skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
"You desire to LIVE "according to Nature"? Oh, you noble Stoics, what fraud of words! Imagine to yourselves a being like Nature, boundlessly extravagant, boundlessly indifferent, without purpose or consideration, without pity or justice, at once fruitful and barren and uncertain: imagine to yourselves INDIFFERENCE as a power--how COULD you live in accordance with such indifference? To live--is not that just endeavoring to be otherwise than this Nature? Is not living valuing, preferring, being unjust, being limited, endeavouring to be different? And granted that your imperative, "living according to Nature," means actually the same as "living according to life"--how could you do DIFFERENTLY? Why should you make a principle out of what you yourselves are, and must be? In reality, however, it is quite otherwise with you: while you pretend to read with rapture the canon of your law in Nature, you want something quite the contrary, you extraordinary stage-players and self-deluders! In your pride you wish to dictate your morals and ideals to Nature, to Nature herself, and to incorporate them therein; you insist that it shall be Nature "according to the Stoa," and would like everything to be made after your own image, as a vast, eternal glorification and generalism of Stoicism! With all your love for truth, you have forced yourselves so long, so persistently, and with such hypnotic rigidity to see Nature FALSELY, that is to say, Stoically, that you are no longer able to see it otherwise-- and to crown all, some unfathomable superciliousness gives you the Bedlamite hope that BECAUSE you are able to tyrannize over yourselves--Stoicism is self-tyranny--Nature will also allow herself to be tyrannized over: is not the Stoic a PART of Nature? . . . But this is an old and everlasting story: what happened in old times with the Stoics still happens today, as soon as ever a philosophy begins to believe in itself. It always creates the world in its own image; it cannot do otherwise; philosophy is this tyrannical impulse itself, the most spiritual Will to Power, the will to "creation of the world," the will to the causa prima."
Nietzsche
Because it's too early, bitcoin is still small. Wait until some terrorists use it for funding.
Their comment referred to a hard problem with a solution written on the "board".

Smells like cargo-culting of BigCo whiteboard interviews to me.
And that will help because Open Source security is so great?

Or because people care to inspect the codebases they otherwise use?
Scaleway.com also offers baremetal servers at a really attractive price. The CLI is just awesome, it's great to see other cloud providers joining the game.
Deep Learning Dissected: Use the Force to Simplify Data Training – The New Stack
Reminds me of cell flagella.
J has an almost explicit goal of being concise; it is specifically a feature they're reaching for, and thus makes sense to promote in such a fashion.

But its absurd to judge the language on its syntax, if the language is uninterested in the syntax, until its almost unnacceptably noisy or confounding. Looking into a language should ideally be first based on structural and semantic differences, and then syntactic.

And a sufficiently semantically different language will offer little with its code snippets, as it wont make sense without understanding the paradigm. Even J; there's not much to take away other than that its dense from just the snippet. If anything, it mostly serves to scare people away as it approaches line noise, particularly when you don't yet know why it can be successful in such a fashion
Exactly. I intentionally posted this separately, because it's particularly interesting where and how the vulnerability was originally posted. And it certainly seems to have attracted some discussion.
Of course there is, but I don't consider unsolicited advertising inherently immoral, while I would consider fraudulently gaining a business advantage dishonest and immoral.
Given that you don't seem to see this sort of rhetorical pattern throughout, you just find fault with one specific sentence and the use of "obviously" and "copyright infringement" it's only fair and reasonable to assume it's nothing more than an editing oversight.

You're really reading way too much into this. You would need to show that Doctorow has a pattern of doing this to even have a reasonable suspicion. He's a great writer, but he's human.

Consider this: he didn't want to say "playing an Indian DVD in Tulsa is obviously not copying", he wanted to say, "playing an Indian DVD in Tulsa is obviously not an infringement on the concept of copyright as it is generally defined both colloquially and legally." He means that in the same way that telling people how to bypass DRM is NOT itself copyright infringement, even though it's a violation of a copyright-based law.

