skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>Agreed, but it almost doesn’t matter: what matters is sending the signal that shenanigans will be punished by the market.

No, what it matters is understanding the issue. And the issue has no "shenanigans". All vendors suffer from Spectre (and some non-Intel models from Meltdown too), but more importantly, none of these was done "on purpose" which is the definition of a shenanigan.

>If devs do anything it should be learning to write software that doesn’t depend on speculative execution for performance

Whatever.
Sounds like you didn't read Andi's reply.
Use cases and requirements for standardizing element queries
When we talk about Big Tech, meaning the dominant high-tech companies, we mean Facebook, Amazon, Google, Apple, and Microsoft. They are the ones doing things that affect our lives, which is what we actually care about. All five are headquartered in the US. That means the US is tops in the sort of innovation that we actually care about. Any "Innovation Index" that doesn't place the US at or very close to the top is not a useful proxy for impactful innovation.
That and the fact that Apple isn't actually dominant (depending on how far you want to split down the definition of "phone" or "smart phone" or "high end smart phone" or "very high end smart phone".
The old Intel-Dell arrangement. Here's some cash to shun our rivals.
> The whiteboard interview was to write out algorithm for a merge sort. I thought it was the silliest thing in the world.

Last one I had was to implement QuickSort. Had a -huge- argument with the interviewer who insisted there was an off-by-one error and it would never work. Needless to say, he was thoroughly wrong once it was coded up and I didn't get the job. :)

> It was such a turn off

It's pretty much an automatic "no" for me now too.
Presumably anything like this is going to be POA, but originally they were quoting about 150m: http://www.businessinsider.com/space-adventures-moon-launch-...
Isn't this just comparable to any customer doing business with a supplier? If you buy a lot of X, you get a good discount.

Given the amount of iPhones in circulation, I'm pretty sure Apple needed a significant amount of LTE chips.
> Now the funny part, my better half has a hotel and restaurant. She has trouble working with good ingredients because people demand crap ones they are used to.

That was my exact experience first time I bought high quality peanut butter. The oil had separated and stayed at the top. I thought something went wrong and I was ripped off. Took me some googling to realise that's what happens if the maker don't take away natural nuts oil and don't replace it with palm oil. Took me some time to adjust to natural no-unnecessary-additives jams too.

Now cheap knockoffs taste like shit though. The overexposed taste is just too lame and lacks depth.
A co-worker is seriously considering switching back to Mac because so many apps are misbehaving in a mixed-DPI environment in Windows. Maybe if both your monitors are 4k you're okay, but it really sucks if 1 is 4k and the other isn't, such as when you have a laptop with an additional monitor.
SWAN+PARK+CITY+|+SWAN+PARK+ĐỒNG+NAI+|+SWAN+PARK+ĐÔNG+SÀI+GÒN
Ok, thats kind of fair.

I should have been more specific. What they are on track to becoming (the we-chat, alipay of SEA), requires a high level of innovation in itself.

As We-chats rise was very different to Alipay's - Grab & co's are to the chinese companies. Its most definitely not cookie-cutter territory.
This is especially interesting, because I remember that the Intel chipsets in iPhones and iPads have had problems in LTE performance comparisons. So, Intel was losing to their competitor some time anyway, but still Qualcomm somehow needed to oil their marker shares growth. Why such aggressive competition?
We are 38/33 and that's medical for both. Additional $57 for vision/dental (optional, of course). This is in PA. I was unsuccessful in using the marketplace, and in my county there's basically only one insurance provider any more. So I get quotes from them directly. On the bright side, it's good coverage. We could save $150/mo, but the deductibles go through the roof. Since we are child-bearing age (and my eyes are terrible), we prefer better coverage.
How a teen used social engineering to take on the FBI and CIA
All fine unless you have a monopoly.
>Alas, rubisco is, by biological standards, a sluggard, a lazybones, a couch potato. ... Years ago I talked with biologists about photosynthesis for a magazine article. Not one had a good word to say about rubisco.

That idea seems to have changed - and frankly was always a little unlikely. From the wiki page on RuBisCO (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RuBisCO):

> A recent theory explores the trade-off between the relative specificity (i.e., ability to favour CO2 fixation over O
2 incorporation, which leads to the energy-wasteful process of photorespiration) and the rate at which product is formed. The authors conclude that RuBisCO may actually have evolved to reach a point of 'near-perfection' in many plants (with widely varying substrate availabilities and environmental conditions), reaching a compromise between specificity and reaction rate

Which seems more consistent with one of the highest copy number proteins around with a vital role to play.
There’s no consumption at all under the alternative.
How to master the ways to say NO
Also, what if Hotmail is associated with a 1.15 relative risk for both black and white users, but a black user is significantly more likely to have a Hotmail account than a white user?
The title should be changed to "OSS developers are being screwed over by companies". It's a fundamental clash of OSS principles and capitalism. At my company we don't use that much OSS, because we're in embedded, but I'm not aware of a slush fund, there's no way for a normal employee to make this happen. It's fundamental to capitalism that companies maximize profits. Individually it's always better to use OSS, but not pay for it. They'll pay only if they get something in return, which they wouldn't get otherwise.

