skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Trump’s war with Amazon and The Washington Post is personal
lol wut? VMware Workstation, Connectix/MS VirtualPC, Oracle VirtualBox, qemu, bochs...what Intel-licensed hardware or software?

How about FX!32 or it’s latest AArch64 cousin seen on Windows 10?

Of the above, qemu can target x86 and run on anything, Virtual PC ran originally on PowerPC, and FX!32 ran on the Alpha
You're both probably wrong or right, who knows. No one knows why the stock market does what it does most of the time, they're just guessing.
Smoking cigarettes makes me feel amazing, so I'm not convinced about your approach.
You’re trying to run MacOS on unsupported hardware and configuring it yourself (instead of letting Apple do it as they always do) which is the only reason it’s more frustrating than Linux. Buying Linux vs. MacOS directly from the manufacturer is a different story and for most users MacOS clearly wins.
I find it funny how everyone focuses on this line because out of context it sounds "evil", even though it's far from the focus or what's shady about the memo itself. That line just implies that "the tool" can be used for bad stuff, but then there's also:

"Maybe someone finds love. Maybe it even saves the life of someone on the brink of suicide."

And, just like postal mail, phones, SMS, newspapers, word of mouth, radio, etc. "the tool" can be (and is probably most often) used for good. What's surprising about this?

What's actually shady about the memo is not how the tool can be used because of course it can be used for both bad and good things just like any other tool (you can kill a man with a baby bottle if you know what you're doing).

What's shady is that it's claiming the ultimate goal, above anything else, is to put the tool in as many's people's hands as possible. And they'll do anything that's possible to do so, even questionable stuff. This memo is about their shady growth practices, not what the platform is used for.
Not according to the article. (Well, they compare different time scales. So...maybe?)

> While New York City's murder rate has gone down - decreasing by around 87 per cent since the 1990's - the Big Smoke’s has simultaneously surged. London's has increased by nearly 40 per cent in the space of three years alone - not including deaths caused by terrorist attacks.
maybe say a bit about what the company is and why its interesting to work there?
And PS2 ports and phone jacks and ethernet ports, yes
I disagree with these points.

1) Essentially no one knows about the author-izer system or understands how it works, especially outside academia. Readers in companies, poorer countries, etc., can't be expected to guess that the way to read an article is to go to the author's webpage and follow author-izer links (assuming they have been set up). What these potential readers will do is: search something on Google (or follow a link from somewhere else), hit the paywalled ACM DL page, give up. This convoluted system of "open-access from one place, closed-access from another" makes no sense.

2) For authors who actually post preprints of their work, yes, you can read it this way. But then you end up with multiple versions of the same work, that are often subtly different: does the author's preprint integrate reviewer feedback? does it fix some bugs that were found after the camera-ready version was submitted? And anyways, preprints posted on authors' websites usually disappear when they change institutions or retire, so it's not a good solution.

3) Yes, you can retain copyright on papers published with ACM, but then you need to give them an exclusive license to publish, so this still limits what you can do with your work (besides some narrowly worded exceptions). There is also a 3rd option of making the work open-access with no exclusive transfer, but this costs at least $700 per article, which is obviously excessive compared to the actual costs of hosting a 12-page PDF.

So I don't think it's fair to compare publishing with ACM and publishing on arXiv, because ACM is not open-access and publishing with them requires you to pay excessive fees or sign agreements restricting how you can publish your work, i.e., the opposite of what's in the interest of science.
>Yes you can customize it as you wish but I dont want to

This was a big moment for me. I was a huge anti-Apple guy, I had built my own laptops and used Android and everything had to be open and hackable. Until one day I just realized it wasn't fun anymore. I would have to stop what I was doing to fix some broken (virtual or real) duct tape that held everything together.

I bought my first Mac the month I replaced the CPU, then the motherboard (wrong socket), then the RAM (incompatible with my new mobo), and then was staring down a dying video card in my desktop. I realized I didn't want to fix it. I picked the wrong parts because I didn't care anymore, I didn't care enough to do the proper research. I spent all day fixing computer problems, I hated doing it on my own time too.

