skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The 919 was built originally to run in the LMP1-H class in the World Endurance Championship and the 24 hours of Le Mans. The WEC rules enforce some artifical performance limits on the car. For example they are limited on the amount of gasoline per lap they can use, and there is a max flow rate that is enforced by a fuel flow sensor. They are also limited in how much energy they can use per lap from the hybrid system. which is lower than the actual capacity of the hybrid system. for example you could watch the onboard with the telemetry that shows the battery status. They would come through Ford Chicane (The last before start finish at Le Mans) with the battery showing empty and then hit pit straight and come across start finish and the battery indicator would jump up to 1/4 or 1/2 full indicating that the car had harvested more power on that lap under braking than it was allowed to consume.

According to Porsche PR the WEC specification car the ICE put out 500hp. the EVO car did 720. and the Hybrid system went from 400 to 440hp.

Aero Development is also limited in WEC in not only the number of aero iterations you get per season, but what you can do like the size of the rear wing, and the rear diffuser. and of course they added a drag reduction system, that basically drops the rear wing out of the airflow on the straights to reduce drag.

they were also able to cut the weight by 39KG by taking out the windshield wipers, headlights, air conditioner and all the electronics that the FIA/ACO mandates in the WEC.

they also had a special tire.

as a point of comparison the 919 in WEC spec qualified at SPA for the 6 hour race with a 3 lap average 1:54.097. the evo did it this year in 1:41.770.
I think that the teaching of QM has already been impacted by quantum information—and I hope it gets impacted more, regardless of if and when we get useful QCs! To my mind, it’s just infinitely clearer to start with the basic rules and properties of QM—states, unitary transformations, measurements, tensor products, entanglement, density matrices, etc.—illustrated with the simplest systems to which those rules apply, namely collections of qubits (or more generally, finite-dimensional Hilbert spaces). This already lets the students fully understand no-cloning, quantum teleportation, quantum key distribution, basic quantum algorithms like Bernstein-Vazirani and Simon, and other cool things from quantum information, and it already lets them explore the conceptual questions (the measurement problem and so forth) that interest most of them. After this material has been mastered, and only after, one could see how it gets applied to real physical systems like the harmonic oscillator, the hydrogen atom, or a particle in a 1D potential well. So, all the mathematical complications of infinite-dimensional Hilbert spaces—which are not essential to understanding QM itself—could be deterred to this part of the course. This is the reverse of the historical order in which the ideas were discovered in the 1920s, but I think it’s the much more logical order in which to learn them—even if quantum information weren’t a big thing that people now care about.

If you want to see a recent text by a bona fide physicist that presents QM in exactly this way—what I think of as simply the “modern” way—then check out Lenny Susskind and Art Friedman’s remarkable “The Theoretical Minimum” series. Or you could look at pretty much any introductory book or course lecture notes about quantum information, including mine. We do it this way as well, except that we never do get to the harmonic oscillator or the hydrogen atom. :-) I can say from experience that the material is then totally accessible to any bright undergrad who’s done math up through linear algebra.
No /specific/ plan to add it yet, but it’s on our radar. Definitely the most requested language.
don't be a killjoy - thinking about these timescales doesn't gore your ox. In fact, putting effort into long-term thinking of any kind is probably going to help prioritizing on any scale.
Google doesn't want to sell hardware. They want to pull the next billion into their platform. Did you catch the Google Assistant icon in the article?
Don't miss the video in the "So, what makes it swing?" section. I think this might interest most HN readers here, since it's about measurements and trying to objectify the "Swing feeling".
Here[0] is a series of videos showing what a small IT company does with pfsense.

[0]: https://www.youtube.com/user/TheTecknowledge/search?query=pf...
I think the licensing requirements for these machines are strict enough that they want reproducibility in the testing, which would be one reason to require pseudo-random numbers instead of real random numbers.

I imagine they might just simulate a million transactions and test the outcome. If it falls outside of expected probabilities, they can dive deeper, and also have a pseudo-random seed to fall back on to figure out if it was just randomness or something is broken or configured to do the wrong thing.
No problem, it's just that with 'This is one of the reasons I always implore people to have a backup of their data with another provider or at least under a different account.' that passage I thought I had the backup angle more than covered.

What bugs me about it is that there are some companies that give serious pushback because their cloud providers keep on hammering in to them how reliable their cloud is and that any back-up will surely be less reliable than their cloud solution and oh by the way we also have a backup feature that you can use.

They don't realize that even then they still have all their eggs in the one basket: their cloud account.
It's on the person holding all the cards to display their power judiciously. Something designed to provoke undue stress is either glib or provocative, by default.

