skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Indeed, the proof of the halting problem is much easier to sketch than the proof of Godel's incompleteness theorem (which the OP doesn't even attempt). So here he goes: a proof sketch of the halting problem for 12 year old programmers.

Suppose that somebody wrote us a program that can check whether another program will loop indefinitely or eventually halt when run on a particular input:

bool halts(string program, string input){
// halting checking code that checks
// whether program's main function
// halts when given input
// returns true or false
}

For example:

string program =
"void main(string foo){" +
" if(foo[0] == 'a'){ return; }" +
" else{ while(true){} }" +
"}";

halts(program, "abc") // returns true
halts(program, "bar") // returns false

Now we can write the following program:

bool halts(string program, string input){
// same halting checking code as above
}

void main(string program){
if(halts(program, program)){
while(true){ }
}
}

Note that this is a perfectly valid program. halts() is supposed to work on any program, including a program that happens to contain the source code of halts(). We can just reuse the code that the person gave us and copy-paste it here.

Now the question is: what will our halts() function say about this program, when given its own code as input? In other words: what will the following code print?

bool halts(string program, string input){
// same halting checking code as above
}

void main(){
string program =
"bool halts(string program, string input){" +
" // same halting checking code as above" +
"}" +
"void main(string program){" +
" if(halts(program, program)){" +
" while(true){ }" +
" }" +
"}";

print(halts(program,program));
}

There are just 2 possibilities: either this program prints true, or this program prints false (if this program never terminates then halts() has a bug).

Case 1: suppose halts(program,program) returns true.

If the halts function is working correctly, that means that when we actually run the code in `program` with `program` as its input, it will halt. But now lets see what actually happens. When we run the main() function in `program` with `program` as its input, it first checks `if(halts(program,program))`. Well, we already assumed that halts returns true, so control flow will go inside the if block to the infinite loop. But that means that halts lied to us!

Case 2: suppose that halts(program,program) returns false.

Now a similar argument holds. run the code in `program` with `program` as its input, the condition of the if statement will be false, and the main function will terminate. So even though halts(program,program) returns false, the program actually terminates. It lied again!

As you can see, no matter what halts returns, it cannot tell the truth about the program we constructed. Hence it is impossible to fill in the missing code in halts() so that it will work correctly.
i realise this is a discussion about economics not finance - but i think this little story sheds some light on this. early into a job on wall street i found that the companies default risk model could be improved (against the 'training'/regression data they had already spent ages cleaning) by adding a neural network that was trained to predict the error in the model.

did they use it? no. why not? because they felt it was important that they fully understand the forces at play that cause the default rates to move in that direction. you could say that they were worried about models overfitting the data - sure, that's kinda it. but the point is the entire nature of the market can change overnight and kind of go into a different state.

so what does that have to do with economics? well i guess maybe some of the same reasoning is at stake - people who think "we're proved wrong so often we need to retreat back to just those few things we can really rely on being true" and are worried about being "too clever" with all this math stuff.

now its true that cargo cult like application of mathematical formula has been (imho) part cause for many truly dreadful economic theories. but still, they are wrong. if you don't understand the nature of far from equilibrium, complex systems, you'll never even begin to understand the forces that drive the economics of the real world.
There's no implication that you give up your copyrights to apple. They won't allow you to sell iBooks elsewhere, that's it. It's not exactly pro-open market but that's Apple: musicians and app developers already knuckle under.

The real disturbing part is this: Apple censors worse than China, and books tend to be provocative, a lot more than music or apps. They essentially want to act as a publisher too, but without taking any risks on the part of authors. I sincerely hope for good literature that ibooks ends to be a flop.

In any case the problem will be solved with 3rd party tools that take an iBook and convert it to (swf|html|exe) that people can sell anywhere they want. Surely apple cannot claim that the output of a conversion program belongs to them as well. Although it would be interesting to see how they react when the first ibook-to-iOS App converter appears.
Joel is right. As it is, we have to win every time: they need to win only once.
In the publishing world an author provides exclusivity in exchange to something. Usually the author gets some type of advance and the commitment from the publisher to publish and market the book.

Here you are supposed to give up commercial exclusivity merely for the ability to use a piece of software. And there really isn't anything special or expensive about that software either, there are plenty of free ebook creation software options.

Furthermore, in the usual publishing contract if the publisher that has exclusivity declines to publish something, the author can usually shop the work to other publishers. Not here. Here apparently if Apple says no, you are pretty much screwed, you cannot sell your work anywhere.

And by the way, I do not think that the original article authors are misreading anything. The agreement says:

"Apple may determine for any reason and in its sole discretion not to select your Work for distribution"

This means they can refuse distribution for any reason, and you do not need to do anything wrong to be refused. And of course if they refuse you do not have the right to sell your work anywhere else.
Golshifteh Farahani Photos
Golshifteh Farahani Photos
Any syndication associated with a naked imagine of a widely used Iranian celebrity now around exile found in Paris features began big On-line viral buzz
The Shifting Digital Sands of Online Jihad
Ask HN: What's a software program you WISH existed?
For me it's a decent offline non web based/non browser specific bookmark organizer.