What I want is a computing appliance that lets me do my job and nothing more. I don't have that yet, I still have to deal with system updates and reboots and filesystem maintenance and all that nonsense with my Macbook, but it's closer. I've been considering a Chromebook but I have had bad luck with Google products in the past.

Not a month goes by where I don't re-read Mark O'Connor's "I swapped my MacBook for an iPad+Linode" series and find myself agreeing more and more.

http://yieldthought.com/post/12239282034/swapped-my-macbook-...
Ask your doctor, not us.
Don’t they manufacture chips for their iOS line of products?
I review flashlights and headlamps as a hobby. Many modern high-powered ones use removable Li-ion cells, most commonly 18650 size.

Temperature monitoring has become very common. The primary heat source is almost always the LED, not the battery, but it would be sufficient to detect a battery nearing thermal runaway. Low-voltage protection is common, but sometimes only a warning blink rather than a hard cutoff based on the idea that leaving the user in the dark might be worse than damaging a battery.

Some models have onboard charging, most often through MicroUSB. Correctly charging a single Li-ion cell is not difficult, and I haven't seen one get it seriously wrong yet.

LiFePO4 has seen a little use, but is not popular due to its much lower energy density. I suspect this has kept it out of other portable devices as well since users always seem to want longer runtime in ever smaller devices.
Nutrition research is really difficult; lack on immediate reactions (digestion and metabolism take time), highly variable results because on stimulus in other parts of the body (including stress) and its being ethically impossible to have a control group (locking people in a room and feed them one this isn't realistic anyways).

On the curve of "knowing how much we don't know" we're just realizing this is way harder than anyone expected even a few years ago.
Post your credit card information on here.
I think this is how I most commonly recognize someone that is familiar with lxc +/- docker and containerization in general. A firm grasp of the fact that they're just beefy processes, isolated wiht namespaces and cgroups is the best, most succint way to describe docker (without even mentioning the benefits), but it also requires that the hearer knows what namespaces and cgroups are.

If I had to rank understanding in explanations of docker:

1. "Makes your application really portable"/other explanations that only cover the benefits of docker not how it works

2. "Lightweight VMs"

3. "LXC + some other stuff"

4. "processes + namespaces + cgroups (+/- image management tools, etc)"

100% agreed on the point you made, pretty sure docker+swarm and other orchestration efforts have basically lost the competition. Kubernetes just has the mind share, and even better than that -- it's actually good.

Kubernetes also has multiple competing container runtimes all rushing to fit the CRI (Container Runtime Interface). Just some of the stuff out there:

* cri-containerd - https://github.com/containerd/cri-containerd

* runv (hypervisor based) - https://github.com/hyperhq/runv

* clear containers (hypervisor based) - https://github.com/clearcontainers/runtime

* kata containers (hypervisor based, collaboration of runv + clear container) - https://katacontainers.io/

* frakti (combination of runv & docker, enabling switching @ runtime) - https://github.com/kubernetes/frakti

A bunch of the projects are in their infancy, but the CNCF/kubernetes and the community are doing the right thing investing in lots of them, and letting the good ones bubble to the top. I don't run a production kubernetes cluster but I've found cri-containerd to be really easy to use and haven't had any major problems with it, mostly small configuration things.

The last one, frakti, gets me really excited, because it lets you be flexible about which containers run in more protected environments and which don't. Also really exciting is frakti v2 (https://github.com/kubernetes/frakti/tree/containerd-kata), which is kata + containerd.
Not everyone is gifted with long-term attention. Our society is helpfully breeding that quality out of us.
Nicely done! Can I ask one question, how do you check if the domains are available?
Wait! What! Virtual Desktops "Spaces" are gone in OSX?
The birds are musical, and may be music to your ears (as in metaphorical music) but whether birdsong is literal music seems to be up for debate [1] unless a human records and samples it into such.

