skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Population density is required to make all amenities to be within walking distance, and to make meaningful public transportation (one you can rely on). In your scheme, low density would mean one has to drive to see your friends or visit favorite caffe (hello traffic gridlock) or take a bus, which will take forever over longer distances and all the traffic light stops.

My concept is to build a city as a 10,000m square with building spaced out at 100m from each other in a grid for a total of 10,000 buildings, each one of 20 stories, 4 flats per story, each flat 12 meters to the side, three persons per flat. This way I could fit 2.4 million people in lavish 1400sqf condos in the city size of 10km to the side, and have the bus to cross the city in 10 minutes through underground tunnels with no traffic light stops.

Large population density creates huge opportunities for development of arts, as there is more audience and a bigger chance of there being enough supporters for a given new art thing in one place.
For the good of your society or something non-materialistic like that?
No I am not assuming anything other that what you wrote.

Consider an AI to be a chat program which maps strings to strings

I could just as well have written a chat program that for any question (including this), merely looked up the correct form of an answer (wrong or not) without attempting to run anything.

But before any kind of meaningful conversation can continue I need to know what your definition of Strong AI is. Because what you have given is certainly not proof against the common definition of Artificial General Intelligence.

Since I cannot prove the Church Turing Thesis I will not try to argue against your belief. I will only note that it is simpler to believe that there is nothing special about what collections of neurons compute than to assume something..more.. is going on. Neural implants should soon enough settle the question.
Left 4 Dead 2 Linux Google Plus Giveaway
I'm surprised at the sheer number of people that have struggled to grasp the difference between an open Android and a closed OHA. Amazon aren't in the OHA and as such are able to do what they want, Acer had the option of leaving the OHA and using any fork they want, including the AOSP Android.

Yes Acer would be forced to launch devices later than the code would be launching on the latest greatest Nexus, but should Acer have gone that route, they'd probably be on to something. OEMs should stop making devices designed to run the latest iteration of Android and simply run good stable devices that require as little modification of the code to get running as possible. If they then want to overlay that and add their own store, that's up to them.

HTC have been hedging their bets with Android in the completely wrong way, hence the abomination that is the Sense framework and locked bootloaders. The key is freedom and ultimately any discord comes from the OEMs trying to ensure a future beyond Android.
Dunno, the trouble with a lot of data journalism that currently exists, is that the people doing it don't have a strong statistical background and tend to forget things like using null hypotheses and regression analysis and take the things they find in data at face value much too often. So sure, teach a writer to do data analysis, but when you do, really teach them.
I feel the same. I've registered using email, and it seems the email does not have to be validated, which just makes it pointless.

Other than that, the layout seems pretty friendly. The main issue of course will be what kind of community will build around this, there being so many question-answering forums in existence.
There is no "FOSS", Free Software is software which respects the users freedom, Open-Source software is software which allow the ability to study the source code(not that some Open-Source licenses is kinda like Free Software licenses too, but some are even similar to non-free software). They are two completely different things. Yes, I support FSF and GNU more than TPB of course.
Here is a vice documentary about Karachi for those who are interested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgIl1vmIchA
How about an "open vault" bank?
While the suggestion seems incredulous and amoral (because it is), it's not far fetched.

The code of law, the reason we have laws in the first place, is to prevent people from resorting to the exercise of "personal justice". This can manifest in many forms (like blood feuds and revenge killings). The problem with a situation in which there is no law is that it is on the whole unproductive to society, and usually tends to escalate to a point where no society is possible anymore (see medieval Italy and the feuds of the houses). Homicide and mutilation are often parts of such ancient justice practices (see medieval torture, killing and mutilation of thieves) because without the support of the society, extracting damage payments or justice in the form of incarceration is impossible or very difficult.

The Sumerian King Ur-Nammu is usually credited with establishing the first written code of law. But it was not until much, much later that an important addition was made in medieval england in the form of the Magna Charta, that established that before the law, everybody is equal, even the king.

