skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
See the chart on page 2 of this report: http://www.justicepolicy.org/uploads/justicepolicy/documents....

The U.S. is generally less than 2x relative to Australia, 2-3x relative to the U.K., and 3-5x relative to Finland. The sentences for assaults show the most differential, I'd imagine because of very strict sentencing for sexual assaults.

I think the averages skew higher in the U.S. than typical sentences than it does in other countries. Initiatives like California's "three strikes law",[1] that result in life sentences for three potentially non-violent felonies dramatically skew up the averages in the U.S. I don't think any of the major European countries have anything comparable. If you took out the ridiculous sentences handed down as a result of those laws, I think the differential would be much less.

[1] If you want to get worked up about something, read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rummel_v._Estelle.
A new webseries about startups - Small Empires
> And potentially 136 years for downloading stuff

Wow, this makes me want to punch the writer more than any other line, and I pirate regularly. It's obvious that the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act needs reform, maybe that's why the press is having their lamest hacks write about it?
A docker container runs in an operating system, but doesn't contain one.
Completely unlike me; a liberal arts major and works on Broadway. Much more creative than I am - she prefers to talk about more down to earth, entertaining things (T.V. we're watching, her day working with actors/actresses, etc.) than computer architecture, and she loves being artistic (painting, drawing, singing).

That said, she's very intelligent, but not technically so. I'm the kind of person who sucks up knowledge like a sponge - she doesn't get the same kind of joy out of reading Wikipedia :).

To be clear, I love this setup. It's really wonderful being with someone completely non-technical for a host of reasons. The worst thing that comes up is that she asks me to debug her computer once in a while.

EDIT: Read the other comments. I do find she has the same sense of humor as me (I think that's really important), and I think that's really important. In situations like this I think it's really important that we're both open to different lifestyles for it to be compatible. She's very open to listening to the intricate details of a programming language, and I get pleasure out of learning how professional theatre operates (to give one example).
Cheap 2nd hand rewording of http://www.sfgate.com/local/article/FBI-shared-child-porn-to...
To put this claim in perspective, we are still unable to simulate a single cell by modeling everything we know from biochemistry, even if we ignore molecular dynamics. Mostly this is because we don't know what many genes and the proteins they encode do.

This matters, for example, if we want to simulate neuronal plasticity or the effect of antidepressants. We're an incredibly long way from a full simulation, which would also require integration with the rest of the nervous system.
There is also a lot of talk about Docker and Vagrant working together. Like using Vagrant to manage Docker containers..
This is a self-evidently excellent comment, and thank you for posting it. I want to make a couple clarifications:

* From the conversations I've had with cryptographers, there does seem to be a sort of consensus that Joux's DLP work is unlikely to result in a viable attack on RSA any time soon, or, for that matter, on any mainstream DLP scheme.

* But: that isn't a uniformly held opinion. Dan Boneh is an example of someone who seems to believe the line of research Joux is pursuing is going to harm RSA "sooner" rather than "later".

* As you note: RSA isn't looking sturdy today. I think the RC4 example is a good one. The recent attacks on RC4 weren't based on a newly discovered vulnerability, but rather on a more diligent effort to exploit an old one. I'm not convinced that there was any better reason for those attacks being unveiled in 2013 than that nobody had a strong reason to investigate them.

* A (just say) 10-year time scale is still relatively short! If we can reasonably predict material weaknesses in a cryptosystem 10 years out, we should replace it now. We don't generally choose to work with cryptosystems that offer us a margin of just 10 years to work with.

Finally, and most importantly: please understand that the audience at Black Hat isn't cryptographically literate. There are a couple crypto people that show up every year, but the attendees at Black Hat generally bring very little background in the subject with them. So, I think there's value in distilling subtle messages down to actionable information for that audience. A subset of the people in the audience at Black Hat are at some point going to try to develop their own cryptosystems, and they're much more likely to do that by trying to hack together RSA than they are ECC. The less attractive RSA looks to them, the better.

