skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Interesting, let me add that you should let people convince you it won't work without proof, especially for something as reliant on behavior!

I think a reputation system could be built using some kind of peer-to-peer trust system. For example, I'm aware you can prove a certain transaction is yours. Simply by collecting a series of transactions conducted with the merchant and with a series of merchant's trusted peers, the merchant could perhaps decide on the (k1,k2) he might propose; and similarly users may assemble a database of verifiable cases where the transaction backfired (since each user can prove the transaction and the merchant address).

It just bugs me -- one of the great promises of crypto currencies is the elimination of need of trusted 3rd parties -- only to be unable to perform useful real world transactions without them.

The key to enabling this would be devising a system for voluntary transparency, I believe.
What Does the Kid Say (Ylvis The Fox Parody)
So, you got me to thinking.

As a side-effect of his work on expert forecasting[1], Tetlock discovered that people put more stock in those who made confident predictions than those who qualified their predictions. To the point that he basically says: if a person is a famous pundit, they are more likely to be wrong, because the media prefers bold predictions to maybes and perhapses.

In business you can be bold or not bold. If you're not bold, you are at a social disadvantage.

Then you can be right or wrong. If you are right, everyone hails you as a visionary. If you are wrong, nobody remembers.

So in fact, in business, the rational strategy for an individual is to speak confidently and let the dice fly high.

[1] I reviewed his book a while back. http://chester.id.au/2012/07/29/review-expert-political-judg...
This actually seems measurable. Do teams that are behind perform worse on average? Do teams perform worse than normal after failing a 4th down attempt?
Short of implementing some kind of drivers license for C coders, I think this is a bad way to look at things. There will always be programs written by people who don't know about buffer overruns, or SQL injection, or just aren't thinking about security at the time because it's a trivial piece of code that "won't make it into a production environment". You can tell them they shouldn't be doing what they are doing all you want, but that doesn't fix the security problem.

Fix the tools, don't blame people for using them as best they know how.
> To improve the program from now on we will reward bug hunters who find bugs outside of the scope provided that they do not violate our users’ information and that their report triggers us to improve our code base. We will also retroactively check to see if other reports found issues that fall into this category.

Do they say that they are going to reward him? I haven't seen that stated anywhere yet.
Ask HN: Is YC the only accelerator worth applying to?
I'm planning on applying to YC for the upcoming summer batch. Given the low acceptance rate, I know there is a good chance it won't work out. Do you think other accelerators (TechStars, etc.) are worth applying to or should I simply refocus that effort and stress towards building a great company?
"the ref counting is dangerous"

hmm?
Universal qualifiers aren't absurd for headlines pitched at HN. They seem to work as intended.
Anyone know the details of the music Spacex used on the feed when not broadcasting?
Ah, but sometimes two points is not so bad if the clock is a factor and you're about to turn over possession regardless. Down by one and facing a fourth down against the Broncos from his own one yard line with three minutes to go, Bill Belichick famously took an intentional safety[1]. The field position gain from the free kick was worth the two points, and the Patriots went on to win.

[1] http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/wire?id=1653659
I'm terribly confused by your argument. Who's talking about equipment seizure here? What does that have to do with the on-the-wire security of the encoded messages?

Your argument appears to concern only the risk in openly publishing encoders. Are you also arguing that Bram's framework encourages such publishing? If not, then what exactly is your beef with it (the framework)?
But couldn't a version be built on the same principles that has higher thrust?
BitTorrent - a new P2P app (2001)
However after the list he states

"And with the sixth example I have reached imperceptibly but unavoidably,
the most hairy part of this talk: Educational consequences."

which is incorrect as item 6 is actually the 7th example. Zero based
indexing requires that the counter be updated after appending and the counter
be referenced for the cardinal value of an item.
(ie. item 6 is 7th in the list).
The piles of money at NASA, DOE, etc. are already allocated to things. They employ a lot of people on strategic projects. There is extreme competition for the small fraction that is available for new bids at any one time.
AUR: https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/bitrated-git/

Any plans for an API?
I think there's selection bias in the underlying data. The dependent variable (realized success on attempted 4th down conversions) is conditioned on 4th down attempts by coaches.

