skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
from https://www.facebook.com/HelpNaliniNow/info

Beloved mother, friend, and professor Nalini Ambady needs to find a South Asian marrow donor match. Swab your cheek and spread the word today! Donors ages 18-44 needed. Go to http://tinyurl.com/iwillsavenalini to register for free!
Description
Nalini Ambady is a Stanford University professor and a mom with two daughters in high school. She is fighting for her life. In 2004, Nalini was diagnosed with Acute Myelogenus Leukemia (AML) which is a cancer of the blood. After 8 years in remission, Nalini’s leukemia has returned, and she needs a bone marrow transplant as soon as possible. Her donor must match her, genetically. The number of South Asians in the bone marrow registries is very low. Nalini needs your help.

Nalini has given a lot. She is a world-class social scientist and is the first South Asian to achieve the highest levels of prominence in her field, which is social psychology. Nalini has produced ground-breaking research, resulting in hundreds of publications and tens of thousands of citations. As a result, her research has been featured in a number of popular press books, including Malcolm Gladwell's Blink. Nalini is also the first Indian ever to have taught in the Harvard and Stanford psychology departments. She is a beloved teacher and mentor, having changed the lives of many hundreds of students at Harvard, Stanford and Tufts universities. She has also trained world-class psychologists and experts in their respective fields. Nalini is admired as a scholar and cherished as a friend. Most importantly, Nalini is a mother and wife. Her family needs her.

HOW YOU CAN HELP:

1. REGISTER
Nalini is South Asian, originally from Kerala, India, so she is most likely o match a fellow South Asian! Please register online for free at http://tinyurl.com/iwillsavenalini or find a drive near you on our website nalinineedsyou.com.

2. SET UP A DRIVE
If you would like to set up a drive, please email nalinineedsyou@gmail.com. We will do almost all the work for you!

3.VOLUNTEER
We always need volunteers to help out at drives. Please email Nadya Dutchin ndutchin@NMDP.ORG if you're available to help.

4. SPREAD THE WORD
You can also help by spreading the word about Nalini through your social networks. Even if you don't know a match, someone you know might. #HelpNaliniNow

5. MAKE A DONATION
Help us provide swab kits to people all around the world. (Contributions are tax deductible) Go to nalinineedsyou.com to donate funds today.
It seems like easy access to the same video with many different watermarks would make it easy to find the watermark, or at least easy to destroy it?

Can you still identify who shared a video, if the shared video was created by averaging ten copies with different watermarks?
i have no idea what this app does from site
I thought PS and Illustrator were terrible tools in the competency domain of Fireworks?
Well, the way that immediately comes to mind would be to send two packets per transmission. One that is point-to-point, which contains the routing information, and one that is meant to be routed without being read, but there must be something more to it as this solution seems too simple to have not been thought of.
Trading to other's tempo is not illegal. This is why everyone on Wall Street has the exact same trade....
Facebook didn't use Scala and they managed do hit a lot of same issues, too, like this one: http://code.google.com/p/android/issues/detail?id=22586

Anyway, the presentation is almost two years old now.
What's Wrong With Killing Hookers?
Silicon Valley Is Human, All Too Human
The article states that the agency was concerned with how to reach children looking at an ad without letting the adult they are with know they are looking at an ad about child abuse.

However, the version of the ad that adults see is still about child abuse.
In recent Firefoxes, they get transparently converted to HTML by PDF.js, so I don't tend to care too much either way. There's a little bit of conversion overhead, but then there would also be some conversion overhead if they were using MathJax.
Shh, economics. This is why people in developing (or not developing) regions will continue to use mobile phone minutes as a medium of exchange rather than adopting btc.

There are a number of effective "we're gonna change the world" platforms in the bitcoin world.

1) No centralized bank or government control of value/transactions/etc.
2) Anonymous wealth control
3) Microtransactions
4) Non-repudiable 'instant' transactions

These are not exclusive, nor a complete list. For example, I'm very much a fan of #3 and #4 because I have been hoping for years that we can create a sustainable system for implementing many of the commercial aspects, including transclusion, of the Xanadu goals.

All of us are ignorant or dismissive of some basic facts, whether technical, political, or economical. For example, people are very fascinated with identifying the high-net-worth btc holders. While the effort to track their accounts and transfers was originally non-trivial, people spent a lot of time developing tools and methods for correlating accumulation and distribution. It's a short hop from there to tying an account to human entities.

It's not that this was unforeseeable, but that the effort seemed too much to worry about. However, one should probably assume that any effort distributed across the Internet will attract the attention of those people who have the time and inclination to grind away at tasks considered to be pointless by the vast majority. For some, it's a way of counting coup, and you'll never escape that.

