skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I'm a little late to the party, but super-resolution is a topic of interest in computer vision, and this approach is one of many that have been recently proposed. At a high level, I should say that the field is still searching for the right approach, and there is by no means a consensus that this method (or more generally, this philosophy) is the right one.

As a general rule of thumb, the performance shown in example figures of a computer vision paper should be taken as best cases (and in some papers, as outliers), and even the "failures" shown are often not the worst or most typical. Similarly, quantitative results are generally as optimistic as possible, arrived at through "graduate student descent" of the parameter space.

So I think we are still quite far from a super-resolution method that is truly practical OR effective.

Some specific points about this paper:

- This research group has a long history of exploring methods based on exploiting self-similarity in images for various tasks (super-resolution, denoising, segmentation, etc.), and although they have shown remarkable progress on this front, it is generally agreed that using more than just a single image would improve results drastically for just about any task.

- The use of more-than-exhaustive self-similarity search is EXTREMELY expensive, however, and that's why runtime is often not mentioned in these papers. It's not uncommon for processing times to be on the order of DAYS, for a single tiny VGA image. (I don't remember whether they quote a number in this paper or not, but it's certainly not faster than a few hours per image, unless you start using some hacks.)

- As others have commented, this method is not actually extracting new information from the image, but rather "hallucinating" information based on similar parts of the image. There is certainly reasonable justification for its use as a prior, but it's not clear whether it's optimal, or even close to it.

- My gut feeling is that super resolution methods will find much more application in compression-related areas rather than CSI-esque forensics. For example, JPEG compression is roughly 30%. But downsample an image by 2x in each direction and your compression ratio is already 25%. So if you can downsample images a few times and then use super-resolution to "hallucinate" a high-resolution version, that's probably good enough for the vast majority of common images (e.g., facebook photos), where users aren't very sensitive to quantitative "correctness". And of course with mobile adoption happening much faster than mobile bandwidth is increasing, this becomes an ideal application domain.
This is great. I'm looking forward to keeping up with this blog!
Top Page Rankings
How you can get top page rankings in Google and other popular search engines. Here you can find some simple tips to make your site Search Engine Friendly
Facebook ads.
That's also a helpful way to look at it, yes. I would say that given Mr. Newmark's personal statements, "Craigslist doesn't care about profit" is an acceptable oversimplification, and is how a competitor should probably view the situation for purposes of trying to profitably compete with Craigslist.
112 points right now and still no one has confirmed the exploit is working... What happened to the good old "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"?
I have to agree. I have published 12 apps on Windows Phone and ported 2 to Android and 1 to iOS, and my experience has been exactly that. There is less competition for small developers. My apps are not earth shattering or new in any way, I was just learning how to code and thought it would be cool to try and earn a few extra dollars doing it. The one app I have that is available on all three platforms did substantially better on Windows Phone. In numbers, I got about 1500 to 2000 ad impressions a day for 6-7 months on wp7 which has settled down to about 500 a day after 1.2 years. Android has been consistent at around 1000 a day for 4 months, however the pay out from ad mob vs microsoft pubcenter has been dramatically less. As for iOS, it hit about 2000 impressions the first day and has dive bombed since then. Now steady at about 300 a day. Interestingly it pays the most and the clicks on the ads are massively higher than Android. Like 50 clicks per 300 impressions. I think on iOS the user as so many more options, why would they open my app? If I was a large shop, I would take that into consideration. For reference, the app is called Critter Cards- Toddler if anyone is interested.
About Ikon Ceramic Knife company
Ikon Ceramic Knife
Industry Co.,Ltd focus on designing, producing and trading ceramic knife, ceramic clipper blades and ceramic tools.
Ikon Ceramic has a long experience of developing technology in the field of manufacturing ceramic knife, blades, tools and other related products. The R&D team of Ikon Ceramic is composed of Senior Engineers and professional developers.
Ikon Ceramic can provide the following products: ceramic knife, ceramic clipper blades, ceramic scissors, ceramic screwdrivers, ceramic grinder, ceramic peeler, ceramic seal rings,ceramic block gage, ceramic pin gage, high-precision ceramic plate, ceramic fruit knife, ceramic muzzle, etc. They have been applied in electronic, textile, paper making, household and many other fields , which also been export to Southeast Asia, EU, U.S., Japan, etc. These products have been highly praised by our customers.
We also acceptOEM, ODM orders, We have a belief of providing high precision, high quality products and high efficiency, satisfying service. Ikon Ceramic will keep up with the development of contemporary world to make itself the leading manufacturer in the field of ceramic tools.
That's funny--I imagined this more as a "why is the signal to noise ratio so poor on HN?" post. To be frank, I've never heard of either Twilio or refer.ly. They appear similar to any number of generic tickets in the gigantic lottery that is the web.

