skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Fair enough guys. An oversight on my part. Links have been added to bottom of post to specific articles.
Minnesota companies need IT workers, but stumble in hiring
Uhh, people get an MBA to be something like a vice president at Goldman Sachs on Wall Street, or a consultant at McKinsey, or maybe even eventually a CEO of a major corporation with hundreds of millions in revenue, not to run a lawn mowing business.

Edit: I see now that you were being sarcastic.
My CS class in HS was in C++ (Turbo C++ in DOS mode with the Borland graphics). I'm undecided as to whether it was the best approach. On one hand I appreciate learning it. On the other hand, it makes you think too much about the computer to appreciate the algorithm.
Identical Droplets in the DigitalOcean: Regenerate your Ubuntu SSH Host Keys now
Cerf does say that part of the reasoning behind packet switching was robust command and control in the event of nuclear war. Cerf doesn't say that ARPANET, in itself, was designed for that (and neither did I).

This is also consistent with the following quote in the Baran interview you cite:

Baran: But the origin of packet switching itself is very much Cold War.
The argument was: To have a credible defense, you had to be able to
withstand an attack and at least be able to show you had the capability
to return the favor in kind.

So there is no disagreement on that point, and your corrective "Actually, ..." is misplaced.
I interned at Trimble in the radio group. Industrial GPS receivers could be purchased by more / less anyone, however they were built and priced for heavy-duty industrial consumption (mines, farms, ships, aircraft, etc.). The unassisted accuracy without kinematic corrections was around +- 1 m horizonal and ~10 m vertical, constantly changing as the constellation moves. This would be for a top-of-the-line 24 channel parallel receiver. WITH kinematic GPS, +- 10 mm (not a typo) horizonal and ~3 m vertical. It was so good that receivers could be installed on the left and right sides of a grader's blade that the angle and position could be known with great accuracy and precision. Kinematic means a nearby stationary reference ground base station sending updates over radio frequencies to another GPS receiver that could be in motion. This was also used to subtract SA pre-Clinton because the injected error would be the same in nearby locations.
That's really good advice for anyone, but particularly for people who haven't already built a large network yet. I find that as my network grows, I can often get a personal introduction to people I want to meet through a friend. This is actually one thing I do like LinkedIn for. A coworker pointed out that I skipped over this very effective use of LinkedIn when I bashed it with a larger hammer than necessary.
Professor Redekopp was one of the best teachers I've ever had. I highly recommend any incoming CS students take him for any classes you can.
Asking for different shopping fees and taxes should not be illegal anywhere.

The price itself could be more tricky. Of course it highly depends on your jurisdiction, but i some this would easily racial (or ethnical or whatever) discrimination.

Also I'm almost entirely sure that this would be a violation of the "one market" principle (and therefore illegal) of the EU if you operate from the EU and distinguishes between two EU countries.

But I'm not a lawyer or ever tried this.
> We have a number of banning mechanisms ..

Did you try the other approach taken by many sites of making their posts/activity hidden from others? Initially they can't tell the difference between being ignored and being hidden. It also has the advantage that if they were incorrectly hidden you can turn it off and their activity is still present.
I guess 2004 was a crazy year for cryptography.
>One thing that makes an expert an expert is their ability to filter signal from noise.

Certainly, but will you be able to spot the breakthrough insight if all your doing is filtering it against your notion of signal vs noise. Breakthroughs tend to come at a problem from a totally different angle & generally it takes a bit of time to understand why its brilliant rather than "noise".
Thanks for the advice. I haven't turned them on, but the dell marketing stuff says that the R510 is pretty quiet. I know how loud they can get though.
I think it is a cool idea. Kind of like snapchat for status updates. We all could use some letting out of built up feelings every now and then
Show HN: Meaningful Private Photo sharing
Thanks, Dan. Great article as well. Love the title ;)

Yeah, I think my basic message is to be a little more human in your dealings at networking events. In that way, I think we're both talking about the same thing. I'm embarrassed to admit that before I knew any better, I could have been Percy in your story. Thanks for the good read.
While 250k is peanuts compared to regular costs of rocket research, I feel 1 km/s is not that impressive of a demonstration. Rifles have achieved higher muzzle velocities as far back as 1935 [1], and ground-based systems capable of over 3 km/s have been demonstrated in the '60s and '90s only to meet with little interest [2] [3].

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.220_Swift

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_HARP

[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_High_Altitude_Research_Pr...
My greater point was that I don't think "we should actively encourage people to pick up a creative hobby" in response to those people making death threats.