Thanks again for the corrective comment, though. I sort of wish Tom and Javed could have had you up on stage debating them. :)
How to make a smart app?
Pretty much. http://wolfr.am/13dDALd
I admit I used it early on (i.e. June) and was trying to build an app with Google Maps. The problem was that I needed to understand Gradle in order to manually edit the build files. I figured I'd tough out eclipse for the next little bit, until the Gradle issues are fixed. Next time I'm fooling around with Android, I might give it another chance.
so nice, saving this
I too, would really like to see a comparison between Docker and Vagrant with an LXC provider (https://github.com/fgrehm/vagrant-lxc).
Yammer Engineering: A Guide to Caring About Everything
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090927061327AA...
If "civilized" is a label that can apply to no country at all, what was the point of changing the "any" to an "a"? Ok, things are better in Utopia. Moving back to the real world now...
We did this in an ActionScript 3 compiler at my last job. The problem is that since code is dynamic by default, you still need the “fallback” operations mentioned in this post, because people can (and do) make use of dynamic operations and you need to preserve behaviour. Also, ActionScript’s type system isn’t expressive enough to actually get to full static typing—there is only one function type, for example, which says nothing about its parameter or return types. But in principle, and in a language that was designed to support it at the outset, it’s a good way to do typing.
Ha! Thanks for checking!
From my experience with warehouses/fulfillment centers, all the other options are same or worse than Amazon with regards to worker treatment. Besides, on Amazon plenty of merchants do their own fulfillment, and those that do fulfill with Amazon are going to fulfill with Amazon on eBay or Rakuten or their own website anyway. To do so morally you'll have to look into the fulfillment details of any individual company you do business with.
He goes on ( http://archive.org/details/Gulag_Archipelago_I ) to say:

If... if... We didn't love freedom enough. And even more — we had no awareness of the real situation. We spent ourselves in one unrestrained outburst in 1917, and then we hurried to submit. We submitted with pleasure!

:/
The concept is that it's actually not as simple as it may seem. You're using the same cookie jar -- what if you inadvertently send back a cookie with the session ID of your public profile? You'll have flagged yourself as a Tor user and this can be tied back to your public IP. You're using the exact same browser fingerprint, which is more unique than you imagine -- it's not just a matter of useragent, but the combination of all information that can be obtained by a site about your browser. The EFF runs a demo site that shows this can be practically unique in many instances. You've probably enabled scripts on certain sites that may not need to execute JavaScript when you're viewing them through Tor. You probably have less restrictive rules around the injection of plugins that may expose your interface IP address, like Flash. You may do something shady and forget to cleanse it from your history (and/or enter private browsing mode). You may have an extension running that shares more information than you'd like, with either the site or the extension provider.

For all these reasons, TBB exists, and is the safest way (short of a live environment) to ensure you have a sanitized environment. At the very least, you should use a separate browser profile before you switch to an activity that mandates the usage of Tor, unless you're using it only for very rudimentary circumventions.
There are no ways of validating anything is not governmental.
Wow this is amazing.. they used to have emergent / "chaotic" traffic patterns back then in the west, the likes of which you only find in (much of) Asia, Africa or India these days.

And how agile, vivid and alert most everyone is in the streets! Quite remarkable -- truly people were a different breed back then, for better or worse.
T-Mobile (US) has never gotten rid of their unlimited data option. Up until recently, they had a 5GB cap whereafter they would throttle the connection to EDGE speeds; they have since replaced this with a generic "don't abuse the network" policy, which I have yet to trigger (some months I have gone over 10GB of usage).
By shutting down child pornography rings, police are preventing further abuse.

Maybe, maybe not. Probably in some or even many cases, but certainly not all.