I think it's a bit easy to lose perspective here on HN. The tough love: I see a bunch of inexperienced folks pimping themselves out in the HN circle jerk/echo chamber.

For my part, I'm wondering where all the power users went, and how I quickly I can follow them before their next high quality community gets blown open.
From wikipedia:

"Trousers first enter recorded history in the 6th century BCE, with the appearance of horse-riding Iranian peoples in Greek ethnography. At this time, not only the Persians, but also allied Eastern and Central Asian peoples such as the Bactrians, Armenians, Tigraxauda Scythians and Xiongnu Hunnu, are known to have worn them. Trousers are believed to have been worn by both sexes among these early users.

Republican Rome viewed the draped clothing of Greek and Minoan (Cretan) culture as an emblem of civilization and disdained trousers as the mark of barbarians."

So, while the Romans did eventually copy the trousers once the barbarians were overrunning and ruling Roman lands in the western half of the Empire, it's disappointing that the author didn't go further back. Back to the barbarians, which likely goes back to the central Asian peoples.
One thing I will always remember from my college economics class was the professor saying, on day one, that that's how you measure what people want.

"You want a lot of things. You want an A in this class. You want a trip to Hawaii. You want a tasty lunch. And you want all of those things ... 'a lot.' Well, I'm economist, I'm trying to be a scientist. I can't measure 'a lot.' What I can measure is - what are you willing to give up in order to get the things you want?"
Since the answer to the rhetorical questions is a resounding no, there is very little meaningful behavior to be attached to the "domain objects". "Domain objects" do not obey the "Law of Demeter" and they are nothing but the data types of OCaml or Haskell. The other side of the coin are abstract apis, which are polymorphic collections of stateless functions, aka modules. Indeed, modern OO is functional programming in disguise.

Regarding Demeter, naming an anecdotically supported observation "Law" is a bit of a stretch ;)
Why don't you submit some articles you think are worthwhile and help raise the bar?

P.S. downvoters - this is actually constructive give me a break
Pandora available in New Zealand without any kind of proxy
The article (the one inside) simply says that one size doesn't fit all.

Agile (or, as I like to call it, short and iterative waterfall with priority management and pipeline solution), fits some scenarios well, but not others.

It fits startups because it's quick to release. It fits non-scientific products (or non-algorithm heavy products) as features can usually be contained in a single sprint or easily broken into deliverables. It fits huge products on maintenance mode when most of the development are customer features and issues.

However, it doesn't fit algorithm-heavy products (algorithms are usually "one-go" and require a sustained effort), it doesn't fit big products during intense development (architecture can't be ignored or it'll crumble under the product weight), it doesn't _always_ fit corporate environment (because of "impedance mismatch").

[very personal opinion, flame-shield on]

It fits average developers since it maximize oversight, reduce the time an error has to propagate and forces the work to be split into manageable, chewable parts.

It doesn't fit great developers ("distinguished", "level 4", "star"...) because, just like any other artificial framework, it hinders creativity and the free flow of code. On the other hand, a great developer is also measured by his/her ability to ship - which negates the need for such artificial systems.

[/very personal opinion, flame-shield on]
No wonder it doesn't work. The </html> tag is in the wrong place :p
Well, I'd distinguish your "maybe there's a better way" from the article's

> All the purported benefits of dynamic linking [..] are myths while it creates great (and often ignored) problems.

which is tripe.

In my view, the fundamental problem with static linking as we currently know it is that when libraries release bug fixes-- especially security fixes (which I think are the real clincher), but really any of the minor bug fixes that happen all the time in more complex libraries-- you almost certainly want all the programs on the system that use the library to switch to the new code, and by the nature of libraries, there are probably a lot of them. In some cases you could rely on a distro / traditional package manager to provide new binaries for everything, but that would be a lot of wasted bandwidth and even if you don't use proprietary software, you probably want to be able to use some software from outside the distro. So you really need an automatic re-linker of some sort and probably a new binary format that can be re-linked, and some infrastructure to keep track of what binaries exist on the system and what they depend on. Plan 9 never had that, and at that point I think you're solving more fundamental problems than static vs. dynamic linking (which is a good thing) and should take a step back and see what you can do with it, but who knows-- it might be interesting to talk about, but you have to come up with it first. :)

General comments on your post: I think the boundary of a library is not quite arbitrary, because

- libraries tend to be developed independently by different people! It might be nice to develop things in a more unified fashion, but in general I don't think you can avoid people having specific (functional) interests and areas of expertise, and it's nice to have a unit of code that someone can "own".

- random interdependencies tend to be a bad thing; ask Google. Organization is good.

- many libraries have the job of parsing file formats or doing other things where the selection of which functions to invoke generally comes from user-supplied data-- you can't ask for half of FreeType or, dare I say it, WebKit; you need to be able to parse whatever the user throws at you, so it's all or nothing.