Cage is performance art certainly but not, IMO, music. Again it’s something certainly up for debate. [2] But such debate reminds me of a particular South Park episode based in SF.

[1] - http://www.iupress.indiana.edu/product_info.php?products_id=...

[2] - https://youtu.be/WTCVnKROlos
"We often cannot certify that an AI agent is optimal or ethical by looking at its source code, any more than we can certify that humans are good by scanning their brains."

What do people make of this claim? Is that a fair comparison?
Jido Maps | Computer Vision Engineer / SLAM Engineer | SF Bay Area / New York City | ONSITE / REMOTE | Full-time

At Jido Maps, we are building maps that will support the next generation of digital experience. We are looking for a self-motivated person interested in bringing state-of-the-art computer vision technology to the real world. You will join a fast-paced startup and should be ready to take on a leadership role in our growing team.

Here is a link to more job descriptions -> https://angel.co/jido/jobs

We are hiring

* Computer Vision Engineer

* SLAM (Localization and Mapping) Engineer

* Computer Vision Researcher
I wonder if "non-transferable" covers tricks like Apple loaning AMD the cash for AMD to buy Apple. Then renaming the new AMD to Apple. Then it would pay itself back for the loans.
New gold is a very small fraction of the gold supply, so I'm not giving much power to those who mine the most (currently). A major new discovery could change things, but it would have to be huge. Mining (or, more probably, refining) becoming easier could change things more than a big discovery, by making many uneconomic deposits suddenly economically viable to work.

Most fundamentally, I'm gambling that the chemical composition of the earth's crust isn't going to change much. That part of the gamble I feel pretty confident about.
> Tech has two sides

I'd argue tech doesn't have two sides, but rather _we_ have two sides.

If you make it about "tech" it implies it's somehow external to us, inherent to tech, and independent of what we do, when in fact, tech is just a tool and since we're the ones using it the fact we can do good or bad implies tech will always be able to do good or bad.
It's my primary desktop as well. I like it because it's low churn, everything I need just works, and most of the configurations have sane defaults so config files tend to be short and simple or not needed at all.

I don't hack on the internals or build my own ports, I just use it. It stays out of my way and I like that.
The food pyramid in the US wasn’t devised by nutritionists. It was designed by the farm lobby. It was published by the Department of Agriculture.
Do note I'm not being adversarial when I say I don't have to give examples since it uses a known-good technique. The status quo for compilers is they have plenty of bugs. The number of bugs go up like most software with the complexity (eg lines of code or paths). Highly-optimizing compilers should be expected to have more bugs than barely optimizing ones. Evidence on application of formal methods in industry showed the programs had way fewer bugs. Cleanroom and Praxis Correct by Construction w/ SPARK Ada regularly hit some of lowest defect rates in existence.

http://infohost.nmt.edu/~al/cseet-paper.html

http://www.anthonyhall.org/c_by_c_secure_system.pdf

So, we have one trend saying complicated software will have lots of errors with another saying verified software will have fewer errors. The hypothesis we should have at that point is a verified compiler will have either few errors in general (optimism) or much fewer than non-formally-verified compilers (pessimism). The empirical evidence confirms this with bug trackers on most compilers but especially the Csmith testing pitting CompCert against other C compilers:

http://www.cs.utah.edu/~regehr/papers/pldi11-preprint.pdf

https://embed.cs.utah.edu/csmith/

It was the first time (IIRC) a program was custom designed to toss computer-years worth of input against compilers to find problems. Found hundreds in common compilers despite them being analyzed and used so much that many bugs were already found. When they applied it to CompCert, they got this result:

"The striking thing about our CompCert results is that the middleend bugs we found in all other compilers are absent. As of early 2011, the under-development version of CompCert is the only compiler we have tested for which Csmith cannot find wrong-code errors. This is not for lack of trying: we have devoted about six CPU-years to the task. The apparent unbreakability of CompCert supports a strong argument that developing compiler optimizations within a proof framework, where safety checks are explicit and machine-checked, has tangible benefits for compiler users."