Summerian codification of law enabled large civilizations to flourish by deflecting the destructive tendencies of large groups of people away from counter-productive behavior. Medieval English law enabled modern society to be possible by establishing that before the law everybody is equal, enabling such things as property, companies, and certainty of being treated fairly.

There is however an evil serpent hidden in law, which is that laws can be unjust. It's not just erroneous application of law that can be unjust, but the rules themselves can also be unjust. Usually on the whole law works because on the bottom line, averaged, it is more just than not. That is true because the number of unjust codifications was hitherto relatively small and errors by justice where statistically the exception, not the norm. And the entire judicature hitherto strives to keep it that way. Why?

There are many examples of where society ground to a halt and regressed to earlier states where law was subverted to be on the whole unjust (see many dictatorships, totalitarian states, corruption, etc.)

What happens when the law becomes unjust and justice cannot be served by law? Personal martial law comes back into effect. Things like revenge killings and blood feuds will become a problem for society again. Civilization as we know it will begin to crumble. The economy will go to the shitters. The works, you know.

Now tell me: This patent law that is hurting countless people by imposing money they have to pay to other people who have contributed nothing to what they did, is it just?

If that is not just, think about: How many people do you have to treat unjustly before the perception of law deterioates and earlier personal martial law comes back into effect? Nobody knows, but it's usually a bad idea to test it out.

The law has to be just, and patent law is not just. Keep on this path and it will be one coffin nail to destroy your society as you know it.
I'll read up on that guy, thanks.
My guess is that if they are to be angled towards the sun then you have to leave enough space so that a panel at 45 degrees (to pick a number out of thin air) will not cast a shadow on the panel next to it.
Milk has a lot of other things which may trigger your allergies other than lactose. You might be lactose tolerant, but milk intolerant in general.

Furthermore, "Milk", quite surprisingly, is not well defined either. I've switched to RonnyBrook recently (NY local, organic, grass fed, and I get it within two days of leaving the cow), and it's a world of difference: The taste, my body's reaction (My lungs and sinuses would often respond to milk by clogging and excreting stuff, they don't anymore).

I haven't been able to find high quality sources (peer reviewed, etc) but I've read claims that the nutrient and vitamin profile of milk from grass fed vs. corn fed cows is completely different - which I don't really doubt - although I'm waiting for some high quality analysis for the exact difference.
The crime "conspiracy to commit murder" does not require you, personally, to actually kill someone, nor does it even require a death to occur.
I know very little Javascript, and from my attempts to code a bit of it, I wasn't too pleased. Maybe I just didn't understand it very well, and that put me off.
Chrome OS's only real milestone at this point is the fact that a few OEMs decided to give it a go. It's certainly not eating away at any market-share.
Just swap base e for base 10, and boom, twice the orders of magnitude.
It's a setback - but I find it less dramatic than what you make it to be. Mobile web still has tremendous value over native (specifically in deployment options). If some of these things get addressed by device builders we could see a real explosion of "apps" not unlike the explosion that has already occurred. I'm a fan of native implementations for the exact reasons Tobie laid out, but I'm a bigger fan of Mobile web for distribution reasons.
Yeah, these problems are hard (and fun!) to think about. But I still don't understand how you can go from:

There has to be an infinite number of functions we cannot write programs for!

which is, of course, true, to

So we have managed to show, in a fairly simple way, that there have to exist undecidable problems.

I don't think that you are using "undecidability" in its correct sense, or perhaps I'm missing something. What is your undecidable problem? You wrote

the problem is to decide whether some particular string is in this set

Which set are you talking about? The set of all programs? How does that tie in with your functions defined on integers?
Actually, if the app I just bought off the app store was a "can of tomatoes", couldn't I use it on any device of my choosing, give it to my friend or include it as part of my estate as a gift to my children?