The 'opportunity' that the limitation on transaction size creates is a value-added service for micropayments. In effect, a merchant would keep a ledger of microtransactions that could be remitted at any time. You could do this today with Mt. Gox, for example.

The downside of this is much the same as with a conventional financial system. That is, people are morons and principles have a price. Many of the systems built to date have been compromised (Mt. Gox, Bitcoinica, etc.) or misappropriated completely (BTCST, Bitcoinica, etc.). It is unlikely (but possible) that an entity with technical and legal competence and a scrupled imperative will bridge the gap for microtransactions on a long-term basis.

If it were to happen, one would still have a centralized 'bank' that would have to follow practices that would compromise anonymity due to AML and KYC regulations because bitcoin services are not a competitive market at this time.
Deep Inside The Biggest Little Dildo Factory In America
Tips for Saving Money On AWS
Terrafugia Unveils New TF-X Project, Talks Future of Flying Cars
JavaFX, I2C, Parallax, Touch, Raspberry Pi, Gyroscopes and Much More
My point is that it isn't a good starting point across designs, because the designs vary so much as to make their formula inapplicable in the general case.

Now, if they said that their formula was consistent within a certain class of materials & construction, I'd buy it. But even then with the Plexiglas, their formula predicted 7 cracks, while the experiment produced 8. They need to explain that, and I'm saying it's because of the near-crystalline internal structure of Plexiglas. If they had altered their hypothesis & and prediction, and then retested, and did some analysis to explain it (perhaps I'm wrong - maybe its because of some other factor and not the internal structure) I'd buy it.
PG and friends are using Continuations ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuation ), which are supported first-class in Racket, as the pattern underlying HN.

Their specific implementation of continuations means that each time a page is generated, each user-specific/authenticated link off of the page (Flag, Voting, Delete) is evaluated as a possible continuation of the user's state and the user-and-action specific hash "fnid" (Function ID) is cached and interpolated into the HTML.

Hence, the hash absolutely changes for every logged-in user every page load.

Lots of older sites still use continuations to great effect; Continuations were popular in the WebObjects days but since they require lots of user state information to be stored server-side they're comparatively difficult to scale.

Continuations are a really cool pattern to study, since most hacking in HTTP-backed web services comes from the inherently stateless nature of the protocol, and continuation-based programming helps prevent the inverted control flow that page-based programming lends itself to.
For anyone potentially dissuaded to watch the talk based upon this parent comment, please know that this talk is not actually about the dynamics of individual success.

Instead, it reflects on how the aggregate outlook of a society across two axes (optimistic-to-pessimistic and determinate-to-indeterminate) affects its strategies, pursuits, and stability.

The title of the talk is just Thiel pushing back on our society's increasingly indeterminate yet optimistic outlook, which, as Thiel subtlety alludes, may be tragically unstable.
Would companies that produce computer animated movies be willing to risk exposing their 3d/texture assets like that? If even low-quality "pre-rendered"^ versions of those fell into the hands of the community then those companies would basically have to deal with a bunch of people using their stuff (probably mostly fair-use covered parody stuff on youtube, but also high quality Chinese knockoff movies and the like.)

^ You would have to pre-render that stuff in some way first, wouldn't you? The actual source assets for those movies are absolutely massive and do not render in real time.
Your question is basically what the entire article is about. Short answer: difficult when dealing with a system that by design is not supposed to read any part of the data.

"The current generation of quantum cryptography systems are point-to-point connections over a single length of fibre, So they can send secure messages from A to B but cannot route this information onwards to C, D, E or F. That’s because the act of routing a message means reading the part of it that indicates where it has to be routed. And this inevitably changes it, at least with conventional routers. This makes a quantum internet impossible with today’s technology"

Impossible with today's technology = extremely difficult.

Routers have to read the data in order to know where it is supposed to be routed to. Quantum routing isn't allowed to do that. That's a difficult problem.

edit: apologies for duplicating previous answers, should've refreshed the comments page before posting.
I find a world where we're locked into using words mathematicians invent a very bleak one indeed.
> When I write a function, I can probably enumerate in my head all the things I want it to do, and not halting usually isn't one of those things. But the instinctive reaction is to worry about Turing-completeness, which is puzzling. When's the last time you wanted a program with fundementally unprovable behavior?

You don't usually want fundamentally unprovable behavior. However, you also don't want to sacrifice the ability to compute anything that is computable. And you can't throw out the bathwater of the halting problem without throwing out the baby of computing everything computable.

So, in practice, you want to use provably-halting-on-all-valid-inputs algorithms for the problems where you have available (either known, or that you can find with reasonable effort) such an algorithm, but retain the option of using other techniques for other problems.
Reality check:

Prior to DropBox, I had used LiveDrive, which was featured in HN, for about six months, but I don't really remember for how long. It was a beta, and the free plan was over once the beta was over. But it was a great and fully functional implementation of the concept.

