skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Do you really think that at 3 star restaurants, where they have about 5 staff per customer, they would serve Nespresso if they thought it isn't good coffee?

It doesn't matter what I think, you can read what they said. Of course it's not Starbucks quality level, but it's not great coffee, just good enough for the other qualities to win over better tasting coffees.

Can you show me any evidence that better coffee can be obtained in a reasonable other way?

Sure, the way multiple coffee shops do so here: you buy a decent Italian espresso machine (such as a La Marzocco), you get a few baristas with a couple of decades or more of experience serving coffee, buy decent beans and grind them yourself daily.

Of course, this isn't reasonable if you're a restaurant which serves a few dozen cups a day, which are just a small part of the whole "product". But for a dedicated coffee shop, which might serve more than a hundred per day, the costs are reasonable.

I know it is romantic to think that you can make better coffee yourself

I didn't say that. I have a capsule machine myself. But I don't need to make better coffee to know that better coffee is made.

Nespresso burns and grinds and vacuum seals coffee that is then placed into a machine that delivers a fixed amount of water at a particular speed and temperature. All the parameters in this process have been tuned by professionals backed up by panels of taste testers.

Sure, Nespresso is a great value for its price. But nothing in that process is better than what I'm describing.

Why would a restaurant be able to do better, let alone significantly better, at a reasonable price and effort?

Not restaurant, coffee shop. And I don't know what you consider "reasonable". The reason they do better is because they have different constraints in terms of space, marginal costs per cup and importance of the coffee to their line up, which allows them to invest more in it.

Coffee simply doesn't have this.

Grinding many days in advance, even if vacuum sealed, does have an effect on the taste.
Features like: Locking. Ease of transfers in and out. Properly authorizing requests for changes. Customer record privacy. Providing their own zone hosting. Not injecting evil wildcards/redirects. Supporting more than the basic record types when hosting the zones.

I'm sure there are other things that could be added.
Senator Leahy tries to make Talking about Computer Hacking a Serious Crime
There are various inconsistencies between browsers (including between version of IE) when you do not explicitly set the type attribute of a button tag. Some will default to it being a submit button and some will default it to being a "button" button. In the instances where we hit this problem making sure to specify a type seems to make things more consistent.
It's a shit source for a shit story that attracts a bunch of shits posts from people who I would describe as utter shits.

There is nothing interesting in this submission. Perhaps so ething mily interesting wod be how they were caught, or how some company is trying to stop attacks like that, or etcetc.

But this?
Your use FUD to justify unwarranted spying and data collection for the use of prosecution is stunning. Not to mention it's a violation of the constitution.
Disclosure: I was a student in the first round of this course and prior to enrolling, only vaguely knew of Cody as 'that guy who hacked hotel locks'.

For anyone considering this course, it's well worth the price of admission. Especially if your company pays :) Cody challenges each student to think like a breaker. The course is very hands on. I'd plan to spend at least 5 hours a week on the coursework.

As a result of what I've learned, I've found numerous bugs within internal apps at my company, bugs within random email survey links, bugs within vendor code. Bugs, bugs everywhere!

My only nitpick with the course was that there were some unforeseen scheduling issues that affected the pace and caused it to extend out to > 12 weeks in length. But I attribute most of those to being part of the first/beta run. I have confidence that Cody will get everything worked out in future iterations.

It doesn't take long to see that Cody really does have a genuine interest in teaching others about security. His willingness to share his knowledge is a benefit to anyone willing to learn.
Toronto Made Short Film Trailer for Weak Armor
Internet Catpital? Like, for lolcats?
That's some great feedback, thanks!

I don't want to edit my previous game to be true to the challenge, but I'll definitely keep this in mind for my next games.
And third-place winner of the second whale challenge :-)
https://www.kaggle.com/c/the-icml-2013-whale-challenge-right...

This second challenge actually featured a different dataset with different hydrophones used etc. But even without retraining (which was rather trivial to do at that point; the hard work of finding the right hyper parameters had already been done), I would have still scored well above 90%. And I think Nick Kridler reported the same.

So overfitting yes, but not too much considering there was a different sensor.
Could you perhaps show some of your code or screencast so others can learn along with?
I think Facebook is making mistakes.

Adwords grew explosively, but relative to the expectations of Facebook, Google looks patient. Adwords didn't start off with ten million customers with endless budgets. They started off letting people buy $20 worth of ads at 5¢-50¢ per click. Some people figured out ways of selling ebooks or whatnot at a profit and figured out things like split testing, conversion tracking and such. They were then qualified to be consultants and go door to door to electricians or removalists who got a good ROI and eventually allowed the consultants to spend an extra $350 per month. Then they hired an in house 'PPC Specialist' who spend their week figuring out new ways to profitably send Google more money. A lot of the campaigns set up 5 years ago are still active. I worked as a consultant back in 2007 and most of the campaigns I set up are still running.

