skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It is even worse since they have a good product without the hyped autopilot, when I read about Musk wanting to use only cameras then I was sure Tesla self driving is not safe.
Here in Hacker News: Many.
I believe it's this intersection, judging by the signs in the beginning of video. Paint is not great.

https://goo.gl/maps/V9qnLYTL2tn
It's not a multi-front war actually. The EU was HOPING to be exempt from US tariffs [1]. They are in fact now exempt from tarrifs [2].

1.) https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/economy/2018/03/14/euro...

2.) http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/22/news/economy/steel-aluminum-...
I think the point is with the basic tail recursive copy it is easy to blow the call stack with the number of function calls needed.
Except one really wants to think that all the words on the configurator page are just Tesla's legal team's forced verbiage and really wants to believe Musk and the video at https://www.tesla.com/autopilot which starts with the claim that the person is only there for legal reasons...
Implementing simple middleware in Spring (boot) is pretty much the same. One class with one method that has access to req, res and the next filter. The @Component annotation is all it takes to enable the filter in your web stack.

@Component
public class MyMiddleware extends OncePerRequestFilter {

@Override
protected void doFilterInternal(HttpServletRequest request, HttpServletResponse response, FilterChain filterChain) throws ServletException, IOException {
// your code
filterChain.doFilter(request, response);
}

}
So, I don't care about the claim severity, as a consumer (unless we're talking deaths versus scrapes). They're clearly talking about costs, which will drive premiums, but are certainly related to parts/labor costs and availability, which is solvable long-term.

Apparently I also don't care about claim FREQUENCY because the article notes that the frequency difference goes down (but does NOT go away) when controlling for miles travelled. What? How on earth does 'frequency' not have miles as a denominator? Okay, fine, they must consider it on a per-day or per-year basis, but as a consumer, again, I don't care.

As the consumer, I really care about whether passengers fare worse in the average collision, or are more likely to be in a collision.

Again, parts costs will come into line over the long term. This is a game the established manufacturers are already good at, Tesla will have to step up to catch up.
Montreal, Canada
> Lisp was based on the lambda calculus, not sure if you can get more functional than that.

I've tried really hard (okay, for about five minutes), but couldn't find any account of the lambda calculus that includes the following features:

(0) variadic argument lists,

(1) object identities for absolutely everything,

(2) procedures that can be manipulated in ways other than applying them to arguments.

Are you really saying that all this time my understanding of the lambda calculus has been a lie?
Similarly, see Pavel Grinfeld's argument [2] advocating the vector basis L = {1, x, x²-1/3} w.r.t. Legendre polynomials.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavel_Grinfeld

[2] MathTheBeautiful: Why {1,x,x²} Is a Terrible Basis [video] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYoGYQOXqTk&index=14&list=PL....

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legendre_polynomials
In 2016 I did a small project that visualizes time as a series of hypothetical cross generation conversations (such as a 5 year old listening to an 80 year old's stories) [0]. Really fascinating to see how recent seemingly ancient events such as the American civil war or the invention of the printing press are when examined in these terms.

[0]: http://mattbierner.github.io/forward-propagation/
Also plan to move to Lisbon. Harsh in what way? Would you mind giving some examples?
With DI, that one big messy application root object that every codebase seems to naturally gravitate to becomes a generic, clean, reusable mechanism you did not write yourself. (Unless you put another big messy application root object on top of your DI, which I suppose is a learning experience I am not alone with)
Closures are simply an implementation detail of first-class procedures. But functional programming, unlike object-oriented programming, isn't just about making procedures first-class. It's about using, to the greatest extent possible, procedures that evaluate functions.
Learning to Decode Unstructured Indian Addresses
Which keyword is generating maximum inbound sales calls?
> it's crucial to their success ...

I don't care about a company's success if it requires endangering members of the public who have no choice in the matter.

If we were talking about, say, astronauts and test pilots who know the risks they take and make the choice, I'd have no problem with them risking their lives. We're not.

>I think it'll be a long time before learning algorithms will take over the wheel completely

They did. A system called "auto pilot" drove a man at full speed into a barrier and killed him.

I have a limited trust of other humans on the road. The deal is that I understand them. They behave in a way that makes sense to me, even (or especially) the mistakes they make. As another driver or a pedestrian, I can communicate a lot with a car just by looking at the driver and interpreting body language and attention.

> The hope is that by experiencing an outlier and making a mistake, the algorithms will be able to adapt to ensure that mistake never happens again.

I think people are making a huge underestimation about the number and types of edge cases. If you have to teach a car not to drive into a static object at full speed, the issue sin't going to be about fixing this one problem, the issue is that if this problem exists 1000 others like it do too.