The absurdity is that we are consumers not customers. We have no rights except the bare minimum. We are sold on the dream and yet we will all experience a rude awakening (this part is never advertised).
Conincidentally, I actually had a rather lucid dream about this a few nights ago. I can see it is possible even with today's technology to get there and stay there. It's just a matter of cost and inclination.

We need to send lots and lots of larger seed probes out there first though - not the limited scope probes and landers we're using now, but general purpose, long life scouting probes with engineering, tooling and life support payloads.
This is N.W.A. - 100 miles and running

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGUbgPYIrU4
Spanner: Google's Globally-Distributed Database
Developers need to treat mobile computing more like 1980/90s micro computing.

You have limited resources with numerous environmental factors that need to be accounted for and respected (ex: bandwidth, latency, CPU, GPU, memory, UI/UX, async task handling, and most importantly BATTERY LIFE).

It is a different mindset when developing for mobile that needs to account for finite resources. If you're greedy, careless, or just don't really think through and test your app appropriately it makes for a horrible user experience.

Regarding the HTML5 vs. Native Apps:

HTML5/CSS/JS and frameworks that allow you to write once and convert to native apps (ex: Phone Gap) have their place. The core take away is that without developing native apps directly you’ll never get to maximize the phone’s hardware and performance will suffer. UIs will be sluggish and network IO suffers from high latency (wrappers).

HTML5/CSS/Javascript frameworks like Phone Gap cannot take full advantage of the hardware and SDK features like alarms, custom hardware access/config/acceleration, background services, and (taking advantage of) the standard UI controls (transitions, buttons, look ‘n feel).

If you’re focusing on content display/information consumption and your app doesn’t need to rely on high performance from hardware and the UI then HTML5 is most likely a good fit. If performance, high availability/background service, native look and feel and the such is critical to an app then native is a better route.

My 2 cents.
It was no joke. How I upvote something here?
If you have dark skin you need more vitamin D, if you're obese you need more, if you're elderly you need more and if you are covered up in the sun you need more vitamin D.

7000 to 9000 IU sounds high but 1000 IU sounds way too low.
Yes, I'm sure Facebook and their stable of developers just never thought of that. How silly.
HTTP proxy for people who got TPB blocked: http://thepiratebay.se.ipv4.sixxs.org/blog/222
Would you be satisfied if, instead, I claimed to be proving that it is impossible to construct a program -- in the sense of a real, honest-to-god compiled executable -- that can respond to statements in English text at least as well as a human being would?
That's what this article neglected to target: The dozens of proprietary versions of Android that are dribbled out by each carrier for each phone.

I'd like to know how this failure happened. Did Google fail to create a proper hardware abstraction layer and driver model that would allow people to update the OS immediately upon release, as long as the driver model didn't change? Even with the crapware installed by telcos, why can't people update the OS? There's plenty of shit installed on PCs by vendors, but it doesn't all just break if you install a new version of Windows.
It's hard to pick out a religious motive for Oklahoma City. There was nothing like that in the 50's because there was no Waco in the 50's, either.
Arbitrary here subtly includes infinite, since if it does not, then my argument is valid.
HTML hit practically 0 latency 10 years ago then we added DHTML, CSS, encryption, Ajax, 3D, multitasking, 2x DPI and 4x screen size, background syncing, ...
When will we stop adding functionality to soak up the hardware power?
maybe it's for maintenance purposes
"Getting it" is task specific for any particular task. It's simply a matter of increasing coverage, which in any particular case is likely to be tractable. There may very well always be more to cover (if there isn't, maybe we've built an AGI).
"The Washington Post's news video editor, Jason Aldag, said he'd be surprised if the third frame doesn't take picture of the year."
I think Facebook do know what they're doing, but are perhaps putting energy into the wrong things. Using a ton of JavaScript to avoid ever having to load another page is a nice idea, but it ends up bogging down the client. Using a lot of abstractions away from the DOM makes things slow. An occasional page load is probably beneficial.

