skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think we can all agree that e-mails should have finite size - it's not a very good protocol for transferring multi-gigabyte files, for sure! Where we would disagree is where that limit should be drawn.

I've seen systems in this day and age that fail in the face of e-mails as small as 5 megabytes (e.g. Yahoo Popgate) which IMHO is far too low - but evidently some sysadmins disagree with me!
Only if you assume that there won't be any other advances in technology that will speed up simulating a brain (such as more specialized processors). Look at genetic sequencing. It was really hard to get from 0% to 1% of sequenced human DNA. But sequencing the remaining percent happened much faster, and nowadays the cost for is exponentially decreasing (which means that soon you will be able to buy your sequencing kit at your local supermarket for a few dollars).

I would be very surprised if it took us another 26.6 years to simulate a brain in real-time. Maybe half of that time. And a few years later you will be able to cheaply backup your own brain in the cloud in case you have an accident.
Atom is still an abstraction of sub particles ( that may be made of even lower ones, we don't know ) and their physical interactions so i think it is a model. And a reasonably good one.
US Embassies Close in 22 Countries Due to Terrorist Threat
Semantic web and linked data sources
It isn't a big leap to imagine a debate between aliens about whether the hairless apes on the third rock from Sol should be considered "sentient", or merely clever animals.

I'd rather err far on the side of assuming sentience and personhood if there is a shadow of a doubt, simulated or otherwise.
You are totally correct.

Lets take sshd for example, you would need to create a skeleton directory structure, /bin, /dev, /lib, etc in your rootfs container, have /bin/bash, a whack of /libs, some /dev devices, and then your sshd application. So an extremely minimalistic rootfs with only the sshd requirements. You could find these my running 'lsof -p `pidof sshd`' , maybe 'ldd /usr/sbin/sshd' (and all their dependencies) too, which quickly snowballs.

Hopefully this explains where I was going with that. Also, this is not a simple task to try and strip off these services into self contained entities. There are lots of hidden issues, like how do we handle logging? Should the container have syslog too? So, there is work that needs to happen, I just like the idea of not running a full fledged OS in a container.
Cute, it doesn't even try to use the race-free O_CLOEXEC variant, which was introduced "only" 6 years ago. http://www.eglibc.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/trunk/libc/sysdeps/... is the trunk version. Seems glibc trunk is the same
That's because it is exactly the situation. Nobody is "held ransom" by anybody. But voters that think like you - low-information voters that can vote for anybody provided that he is "our guy" because "their guy" is The Devil himself - are exactly the reason why it happens again and again. And will happen until the majority abandons such mentality - which I personally wouldn't expect happening any time soon.
Thinking about how often I use scan to PDF and e-mail with important documents, this article give me the shivers. This is an epic fuck-up. Nothing less than grossly-negligent.
Your point is valid, but many people are trying to "correctly model a cell" without making a total atomistic simulation (which is clearly not going to happen any time soon). It's all about what questions you're looking to ask of a model.
I average 100 hours per week. I think you sound sickly sheltered.
Sure, but that's also for a bacterial cell. We have 50 times as many genes and you can't easily culture humans on a Petri dish for experimentation. A single gene can take years of work to understand.

Yes, you can simulate anything if you abstract away enough. But if the goal is a convincing replication, you'll need to include lots of intracellular effects.

In the end, I believe that practical simulation of a whole brain that you can have a conversation about its existence with is more difficult than the development of quantum computing powerful enough to break all existing crypto.

The work is still interesting, if only because it pushes the limits of what we can do. But I might want to start with an ant brain.
Can't speak precisely to the application used in this example, but a common and important feature of programs like this is mapping the knobs and sliders of the UI to real-life knobs and sliders on a physical control station.

Some consoles even have servos so the binding can go both ways.
Usually people modeling cells don't consider molecular dynamics, they consider concentrations of proteins, ions, and metabolites. A full MD simulation would obviously be superior, but useful predictions could be made without it.