Since coaches are conservative, they're likely to go for fourth down conversions only in cases when they are likely to succeed (due to defensive mismatches, etc).

Hence the model may over-estimate the benefit of going for it on fourth down.
Cool! Wish it could load faster..
I just read it, and you are completely extrapolating what that paper says. It does not say steganography is hopeless. It contains no mathematical proofs, and it's also from over 15 years ago.

More generally, "we do not have a proof" does not mean "we disprove". You also completely ignored my point about the secret, without which the encoder will not work when an attacker tries to run it.
Nope. The CLR has supported it back to v2, and C# delegates used the feature before language support was added in C# 4
Maybe start with the guy who uploaded the video to YouTube?
The best defense is keeping the other team's offense off the field. Going for it on fourth down has a much higher probability of doing that than a punt does.
there's also bufferbox: https://www.bufferbox.com/
I wonder why. There are plenty of ways to get growth, why is this one so important?

I can think of one reason off the top of my head:

Perhaps it's because many organizations that grow very large do so by creating a market, or largely shaping it in some way. It seems that in that case, word of mouth is even more important.

As an example, I tell my friends about gyro food trucks all the time. But most of them have decided whether or not they're going to eat greasy falafel. On the other hand, if there's a new type of food vendor they've never heard of before, it will count for a lot more, because their opinion hasn't been formed yet.

I suppose the other explanation is that word of mouth is only a signifier of high quality, but I'm not sure that's all of it.
I think there are limits. How do you "fix" assembly language without simultaneously breaking it? The best way to fix C is to use OCaml or Rust or something instead.
This: http://fabiensanglard.net/rayTracing_back_of_business_card/i... is a perfect example of what you're asking for (for me of course).
The same statistics wonk has done a lot of work on "momentum" in games. His conclusion is that there is no such thing:

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2013/11/momentum-1.html

That jibes with my own anecdotal experience watching a lot of football, despite how often announcers like to cite it as a factor.
So can't you just embed messages in every file you own? Then when asked for the keys, give out fake keys for the really really secret stuff. So law enforcement ends up with a few sensitive documents and a whole bunch of random bytes where you cannot distinguish between "actual random bytes" and "bytes decoded with the wrong key". And there is your plausible deniability.

Obviously it's not perfect. Obviously a totalitarian regime which suspects you of dissident activity will pick any reason out of thin air to lock you up for as long as they like, or just execute you.

But being able to say "here's the keys" with them having no way to know if they are all the right keys, is at least something.

Though of course at best you won't keep those files on your PC in the first place. You'd keep them on a microSD card that you keep in a tiny pouch under your skin. You'd keep them encoded in photos you have printed out and hung as wall pictures. You'd have them embedded in a well-torrented movie and backed up willingly by hundreds of thousands people (though not you). And if you just use them to send encoded messages, neither you nor the recipient will ever store them on an hdd.

I mean, you're not stupid, right?
I don't disagree, but the fact of the matter is that people do - and even people who know how to use these things safely have been known to make mistakes. Flaws are found in all kinds of software and there is a LOT of C code out there where these functions were and are the cause of serious security flaws.

So sure, you can say that people shouldn't write in C if they can't call memcpy safely, but the truth is that people do and mistakes do get made.

It takes a lot of effort and care to make sure that memcpy is never used to copy data that isn't too large for the destination buffer and there are alternatives like mempcpy and memccpy.
> Having a growth team is still a good idea--you almost always need to jumpstart things. But don't forget about what you actually have to accomplish.

Maybe it's better not to jumpstart things. One strategy could be to fail faster by purposely not marketing, to quickly find out whether a product is intrinsically viral.
And here comes the bloat. Soon Rails will be replacing WEBrick in Ruby 3.0.
I actually agree with you, and I'm just complaining about how edit and draft seem imprecise.