I come from cold climates and country roads, I think the fact that these vehicles are being designed and tested in the bay area (or Arizona) makes them incredibly dangerous because of the fair weather bubble that the people design them in are living. Make your engineers live and work in rural northern Minnesota and maybe you'll get a bit more trust from me.
The latest version of AddFix (v3) is able to correctly determine the locality/sublocality of >90% shipments that flow through Delhivery’s network and predict geocodes for these addresses with a median precision of 200m. These results are guaranteed to improve with time, without any additional developmental effort. This has enabled us to discard traditional pin-code sorting of shipments in favour of a more granular locality-based sorting system.
http://freakonomics.com/podcast/mattress-store-bubble/ might be interesting listening material in this context
In addition to horrific disregard for the value of natural ecosystems and natural beauty, this comment contains significant misunderstandings:

> Species extinction is nothing new, that literally is the process of evolution

No. If you want a one sentence definition of evolution then it is change in gene frequencies within a population over time due to natural selection. You'd also want to point to the processes of mutation, recombination, chromosome-level rearrangements, and speciation. You are confusing standard mechanisms of evolution with species selection, which is occasionally put forward as an auxiliary mechanism of evolution but which orthodoxy largely rejects and which no-one believes is a dominant mechanism of evolution. If you want to learn more about this then read Dawkins' early books from the Selfish Gene onwards.

> If we don't want a species to go extinct our primary concern should be how it effects human well-being.

This sentence, and its paragraph, are incoherent. It appears that what you're trying to say is: "We should decide whether species go extinct according to whether they benefit humans". Hopefully such a repulsive argument needs no counter here.

> This idea that nature is something beautiful and lovely apart from these evil humans who live in it is, frankly, absurd. Nature is harsh, brutal and violent.

Yes, the natural world is harsh, brutal and violent. Perhaps you could explain how you get from that observation to the conclusion that it lacks beauty and is not worth preserving for its own sake.
The initial cruise control software was an afterthought, that ran on spare cpu cycles taken from the door lock control system.
Anyone else feel like that Tito guy is trying too hard? He seems like a preposterously bad fit for Techcrunch.

He tries this comedic approach but all his jokes fall flat. I've entirely given up on TC video section (blocking it through uBlock) because I can't stand to watch videos with him in it.
Preferences for DNS-Over-HTTPS (DoH) Functionality in Firefox Nightly
The whitepaper works for me. What browser are you using?
UK roads are some of the safest in the world. US roads are an outlier amongst developed countries and sit with the 3rd World when it comes to road safety.
Yeah, it's literally the opposite of behind-the-scenes. Would have loved to see some backstage jitters by the founders, what they do in the last minutes before their pitches, etc.
> FridgeCoin's

You meant to say "FridgeCoins"

Also just having a react component is not very creative. Try including smart contracts.
And you can use this to control it from the menu bar: https://github.com/jedisct1/bitbar-dnscrypt-proxy-switcher/
If all the PR and the CEO keep saying “autopilot”, users will use it as auto pilot. If it isn’t autopilot, it should have a different name.

The word "autopilot" originated in aviation, where it is a system used to control the trajectory of an aircraft without constant 'hands-on' control by a human operator being required. Autopilots do not replace human operators, but instead they assist them in controlling the aircraft.[1]

Most aviation professionals understand those limitations. You're complaining that the average Tesla owner ascribes a different meaning to that word?

Sadly, in aviation, over-reliance on autopilot has also led to very tragic results, the most prominent recent example being the crash of AF447, which killed 228 people.[2]

Musk is doing nothing worse than Airbus, which has pushed automation to the extent that many of their pilots no longer understand the basic principles involved in aviation. They aren't pilots, they're operators of a very complex machine which has a UX that is usable in benign conditions, but that is abominably bad under difficult conditions.

When faced with "temporary inconsistencies" from various sensors, the AF447 autopilot gave up and returned control to the pilots. But the pilots' inexperience in actually "flying" the aircraft, together with the awful Airbus UX, caused one pilot to say "We've lost all control of the aeroplane we don’t understand anything we’ve tried everything".

In reality AF447 was a perfectly flyable aircraft. "pitch and power" was all it needed: Holding the aircraft level with pitch at IIRC 6 degrees above the horizon and applying 85% power was all that was necessary.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopilot
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447
I tend not to agree with most of your points, but it may be a matter of taste. I actually like Java (but I also see quite some overengineering in some places).

> all the magic with annotations

... which are basically just decorators

> dependency injection

... which is quite useful for loose-coupling and injecting different implementations (and you don't have to use it)

> glueing libraries together by placing some files in a folder

.... what? Never done that ;-)

> Java is still super verbose, not just the language itself

I don't see that. It's actually quite nice for my taste. I guess you don't like generics, but then you have to live without them, which also sucks.