Don't forget, in this card game, you may be the dealer and the asymetric equation may be tipped in your favor, but play fair or some of the players might surprise you by throwing the game.

As "The Boss" you better not only know more, but also consider how put that on display. If you're actually in possession of gifted, multi-faceted intelligence, you won't need to read minds, so much as place yourselves in the shoes of the candidate, as you probe for awareness of facts, and exposure to subject matter.

It's often enough, to understand the conceptual interplay of known processes, before worrying about which color Teletubbie was the "funny" one.
rhotic speech defect. you get used to it (and turn on subtitles)
I respectfully disagree. I have worked on two projects with Azure both with big accounts, one even so big that we had senior Azure people sitting in our teams. Both had the highest possible support contract.

Yet their support didn't ever solve a problem within their SLA's and sometimes critical level tickets were hanging for months.

Plus my impression is that whereas AWS (and possibly Google) clouds are built by engineers using best practices and logic, Azure products felt always very much marketing driven e.g. marketing gave engineering a list of features to launch and engineering did the minimum effort possible to have the corresponding box ticked. I absolutely hated working on Azure and now won't accept any contract on it.

Documentation is horrible or non-existing, things just don't work, have weird limitations or transient deployment errors, super weird architectural and implementation choices + you never escape the clunkyness of the MS legacy with for example AD.
Germany.

ARD: http://www.ard-text.de/

ZDF: https://teletext.zdf.de/teletext/zdf/

According to http://www.daserste.de/specials/ueber-uns/ard-text-erfolgrei... there were four million users a day in 2014 for the ARD teletext, with a peak during the football world cup with 8.57 million users in a single day.
> work religiously ...

that's my problem with part time work. If I have to spend even two or three hours on something not related to the research I really want to do, the rest of the day is ruined.

I'm the kind of person, who does well by dedicating solid chunks of time day in and day out on one topic, with the only distractions being eating, sleeping, and going to the restroom.

However if that part time work involves me showing up and just being there, or following mindless instructions (like burger flipping, or moving containers from one place to another) then as long as I'm not physically tired, and I can go back and do research for the rest of that day. But I doubt part time menial work would raise enough money to pay the bills.
In this case the complaint was against some image(s) we were publicly hosting. We've taken steps to isolate our file hosting from the rest of the system in case this were to happen again. We only host images for fashion blog posts written by staff so I imagine other aws customers have had a much worse time in this regard.
Garageband has this in the Drummer section.
At least someone gets it.
Remember the echo in Apples old 90's social network eworld? There was never anyone there, it was like being in an empty shopping mall
torrentz2.eu is a good way to search for torrents. DMCA compliant, at least on paper so mileage may vary. But it has helped me out many times.

Google isn't the internet. Eerily close but not 100%.
You can federate Kubernetes across your own rack and one or more public cloud providers.
Current student here!

I really the prepare ahead type of course layout. It gives me the chance to read through, maybe code up a couple of examples and come to class with questions. It also seems like that format of class leads to more interesting discussions on how concepts can be used.

Another thing that I've come to appreciate in University courses is a professor who was in the industry for a while. One professor in particular had a lot of stories about his time at IBM, talked about perspectives on building large systems in teams, thoughts on how to deal with management as well as the actual concepts. It's very neat to hear about what practicing computer science looks like off campus.
I'm the opposite, I found the books in a steady decline from book 2 onward. I thought the last two were terrible. And the new books by Brian Herbert were largely unreadable. But we all have different tastes.
> probability... can be founded on linear logic instead

Do you have any links or more details about this?
> The first was the quality that caused my YC cofounders to nickname me "The Social Radar." I was one of those kids that you just couldn’t get anything past. If something seemed off or out of character, I noticed and made inquiries. I was always trying to figure things out based on subtle social cues.

> When it came to investing, I had something that my cofounders didn’t have: I was the Social Radar. I couldn’t judge our applicants’ technical ability, or even most of the ideas. My cofounders were experts at those things. I looked at qualities of the applicants my cofounders couldn't see. Did they seem earnest? Were they determined? Were they flexible-minded? And most importantly, what was the relationship between the cofounders like? While my partners discussed the idea with the applicants, I usually sat observing silently. Afterward, they would turn to me and ask, "Should we fund them?"

Perhaps the unreplicable advantage of YC in its early years.

I've always been fascinated by this and would like to learn more about how to do this. However, I think it is really a function of how much experience you have talking to real people. For example, it is easier for me to retroactively analyze a social situation after it happens (like a date) than to proactively act and do the "right things" in the moment of the situation. I think it really comes down to how much true experience and pattern recognition you have. You can't analyze a situation correctly until you have been through it way too many times and can "step back" from yourself.