There are already people who are choosing to pick up creative hobbies. Those people make games. People that make games get crucified by gamers who do not like their decisions. Those gamers make death threats.

The people who make death threats can easily enough make something creative. Certainly there is no larger barrier for them when compared to someone like Phil Fish. I do not think we need to make it easier to expect better behavior from someone who is making a death threat.

We need to prioritize the people who made the extra effort to actually get up and make something over the people who chose to directly threaten the lives of the creator.
When the drink isn't drugged, these look just like straws and cups that don't detect drugs. This suggests an obvious attack: swap out the straw or cup for a plain plastic one. (Countermeasure: make the cups and straws look distinctive.)
One thing I've wondered -- rather than spending so much effort building an extensive network, why not build a very small network of solid connections... with people who have lots of connections?

In any industry there are those individuals who seem to "know everyone," have been next to many industry-shifting moments one way or another, have worked at a half-dozen of the most important companies, etc etc. It's clear that a large part of their time is spent networking (after all, it's a hard job), and a large part of their value is as a connector. As an added bonus, because they're a connector and value having lots of connections, they should be open to the idea of getting to know you and forming another connection.

Why not just make connections with 6,7,8 of those people and then be done? You'd be one hop away to almost everyone in your industry with far less effort than actually getting to know everyone in your industry. Anyway, just theorizing at a more efficient way of networking. Agreed on the article's premises that a real network is with people you know as human beings.
I did t=0, if you can, I highly recommend hitting up an mit hackathon.
aha, so mining bitcoins in Thailand was not mentioned!
I didn't know GPS hammers were a thing but now I want one. Thanks, LSE.
There's nothing necessarily crazy about what you describe. The markets reaction to news that everyone knows is going to be released (that is, we know job numbers will be published at this time on that day, but not what the numbers will be) won't necessarily track the good-ness or bad-ness of the news, because the market will have moved in advance based on the best estimates of those playing that game, and they might have overshot.
Would love to see a community project analogous to this one develop in the e-mail space since too many users find PGP to be cumbersome, despite some very nice implementations.

We're on it! https://parley.co will be entering pre-beta later this week. Maybe not technically a "community project" because it's being built by a company that is at least partly motivated by profit, but the whole thing is BSD-licensed so people can do whatever they want with it.
We did this for social contact (channels, forums, and other forms of communication) for a while, but because it's a MUD, it's a shared world with persistent effects, so it's impractical to make all activity invisible. Blocking social communication just resulted in other forms of griefing as a result. Griefers gonna grief.
Isn't GPS clock sometimes used to set up high-speed network connections? Maybe someone is jamming GPS to mess with a particular HFT application.
Jammers. Thanks, iPhone.
The easiest way would be to store everything you can on the stack. The Go compiler does a very good job at escape analysis and tries to put everything on the stack that does not escape. Therefore, it's often better to use output parameters instead of return values to reduce (or eliminate) the number of allocations.

Some careful thoughts about the memory layout of your structs, especially which of them should be embedded and / or passed around by pointers and which of them shouldn't, might also pay off.

Another common optimization is to put the allocated objects back to a memory pool for later use. Take a look at the bufCache channel [1] from the bufio package for example (the http and the json package are using the same trick).

[1]: http://tip.golang.org/src/pkg/bufio/bufio.go#L79
>I actually think that someone who is incapable or even worse, unwilling to learn programming using C, has no business programming anything at all of any import, beyond the most toy-example tiny scripts here and there.

I'm a C hacker, and I do agree with this 100%.

And keep in mind, when I say "introductory", I'm talking a 1 semester class at most. I'm not saying that it should necessarily be any more than that.

>Furthermore my (admittedly curmudgeonly) take on the C vs "high level languages" debate is that learning something like Python "first" because it's "easier" is actually sort of damaging, in that the student will learn these "high level" concepts without any clue about the underlying implementation. They will then have to learn a bunch of "bag of tricks" that will seem arbitrary to them, and a bunch of "gotchas" to avoid, again, that will seem arbitrary to them, because they have no concept of things like the cost of memory copying (passing-by-value giant arrays as arguments to functions, etc).

Honestly, starting out with C++ when I was in my early teens(I'm in my late 20's now), a lot of those "bag of tricks" stuff I use daily was pretty much magic to me for a long time. It wasn't until I started to learn about dynamic memory management and serious data structure concepts in high school and college that it began to make sense.