> There's a lot of libraries, but on UI/UX level you don't have anything close to what Rails offers out of the box.

What do you mean exactly? There are things like thymeleaf if you want SSR, otherwise you can put whatever SPA in front of it.

> things you take for granted don't exist, like devise.

.. it's not hard to use Spring Security though

>Elixir/Phoenix/Ecto"
- is there some devise like auth by now?
I also like Elixir/Phoenix quite a lot, but it's nowhere near Rails/Springs level.
When I use lambda expressions in an OO language, I find that the smallest logical chunk of code that can be exercised by a micro-example is larger than when I use iteration or recursion for the same solution.

That's the thing I keep coming back to. FP simply allows you to do more with less code that has to be tested.

I would not consider lambda programming FP, although I sort of understand what is being said. Lambda is just the tiniest beginnings of FP.

When I started FP, I chose F#. I figured that way I could still write classes when I needed them. I also figured it would allow me to do things the "wrong" way and then learn by cleaning up.

I found over several projects that I eventually stopped using classes altogether. There just wasn't any need for them. So much of what TDD brings to the table can be boiled down to "ways to make sure you're not shooting yourself in the foot in OOP"

Sidebar: At one point, Dave (the author here) had the only TDD/Microtest framework for COBOL. It was a very cool idea. Dave's a really smart guy.
They don't >have< to have this problem. The problem is that the robot should be watching the person, not vice-versa.

This however, can't be sold as 'almost self-driving' to a gullible public.
DNS Performance compared: CloudFlare 1.1.1.1 x Google 8.8.8.8 x Quad9 x OpenDNS
A Front-End Component Is a Function
Indeed, Thalmic Labs (YC W13) had a article about the Myo nearly five years ago in the same publication:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/forearm-gestures-...
Space Invaders from Scratch – Part 2
I came here to say the same thing. It looks like a great tool which I will use frequently on large json files but I don't get why the author bothered to implement a basic HTTP client with some curl-like options when it can just as well read from stdin.
Peeps marshmallow candy tested for indestructibility
No. "Make the easy things easy, make the hard things possible." Frameworks are usually good at making their target use case easy; they're worthless if they fail at this. The risk is when you need something outside the box, do you need to find a nicely wrapped framework widget to plug in, or can you easily wrap it yourself? Or is the abstraction light enough that you can easily drill through to the implementation layer?

It's about optimizing for the easiest case vs the harder cases in design. This is the design space that answers the question as to how serious the curve is. Serious curves require a leap in complexity, whereas other approaches can have more incremental increases.

Authentication was a fine example. The canonical example in my mind though is Visual Basic vs Delphi. VB (version 3 era, for Windows 3.11) required that you write your components in C++. You could use the framework in Basic but to customize it you needed a leap up a cliff in complexity. Whereas Delphi's VCL was written in Pascal just like your own code, the source shipped with the product, you could step through it, and you could even make a copy of the source and modify it as a step on the way towards writing your own component.
I can't find the $39 plan although I remember that from a while back. Maybe it's been discontinued?
It's blank for me --

0. In Firefox.

1. In Chrome.

2. In a saved pdf, viewed with Preview.app.
Perhaps it's taking the whole whitepaper thing to its logical conclusion.
Already bought $1000 worth of FridgeCoins.
> without constant 'hands-on' control by a human operator being required.

This is exactly what the Tesla autopilot isn’t. It requires constant hands-on control. It in fact goes as far as flashing alarms when your hands are not on.
It would be nice if the returned files or PDFs were (GPG) signed with an official cecibot key, for tamper protection.
Emmanuel Macron Talks About France's AI Strategy
> how is Go more anti FP than Java or other more classic imperative languages?

Than Java or any of a number of other popular languages, because it uses a static type system without generics. You can build functional control structures up from common imperative ones as well as from an in-language base of the simpler functional ones, but without either dynamic typing or generics, this is a painful exercise in copy-and-paste coding.
I see, people imagine that Tesla would use a defeat device to put doctored logs prior the crash. However this would not work since the car can’t put logs that say that everything is fine and did everything right because people would notice that’s incorrect as soon as they compare it with the evidence collected on the crash site.

If the car was able to know what’s the right thing to do, it would not only put it into the logs but it would have prevented the crash by doing it(unless of course, Musk is a contract killer and the cars ar crashing intentionnaly with correctly pre-doctored logs).

That’s why I suggested to use a blockchain - to ensure that the logs are not modified post-mortem.
Self-driving cars lose their appeal if you have to build significant infrastructure for them. At that point you might as well build railways.
No, you just lack imagination.
This is a really thorough article that explains the reasoning behind the design of the bridge and looks at multiple reasons why the bridge collapsed. I found the animated concept video of what the completed bridge would look like very illuminating [0]. I've never seen a bridge made of concrete/rebar designed like this before. Novel designs are more likely to fail than tried and tested ones; if they built the bridge in a more conventional style I doubt it would have collapsed. Innovation is not always free.

