skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Title can easily substitute 'Google' with 'a large & successful company'. This would not change anything about the story but the title would be more honest (as most who clicked on it here likely expected something Google-specific).

The post is not about Google but author's personal life.
It's also known as supercookies. KISSmetrics used to use this technique for tracking/analytics and got a bunch of their clients sued[1].

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_ETag#Tracking_using_ETags
I suspect you're referring to this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Slotin#Criticality_accid...

"At 3:20 p.m., the screwdriver slipped and the upper beryllium hemisphere fell, causing a "prompt critical" reaction and a burst of hard radiation. At the time, the scientists in the room observed the blue glow of air ionization and felt a heat wave. In addition Slotin experienced a sour taste in his mouth and an intense burning sensation in his left hand. Slotin jerked his left hand upward, lifting the upper beryllium hemisphere and dropping it to the floor, ending the reaction. However, he had already been exposed to a lethal dose of neutron radiation."
Is that because you're so ascetic that you haven't cut your hair or fingernails in 20 years and they are literally attached to your central heating? :-)

That wonderful temperature between 21-22ºC is truly excellent. Paris in the springtime.
Sure, call sites of C will need to change, since C's signature changed. That's expected, since C doesn't even take a callback anymore. But callers of A,B,D,E etc don't need to change. A,B,D,E etc can still take a callback parameter and return C's result via the callback.

MultiplyAndSquare = (a, b, cb) ->
Multiply a, b, (err, product) ->
Square product, (err, square) ->
cb(null, square) #ignore errors for now.

C = (a, b, cb) ->
MultiplyAndSquare(a, b, cb)

ABDEXY = (a, b, cb) ->
#Calls C
C(a, b, cb)

callersOfABDEXY = (a, b) ->
#Calls ABDEXY
ABDEXY a, b, (err, result) ->
Console.WriteLine(result)

#Refactored C. Returns a promise instead.
refactoredC = (a, b) ->
(Q.async ->
result = yield Q.nfcall(MultiplyAndSquare, a, b)
return result)()

#Refactored ABDEXY.
refactoredABDEXY = (a, b, cb) ->
#Change needed here, since C now returns a promise
refactoredC(a, b).then (result) ->
cb(null, result)

#No need to refactor callersOfABDEXY
The two sessions could not be linked, but after I close incognito, the counter and the stored text in normal Chrome are reset. Why does that happen?
Fascinating, an analog computer. Reading about it on wikipedia, it seems analog computers have been almost completely forgotten in the digital age. It makes me wonder what kind of analog computer would be possible now with 21st century technology, especially because of discoveries in condensed matter.

For example, could an electrical analog system be a way of carrying out large-time molecular dynamics simulations? With proper tuning of the material, might you be able to create arbitrary potentials between the electrons within it so that they would interact roughly like atoms in an MD simulation? Or, perhaps you could create an analog chip where the electrons would 'naturally' solve various NP-hard problems, effectively by brute force?
Not sure how much the screen matters to OP, but the last Razer was considered by many to be an otherwise perfect machine that is ruined by a screen that you would expect to find on a $300 laptop.
Wow, hate to sound insensitive, but there seem to be a lot of "First World Problems" on Medium today.

So? Do you really think that simply screaming "first world problem" at somebody makes their problems any less important to them? At the end of the day, we are all living our own lives, and our own problems are pretty damn important in relative terms. Should we criticize somebody for wanting to maximize their happiness during their short-time in this world?
Sorry for the lack of clarity. Case #2 is only meant to illustrate that commoditization has harmful effects of innovation. Microsoft, for a time, commoditized the browser market, which harmed web innovation. I don't think that's in dispute.

My overall argument is thus:

A. Commoditization is not necessarily good. It often harms innovation (supported by case study #1 and #2)

B. Open source is a kind of commoditization

C. A and B together implies that open source is not necessarily good.

By the way, I would argue that it wasn't open source that enabled Firefox to save the web. It was the fact that Google was making lots of profit on web search ads, and used that money to fund Firefox's development. The fact that Firefox was open source, is incidental.
I appreciate her choice，live for yourself，live for your heart. It needs great courage to quit a high salary job.
I think I would have written a hardcopy letter to the CEO, cc:ing every member of the board of directors asking how they would protect my business from the slander.

I don't see how the offending employee doesn't get fired, but I think I would have given the boss a way to make me whole before going public.
It's a lot harder to realize the game is meaningless when you're winning.
You might be forgetting the other thing you left behind that was causing even more pain than, say, a car. :-)
Dude, What is this? Some kind of 4chan style doxing? The dude is bad at his job... okay. He was a jerk to someone over email. I hope he gets fired and I've got a feeling he probably will. Lets lay off the estalking and witch hunting.

