skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
We don't really have the infrastructure in place for doing that at the necessary scale, so it would be so much more expensive as to cause food prices to skyrocket. I'm sure that as supplies get lower more research will be done on recycling phosphate efficiently, though.
Sure -- Descartes mathematics in the abstract are surely not dependent on his foundationlism/rationalism. As such they are merely tautological. But the science that deploys that math in pursuit of practical knowledge is.

Agreed that 'certainty,' at least the kind that Descartes was advocating, is an abstraction in search of a definition, and as such not desirable. Godel and incompleteness is just one species of the problem. This is where I would rather see a reformed Baconian science, tempered with (rather than utterly rejecting) an Aristotelian view which had a more sophisticated language for dealing with ambiguity and the fluid borders between substances. Our physics has advanced far beyond simplistic atomism, why can't our philosophy of science?

Popper and falsification is a good rear-guard action against skepticism and making unwarranted philosophical leaps within the Cartesian taxonomy, but why can't we question the taxonomy itself? There are plenty of good starting points -- Whitehead and Bergson come to mind, as well as an open re-examination of medieval and pre-socratic philosophy, as Heidegger does in the Question Concerning Technology. On and on. It's not as if no one is asking these questions or refining philosophical language to deal with them -- it just seems that the scientific community would rather declare its own sovereignty and emancipate itself from first-order questions once and for all.
Setting up a Puppet Master and Agents on EC2
Why Asians are Often Better at Math
Welcome to Diversity News Radio, On AIR with Steven Escobar
You don't need a lot of infrastructure. Krill nets are pretty low-tech.

Also, it's not like we're going to wake up one morning and all the phosphate rock is gone (which is the usual unstated assumption with "peak" this or that). The price will go up gradually until the point where alternative sources become more economic.
Fakeer,

Bottomline: the definition of early adopter as the west calls them, is a bit of a scarce populace in India. Thats what i was hoping to get at, and it looks like we agree.

Not at all complaining about whats all in place (in terms of security etc) - we might have avoided the credit card scams to a large extent thanks to that. No debates there. Just that the prevalence of all these checks and balances, makes India a harder market to grow a company like its grown in the valley (but the metrics set by the investors are predominantly the same), which comes back to bite indian startups.
My company has been using IPv6 extensively since 2004, and we have about 13 million network elements under management, and all of our internal hosts / routers are 100% IPv6 addressed.

But, I don't feel any pressure, or see any need whatsoever to move our Internet routes to IPv6 right now. NAT/PAT gets the job done just fine, and it will be many years, probably the better part of a decade, before we feel the need to start routing IPv6 onto the Internet.

Internally, we're 100% deployed in RFC 4193 space, so when we do decide to route IPv6 to the internet, we'll need to NAT/PAT on our firewalls anyways - the same way we do with IPv4. Whenever we need to reach an IPv6 host over an IPv4 transit network, RFC 2893 does the job quickly and efficiently.

IPv6 brings us some advantages, Stateless Address Assignment, Reduced chance of address conflict when we communicate with other companies via IPv6, intelligent use of multicast, elimination of CIDR - but none of these are relevant when communicating to the Internet. That, more than anything else, is why people are not moving off of IPv4 more quickly to IPv6 - After 8+ years of using/managing IPv6 every day - none of our network engineers/IT team really see any pressing motivation.

[edit: I would be interested in hearing comments from other practitioners whose experience was different from mine. I'd also be interested in hearing if other major enterprises are deploying in RFC 4193 space, or, are considering exposing their internal address topology to the Big-I Internet - i.e. Not using NAT6/PAT6]
What a phenominal account from "outside the wire" in Afghanastan. Thanks for sharing.
Looks like a violation, because .woff is hosted on their site and unprotected.
Thank you for this feedback. You're validating the general direction we were hoping to pursue. Expect to see more high level content always paired with meaningful examples and real world application.
I'm not suggesting that a person model their behavior after Homer.

The point I'm making in quoting him is that caring and understanding are distinct axes. You can care/understand, not care/not understand, not care/understand (Homer), and care/not understand. Each of these ways of being tends to bring different results.
iOS Chrome has "Incognito Mode*". The asterisk is there because WebKit does not have any way to make localStorage private, meaning it's shared between Incognito and Normal browsing modes, so there's a possible leak of information there, especially if they're using a third party tracking service. This is true for any of the private web surfing apps that use WebKit.
I wrote a good deal of code for a two of the popular emulators; starting with SphereServer, and then RunUO, primarily just on the server side and less so on the actual shard side.

Shards (emulators) let the server owner script and customize the game a lot, such that it rarely resembled the real game. A lot of shards were really shitty, in that the minute you created your character you instantly got full skills, tons of gold, free armor, etc. Thus, there was no pride or value in anything.