For example, I have thousands of bookmarks, but I'm not interested in backing them on a random website that might go down. Google bookmarks is good but it doesn't let you important all your bookmarks, you have to add them one by one.

I wish there was a program that let you import HTML/JSON files into it from FF, IE, Chrome, Safari, etc then had some good organization features almost exactly like firefox. It should also have the ability to delete duplicate links, organize links, put tags, create folders, etc.

It should also have the ability to sync with iphones so one could back up their iphone bookmarks onto the thing.
Who cares. IP protection trumps basic common sense and basic human rights. And even though we all have to abide by inane protectionism schemes, we should not be allowed to directly vote on them, because direct democracy would make uninformed people make impulsive decisions and possibly introduce theocracies everywhere. So to prevent theocracy, we have to prevent direct democracy, which means we cant vote on copyright, which means we have to swallow down our pride and just abide by any IP protectionism scheme the informed overlords make in agreement with the industrial stake holders. There sadly is no middle way. It is either theocracy or IP protectionism. Pick one.
And dont forget that the Taxman will want to tax you on benefits in kind - or they will be if they are doing their job right
Yeah it's weird going to a site you expect to see blocked and seeing that it works just fine. Anyone have a screenshot of what it says to US visitors?
Why ConcurrentHashMap is better than Hashtable and just as good as a HashMap
In practice, it doesn't seem that bad. It's no worse than having to rewrite parts of your app to submit it to other mobile stores. You just have to make sure you write the actual book outside their tool, in order to be able to sell your book in case Apple rejects it.

In theory, it's an appalling way of doing it. They could have simply put in the eBooks Store rules that you couldn't sell the book anywhere else if it was accepted by them.
They are using their dominance in the tablet market to own another market, exclusively on their terms. Similiar to what Microsoft did when bundling IE with Windows. I would not be surprised to see an antitrust case against Apple in the near future.
On Friday when I cycled home from work, I wore a compression shirt under my cycling jersey for the first time. When I arrived home, I had drunk less than half the water I did the previous trip. This is anecdotal at best, but I'm going to wear it again on the next ride.
The most bitter pill from my previous job was hearing "we don't track vacation" right up until the day I noticed my pay was low from the last pay period and when I asked why, the answer was "you took too much vacation".
On the first one, Google seems at least a little less blatant about it; there are tech companies that offer free dinner, but only starting at a relatively late hour, like 7pm, which is pretty clearly a perk for people who stay late. Although someone I know works at a place with a policy like that, and just works his 8-hour day 10am-7pm (with an hour break for lunch), stopping by for dinner on the way out, so it works for some sleep schedules without actually putting in overtime.
The line that really grated for me was

> You can count on Microsoft to ensure all your favorite PC software will be backwards-compatible with the Windows 8 tablet.

And, well, no we can't. Windows ARM tablets will be for new-style Metro apps only, and even if you can run a traditional Windows application on a Windows x86 tablet, there's no reason to think it will be a good UX, given the difference in form-factor.

I think Microsoft is getting back on track, and I agree that's a good thing. But the article is over-enthusiastic about it.
Up to a point - if something has been going on for a long it can become an implied part of your contract (probably less so in the US but still a danger)

And removing these little perks to save 20$ a month can have an impact on Morale out of all proportion to the cash value.

I remember one case I dealt with where a senior manager ($200,000 pa level) was very upset over losing his business needs phone line which was worth £15 a month.
Protect IP, SOPA supporters vow not to give up fight
Internet opponents of a pair of controversial Hollywood-backed copyright bills won a temporary reprieve today, when upcoming votes in the Senate and House of Representatives were postponed.
I always think it's interesting when companies try to negotiate compensation by perks... They're basically giving away more cash.

"Well our health benefits are worth $15,000 a year, you know. It's a very good plan."

My answer is always "Wow, I didn't know you guys thought I was worth X+$15,000, I'll take that in cash, thanks." My health plan is comparable and costs me $200 a month + $1500 a year in deductibles, tax free.
Top 20 Americas Most Promising Companies
Anonymous tricked people into joining Web site attacks
If you clicked a link distributed by Anonymous yesterday, you may have unwittingly helped the online activists in their attacks against U.S. government and entertainment industry sites that were organized to protest proposed antipiracy legislation.
Nope, still extra-curricular, just like the food is still theirs to make available or take away as they see fit. This is a shady tactic you and the employer can both use. I wouldn't though.

let me elaborate. if someone looks me in the eye and says, "Don't forget that we never work weekends, how much is that worth?" then they are not my friend. That's a given, it's part of a 40-hour job not to work weekends. To put a price on it and have me concede part of my salary means they don't have my interests at heart.

