skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Buying domain names and reselling them when someone actually wants to build something is really scummy, I think.

They're not bean bag babies, you don't collect domain names.

You get a domain name, and you use it as the front-door to a house you've built and want people to see, not an empty plot of land that you're hoping someone will come and pay you off because they want to build something.

[EDIT] - Removed "Am I the only one that thinks", because I don't care if I'm the only one that thinks it in this case. I shouldn't be the minority opinion.
the flaw here is assuming that the value being higher on average in the envelope is a sufficient criteria to make swapping the best choice. this is not how probability works, if i have a million empty envelopes and one with a billion dollars in it, the average value of each envelope being £1000 doesn't mean anything in the face of the 1 in a million chance of actually picking the right one.
Experimental Chrome Extension to reclaim RAM by kill-reviving tab processes
Is there any chance of getting a guide of this for FreeBSD?
Maybe it was more of a way to demonstrate that she didn't mean nearly as much to him as the electronic status he shared with her.

Or maybe the younger generation does multiplex much more than we've been accustomed to (I'm also 25 and don't use facebook).
Way to avoid the question!
> When the listener isn't paying, there will always be someone else to foot the bill: the artist.

Yep, it's possible his music is just not good enough, and that he should pursue other ways of making a living. Market forces and all.

> You forget the primary function of a music production company is to act as a bank for the artist, they'll sign a contract with anyone who is willing to re-pay a loan

Well, I'm not sure it's that simple. They're expecting a return on their investment. If a new artist signs up and takes on a $1M "loan", but then proceeds to sell zero records, how will the loan get paid back?

> The point I was making is that it's not things like Grooveshark discouraging those practices, it's cheap technology which has made it more cost-effective for artists to just avoid production companies all together.

Sure, it's never been cheaper to make and sell music online. That's fine, but I was talking about the business side of things, where music producers really do expect/hope people to pay for it, because otherwise they wouldn't be putting it up for sale.

It's quite effortless to by-pass paying for music, but that doesn't mean the music you're happily downloading for free was meant to be free.
Scala Type Parameterization
http://scalatuts.com/blog/2013/09/12/type-parameterization/
>The housing bubble was in part caused by crazy incentives in the financial industry to make as many loans as possible and sell that debt back and forth. The ability to do this and make ever larger bets which meant any downturn at all in housing would be catastrophic was allowed by deregulation.

Those "crazy incentives" were put in place by well-meaning people who confused middle class signifiers with causative behavior. In other words, people who thought home ownership was a way into the middle class instead of what it is - a middle class luxury.

>Welfare programs haven't expanded in the last few years, they've simply been more needed.

Not true. Before Obama took office you could be on food stamps three months in a three year period. Now the only limit is your income. Even bigger is Medicaid, which consumes ever greater portions of state budgets on a per-capita basis.

>I don't think you understand what being trapped in poverty really means. If people are choosing to stay on benefits, it's usually because working 60 hours a week to barely tread water doesn't seem to appealing to them.

That's exactly my point. Of course nobody wants to work hard. But if you don't take an entry level job you'll never have a job that makes you comfortable. Thus my comment about social programs trapping people in poverty.

>Tax liens: for the most part it's not corrupt, but I was referring to this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6349476

I understood what you were referring to. The article is written to inflame passions in people who don't understand the process. If you read through the HN thread you'll see half the people who read the article think the lien holder pockets the entire amount from property sales.

>So far you're not really disproving my point, just arguing other aspects of your ideology.

No, I'm disproving your point, but you're ideological blinkers prevent you from reassessing your position.
That's indeed a good solution. Here's hoping that Github might adapt something like that in the near future. Manual repo maintainance is quite a burden, so making it harder to shoot yourself in the foot using the API would be much appreciated.
They can image its position from the radio waves; http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-09/nrao-v1s09121...
Didn't say that. Poor information on the conditions and effects of production is fundamental to unregulated markets. Much like externalities, they are not mere "imperfections" or footnotes which is usually how they are presented in pro-free-market Econ 101 texts. They are fundamental; e.g. much of the environmental threat the planet faces can be contributed to externalities and poor info. Nevermind the poor animal-poop slaves.