I was thinking of how Harper Lee wrote To Kill a Mocking Bird. Also, Philip Roth said something about taking the right first steps instead of the wrong ones and that's how he could tell he had material for a book.

It's possible if you redefine or throw out the words draft and edit. Sure they mean something to you now, but for me you might as well say the secret to writing is writing. The advice to draft then edit till it's good, leaves out how hard you try on the first draft. It makes it sound like editing and drafting are different things when they aren't so different. Do you punctuate on the first draft? In American Pastoral the whole story happens parenthetically between dashes, how would you think to do that on a second pass? I'm worried the first draft has a way of keeping the subsequent drafts down--like writing about socks; on the third draft you still have socks.

Seems to me you are taking time to think, but you could just as easily (to my way of thinking obviously) call it all one draft spread out over a few days.
> KVO all comes through one method

Yes, and it's annoying to have a long list of if statements. However, there's a blocks based alternative since iOS4/10.6, and a number of third-party variations.[1]

> KVO is string-ly typed

That's a big reason why libextobjc's @keypath() macro is so popular.[2]

> KVO requires you to handle superclasses yourself

That's a feature, not a bug. If you use observeValueForKeyPath:ofObject:change:context: then you need to call super just like overriding any other method. This also gives you the flexibility to selectively decide to override behavior of your own superclasses.

> KVO can crash when deregistering

Only if you deregister twice. And yes, it really sucks that you can accidentally deregister the same key path that a superclass deregisters, resulting in a crash. Much has been written about this issue, and third party libraries address it.[3]

> KVO is a pit of failure

That's a strong and subjective statement. Yes KVO can be frustrating for new developers - no argument there. But it does have its place.

> KVO is implicit

Woah, no one (including Apple) is suggesting that apps use KVO for all of their message passing and dependencies. It has its place, especially for monitoring changes to Apple's APIs or when multiple observers need to monitor the same object (again, that's a feature not a bug).

> KVO can cause infinite loops

Your handler should always avoid triggering the same event that triggered it. That's not unique to KVO.

> KVO is the old way

I remember when Apple introduced it, so I guess that makes me even older! Actually, Apple's KVO is responsible for some of the newest JS libraries. SproutCore borrowed many of KVO's ideas,[4] and you may be familiar with one of SproutCore's notable forks: Ember.js

> When is it okay to use KVO?

Agreed that these are great use cases for KVO. But doesn't this counter the title of the post? It's certainly not "harmful" to use KVO for these.

[1] https://github.com/search?l=Objective-C&q=kvo&source=cc&type...

[2] https://github.com/jspahrsummers/libextobjc/blob/master/exto...

[3] http://www.mikeash.com/pyblog/friday-qa-2012-03-02-key-value...

[4] http://guides.sproutcore.com/core_concepts_kvo.html
A new version was pushed part of the way through the day. Editing wasn't finished when it first went out.
The guy finds the company source code wide open and notify them and they treat him like that?

Whats up with those people ? They have lost their brain ? or is that inflated egos ?
Ah interesting, I have never heard about this game specifically.

It seems though he gave up some amount of EV by giving up the 2 points to the Broncos, thus a FG later on would only tie the game instead of winning it. But I assumed this was offset by the risk of having to punt and the Broncos end up getting a FG where then they'd be up by 4 points.

I don't know if Belichick was right to do this, but it paid off for him which is why everyone pats him on the back.

Contrast this with the 2009 Colts/Pats game where he went for it on 4th and 2 on his own 28 and didn't make it.
Discussion about Open Source and Money with DHH and Chad Whitacre
There is a significant portion of the healthcare conversation (federal policy wonks, CMIO, etc) that will not use reddit for whatever reasons (confusion, overwhelming, not 'serious' etc).

In the interest of developing real conversation, and not just an echo chamber, I think this is the right direction. Also, /r/healthIT and /r/healthcareIT haven't been a great success.
We offer an enterprise plan that allows for self hosting in a private cloud (ex: Amazon VPC). Contact me (email in profile) if you'd like more information.

