriously changed my mind.
so... is eve fun?
I don't really get it? Is there any worth in seeing what others are searching unless it's something embarassing?

I think it looks like a cool idea, but I'm not really sure how to start using it :) The motivation to create a new account is pretty low so perhaps a nice example of how the service helped someone else with their search might sway me?
Free Wi-Fi Service Coming To City Livery Cabs
If people are poor then they won't be able to buy your stuff. On the other hand people with more money means that they'll have a stronger buying power. It benefits the rich that the average person is also well off.

People will kill to own a singularity device. However, I don't think this will be necessary since by the time we are technologically ready to invent such a machine it will be invented or duplicated in every single country on earth and by anybody that wants one. We will reach a point in our future where the knowledge to build an Artificial Intelligence machine will be obvious by everybody the same way it is obvious now that the earth is round. This will make it impossible for any single entity to control this technology. The knowledge will be out there in the net for anybody to read. This assuming that we are not stupid enough to destroy ourselves before we reach this point.
Good point I hadn't considered the real purpose of the service. But one thing I can't understand is why google - the kings of simple - want to include such messy data? When I see "do more" I smell failure.
https://adwords.google.com/select/KeywordToolExternal suggests 1,500,000 global searches, 368,000 local searches per month for "online trading".
I'm sure someone sufficiently motivated could write a program to see what percentage of items on the front page have "This isn't HN" in the comments, because it it seems like it's happening more and more.
What I actually meant was what we create rather than why.
For some reason, I'm reminded of this Penny Arcade strip: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/06/25/
I enjoy it as do a lot of other people. On the other hand lots of people hate it or have misconceptions about what it will be like only to be disappointed when they start playing.
Another way to say all this is that if you ignore price bubbles, taxes, personal preferences, and leverage then renting and buying are roughly financially equivalent.

And that shouldn't be surprising. In a world where buying really is clearly superior to renting, there would be lots of arbitrage opportunities to buy houses and rent them profitably. That would increase both the demand for houses and the supply of rentals, which would make buying more expensive and renting cheaper until they reach a point of equivalence.
One common technique for lowering the cost of a mortgage is to make one additional payment per year and/or each month. This lowers the principal and makes subsequent interest payments lower.

Although, not everyone can afford that it would be nice if this calculator would allow you to factor that in. I suppose you can fake it by altering the interest rate an appropriate amount but I'm not sure it follows the same curve.
The quest for Extreme JavaScript Minification
It seems that Mac games do not have the same performance as PC games, even on the same hardware. Maybe not surprising with Valve, who is new to the mac platform, but it is surprising with Blizzard who's been Mac from way back. I can only assume that it's either an OSX issue or bad drivers.

Either way, hopefully this is the start of a virtuous circle where more games = better drivers = more gamers = more games.
This is a superb calculator, however it assumes a faster growth rate relative to inflation than is likely. Try it with a -1% appreciation rate (which is the historical average for residential real estate since ww2)
I'm pretty sure that the current behaviour (in 4.0b1) asks "Do you want to update?" only if "When updates to Firefox are found:" is set to "Ask me what to do" (corresponding to app.update.auto being false, probably); and that, if it's set instead to "Automatically download and install the update", then the update is still not silent—the user receives a notification after it's completed—but it doesn't prompt beforehand.
There are several possible values of XXX. The most likely is the Maldives, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maldives. Note that the whole country is seeking a place to relocate in the event of sea level rising due to global warming. If global warming continues according to current projections, the entire country will be under water at some point in the next century.
This is what makes games fun. Looting and losing loot is an essential and fundamental gameplay element which has been disappearing ever since Everquest(imagine WOW with prepatch UO rules) due to catering to crying and whining. I remember when I was playing Ultima 7 and 8 while talking on the phone with friends dreaming of the day would be able to walk down the same path together in real time. That dream was realized. While it was challenging to battle PK's on the pathway in UO(get paralyzed and fire balled), it only made me more determined to become stronger! There is so much potential for someone to create the killer mmorpg which doesn't nerf real economies and vilans.
This real-life and direct dollar value loss is nothing compared to losing your house key and having your whole tower looted of a years worth of stuff because you were careless not to protect the transport.
Agreeable ways to disable your children
I don't think this is necessarily true. The gap between tractable and intractable is a human convention (albeit a reasonable one). It's quite possible that polynomial-time algorithms exist that technically defeat cryptography, but they can still be practically intractable if their constant factors are astronomical.