There is a line and this thread is crossing it.
If I was a hard working immigrant laborer perhaps I would say she was lazy and shallow. If I was a psychologist I would diagnose her with anxiety and possibly depression.

The vagueness is strange. This doesn't feel right -- well people can be manipulated in to making the wrong decision by making that decision feel right and the right decision feel wrong (sales people do this all day.)

However, if you have spent all of your life with tunnel focus on education & then your job, there is a good possibility that you have missed out on a lot of the periphery parts to living. These small things matter a lot more once you reach a higher level of personal achievement. They also allow you to comprehend the rest of the world.

High performance environments, whether in a city like Manhattan or in a 100-hour work week company, breed a whole new set of problems. You don't need to run away from them, but, I do believe some times you need to take a good step or two back. When you return, the actions you take which impact your lifestyle will be more well intended and thought out.
Sure I can justify this. You present 10,000,000 employed people working jobs which could, conceivably, be automated. Do you seriously think that given technology currently applicable, their employers would not replace those people with machines in a heartbeat if the latter were cheaper? Sure, you can hypothesize about how that should be the case, but you would overlook a multitude of realities that indeed render the human worker superior to the automated alternatives.

I dislike human-clerk checkouts at stores. Nothing against people per se, but as a high-tech introvert I'd rather do it myself - exactly as you suggest. Sure, the technology is there; heck, Walmart even has a phone-based self-scanner so you can do 95% of checkout before you even get to the self-serve register for final payment. The technology sounds great on paper and in rhetoric, but in reality it sucks (despite my valiant concerted efforts to be a automation-supporting customer). Standard self-checkout chokes on the bottle of wine ("Human clerk, is customer over 21?" Uh, yeah, I'm greying with two kids in tow, of course I'm of age). Phone-based on-the-go checkout is time consuming (stop, turn on phone (again), tap Scan, point camera, wait for slow auto-focus, wait for crappy in-store wireless connection to function, get to payment station, get selected for another 15-minute "you've been selected for a compliance check" which confuses human staff every time). Never mind shoplifting, mis-scans, and a host of other problems. Those ten million "technology replaceable staff" are still employed because they're better at the work than technology, and relieving them of their duties does NOT make their freed-up wages available for confiscation & redistribution as "living wages" to the now-unemployed former workers (it's going to technology costs and high-tech maintenance staff). That's 10M people "contributing to maintenance of society".

As for manufacturing wants and increasing money spent vs. consumers making rational choices? I'm watching a startup put serious money into marketing staff; the product is [r]evolutionary and WILL "advance society & technology", but isn't going anywhere without convincing a lot of people to buy it, and the staff IS earning their significant wages by doing so. Oh sure, there's a lot of sales of superfluous goods out there, but even that helps fill out & support an infrastructure which gets vital goods to a broad clientele: Walmart isn't going to get five pounds of bread flour on a shelf for $1.89 without the delivery system greased with the profits from the "cheap crap" they're famous for; in comparison, that same sack of flour would cost about $5 at everything-is-perfect Whole Foods.

Indication that considering what is and isn't necessary in society could "liberate" half the population? Yeah: every society that tried it, like the Soviet Union (hint: they'd kill people for trying to leave).
If you're interested in education systems in other countries, then you may find this post, by an ex-lecture/prof from the UK talking about why he's not a lecturer any more, interesting:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080709051840/http://www.lambdas...

^_^
I take your point, but "The 1%" she is not. At least, not unless she happens to have a net worth of ~$9M, which is the floor for 1%erdom in the U.S.

Nor are most "techies", even if they are fortunate enough to be an exception to the downward trend in real wages (for the moment.)
It looks like preserving the integrity of their ToS to me. If you believe it is because of $500, you are a total idiot and I will not talk to you.
I'm in the "hacker and startup world" and find the article absolutely worthy. It resonates with me. It's deeper and more interesting than most of what I've read here for the past weeks.

If something doesn't interest you, save your upvote, move on. This comment you just made is a perfect example of the decline in quality of posts here - and please don't take this as a personal attack, one of the reasons discussions get poorer everyday is going 'meta' about HN and the thread itself, like what we're doing right now :/
Out Of The Comics, Into Reality: Jet Pack Moves Closer To Market
What you describe is exactly the same as genetic algorithms (also genetic programming) or artificial life (Alife.) If you are interested there is a lot of information about these things available on the internet and plenty of implementations you can experiment with. And it does work to do amazing things. The problem is evolution is slow. Incredibly slow. It just tries random things, it takes awhile before it finds something that actually works. You say that nature is more efficient, but it's not. Not at all. It's simply had way more time than humans, and it has population sizes in the billions (way more for some species.)