I think perhaps a small handful of my more socially adept friends are good at it but probably not at the level of JL.
In any search result page, click Tools > All results > Verbatim. That is also how you restrict e.g. the temporal range of results (Tools > Any Time > ...)
While not a cloud platform, I had an experience along the same vein with Stripe.

We're a health-care startup, and this past Saturday I got an email saying that due to the nature of our business, we were prohibited from using their payment platform (Credit Card companies have different risk profiles and charge accordingly--see Patereon v Adult Content Creators).

Rather than pull the plug immediately, they offered us a 5-day wind down period, and provided information on a competitor that takes on high-risk services.

Fortunately, the classification of our business was incorrect (we do not offer treatment nor perscription/pharma services), and after contacting their support via Email & Twitter, we resolved the issue in less than 24-hours.

So major kudos to Stripe for protecting their platform, WHILE also trying to do the right thing for the customers who run astray from the service agreement.
Yes, there is or they wouldn't turn it off. Companies aren't in the habit of trying not to take your money for services without a pretty damn good reason.

And if it was that critical it should have support and a SLA contract, and you know, backups.
Oh, I agree with you. SpaceX is awesome and I'm excited about the idea of colonizing Mars. The difference is that Mars is attainable now. Lots of unknowns but it's within reach.
My recollection is that I usually found the lectures to be as exciting as the lecturer did. So if he was excited, so was I.

Are you perhaps not sufficiently conveying your interest in the topics to the students?
Vovk’s book probability and finance bases probability on game theory. Linear logic is game theory on steroids. However there are more connections.
This was purely my first—and very subjective—impression after opening the site. I was reading through the blog since this was posted and I'd say the content is interesting and is far from a conspiracy theory.
In most states the Gaming profits are taxed, hence up to 30% of the states budget is funded by Gaming operations (here in Australia it is). Regardless of the media rhetoric, no government wants to lose 30% of its budget funding, hence it does everything it can to appease the Gaming industry while pretending to care about community cost. At the end of the day, you can have more schools, hospitals, better roads etc (thanks to Gaming), or you can have less schools, less hospitals, worse roads etc (and be Gaming free).
The other perspective is you can't always do work on interesting, fundamentally game changing problems. Some people maintain infrastructure and keep things running, and while those jobs can at times, look boring, thankless, and energy zapping - someone needs to do them.

Honestly there are plenty of people working in the most mundane areas of life doing exciting, novel things. The difference is no one notices it, until someone happens upon it, learns from it, combines it with their understanding, aggregates, synthesizes, culminating in recognition. Information is fundamentally open, we stand on the shoulders of giants, etc. When you come to an awareness or an epiphany, think of how you got there. Some of it comes from you, but a lot of it comes from things that aren't you. That's the problem with recognition. Sometimes the giants you stand on are the people you don't agree with.

Computer scientists stand on each other's toes, and so on. Falling too deeply in this awareness is like swimming in a sea of your own conscienceness, but it's important to remember, be thankful, humble, and try to give back more than you take. There are plenty of nerds out there working on interesting problems. They just don't look sexy on the outside because the interesting parts are all at the core of the technology, stuff you learn from, but don't know how to see well enough, quite yet.
NYC.com 'Secretly' Hosts a Pirate Torrent Site
Doesn't hurt that he has a graduate degree in Mathematics, so he's already credentialed for research.
I just finished my Associates in CS, and my favourite classes were the ones that were really, really hard. Case in point, my digital systems design final project had only 6 students complete it, and of those projects only 4 actually worked perfectly.

The opportunity to actually struggle in a "safe" environment is extremely valuable as a learning aid.

Nothing demands a thorough understanding of the material like a fairly complex term project.

My databases class had a similar project, and my information security class had weekly long-form research essays. Doesn't matter, as long as it's hard enough to matter.
There is a Bay Area Quantum Computing meetup (I'm one of the organizers!)

https://www.meetup.com/Bay-Area-Quantum-Computing-Meetup/

Next one will likely be at the end of July. Hope to see you there!
First of all, it's awesome you're putting in the effort your students deserve!

Your question and many of the answers exactly fit a framework taught to me in university pedagogy classes (which were a part of my PhD program). According to this framework, there are three levels of teaching:

Level 1: teachers focus on how the students are.

Level 2: teachers focus on what the teacher does.

Level 3: teacher focus on what the student _is doing_.

I think you are mostly now operating on level 2. You should try and switch to level 3! Review all the concrete activities the students are doing and ask yourself: how and what the student is learning when they are doing this?