Regulations and activism (such as this type of journalism) are some of the non-market forces that can compensate.
You can even explicitly define the distribution as P($2^i) = 1/(2^i) and the 'paradox' remains. The problem is that you are reasoning about the expected gain of swapping but that expectation is a sum over a series which is not absolutely convergent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_convergence) so it's value depends on the order in which you sum over the different cases.

In fact, if you repeatedly simulate the problem (make sure you use bignums) you will find that the mean gain from swapping is not well behaved at all and refuses to converge. The law of large numbers only applies if the expectation is well-defined.

The lesson here is: when in doubt, explicitly write out the probability space over which you are working. Problems like this and the Monty Hall problem are trivially solvable on paper. There is a reason that mathematicians get all hot and bothered about formalism - it gives you a solid base from which to build correct intuitions.

EDIT Let's write this down properly.

i | gain from swapping if I have the smallest | gain from swapping if I have the largest
1 $2 -$2
2 $4 -$4
3 $8 -$8
etc

There are two arguments.

The first is that the situation is symmetric so you can't possibly gain. That is:

E(Gain) = (1/4 * $2 + 1/4 * -$2) + (1/8 * $4 + 1/8 * -$4) ...
= $0 + $0 + $0 + $0 ...
= $0

The second argument is that swapping from small to large is a bigger gain than the loss of swapping from large to small. That is:

E(Gain) = (1/4 * $2) + (1/4 * -$2 + 1/8 * $4) + (1/8 * -$4 + 1/16 * $8) ...
= $0.5 + $0 + $0 + $0 ...
= $0.5

Adding up an infinite series is tricky :)
To be fair, that's a direct quote from him - it's possible that he had a job that allowed him to pay for the replacements himself.

On the other hand, I doubt my parents would have lent me $2k when I was 13.
Streamlining the development process of a chrome extension
I don't think they view that as a significant growth vector. Skimming an existing market is rarely a good tactic.

Plus it's up to the developer. We can't have one-click-do-all buttons for everything.
You can explicitly state the distribution and still run into the same problem: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6387344 .

The underlying problem is basically that probability theory in non-finite spaces has some gotchas - one of which is that the expectation of a random variable does not always exist.
Seoul's New Tower Seems Familiar, and Not in a Good Way
The convention of a 1/3 em space between words, 2/3 after most punctuation, and a full em space after a sentence seems great to me. And I do appreciate a serious piece of pedantry.
>Why do you equate lack of population growth with a bad future?

When the health of your social programs is based on continued population growth the future may indeed be grim without it.
Well if you want someone to do something, you should make it as easy as possible. Therefore, if you want someone to migrate their repo to your site, you should make it as easy as possible for them to do so.
Does Goodreads allow "groups"? That could be handy.

Edit: yes they do, and that's exactly what they're called, and there's already one for Hacker News: http://www.goodreads.com/group/show/94469-hackernews
It was double opt-in: I had to enable, then activate the "Bandwidth management" option.

http://imgur.com/NoctiYu
What do you think happens to the useless males. The little infant bulls and roosters?
What's new: https://wiki.freebsd.org/WhatsNew/FreeBSD10
Noah - short film that plays out entirely on a computer screen (Video NSFW)
This will filter out and miss the really nasty children (who'll just use networks with privacy), and catch the stupid ones who need education rather than discipline.
The What's New for FreeBSD 10 wiki page[1] linked in the reply has more details (though it doesn't necessarily indicate what will make the cut). The interesting bits to me are the merging of VPS support[2] which, last I read was a patchset against the 7 or 8 kernel. The seamless migration of virtualized envs seemed like a pipe dream at the time, I can't wait to play around with it (if it makes the cut).

Not to mention virtio support and bhyve[3] (in addition to the old jail subsystem). If everything makes it in, there will be so many different options for service isolation!