Now, you might say that negotiators don't have to have the other guy's interests at heart. Then maybe you can read Getting to Yes ("the Harvard principle") or even the old How To Win Friends and Influence People.

the toughest negotiators usually end up having no one to talk with but mud with a stick in it. If all you want for an employee is a mud with a stick in it, by all means, harp on about how elephants do not trample around your premises, there are no monsoons in the area, and other employees don't use the outhouse or squat outside to potentially poop on them.

But if you want a quality employee, an actual human, then the negotiation that works on mud with a stick in it will not be very compelling. Or honest. Pretty soon you won't be negotiating with another human again.
And if that perk then goes away - a smart person would have this in writing.

So boss wheres my pay rise to replace the free food "hr said" the free food was part of my compensation
i have an advanced graduate degree & am not 12 years old. The guy on reddit with his explanation was good reading. Now-fr the interesting part-it's people who can understand the theorem AND explain it to a third party are the really RARE people. Putting complexity into simple terms is what takes the real talent. Amen
Www.getdollarsdaily.com
This Website is for Making money Online ... It is The best Home based Business for Earn Money ..
As I got up on a late Sunday morning, all major news outlets are talking both about the alleged attacks and about ACTA itself. Sunday talk shows are talking about ACTA. The Govt spokesman starts assuring people that they won't rush anything and ACTA will be consulted.

ACTA suddenly came into mainstream public debate.

Where else did that happen in the world? I'm friggin proud of my country. :]

Oh, and BTW, signups on Facebook for the street protest against ACTA have jumped from 13,000 to 19,000 in 12 hours. :]
So I multiplied the $30/day by the 9,600 employees in Mountain View and New York by the 251 days Google is open every year. Remember that Google probably spends a lot more than this, because there are employees outside those offices, and because visitors are there all the time eating.

The grand total: By our guesstimate, Larry and Sergey are spending at least $72,288,000 per year to fill their workers' pie-holes. How can they afford to do that? Easy, of course: Last year Google (GOOG) earned $4.2 billion.
From Wikipedia about "Citizens United v. FEC": "the First Amendment prohibits government from placing limits on independent spending for political purposes by corporations and unions."

The German system does not place rules on independent spending; it only requires TV channels to provide ad space for political parties that run for office. The amount of space is tied to the relevance of the party, usually measured by the success in the previous election. The TV channel can charge the party 35% of the usual price, this is considered to be the cost price of the channel. [1]

Parties are, of course, allowded to buy additional space, but they would have to pay the usual price. In other words, the German law doesn't limit independent spending.

[1] http://wiki.piratenpartei.de/Grundlagen_f%C3%BCr_Wahlwerbung...
I don't want to speak for the OP but he's probably referring to the character Mickey Mouse, which is already protected effectively in perpetuity by trademark law. So there doesn't seem to be a reason to distinguish copyright terms on that account.
Won't work on me, I'm asexual.
I'm not sure if it is possible or not for a citation in a book to be illegal.

If by "illegal" we include civil liability, not just criminal liability, I could imagine that a book could contain libelous citations. For instance, if someone published a book called "Child Molesters Among Us!" that contained citations to a bunch of people in the community that are not in fact child molesters (basically people that the author simply didn't like) he'd be in for some serious lawsuits.

If he did the same thing on a web page, with the links being names that when clicked brought up the person's house on Google Maps I'd have no objection to him being in for the same lawsuits.
Disqus Commenting System Goes Down; Leaves All Blogs Comment-Less
Odd Man Out? | Quazen
How Small is BigData?
How deep the analysis of ourselves and our society should go thanks to the disintegration of technical limits on storage? How small are the pieces of the huge BigData pie?
Companies try to do the same playing-both-sides there, too, though, which is what causes some of the confusion and ire. On the one hand, it's formally just a perk that isn't guaranteed. But on the other hand, they'll often make claims about what kinds of bonuses you can expect to get -- "baseline 10% is usual" or "we've never given less than a 5% average bonus in the last decade" -- because they want potential employees to consider it as quasi-salary when evaluating the offer.
Ask HN: Today, Croatia is voting on joining the EU. What are your thoughts?
Today in Croatia, we're having a referendum on joining the European Union. Both the proponents and opponents are loud, although the polls seem to be in favor of the pro-EU side.

What are your thoughts about entering, considering the problems the EU currently faces? I've seen plenty of HN-ers from Slovenia, Bulgaria, Romania, and other countries which recently went through the process. I'd very much like to hear about their experiences, especially about the way it affected startups and small companies.