It's hard to say which is the better approach. On the one hand you have MD from which you could technically build an accurate model "from scratch", folding all of your own proteins as part of the simulation, but it is exceedingly expensive to do that. On the other hand, you have a model built at the level of biochemical reactions and molecular biology, which is computationally feasible, but then you don't have enough information from bench work to flesh it out.
> Besides, wouldn’t it be just lazy to stop working and rest on the results of the sweat and pain of our forefathers?

No, it wouldn't.
Or even "Batman with a completely normal corporate moral compass – 100% focused on its primary goal – of 'increasing shareholder value'"…
I don't understand why people are down-voting this comment. It is a legitimate question and a productive one at that.
Part of what I see m0th87 saying, though, is that practice has shown that these claims about JIT compilation handling certain cases more effectively than AOT compilation just don't really hold true.

JIT compilation may be better than some of the other approaches for implementing VMs or interpreters. It may also theoretically have the potential to be better than AOT compilation in some cases, too. But that potential doesn't really matter if we never see such benefits in real systems.

Real-world code written in C, C++, and Fortran and compiled ahead of time still basically always outperform Java bytecode executed by HotSpot, or JavaScript code executed by V8, or Lua code executed by LuaJIT, by a huge margin. This is even after a huge amount of effort has gone into systems like HotSpot and V8, for instance.

The theoretical benefits of JIT compilation do us no good if it's too costly or difficult to build effective implementations of such systems in a timely manner, for example. It does the wider community no good if such optimizations only really apply in a very small number of highly specific cases, as well.

A lot of us have heard these claims about JIT compilation for over a decade now, especially with respect to HotSpot, but we've yet to see these techniques consistently and reliably match AOT compilation in general, never mind outperform it. There is a lot of doubt out there due to this.
i work about 60. 100 is excessive. that's not impressive, just stupid.
Reminded me of this:

"Digital Photocopiers Loaded With Secrets"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wa0akU8bsOQ
You can actually configure Docker to use an Unix socket instead of TCP[1]. It seems it still opens it up to every user (it runs a chmod 777 on it), but you can always enforce stricter controls (e.g. with SELinux).

[1] https://github.com/dotcloud/docker/pull/938
A lot of people have "interior access", restaurants are not exactly highly classified CIA facilities. And any certification/review body can request - and obtain, if certification is worthy - such access, without any problem. Did you ever hear, for example, about Kosher certification? How do you think it can be done without access to everything? It can not. Whoever wants to sell on markets that need Kosher or Halal or any other such certification - provides access. Whoever does not - sells to people that don't care about this certification.

>>> Secondly, even then, all you can do is disseminate information. You can't enforce anything

You mean - you can't stop people from buying what they want even if you think it's bad for them, you can only give them information and let them decide for themselves if they're ok with it? Oh horror!!!
https://mega.co.nz/#!VAkR2bzR!cn7P3VIsAR2ub8O2T6acJCCGgK1vaN...
How many of said 100 hours do you spend in coal mines or heavy engineering factories?
> What magical land do you live in that has truly unlimited cell data? And how much does it cost?

Three in the UK. GBP 15 per month for an unlimited data plan.

It's only 3G, but they've committed to provide 4G for no price bump once they've finished their rollout later this year.

What else? Hmm... I used 7GB last month. Spotify mostly, some Ted talks too. No-one's complaining, it really is unlimited cell data.
IIRC when security cameras moved from individual frame compression algorithms like M-JPEG to modern codecs which could sometimes replace small movement in background with still image if there is a bigger change in foreground there were news reports about some problems with investigations.
Your claim is orthogonal to mine.
Why MIT should not be blamed for Swartz’s suicide
This will make lawsuits a lot of fun in the future.