It took some time to figure out that Adwords works for dentists but not for burgers or detergents. That wasn't immediately obvious. Burgers and detergents were the big spenders of the advertising world and a platform that didn't work for them was a toy.

There were a lot of ultimately stupid campaigns started. Half the initial customers tried to get a better CPM (cost per 1000 impressions) by optimizing for a low click through rate, benefiting no one. Google killed this off by creating adrank. The other stupid advertisers were eventually outcompeted by those who could turn their click into revenue more efficiently.

My point here is that Google put a tool out there. It took time before users (advertisers) were good enough at using it to put pressure on the bids and bring up prices. Someone figured out how to sell car insurance. Comparison sites were created. They signed deals with insurance companies. Ecosystems developed.

Facebook ads aren't useless. They just work for some stuff. The advertisers just need time to figure out what works. If you are having a town fete and want parents with small children to know you have a petting zoo, Facebook ads will get you customers physically driving to you for cents. Incredible value.

Facebook is just impatient. They keep moving the posts in an attempt to find a formula rather than making good tools, leaving them out there and letting advertisers find the formulas.
Demonoid Returns, BitTorrent Tracker is Now Online
I just checked out nearby.lk's Facebook page and it's no wonder that they weren't getting performance out of Facebook Ads.

Facebook Ads are amazing. Nothing else has come close for us both for direct conversion and likes. Likes are far cheaper to acquire and can be extremely performant if used in the right ways.

Facebook has a huge learning curve though. As with all things, if your FB page doesn't have "page/audience fit" before the ad campaign, it won't after the ad campaign either.
Bad recruiters are a stereotypical joke for good reason, but ones who pay attention are gold. Keep it up :-)
An interesting read on this topic at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK9579/:

"When personally identifiable health information, for example, is disclosed to an employer, insurer, or family member, it can result in stigma, embarrassment, and discrimination. Thus, without some assurance of privacy, people may be reluctant to provide candid and complete disclosures of sensitive information even to their physicians. Ensuring privacy can promote more effective communication between physician and patient, which is essential for quality of care, enhanced autonomy, and preventing economic harm, embarrassment, and discrimination (Gostin, 2001; NBAC, 1999; Pritts, 2002)."

I disagree with "outside of a doctor's visit health data is virtually worthless" for the above reasons.
I was just about to ask how well this would work as a companion to tapl. I'm still very early in the book so the notation isn't indecipherable, but I'm sure it'll get there soon.
Smart Glasses, Without the Bulky Lenses
You get it, swombat (at least in my humble opinion). Thank you for posting that, I hope that it helps some people understand the distinction between currency and assets that produce returns.

edit: Just thinking further on it... I tend to approach things by thinking of pathological cases. In the case of a deflationary or flat currency, I think currency hoarding is a rational response economically even though it's unproductive and leads to high concentrations of wealth. On the other end, inflation that's too high will lead to an economy that is very illiquid and prone to solvency crises. There is a high incentive to minimize cash on hand and maximize debt. In my lifetime I've really come around on the value of a managed and low inflation to having a productive society.
I, for one, like this workflow which is simple and elicits collaboration and creates history: http://scottchacon.com/2011/08/31/github-flow.html
This could be another vector for transmitting data out of a device without detection.
Yeah, because the drug war is enforced strictly. I mean, look at all the well-off white people going to prison at the same rate as poor black people.
Almost all of my data structure or algorithms use has been in the following three cases:

- Programming interviews

- Programming contests

- Exams

Doing well in those things is desirable to me, so knowing data structures and algorithms has been useful in those cases.
"Money is a medium of exchange for wealth, it is not a store of wealth."

Disagree. To be a medium of exchange, money must have "holding" value (because money does not circulate, but simply switches holders: http://blog.oleganza.com/post/43378777734/on-circulation-of-...). The liquidity of money is in how many people want to hold it in their cash balances. The more people want it - the bigger value of the total supply (regardless if it's slowly shrinking or growing). The more and longer people want to hold cash, the bigger liquidity - the more "wealth" you can reliably "move" from one person to another. E.g. Bitcoin valuation is pretty small right now, so people can't use Bitcoin (yet) to make multi-billion purchases. Because to make multi-billion purchase one of the parties must hold billions and another must be willing to hold billions (and then find others to who give them if they need in the future).