Which is not to say here couldn't be improvements.
> In practice, I don't think there's a List typeclass in Haskell.

I'm a Haskell n00b, but there is Functor, Foldable and friends, right? That's basically what you're talking about, although the methods are generalaized map, fold and so on instead of get and length. It seems like this just supports your point: there's nothing making functions operating on data in an FP less abstract than objects and methods.
I didn't compare github to any of those things. I simply pointed out that "X doesn't even know about Y" is not equivalent to "Y isn't important to X".
This is why you look at the related works section first. If you don't know any of them, go find those articles and do your favorite recursive look up of those articles until you find documents that you can grok.

At that point you work forward, annotating, high lighting, and answering a few questions like:

* What is the take away message?

* What is the people problem?

* What questions does this leave you with?

* What previous questions were answered?
I knew before I opened the thread there would be a bunch of detractors. Not sure why Gabriel seems to attract the naysayers on here?

To me this and the traction verticals stuff on this blog are absolute gold.

I don't think I would be far off the mark if I suggested that 90% of the people on HN would be capable of building a product, but 90% would also fail to get something off the ground in terms of users. (Partly through lack of skills, partly just because it's a hard problem in a competitive world.) It's only where the skills intersect that they're even in the game.

Anything that breaks 'getting traction' down into an analytical approach is great, and much more actionable than most of the fluff that passes through here. Fantastic article.
>You're comparing github to the Haber-Bosch process??!

No, don't be dense. The point of the analogy is that something's importance to a person is independent of that person's knowledge of that thing.
You should use (vanilla) Webkit or Chromium if you want to be really safe. As I'm sure you know perfectly well, Chrome is closed source and you really don't know what's going on inside it (Chromium, that is a different beast, is open source).

Chrome might be safer (than Safari, Firefox or IE) for this kind of malware, but I sure as hell wouldn't run a browser made by an company that makes money by collecting personal data for the benefit of advertisers if I wanted to be "safe". I see no reason to believe Microsoft, Apple or Google haven't put some spyware/backdoor in their browsers. But I really don't care about it, so I use Safari which is the best browser on Mac, IMO.
Alternatives to Google Chrome for Android
Allowing JavaScript is only going to get closer to being equivalent to allowing untrusted, unsigned code on your machine. Atwood's Law applies to malware too.

Before I edited this comment, I had a laugh at the expense of people who think I'm in some way misguided for using NoScript and complaining when sites break with JavaScript off. That was wrong. I think that those critics are also wrong, though, and this sort of thing is why. Even if this particular code is a non-starter, the plausibility of this kind of threat, this kind of nightmare scenario, is a huge problem. JavaScript is a general-purpose programming language that's present on nearly every user-facing computer in the world, with all the security issues that come with that. It is in some ways the world's biggest and most-rewarding malware attack surface. A working 0-day attack in JavaScript itself could be worth millions or billions in the right hands.
We knew :)

http://www.brucelawson.co.uk/2010/a-minimal-html5-document/

<!doctype html>
<html lang=en>
<meta charset=utf-8>
<title>blah</title>
<body>
<p>I'm the content
Feh, it's just a slight incompatibility with the ways you two communicate. Some people think "hate" is too strong of a word to be used lightly, and it can get awkward when they talk to a person who casually says "I hate <name>".
While I dislike OOP, I think that CLU-style ADT has some merits, especially when ADT implemented in pure functional way.

Just because you don't have explicit schema, doesn't mean that you have no implicit schema.

Likewise just because you don't have explicit objects and classes, doesn't mean that you have no implicit objects and classes.

I code in Erlang, and I treat every gen_server either as a singleton object or as a class (in case I spawn many instances of it)
I copy/pasted the text and sent it to my gmail address (to archive it), and gmail rejected the message with "Our system detected an illegal attachment on your message.". (There was no attachment, but just the main part).

So it might be possible that some parts of the code match existing malware.
Internet rules and laws
Wow, that's a shockingly bad article, even from Sarah Lacy's standards. Here's a summary:

"Here's a list of PayPal's fringe competitors" -> PayPal is VERY screwed

"Ex-PayPal co-founder says bad things about PayPal, while investing in a small competitor" -> PayPal is VERY screwed

"Young startup has a better user experience compared to 10-year old behemoth" -> PayPal is VERY screwed.

Sure, some of Lacy's Valley friends are making (or investing in) interesting products in the payments space, but man, does she let her 'network' write all her articles or what.
Road speed limits are based on standards that take in to account the environmental circumstances of the road - straightness, visibility, etc - as well as having a huge amount of safety buffer built in to account for human reaction time.