--

[1] https://wiki.freebsd.org/WhatsNew/FreeBSD10

[2] http://7he.at/freebsd/vps/

[3] https://wiki.freebsd.org/action/show/bhyve?action=show&redir...
Richard Dawkins: By the Book
Okay, I was finally able to find a direct answer to my question by studying NaCl.

http://cryptojedi.org/peter/data/tenerife-20130121.pdf

"NaCl systematically avoids all loads from addresses that depend on secret data"

"NaCl systematically avoids all branch conditions that depend on secret data"

So NaCl is an implementation of AES encryption that prevents cache timing attacks. Since there are no other reasonable side channel attacks on AES, the AES key remains secure. Therefore reusing your AES key is ok provided you're using NaCl. (So you should probably be telling people they need to be using NaCl, not merely AES.)

Thank you for the answers. Also, thanks for pointing me at NaCl. That's the most exciting crypto slide deck that's ever been written!
How I Survived a DUI -
Does that mean you're against uppercasing the first letter of a sentence?
Your response and the URL of your link refer to free markets, and they by definition require perfect information. The info at your link talks about something else.
It is fundamental to all markets in the real world. It is also a defining trait of the platonic ideal of a free market, and one of the reasons why the platonic ideal absolute free market is unrealisable. Markets can be more or less free, but never entirely so. Regulation by non-market forces is one way that markets are made less free. Such regulation is often intended to counteract or offset other things that make the market in question less free.
Actually, that's exactly how expected value works.
That was what I was driving at, yeah.
There are also some hybrids along that continuum: for instance, private universities that receive partial state funding.
Even if there's no one-click option, it'd be nice if the API exposed a much more flexible set of issue editing options to make it possible for us to write better importers ourselves.
but you are implicitly turning the scenario into one with three values, 1/2X, X, and 2X, so something went wrong with what you're doing. There was only ever a universe of two values.
I guess my point was you'd have to refactor your html and css as well as the property itself
Random Luddite opinion. No real data.
It's D9D9D9, that's 85% bright. It has plenty of contrast here.
This is either way over my head or not at all clear. More explanation would be appreciated.
Great, but to be honest this all feels almost cynical at this point coming from Google, headline might as well read:

> NSA unleashes Coder for Raspberry Pi as kid-friendly tool

Don't get me wrong, I have a Raspberry Pi and think it has great educational potential, I think it is great that Google is doing this, but I have lost all trust in them that anything they do they actually give a shit about anymore, this just feels like a crappy PR move.
What a pessimistic person that blames pretty much everything on IT. Thankfully his arguments are void or self defeating.
Reading The Book Thief at the moment.
If this article is a joke or satire, I didn't get it.

If it's serious, my only question is "Wat?".
I came across an excellent list of science fiction awhile ago;

http://4chanlit.wikia.com/wiki/Science_Fiction
I would be surprised if your professor's research tab is partly covered by the university unless they are using startup funds as a new faculty hire. The universities I've been at all (Caltech, MIT) have a significant "overhead" charge against all incoming grants to cover the cost of university infrastructure, keeping the lights on, etc. So it is research that is subsidizing the university, not the other way around.
In theory, they could, but it would be a terrible business decision. Their whole business is software. Even if they didn't have their own mobile OS and had no plans to ever create one, creating an Android phone would make them into a hardware company, competing in hardware with a bunch of other hardware companies that have much more experience in being hardware companies than they do. Since they do have a mobile OS, I can't think of a better way to destroy any possibility of that OS ever succeeding than for the company making it to market a phone running their competitiors' OS. If even Microsoft doesn't believe in their own OS enough to make only devices using it, then why should anybody else?
Can't you do the same thing with Github pages?
This essay is remarkable for missing a large number of big fat important topics and settling for some untargeted grumbling.
Suppose you restate it. You own a $100 stock. It has a 50% chance of doubling, and a 50% chance of going down 50%.

Should you sell it, or hold onto it? Expected value of holding is ($200 + $50)/2 = $125 . So it seems like you should hold on!

If you repeat that wager indefinitely, the standard deviation of the net wins (number of ups-downs) goes up according to a square root law.

