skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Any proposal that requires a battery pack probably isn't very reasonable.
In English: if you're only using one ray for shading, then you'll have areas that are completely in shadow directly next to areas that are completely not in shadow; what we call hard shadows. Soft shadows are a better approximation of reality, because they show the shades of grey between "covered" and "uncovered", but they require more ray intersections (unless you're using sphere tracing!).
The quick compare, of course, is Android / Google Maps turn-by-turn directions and Garmin.
Right - I recognize there are limited things you can do about guns illegally out and about. But if owners were held liable for the social effects of weapons they own(ed), then:

1. You'd choose carefully what you owned and why you owned it. No matter how you slice it, its hard to justify why someone should own ~30, ~40, or ~50 firearms (dont know how often this actually happens but I believe owning multiple weapons happens fairly frequently), and any insurer seeing that, would price your risk accordingly. You'd be forced to take steps to reduce the cost of ownership, hence reducing it to the amount you actually use.

2. As a result of this change in ownership, the likelihood of weapons getting stolen drops, and correspondingly the flow of new guns into the black market.

assuming here that guns on the black market typically start out under legal ownership.
Pedantry: not "Google's Driverless Car" but rather "Google's IPR on Driverless Cars" (http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2011/12/16/google-granted-pat...).
Because car owners tend to replace their cars regularly. People who don't own cars often don't own them because they don't need them, don't want them, or can't afford them.

But this is a derail. The point remains, 'poaching' is a misnomer. It's offering competitive wages and communicating your desire to buy skilled labor at a higher rate than your competitors. It's a virtuous thing to do all around, and it's criminal to conspire against the workforce in order to profit at their expense.
Stanford Offering iPhone App Development Winter 2013 (CS193P) on iTunes U
> In my opinion, an apology simply isn't enough.

I think you're making the same mistake that the OP made - not considering that there was a person at the other end. People make mistakes, including acting like assholes, but they are still people at the end of the day.
Chi ceramic flat iron
long story short, why do programmers have to get special treatment for something that is universal in the world?

it has nothing to do with programming per se, that's just the thing that tends to be more discussed on hackernews.

people say mean things. boo frikkin hoo. that's life.
To Kill or Not to Kill
Until a Supreme Court ruling a couple years ago, all handguns were illegal in Chicago.
All those other car companies? They are the ones with the brands and the cars people want. They are the iphones in this situation.

Sure, if you're pushing a new powertrain you can do okay making one or two of your own cars (which will take years) and you can shortcut the time to build up a brandname to a degree by being exclusive, but none of that effort is warranted because this technology does not require that sort of vertical integration.

If your competency is not making cars but rather automated cars, why would you want to get into the business of making cars?
There are different kinds of pepper (OC) spray, too.

In general Mace kind of sucks, but OC spray is an adequate untrained-person defensive choice, and OC stream or OC foam can be used in a fairly targeted way and is useful -- maybe a carbine-length OC foam dispenser would make sense, combined with geolocator, 3000 lumen 5-minute flashlight, radio communications direct to the police, etc.
> Throwing more ( or finer etched) silicon at an algorithm will not help the algorithm, compared to a superior algorithm

Actually, it will when the complexity classes of the algorithms differ. Which is true in this case -- the time taken to ray trace a scene rises as the log(n) of the size of that scene, while the time taken to rasterize rises linearly with regards to the scene.

There exists a threshold of computing power/scene complexity above which raytracing beats rasterization in speed. However, like Carmack pointed out, the constant factors are massive, so this won't be reached in the near future, if ever.

The reason the constant factors are so huge is that complexity of raytracing rises linearly with the count of pixels to be drawn, while in rasterization a lot of the work can be shared by neighbouring pixels.

Intriguingly, this means that if you can reduce the pixel counts, you can vastly improve the value of raytracing.