If you're keen on a DIY option there are a couple out there but I wouldn't consider any of them to be as full featured as our offering and none allows for data source sharing or tracking audit trails. Also, most other tooling is specific to a single database type (MySQL, Postgres, etc) and I'm not sure which you're using (Amazon RDS supports MySQL, Postgres, SQL Server, and Oracle).

That said, here are some other options:

http://www.adminer.org/

http://www.phpmyadmin.net/

http://phppgadmin.sourceforge.net/

http://www.teampostgresql.com/

http://www.postgresqlstudio.org/
Yes it's actually quite an awkward point for me at the moment. I have a side-project that I've been developing for a while. My attachment to it means that I know every single bug and flaw within the product. But at the same time I know that if I add caveats to any marketing (it's a bit alpha/beta, etc.), then it will come across as unconfident. On the other hand, if I just say it's amazing and will change your life, I'll probably (can't resist the language even now...), do far, far better.
Public Relations Lessons From A $4 Slice Of Toast
My favorite bubble story is Airbnb building a conference room modelled after the War Room in Dr. Strangelove:

http://www.modernluxury.com/san-francisco/story/workspace-ar...
For an example of this, look at the sibling comment by pak (made after yours) =)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6844169
Edge cases seem to be where all the fun is, tho... =D
Boy. I know more or less informed speculation is the best we can do, but it would sure be fun if detailed information about the CPU were public so such things could actually be tracked down.
I'm not sure that people will go through this app and pay another $6 on top of the original shipping fee, and enter an oddball shipping address. They may pay it if it's an option at checkout, as at that point they are weighing the shipping costs as a total and looking at things like overnighting a package, or two-day shipping etc. If it was a markup for nighttime delivery at checkout, and you just enter your home address one time, that would be the most painless implementation. To get there, that means they'll need to partner with Amazon, UPS, FedEx, etc, rather than acting as competitors. If these companies are not interested in night-time delivery or unable to do night-time delivery for labor reasons, they may be quite willing to earn a markup by partnering with Luna. They already have similar relationship with USPS which handles last mile deliveries, which is what it looks like Luna is going for.
I guess it's a balance between over and under-engineering. The thing is, more often that not the person coming along to do 'external modifications' to that code is actually you, a few months after you wrote it.

You can adopt some good coding practices that ensure that the code isn't a spaghetti mess that's hard to understand when you come back and look at it. That's different than designing a system to be pluggable from the start.

So, I haven't watched any of Notch's livecoding videos, but for those who have, what kind of bad is the code? Is it bad "this is a mess and I won't remember what these variables do in 3 months" or is it just simply designed to handle the most immediate case (coded well but not with plugins in mind)?
They were Microsoft functions long (6 years?) before they were standardized.
I stocked up on oxygen in the first place because I had an end—sustaining my own life—and the means for this was, in part, supplying myself with oxygen. Oxygen only ever was considered valuable because of my purposeful human action. It was never valuable "just because" as the concept of "intrinsic value" implies.

You seem to be partially accepting my argument that "intrinsic value" doesn't exist but trying to win by redefining "things having intrinsic value" as "things necessary to sustain human life". Okay, things that humans need to survive are "intrinsically valuable" to that end but that isn't what we're talking about.
Electronic Arts Standard Template Library (2007)
Excellent point, I wouldn't however use USD, EUR, or RMB for jewelry. The point remains that BTC has no less intrinsic value than any fiat currency. As soon as we promise each other work in exchange for something that thing gains value. In a sense BTC is more like gold than dollars because it is mined into circulation, rather than being conjured into existence by a central bank.
Here is a high school coach from Little Rock that never punts, and always onside kicks. His reasoning is sound and it seems to work out for him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGDaOJAYHfo
Tablets at restaurants: Applebee's, Chili's race to eliminate human interaction
In Parliment, Guardian Editor Details State Tactics After Leaks by Snowden
Difficult to be certain, but I suspect TNW may have based this off a HN submission I made yesterday:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6838530