And the value of your stock goes up exponentially as the number of net wins goes up.

So over time the EV goes to infinity like (2 ^ (n/2)). The EV of say the -1SD outcome goes to zero. The EV of the +1SD outcome goes to 1/that. So the average EV overall goes to infinity.

And yet the expected value of the growth rate is 0. For every 16x win there's a loss down to 1/16th. But the average of those 2 outcomes diverges to infinity.

All this to say, when you're looking at exponential returns (or other processes), you need to measure growth rates, not average outcomes. And it has nothing to do with log utility.
Frederik Pohl's Gateway
Sorry, I rushed it. Did the edit make it clearer?
The Payday at Twitter Many Were Waiting For.
Not just low cost, but slightly inferior as well. Otherwise it is just price competition. Think ARM vs Intel...definitely not the same quality, but much lower priced and good enough for a significant subset of people.
The Internet is for snacking
That's just silly, they don't even have opposable thumbs. It would have to squirt the milk into your mouth.
Maybe the Google founders want Pentagon to keep giving them discounted fuel ? http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6378553 :-)

Seriously, there was an Assange essay here stating Google's role in the "revolutions," or doing what the USGOV wants them to. Summary here http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/06/17/assange_googles_just...

Come to think that Google did escape anti-trust scrutiny without a scratch. Ah yes, the agencies are independent and no wink and a nod exists up there. Huh...hmmm.
http://abstrusegoose.com/536
Harry Potter; Tales of Pirx the Pilot (Stanislaw Lem)
Nothing 'exotic' really, my all time favourites are Asimov, Heinlein, Philip K.Dick, Stephen King (particularly dark tower series), Arthur C. Clarke, Orson Scott Card (Ender series), William Gibson, Douglas Adams.

I was recently coaxed into reading the 'Kingkiller chronicles' by Patrick Rothfuss, I was sceptical thinking it would be something like Harry Potter (not my cup of tea) but I ended up really liking it, looking forward to the third book.
So how does bhyve compare to kvm? I've seen FreeBSD people saying it's a 'legacy free' virtualization system but I don't really know what that means or entails.

Can it do live migrations and failovers like xen/kvm?

What can it do that kvm/xen can't? What about vice versa?
Huckleberry Finn
My favorite is still Frank Herbert's Dune series.
At one point, yes, but the caffeine content was off the charts, presumably because of the extended soak that the method required.

One large cup of that and I needed an even bigger spatula, just to scrape myself off the ceiling.
> If you run the math without adding assumptions, it works out that swapping makes no difference, statistically.

I beg to differ :)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6387344
I bought all of them with the intention to build something. Obviously I've gotten a bit carried away, so am now downsizing. In my opinion, there's completely nothing wrong with selling a domain name. The reality is that if I don't own it, someone else will. Luckily for the buyer, I'm a nice guy and am not going to severely mark up the price as "professional domainers" would.

So, if you're interested in any of the doors I'm selling, let me know.
If you haven't read "Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality", you're in for a treat: http://hpmor.com/
Hashtags are Punctuation Now
Judas Unchained
NIH keeps its overhead negotiations secret, but I know that The Scripps Research Institute, is currently at about 85%, schools like Harvard, MIT, and Caltech, Berkeley, Stanford, are hovering around that value right now, although IIRC in the past TSRI got 100% and there are rumors that some places got >100% overhead; the government in its budgetary crunch has begun reducing these figures.

DOE is slightly more parsimonious with its overhead, NSF is the most conservative. DARPA gives overhead in all sorts of ranges. Or so I hear.