Notably, if you can do eye tracking and rendering in less than 15ms, you can reach the same visual quality as a full-screen, high-resolution render by rendering only the areas you are actually looking at in high resolution, and rendering the rest of the scene at a progressively lower resolution farther from the focus point. The cone of high-precision vision is surprisingly small, something like tens of pixels when looking at a screen from a normal viewing distance. If you did this, you should be able to cut the amount of rays you need to send by at least two orders of magnitude, which would bring raytracing to real-time quality on modern hardware.
Then write it once and share the wrapper script on github. No?
The disruption will come late to the end user. But all of fleet car - this is a god send, taxi firms without the stupid medallions, totally safe, couriers, trucking companies ... these can see a lot of value.

Also there are some situations when driving a car is not an enjoyment but a chore - almost any place where traffic is heavy.
We've all seen stupid code. We've all seen WTF code. We've all seen redundant code. WE ALL MAKE COMMENTS ABOUT IT. WE ALL CHIDE PEOPLE FOR WRITING IT. We all have a good laugh over it. (Does -anyone- remember the way Microsoft platforms were/are treated?)

Hell, some people even have twitter feeds about it https://twitter.com/stupidphp

All I can say is this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DozqEUPY5dA
This reminds me of the first of Larry Wall's three virtues:

"[Laziness] makes you write labor-saving programs that other people will find useful, and document what you wrote so you don't have to answer so many questions about it. Hence, the first great virtue of a programmer."
Sensationalist headline but I can conclude that Google and SpaceX are the tech leaders of our generation. Love hearing about companies focused on the future. To think that potentially this guy who has to depend on other people to take care of him and drive him places, or he has to take the bus, won't have to because he can hop into his self-driving car and be independent.
Passive aggressive, backhanded shadow dweller. Of course you criticize in public. That's the ENTIRE point of creative expression... to endure the reactions of your efforts!
you don't predict an incentive to use self driving cars? How about:

1) reducing the risk of accident and increasing safety in case of accident (you could, for example, sit in the back seat)

2) no need to find nearby parking (let the car drop you off and later pick you up)

3) ability to apply the time you would have used driving to do something useful

4) improved gas mileage from caravaning, ability to predict light timing, etc.
Here's a link to that apology: http://programmingtour.blogspot.com/2013/01/im-sorry.html

I know Corey and don't really know too much about what happened here, so I'll only say he's one of the most positive and supportive people I know.
Time is a limited resource. But fair point, as one could spend less time being unsympathetic towards others and instead spend it more valuably being empathetic towards legitimate causes.
Especially where defendants are characteristically individuals without the resources to defend their interpretation of the law in court.

Not true. Just because you may have to rely on a public defender doesn't mean your legal theory would have legs with a better lawyer.

A kid who sneaks through your literal open window and starts nosing around in your house is not pointing out a critical security vulnerability; you know that your window is open. There is no benefit to the homeowner, the kid is just a pest. But computers have higher security requirements: The equivalent of an open window is a major failing in need of immediate attention, because if a kid can get in then so can foreign criminal syndicates, and if they get in they'll be doing more than poking around.

That's true as a pragmatic matter, but it is not your decision to make about other people's systems. I can think of cases where an open window is a critical security vulnerability; kids can fall out of them, medical or legal papers may be accessible to third parties and put the subject of those papers in jeopardy and so on. But that doesn't entitle me to climb through the window in order to demonstrate or draw the homeowner's or business operator's attention to the risks of the open window.

While it's quite true that AT&T was doing its customers a disservice here, and I have no problem with people observing and commenting upon that fact, it's their computer system, not yours. You don't have a right to poke around there just because you have the know-how to build/operate a more secure system. I doubt you would appreciate a private security company representative turning up in your living room to harangue you about your open window. You would rightly tell him that a) it's not his business and b) if he wants to help, ring the fucking doorbell first, rather than publishing an directory of what's inside your house.
Edit: I'm thinking we could use nanotubes, with a strength-to-weight ratio 117 times greater than steel.
"Do you think there is something inherently wrong with the feeling of independence and happiness attained from the car culture in the US?"

