skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
No, the scariest part is the likelihood that they will be hackable, resulting in cars that essentially steal themselves or kidnap people or 'inconvenience' them while someone breaks into their house. Then there's the degree to which state actors can use them for ubiquitous surveillance and suppression of freedom of movement. The kill switches wouldn't be used to kill people, just round them up or lock them remotely inside their vehicles.
AppThwack (https://appthwack.com)

WHO WE ARE

AppThwack allows developers and QA teams to quickly test their Android and iOS apps on 100s of real devices. It's 100% automated and a clear, helpful report with high-level results, low-level logs, screenshots, and performance data is built in minutes, allowing people to catch issues well before publishing to the market.

AppThwack started in March, 2012, and since that time we've raised a seed round, rapidly grown revenue from customers of all sizes (Intel, New Relic, and Unity to name a few), and recently (yesterday) moved into a new, larger space. We’re located in beautiful downtown Portland, Oregon, and we’re looking for talented and motivated people to help us build the best automation tools in the world.

JOBS

Developer Relations & Community Building - In this role you’ll be responsible for interacting with the development community, managing outreach (blog, social media, etc.), and organizing events. You'll work closely with the team, both development and sales, to build competent, helpful content for our current and future customers. You ideally have experience marketing SaaS products to a highly technical audience in a non-slimy way.

Preferred location is Portland, Oregon, but we can make exceptions for the right person.

For a full list of positions, including internships, see https://appthwack.com/jobs

INTERESTED?

Please contact me directly: trent@appthwack.com
I can vouch for this. I've run ddwrt on all my routers for some time, but it seems like they're no longer the favorite, for many reasons.

If I could do it all again, I'd go for OpenWRT, though in my case that's just because OpenWRT has some features that ddwrt is lacking (e.g. native IPv6).
Just make sure you don't get the v3 version... I had a WNDR3700 v1 that was working great, needed to buy another one, and didn't check that the whole radio chipset changed with v3 and is not supported. Still works well with the stock firmware, but kinda disappointing...

http://wiki.openwrt.org/toh/netgear/wndr3700
Looks like the last time it traded below $500 was November 17th[1] - so everyone you know who is interested has only become interested in the past two weeks?

[1] http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/bitstampUSD#rg30ztgSzm1g10zm...
1993 vs 2013 (image)
I... want Rome to burn. The authoritarian, hierarchal power structures that exist in this country/world ("Rome") are in need of re-formation or collapse. I'm not interested in participating in that process though. I certainly would never have architected a system of the manner that exists, and I'm not interested in helping the a-holes who did do that debug it. I'd rather just live awesome, think, feel, and make cool stuff when I'm in the mood to do that.

The thing that concerns me about SF Bay Area Startup Ecosystem is that it is def. neither a meritocracy nor a technocracy. (Those systems, properly implemented allow great new things to come into the world, without the side effect of king-creation.) Right now, California is dynastic. Dynastic money, flowing into the hands of people who adopt a dynastic culture, and creating the weak sort of creations that dynastic people end up creating. It makes people rich, and dynastic, one startup team at a time. That's a problem for the world! Once the bulk of the genius-level people now tied up working on dynastic projects or on online advertising/email delivery for some behemoth company wake up to the true nature of the reality and start operating in it as true creators things will start to actually get interesting and awesome.

In the mean time I'll enjoy the delicious beer, food, and weather. And Tahoe once there's enough snow.
It's unlikely Nakamoto is actually Japanese, but I'd imagine a Japanese person would use American spellings considering it is the US that Japan deals with and they typically are taught American English.
The author's central point is still very misguided: "Specifically, watch legitimate transaction volume--I'd suggest only buying if it shows signs of seriously ramping up."

Markets are based on expectations about the future, which is tangentially related to present reality. Present reality is that many smart, well-funded people are working on merchant adoption.

By the time legitimate transaction volume ramps up the price will have baked it in months ahead of time.

Not saying today's price is unsustainable, but I would recommend buying as many bitcoins as you would bet on black at the roulette table during a weekend in Vegas. If you're not a betting person, get off HN and go read Reader's Digest or something.
Because it's based in Bulgaria and no one knows who actually owns it. But it's good software and one of the few places you can trade other currencies like Feathercoin and Litecoin with plenty of liquidity.
There's a reason LA has shorter commutes: because highways and car traffic don't scale, and subways do, so it's impossible to get as far as you could with a subway. Los Angelenos still have 45 minute commutes, they just don't get as far and burn a lot of petroleum getting there.
I have a DLINK DIR-615. Cheap, easy to install (just flash via webinterface) and nearly unbrickable. Although not very powerful, i find it is a nice device to try out new stuff.
> No one questions the value of gold, yet not many people
> use it to make purchases.