It did as expected where the verified parts had no errors in their code. CakeML uses an even stronger form of verification if I understand their paper correctly. It's also on an easier-to-analyze language since ML was straight-up designed for theorem provers. With decades of evidence, I'm confident in saying the use of formal methods by experts on a compiler for a language designed for easy verification will make that compiler have fewer errors than unverified competition. It will also have feature or performance limitations, too, from their picking simplicity over complexity. Still useful in many cases where ML would already be used, though, which aren't usually performance-focused.
It's absolutely data-driven. By food and farm lobbies that do not have your health as their priority.
It is more than a sensitive subject in certain other countries, and I can only imagine the horror of someone who is in the US as a visitor of some sort being revealed to be a Grindr user.
> ...something whose primary goal is the welfare of the populace, and not some profit motive.

It may not be a profit motive but governments' motives are sporadically focused on the public welfare at best.
There are also some unfortunate features of academic research. A big one is that the product the researcher cares about is papers and citations, not working software per se. Papers you only write once. You can cherry-pick examples, work around bugs, do some facile analysis, publish the paper and then move on never to look at the code again.

This means that code and data is typically hacky, unpolished, poorly documented, unmaintained, and unsuitable for public use (or often not publicly inspectable at all). Often the folks doing the grunt work are graduate students, who leave after a few years, leaving a new batch of graduate students to deal with the code without much guidance, so it tends to accrete features but seldom get any refactoring love. Nobody is paying for bug fixes or software maintenance or documentation.

Someone coming from industry (or even just a tinkerer) who wants to use the same idea in a production environment often realizes halfway through reimplementation that it isn’t actually better than existing alternatives, and that the analysis/benchmarks in the paper were limited or misleading for a general context. Sorting the wheat from the chaff can be pretty demanding, ideas can sometimes be obfuscated by abstruse mathematical formalism, and academic researchers don’t typically go out of their way to make their output usable for non-academics.
A- This is infuriating

B- How can a company have such a bad response? I think just about every big company has put a huge emphasis on data security. But hey, companies are big and technology is complex, so maybe data leaks still happen. But when they do, how can you treat them with such a lack of care? And how can the director of Security be alerted about this and not fix it? Seems potentially criminally negligent?

c- The tweets from Brian Krebs are also infuriating (and hilarious) https://twitter.com/briankrebs

Some highlights:

"Per my last tweet, Panera issued a statement to Fox News saying the breach only impacted 10,000 customer accounts. Interesting that they had no numbers for me, and yet had this 10k number all ready to go on the same day this was "discovered," eight months after it was reported."

"Hey Panera, despite your statements to the contrary, you still haven't fixed this customer info leak. Would you like to revisit the 10k number you just gave to Fox news? https://delivery.panerabread.com/foundation-api/users/12345"

"you know what, let's go for 37M instead of 7M: https://delivery.panerabread.com/foundation-api/users/12345"

"At the risk of making my job harder (or possibly, easier?) it's clear I'm going to have to write an entire series of blog posts about how not to handle a data breach from a PR perspective. I'm sputtering over here. Gave @panerabread every courtesy and they treat me like an idiot"

"Hey @panerabread : before making half-baked statements to the press to downplay the size of a breach, perhaps you should make sure the problem doesn't extend to all other parts of your business, like http://catering.panerabread.com , etc. Only proper response is to deep six entire site"
I don't agree that such a tax is a good idea, but consider the following:

1. If it bothers the Germans, why don't they change it? Is there some concordat that makes it difficult?

2. Do I really have a right to comment given that I'm not German? Does it really makes sense for you to apply what are presumably post-revolution, secular French standards to Germany?

3. "co-opted by the church to act as their debt collectors " -- sounds conspiratorial. You think the Church is all-powerful and able to do that? Tithing isn't new.

