skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
There was a write up about this a while ago.
http://www.inmotionhosting.com/support/website/ssh/speed-up-...
It probably does not. It is perfectly legal to damage anyone if you do not violate any laws. Given that IBM can probably show a court order, if necessary a retroactive one from the NSA.

In order to get a conviction, shareholders would have to prove :
1) that such cooperation existed
2) that it violated existing laws
3) that they personally suffered losses as a result.

3 looks to me hard to prove by itself, but the real problem is of course condition 2. An action that was the result of directly following a court order is not illegal, not even if it violates laws (that's the whole point of court orders, after all).

I would be interested in what would happen if they did get a conviction. This would be a weird situation. Shareholders own IBM, after all. So any damages paid would effectively be a transfer from one part of their ownership to another, effectively a zero-worth transaction.
Gun bag: good art makes us uncomfortable
Ahh, so these startups are not totally accepted, they're just the ones to get through the first part of the process. Sorry I misunderstood. Thanks for answering.
Venture investments are made by venture capitalists, not to venture capitalists. You're comparing apples and oranges.
Yes, I understand you would have to get widespread acceptance of the new client. I don't think it is likely (hence 'fracture the currency').

I didn't say cash was always better than bitcoin, I just pointed out that it is very hard to beat on settlement times (and you revised your comment to say fiat currency rather than cash). Maybe I replied to an early draft.
All serious economists disregard the Austrian school. And with good reason - they're kooks.

There was a central bank during the great depression but the US was still on the gold standard until 1933. When it went off the gold standard the great depression stopped getting worse and started getting better: http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2011/09/yes-recovery-in-the-gr...
Effective & Visual Story Telling (in 5 easy steps)
It has already been said, but this is just a point release. If you keep your Debian system up to date (which you should) you'll only get a few new packages.

See also https://wiki.debian.org/DebianReleases/PointReleases
You're awfully presumptuous.

The global economy functions with many, many different currencies, nearly all of which are managed by a central bank. It's widely accepted that currencies are best that which are regionally segmented, because the qualities and monetary needs of different economies tend to vary locally. See wikipedia on Optimal Currency Area.

Thus, we consider individual currencies on a case by case basis. By almost every conventional and widely-accepted measure, bitcoin is a terrible currency with little chance of remaining stable. a.) it's region agnostic b.) hugely speculative c.) inelastic, practically constant supply d.) difficult to centrally manage.

Please, tell me more about economic history.
you would not buy surgery using this currency if you can avoid it since it would gain value in a possibly near future. So while people would still buy when prices fall, but with a preference given to other currencies.

Note: I am no expert.
> There's a fixed quantity of it like gold and gold worked as a currency for a very long time.

And that time has passed, the world moved on.
That reads like a credo.
I'm impressed by your collection [1]. Since this is a entrepreneur forum, would you mind describing your solution's process - from design to sourcing? Thanks

[1] https://somethingnewbridal.com/collections
if your customers are governments, I think your prices are missing one or more 0s
As a contrast, Steven Ragnarok has a interesting talk about teaching ruby with objects [1].

Whether it's appropriate to start with an OO language I guess is another question, but I think done the right way, starting with OO isn't as hard as people think.

[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNbBC2pSiVw
Kill Off Software Patents
I think it's best to incorporate your own natural rhythms, to the extent that you can and still complete your work. You said you can do 6 hours of concentrated work, so after that, why not take a break for as long as it takes to refresh and then go back and do anothe hour or two work, on the less demanding, "administrative" tasks.

By the end of the week, you may find that you don't "need" to work additional hours on the weekend. . .at least not every weekend.

Also, experiment with the times of day that you are most productive. You may find that at different times of the day. And remember that you may not always need 40 hours in a week to feel productive. Other weeks, you may have the energy, desire and drive to work for 60 hours.
You've missed the point.

From the article: "When prices fall, people put off buying things. And when people put off buying things, companies put off investing. And then the economy slumps—and keeps slumping. "

I will make a more specific claim: the author is arguing that when the price of things in a given currency fall, people delay purchasing. This can be re-stated that as the ratio of money to goods declines, so too will the purchase of goods.

The ratio of money to a specific good declining can happen in one of two ways. Either

1) the currency as a whole appreciates in value relative to everything in the economy (usually called "deflation") or

2) the good becomes cheaper to extract, manufacture, grow or otherwise produce which then allows business to price it less expensively

In either case 1 or 2 the ratio of money to a good has decreased. We normally would say it has "gotten cheaper"

Computers are a good which has gotten cheaper in real terms and nominal terms and especially in absolute terms. A desktop computer used to cost $2000 or more for anything decent (adjusted for inflation perhaps $5000 or more), today a quite respectable laptop can be purchased for $800 which has hundreds if not thousands of times the capability of the $2000 machine from 20 years ago.