And TSRI doesn't give most of its professors salary, unless they are doing "administrative duties" (Pres, VP, dept chair, etc) If you run out of grants, you basically don't get paid anymore. At one point ~90% of TSRI operating costs were run off of NIH overhead, all coming in from a very dynamic patchwork of grants from all of their PIs. I think then the pressure to keep getting grants made the place a bit of a boiler room, there was an uptick in shady science (Peter Schultz's retractions, Geoffrey Chang's retractions, and others I'm not ready to talk about yet)... Eventually professors started leaving because they didn't want to take it anymore.
I think it is simply an article written by someone with a sufficiently different set of cultural values that a great deal of additional background information would be needed for it to be understandable.
I recently started Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand. From what I understand, in the US the book is viewed as a must-read for students, but it's much less known here in Europe.
This is one of my favorite problems. Here is one variation can help clarify thinking about it:

"There's two envelopes. One contains twice as much money as the other. No envelope contains more than $N."

This changes the problem dramatically. If your envelope contains more than $N/2, of course you should not switch: the other envelope necessarily contains less. If it contains $N/2 or less, perhaps you should switch: the other envelope may or may not contain more.

Say your envelope contains $x, and you don't know what $N is. There's two possibilities:

1. $x <= $N/2. If you switch, your expectation value is $3x/2, by the original argument.

2. $x > $N/2. If you switch, you will get $x/2, since no envelope contains more than $N.

If we assume the distribution is uniform on the range [0, N], then these possibilities are equally likely. Therefore the total expectation value is the average of the EVs of the two possibilities (3x/2 and x/2), which is $x. So we recovered the naive expectation of "it doesn't matter" from this variation. Now we can take the limit as $N goes to infinity, and while the EV of $x approaches infinity, the fact that switching does not matter does not change.

As others have said, the underlying problem is the assumption that a uniform probability on an infinite set makes sense, which it does not. However, we can instead take the limit for finite sets, in which case we recover the intuitive result that switching does not matter.
I did use it for a large project over about 14 months. You do need those docs open and since Sencha's doc servers were always overwhelmed, they suggested you run your own locally ;)
That comment is very misleading.

No it's not. I was responding directly to this:

A better question may be is it worth it for the government to subsidize research for humanities professors?

The article itself didn't have anything directly to say about the humanities as a field of study.
Kafka. Catch 22. Orwell. Hemingway. Plato. But mostly pathology these days.
For those who like these sorts of problems, I find this to be another tough one to wrap your head around:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_or_Girl_paradox
I have set my mind years ago to completely ignore Potter fan-fiction, regards of its quality.
Twitter's Patents: No 140-Character Gold Here
Don't get me wrong, I hate the NSA spying as much as the next person on HN and I think it's great that people are upset, but this might as well read:

>Google has no choice but to comply with the NSA, continues operating despite their pending lawsuit against the federal government.

Not everything Google does has to be framed within the confines of the NSA debate. I'm struggling to understand how the NSA has anything to do with teaching kids how to code on a Raspberry Pi through a Google project, or even why the NSA would care.
I read through the common resolution but I just can't get why you need all this. The problem seems to be at the start: you select one of two amounts, then you say the other amount is either double or half what you chose.

That means you have 3 amounts in the equation: 0.5x, x and 2x. But in reality there are only 2 amounts: x and 2x.

So you have to state the problem like: you choose an envelope. The other envelope either contains x or 2x. It can't contain 0.5x because that amount never existed in the first place.
The whole discussion is pointless because as soon as you start thinking in spaces, linebreaks and tabs to generate whitespace between objects you're doing it wrong! Change the font, size, weight, line height, etc. and your layout is gone.

Just use LaTeX. Problem solved.
GWT-P takes this a step further with completely isolated layers (MVP) so that you can easily make permutations of your app bound to a Tablet, Mobile, and Desktop set of Views very easily. I've been using it a year now and love it.
H.P. Lovecraft :)
I also had it in Bali, a few years ago, and had a similar reaction both there and with the small quantity I brought back.
The original way this was marketed was (paraphrasing): "civets roam the forest, eat cherries, poop, and we collect the poop." In other words, not farmed at all. Sounded ethical to me at the time.
There's a vast difference between being able to share much of your code base between platforms, and simply having your existing binaries run as-is with no changes. For a lot of developers, the gulf between "do nothing to support Windows Phone" and "do anything at all, even very little, to support Windows Phone" is enough to make them not do it.