But with the same amount of resources, human engineers are way better at designing things than evolution. If you give humans enough time, we can figure out how to make intelligence, and we can probably do a way better job than nature. At worst we simply need to reverse engineer how nature did it, at best we find an even better way.
This is because I use a static etag instead of generating a new one for each session. From the page:

> When you visit a page where you don't have an ETag (like incognito mode), your session will be emptied.

This unfortunately also throws away your other browser session at the same time. In practice a website would probably issue a new etag for the incognito session, and your existing browser session will simply continue.
The memory accesses of a binary search look pretty much like complete random access

Why would this be? I would think that even in a naive implementation the fan-out is high enough that top levels of the B+ tree will always be in cache, so that you are only hitting RAM for the last level or two and the leaf. For in memory use, I thought the usual argument against binary search was (as 'elbee' mentions) the poor branch predictability, not the caching.
Much more massive demonstration can be seen at evercookie where ETag is just one method among others.

http://samy.pl/evercookie/
If anyone is interested, I'm making an alternative to The Pirate Bay that doesn't depend on the BitTorrent protocol: http://www.infinitecopies.com.

frabrunelle@gmail.com for feedback.
I wish HN would stop talking about itself, and I could participate in discussion on the linked article for once.

Paradox.
The thread started off with hnha asking, "why on earth is this a link to Facebook of all things?" followed by RexRollman responding, "I agree. I see Facebook in a URL and I won't visit it, regardless of what it is.", followed by you asking, "And why is that, exactly?". None of which were asking, "can I access this link without logging into facebook", so positing that the discussion can be ended simply because this link can be accessed is a non-sequitur.

Interestingly, in the same thread that hnha started, there is also a posting by brokenparser about NOT being able to access the linked content - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6228750 So, not only is your position a non-sequitur, it is also based on inconsistent evidence.
Using ETags was well known on HN years ago as one technique in the "Evercookie" arsenal: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1714446
I am a big fan of languages trying to solve callback hell. I use a library in Haxe that allows for similar syntax: https://github.com/proletariatgames/haxe-continuation. Haxe compiles to Javascript and is great for node programming...but it has the added benefit of also compiling to c++, php, java, c#, etc., etc. ;)
Mobile Learning Lessons From the Audible App
Interesting, I'd never heard of B612. So they're sufficiently well-funded to commission a $500M Kepler-class probe?
Is Big Data an Economic Dud?
There is not enough energy available in our universe to crack a container encrypted with AES256.
Clicked thinking I was going to be introduced to a new startup with a pretty cool name ... actual mechanical movements not bad either, however.
It's clearly false, too -- a multinational corporation or large research university could make a weapon more effectively than North Korea or Pakistan, if they wanted to -- the only limitation would be hiding the work, but that wouldn't be too hard. Jihadis living in caves probably couldn't, true.

I wonder if a multinational could hide purchases in enough companies to avoid being identified. Even more interesting would be using something like decentralized task markets and subcontracting to have a group of agents/companies/etc. build you a bomb without them knowing they're building a bomb. Things like "provide an HPC cluster" "simulate high-energy physics for a research paper" "high precision timing circuit" "high accuracy 3d machining for arbitrary purposes" etc. could all be contracted fairly blindly.
> Again: if you want to construct an argument that politically-motivated overestimations of the Soviet nuclear arsenal were used to drive spending to profit contractors: sure. But it does not follow that nuclear war was off the table!

My argument was about a matter of degree. I didn't mean to say the nuclear war was off the table. But we now know that neither side was really ready to launch. It should have been the job of the intelligence agencies to correctly assess that but they didn't.

Then someone else took that and ran with it without double checking and added on a heavy layer of propaganda about evil empire and how communists were about to destroy the free world and so on.

As an addendum, as a good indication the Soviets were never going to attack first, was that they built Периметр (Perimeter) -- their dead hand device. They did that because they thought Americans would launch first. And if that happened the wanted to have a second strike (retaliatory) capability. If they were the evil empire and always wanted to attack first (like the Americans believed) they would have no incentive to build that system.
That won't dissuade him. We live in strange times where people practicing cognitive dissonance want to deny others their basic rights because "terr'rists wanna blow you up!"
Oh man! If only they could fix the situation!
Are any of ya'll enjoying this more now than when you worked as a team? I've found the whole process of programming far more fun now.
Based on your comment, I did a little searching for the terms (single electron circuit) and found this interesting document. Maybe it's the kind of thing you're talking about:

http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/suppl/10.1142/p650/suppl_...