The world as it exists today does have a computer industry, in fact it's huge. Compared to 1993 it's at least 10x larger, and surely quite a bit more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Personal_computers_(millio...

So according to the author's "when things get cheaper people stop buying" argument the computer industry should have been shrinking over the last 20 years, not growing. But we can clearly see from the world that exists today that the computer industry has grown over the last 20 years.

How should I reconcile the author's argument with the reality I see around me? I feel I have no choice but to conclude that the notion that "falling prices causes people to reduce their purchases" might not be a universal truth, or perhaps it contains only a little truth inside it.
I bought mine directly from inforce (http://www.inforcelive.com/index.php?route=product/product&f...). There are a few similar boards like the odroid-xu, but the IFC6410 is currently the only one with both SATA and real gigabit ethernet, not something attached via USB.
And it uses the GPU with the best open source driver support (https://github.com/freedreno/freedreno/wiki/Ifc6410), so it runs the full Gnome 3 desktop and even weston/wayland.

There's a small community forming around the board, so there's some degree of support available. But currently it's not comparable to what's available for the Raspberry PI, you still need decent linux skills to set it up. But that's half the fun anyways.
Yeah, a little real punishment could go a long way towards preventing future abuse.
I'm wondering if this is true, and if so, why? It's the same winner take most dynamics. In most fields, like disk storage, it was extremely competitive and most profits disappeared.

VC in general has poor returns for funds outside of the top 10 or 20.
In the real world, these (and other) programming principles are abused to no end. OOP is used blindly as some kind of magic that is expected to produce a good system by itself. More objects, more abstraction is not always good. What will you do when you need to debug trough 5 levels of abstraction meaning 37 levels of subroutine calls just to reach the critical code? What will you do when some guy encapsulates his code in i class as into a black box, but then leaves the company, leaving the class unmaintained? You will still need to deal with it, you will still need to debug through it. And the added levels of abstraction will make it more uncertain where the problem lies. As i've seen recently on a project, the blind enforcing of various OOP principles was responsible for the messy code, i would say 90% of code was in-house made framework/boilerplate, and the important parts were scattered around that. I'm only fan of one programming principle, and that's KISS. Or more precisely i believe that: when you can express something with the programming language directly, don't build abstractions on top of the language to express that thing. When someone else looks at your code, he will only need to know the programming language and read the code, and he will need to learn less about your custom abstractions.
I can't help but observe, with a sort of grim humor, that this fellow's resume now consists of international unwarranted espionage that threatens to upend the very foundations of our constitutional republic...and organic mayo entrepreneurship.
Mohammad Said Jesus Was a White Man… Will the Left Condemn Mohammad, Too?
> It's as if the author completely disregards the fact that the Austrian school exists at all.

Because they don't really, they're cranks, not a serious field of study. The Austrian school is equivalent to the flat earth society. Their answer to every possible economic issue is the same, the magic market will heal itself. When you have one answer for everything, you don't get to call yourself a serious field of study.
Obviously we need to bring back poll tests to prevent the sheeple from voting and ruining things for the rest of us.
I actually prefer making ( and ) be active characters that expand, in math mode, to \left( and \right) -- as long as I never need them for anything else, I'm happy.
Eventually, academic papers should be interactive because taking advantage of electronic media can communicate so much more.

See this talk on "Media for Thinking the Unthinkable" by Brett Victor: http://vimeo.com/67076984

There still have to be a bunch of changes before we get there.
Back up now. I'm very surprised that HN gave them any problems, even on an underpowered machine.
A couple of alternatives you might enjoy:

http://www.stat.uni-muenchen.de/~leisch/Sweave/

http://orgmode.org/worg/org-contrib/babel/

These don't fix all the problems mentioned, but they definitely fix this one "It is grossly non-interoperable with other modern scientific tools, and mainly it is unable to embed interactive (i.e. “non-dead”) content generated by other tools.".

But why prefer Latex to HTML? Latex makes a beautiful, well-structured document every time. I don't think I've ever made something beautiful in HTML.
You can also add Duda.IO to the list: http://duda.io/
I've been working full time for myself for 18 months now and can see some similarities (and I have been working this weekend despite just moving house and should be unpacking).

My tips would be the following, but ultimately everyone is different:

- Don't be afraid of doing a 9-5. If you find that a struggle, it's generally suggesting that the work isn't engaging enough.

- Don't work weekends, or at least every weekend. You'll soon start to resent the personal time lost if ever you felt the need for a career change.

- Make sure you can get out the house. I rent a desk in a converted chapel in a cemetery and absolutely love going to work.

- If you spent time on weekends coding, then it suggests coding is a hobby as well as a job. You may have side projects or just want to learn something new. Don't sacrifice this time for your day job. It's probably one of the rare qualities that actually makes you good at what you do.