OSS developers need to have split licenses between corporate and private use. Corporate use has licensing costs. Otherwise they don't get paid.

BTW the pre-fab wall makers also don't hand out the walls for free and ask for donations later. Because they'd get 0. Business is business.
Ha it does make me think of this tweet https://twitter.com/KevlinHenney/status/381021802941906944

You nailed it really, senior engineers code is the most simple looking as generally they've picked the right abstraction for the problem.
Probably has more to do with how you process written vs audio information. Richard Feynman had an anecdote about discovering that he couldn't read and count in his head at the same time but others could, turned out the person who could counted in his head by visualizing the numbers rather than 'hearing' them in his inner monologue which allowed him to continue reading.
The press release[1] says:

"The fine represents 4.9% of Qualcomm's turnover in 2017."

"In accordance with the Commission's 2006 Guidelines on fines (see press release and MEMO) the fine has been calculated on the basis of the value of Qualcomm's direct and indirect sales of LTE baseband chipset in the European Economic Area (EEA). The duration of the infringement established in the decision is five years, six months and 23 days."

Qualcomm made 122.5 billion in the last 5 years[2]. Making them pay 1% of that for breaking the rules isn't what I would call "taking this hard stance on antitrust".

[1]: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-421_en.htm
[2]: https://www.statista.com/statistics/737780/revenue-of-qualco...
You made it sound way more depressing. Who says they are the best? Maybe you are - so change the world the way you want to.
Me too. Moving from Brasil
I was pleasantly surprised. The writing in that article is of a much better standard than that in Moorcock's fiction.
The decision on how much effort you expend to secure your particular system(s) often comes down your perception of risk and reward (and it's worth emphasising that word perception too).

There's usually a cost associated with greater security[0], and generally a balance that is struck. You can argue whether a particular system should lean further towards security, or further towards lower-cost, but ultimately there'll be a judgement call.

I'd suggest there isn't a single correct answer for this.

[0]whether in actual dollars, ease-of-use for users, time-to-market or possible reduction in feature set
Did you read GP’s comment at all? It depends on the strings attached to the discount.
none of these was done "on purpose" which is the definition of a shenanigan.

The “shenanigans” are that it has become acceptable practice to cut corners on security to improve benchmarks.

Maybe speculative execution is just a thing that shouldn’t be done? People computed perfectly well before it. Itanium isn’t impacted by Meltdown so Intel is capable of it.
Elasticsearch Learning to Rank 1.0 released
Link to the article's source: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-421_en.htm
> but don’t become a fucking missionary

That might work for you and your choices but when you talk to developers whose software doesn't support your choice because "nobody uses it", and there are no native alternatives, you quickly see the fight is real.

The odd bit of platform evangelism is the reason we don't all have to use Windows. It's the reason we have a choice at all.
Solus' kernel is also compiled with retpoline since a few days ago. They "borrowed" the compiler from Clear Linux.
I did submit it as a Show HN, but as I said, without any description, that's most probably why the post went unnoticed...

In this post of mine: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16197412, the person pointed out that it may not be clear what my idea is without a description... So I added some details in the comments, but unfortunately, at that point the post was deep down...

Thanks for your advice.
The H Is Closing Down (2013)
> Once the less than ideal code is in the codebase it's there to stay.

That is not objective fact across projects. That means either the process or culture is bad.
You say reduction in fleet size and whatnot, but I believe that's assuming population remains the same; as it stands, it grows with about 1% per year. That fleet size reduction would need to exceed 1% a year; I don't think that's very likely.

It also implies people are willing to move from owning a car to time sharing a car. That's not likely, because it'll be businesses that will offer it, and they need to make a profit. As it stands, Uber is more expensive than taxis (and they undercut taxis using dank investment monies); take away the driver and replace it with a more expensive car, and I don't think they'd be able to operate cheaper. Plus, traffic comes in peaks, so that fleet would have to be optimized to handle said peaks.