I mean, there's not an easy shorter way to say, "it's ludicrous to think that DVD playing in a different continent is possibly copyright infringement, regardless of the complex legal arguments that get such an argument all the way to the point of a portion of the SCOTUS getting this wrong."

Do we even have a way to talk about the concept of copyright infringement separate from the overly materialistic discussion of "copying" or the risk of being interpreted as making a legal argument internal to attorney-style legal chatter??

I think the implied part of the sentence you're tearing apart is: "it's obviously not copyright infringement (in terms of what that actually means as both a general and legal concept and yet our screwed up legal system has allowed people to make a legal argument to that effect!)"

This is similar to my reductio ad absurdem still. The law can say that a cartoon is a child, but the law would be obviously wrong. But the law was getting at what is "child pornography" and that doesn't mean the cartoon is a child, it means it is a cartoon of a child and thus debatably child porn. There's no legal idea in that case that the cartoon is a minor-age citizen/resident etc. In "child porn" child is more of an adjective than a noun.
Can anyone explain how this works? They're scanning logs of what? Suspicious interaction of a service, or suspicious command line fu? You know, for science.
I want to see this working. I want to try it out myself. Sadly, I'm not part of a multi-million customer company, so I don't know if I am the demographic they are looking for.
Show HN: Serverless load-testing with OpenFaaS and Locust
Ive started with React recently and strangely the lack of fragments were one of the things that caught my attention in the first days.

Another thing I'm looking for in React as I get started is better styling support. I'm resourcing to React JSS for that, but I feel it should be part of the language. The web trinity if you may is HTML-CSS-JS and React basically left CSS out half-baked into almost unusable style attributes, so I still have to resource to className and CSS. Or am I just being noob-anal?
Quantity over quality? There is "don't reinvent the wheel"
stereotype in software industry, but it does not apply to other areas by the looks of it.
They do provide a hello-world example, though it's a bit hidden (http://cell-lang.net/procedures.html):

> Main(String* args) {
Print("Hello world!\n");
}
Andy Rubin takes leave from Essential after probe
Congress government funding fight seen spilling into 2018
GDPR – A Practical Guide for Developers
Pentest tool LITE – Add some tips for another checks
When you are on a safe playground you don't need to watch your child all the time. I read books at that time.
My upgraded high sierra doesn't have this problem. The theory could be backwards. Anyways, this is stunning.
Big Data and Blockchain
How is it different from using pssh and pass "du -sh /foo/bar" farmed out to all nodes?
Ouch, that is much worse than my intuition!
Faircode, an alternative to Open Source that aims to get developers paid
Of language testing in particular, it is culturally biased as a testing regime. I've encountered 'culture-fair' IQ tests but they are substantially limited.
Right, this seems to be an announcement of a possible forthcoming announcement. A more substantive story would be a better fit.
Nginx vs Apache which is better for cPanel Hosting?
I'd like to see algorithm questions replaced by architecture questions, as IMHO they are more important and can also invoke algorithm knowledge.
Totally useless.
And if you're thinking that manually disabling root might also fix this, it won't. You have to leave root enabled.
Foot-in-the-Door Technique: A simple way to boost email engagement
This bug isn't caused by rapid succession or whatever, it's more of a generic end to end test. In this case someone would have had to write an exact scenario that opens a settings page, unlocks it, types in 'root', no password, presses login and it should not work.
Book already referenced by GP, click your links. These are old classic conference proceedings edited by Zurek https://archive.org/details/ComplexityEntropyAndThePhysicsOf... but it’s a mixed bag unless you really fancy EG quantum field theorist’s opinions on workings of visual cortex.
The six questions Facebook refused to answer about its suicide-detection AI
From the high-level overview, I can imagine from my experience that there is a need for something similar.

But, at first glance, the web site doesn't address the following questions:

1) What problem does it solve that a conventional approach doesn't? More specifically, what's the ideal use case? Embedded apps / IoT? Protocol implementations? Something else?