- An hour of work outside of 9-5 is usually preceded with an hour of "I must sit down and do some work" followed by an hour of "what was it I should do now that I stopped working" - so expect a 3 hour mental drain for work during your time off.

- Do you want to be doing this in 5 to 10 years time? If not, what do you want to do instead, then do that.

Your schedule may work for you, but just keep a look out for other areas of your life being affected and recognise the source. You'll find your fiancee will probably be the to give you signals.
Hi there, thanks for the comment.

I love the idea about working out my own natural rhythm, this is certainly something I want to experiment and tweak over time.
Citation.
This is an interesting article, thanks for sharing. Your summary does not quite reflect the article though. You say "In fact, it's been known for months that the DEA receives intercepts from the NSA in such volume that they have an office devoted to handling them (the DEA's "Special Operations Division")", which to me created the impression that the NSA was funneling large amounts of information about US citizens to the DEA.

However, the article actually says: "...two dozen arms of the government working with the Special Operations Division, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency.", and later that "the Special Operations Division of the DEA funnels information from overseas NSA intercepts, domestic wiretaps, informants and a large DEA database of telephone records to authorities nationwide to help them launch criminal investigations of Americans. The DEA phone database is distinct from a NSA database disclosed by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden." [emphasis mine]

It's quite possible that the NSA passed only occasional information about non-US citizens - it's impossible to tell from that article - if that's the case, then to many people they're acting within their mandate.

I'm not trying to defend the NSA, and I'm deeply troubled by the implications of mass surveillance. But it's important I think to be clear about the claims we're making since otherwise it's easy for people to dismiss us.
The author ignores several advantages of LaTeX, one being: a commitment to forward-compatibility. On any recent version of LaTeX, I can still compile documents from decades ago with a reasonable chance that they still render the same.
If there were a browser plugin that applied Knuth's linebreaking algorithm for printouts, this would be more appealing.
I agree with ThinkGeek needing to go back to their roots.

Purchased many things over the years from them but nothing recently. I have always been on their mailing list but now in the last two months get an email from them it seems like almost everyday. About to unsubscribe...
there is an advantage to the traditional approach of fixed times - you are not giving everything they can get to your employer. and i think that is, simply because it is how things have always happened, considered fair.

instead, what you seem to be doing is giving as much as possible to your employer. now it's difficult to separate american / startup culture from everything else, but it seems to me that is not fair.

you are entitled to a life outside work. and it doesn't have to be a second rate life. your time isn't yours only when you are exhausted. your time isn't yours only when you are useless to your employer. it's just, and fair, and right that sometimes, in your time, you feel smart, and useful. that you have time to learn, to explore new ideas. and, flip side, it's fair if some of the time you're paid isn't top time. people are not always at their peak and there never was any "agreement" that they should be.

so i think, quite seriously, that you're wrong here.

[i work from home, and i start at 9am, take an hour off at lunch and finish at 5 or 5.30, weekdays.]

[edit: ah, ok, sorry i misunderstood.]
http://www.maymounkov.org/js/shatter.js

Why would you do this? I thought this was an attempt to troll typesetting nuts, but its all over your personal site.
Can anyone point me to a step by step for how to get debian running on a macbook air? I've googled it and tried at least 4 different approaches, to no avail. I'm talking about a macbookair3,1 (late 2010 11").
You can compile LaTeX to two different output formats if you want to. Sure, you'd have 2 different output files, but e.g. for slides, thats done very often.
Deflation in that sector has led to investment and growth. I would argue that the impetus is on you to prove that economics isn't scale-free.

In other words, what works for an individual with thousands of dollars also works for a company with millions. I.e. that math doesn't change as the numbers get bigger. $1 + $1 is $2 the same as $100b + $100b = $200b. If an individual accrues wealth by saving and investing (how most people do it) that's basic arithmetic. Expenditures less than income over a period of time. Works for companies large and small.

If we believe that this works at scales from the individual which is an organization of one person all the way up to organizations of hundreds of thousands or millions, why would it suddenly stop working that way once it's a "whole economy" that's nothing more than the organization of all individuals?
Take for example, proper use of a unique_ptr<lock_guard<std::mutex> > in C++. You can pass around the unique_ptr, and guarantee that you are in "unique ownership" of a particular lock at compile-time.

In C++, you may not be able to prove "the lack of race conditions", but you can prove things like "I'm the only one who is holding onto this mutex right now" thanks to stuff like unique_ptr... which tracks that stuff. These primitive proofs are performed at compiletime, and have little-to-no effect on runtime as well.

Stronger languages with stronger type-systems (ie: Haskell) can prove / disprove which code has side-effects... because you've explicitly passed the Monad around. (Note: Code without side-effects is guaranteed to not have race conditions).