And of course, a large percentage will need (and want) to use it. It's possible if the transport system becomes government owned or it becomes competitive with car ownership, but I don't see that happening. Sci-fi utopias usually don't explain why everything is going as smoothly as it seems; one explanation is that companies are just that awesome and managed to get a cooperative traffic system up and running whilst making automagic cars cheap enough for everyone, another is that the government or some other singular but benevolent organization is in control of all transport and is making sure it's standardized.
There is a world of difference between:

"Buy five thousand and I'll give you 10% off"

"Buy five thousand and don't buy from my rivals and I'll give you 10% off"
I seem to remember an interview where Banks described the Culture as "anarchism within, socialism without," but yes, it very much depends on being post-scarcity and transhumanist. I wonder what Banks would have made of "Meditations on Moloch"? I could see the Culture's progenitors using something like that as their manifesto.
There's a different between getting a discount "if you buy a lot of X" and "if you don't buy any X from our competitors". The latter in anti-competitive.
Well, I was told not to in the course I took to get my license, and I found it helped without really thinking about why.

However, if I try to introspect...supporting my weight with my arms tends to conflict with the counter-steering part. If I push on the left side, the motorcycle leans that way. But one instinctively pushes on something to hold oneself up. So I think I would say my brain gets subconsciously conflicted over whether to push or pull.

Unfortunately, sport bikes typically have a seating position that makes it very difficult not to put weight on your wrists unless you have good leg and abdominal muscles.
Use Cases and Requirements for Element Queries
Reaction time is a relatively small factor in safety distance. Kinetic energy is a significantly larger factor. Currently, humans violate this as a matter of course, which is why we're so bloody unsafe. Automated vehicles will be far more punctilious, which at higher speeds means that the gains from reaction time will be more than offset by the respect for kinetic energy.

What's interesting is that automated vehicles, coordinating their interactions, should be able to accommodate additional traffic much more smoothly than human-driven vehicles. They will accommodate it by slowing down. Counter-intuitively, capacity is maximised at around 10 mph (16 km/h).

Here's a spreadsheet for doing those capacity calculations: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1F3w5-hcopm2GBGz3UswN...

For humans, the reaction time is ~1 second. If you take that down to 0.1 seconds, you'll notice that the 10 mph capacity increases by about 1/3rd. That's not too shabby! But at a more acceptable 50 mph, the capacity increase is only 15% -- and that's if humans drove safely, which they don't. Actual capacity increase versus actual human driving behaviours, at highway speeds, can be expected to be nil.

Conclusion: automation will only bring capacity gains if roads get slower -- probably much slower.
aka https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-rider_problem
So reading this, Qualcomm straight up paid Apple to only use their products?

I have a limited understanding of how these agreements, but isn't that just completely illegal?

How do you structure an agreement to be even a tiny bit plausible?
I have. I just don't see how it's a bribe. This in part, because if Apple essentially ended up being 80% of the market, I don't see how one business relationship can be seen as monopolising.

Part of the reason Apple agreed to such a deal is because having a longer term contract will give them a better per unit price.

If you follow that line of thinking and Qualcomm gets a fine because of that, the commission should also force Apple to purchase LTE chips from multiple suppliers, because they can force the price down so much due to the fact they're 80% of the market. It goes both ways.
I'd say it would be good if the mods changed the submission title to something like "EU fines Qualcomm $1.2B over antitrust violations" or "Qualcomm fined $1.2B for violating EU antitrust regulations", since the article's title is almost egregiously wrong.
> Bcash

It's always easy to spot a Blockstream shill by the way they refer to Bitcoin Cash in the pejorative.
Compared to some of the antics we had with Direct Line, Admiral have been really good - not had any serious problems and when my wife crashed my car last year they looked after everything pretty well.
And chickens prefer attractive people:

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2018/01/animals-chickens...

Rough out there.
What does that say about Apple that it accepted the deal? Are they subject to any fine for their behavior?
This seems like it would be subjective but it actually tells a story. Most likely tickets aren't being broken down enough, one employee could be snagging easy bug tickets in the morning and another employee could be working on a epic feature.

On the other side of things I have a guy at work who rocks out 20 tickets and a guy at work who tries to go into super plan mode and take his time and make sure every semicolon is perfect 20 times. This is ok, it's what management is for I need to make sure the fast guy is a little more careful sometimes and I need to check on mr planner and make sure he speeds it up sometimes.
NY Times has to insert a general lefty bias into almost every article. New Yorker does this too. Both great papers, but I've learned to detect it and dismiss it over the years
I totally forgot that he actually mentioned her briefly in that article, thanks.
I think that example is kind of right about Shallan, but I can't think of similar analogues in any of his other books. Though I don't really care for the newer steampunk mistborn trilogy.

Actually I thought most of the standalone short stories in the cosmere book itself were pretty great.
Introducing React Easy State: Making a Stopwatch
Firing up 750 Raspberry Pis
Ride sharing doesn't really work, because it assumes that people have very fixed patterns. I get into work at 8 in the morning, but I leave somewhere between 15:50 - 17:00, depending on what happens to land on my desk that day. Finding someone who's going my way, and willing to wait an hour for me to finish up is going to be hard.