[0] http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/w...
The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Learning [pdf]
Glowing plasma created by a high speed jet of water
Inside GCHQ
And not just Sunday, Easter Sunday.
I completely agree with you. Use the tech you know, and learn new tech with time. Staying on the bleeding edge is fun but doesn't have the payoffs people think it does.

My stack is pretty much 100% JavaScript. I can do PHP, I can do Go, but I can build full-stack apps very quickly in JS.
Works great until the brands start cutting corners.
Those services could be gone tomorrow!

This is true of any hosting service. Unless it's your machine in your rack in your building attached to your pipe, there's a company that could suddenly shut down tomorrow and leave you in the lurch.

I believe the answer to many of todays challenges is to move on to static sites, and to make most sites work without JavaScript

The second part I agree with. The first part... meh. I've built a lot of database-backed websites, and have been doing so since the days when people used the term "DHTML" to refer to using JavaScript in a web page. The patterns for doing it are well-understood, the tools for doing it are solid, and for anything bigger than a brochureware site I'll basically always turn to a database (and even for the brochureware, I'll usually do it, since I don't want to train non-technical people on how to edit files and run a static generator).
The first point in the article is the dead killer of AMP for me. My mobile provider gives me very little monthly data, I've stopped using AMP because preloading the AMP results is eating through my cap, with images disabled.

Without preloading, AMP is slower than the non-AMP version of the same webpage with a simple script blocker. And usually causing more traffic too.

I hope Google refrains from bullying website owners into making the internet a worse experience for people without 1GB+ data plan.
Kepler caught strange supernova: Sudden surge, rapid decay
I'm immoral in a lot of other ways, too.

Morality is a purely human artificial construct.
Spanner: Becoming a SQL System [SIGMOD'17 PDF]
“While these systems provided some of the benefits of a database system, they lacked many traditional database features that application developers often rely on. A key example is a robust query language, meaning that developers had to write complex code to process and aggregate the data in their applications. As a result, we decided to turn Spanner into a full featured SQL system, with query execution tightly integrated with the other architectural features of Spanner (such as strong consistency and global replication).”
If you are learning something that requires high level control and conscious decision making and correction, what is typical rate of full feedback loop? Maybe 1-2 times per second?

If you train nonstop for an hour, that's just 3600 - 7200 times. That's relatively small batch size to learn something. Even 10 or 100 hours of training is not that much. It's not surprise if brains reuses old stuff as much as possible.
Whatever state of the road, a self-driving car shouldn't run heads on into a large static obstacle.
bed bugs man, bed bugs.
Ask HN: Do you think there paid shills here?
Is it? Taking this perhaps too far afield (and I'm spitballing here), but what would it look like to observe morality in animals? I can't think of any off the top of my head, but I can imagine there are examples of social animals punishing each other for "bad behavior". Would that be an expression of morality?
But immigrants talk different languages and look funny, this frightens me and I need protection
The author just hasn't fully grokked the command line yet.
This is really cool, nice work.

In addition to censorship-circumvention, it also provides a way to read the content of potentially-malicious sites without risk of browser vulnerabilities being exploited, and without revealing your IP address, User-Agent, etc.

Now we can all browse the web like we're Richard Stallman :)

EDIT:

> try downloading it, if it is a file smaller than 5 MiB;

I found that even pages smaller than 5MB get rendered to PDF.

Are you using headless Chrome or similar to implement this? It seems Javascript isn't getting executed (which is probably wise, I was just surprised it renders the pages so faithfully if it's not also running some sort of engine that will execute JS).

(Update: UA is "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) HeadlessChrome/67.0.337")

EDIT2:

It doesn't seem to support chunked transfer-encoding:

> Your request [...] has been unsuccessful due to following error:

>	file size unknown: "content-length" header is missing
Helsinki, Finland.

Born in the UK to a Yorkshire mother and a Scottish father, I grew up in York. Moved to Edinburgh (Scotland) to attend university and stayed there for 20+ years.

Moved to Finland with my (Finnish) wife a couple of years ago, and desperately awaiting the arrival of Spring right now. (Today it is snowing, once again in Helsinki!)
This might also explain why learning a 2nd language is usually harder than the 1st, and why getting rid of, or changing, an accent is so hard. All that time invested in those old neural circuits, better make use of those first.
Yes, I understand that having closures does not mean that a language supports functional programming. What I am taking issue with is the idea that Go is somehow especially "anti-FP" when an enormous number of languages have even fewer core functional programming features.
App Development Company – Hire Mobile App Developers
And rq has even easier syntax.