1bis) You claim that the only significant project written in Cell is Cell itself, which is quite an achievement ("Bootstrapping"), but does it mean that the ideal use case for Cell is writing compilers?

2) Who are you? What's your long term plans for this project?

3) Are there any alternatives? (Ragel, SMC, SCXML based tools...?) How do you compare to them?
Yes, the fun in compilers: Even if every phase and every optimization actually produces optimal results, the combination is probably not optimal.

One deep problem is that there is no good optimization goal. Today's CPUs are too complex and unpredictable performance-wise.

Another problem is: Register pressure is one of the most important things to minimize, but how can the phases before register allocation do that? They use a surrogate, like virtual registers, and thus become heuristics even if they solve their theoretical problem optimally.
I use the same config in Windows, macOS and Linux so I just need to learn once the shortcuts and it works the same everywhere.

I also use it along tmuxinator, which is very convenient to setup sessions. I just need to type "tmuxinator my-project" and it opens the tabs and layouts in the right directories for this project, with "tail -f" running in some panes, mysql client in others, an SSH connection in yet another. Tmuxinator makes configuring all this very straightforward.

Scrollback was a bit annoying at first but I got used to it and it's no longer an issue. Copy and paste can indeed still be an issue especially when sshing to a server.
No Qt or GTK application sends draw commands to the X server anymore (except for the final "draw window-sized pixmap"). That only applies to xterm or maybe Tcl/Tk stuff.
Good engineering skills and good interviewing skills are not necessarily identical.
Tokyo condos shutting doors on home-sharing lodging businesses
Is there any RISC-V SBC in the same class as, say, a Raspberry Pi? I've seen some SoCs more targeted at Cortex-M0 and low-end Quark spaces.
the bridge-mobile pilot episode: Carpool Karaoke Meets Humans of NY
Given that the article makes a case that Netflix and cable companies started by exploiting grey areas in legal contracts, it's clear that they're talking about competition that broadly. The fact is, weird grey areas or loopholes in contracts (basically everything that undermines "protection" against competition) is an opening for competition.

The logical conclusion is that much of contract law is in the way of competition. But the point is that whether we think competition is good or bad or contract law should exist or not or be strict or whatever, the companies in this case are not following the Golden Rule.

Contracts were intended to block things like Cable TV or Netflix, but they came into existence by finding loopholes in those contracts. The argument is that their exploitation of the loopholes added real value, invented new services etc.

The arguments about competition here are anti-protectionist. They basically say that since we recognize that Netflix added value, we not only should be glad that they found the contract loopholes, we should probably eliminate all such protectionist contracts.

The argument about regulation in this case is that we don't necessarily need regulations to protect digital rights because it's trivial enough to technically enable them as long as we don't prohibit the rights legally. Take away the legal enforcement of DRM, and DRM becomes irrelevant for technical reasons. Thus, no digital bill of rights is needed.

It's not my argument (I'm not sure), but it's logically consistent.

In short: legal protection of DRM enables companies to have profit and power and avoid the threat from new types of companies, services, and innovation that would otherwise happen and would be in the public interest. The public isn't only interested in Netflix alternatives but in all the world of innovative developments that would be possible if we removed the protections of Netflix's business model (even if it doesn't protect Netflix as a player in that model).

Really short: it's about competition between types of businesses or between business models, not competition within a business model.

It's about cable competing with airwaves; about radio competing with live concerts; about books competing with priests, etc. not about competition between different books etc.
Cardano: Cryptographic currency implementing Ouroboros PoS protocol
Homepage:

https://www.cardanohub.org
Please stop posting repetitive comments to Hacker News. At this point you're spamming and that's totally not ok.
Head-to-head cost comparison of Amazon's AWS, IBM's Softlayer, Hetzner and Google's ComputeEngine on a machine learning benchmark:

https://rare-technologies.com/machine-learning-hardware-benc...
Yeah, I do not think they are very useful. I know a lot of people, myself included, who perform worse than their true ability during interviews. It can be an anxiety thing, but also some people just prefer to take their time and deliver solutions in writing vs. work things out in real time on a whiteboard.