That's why I think that the higher level languages are great for learning the basics of program flow control and basic computer data handling. The students don't need to know how dynamic memory allocation works at that point, but they will soon.

The overall point is that a well rounded, theoretical CS education should be teaching that the languages we use are closer to standard tools than the end-all of our products. There will be times where a high-level language will suit your needs perfectly well, and times where a low level language will have the raw power that you need, with the caveat of potentially needing a lot more thought and work to get the same results.
It's the year 64-bit CPUs became consumer commodoties.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit_computing#64-bit_process...
I wonder if this principle also applies to how legislatures and agencies monotonically expand the total body of laws and regulations. It's often too politically dangerous to deprecate a law.
Presumably you could also use lossy compression across users, especially for the boring parts. I imagine that, within the confines of my bowl, my milk and cheerios look pretty similar to yours. Do the actual differences matter, as a record of some particular breakfast experience? I suppose only if they float into some surprising configuration.
+1 for bcrypt and related solutions.

http://yorickpeterse.com/articles/use-bcrypt-fool/
http://codahale.com/how-to-safely-store-a-password/
I learned algorithms from Segdewick's "Algorithms in C", and had a different experience: I really liked understanding the algorithms and data structures right down to the level of bytes in memory. It felt... less magical. In a good way.
How did the Go version compare to the C/C++ one?
"Treatings account created! We are currently beta testing in New York City and will notify you when we open elsewhere."

I'm based in Portland, ME but am often in NYC. I presume there is no simple way to use the site yet for me?
Tor's cause is a noble one, but I fear it will end up (if it hasn't already) being used mostly by bad people for bad things.

Once you get your home or server IPs connected to black market forums, drugs, human trafficking or kiddie porn sites and your life (and your family's) has suddenly become more complicated, I wonder how many will still be eager to run Tor exit nodes? Maybe a few dreamers and anarchists.

Tor exits will be shut down one by one, either by the owners or by the police/state.

What we need to come up with is a fully encrypted, anonymous, self-contained super-internet of something like Tor "hidden services" only.
What a terribly example for an article about bullying to lead with. Bullying is bad, but Fish bullied others and contributed in the vitriol.
New logo for Dropbox
I too casually obsessed with algorithms for extracting geometry data from photographs. Here's a Javascript experiment/demo from a few years ago.
http://francoislaberge.com/labs/normal_mapping/me/

I'd always meant to make a writeup about it. I thought your article was great. Email me sometime if you continue to geek out in this space.
Right – but reflectors at the base of your cell still help. Any photons that pass through the first time, not being absorbed, are reflected back, effectively increasing the path length of your photon in the material.
Ah yes. Intro classes, where the point isn't to teach people but sort out the ones you don't have to teach.
Streak Brings Mail Merge to Gmail
Just to put it here, you can get these price differences between US hospitals as well.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/08/hospital-prices-cos...
in that Article, there's also a link to the Database of Medical Provider Charge data.
https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Sta...
Most C++ implementations of linked lists are bad, including std::list and apparently, this course's.

People misunderstand linked lists so badly, that they actually list the motivation for linked lists as fine-grained growth, as opposed to an array-based list.

The main benefits of linked lists over array-lists are:

* Can put data structures in lists even if they are already in some other data structure. For example, have some ordering between array elements.

* In intrusive style (can find the list links based on the item), can add after that position in O(1).

* In intrusive style with doubly-linked list, can also delete an item in that position in O(1).

Non-intrusive lists are incompatible with having the same O() while also allowing an item to be in multiple data structures simultaneously.

std::list indeed does not allow this, and is almost useless.

It's sad to see this taught incorrectly in courses, too, perpetuating the uselessness of std::list.
Reasonable people get in arguments over Monty Hall because the problem is usually stated incompletely. The odds depend on what the show's host is doing.
In some sense, the same ideas he has always written about, but again expressed in a new way. I like it.
Cool. Waiting to see if you catch hell for running your Python blog on a WordPress hosted account.
There was a nice article called "An editor recalls some hopeless papers" about all the "proofs" the editor had received alleging to have disproved Cantor's Theorem, so I'd say you're exactly right that many people have problems with infinity.

[1] http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.27.6...
Just getting started. Also, check out http://gcloud.io. Let me know if you have any questions.
G forces are less problematic when launching bulk materials (fuel, air, water, foodstuffs, metals - as I see the project proposal suggests). If you're 'catching' the payload at the other end, you can make the launch vehicle very dumb. Even more so if you can leave your engine at home and still use it (see also "ablative laser propulsion").