Of course, that's still a blow to cryptography, since polynomial increases in computing power will make cryptography-breaking algorithms run meaningfully faster. Still, I don't think it would immediately devastate cryptography.
Though the good old days of these kinds of shenanigans in the US are presumably over, their memory lives on in Truth or Consequences, New Mexico (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_or_Consequences,_New_Mexi...).
Google doesn't mind messy data at all. Their goal is to get more data, even if it's not perfect. If they can get massive amounts of data, their statistical accuracy will improve.
I really shouldn't be too put off by the $450 (and the commute from Ballard to Capitol Hill). If I can be just a little more productive, it will be worth it, and the chance to work with interesting characters like Kevin Moore sounds great.

Maybe I'll see you there.
There are other similar solution for handling "bundles" (or plugins distributed as git repositories):

tpugin (on demand path manipulation): http://github.com/tomtom/vimtlib/blob/master/macros/tplugin....

scriptmanager: http://github.com/MarcWeber/vim-addon-manager
A problem harder than NP would not even be verifiable in polynomial time, which I believe would limit their practicality.
Since more and more plugins are available as git repositories, vimball becomes less important though.
- Identi.ca
It's interesting to see just how sensitive the scale is to initial assumptions. But more important to me is the inefficiency created by the drag on movement - when you're renting, it's much easier to move, even when you've got furnishing and the whole lot etc. When you've bought, and you want to move, you may be at the mercy of the current state of the property market as to whether you make a loss or a gain, or even need to stay for a few years more.

I grew up in rented homes. Perhaps the most poignant thing is that the house I remember best (age 9 to 18 or so) has been renovated, sold etc. It's not somewhere I can ever go back to. But that may have been the case with a bought home anyhow.
It wouldn't be the first time players obliterated game time. Players also sabotaged large inter-alliance battles by doing frequent mercantile/trading operations until the star system's server would fall over. Admins would come in and reset the system, with the result being the work of 100's of players being undone. (6 hours straight causing millions of points of damage.) Waste the time of players this way, you've easily obliterated their day's subscription. It doesn't take this happening too many times for this to add up to $1000.
RedshiftGUI
Livefyre.com - I work there as an intern this summer and I really like the system. You have to sign up for the beta as we're still rolling out, but should be quick.
In the special case of playing time, I think re-conversion is valid, because buying more playing time basically enables you a certain number of cpu-time in their servers, which then overall translates into hardware, electricity, ...

Jugding from this direction, $1000 was saved for someone, because the server costs which would have appeared if the game time was used disappeared.

But besides this, I agree.
http://whatthefuckshouldimakefordinner.com/
That is assuming we can't figure out how to make computers create on their own (which right now, does sound almost impossible). If at some point we figure it out, all humans become obsolete.
Bermuda Triangle plane mystery 'solved'
In most third world countries, unemployed don't have that one, or any other cheap distractions for that matter.
I took that as an author's proofing note mistake. I often use XXX (highlighted in yellow so I can find them again) when I'm pursuing a chain of thought, am confident a specific example exists, but can't think of one right now.

Most recent example was a paper I was writing on purchasing brand over product - I wrote about "buying a 'Rolex' over a XXX", where XXX later became "an Oyster Perpetual Milgauss" - my guess is the author meant to replace XXX with some global-warming concerned island nation, but forgot.
Not quite the same thing; what happened in this instance was game time was lost that hadn’t been redeemed yet, but paid for. (By somebody, not necessary the victim mentioned.)

It can be argued that what happened in your instance wasn’t a “real” loss, since players got to actually play for a few hours, and could have maintained or created new social ties during that time period, even if they lost virtual “loot.” It would still sting, but not quite as bad as what happened here.
I personally believe we should be eating raw food. (plant based foods etc) and not meat, although I still do :|

Some great points are:

+ Look at our teeth, they are made for eating plants/veggies and not meat, unlike lions etc.

+ Cooked foods kill the nutrients, unlike eating raw organic food.

+ Our digestive tract is long, apparently to process plant based foods, compared to a meat eating anmial like a lion, they have a short digestive tract, so they can process raw meat quickly.

+ Animal meat is the only food that gives us colesterol.