Not at all. Note, I had a car that in 12 years, I put 256000 miles on, while I had a second vehicle during that time that had many miles put on it as well. I personally love road trips. One area where modern vehicles (hybrids and eventually self-driving) have no place (for now) is off roaring. Every year or two, I do road trips that include up to (and sometimes exceeding) 1000 miles off road -- not just dirt, but jeep trails, high clearance, having one person act as a spotter kind of stuff.

Where my comment was directed is that all the technology in the world isn't going to do away with the car culture you point out anytime soon (probably not in my lifetime).
I am still dubious that self-driving and non-self-driving cars will be able to share a road in the future

How exactly do you figure? You don't think regular drivers can handle a road with computer cars? Or you don't think computer cars can handle a road with people?
I'm curious about whether this is an actual grammatical rule and what it's called if it is. Shouldn't that be, "The First Annual Objectify-A-Man-in-Tech Day?"
He might gain easier sharing and (much) more traffic.
How do you guy handle situations where there may not be a trade that day. For example: with OTCBBs. Also, how would you handle unexpected market closures [such as the flash crash?]

I've been developing my own back tester for quite a while [in Java] and I must say: You guys are doing some interesting stuff and its a challenging area.
Again, it's completely irrelevant what amazing treatment rich people get. And please, find me any evidence that American health care is in any way better or that anyone is flying there to get treatment. I can only find evidence of the contrary. If I ever get seriously sick, I'll be on the first plane out of here.
Insurance is for covering unexpected events. A gun being fired is a deliberate act. I don't see how it makes sense in this context.
Poster previously requested help after death, coma, physical rehabilitation, and drug abuse.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2312566
I have this thought recently that firearms should be replaced with faintarms for general public. Guns for public should be designed to cause faint to the aponent if discharged rather than killing. This way individual claim to 'right to defend/protect' him/her is maintained while at the same time, his ability to kill somebody is also curtailed with the use of that gun.

Just a thought.
Are you suggesting I was talking bad about the Ruby community?

I openly dislike Ruby (as a language), but I swear this project was written in Node, which I also dislike.

Oh, and I could care less which language something is written in, my simple, trollish tweet, was only based on the usability aspect.
Hmm, no mention of the disruptions in employment due to driverless cars. There go taxi drivers, bus drivers and a big segment---truck drivers, so I would expect a large push back from the various unions (I'm extrapolating from _The Box_, a history of container shipping).
In my experience a couple of really good freelance gigs can be enough to cause all of these problems. The problem is there aren't enough hours in the day and so if a project starts getting behind you work at it harder, forego things like marketing yourself (because you can't commit anyway to anyone else) and pretty soon your presence is down. It's a painful lesson and I have been through it. When you combine this with a sluggish economy, what might have been a moderately painful lesson before can be quite devastating.

I do, however, agree with the recommendation to talk to other freelancers, etc because this really helps with the learning curves of this sort.
The funny thing is, that Python doesn't use PCRE either and never had.
The Inside Story Of Siri's Origins
I've had the opposite experience. I've converted 2-3 complex build systems implemented in different flavors of make to ant. It's tedious but it's doable. And once you get to ant, it's a lot easier to maintain compared to make.

I looked at maven a couple time but could never figure out how to convert a make-based build to maven because there is always a bunch of weird hacks lurking in the makefile. However, I do see how maven would be fine for a new project.
Not the parent, but I do think there is something inherently wrong about it.

I grew up around cars, driving cars (heck, my college job was the stereotypical pizza delivery guy). I live in a metropolitan area where I can go just about anywhere I need to with the swipe of a card and waiting a few minutes on a train platform. The feeling of independence that I didn't need to worry about the CV boots on my axles screwing up and costing me hundreds in a replacement axle. The feeling of independence that I'm not contributing significantly to pollution. The feeling of independence that _getting out and walking somewhere_ gives me. The feeling of independence that I get to read a book on my commute instead of staring at the ass-end of an SUV jettisoning metric tons of fumes while in stop-and-go-traffic.