Given the way the algorithm works, it would seem to me that "fine print" would be the most vulnerable to the bug (well not really a bug, it's the behavior of JBIG2). I wonder if there will be a clear dividing line, e.g. "smaller than 10pt type is subject to reasonable doubt if a Xerox copier was used"
'infiltrated by feds' is a presumption based on speculation at this point. Assumptions dont 'correctly reflect events'. If you want to fix something, fix it entirely.
Linus Torvalds releases Linux 3.11 for workgroups 20 years after Windows 3.11
I agree. I'm 13 and spend over 120 hours per week in the oil mines of North Dakota. I puked when I read the first comment and slammed my laptop shut because I was shaking with disgust.
The direct result of compiling a C++ Hello World program into JavaScript.
I see it in a different non so-scientific way. My company is not a startup but my issues were more about how to move forward with thousands of, probably, good choices. And analyzing it in a scientific way was not feasible if you need to move fast.
SSL, gone in 30 seconds
I came across this wiki page last night. It doesn't support this out of the box, but it looks like there is a way to run docker inside of a docker container. It seems to take a good bit of customization though.

https://github.com/dotcloud/docker/wiki/Docker-in-Docker
Seems to work well for the US
My comment being sincere, I don't expect it to sting you in the least. What a petulant reply.
It would be helpful if file managers gave better cues as to file size. A barn is obviously different to a letter, but a one byte file is normally given the same icon as a one terabyte file.
I don't think the programmer who coded it is to blame. The manager who (very likely) cut the QA needed to save a few bugs to find it is.
> Would not a better way to do this be to take the spammer's approach

On the other hand, anti-spam has gotten very good at distinguishing wanted and unwanted content.

If Google can do a reasonable job binning email spam, we must assume the NSA can do a reasonable job ignoring even relatively sophisticated keyword spamming.
Why does it show that the belief isn't accurate? This isn't simulating a brain, it's simulating the connections in a brain and pretending the neurons are about as complex as wires. That is a model that is possibly correct, but there's certainly no evidence it's correct.
I'm not certain if that extrapolation you made of the time it takes to simulate a brain at the same abstraction level is valid. You're assuming the computation cycles needed will scale linearly, which might not be true considering that the brain is a network of neurons, where each neuron has a high number of in/out links to many other neurons. Consider the case where you take n seconds to simulate n neurons. Now add another neuron with connections to perhaps n/2 existing neurons. You'll have to iterate over each in/out edge of that neuron. Since adding just one neuron increases the time by a non-constant factor, the resources needed would increase more than just linearly. All this of course depends on the abstraction model, and I admit I know nothing about it.
After too long of averaging 100 hours a week, I think you're just going to be sickly, not sickly sheltered.

No matter what, you don't have to work 100 hours a week to survive. The fact that you choose to do so isn't saying much about you.
I am joining a start-up
That's why there are things like Whonix
How do we know that Linux is not targeted? The script checks for "Windows NT" in the user agent, but as mentioned above TBB on Linux does have that string in the user agent.
We're a lot alike in a many ways. My husband is also a developer (though more as a hobbyist the past few years - he also owns a local computer repair shop).

We both share a love of strategy gaming, we're both introverts, atheists, liberal. Neither of us are particularly outdoorsy or sporty. He's much better at math, and I'm much more expressive, artistically.

He plays more video games than I do and I watch more documentaries than he does. He's a bit of a dreamer. I'm a bit more pragmatic.

We both have a very similar sense of humor.

We both have our own particular hobbies/interests that the other doesn't share, though. Sometimes I think it would be nice if we did, but I think the differences are also probably very important and healthy, too.
I've often wondered about this. As some commenters have pointed out, we don't work quite as hard as people used to have to. But we still work a lot. I suspect the short answer is healthcare costs. I was an expert in the earn-little-spend-little lifestyle for a while, but I knew it only worked because I was a healthy 25 year old with no one I had to take care of.
"Our Xerox scanner randomly adds penises to copied documents"
Just compare the average Tumblr blog to, say one produced with Jekyll, document produced with Latex vs. Word, etc.