So the money to be a good liquid medium of exchange must be a good store of wealth. And the more wealth it is "storing", the better medium of exchange it is.
Iptables ClusterIP target as a load balancer for PXC, PRM, MHA and NDB
The fact that this question is being asked illustrates that the Godaddy hate in the tech community is not as strong as some would think (hope?)
The nice thing about these convolutional neural nets is that they're not convoluted at all. ;-) It's basically feed the raw data, in this case spectrograms. Traditional approaches in this field are usually much more convoluted, because they involve a complex feature extraction part. Which tends to be specific to a certain species.
This is a really salient point. I would go a step further and ask whether or not that $100 is better in the hands of a wealthy person (in the context of this article - a person who would put that money to work in the local/national economy to make more of it), or in those of the poor person. Certainly the latter can put it to great use buying necessities of life, but in the hands of the former it might increase the latter's ability to find a productive job. I'm not really a fan of trickle-down economics, but I think it's more realistic than Robin Hood economics, for the reason you espouse.

I agree that in theory it would be awesome if wealth redistribution worked the way we think it might. I'd love to live in a Trekkie world where everybody seems to have all needs and wants met. In reality, redistribution is very much like throwing money away, considering the long-term impact of such. I think people are mostly either wealth generators or destroyers. Money in the hands of a benevolent generator has the possibility of benefiting many (even though in practice only a few wealth generators actually benefit the average person). In the hands of a destroyer it benefits only them, and only for a short time. Trickle down sucks, but it might be the most realistic option.

That said, while redistribution doesn't work, getting rid of tax shelters and deductions for the wealthy would.
Winnie the Pooh needs to be lean
We Will See Malware Attacks on Internet-Connected Cars, Expert Warns
Not sure if Grunt or Gulp do this, but Make will only run compilation if there have been changes since the last time it ran. Not something you're going to get with writing your own shell script.
Strawman. Safety net programs aren't about "wealth redistribution", they're income redistribution. Further, there are social factors and goals beyond aggregate economic growth to consider.
I feel like real time strategy games makes me think a lot about investment and a sort of compounding interest (making workers, expanding), investing resources in tech vs. army vs. making all armies better in the long haul (upgrading army), attacking early and have a worse late-game v.s. playing defensively ...

Some RTS are, to a surprising degree, a lot about economy and balancing the short term v.s. the long term when it comes to your own resources.
My issue with stuff like this is this: I don't get paid for them using data that is tied to my behaviors and I don't know what they do with that data once they get it. I'd be down with selling them the data if they were willing to bid on it, as long as I know what they did with it later (and got paid if they shared it with others).
This is definitely not simple. So much rebasing. Ugh.
An interesting idea. Yes, you can usually use a convnet with any number of channels per pixel.
Completely off topic, but reading this ^^ has made me go and grab a Coke from the office fridge. Can't say I wasn't thirsty but can say seeing the word Coke several times above did have an effect.
You would but with the camera. The mirror itself is a double measure - also nothing beats turning your head.
Looks like they are fishing for a government contract.
You're getting "false positive" with the method you've chosen, but it's not a method that would be accepted in a scientific paper as evidence for an experimental effect. Maybe your method is more appropriate for, say, a machine learning context, but it's not what would be used in a paper like this.

First, the statistical tests used for these experiments don't make use of Bayesian stats, so the prior 50%-loaded probability simply isn't factored in. The standard is to use null-hypothesis testing, which says roughly, that if the null hypothesis is true -- that is, if there is no actual difference between the populations (experimental groups A and B, for example) -- what is the probability that you'd see a pattern like the one observed in the data. And the tests take sample size into account in calculating this probability.

If you throw the die once, the test that you'd use here (Chi-square) would _never_ give you a false positive, that is a p-value of <.05. With small samples, there is too little power to get a the requisite p-value. (And I'll note that Chi-square is one of the tests used in these papers.)

There's a whole other debate about whether p-values and null hypothesis tests are the right thing to use, whether the standard 0.05 threshold p-value is small enough, whether Bayesian stats should be used, etc. These are legitimate issues. But they're separate from the claim that small samples will increase the likelihood of a false positive.
Thanks, I understand your reasoning, but I think we'll just have to disagree.
With make you wind up having separate makefiles for each platform. For cross-platform by default environments like Node, that doesn't make sense.
This just seems like a complaint about illiquidity of certain assets, which is a legitimate concern, but also a pretty commonly addressed one, because it already arises semi-frequently. If you were one of Sam Walton's heirs, for example, you can't just dump all your Wal-Mart stock on day 1. But if you want to turn that in-practice-fairly-illiquid holding into more liquid and diversified holdings, you are not SOL. It might take a few years, but it's perfectly possible to liquidate most such positions without destroying them, and it's done routinely. There are even financial folks who specialize in exactly that, who you can hire if you'd like.
While I appreciate the effort that went into writing this thought experiment, that's not what I'm interested in.