If self driving cars become ubiquitous, there is no longer a reason to have this buffer built in. Perhaps the whole idea of posted speed limits will become obsolete if the software determines the maximum speed in the moment for a certain risk tolerance.
Pipedrive should fit the bill pretty well. https://developers.pipedrive.com/v1
Curious, why did you use a bit.ly url for the app?
Shortened urlsm have their places, but I'm a little leery of them,.
(http://bit.ly/MlUfJm)
I'd look into figuring out which search terms your potential customers are using. And then targeting those words with AdWords.

If it proves to be effective, you could invest more time and energy on using SEO to target those words.

Also, how are your competitors acquiring customers? That would be a good starting point.
It's entirely possible to have completely bug-free code, that's how we have complex systems that work, including planes that don't fall out of the sky (some of this is based on formal proofs and verification, expensive but it can me done). Further, the assumption that your code will be buggy (at some point) is not a lowering of standards but crucial to ensuring that you're vigilant in both analysis and testing.

Having said all that I think the code is a poor analogy, as where a function or module usually has an agreed correct behaviour or outcome the same is not often true in the real world, and the things that get reported on are often those that are most disagreed-upon.
You might want to ask this over here: http://answers.onstartups.com/
> Apple's design belongs to Apple, not to Samsung, and consequently, Samsung should not be allowed to sell it.

I'm not sure that sole rights to a design is a moral principle. Imitating is the very basis of most design anyway - we take ideas from places and things we've seen and build upon them. If you acknowledge that designs don't occur in a vacuum, that they don't spring purely from the mind of the designer without outside influence, then maybe it's not morally wrong to take design elements from anything else, even a competing product. (The question of degree, however, is another matter.)

Product differentiation is heavily emphasised in marketing courses because it offers a competitive advantage over similarity. But that doesn't imply products need be differentiated in the first place.

Basically, IMO, companies can rail all they want about their designs being imitated, but the law shouldn't stop the appropriation of design elements -- except when it crosses the line into fake products, i.e. when there is intent to trick consumers into thinking a fake is the real thing. Taking the (perceived) pleasing aspects of a design should not be illegal.

I don't know, if it were a big company imitating the design of a small but up-and-coming rival, I would be more sympathetic to the small company, and maybe my stance would be different. But 'copying' design is not something that seems intrinsically wrong to me. I take design elements from other websites when I work on my project, and I wouldn't be able to blame another website if it took elements from me. If it imitated my design wholesale, I'd feel bemused and flattered, maybe angry if they were beating me at my own game, but I'd accept it as part of the game.

In this case, the Samsung phones I've had experience with have not looked like my iPhone 3GS, so I cannot agree that they slavishly imitate Apple's designs. The Galaxy S you linked does look similar, but the other Samsung phones I've seen do not (unless you consider rectangles with rounded corners to be sufficiently similar).
This makes me sick - I'm no M&A expert so it's unclear what Goldman's exact due diligence responsibilities should have been but clearly they screwed up if they helped execute a transaction against a company that basically didn't exist.

The article lets the founders completely off the hook, however, which I believe is also unfair. A $580M all-stock deal at the height of the bubble? Signing away your life's work without calling your acquirer's customers? Come on.

I hope the founders get paid (on Goldman's dime) but they have to carry some of the blame here.
Suggestion: future HN submissions linking to editorials in magazines, newspapers, or journals should be prefixed with OpEd:
Hmmm, this might be kind of similar to what the Demeter system actually did. With Demeter, you would provide some sort of machine readable descriptions for your data structures. Once you implemented this description, you could ask Demeter to fetch you all sections of a book, or all sentences of it, or what have you. If you were to then change the representation of the book, you would't have to change any of the client code--you'd only have to change the machine-readable description of the data structure. Then when client code asked Demeter to fetch all the sentences, everything would still work fine.

Maybe the best solution is to just resuscitate Demeter! Though apparently nobody actually used it either.
It should also serve as a reminder that stock is just a piece of paper (not even that anymore, just bits in a computer) until you can sell it.
RegEx was talking to himself, not you, so don't worry.
An explanation attempt: This demo consists of actually two programs. A test loop, which gets exploited and the malicious code. The test loop needs to run until patched. It is completely running from the cache. When the exploit runs, it modifies the 4 first bytes of the cached loop into 4 NOPs via the cache exploit. When the change happens, the exploit is successful.

This test code is save for c2d users to try. It just checks, if the cache modification is possible.

A real exploit would combine this with other explotation code and would change the machine code of the test loop into a jump or a call.

The real scary part of this is, that it is possible to patch code despite of access rights. If the loop is really changed, I have no doubt that this can be made into an effective exploit.
My god, they're even using invalid markup?!
This is why "underpromise, overdeliver" is so important in managing customers. People develop expectations very quickly, and then are delighted or disappointed depending on how things turn out relevant to their expectations.
http://pin.net.au

You're welcome.
There must be some way hackers can help do something about things like this. Maybe a Kiva for environmental issues or something?

Surely some of the brainpower we're burning on social media and cute mobile apps could be redirected this way.