But, it also provides an unquestionable excuse to not care about "accidental" overreach or collateral damage. Someone's hosting something they don't like on a shared server? Guess what happens when they "discover" kiddie porn hosted by someone else on that same server?
I really don't know why I still have to suffer from unmutable Flash, immediately starting music and videos without any possibility to have it to shut up by default. Just ask me:

This page wants to play audio, would you like to hear it?
Yes / No
[V] Remember for the next times

The funny thing is that soundcloud and youtube behave very well in this respect. Apparently the biggest audio sites (just look at the amount of music on youtube!) don't need to start blasting without any user interaction.
Has-many-with-set 1.2.0 has been released, added support for Rails 4.
> To put this claim in perspective, we are still unable to simulate a single cell by modeling everything we know from biochemistry, even if we ignore molecular dynamics. Mostly this is because we don't know what many genes and the proteins they encode do.

To me, this mostly shows that naive beliefs about difficulty aren't really accurate ('but it should it harder to simulate a brain than a cell, because it's bigger right!').

But of course, progress is being made on simulating cells: http://lesswrong.com/lw/drk/paper_simulation_of_a_complete_c... It's a high-level enough model that you can do it with only 1 core per cell.
Ugh. I would propose to apply the recursive Godwin's law on any invocation of Godwin's law if only Godwin's law weren't more trite and, worst of all — boring — than the comparisons Godwin's law tries to outlaw, and so, by induction would be any recursive Godwin's law.

And when have Hitler comparisons, if you think I made one, ever been more apt? ;)

EDIT (if I need to spell it out): It was claimed that an offhand dismissal of a famous "philosophy" is inappropriate in a quality discussion. I then offered a famous example of an entirely different "philosophy", undeserving any serious merit and discussion on its own, and yet important historically for its effect on society. Rand is considered a childish, ridiculous "philosopher", so people rarely take the time to argue with her beliefs as their falsehood is apparent to almost anyone with a pair of eyes and/or ears, but her writings have played a part in recent American history. In no way other than in her intellectual rigor, should Ayn Rand (who, BTW, is one of my favorite historical characters; she was so deliciously cruel and lost at the same time) be compared to Adolf Hitler, the Nazis, the SS, the SA, the Luftwaffe or any of their affiliates.
It's the 21st century – why are we working so much?
> Picture it like someone who is manufacturing some form of illegal-but-sought-after drug, like MDMA. Have you ever heard of someone who makes MDMA--not a redistributor, but an originator--giving away large quantities of it to people they don't know, just for the attention?

Well actually yes, but not for the attention. It happens with less serious drugs (and amphetamines to a lesser extent) in some of the more social communities which are open minded to drugs (eg randoms in a dance music club or hippies back during the summer of love). The drug sharing happens from there because of the way how those communities are united (eg through music or ideals).

You also see free harder drugs pushed as a way for dealer to get new customers (ie get them hooked and then you have their custom). So even there, it's not about the attention, but about future profit in the long term.

But I do get your point, it's less common for what you say to happen; it's certainly not the norm. But it does happen.
> ActionScript’s type system isn’t expressive enough to actually get to full static typing—there is only one function type, for example, which says nothing about its parameter or return types

Yeah, that's the problem in Dylan too. See: opendylan.org/~hannes/coll.pdf‎
Lld - The LLVM Linker
Chrome.declarativeContent
Well, that depends on your definition of "operating system".

Is an OS just the kernel? Then yes, Docker doesn't contain an OS.

Is the OS the userland? E.g. the init process + the shell + the C library + other runtimes? Then most Docker containers actually do contain an OS. Yes you can get rid of most of them by making static binaries, but why would you want to? Making static binaries with anything besides Go is a pain, and good luck trying to statically link MySQL or Redis into your binary.
language is incredibly important. thank you a lot for the explanation.
Socialism is more than the worker's ownership of the means of production.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/fromm/works/1961/man/ch06.ht...
Exactly. I have no time for those sniping from the sidelines at the doers of the world.
I work on Hy, a Lisp that compiles to Python AST, and my intuition tells me that it's a bit of a wart too. Particularly how the syntax for calling is conflated with the definition and partly in how the arguments are filled in the Call node (basically, left to right). It lets you do things like:

>>> def foo(a, b="Default"):
... print(a, b)
...
>>> foo(1, 2)
(1, 2)
>>> foo(1)
(1, 'Default')
>>> foo(1, b="bar")
(1, 'bar')
>>> def baz(*args, **kwargs):
... print(args, kwargs)
...
>>> args = (1, 2, 3)
>>> kwargs = {'foo': "bar"}
>>> baz(*args, **kwargs)
((1, 2, 3), {'foo': 'bar'})

It's the first example that kind of seems 'off'. It's probably just cross-polination from my CL experience (which seems 'more correct'):

?> (defun foo (a &key (b "Default")) (list a b))
FOO
?> (foo 1 2)
Error: Incorrect keyword arguments

For the most part it hasn't been an issue when I'm writing the code. But when I read code that does this stuff on the call side frequently (or isn't consistent in its use over time) it can be a little frustrating.
I think the GP is talking about current simulations, not future ones. Current simulations don't have sensory organs, and I doubt the simulated neurons accurately reflect a real brain at this stage. Most likely, early simulated minds would be insane and in great pain, with no way to communicate.

Considering we experiment on animals to reduce human suffering (heck, we kill and eat them just because they're tasty), running a tiny fraction of a simulated brain for a few subjective seconds doesn't worry me much. Of course, as computers get faster and cheaper this could become a huge issue.

It's only tangentially-related, but Robin Hanson has some good talks and papers about emulated minds. The shortest summary of his views is probably this talk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qcIsjrHENU. A more in-depth version of that talk is at http://vimeo.com/9508131.
Even if I don't see why you are saying it on this specific thread, it actually came to my mind few days ago. I think it is a good, simple idea. No technical difficulties, just spamming and make the whole thing unanalyzable.
It's difficult for us to work through all of the submitted issues because most of them are from students who don't understand the problem or have made a mistake in their work, not real issues with the content. We always keep an eye on the number of issues per exercise, and we're lucky to have volunteers who read through the issues and surface the real issues.
And I suspect you're wrong. I didn't find Wikipedia's markup language difficult, but I did find it needlessly cumbersome, plus it makes proofreading more difficult. Do you have any evidence for judging the quality of authorship by the standards of typesetters?
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6072753
To correctly model a cell you would need to simulate every atom and there are about 10^11 to 10^14 (!) of them in a single cell.

I think an interesting number would be how many atoms does it take to simulate one atom reasonably well. Then you could get correct results for some ( really ) small biological functions.
Boring is generally a subjective word and when someone say "these are boring" I interpret that to mean that that's just their opinion. But when says "these are boring" I interpret that as the writer trying to overcome the inherent subjectivity of 'boring' by emphasizing the objective 'are', saying in effect "I found this boring and I expect almost any other reasonable person would too."
Bizarre how you group in multiple completely different actions and pretend that they're one. And the Obama Administration didn't make a statement about FRAND or the correctness of the ITC's judgment -- they simply decided that they'd rather not have an American company's products blocked.
I think this type of thread is what tptacek meant by "these threads [that question whether CP is a big deal] are always repellant." I must say, this one certainly is.

I encourage everyone to chill out, leave your emotions at the door, and give the topic a thorough and dispassionate treatment.

"I'm fucking tired of X" is an unreasonable way to conduct ourselves. It's a sure way not to change anyone's opinion.
Without having an abortion debate, what's actually happening in the simulation is just a random interconnection of very primitive nodes at this point. The network has no refined architecture and, at best, some kind of spontaneous activity. In the number of nodes, it could be (generously) compared to flipping on a cat for one second. But a cat's brain obviously has extremely fine architecture, so the better analogy would be that they're flipping on a completely scrambled cat for one second.
Docker is great, but there is one security issue that it should solve. Right now, any user can manipulate any Docker container. If you create a container as root, then www-data can kill that container. The reason for this is because container orchestration is done through the Docker daemon, which listens on a TCP socket. Anybody on the local host can access that socket. They should, at the very least, implement password protection.