Relatedly, making things too "easy to use" often obscures what's actually happening underneath and makes them harder to understand for certain classes of user (i.e. those that want to understand what they're actually doing).
Tons of stories get flagged on the new page. They're usually spam.

In this case, it's part of a policy not to discuss meta-hn issues on hn. If you start a post asking why you were hell banned, or flagging/downvoting, it'll usually get flagged and/or removed.
I'm getting an 'Error establishing a database connection'. Anyone getting similar problems?
And before that, many societies would work 4-hour days, or work during part of daylight and have the rest of the day off.

I really don't see why people affix any sort of value to the amount of work they take when they should be concentrating on their results and how work aligns to their life.

I work less than 20 hours a week to finish my studies and generally speaking I do what I want, which includes reading technical literature (out of a personal desire to do so), cooking, and taking a 3 or 4-day weekend off every month to visit people and travel. I leave the stress to the difficult stuff (the studying bit) and live within my means, and the lack of anxiety or rush means my work is actually solid without spending excessive time to concentrate or get results.

I consider this my ideal lifestyle, not because I work little, but because I have a choice on how I live my life and how much effort I get to focus towards the things that I want.
I love that quote. So pure; so childish. Ayn Rand was, at heart, a little girl (and who of us isn't at heart a small child?). Of course Rand is inspiring, just like "Jack and the Beanstalk". Inspiring children is easy. I just hope that as her readers mature, they come to realize that Dr Seuss's work, has more sophistication and truth to it than Rand's writing, while being no less inspiring.
Yes, but there are degrees of this, and TOR gives you nothing without the resources of the government.
Assuming (1) it's parallelisable (2) this is an accurate enough similation, and (3) a whole human brain is 100 times bigger, we'd need 406083k*100 processors which is about 20 billion.

We could do it now (hardware-wise), if we really wanted to.
I do only what is necessary to survive. You sound like most of your bills are still paid by mommy and daddy.
It's the same as self.

Beautiful is better than ugly.
Explicit is better than implicit.
Simple is better than complex.
Complex is better than complicated.
etc.

There are a few implicit things in Python, but I would consider those the blemishes on the language.
I don't know where you live, but I'll assume US. In other countries, the wages are different (usually lower), but the salary/cost of living ratio tends to be similar.

The minimum wage over there is $7.25. Are you really telling me that you need $3K per month to survive?
The exploit is targeted at the version of Firefox in the Tor Browser Bundle on Windows, which means most Tor users are vulnerable. While you can use a different browser the Tor developers have generally recommended that people don't; it's hard to lock down browsers against information leaks, and the fact that someone's using an unusual browser helps an attacker track them.
related

http://foundation.zurb.com/docs/components/joyride.html

http://usablica.github.io/intro.js/

http://eragonj.github.io/Trip.js/
Yeah, what the hell kind of a question is that. What are we doing building all this technology if not trying to work less?
Agreed. I worried that this might be yet another example of printers and scanners doing strange things, like <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printer_steganography> or <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EURion_constellation>. Glad to see that this can be ascribed to incompetence rather than malice.
Not so. Any sexual activity between a child (under the age of consent) and an adult is statutory rape because children are deemed legally incapable of giving consent in this context. By contrast, most adult sexual activity is consensual.
But we're not dealing with barns or letters or any physical object, we're dealing with abstract systems where the physics are much more flexible and changeable. It's important to change our computer systems to work for us, rather than attempting to change people to adapt to the computer systems. We should discard those systems that can not adapt to humanity, as they are of little worth in the long run.