Thanks!
Create your own app for iPhone, iPad or iPod Touch « StartupTunes
He's talking about supporting all the hangers-on, the stylist, make-up artist, managers etcetera. That is purely perpetuating the parasitic industry that has latched itself onto popular music.

Disrupting the industry in my view means separating that stuff from the production and distribution of the actual music, so that those of use that wish to make and/or consume music are not forced to sustain and entire industry we neither want nor need, and has fuck all to do with music.

That BTW doesn't mean I don't recognize an act like Lady Gaga as a legitimate artistic and commercial product, I just think that it belongs in an entirely different industry where music is secondary. One most musicians wouldn't want a part of if there were other options, and most music lovers don't want to pay for (because most of the money you pay for "legal" music goes to that industry, not the musicians who's music you actually want). Making that happen is the disruption consumers and musicians are waiting for.
Joel is right on some terms, however the problem is how are we going to know who gets to join in this share of air time on these sites? Also, who is going to determine that?
The swiss have a direct democracy and are not a theocracy.
No, they wouldn't. You have a nice legal argument there, but JUST THIS WEEK the owners and operators of Megaupload were arrested by US authorities with no extradition, no "prosecution in the target jurisdiction", just arrested in New Zealand for running a company from there.
> After all, you can't shout fire in a crowded theatre because it would harm the public good.

That's not true; there's no general "harming the public good" exception to the First Amendment. There are exceptions for lying (i.e., making false statements with knowledge that they are false (or with reckless disgard of whether they are false) and intent to deceive), and that's the actual reason why it is unprotected to falsely shout "fire" in a crowded theater.
Thank god-you are one of the rare individuals who can use the English language to explain a complex idea. The hideous bias I have encountered in the "hi tech" world is because my mind works like yours and I have always found your talent to be rare gem.
Why anyone would think the reduction of complexity into simple terms means putting it into "12 year old" terms is beyond me. So I remain an exile.
I think many people fail to notice that there can be many motivations behind someone's actions. When the motivation is some kind of business interest, for example, it does not make much sense to reinvent the wheel. On the other hand, when the motivation is to explore concept-space, it does not make much sense to not reinvent the wheel. Motivations determine the proper course to take and no motivation is superior to another. And we should not forget that the reinvention of the wheel is the reason we do not bustle about on wooden rims anymore.
They want to move into USA for whatever reason, but the process is getting there isn't very fun, so I've heard.
Also, sometimes people have to move into USA, instead of "want".

Also, if we're talking about software developers and startup founders, you can't bullshit this kind of people for a long period of time. They'd figure it out. Well, they did.
Lamar Smith has another Internet censorship bill: H.R.1981
arn posted this screen below: http://imgur.com/BJJOs
Why would it be one-sided? The proposal is to give free ads to all candidates.
I think we just see the government (any) as an enemy and I agree it's pretty healthy. History teached us to do so but somehow still works.
17 must have Chrome web development extensions
Not sure that would work in the situation as Rachel described since the free food was still there, just with decreased availability and ubiquitousness.
USA is behind it, they're almost the only ones who really want it, they write it and also their world view gets into it and then imposed on the other countries.
A problem with continuations
If you read the 'evidence' against MU the mere blocking of US traffic to your website could be seen as 'evidence' that you are concealing a crime.
Sigh. As a citizen of Israel, I'm upset and somewhat worried about the "cyberwar" that has begun between Israel and people who dislike us. I have no doubt that it's possible to wreak havoc on the Israeli economy given enough time, effort, knowledge and Internet access. That knowledge and access is now increasingly available in Arab countries, and there are plenty of people there who want to hurt us in some way.

The Israeli government claims that they are taking such threats seriously, but I'm not convinced. Rather, I'm concerned that this is the beginning of a low-level online war that cannot end well for anyone.

My concern doesn't, however, translate into support for online vigilantes who think that playing tit-for-tat games of exposing Arab users' accounts, credit-card information, and other data is acceptable or even desirable. Exposing the online data of innocent Arabs won't improve Israel's security, won't help to improve our image in the world, and won't deter Arab criminals who enjoy the publicity and notoriety of exposing Israeli credit-card numbers or bringing down our national airline's Web site.

I'm all in favor of the Israeli government using its security knowledge to defend its citizens, or to attack our enemies. But it's going to be a nightmare for a lot of people, Israelis and Arabs alike, if we encourage in any way, shape, or form individual criminal acts and exposure of innocent bystanders' data.
A Web OS? Are You Dense? (Dated 2008)
US is certainly going on a trend of isolation by either bullying other countries or putting sanctions and such on their imports.
Defending Privacy at the U.S. Border: A Guide for Travelers Digital Devices
Tiny amounts of alcohol dramatically extend a worm's life, but why?
$15k / 250 business days, that would be $60 per day AND they would get the food at much lower prices then you do when you sit in a restaurant. Really? If it was a random company that kind of BS would put me off working there big time.