For the first months of DropBox, it was known as 'a LiveDrive alternative'.

The only real innovation of DropBox over LiveDrive was the free plan. Which I'm still using for free.
Of course that is good, but if the agency's principal motivation is something self-centered (getting attention), then they are using this issue as a vehicle for their own profit.
That's what he's saying. If this is the NSA telling us what the s-boxes for DSA are, what's the equivalent to the DSA understanding differential cryptanalysis when designing the s-boxes?
Just what we need: more laws to invade privacy. So much for trusting teachers.
Well they do mention that they "solved" this problem:

"Today, Richard Hughes and pals at Los Alamos National Labs in New Mexico reveal an alternative quantum internet, which they say they’ve been running for two and half years. Their approach is to create a quantum network based around a hub and spoke-type network. All messages get routed from any point in the network to another via this central hub.

This is not the first time this kind of approach has been tried. The idea is that messages to the hub rely on the usual level of quantum security. However, once at the hub, they are converted to conventional classical bits and then reconverted into quantum bits to be sent on the second leg of their journey."

With a little more reading, it seems like the issue they face now is the reliance on a secure central hub.
Realtime Software Engineer at PagerDuty in San Francisco
GitHub SSH access disabled because of Security vuneralibity
Visionary: Seeing Through Defects
You people and your TLD purity...

Railing against re-use of small countries TLDs is the 2013 version of writing "Micro$oft".
Or just regular registration. I have near 100 that I registered with good intention. Then I get distracted and later I'll look at my list and be amazed at the quality of the names I have. Nothing that I could sell for much, but that would be great memorable names for a service or company. They're so cheap that it's no big deal (at least in bite size chunks), but the truth is I'm locking it up for an entrepreneur with the time and motivation.
http://imo.im
"I'm glad you wrote to your Representative, Ms. Concerned Voter, but I regret to inform you that because the amount of taxpayer fraud you witnessed was less than $5,000,000 that the Department of Justice would be powerless to bring charges even if I referred the case to them. $5,000,000 is a stupendously minor offense in the grand scheme of the budget, and minor offenses no longer warrant charges after the Major Crimes Prioritization Act of 2018."
I don't think I've ever seen a software project hit a deadline, that includes early delivery as well as late.

I found the constant focus on time estimating in management disciplines incredibly contrived and frustrating. It's an incredibly wrong headed effort at taking mass production estimate techniques (where zero creativity is required) and applying it towards a creative endeavor. It makes as much sense as asking "how many innovations per hour can the team accomplish?" "or how many paintings can a team of painters crank out per day?".

What I think bothers me the most is how this is treated in management education. At its simplest, you start with a roll of the die, because any estimate is essentially a Wild Ass Guess (WAG). But then, realizing that software deadlines are never met, the management discipline tries to use various structured techniques for estimating, like complex work breakdown structures and critical path analysis blah blah blah, which of course simply use WAGs at a finer level of granularity and do little but generate busy work for the managers. Instead of one WAG, we now have dozens or hundreds of small WAGs.

Of course none of this provides a better estimate of time, but might include gems like when aggregating your WAGs from a work breakdown structure to derive a total project estimate, add 20% to each small WAG to build in "slack time" which is another way of saying "we don't really know how long it'll take, so we're going to over estimate as a Check Your Ass (CYA) maneuver, if we estimate out long enough, all work will get done early!". Brilliant. Modern management practices have now turned from coordinating and organizing complex efforts into professional CYA endeavor.

I think there's light at the end of the tunnel, most of this nonsense is a result of trying to scope box projects, which makes sense when building a bridge, or making millions of widgets, but makes little sense when building new software. There's obviously a need for setting deadlines, as anybody who's ever managed a "when it's done" software project knows...that only asks for "Duke Nukem Forever" problems. Setting deadlines keeps people on task and motivated.

So the solution? What do your business needs dictate in terms of delivery time? Then timebox to that. If features don't get built by that time, too bad. Software, unlike building a bridge, is a continuous practice. You can build, deliver and then rev to fix, extend, addend software that didn't hit the desired scope. It eliminates lots of the CYA and WAG nonsense, and forces people to try and get as much as possible done in the allotted time anyways. It keeps the development team from going into (what I consider) largely unethical extended crunch periods near or after a WAGs arbitrary deadline. They'll simply focus on what they can deliver. It's descriptive of their job instead of proscriptive. It implicitly creates the understanding that full functionality is not the goal for a milestone.