Do I wish I had a car for getting out of the city and into the countryside sometimes? Well, sure.

That's what zipcar is for.

I _do_ admit that the feeling of driving is exhilarating. Pushing the pedal down, feeling the engine rev, connecting with the road through the tires.

For the majority of uses, I can see driverless cars completely taking over. And for those who want to drive endless country roads? Well, driverless cars will probably be built to drive with the expectation that every other car on the road is being driven by a drunken teenager on a methamphetamine binge. For liability purposes.

And in certain parts of the country, you can still see horse-drawn carriages clopping along the shoulder.

So you'll [the quintessential driver, who just wants to drive because of some ass-backwards ideal of freedom which is actually more crippling than freeing] will be just fine.

If not? Well, we have four-wheeler specific mudding "roads" out there right now, don't we? I could see the blue ridge parkway, for example, being a driver-only road (it is incredibly fun to drive).
Technology isn't there yet to do much. In the future the gun could be smart, sensors could figure out the situation and make "judgements". Examples: Accelerometers could determine if user was charging or attempting to flee, they could also detect if your shooting from a moving car. Image recognition could determine if your shooting a fleeing person or an actual threat. Gyros sensors along with proximity sensors could determine if you are attempting to shoot yourself. Enough sensors and cpu power, guns could make decisions much like a human being. These won't help much because the bad guys will just have non smart guns but thats another issue.
1. Actuarially-priced insurance for a white 50 year old male who lives in a rich area and has an 800+ credit score, and owns NFA items and ~500 guns, would be less for all of his collection than for a single 21 year old black male who owns a single Raven .25acp (legally) for self defense.

(Maybe the younger guy is a military veteran, is volunteering to help his community and thus lives in a high-crime area, and has that gun to protect his 5yo niece from criminals in the neighborhood. Or, maybe he's a gang member who hasn't gotten arrested yet. The insurer would assume the latter.)

I mean, look at car insurance. There's also more of a socially-beneficial and defensible use for the 21 year old who wants to defend his family than for a collector, really.

2.
Stolen guns are minor part of the supply of guns (10-15%). The benefits of this whole proposal could come from universal background checks on transfers, to the extent that they hinder straw purchases from dealers and "outside the gun show" person to person sales across state lines.

~all guns start out legal (at the manufacturer); the issue is how they go from manufacturer to first sale and then subsequent sales. Right now, a large number of illegal guns (particularly handguns) come from straw purchases (where a criminal has a non-criminal buy a gun from a dealer) or from private party sales (generally across state lines, since high crime places like LA, Baltimore, DC, Chicago have strict gun laws; places with low gun crime have looser laws).
Can you elaborate on how you think that map data is important? I would expect that mapping data at best gives you a route - something the user could supply. Naively, I would think that the hard problems are responding to obstacles in the road, cross walks, stop lights, etc., where map data won't help much.
I can tell you're not from the south... I shoot targets while standing on my friend's back porch every few weeks or so. I think you'd have to swap "not at a shooting range" with "within city limits."

Regardless, say a guy is suicidal/crazy/wants to murder his ex-wife so he throws his 9 MM in the microwave with his macaroni dinner and, well, so much for any 911 calls
Google has loads of money. They can buy a car company. Tesla has a $4B market cap. Or they could invest significantly in a car company. Or they can strike exclusive agreements.
There are other companies, but I think I've mostly seen this kind of tech from small companies and start-ups, rather than big auto-makers. Sure most of them have been working on "automization" of the car, but only for certain specific technologies, not "self-driving car" technologies.

The best Audi could show at CES was self-parking, and even that needed infrastructure put in place in the parking lot for it to work, so it's not even in the same class as Google's self-driving tech.