When somebody says, "can you email it to me" they mean, grant access to the data via their centralized messaging system, their email. There are many ways to make that happen, one of which is an attachment, another of which is linking to the content, but the key is to make sure that it's low friction and takes very little time or clicks to get access from the email.
Defcon Day 2 Postmortem
I blame it on the culture. It's considered unethical to survive without working so now we need to work in order to survive. The constant push for more jobs is the biggest enemy of automation. Until we get something like a no-strings-attached minimum income we won't make the transition.
Click-to-play plugins in browser settings not enough?
I happen to work in the synthetic biology lab at the venter institute, although not on this project - two of our researchers are coauthors on this paper - and my personal opinion is that this paper is a joke. Note that the guys who made the simulation didn't even pick the correct organism. The cell that we have synthetic control over is M. mycoides, not M. genitalium. Lest this seem like a nit-pickey detail, until they rewrite their software for mycoides, in broad strokes the model is essentially untestable, since we don't have broad-scale control over the genitalium genome like we do mycoides.

Also note that: "The model accounts for previously observed
gene essentiality with 79% accuracy." This is REALLY bad. Considering they are 'seeding' the model using a biased structure that automatically "knows" that certain genes are essential (for example, they have a 'module' for replication that probably zeroes out if you are missing an important replication component, as opposed to simulating how those genes work at a low level) this is probably somewhere close to as good as flipping a coin.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ywTfBwP...

interesting article, I've seen the ensemble over the years, and still mean to spend time seriously studying his works, as well as Reich, Terry Riley, John Adams and others. Also (HN angle) it's one of the best vocal-less headphone music for coding/debugging (esp. the debug phase when you need to calm down).
Trying to achieve more, perhaps?

Work x Leverage = Achievement
Most of their constituents have kids do, and want similar things. Your assumption that politicians are unilaterally imposing this on others is wrong. There are a lot of people out there who want the state to aid them in protecting their children from what they consider to be malign influences, and they vote.
Admittedly, I was just spitballing from the parent poster's numbers. But the idea that brain simulation is not that far off still seems plausible given those extra considerations.
I'm mostly a back-end developer and I don't have much experience with rich front-end interfaces other than my own little side projects and a WPF project from about a year back - however, I do believe the same principles apply to both front- and back-end design.

Specifically, you should be following the SRP - duplicated code is a symptom that you are not. Without seeing your code that you feel doesn't pay off, it's difficult to answer your question more directly.

I will say there's no reason you can't design your server-side services to be consumed directly by the view, in which case I wouldn't see a problem referencing the service directly from the view (e.g. the UserService exposed by the server implements (a) normal login, (b) login as part of checkout and (c) registration).

Alternatively, you could build a client-side service to wrap the server-side service and reference that directly from your views (e.g. a UserController that wraps the UserService and is consumed by (a) the omnipresent login view, (b) a login/signup view, and (c) the registration view).

Over and above this, there is some middle-ground where you reuse structures. For example, a User structure (with IsAuthenticated, UserName, FullName etc.) would be assigned to a $scope.CurrentUser property for the views. Consequently you don't reimplement the User object the service implements, and you don't vaguely depend on the entire UserService, but the data contract the view does depend on from the controller is still explicit by looking at the $scope definition in the controller. Similarly, the operation contract is defined by the controller functions. This improves maintainability and readability IMO.
MySpace's new 404 page
Docker: the Linux container runtime [video]
Norway apparently
Amish: The kindhearted people
How do you have time to post on HN?
Mind me asking what exactly your living standards are and which position you fullfill that you need 100 hours of work to survive?
You get to leave the oil mines? Talk about preferential treatment, you have it easy!
Are these women "too pretty" to be real engineers?
In cases where qualitative meaning is nontrivial, you don't know 100% what is going on, it is nevertheless possible to implement parametric studies for some target parameter.
“It” (that is POSIX fall-back) don't try it because O_CLOEXEC is not POSIX. And you don't know how to look properly

http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=sysdeps/unix...
Microsoft Exchange Online:
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/exchange/microsoft-exchang...

and

Microsoft Exchange:
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/exchange/microsoft-exchang...

are both very popular.

I've heard people talk about Zoho:
http://www.zoho.com/mail/
We are allowed 45 minutes for cigarettes and internet before Sunday prayers and lights-out.