Gold is purchased and used to make art, jewelry, electronics, medical devices, and so on in addition to being hoarded as an investment / currency reserve. Those products have real tangible value. Very few people are interested in buying bitcoin just to use the bitcoin address as artwork, for example. Tulip bulbs had more actual value. At its peak, one tulip bulb cost around €25,000 and WAS being used for legitimate purchases: milk, cheese, cows, wine, etc. Even after the price of tulip bulbs crashed, you could still at least plant them and grow flowers. If bitcoin reaches that price and crashes to next to nothing, what could you use your bitcoin for?
I'm not sure why there wouldn't be conversion vehicles that could pull second duty on rails. For rail-less areas, it's a car on roads. When long haul/high density travel is required, merge onto rail to reduce friction and road costs.

Also, we will all have subscriptions to car services that drive a car scaled to fit your current trip need to your door. Some enthusiasts will still own a manual drive car.

The costs of building and maintaining roads will then be shifted to auto service conglomerates - which might end up being manufacturers as well. This will, in turn, optimize around profit margins for the services. Instead of construction firms blowing politicians, they'll be blowing the car service companies. Feasibly, you could see private spans of road.

Cars can stop looking like jet cabins and will look more like mass transit or RV's. Think more like European trains. I'd be interested to see if you don't end up with multi-compartment buses that operate a bit like an elevator. Reduced cost subscriptions could involve multiple pickups along a route. Again - optimizing the bottom line of transport services.

Auto brands shift market focus from consumers to fleet operators. Expect final conglomeration into verfy few brands, each with very utilitarian lines of vehicles. Interiors become focused on amenities, but also minimization of cost of ownership - more hotel than home.

People will own an array of accessories to provide comfort lost from the lack of ownership. People will be guided to see those not making use as anti-social or self-centered.

What will happen to shipping? Could we not bring/send autonomous service vehicles to warehouses to pick up and deliver large goods? Does this change the consumer experience from warehouse retailers and monster SUVs to smaller strips of showcase stores and/or mobile retailers that can use excess capacity of delivery vehicles to increase the value of their shopping experience? Say, ship multiple options, accessories, etc. which can be used to up-sell consumers at their home...

And what about cruising? People riding around in autonomous vehicles hooking up? Need a lift?

What about transport of illicit materials? Load a service car up with some goods and send it on its way. Who gets the blame? Subscription holder? Service?
Same. I've tried to warn them about this whole mess (even if the value is appreciating I think it's at best a risky investment and at worst partaking in an immoral scheme).

This article reiterates 2 of my favorites points --

1. the lack of real-world transactions, coupled with

2. the fact that these transactions are usually done via 3rd party processor or immediate conversion back to USD. If vendors had faith in it as an actually currency, they wouldn't feel the need to do so. This is not true adoption, this is simply an attempt at expanding one's market by accepting a tradable item.

Glad to see some more sobering articles emerging as I've been wondering why no one has coherently written these things. Most of the negative BTC articles on HN are poorly written and used as a straw man.
There are some practical limits to voltage conversion if you want to keep that high efficiency. Probably most important is that your switching frequency shouldn't be as high as it is in most small devices (because high freq. allows you to use smaller components).

In any case, as dfox mentions, most internal voltage level conversions won't be switched, because it adds complexity. They will be some form of linear regulation s.t. they can move between logic levels. That's different than moving from whatever high voltage is on your 150W USB line into a level that won't fry CMOS circuitry. There's a reason that the wall-->DC plug conversion usually happens in a brick on your power cable. Switched mode will be used as sparingly as possible, such as when you also need AC signals rectified, if you need both buck and boost depending on a battery or something, or if you need to be able to modify the control loop dynamically.

> those microwaves and kettles are getting up to 15A @ 120VRMS continuously, which works out to 1800W

Well that's kind of my point. Even at 1.8kW those devices don't need to draw 20A continuous (or even pulsed, because of the fuse). Basically no matter what you're doing, the copper losses are roughly fixed by the hardware. What you can control are heat dissipation and current levels, and it's a lot more fun to play with Ohm's law than try to fight against thermodynamics.
Spreecast - San Francisco - H1B Welcome - iOS Team Lead and iOS Engineers

Spreecast is the social video platform that connects people through video conversation. Our partners include ESPN, LinkedIn, VH1, Extra, CBC, and others. Our CEO previously started and sold StubHub. Our mission is to connect people through conversation. We believe that people obtain a deeper understanding of each other and a more emotional connection when they interact face-to-face.

Our upcoming app sends and receives video and audio in real time. We use lots of custom code since the iOS SDK does not support real time video. We're looking for engineers to join the iOS team. We're also looking for an iOS Team Lead.