--

For a completely different portrayal of futuristic mechanical computers, check out Neal Stephenson's story The Diamond Age. It's set in an era of nanotech, and the computers are nanoscale clockwork computers.
Automating IPython Notebook Setup
There's a pretty good basic book on the basics of design called "White Space is not your Enemy" that I find pretty helpful.
I read this blog post by an Argentinian guy who teaches programming to elementary school students. Maybe not exactly what you're looking for since it's primarily about programming and not computer science in general, but it might give you some ideas. In particular, it might give you a sort of yardstick for how much kids can learn. He started them on Python (though some kids already had experience with another, pedagogical programming language), then switched to Haskell. I was surprised by this:

> When I presented Haskell at first time in both groups, they were making conclusions in only two hours about these topics:

Functions, expressions and types (they answer questions about the type of functions and expressions)

Parametric polymorphism and polymorphic functions

Currification

Sum and product types

Pattern matching.

Partiality and the use of Maybe.

And this is just beautiful:

>Map, filter and fold, comparing them with iterative implementations in Python. They infered the types of the paremeter functions. One girl understood the difference between foldr and foldl, and she said "if the binary operation is conmutative the result is the same".

Although he seems clearly excited with Haskell, I think the interesting issue isn't whether "Haskell is a better teaching language than Python" but just how much kids can learn by themselves, including theoretical stuff, as long as you don't underestimate them and give them interesting problems instead of paint-by-the-numbers programming.

Unfortunately the samples he presented at the end weren't that impressive.

http://sawafaso.blogspot.jp/2013/07/why-haskell-at-school-ma...
I think part of his point is that, for "10-12%" of Americans, these laws actually make them go from unemployed in the official sense to actually having no meaningful income in the literal sense. In other words, it will make many bad situations even worse.

> As a result, "drugs are the only industry left in places such as Baltimore and east St Louis" – an industry that employs "children, old people, people who've been shooting drugs for 20 years, it doesn't matter. It's the only factory that's still open. The doors are open."

I'm certainly not going to agree that that's a reason not to do what we have, but that race/poverty line point he's making isn't just about arrests.
It wouldn't be of much use to China. It can't hide from airborne radar. And it can't operate effectively in rough seas.
I see, the normal Chrome session is not reset, but rather linked to the new ETag in incognito mode, at least in this example.

You could probably have submitted a bug to the Chrome team and get a bounty for this thing. It kind of allows to track the incognito session linking it to a normal session.
Changing environments can help immensely with changing your state of mind. I didn't get the feeling that she blames Google; she blames being at a place in life that doesn't fulfill her, coincidentally she works at Google. It's pretty clear from the text that she has goals in mind other than a good 9-5 job.
I'm confused. How big are the cells? How do they attach and unattach.
> It seems to me she hasn't developed that sensitivity towards others yet.

This is a personal journal. She did not corner you at a party and harangue you for 20 minutes.
"it is hardly harmless and we definitely don't know enough about its effect on the brain especially amongst younger users"

I'm a great deal more worried about tobacco and alcohol binging in youths, or in the privacy nonsense and the social stuff, then I am about some weed.

If you really want to argue "Think of the children!" look at Portugal's decriminalization for the past decade, and see if they have any numbers for you. Stop scaremongering.
> "Folks like Musk" are smart enough to know that the progress of humanity, the great and meaningful leaps of technology to strive for, are accomplished by people solving those hard problems under a common banner.

That's an interesting aspect of their work you point out. It made me think about describing my "banner" and add it to my HN profile.

It would be cool if we can all identify such "banners" under which we work in our HN profiles. Note that the banner doesn't have to be a technological breakthrough. In my case, for example, I wish for cultural impact.
Could you tell me the reason why I have to stay?
I don't know exactly why I feel uncomfortable. Maybe because we often have different opinions. And sometimes I want to be free and make a small team with other people who have same think like.
Bye Kepler. You were awesome. http://kepler.nasa.gov/Mission/discoveries/
Then link it.

EDIT: From last time we talked about this, some Google Scholar links--

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0890856709....

http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/180/3/216.short

http://www.bmj.com/content/325/7374/1195.1.short

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022395607....

Note, though, that these are pretty inconclusive as far as causality goes.
Articles like this reminds me that I'm probably not the target audience of the Palahniuk quote.

I tend to think things like "do I really need to own a large pot? Couldn't I just do several smaller batches of food in a small pot?" and "why do I need a chair in my bedroom if I can sit on my bed?"

But I actually try to banish these thoughts--they're almost as dangerous a mindset to get into as that of a hoarder, I think--because the experience of sitting crosslegged on your bed typing on a laptop, with your back aching, reminds you that some possessions actually are a marked improvement to your life. There are a certain number of objects I am alright with being owned by.
Slightly off topic, but it would be nice if the test accounts really worked all the time. I've seen a number of cases where entire sections of the site (e.g. http://developers.facebook.com) that error out (return 500's) when using whitehat test account's auth info. This leaves us with little choice but to use real accounts in some cases.
Patent != Feature
> It's more secure. If identifying session data is not accessible to JavaScript, it makes a site more secure from XSS attacks.

HTTPOnly should take care of this.