Radial forces on the launch platform itself are more of a concern. You have to stop it from tearing itself apart while it overcomes friction/drag and reaches escape velocity.
Israel is not the hub.

It's just that Israel is technologically advanced enough to actually track these bugs so there is data to map.

Other countries (India) are much larger hubs, but they don't check for it so there is no data to use.
Anyone who has ever dealt with bullying in their life can tell you that the absolute worst thing you can do is react to it.

With that I agree.. I once stood up for someone who was being mobbed, and we both made that mistake. Combined with things I found out afterwards I know "we were right", and if we had not reacted hurt and frustrated, that would have won out. Instead we kinda broke our backs trying to break a block of ice instead of letting the sun melt it.

But that's also kinda "woulda shoulda". Yeah, if everybody except rapists knew kung fu, there would be no rape. If you respond to insults with something witty that puts the egg cleanly on the face of the person who attacked you, you won't be bullied. And that's a worthy goal, I'm not being sarcastic, I just don't think it's fair to leave it at that. Because it's also a worthy goal for people to be able to exist before they became some kind of super person, and if someone acts stupid towards bullies for the right reason (not sure if that's the case here, but IF), then we should give them that advice while supporting them.

Why is reacting angrily to bullshit even so easy to "vilify and dislike"? Not that I necessarily want to defend all he said, especially since I'm just aware of rather random snippets with zero context. But I noticed that during the mobbing apocalypse I mentioned above: Most people don't really understand (a whole lot of) the context, or give a crap about the fact that if it's 20 on 1, the 20 started it, and that the single person can't be expected to be as calm as the 20 individuals. Some don't even understand the content of the statement(s), but nearly all of them react to the fact that one party is frustrated and hurt, and said some word or other, while the other is grinning and so light they swim on milk... so they instinctively side with the supposed "winner" (especially if that's the bigger group, or even the group vs. an individual), without really caring what the content of the dispute is. That's seriously fucked up IMHO, and a dysfunction so major, that compared to it having a bad temper or a potty mouth is EZ PZ to fix.

If every ugly comment someone made went into a black box and was ignored,

Then that would also apply to the "disgusting garbage" that littered his Twitter feed, so that sounds like a double standard and blaming the victim, no? I guess you don't mean it that way, because you are right: anger is a sign of weakness, and bullies thrive on perceived weakness. But I don't think bullies, or the people who watch such stuff idly, should be accepted as a fact of life. Not that I want to accuse you of implying that, but I know it can be read that way, and that if people can turn something into Someone Else's Problem they love to do that.

I think it's good on PA for calling it out, just like it was good on Bill Hicks when he had his "Freebird!" flip out, as ugly as that was.
From your source: "Illicit drugs were detected in 344 cases (34%)"
Interesting read. I liked the reference to Ralph Nadar... Those who vote in favor of war should be required to enlist in a draft.

Though I don't know how serious I can take this when the guy uses the word 'wonks' in reference to those he disagrees with.

Also I think that the lack of 'skin in the game' encourages risk, which counteracts a natural tendency for large groups to be more conservative (look at big business vs small). If you made decision makers have skin in the game, you'd have even less innovation and new ideas in large institutions. This is taking into account factors beyond his thesis, but leads to interesting thoughts when it comes to practical application of his ideas.
Beware the courier scam [clever landline phone hack]
A structure 2000 km (actually, 4000 km) long is envisioned, with internal speeds of 14km/s. We're just not very good at building that sort of thing yet.
At first I thought the filepicker.io folks, who recently rebranded as Ink, had released a UI kit.

Of course they don't own those 3 letters which have a wide array of meaning, similar to words like "bootstrap", "ember", "buffer", or "backbone". I'd be hesitant to use those words in a product, open source or otherwise, however.
Not necessarily.

I have, in fact, seen a potential design for a time machine which violates no known laws of physics and could take you back in time only as far as the point where the machine itself was built. This would prevent the "patent filing leapfrog" that you are talking about.

Before anyone wonders why this machine has not been built, it requires a rapidly rotating rod, several light years long, about the diameter of the Sun. To travel in time you need to orbit the rod at extremely high speed, and your direction relative to the spin of the rod determines which direction you travel through time.

In theory it should work. But reducing theory to practice is somewhat beyond our current means. :-)