See this reference: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/0729436990180105

Also think about this concept: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_alignment

p.d. If you decide to apply these methods, be prepared for some initial resistance from the students - effective learning is not easy and many students have rarely experienced it!
Thank you someone for giving me a downvote :)
Intro to machine learning with scikit-learn (2015)
Still, a propeller works, even though the positive and negative pressure seek each other out.
If the controls for everything that I need are physical, then I don't need the digital controls.
This highlights one of the challenges Google has going into the cloud market - they don’t have a history of serving enterprise customers and the organizational structure and processes to do that well. I think one of the reasons Microsoft has gotten cloud market share so quickly with Azure (in addition to bundling licenses with other products!) is that they have the experience with enterprise customers and the organization to serve them well (regardless of how Azure compares to GCP as a product). Supporting enterprise customers is what they have always done - not so with Google (and Amazon had to learn that as well).
I do engineering education research (and some CS education research) along with friends who teach and are active in the open source community. You should be able to email me via me profile. Go for it, I love talking education with folks and helping them improve their classes.
The climate controls aren’t ideal on the Model 3, but “Auto” does the job 90% of the time. As a complete system the Tesla UI is everything that BMW and Mercedes has tried to be for the last decade with its stupid wheels and touch pads and other gimmicks. Audi/VW is probably best in class in terms of a streamlined and feature complete set of cockpit controls but it’s jus so damn buggy. Doubly so in the US where you have to go to a dealer just to update the software.

I much preferred the fully manual controls on the late 90s early 2000 BMWs without nav to ANYTHING they have put out since. Mercedes is even worse with multiple different input gimmicks, all of which are hard to use. It’s like every year they make it worse. Somehow.

Tesla can improve with voice commands and better mapping of steering wheel controls but everyone else really just needs to scrap their entire UI and start over because their current software is just 15 years of monkey patches from the first navigation control models in the early 2000s.
There's a chrome extension that restores the view image button.
The affected PRNG (90's design) was reseeded every 100ms and only had 96 bit resolution. These days the PRNG is reseeded every 10 ms (+-5ms sliding interval) and use a minimum of 1024 bit resolution.
is it not kmh?
THIS!

I would add that they can also come in and observe and confidentially give you input.

Not just flipped classroom...which some students find annoying / 'cheating' ...look at active learning as well.
> the most authoritative thought leader

That sounds both terrible and very much like Silicon Valley.
My favorite part of my sabbatical in Tel Aviv was having some actual time to do research. My second-favorite part was the hummus.

Forrelation is not a “guiding light for quantum deep learning.” I’m not even sure if there’s such a thing as “quantum deep learning” that’s sufficiently well-developed to deserve the name. You can use Forrelation as a separating example for some other quantum learning problems, e.g. k-means clustering, but so far that mostly just shows that you can artifically shoehorn an exponential quantum speedup into those tasks, rather than that the tasks will give us useful quantum speedups in “real life.”

In the Forrelation problem, I conjecture that the only thing that really matters about the Fourier transform is that it’s a unitary matrix all of whose entries have small absolute values. As such, it lets you relate two Boolean functions in a way that a quantum computer can notice, but that’s extremely “global” in nature and doesn’t show up locally. Raz and Tal may have used some additional technical properties of Forrelation in their proof (now that I write that, I’m actually not sure—I’ll need to check!). But if they did, then I conjecture that another proof could avoid the use of those properties.
"sourceforge". nuff said.
Google Fi is for consumers.
urbex of the web?
I don't know what policing is for anymore. Crime is a part of the cost of a free society. Fighting crime with such tools takes away a lot of freedom. This is a power grab, I cannot imagine it helping anyone. Maybe it will solve a few petty crimes, but it is a squeeze on freedom in my opinion.
It's unclear what "unfettered access" would mean for a search engine. Google has always been ranking results from the very beginning (PageRank). To get unbiased results you'd need a random sample of something, which is never going to be useful in a search engine.

So they are always going to make some people unhappy and the question is who. It used to be people nobody on Hacker News cared about like spammers and click farms (remember them)? But you could still call that censorship or social engineering even then. Isn't getting rid of spam also "using their power?"

Without heavy-duty ranking and spam prevention, would you even use it at all?

So yeah, they have a lot of power, they're getting leaned on by other powerful forces, and we don't need to agree with their choices. But just like a newspaper has to decide on something for its front page (and leave other stuff out), a search engine's gotta rank things.
All of those things are true!

Overall, it's a solid alternative to Spacemacs that not enough people know about.

Spacemacs markets itself much better and I tried it first, but found it to be bloated to be point that it noticeably impacted performance. E.g. start-up time was 10+ seconds; ~2s with doom (and doom doesn't feel any less feature-complete).

As for the bus factor, doom has the maturity of a 4-year-old project; it won't just fall apart on you. It is mostly a one-man show, but Henrik is still very active and super quick to respond to issues.