"Build as much as you can by x" makes more sense than "How long will it take to build all of Y?".
You are an incredibly lucky person if living for 18 months with no salary is plausible for you. Either that or you've already worked somewhere for a large salary. You shouldn't talk down to people because they haven't experienced the same luck as you. Instagram was an exception to just about every rule, and I don't think it's a bad thing that a majority of the world would laugh at anybody trying to sell them the idea of work in it for equity.
I have been absolutely delighted with my Pebble. Most new tech is underwhelming, but Pebble+Android is a fantastic combination. I can see incoming messages without being obtrusive.

The battery life is impressive too. I put a different watchband on because I hate the feeling of silicone, but it fits my skinny wrists decently.
>I'm frankly more interested in the guy who blew up during the dot com boom and who is currently some random employee at some random company, with a past filled with mistakes

Here you go, sort of:

http://www.businessinsider.com/james-altucher-mistakes-2013-...
The difficulty of accurate time estimates is not limited to developers. Anyone who's ever ordered food for delivery intuitively knows this, but many people in our industry fail to make that connection. It's the same problem.

The cause of the problem is you make estimates by running a simulation and no matter how complex, the longer the time / the bigger the scale of the project, the more entropy reality will introduce which your simulation did not account for.

Rather than embracing delusion that you can give accurate estimates -- or driving yourself insane trying to reach deadlines you created with incomplete information -- developers should follow the lead of other professions, and when we give estimates make it clear that it is an estimate.

House contractors don't have this problem. Plumbers don't give this problem, and in 2013 even pizza drivers no longer have this problem. Why are we still pulling our hair out trying to give perfect time estimates and follow through on them as though they are gospel?

Here's my rules of time estimates:

1) Under promise, over deliver. Be conservative in your estimates (that means expect it to take longer than you initially think.)

2) Make it clear to whoever this estimate is for that it is only an estimate, and that it is only good for the current parameters of the project. As problems come up, and when the paramters change, the estimate will become insufficient.

3) Don't treat them like gospel. If you do a good job of setting up expectations, sometimes you will finish ahead of "schedule", and unfortunately no matter your best efforts, sometimes you will finish behind. That's OK. This is reality, not a simulation. Things aren't perfect. If you're working with someone who says it's not ok, stop working with that person in the future.
Valid point. I don't personally care about statements of truth unless they can be used toward some form of improvement. So that's my bias which you might have picked up on.
I think it is best to do incremental estimates. "How long until you have the service deployed to staging with a single 'ping' operation?". When that step is complete: "Ok, now how long to get operation Foo working end-to-end?". This requires trust along the way that people aren't wasting time, but estimating a big project can really screw you. If the estimate comes back for 6 months, and it could have been done in 3, then the project will still take 6 months.
Apparently, Homakov has discovered it:
https://github.com/blog/1069-responsible-disclosure-policy
19th century 'Design Patterns'
Building the Bomber Cam With 3D Printing and Scraps
Because it is impossible. Let me see if I can find that recent article that articulates it better than I can.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planning_fallacy
Not having to think about layers (until they are actually needed) is my favorite core feature of FW. Why couldn't Adobe just add this as an option to PS.
I see his larger point, but the conflation of "understanding math" and "being able to do simple arithmetic" is something of a pet peeve. The latter may be a useful life skill, but is not very closely related to understanding mathematics. In fact it's not only non-technical office workers who can be proud of not being able to do it: if you walk into any math department you will find accomplished mathematicians almost gleefully recounting how bad they are at doing simple arithmetic. They can prove things about topological spaces but can't balance a checkbook!

That makes the comparison to literacy more complex. Clearly mathematicians think mathematics is important, or they wouldn't be studying it. But many of them consider ability to do arithmetic, as a skill, essentially irrelevant, to the point where they don't even learn it themselves. Then a question might be: what is the relevant literacy-like skill? I think it comes closer to logic and analytical thinking than specifically mathematics, although understanding of statistical arguments fits into that category.
> Once you are proficient in Photoshop,

I have no desire to ever be proficient in photoshop, which is why I like Fireworks. It's easy for me, a programmer, to open it up, figure out how to do what I need to do, and then get back to working on whatever site I'm working on.

I don't have half a day to spend trying to figure out how to change the white background to transparent because I want to introduce a background switcher to a website. I also don't want to have a designer do it either, not when I can open Fireworks and complete that task in 5 minutes.

That's the power of Fireworks in my opinion - a graphics tool for non-designers.
The only thing that worries me with this technique (as tempting as it is), is that I've seen teams where the work will dramatically slow down because they're trying to "fit" to the deadline. Getting it done as fast as possible and early only leads to more work for more people.
If they told you, they'd have to... oh never mind.
But how can it tell the difference between the hub's modifications and an attacker's modifications?
I understand the need for proper formatting in academic papers, but it wouldn't hurt anyone to provide a text copy after the fact.

If someone needs a formula they can render the pdf. But a secondary text copy can be more easily indexed, searched and viewed on any kind of text-viewing device... it's just a million times more convenient.