So yes, there are important things you can prove using the type-system. More importantly, it is the compiler's job to automatically conduct these proofs every compile cycle.
I think very well. :)

Scalar does not deal with plain text as math. At all. Plain text is good on Macs with keyboard as it allows very quick, familiar and intuitive copy/paste and document restructuring, but is terrible on touch screens. That was the main motivation for me to start the project, BTW.

Commenting system is different as well (Soulver simply ignores all non-parseable text).
I do think a project website is a great complement to an academic paper for collecting all relevant information into one place (author info, supplementary material, citation information). I know most Computer Graphics authors have web pages for their papers that include the paper, accompanying video, reference information and very occasionally a demo. I don't think it is a good replacement for academic papers however.

Academic papers are intended to be static, finalized content so I don't see the need for anything more than hyperlinks, and even hyperlinks are problematic because the content they link to disappears so often. Because of this PDF makes a great export format because it is nearly as old as HTML, standardized and you know your paper will always look the same. And for generating academic paper PDFs there is nothing that produces better looking papers than LaTeX.

As for standardization, TeX is older (1978), more standard (a single definitive reference implementation), and more stable (no feature changes since 1989). LaTeX is not quite as stable (last release was in 1994 with a new version planned for some time in the future) but I would argue it is still more stable than HTML.
Interesting. The only email that I had from Id was one that "We" (Me and other guy) was violating Id EULA & Copyright... We was making a Unreal Tournmanet DOOM Total Conversion mod (original DooM in UT !!!). Obviously we must to stop... It was a few moths after DooM 3 launch.
thomasz's point was that nothing in your example was "Human inherits Mammal".

As kazagistar succinctly puts it, "Inheritance is not taxonomy." Your house analogy isn't taxonomy; that's why it's correct.
The Bitcoin Central Bank’s perfect monetary policy
Well done, OP.

I forsee Apple and Google (and Microsoft?) devices will increasingly be aimed solely at consuming content. This will be the "interactive television" of the future.

If you haven't noticed, it is not easy is it to turn an iPad into a router/server. Perhaps it was not meant to be. It is an "interactive TV", for sharing and consuming content. These type of devices are not under the control of users; they are ultimatly controlled by large corporate interests, in the same way that TV is the medium of government and large corporations. That is not "revolutionary", just business as usual.

As such, I posit that it is another computer -- the computer that retrieves data from the internet and sends the content to your TV-like device -- that is the most interesting, and hence the most "revolutionary". That is your router/server.
The OP, a programmer, calls it "one of [his] best hacks."

This I believe is the "PC" of the future. The "PC" was at one time a revolutionary device that brought the power of computers, once reserved only for those who could purchase and administer mainframes, to the home and business. Where would Apple, Google if not for the PC revolution?

I believe the home router/server (not your beautiful form factor, high priced device) is, going forward, the "PC" of the future. This is the device that you can program for free, that can run open source software, including an open source OS of your choice, that you the user can fully control, and where real innovation can occur. This is where the "PC revolution" can continue.

The OP says he does not see why there should be a separation between programming and administration (e.g., a subset of programming that, allong with basic networking know-how, allows the user to install and configure her own "server" at home).

As a user, if I could only master one and had to choose between the two, I'd pick administration over programming. This is because I feel it is more useful to me as a user (like the OP, "one of my best hacks"). As such, I am biased toward administration and believe if there is to be another "PC revolution" I believe it should be focused on the home server/router and, if so, must be lead by those who can at least administer computers performing these crucial functions.
If your salary is priced in USD, you're really just being paid in USD, not Bitcoin. When you're ready to accept a fixed amount of Bitcoin every pay period, then you're paid in Bitcoin.
Even if that would be OK, I haven't heard of "capital punishment by drone" as execution method yet. (And add to that "also include anyone he happens to be with at the moment of execution because terrorism")
Probably algorithmic trading.
> by the very nature of the restricted work environment at intelligence agencies, it's not reasonable to expect him to have a complete picture.

How is that different from "he lacks credibility" ?
Great post. I've got an old WD MyBook lying around, I should try and get some use out of the thing.

You don't have to hack it too much in order to get a 'full' linux on there. You can enable SSH access on the system via the web UI. From there, you can set up a simple packaging system to install most other common binaries (and a functioning build environment to add anything else)

Take a look at: http://mybookworld.wikidot.com/optware for instructions.
The right of sovereign nations to kill foreigners on foreign soil is well-established

Only in times of war and with carefully described conditions (Geneva conventions). Declaring an eternal war on civilians everywhere will not end well, and claiming the right to assassinate worldwide will rapidly erode US power and allies worldwide.

I disagree that a trial in absentia is worse or more dangerous than killing on suspicion, without trial or appeal.