I'm also unconvinced they can't scale down images server-side to make them more mobile-palatable.
"- Simple way to implement pull to refresh (via dedicated off-bound-scroll
events?). "

At first when I read this suggestion I thought it didn't seem like something to include. This would force every smart phone to support this type of scrolling wouldn't it?

I think there's an issue with many developers just doing too much on mobile web without realizing the limitations of the device they're using.

People today are used to developing on systems where they don't have to think about memory, hard drive space, or performance. But when you get to mobile web you have to think about these things AND more (screen resolutions, landscape vs portrait etc).

The problem with many suggestions for w3c is that they are often tied to what specific companies (ahem Apple) are integrating (or not).

In terms of the Facebook app, I (along with many others) have just been flabbergasted that they've not been able to make their app load fast. Tobie's post gives some great insight, but I don't think it's impossible to create a smooth, well run webview - especially when you have the resources Facebook has.
Well, the name is stupid. Let's just start there.
I have already quoted a strong argument against such an impossibility: http://www.scottaaronson.com/papers/philos.pdf

Practicality is another matter for which, what you have is not a proof against.

Like I said, you can use arguments from computability to show why a Bayes Optimal AI is impossible. But there is nothing stopping an arbitrarily close approximation.

If you are interested in this I strongly urge you to familiarize yourself with the current literature. It pays to start new ideas from a point that does not cover past work. http://www.hutter1.net/ai/uaibook.htm
I see two ways out of the dilemma.

Option 1:

Sal: Sorry Dave, I can't do that.

(So we just can't code strong, obedient AIs.)

----------

Option 2:

Sal: You realize if I run that, the machine will hang on a fork bomb, right?

Me: Well, I just asked you to run it and it didn't hang, so maybe it won't. Humor me.

Sal: Okay. Working . . .

Sal': Okay. Working . . .

Sal'': Okay. Working . . .

...

Sal(38): Sorry. The machine appears to be out of memory.

Sal(37): You eventually run out of memory.

Sal(36): It appears we run out of memory if we try.

. . .

Sal: It runs out of memory.

(Eventually, Sal gets input of a sort she can't control.)

------------

I'm still kind of persuaded, though. It seems to me you ought to be able to convince the AI to humor you, and only being able to code an AI on a finite machine (but it's impossible on an infinite one) is just too weird a possibility to take seriously.
I'm a worried although the JQuery foundation is not a company. The CLA basically allows them to do everything with your code and you can't revoke it.

One big bad example of CLA abuse to me is Sun's OpenSolaris CLA which allowed Oracle to take external contributions and turn Solaris back to proprietary software.
Is Debian your problem, or GNOME?
I'm not saying that I disagree with the general assessment (right now), but the line of reasoning is a bit odd. "At its core"? Well, the GNOME people did get quite a bit flack for ignoring the nerdy needs. Or are we talking technical terms? OS X is based on unix underpinnings, too. I'd argue that even Windows isn't as un-nerdy as some people might think. Most people aren't too happy about using it beyond what their work required, and then to a very superficial degree (browsers + media). (His target demographic of gamers being one noticeable exception)

That's one of the reason why mobile devices (phones/tablets) are so popular, they're basically the first un-nerdy computing devices.
I love this quote from the article.
"Several Google projects rely on [J2ObjC], but when new projects first start working with it, they usually find new bugs to be fixed,"

And also
"If you'd like to join the bug hunt, the full source code for J2ObjC is available now under the Apache open source license"
there are certain time intervals in a day that you CAN get some sun exposure without worring (too much) about UV rays & skin cancer

Note that it is exposure to ultraviolet light (particularly UVB) that causes the production of Vitamin D.
Reread the statement you are commenting on. The reason that you don't want to ride this board in the rain is inherent to longboarding, not to electronics. It is entirely possible to design the mechanical enclosures of electronics to withstand rain, it is simply a design choice. If people shouldn't be longboarding in the rain, why design for it?
Is Debian your problem, or GNOME?