Get this movie and watch it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZmV8b1wr10
If it was verifiable in NP time, and P = NP, then wouldn't it also be verifiable in polynomial time?
Yes sorry, RIA is JavaScript to me. I mainly work on web-apps, and they are JavaScript intensive. The security constraints but in say that accessing services.mydomain.com is like accessing yourdomain.com so JavaScript balks at it because it views it a a cross site call. So fir simplicity sake you end up just doing mydomain/services/customer1. It is semantics but I would love to put all of my services on a sub-domain and have browser based JavaScript be able to access it. It would make moving that logical sub domain off to an app server easier as it is a DNS entry as opposed to routing rules for the /services sub folder on the domain. For SaaS it would be a god send because for each client you could set up a virtual host that pointed services.clientdomain.com to the hosted app server and provide managed services for a client with just a simple DNS entry. As it sits now, the client has to set up configurations to forward /services to the managed services. For me and what I do, allowing JavaScript XHR calls within the second level domain would simplify some things. The problem is it assumes trust across a domain and that does not hold true for larger entities, for example say you have bigco.com and it has hr.bigco.com. You really don't want all of the enterprise to be able to access sensitive HR services so that is why you get the current model. I just wish it was configurable per domain.
Nice.

The instructions assume some familiarity with BIND and Varnish, what I'd love to see would be a Linode article explaining how to use their datacenters to do this.

Specifically I'd love to put noes in 2 US datacenters and the London one to help reduce my page load speed for the US visitors, whilst leaving the dynamic nodes all in London where most of my users are.
A special note for non-EVE-ers, the stuff in the cargo hold has a chance to either survive or be destroyed.

The players that destroyed the ship (and associated cargo) weren't trying to destroy the cargo, just got unlucky.
I don't believe this is really a factor. Paying down the principal faster saves you the 5% (or whatever your mortgage rate is) interest on the amount of your pre-payment. It's tantamount to investing that money at a risk-free 5%. That might be the smartest thing to do with your savings but it doesn't change the calculus fundamentally.

Buying a house with a suitcase full of cash or getting a zero-amortization (infinity-year, ie, interest-only) mortgage or anything in between is all roughly financially equivalent if you have alternative investments available.

Actually the longer the mortgage term the bigger total tax deduction you get, so in that sense the more you pre-pay the costlier it is.
I fully agree, in competition with a mechanical drive, but it's an important consideration when looking at which SSD to buy.
How so? If P!=NP, that is obeyed by the brain as much as by computers and whatever trick our brains does to be creative despite of this, will be available to computers as well, regardless of P?=NP. What am I missing?

Let's talk math: In some very formal, reductionist sense, what we're doing when we do math is to start with a set of axioms, operate on them using a fairly small set of logical rules, and arrive at theorems that seem interesting.

If we do this very carefully -- much more carefully than a human would ever normally do, showing 100% of our work -- it's trivial to check such a proof automatically. You just look at each step, and verify that that step follows from the axioms + logical rules you're using + previous steps. This checking is clearly (handwave) polynomial: at worst, at each step N, you have to examine every axiom, every logical rule, and each prior step to make sure that step N+1 is legal.

So proof checking is in P.

Let's say I have a set of axioms, and a logic, and I want to know whether a theorem T is true given that system. One strategy I could use is to decide to only consider proofs of length less than N, and generate every legal theorem that I can reach in fewer than N logical steps. When I'm done, I check my list of proven theorems and see if any of them match T. Since I can always my answer in polynomial time, I know this is in NP.

The try-everything-possible algorithm has the downside of being a bit exponential (since we expect N to be very (very!) large for any interesting theorem) and so also a bit useless.

But what if a P=NP proof can provide guidance on how we should combine our axioms in order to reach theorem T? We suddenly have not a proof-checker, but a proof-generator! Anything that we can state in a formal language, we can simply ask the prover to prove -- it will either give a proof, or say that a proof of size < N doesn't exist. (That wouldn't be a disproof, and it's a Goedel/halting problem kind of argument that we may never really know how large N needs to be.)

Finding new proofs is a large part of what's considered creative in mathematics. It's hard to over-state how math might change with a tool like that available. The field has seen any number of revolutions before -- e.g., the effort of hundreds who worked on the algebraic roots of polynomials pretty much only survives in homework exercises nowadays -- but automating proofs would be Big.

(Finding interesting conjectures is valuable, too, but I doubt Erdos would be nearly as famous if he'd only posed his questions without his resume of theorems behind them.)
Interest paid to the bank is also forever gone.