SphereServer scripting was very clumsy, written in its own quasi-object language. It had a LOT of flaws, but was leaps and bounds above UOX, the first major emulator.

The RunUO came around, written in C#, and was much faster than SphereServer. It scaled to thousands++ of online users. Scripting was all done in C# as well, meaning things were compiled rather than interpreted at runtime as in SphereServer (some things in Sphere were cached, but not many). Most of the active emulator shards today use RunUO.
They use labels (correctly) in almost all the forms on the site except this one.
They might have gone through the trouble to take it out on purpose.
On Calling Richard Stallman A Childish FUD Spreader
Involved people at the site of an accident often have no compunctions about lying. If such data can be securely provided in only 5 minute increments, I'd be all for it. We should be able to do this with a sequence of keys based on timestamps. Basically, each 5 minute parcel of data would be timestamped, then a symmetric algorithm with a master key used to derive a parcel key from the timestamp. The master key would never be revealed and only the parcel key given to the authorities.

Authentication could be done through PKC and/or a hash chain. (As in bitcoin.)
I don't doubt these are real issues on reddit. Even with that, good content does rise to the top most of the time.

As to the ops questions: you should look into creating a list of subreddits that cover these things you're interested in.
A Peek At Brackets
Screw tl;dr
>But seriously, rethink the quotes-only approach. Writing is about so much more than quick snippets.

I agree. When I read the blurb of the website, I thought "okay, it's a place to show off writing; awesome," and I was actually confused by the just-quotes format. Quotes do not make writing. I was hoping that clicking one of the quotes would bring me to an essay, story, or longer excerpt of writing, but no dice.

Many of the quotes on the sample page beg for context, and my eyes glazed over as I scrolled down the page.

Sure, the page looks neat at first glance, but I'm not really sure what this website is trying to achieve. I like to write poems and short stories and I am an avid reader. I don't really see one-line quotes as a way to show off that kind of work, and I wouldn't buy a novel based off one line. But perhaps I'm missing the point of the website?
One popular game bug in the Quake series was "strafe jumping" [1]. It became a canonical movement technique that got ported into other games.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strafe-jumping
I was hoping people would just get that hitting enter in an input field submits the subscribe form. I'll need to make that more explicit, thanks.

Regarding submission of articles, I'd like to work with authors earlier in the writing process rather than just receive a bunch if completed work that may not be right for the site. However, even that should more transparent, I agree.
Don't forget the dogs.
http://www.clarionledger.com/viewart/20121205/NEWS02/1212050...
Everyone was happy with 'Made in China' or 'Assembled in China' This is nothing but moving out from China.
We're looking into this immediately. Thank you for raising the issue.
This looks quite awesome overall. I do wonder, though, why you can't do the actual invokation in Cmd.TryInvokeMember rather than Cmd.TryInvoke? That'll get rid of the () at the end of commands, from my quick read.
I think the OP was pointing out that it's not impossible to convince people to eat stuff like this. If you can get people to eat fungus grown in large vats (Quorn), then with the right marketing you can probably get them to eat artificial meat.
If Malthus' warning was heeded, the Irish Famine that occurred less than ten years after his death may have been avoided. Ireland's population of 8 million, to Britain's 14 million, dropped by estimates of 25% through disease, emigration and starvation. This was on the doorstep of the dominant British Empire. Saying the Malthusian crisis will not ever happen is hubris.
I've never seen this happen -- at least with CNAME'd feeds. Can anyone else confirm?
More like reimplementing a shell from within a shell and running your program on the latter.
There's nothing in this article about "not eating meat". The whole point is that meat can be grown in the lab, so you can eat it all you like then.

Meat comes from animals who have pretty miserable lives up until death in the modern factory farm. and then the environmental stress from feeding and transporting livestock is huge. And the protein health benefits comes with some warnings not to eat too much meat! Raw meat is dangerous too, causes much sickness annually. Left over chicken, oops don't touch that.

Tastes great though, so let's grow the world's meat in big vats and the cow can have a well earned vacation. Fair?
> (I'm Hindu, so no beef or pork)

Minor nit: I don't think Hindus are prohibited from eating pork. AFAIK.

> And I would bet that my environmental impact isn't all that high.

Ironically this page claims that lamb is the worst of all meats wrt CO2 footprint.

http://ewg.org/meateatersguide/eat-smart/
Yep, implementation is a no brainer, was just curious about the viability of RSS as medium. It appears it is not dead!
Thanks. Yes, * is good, but only if you already are at the word you want to search for. When that's not the case, in Emacs I hit C-s, typed the first few letters, found the word, grabbed it with C-w, then hit C-s repeatedly. In Vim, I haven't found quite the same convenient way. I have been getting out of incremental search, then used *, but it's a few more key strokes, especially if the first hit is not the word I'm looking for.
Man Petitions Whitehouse to Recognize Micro-Nation...in Nevada
If you continue all drug-funding efforts via your insurance company, etc, the way things are done will never change.