4. "disgusting and no longer of this day and age" -- appeals to time period are rather silly. We're not talking about fashion, and it's important not to fall prey to the Idol of Progress.

5. Interesting that more religious countries, like Germany's neighbor Poland, have no such tax.
Not in your personal capacity, no. As mentioned in the other comments to this parent, HIPAA only applies to "covered entities" like doctors that take insurance and insurance companies, and their "business associates" that process PHI on their behalf.
It's the old story of convinience vs. freedom. I myself am willing to trade a bit of convinience and the need of tinkering with the system for a big chunk of freedom. Not only for me but by using and making Linux better, hopefully it's also a (small) investment for future generations.

This way I hope they still will have the choice to run software they (can) trust on their own devices. If everyone would just go for the convinience, at least desktop Linux would dissapear as an option.
They didn't at the time he wrote that.

That post is pretty outdated. It's about old hardware and an old version of Geekbench. But people still use Geekbench 3 and old x86 hardware, so it's not totally irrelevant.
so how does this compare to something like Deco? https://github.com/alex-sherman/deco. I guess since this uses a single GIL its good for IO limited things?
The Cognitive Bias Each MBTI Type Is Probably Guilty of – Astroligion.com
Detecting who speaks is also a (relatively) lightweight analysis. Combined with bag-of-words can build personality/interest profile.
Speech based gender detection can also be done, probably also detecting kids from adults. Now have good data about demographics of the household.
What are you talking about? MacOS is a certified Unix variant and it has everything you need to do local dev on it.
The Lost Language of Diners
I still prefer the "closed fence" that is macOS over the complete mess that is desktop on linux. macOS was really really liberating after years of frustrations with all of gnome, kde and xfce. Then was x11 vs mir vs wayland. Desktop on linux is pretty much still a toy when compared to desktop on macos.

There seem to be a lot of misconceptions about the whole developer's environment thing. "Made by developers, for developers" and "all that money for such a closed box" sound a lot more like wishful idealism than actual "best tool for the job" pragmatism.

I also used to think linux was the best desktop, and did so for a long time, because of "by developers for developers, open-source" and other righteous sounding things. But believing you're using the best tools and actually doing so are two different things; I wasn't even living in Emacs or aware of how superior the VIM language is back then, so much for using the best tools ;)

Its easy to fool yourself into thinking you have the best tools, and its near impossible to tell you actually do.
Unless the licensing terms are extremely lopsided, they'd still own AMD64 patents which EM64T is based on, and intel would need to strike a new deal. VIA's situation should be similar, but with other technologies.
Bitcoin creates the same value as VISA, Paypal and Banbks as a means of transferring money. If transferring money without these middle men is as valuable as a beanie baby, then please explain the similar utility created?

It is also a fantastic means for storing wealth and moving it without qeustion, but I'll admit that the volatility makes this use case substantially less useful than the payment network which is the true value, regardless of price (so long as it is non-zero).
Spokane already has an aluminum plant (well, a rolling mill), and it is profitable because of cheap Washington state hydro.
The Tesla accident: How media distorts the perception of safety
You're right in that the genie will not go back to the bottle, but we have other models for aggregating social data / building networks on the horizon that don't involve a central entity (state or otherwise) so the future is likely to look very different and I'll bet very "weird" to us now.
The Economics of JavaScript
Look at https://nutritionfacts.org it's a doctor that does the digging through research paper and try to find a place to draw the line.
Spoiler: The best diet is complete avoidance of process food and animals products. It also correlate highly with the blue zones findings.

edit: wow! I was expecting some pushback, but this is still a surprize. Please take a bit of time to look at the actual content before being to critic. Also it's made to be a bit entertaining and simple so it can reach a larger audience.
I've noticed that a few minutes after eating some foods (chocolate, unfortunately), I feel like my brain's been messed with. Not in a good way - I'm both mentally a bit off (well, more than normal) and I have a headache.
For a reason not too dissimilar from the reason you call Trump's actions "tantrums": human emotion dominates logic.