I think a good alternative is to give the candidate a nontrivial project that should take around 8 hours, and pay them a day's wage to do it.
ACADEMIC PAPERS:

https://www.cardanohub.org/en/academic-papers/
Depends heavily on the GPU and the scene being rendered. On Android I've seen low-end GPUs bottlenecked by the shader ALU of all things, even though the 2D renderer only produces trivial shaders. Turns out it's easier to whack off shader compute cores than it is to muck with the memory bus in some cases.

Most common situation is the GPU isn't taxed at all, though, and doesn't even leave idle clocks. We end up just being limited by GL draw call overhead.
Good camera control in games is quite hard. If the camera is third-person, finding a valid place for it is tough in tightly bounded spaces. Letting the camera move through a wall is considered unacceptable today. (Second Life still does this, frequently. They're stuck in the 1990s there.) If the camera is too close to the character in third person, the player can't see what they're doing.
There's been releases ever since that improve battery life, or, keep it the same while doing more; background apps get throttled, graphics rendering has been optimized using Metal, and in future Mac devices, I'm sure they'll put their mobile processors in it to handle background tasks - it might even be strong enough to power the next generation of Macbook Air.
Oh oops, you’re totally correct that geometric growth is a synonym for exponential growth. I don’t know what I was thinking, but I may have been confused by the fact that volume grows polynomially faster than surface area for any fixed n dimensions (I now fear I may also be incorrect about this claim, although I’m confident it’s true for n=3).

Still, geometric growth is exponential in n when n is the number of dimensions, which isn’t really the n we were talking about in this context.
Accepting that my needs come second and just generally trying to make things smooth for my son has made our relationship so much better.

I used to think that I would be able to get an hour or two of work done when he was asleep,but the result was never good. I was stressed out after my third month of paternity leave. For the remaining months (we get 195 days to use as we please at 80% pay in Sweden) I just called down and learned to be happy with my day if we managed to

1. Walk the dog for at least one 1-2hr walk

2. Have some kind of social inreraction with grown-ups.

I now just sleep/relax whenever he's sleeping. Good days he sleeps a good 3hr mid day, and those days I try to get things done, but depending on how the night was sometimes I just do 3hr of relaxing and doing things that I know are good for me.
And, as far as I know, Microsoft has developed Edge from scratch after all. The years of incremental updates to IE are now maintained for legacy support.
Oh my! Now I'm curious. How does whatever I said create more trump voters?
IMO that you think humans are entitled to get “what they want” shows you’ve been confused by certain voices in your culture

If no frameworks are viable, why should “getting what you want” be a concern of mine?

If there’s no morality, why not just shove you into traffic and be done with your desire to get what you want? I have no need for the selfish nonsense that are your needs!

Capitalism is fake! Socialism is a ruse! None of these things we can see and read and consider exist!

Go smelt your own metal for a toaster then. Not up to anyone else. I am not finding one reason why I should concern myself with “leohutson”

On the one hand you accept the absence of physical evidence of higher powers; empiricism! but ignore a whole lot of biology

We appear to have an innate morality against killing each other. That’s why we believe human morality is a thing to be considered

Morality is what lets the species scale without destroying itself.

We each have our own minds and generally speaking find value in acknowledging this

The universe begets physics, chemistry, biology, humans, and their creations.
Postal rates aren't (in most cases) determined by bilateral treaties between governments. There's a single organisation that handles things for roughly the whole of the UN: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Postal_Union
and some people are yelling at the guy for not "responsibly" disclosing it!
Exchanges for distributed bidding exist for financial securities. It's a bit of an IT hassle, but not an unsolved problem.
So you're saying these average people that say "sure, digital money, why wouldn't that be the future" also "understand why a decentralized asset is the ultimate safe haven"? Huh?