Today I also found out that it's not possible to run Docker inside Docker. :( I'm working on a Docker-based continuous integration system similar to Travis, and it would be great if I can distribute the CI system as a Docker container.
Sufficiently advanced bugs are indistinguishable from sabotage.
Almost signed off an email to the Beeminder support team with two kisses the other day.

(Not a joke! Fortunately, caught myself before pressing send.)
I don't think you need the init process even without a statically linked binary, and I don't see why would having a bunch of libraries suddenly make it an OS. The linking happens "outside" the container - in the shared kernel.
I'm looking for Jr Rails Developer position in Boston, MA. Interested in learning and applying Angular and Ember next... Email me at my username at gmail dot com.
Unlike modern web browsers, unix variants are a very inequal market. Linux can and does introduce new APIs that programs then depend on, without consulting anyone else or trying to standardize them, rather like IE in the bad old days (see recent cgroups/systemd). Until another unixlike achieves firefox-like success we're unlikely to see any change - it's not in linux's interest to cooperate, and linux doesn't even bother staying source-compatible with previous versions of itself, never mind other systems.
It's John Venn's birthday today - create your own Venn diagrams to celebrate
https://lavabit.com/corporate_e_mail.html
Aren't you modeling a subset of the universe at that level? Isn't a model supposed to provide a higher level understanding/abstraction?
> A 2004 study found that stock sales and purchases by Senators outperformed the market by 12.3% per year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insider_trading#Insider_trading...
We are working less and, more importantly, we are working differently (at least in the industrialised/western world). I doubt that there are still many children around in Europe working 60+ a week in coal mines, nor are people who put in exhausting physical work usually working such long hours – both of which was perfectly common less than two centuries ago.

Besides, wouldn’t it be just lazy to stop working and rest on the results of the sweat and pain of our forefathers? :\
Interesting. That isn't excessively large for distributed-memory Krylov-subspace eigensolvers (e.g., SLEPc). Do you have a good reference for the current algorithms used? And how large is the nullspace typically?

EDIT: I assume this [1] is what you're referring to, which draws from the following algorithms of Coppersmith [2,3].

[1]: http://eprint.iacr.org/2010/006.pdf

[2]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0024379593...

[3]: http://thales.doa.fmph.uniba.sk/macaj/skola/seminar/Coppersm...
I've been looking for something exactly like this. It's so tedious trying to remember what metadata needs to be copied from a function when making a decorator. Thanks!
1. Dont rush into anything that costs you a ton of money

2. Spend as much time learning about yourself as you do about different career fields

3. Dont take advice from career counsellors or program advisors. In my experience most of the time they are sales people in disguise.

4. Talk to seasoned adults who have been doing what they are doing for a while (lets say at least 5 years). In most professions it is not weird to ask for an informational interview, and they are super useful. A lot of the time people you interview with will try and find you jobs or other leads.

5. Remember it is your life, not your parents. Making them happy wont necessarily make you happy and you have to live your life.

6. Volunteer (if you can afford to)

7. Travel (if you can afford to). check out youth/student working visas in foreign places.

8. consider if your personality and lifestyle is compatible with career fields you are considering. For example, if you like stability and routine, Film might not be your thing. If you like to move about and use your body as well as your mind, computer stuff might drive you batty. If you want a life outside of work, and dont want to be working all of the time, dont become a nurse, etc

9. Check out trades apprenticeships. Trades are high in demand, you get paid while you are in school (in Canada at least), you have a job most of the time, and at the end of it you make way more money than most people. If you decide the trade you have chosen isnt for you, you will at least be making enough money to put yourself through school again.

10. Meetup.com. Find a group that meets about something you are interested in and join it.