This isn't a complaint. I just find it interesting to consider that news outlets might be watching HN's /newest page closely.
there has been websites breaking the back button forever... this isn't new.
Just use Reactive Cocoa.
Jack Andraka, Maryland’s boy wonder
How I ‘burnt’ $4,000 last week
Yeah, you're right. I made some changes to the UI to remove some mentions of public/private keys (made that public/private field hidden by default and only shown after clicking "Display advanced options", hidden some stuff behind the "Advanced mode" in the transaction page, etc) but didn't update the FAQ to reflect that.

I'll change the FAQ to be a bit more easy to digest, and yes, some infographic explaining how that works, or possibly even a video, would be a great way to explain that. I'll try and see if I can come up with something.
Intro to the Arduino Leonardo Board
Coursera Receives $20 Million in Funding
You're equating 'responding to' with 'blame'. The former is factually true as an antecedent point of history. The latter is at once both unknowable and irrelevant.
It is interesting what an emotional reaction people instinctively have to 4th down. Going for it on 4th down and failing feels like a catastrophe. But punting would have given the ball away anyway, so all you've done is give the opponent an extra 40 yards or so. Which is bad, sure, but it's a hell of a lot less bad than, say, throwing an interception on 1st and 10. But somehow giving up the ball on downs has come to be seen as a massive failure, on par with an regular turnover.
Edit: I'm going to try to rephrase this whole question since it got so unpopular. (I also said moon when I meant sun)

Lets say we fly a rocket up to earth sun L4 at a really slow speed. When we reach L4 we fire retro rockets to slow down as to not overshoot.

It seems to me that we never have to reach a high speed to stay in space at that point. The two bodies would be holding us there?

Is that correct? Is there a certain speed to fly out to L4 which uses less fuel than speeding up to 8km/s like you would need to stay in space orbiting earth?
The processor industry is a mess (especially x86). The micro-architectures are fine tuned for benchmarks, at the expense of clean and reliable design.
Moreoever, the probabilities are likely to change if behavior changes. For example fakes or trick plays become less successful if you do them often.
Ripple Labs - San Francisco, CA

Looking for full time developers (open to remote and h1b with a perfect technical fit)

If you're not familiar with Ripple, check out the video we posted at ripple.com to get a better sense of what we're trying to do. Our payment platform has the potential to be huge and universal; we want to do what SMTP did for email in the payment space. There are a lot of players in the digital currency space but we think we have the product to set us apart. It's about time someone made payments as easy as email, and we have the technology to do it.

1.) JavaScript Developer - working with angular.js, backbone.js, and node.js

2.) c++ Developer

All job descriptions are found on ripple.com/jobs. Please send me an email if you're interested in hearing more - tyler@ripple.com
I love HN's community but don't like a lot of it's policies/design choices. Before anyone says "but maybe that's what made it a good community in the first place", you probably aren't wrong. But I keep thinking there must be a more optimal way to do it.
Pretty sure it's the definition of making something.
WSJ: HealthCare.gov’s Heart Beats For NoSQL
"CMS needed to process non-standard data types from multiple vendors. Insurers trying to sell their products on HealthCare.gov lack a standard way of expressing their data, describing deductibles, health conditions and other plan attributes differently. If CMS had elected to use a SQL system, its programmers would have had to build a common data model, or schema, to describe the disparate data sources within the application. This would require more time, a luxury CMS did not have if it wanted to meet HealthCare.gov’s Oct. 1 launch deadline. In contrast, NoSQL systems can more easily search plan information– a process similar to how Google Inc. retrieves Web content for users. “We’ve essentially built search-based applications against the [HealthCare.gov] data,” said Mr. Bloom."
Hi. I wrote this post and I agree with you about this particular annoyance (and apparently so do a lot of other people). Blogger themes are limited and while I can customize it I think a better solution is to move to another blogging platform.
List comprehensions in eight lines of Clojure