How are you interpreting the term "understand"?

Does the average person even understand what a "decentralized asset" is?
You mean 'as per an internal report compiled by USPS, quoted in the Washington post'.
I can even apply gravity laws here: what goes up must come down. Except when in orbit...
I find it useful to remind myself that I am interviewing them while they are interviewing me.
We had similar experiences with some doctors.

We've had specialists telling us they flatly did not believe in Endometriosis. Fun times.
They're not just older. JavaScript has a very special position, and both C# and Java had a tremendous marketing push.
Has anyone here done any line of business/crud type of app with XUL that they feel has been successful? I'd be interested in hearing any short description of the ups/downs of your efforts.
When you do this you'll get the creationTime and passwordLastSetTime as seconds since the 'epoch' – January 1, 1970, 00:00:00 (UTC). These are numbers like 1474441704.265237 which aren't very easy for a human to read :-)

To convert this into a human-readable date and time, open a terminal and do this:

python

>>> import time

>>> time.strftime("%a, %d %b %Y %H:%M:%S", time.localtime(1474441704.265237))

You'll get something like 'Wed, 21 Sep 2016 07:08:24'

(I'm sure you can do this in other languages than python...)
I've got a phone interview with a well known company soon, and the stress of revising for it is really getting me down.
> The US is a very particular case ...

I'm not sure if it's particularly special, just particularly large. It's the largest economy in the world, and even in times of relatively high debt-to-GDP, it's still far better off than many of the Euro-zone countries that were brought to the brink. China, for example, has a far higher debt-to-GDP than the US.

That said, one particular reason why the US may more resilient to inflation is the fact that the dollar is the worldwide reserve currency of choice. This helps with inflation, but can hurt by artificially increasing the value of the dollar hurting exports. So overall, it might not be a great policy, but in a debt crunch, it gives the government more leeway to print money without risking inflation.
> embedding subtitles

shame on you, good thing you aren't doing it either way ;)

> I suspect that format-shifting wouldn't be a good legal defense

you seem to imply by analogy to homerecording, torrenting stuff you once payed for (or didn't directly as with yt) might be ok, but sure enough, taperecordings were campaigned against, too.

Btw: I worry about codec and network exploits, so easy is not the exact term I would choose wrt torrents and p2p-"sharing".
Fire up Excel and enter these:
A2 enter the IQ score you are interested in
B2 =NORM.DIST(A2, 100,15,1)
C2 =1/(1-B2)
C2 will show the group size you are the top "1" of
195 IQ is the top IQ for a group of 8 billion people
197 (Walter O'Brien's supposed IQ on "Scorpion") = top IQ for 19 billion people
230 IQ is impossible.
>IQ is not a good measure of “smartest”. It is racially biased, gender biased, and geographically biased.

I'll disagree on that, IQ isn't biased, it's a uniform test.

Just because the outcome has a bias and you don't like it doesn't mean it's bad. Geographical bias can be simply explained by different countries having different education and standard of living. Especially the amount of food you get during your childhood can affect brain development and thusly affect the IQ.

Next point, the racial bias can be similar explained through a hidden variable; poverty. Especially in the US, people with low income have worse education and nutrient supply during childhood and have a certain demographic makeup which is a completely different problem in of itself.

Lastly, the gender bias has been many times proven to be simple biology. You don't have to like it and it doesn't say anything about individuals but the chromosomes and genes you have are heavy first influencers on IQ and brain development. That doesn't mean women can't be as smart as men or men can't be as smart as women, quite opposite. This is simply a matter of distribution, which forms two bell curves with a slight offset. I've forgotten in which way they are offset but there is a clear difference in distribution.

Again, just because the result is biased doesn't make the test wrong, it just means that the differences might be generated elsewhere, which in this case, they are. Some are fixable (support developing countries, better education, higher standard of living) some aren't.