Also I might have errands to run, team sports (or I may not, depending on the weather). OR how about you having to leave early, because you have to pick up a sick child from school? Current ride sharing leaves you stranded or unable deal with unplanned events. That's why people drive.

With driverless cars, that can pick you up on demand, some of these issues go away, maybe, but how do you coordinate sharing a random ordered ride with someone? How long are you suppose to wait, before the car decides that the other person is now late, and takes off without him?
Meta mental model
"In 2011, Qualcomm signed an agreement with Apple, committing to make significant payments to Apple on condition that the company would exclusively use Qualcomm chipsets in its "iPhone" and "iPad" devices. In 2013, the term of the agreement was extended to the end of 2016."

Does it still sound okay to you?

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-421_en.htm
You should watch Michael Schøts interview with Margrethe Vestager here: https://www.facebook.com/michael.schoet/videos/1015551099688... (It's on danish, sorry non-danish listeners!)
I see two things wrong in the post:

> fair share

Male drivers and female drivers don't have a "fair share" of insurance costs. No one should be obligated to pay for the actions of others simply because they're the same sex.

Driving risk should be evaluated on an individual basis based on those individuals' behavior.

> putting them at even more of a disadvantage

Young women are no longer at a disadvantage. Young women graduate college more often and earn more than young men.

I focus on young women and young men in this case because those are the people most affected by gender discrimination in auto insurance pricing, because they lack individual driving records on which to base insurance rates.
Apple is problematic for other reasons too. Try creating a movie rental service on the iOS platform. Apple wants 30%, killing all possibilities of competitors. Same thing for ebook stores etc.
What a useless article and waste of time.
"Like the author, I consider Siri (and most other vocal assistants that I’ve never used, but am just prejudiced against) to be garbage: unworkable, and a flawed user interface paradigm (I'm of the command line and late-nineties-style GUI persuasion). I don't use it on any of my devices except for getting the time when I'm in bed in the dark. I cannot imagine anybody would want to do anything with it.
"

My god are you wrong. I could try to meticulously refute each of your points, but honestly you are soo off, I can't even start. Just put a pin in your current world view and get back to me in 6 years when you as the last of your social circle begrudgingly get a voice assistant and realize how awesome they are in all their simple glory.

Their primary usages are simple but effective. My google home allows me just say in kitchen while I'm cutting vegetables and have both my hands full "Hey google play music" I don't have to tell it what music, it just goes on spotify and continues what I've been playing. I can tell it something specific if I want though, a genre or playlist and it'll find it, and I've never experienced it get it wrong.

Then when I'm done in the kitchen I can walk in with plates in hand, tell it to switch to romantic music on the way and "Hey google set the light in the living room to cozy", or if you're the lonely type, perhaps just tell it "Hey google play Rick and Morty" and it pops up on the chromecast on the tv.

And this isn't some futuristic expectation of what will come. This is how I'm using it right now.

Its obvious that Apple wants a piece of the action and it looks like they've gotten the memo that playing music is an important part of the apeal of these devices and actually put quality hardware in the box, that might win them a noticable market share.
This is a common mistake. Reducing inequality is not morally equivalent to penalizing the person who was previously in a superior position.
This will be a key year for AMD, if they cannot make a GPU that performs as well as a 1080ti then Nvidia will clobber them with Volta.
Sure, but then you'd still need a large number of cars to handle peak hours, like 7 - 9 in the morning and 15 - 18 in the evening. You're not really freeing up the road if you're not reducing the number of cars.
Driverless is great for quicker reaction times, but they cannot anticipate larger-scale situations. Perhaps if all cars were autonomous and connected it could work, but that will not happen for a very long time.

When I see a heavy truck merge a mile ahead on the interstate, I will go ahead and get in the left lane. Heavy trucks cannot accelerate like a passenger car. If I can detect the age of the driver in front of me, I can anticipate an older person with slower response time and tendency to drive slow, so I accommodate them.

In a traffic jam, I will leave 50'-100' buffer zone between me and bumper of car in front. Unfortunately, some drivers will quickly pass me and take up this zone, because people like the idea of "getting ahead". This only clogs visibility and increases braking. There are certain situations where this is not appropriate, because that buffer zone can mean other drivers getting caught at red lights. There are some tight situations where it is ideal to drive bumper-to-bumper. Interstate jams are ideal for the buffer.

If the light turns red and I can see it a mile away going 55mph, I will begin my coast with minimal braking so as to conserve momentum. Most times I never get below 30 and can always catch green lights this way. I feel even better if people stay behind me while I do this, because I am essentially saving their energy by setting our pace. Sometimes slower is faster.

I'd like to think that just a handful of mindful drivers in a jam can improve traffic flow.