If instead we pooled the money we would spend and payed the companies to do the research directly they wouldn't deserve ownership (it being work-for-hire) and society would directly benefit.

Besides, it's not like patents work. Too often a real inventor loses all protection because of a filing error, and too often patents just enable squatting.

If patents weren't absolutely horrible for business and consumers we'd need to figure out a better replacement. But the way it is even just removing them totally would be better for everyone except abusers.
Dice.com interviewed me about staying relevant as a Web Developer. How did I do?
My former job was systems programming on precisely this sort of project. We ran embedded ARM based Linux systems in cars, motorcycles and over the road trucks to gather research data from the vehicle CAN. The volume of data and variables collected was immense. Lateral acceleration (swerve), turn signals, seat-belts engaged, gear position, vehicle speed, individual wheel speed, engine rpm, GPS coordinates, steering wheel angel, etc, etc, etc. We were collecting petabytes of data for research. We had cameras on the vehicles as well so that we could correlate all of the collected data with what the driver was doing, where they were looking, etc. I doubt the cameras will exist in the mandated black-box systems, but who knows.

I only say this because there are tons of research projects in this area right now and likely will be for many years to come.
> Timer goes off? Turn over, too bad.

I used to play chess with someone whose style of play would watching paint dry seem fast paced.

I bought a chess clock.

Good investment!
Stop Coming Up With Startup Ideas
Really appreciate the feedback. You make some great points, and it's clear that what I've got at this stage falls short of truly showing off writing in a way respectful to the writing. The pullquote format is actually left over, so to speak, from the previous iteration of Boldfaced, which was solely for copywriters. Based on feedback, I decided to shift gears and focus on helping any kind of writer show off their work.

And yep, this is an Elepath project. Thanks for kind words. :)
Nice idea, but, sorry, it does not work as well in real life as it does in theory. :-(

In any case, everybody is talking as if holding a program in your head is a huge problem. It really isn't. All it means is that particular individual understands the problem (and the solution) deeply and comprehensively. That sounds like a good thing to me. It is true that communicating that level of understanding can be challenging, which is true of most domains. What is special about software development is the degree to which we attempt to communicate that understanding.

Well, why do we do that? Do we really need to communicate that understanding when it is sitting happily in that developer's head? Instead of moving the mental model from one developer to another, trying to squeeze that rich, internal representation through the band-limited drinking-straw that is the human sensory suite, can we just move the developer himself, mental model and all?

The problem really arises because of all those preconceptions that we have about how team-working and large organizations should function, about how people should be replaceable cogs: jelly-beans that can be discarded at will.

Do you like being a cog?

Do you like working for organizations that treat people that way?

I do not.

Instead of trying to dehumanize our profession, can we not re-humanize it? Instead of talking about re-using code, why do we not talk about re-using developers? Recognizing that developing code is as much about developing knowledge and expertise in the head of the developer as it is about herding electrons through tiny pieces of semiconductor. We should value that learning, that knowledge and expertise, and seek to maximise the return from it, rather than hanging on to the (inappropriate, perverse, and just plain wrong) idea that humans are substitutable parts in a machine.

Write code, yes. Write documentation, yes, but recognize and acknowledge the unavoidable truth that a significant part of your intellectual capital lives, not on pieces of paper, nor on magnetized platters, but inside somebody's head. Consequently, when you seek to maximize the return on your investment, seek to build on your developer's expertise by redeploying him or her to use the same expertise to solve as many related problems as possible.
Interesting to hear!
Depends on how you look at it though. If you keep your view narrow (not meant as an insult), you're right, our impact on the environment and economy via agriculture is probably higher. Fact is, an animal requires more nutrients and care to raise than a plant. That takes a lot of energy and resources.

If you expand your view, you can actually begin to argue that we might have a reduced impact in comparison to others. There is anecdotal and limited empirical evidence that suggests that people that strictly follow a low-carb diet actually have better blood chemistry that those on a low-fat diet. Lower LDL cholesterol and triglycerides, and higher HDL cholesterol levels usually lead to a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease. Not to mention that it's practically impossible to have diabetes. Those on a low-carb diet are usually trying to lose weight, so that helps too, since maintaining a "normal" weight has wider health implications.

My point is that being overweight likely has a larger impact than simply eating meat. Being overweight, you're more likely to have higher healthcare costs, eat more, and require more energy and resources to sustain. If you're lighter, most of these negatives go away. Whether you achieve your lower weight by low-carb or low-fat doesn't really matter. But there are plenty of people that eat low-carb as an actual lifestyle, and their blood chemistry generally indicates that they're healthier overall.