Also as others have said, Google might have the most accurate data in the future for such technology, which means cars using Google's self-driving tech will be the safest out there.
If you think his reaction was bad, perhaps you should look at yours.
While I agree car culture is powerful, I've been persuaded that it'll be over 50% faster than you think. The cost saving of not owning a car will become apparent quickly. Cars that can be much smaller (since you no longer buy/rent a car for the biggest task you have a year), carpooling gets MUCH simpler.

It's going to reshape cities and entire industries. We'll get most of the best of cars (flexible mobility and independence) and get rid of most of the worst of them (cost, insurance, waste of public space, car-centric architecture, deaths, drunk driving, etc.).

I cannot wait.
An analogous post from Steve Klabnik:

http://blog.steveklabnik.com/posts/2013-01-23-node
Also - it's much easier to debug the equivalent dynamic language's code than to try to figure out what went wrong in your xargs pipe.
This is not a good idea. People can barely invest in regulated securities doing a dipshit buy and hold strategy.

For professionals - brokerage houses already do most of the hard work and provide decent APIs - so they don't need it either.

Algo trading is cool - but it's most definitely NOT for the masses.
My compiler does not have an abstract symbol tree. Game-over you lose.

My kernel is ring-0-only and identity mapped. Game-over you lose.

The world is perfectly just.

God says...
fulness predict vile paying suppressed solicits perisheth
you_hoser abashed vein treasury game containing Weight
enticing healed CONSEQUENTIAL readable Mission_Accomplished
brim-full containeth 'knock sprang fellow-pilgrims zoot
Body sea perceiving did obstinacy spokest instant unutterably
vocal ridiculous gluttony pines Saint Copyright saw think_you_could_do_better
diversely propound congregations magical proceeded Whose
singsong curiously Place strangely 2000 Thereupon discomfort
youth replenished geek peacefully convert shifting souls
shunning flowed total waste floods lancet England risen
hereby disembowelled affection 'It tides staggered Moses'
persecuting imitation indicating reputed docile contributions
noble diligently artifices surpassingly had perish compelled
new-born refused exhalation unchanged unforgotten succour
excess bank Far containeth floods bold-faced concord lodging
points determined presides tomorrow lives conveyed ensample
umm unconscious grant lose population just groan Nevertheless
protesting par leaps haste I_am_not_amused silenced springs
Say mutability mingle clanking flee New_Zealand considered
deserters However stead Where space refraining handyman
-unlike mingling princes assiduously accomplish Saviour
wavy who its Enlightener one's decide pauses displeased
melodies corn gate unforgotten appointing fornication
sensible righteousness variously a attained are_you_sure
Not always. Don't underestimate the strength of pride (though in this case, over a tweet, you're probably right).
Why do you choose to not be a nice person (online)? Just curious.

Also, I think the "If you don't like, ignore it. If you can't ignore it, then you won't survive," is self-serving advice. It'd be easier to take seriously if you were one of the nice people.
"I can’t help but think of potential future employers that are no longer potential."

Trust me when I say: this faux intellectual, hipster hacker bullshit, "I liked Ruby before it was cool." represents a tiny, infinitesimal fraction of employers. I'd be shocked if any of these commenters have ever taken the time to release anything of value. I'd also be shocked if any of them was in a position to hire anyone. They're probably too busy performing smug, mental masturbation on HN and trying out their fourth JavaScript MVC framework for a three page vegan bakery shop website for that girl that friend zoned them.
Even Google's own data isn't perfect. A couple of years ago someone even tried to sue Google for "getting her on a highway" and then having an accident. I think she was walking, and obviously she can't blame Google for not noticing the highway!

But with self-driving cars, it's different. A car landing on a highway, when it's not supposed to be there, and then getting into an accident, is not good news. So that's why I think accurate map data will be very important for this.
author should grep -v pub from the keys list.
Yeah, if they really had to get off on criticizing other's code, why not use IM or email? To do it on such a public place as twitter is kind of cruel.
Can PayPal win former customers back with "aggressive changes"?