My phone runs Linux, and it has 512MB RAM and a 1GHz ARM processor.
I support it for the sheer fact that it has forced copyright to offer digital alternatives in a quicker manner here in the states - i.e. Hulu.

FOr those who dont have access to Hulu and other similar services that's not your fault and I say keep downloading torrents!
And to be sure, I am not married to the low-enclosure idea. I did the math for the worst-case scenario: "what if everyone wants plenty of space around?". If people in fact prefer higher enclosure I would have no qualms about spacing the buildings three times as closely, and maybe setting aside parts of the real estate for greenbelts a-la central park in NYC. That would actually allow me to achieve even higher population density, which is the goal I was shooting for. My only concern is that such approach creates non-uniformity in desirability of different buildings, which may in turn create population density distortions and thus trafic abnormalities. So I would have to schedule more busses in some areas. Too much thinking for a concept, but certainly manageable if one were to actually build this.
In what way is server pricing even comparable to S3? Or are you pricing up running openstack on Hetzner?
And that is exactly why driverless buses on driverless bus lanes will wipe out commuter rail in 10-15 years.

Perhaps the vast infrastrucutre, subsidies and resources could be repointed at really useful services, but some unions in some industries ( and the RMT is one) are so reactionary it gives Lenin a good name, and some management in some industries (and British railfranchisees are one)
are so rabbit-in-headlights dumb and hemmed in by pensions regulations and on subsidies for life support that oh brother I throw my hands in the air and go looking for a cab
I get it that he's uneasy about Steam's dominance; but there's not a whole lot of reasoning behind it. There is competition, every publisher is trying to push their own marketplace. The problem is that they're all complete crap, look no further than Ubisoft's UPlay rootkit incident.

The last bit honestly left me reeling. As a Linux user, I feel like we're very close to turning a huge corner if Valve gets Steam/Source running well on Linux. This could be the nudge that starts an avalanche, and it's really disheartening to see such an influential figure dismissing it as though it's nothing; especially considering he's released his own game on Linux. Not to mention his reasoning makes no sense to boot - If anyone is capable of dealing with getting their hands dirty, it will be gamers who are accustomed to fixing buggy console ports and editing configuration files. For most others (Families and Corporations as he mentions), a browser and OpenOffice is already more than enough.
IMO there is no reason to get an Android phone not officially distributed by Google (e.g. the Nexus 7).

I bought an HTC Droid Eris: EOL'd a year. Never saw a version update.

Then I bought a Samsung Droid Charge: EOL'd in a year. Will never see a 4.0 update.

Yes I've learned my lesson. I'm on Verizon so I can't get the Nexus. I'll be getting an iPhone 5.
The fact that this draft bill about cyber-security was leaked does in itself highlight that they need to go back to the drawing board and rethink it.

One day this incident will be listed as the definition of ironic.
Can't is a non-answer. NFC needs Apple's support, but Apple has not figured how to make money off it yet.
Just an off-hand observation: Australia also has a common-law legal system, which TFA suggests correlates strongly positively with out-of-control prices on such projects.
@TazeTschnitzel agreed, but then what would fb engineers do all day? they gotta "keep shipping"
It's definitely possible to build a Facebook-like app with HTML5 that's fast. I won't assume why they couldn't - my instinct is that the app is significantly more complicated than it appears - but I am a bit confused by some of their concerns. Pull To Refresh is trivial to implement with JS; I know, because I've done it. Perhaps it wouldn't have worked with the code structure they were using, but still, confusing.
Given this list of concerns, I believe that Facebook made the right decision in switching from HTML5 to native. The downside for them is now they have to write native code to support both Android and iOS.
Tipbox helps you discover and share useful tips while on the go.
Point of fact: you do go to jail if you don't do what is commanded.

Another point of fact: sarcasm and sneering are not an argument.
re Mindgym: can you post a link? The closest I could find was http://www.themindgym.com/ but there is a huge amount of cotent there.