Anyway, to each their own. But this fallacy that meat-eaters are creating an unethical and unsustainable environment is specious. You really need to look at the big picture.

(I wish I had actual sources to cite.)
Ha! When I was a kid we had Pong. You know, the hard-wired kind that plugged into your television, and get off my lawn, but this one had three variant games: Pong, basketball, and ... racketball I think. There was a hard three-position switch to switch between games - and if you positioned it just right between positions, you could coax the game into a hybrid game that mixed up the court layouts.
I don't want to be too narrow in these early days so I'll say we want content that will aid developers in discovering new development techniques as well as reinforcing the practice of ones they may already be aware of. I think both types of content you mention can aid in that.

I'll def read your post and follow up.
Well,

> "... the hackathon’s goal is to come up with technological answer to the problems of meat supply, processing, distribution, health and ultimately consumption. One of big problems the group will tackle is how — simply put — to get people to eat less meat."

That said, it's true that meat production (beef at least) is a very inefficient use of arable land, in terms of nutrition per acre.

Curse their tasty hides.
Companies or Countries
Poor Plato, it seems the only sin of which he is accused, and for which he is pilloried, is that of having lived a long time ago. But for all of the comments, I can find no arguments against any thesis in Plato. And this is noteworthy. Not just because it indicates that Plato is here just a straw man and that few (if any) of his assailants here have read him, and so of course, have no grounds to criticize. But more importantly, because, Plato does not have some set of theses which even could be toppled or made irrelevant. Plato does not work like that. Philosophy does not (usually) work like that. Plato does not promulgate, he investigates. He is still taught not so much because his answers are still relevant, but because his questions are. The original article implicitly acknowledges this point when the author guesses that philosophers trained in "modern" disciplines might "get farther" than Plato on the big questions—to which one might reply: and how shall they know the big questions?

Someone here pointed out that this wholesale dismissal of philosophy is a category mistake (a welcome reference to Aristotle), and I agree. If you will forgive my speaking too broadly, the difficulty many non-philosophers seem to have with philosophy is simply that they do not know what it is—and more importantly, that they have never done it. I do not fault them for this (and I'll readily admit that our academies are very much at fault here, as the professionalization of philosophy has done no favors for philosophers or non-philosophers) but one ought to have, if not enough humility, at least enough love for truth to motivate silence, study, or wonder in the face of the unknown—not slander.

Philosophy (and especially Plato's philosophy) is not the sort of thing for which one uses a textbook. If you recall the Phaedrus (and if you don't recall the Phaedrus, you probably should not be commenting on philosophy) you'll remember that Plato has an argument against books. He worries that books will codify doxa in such a way as to stifle inquiry—a worry that was clearly warranted, as evidenced by this thread. Thus he preferred dialogues to dissertations, and precisely because the individual appropriation of knowledge, and the harmonizing of the person with reality, is what really counts—not knowing (or believing) a bunch of stuff. It is important to remember that Plato, even when making myths, is imminently and always practical.

Those who advocate that contemporary science is better equipped than philosophy to answer the big questions, because science "examines reality, etc." fail to recognize that "reality" itself is big question. In my own experience, I have often found it amusing how quickly some "scientists" dismiss philosophy, while I've met very few philosophers who would do the same for science. It is fine if one wants to ignore philosophy, but it is hubris to dismiss it simply because it does not do what one wants it to do.
Shuttlebrad is right, but I was mocking the general pattern of proselytization.

I believe in what Hickey's doing though.
Pushing Nginx to its limit with Lua
Wait... It's illegal to have a website that's not accessible? That's news to me.

http://news.cnet.com/2100-1023-962761.html
UberVU Response:

For the life of me, I can't figure out how to link directly to a specific reply in Google+, but here's the reply from UberVU:

"Elisabeth Michaud
Hi Sumit - Elisabeth from uberVU here (I also run the uberVU twitter account where we were chatting earlier). Niek is right that we have been using a tool called LeadLander (based in San Francisco) to help us connect with companies who visit our site. We take privacy very seriously and definitely don't want visitors to our site to feel we are overstepping our boundaries. As such, we've decided as a team to discontinue our use of LeadLander and focus our efforts on other ways to engage website visitors. You won't see any further emails from us, and these changes will be implemented globally.

If you have any further concerns, don't hesitate to reach out to me at <redacted>"
Not that I like the surveillance state anywhere, but I'm a lot less concerned about "advances" like these in societies where democracy is already established than countries were authoritarian regimes are still in charge.

EDIT : Why is my comment being down-voted ?? what part of "Not that I like the surveillance state anywhere" don't you understand. It's a FACT, the consequences of Big brother are magnitudes of order more terrifying for societies that still don't have institutions to protect them.
Is there some kind of analytics service that google provides with this? If so, can you turn it off?