I would like a historical example demonstrating the problem of the gold standard. The world worked this way for centuries, so surely there must be some documented case of one of the doom scenarios you proposed.
Just use Gitflow peeps. It's simple, not mentally taxing, and having a feature branch for each feature (JIRA ticket, or whatever unit you're using) makes things very atomic and simple.
Ah, I misunderstood the question. Thanks for the clarification.
I've run millions of dollars worth of Facebook ad campaigns. "Like" campaigns are the equivalent of brand advertising, a world in which there are no directly measurable metrics, so advertisers judge their performance based on metrics like "Did your ad campaign increase awareness?". Also, surprisingly, the most effective way I found for actually acquiring likes cheaply was to run direct response campaigns focusing on clicks to website, offer claims, and website conversions. So we got the best of both worlds, cheap fan-getting, as well as DR conversions. Basically, what I found was that to get their desired result of "people who visit your website then like the page," it is much more effective and cheap to focus on driving them to your page.
If you are advertising to decision makers in a restaurant, there are probably much more effective ways of reaching them than mass TV ads.
well...it all starts at what you want to do. Since they're different type of databases and are used in different contests...
You're actually asking "Why would one use a Screwdriver over an Hammer?"

Different tools for different projects...I guess..
How to stream live NFL playoff games: VPN + NFL Game Pass
it probably would be much better to disable the wireless transmitter
It is just trying to appeal to feminists and white knights.
I find the name great because it's easy to remember. and un forgettable
I believe he is referring to the git workflows and tutorials that encourage rewriting history in a potentially lossy way.

Mercurial can do the same sort of history rewriting, to a point, but it is not the default workflow and requires that you explicitly enable that functionality. Even then, when you push a modified history to the central repository, you have the old history around still. Whether or not this is desired is up to your team's workflow, but it does make it harder to lose something.
Please Bring Me More Of That Yummy DRM Discussion
I read through this, but I'm a bit lost. You realize you can use money to purchase income generating assets? In fact you realize that most people accumulate money for the purpose of purchasing these income generating assets?

If I have a lot of money I can easily change it into a lot of wealth and a lot of wealth can be liquidated into a lot of money. And no, nobody who is actually rich cares about their education or intelligence because neither of these are able to generate anywhere near the kinds of returns from simply buying up large amounts of income generating assets.
The flaw in my argument is that I'm calling for reasonable and evidence based traffic laws and road planning, rather than making it a political fiasco that's more about revenue generation than safety?

Whereas your argument is, the status quo is fine, people just need to follow the current rules better, even though all evidence says people aren't going to do so?
When I first heard about Gulp I was enthusiastic but skeptical. Grunt seems unassailable in many ways, it's nearly ubiquitous in JavaScript projects. Gulp doesn't need to be as popular as Grunt, but if it can be popular enough to have plugins for most common tasks, I'll switch in a heart beat.
Hi everyone, Product Manager from GoDaddy here. A lot of you have made the correct assumption. We simply host very few Ruby sites. We are radically improving our hosting, and with all the great offerings like Heroku (kicks ass) it doesn't make much sense to continue to invest in what will be a less than great user experience for Ruby developers. I'm happy to answer any more questions here!
To the best of my knowledge Safari is available for OS X, Windows, and iOS.

I used to use it on Windows because I liked the font rendering more than Chrome, Firefox, Opera, or IE.
> It is not impossible to conceive of malicious code being able to exploit an unpatched browser flaw and overdrive the motor to destruction.

Are there not restrictions at the OS or hardware level to prevent this?
Is there anything concrete you can say in response to my argument, or is this it?
Is it me, or does the HTML version not have any "Next/Prev" pagination buttons?
It would only be healthy for the industry if organizations was liable for loosing sensitive information. If there is no economic risk to be lost, then no serious amount of budget will ever be spent on security. It is basic economics.

There is always the opinion that liability might threaten innovation. That can however be mitigated by having less sensitive information stored on ones servers, or by regular insurance if such information is critical to have.
I like the article and agree with the main points, but I don't really understand the fixation on terminology. Who really cares about what one person defines as wealth vs having money?

Isn't the real point here that people who are capable of making a living will always have means to live and those who don't may get by from time to time when they come into money but don't have a lasting ability to generate it for themselves?

On a larger scale, I think this same idea could be used to describe the success and failure of most companies. Companies that can create products or services that sell will succeed in the long run whereas those that have large cash reserves but no ability to produce products or services that sell will eventually run out of cash and fail.
The markets doing well so anything will probably look good. Not sure if groups are willing to RIF 10% of their own in a bad econemy.
"In the (somewhat less common) case where other people are also working on the same shared remote feature branch, also rebase changes coming from it"

I don't think this use case is uncommon, and unfortunately when you are multiple persons working on a shared remote feature branch you can't rebase the branch from master and then push it either.

What work flow do people who have shared remote branches use? Or do you think that way of working is broken?