We're always interested in generalist engineers as well, even though we don't have a job ad out. So if you're really good, send me an email (robert@spreecast.com)

More info at http://about.spreecast.com/jobs/
I really don't want to write this low-level code, or decide whether parallel or sequential implementations work best. Compilers targeted at particular environments can do this better.

My main takeaway from this is that most programming languages still fail at allowing the programmer to specify intent where a particular implementation is not desired - I cannot use the mathematical sum notation for the accumulator example and let the compiler choose the best implementation, instead I need to implement a particular array traversal or partitioning. And in situations where high level language constructs would allow a certain flexibility w.r.t. implementations and parallelism, usually this isn't taken advantage of by the compiler/interpreter and programmers even rely on that fact (e.g. map in Perl could work on list elements in any order or in parallel, but all hell would break loose if it actually did at some point because people are now used to sequential processing).
I used to strive for clever solutions. The shorter the better. I still like to look at them but I want them as far away as possible from my code base. Sure, if a solution is clever and efficient, while still readable, maintainable and easy to understand when documented properly, I'd use it. However, my general rule of thumb these days is: "Write this code, so an utter idiot can read it". Because that's what's going to happen: One day I'll have to read it again, and I'll feel like an idiot, trying to understand what once went through my brain.

That's something that took me way too long to learn and I feel that novice programmers should embrace that more. We all like to feel like Einstein sometimes, but a big code base is not the place for solutions only we can understand... temporarily.
"anoything more than inconveniencing Miranda at Heathrow for a few hours" > I am not sure if you're deliberately leaving out details or are just ignorant. The British Government charged him under the 2009 Terrorist Act for espionage activity. The authorities also confiscated the electronics equipments he was carrying including his mobile phone, laptop, camera, memory sticks, and DVDs. And he was forced to tell the passwords for his phone and laptop. Thank god the data on the machine was encrypted.

Just a advice, next time spend some time on Google before classifying serious events as "Hyperbole" and "Monthy Python sketch".
Even if it all gets buried under high-level visualisations, it's better to have fewer moving parts and a smaller cognitive model in case you do need to dive in. But the premise of d3 is that you tweak your visualisations. There are other libraries like raphael that are supposed to be higher level.

But there are many times you need to create something new. At least I've had to, maybe I'm atypical. And when that time comes, I prefer manipulating familiar HTML and AngularJS that I also already know, than needing to understand yet another toolkit's approach to bindings.
Are we even sure it is one person? I've heard the algorithms and techniques used make it probable that more than one person was behind this. I would have no idea where to begin searching so anyone's guess is a good as mine.
I like your comparison -- nobody hats yet drawn the parallels between the topic and the startup culture, which makes a lot of sense. It reminds me of a quote I once heard attributed to Bruce Sterling: "Start ups are full of people working hard to make other people rich -- baby boomer financiers, mainly."
A laptop is a good option for x86 network stuff. Relatively low power with a battery back-up. I would never use a desktop PC, too expensive.
FDA identifies the idiot gene: 23andMe users
Actually we can say what we like when we like and to whom we like.

The only thing is there may be a consequence of doing so.

The inner workings of the human rights act pretty much does nothing to prevent any consequences but it doesn't stop you speaking and neither can any law. It might stop you speaking the second time but rarely the first. The internet is a big enabler of speaking to lots of people before you have a chance to be censored.

The Guardian is using that fact to drum up embarrassment and wailing the terms according to those who wish to prevent them from speaking whilst ignoring them.

The government are trying to stop them speaking again and trying to prevent people from speaking before they know they want to speak.

we're sitting here echoing the first words again and again.

Ultimately we don't live by any laws. The law only issues consequences. The law is powerless here and the Guardian know it.
I don't think liability insurance on motorcycles goes up very much. You still can't cause too much damage to a car, even if a human driver is much more likely to crash than computer.
Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen paint a pretty scary picture for drones in their book The New Digital Age. They predict a similarity between how terrorists and guerrilla warriors use cheap consumer technology now, such as cell phones in IEDs, and how they might use drones in the future as their prices continue to drop. "Imagine [a drone] that is fitted with a homemade bomb on its undercarriage, producing a whole new level of domestic terror that is just around the corner."
It's still just words.
"To me as a non-native speaker, the difference between 'him' and 'them' seems academic but hey, if it gets us scores of female contributors, who am I to object?"

I sense some subtle irony in that statement.
Over the past 150 years or so we went from ~90% of the labor force working in agriculture to between 1 and 10% working in agriculture.

That's a shift of about 80% over two generations.
From the article:

low transaction costs for worldwide commerce would still be great.

I'm late to the whole bitcoin phenomenon, but here is what I really like about crypto-currencies. My US credit union (not even a commercial bank) charges me 40 dollars for an international wire transfer to Canada, and the bank on the other end will charge me 15 dollars. If this were done in bitcoin or a similar currency? Nothing, as far as I can tell, if you do it through the right exchange. And that's how it should be.

I suspect that banks don't even know to be worried at this point.
The Indie Revolution
It already is. Look up OnStar. Built into all GM cars for the past several years.
Another Bitcoin crash is happening right now
Perhaps a large sell order, but price just dropped from $1150 to $850.
I'm not so sure about this. That's like saying, "People will always have AOL accounts." Well, eventually they became irrelevant. In addition, there are other ways it could end. Perhaps a government finds a way to shut it down. Or there's some kind of fraud. Or perhaps they become a victim of their own success, and someone else creates a better version.
I normally love SA's writing, but this opinion piece is really narrow minded and I think misses the point.

cs702 had a fantastic comment a few days ago in another thread [1]:

Bitcoin befuddles experts who analyze it from a narrow perspective,
because it is not just a new medium of exchange or a new store of
value: it is also a new kind of point-of-sale payment system (one
that doesn't require payment processors), a new kind of global
financial transfer system (one that doesn't require financial
institutions), a new kind of time-stamping certification system
(one that doesn't require notaries or county clerks), a new kind of
contract-enforcing mechanism (one that doesn't require lawyers), etc.

With rising global adoption, many new kinds of applications are likely
to be created to take advantage of the Bitcoin network, the design of
which even specifies a built-in script for defining and executing new
types of transactions involving any arbitrary number of parties.

In short, Bitcoin is a technology platform -- one that is benefiting
from network effects.

It may fail as "money" (in a narrow sense) and still succeed as a
global platform.

Even from SA's narrow perspective, it's not clear why "legitimate transactions" is a requirement for success. As long as there is a large enough community of people who want to use it to transfer value for any reason, it'll continue to sustain itself.

The one takeaway he offers in closing is spot on though: "Just as it’d be stupid to convert all your dollars to bitcoin, it’d be stupid to not pay attention."

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6810839
Satoshi Nakamoto is...
I've had a bad impression with the v3 release. In the past year I've had two hardware failures and recently had an issue with the Netgear firmware causing upwards of 80% packet loss. Switching to DD-WRT fixed the packet loss issue. The v3+ routers also only have DD-WRT builds so far as I can tell, and switching to another firmware is damn near impossible once you switch to DD-WRT. That said, with DD-WRT it works and works well so long as the hardware doesn't fail.
You should read before commenting. Ben never threatened anyone. Stop spreading this falsehood.
Still not supported properly in OpenWRT, all these years later. (yes, I've got one sitting on the shelf waiting for this purpose)
This would be a fun time to talk about the power of `Monoid`s.

`Monoid` is a popular Haskell typeclass because the algebraic model for it, the monoid, is simple, pervasive, and powerful. A monoid is composed of three things: a type, a combiner, and a null value.

Monoid = (T, <>, e)

And it must follow the laws that the null value (`e`) is the zero of the combiner (`<>`) on both sides and that the combiner is associative.

e <> x == x
x <> e == x
x <> y <> z == x <> (y <> z) == (x <> y) <> z

Examples include (Integer, +, 0) or (Integer, *, 1) or (List, append, []).

The trick is that if you are trying to fold up a law-abiding Monoid of any kind then you know two things (a) you have a default value which you can insert wherever you like to no effect and (b) you can reassociate your expression (rotate your evaluation tree) to be any shape you like at all.

((((1 + 1) + 1) + 1 ) + 1) -- left
==
(1 + (1 + (1 + (1 + 1)))) -- right
==
((1 + 1) + (1 + 1) + (1 + 0)) -- parallel

By encoding these laws into the type system, you provide information to the compiler which it could theoretically use to rearrange and optimize your computations on the fly. To my knowledge, this isn't done anywhere yet, but knowledge of those laws does allow you to confidently build efficient parallel algorithms. For instance, we know that a dictionary full of monoidal values is itself a monoid.

instance Monoid v => Monoid (Map k v)

We take the empty dictionary as `e` and let our combiner be the union on keys where values are combined using their own monoidal combiner. This forms a really nice basis for a large class of map-reduce algorithms where the mapping step results in some kind of dictionary-like summarization of values.
I use AirPort hardware all over the place and the one thing that annoys me to no end is the fact that I have to reboot the thing any time I change any configuration. This means that adjustments have to be more carefully planned and take much longer than with any other hardware.
Interesting. So this money is cursed right now? Satoshi either de-anonymizes himself or doesn't have a chance to use it?
War should not be one soldier’s private burden