skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
BOOM.

The price of that uncertainty is what you capture in the options pricing model. aka. "premium"

Two scenarios:

(Short-selling) AAPL: Sell 10 lots (1000 shares) short -> now you OWE someone 1000 shares but have the cash in your account of 1000 shares worth of AAPL stock. The next day, AAPL loses 99% of its value, you buy the shares back at their now 1% value, deliver them to the person you borrowed them from, and keep the rest of the cash in your account. OR, the next day, the shares DOUBLE, and now you owe that person shares that are worth twice as much as you got selling them in the first place. Bad news. Nearly 100% loss on the trade.

(Buying a Put Option) You buy 10 AAPL PUT contracts (100 shares each) "at the money" (strike price equal to the last sale of AAPL) for $XX that expire at some point in the future (lets say one month). Anytime between now and then, if the price of AAPL doubles, your PUT OPTION may most-likely will be worth more than what you paid for it and you can sell it for whatever the market wants to pay for it. If you do nothing, at the end of 30 days, your option is worth exactly ZERO.

The difference in the price movements of the underlying securities in both scenarios is what makes up the premium you pay OVER AND ABOVE what the difference is between what the security trades at and the price you paid for that "option" on the security.
This is Will from FundersClub. Thanks for the feedback. We will consider ways to improve contrast and legibility.
I checked your post history after guessing based on the phrase "Trading Standards Officers". :)
Snap-on thermal camera for iPhone gives you heat vision
That's not really the case. Some of them unlock via low frequency RF, but to my knowledge they still use encryption that uses their button click count as one of the variables plus a shared secret.
Family sues Uber for wrongful death of their 6-year-old daughter
> It's no better than not stating at all.

I mean, it's at least slightly better, right?
The most interesting quote:

"Lately, I was comparing standard data structures between Java and .Net. In some cases I observed a 6-10X performance advantage to .Net for things like maps and dictionaries when .Net used native structure support."

The ".Net" can be much faster than Java because Java has to have the things on the heap which can be on the stack.
So, simulate a cluster of machines instead of a single machine? Seems like a good thing. "Tiny datacenter in a box."

The question whether it's close enough to production to be useful; any testing environment simulates some things well and others poorly. Load testing would be right out, I'd presume, but it might be useful for testing some machine failures.
> This is a class issue that is always conflated as a race issue, with the the same lame excuse: because, history.

Do you think using class differences to cover up racism is only a historical thing?
Lots of Americans drive around great distance, but for commutes, it's shorter than average. More public transportation would be great but not always economically viable.

> According to organization’s time use data, the average commuting time in the United States is about 28 minutes (similar to a separate measure from the United States Census Bureau). That is 10 minutes shorter than the average commuting time for all member countries, of 38 minutes, and longer than the time spent traveling to work in only three rich countries (Israel, Denmark and Sweden).

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/14/world-of-commut...
This is Will from FundersClub. We're considering that. Thank you!
This is not a bash on Haskell as I like Haskell, but is every Haskell article or discussion academic? It's all fascinating and interesting (especially the OP), but some of us would like to learn about Haskell's applicability in the real world, not just in computer science academia. I would like to read about Haskell workflows, productivity, and the positives/negatives of using it in your organization. Languages like Go and Clojure bring up these kinds of conversations all the time, so why is it so silent (or at least very low volume) on Haskell's front?
Working on it. Really solid sources are a bit sparse, though. It's one of those odd cases, which I think are both problematic but interesting for Wikipedia: someone who is clearly notable, but proper bios on him don't really exist, just scattered mentions that need to be tied together. It's a lot easier to write bios on people who already have other bios written on them (since that solves the problem of what to cite pretty easily).
Wow, that's quite an unusual profile. Good for you guys that you've been able to decompose things into thousands of relatively self-contained apps. It's a really interesting situation. Part of me wants to say that this doesn't really qualify as a "large codebase" as referred to by the OP. I tend to think of "large" as hundreds of thousands of lines and up. But I certainly don't want to marginalize the experience of an organization maintaining 30 million lines of code in 10k chunks. Your experience definitely suggests there is great value in decomposing things into small self-contained pieces. But I would say that strong static type systems are better at helping you do that than weak dynamic type systems. It can certainly be done in dynamic languages, but it requires more discipline.
We already have a privacy orientated lastfm called GNU FM. Its been in dev since 09 and has a couple hundred thousand users at www.libre.fm
On newer versions of OS X, invoking gcc will prompt you to install the command line tools. This means you don't need all of XCode.

The best (visual) example I could find is on this page: http://railsapps.github.io/xcode-command-line-tools.html (scroll down a bit).
Me neither. I would have thought draught and drought were homophones. Interesting, my EN-US spellchecker here in Firefox is also insisting that draught is misspelled, and is most likely "fraught" (with drought next). I guess I've never had to read that word aloud in front of anyone who would laugh at me....
Take Buffett's Billion
Nanoscale Heat Engine Beyond the Carnot Limit
Judge upholds right to border electronics searches
paper http://arxiv.org/pdf/1308.5935v2.pdf
Exactly. I think the obvious answer to the author's question is that apps are verbs and people (and documents) are nouns, and when people are trying to use a tool it's the verbs that start the process.

The real problem, which the author does not discuss even though it's implicit in some of his examples, is that many of the apps on a typical phone (or desktop computer, for that matter) aren't the right verbs; they're verbs that were easy for the programmer to program, not verbs that are easy for the user to use. You fix that by making better apps, not by switching from app-centric to people-centric design.
But what metric can track might-have-beens?
That's not what I meant. Just as sales of new Mac hardware slow before new devices come out and surge after they do, consumers are becoming more aware of the market with each device they buy. Personally, I went 3G, 3G S, 4, 4S with Nexus 4 and Lumia 920 on the side, and now Nexus 5. I found that the Nexus 4 and Lumia adjusted me to larger screen sizes, and iPhone's doesn't cut it for me right now. I love iOS 7, but I can't carry an iPad mini in my pocket, so until they release in-between sizes (which Asset Catalogs and iOS 7 both will help prepare devs for), I'm avoiding the iPhone until I really think I'll get $600-900 of joy from it. So don't get me wrong, just because I don't use an iPhone doesn't mean I don't want one. I just don't want the specific hardware they offer today, and I suspect I'm not alone.
All of the Android phones I've had in the last few years already do this. Unless I'm missing something? I usually set it up with my favorite contacts on the home screen even I first get a phone and then don't use it much.
Ebay's glitch and customer service that lost me as a customer for life
Show HN: Unveiling callstats.js — callstats.io
> Much of Apple's cash is stashed in Ireland, where the corporate income tax rate is 12.5%. If it were 5% in the US, no doubt that money would return quickly.

Apple did not pay 12.5% tax on the cash that is now in Ireland. They used a loophole known as the double Irish with a Dutch sandwich to avoid taxes in both Ireland and the Netherlands.

Note that the US offers a foreign tax credit. Every dollar of taxes paid overseas is credited against US tax owed when the cash is repatriated. Thus, you wouldn't have to reduce US corporate tax to 5%, just to 12.5%.

Any company that had actually paid 12.5% Irish tax would be able to repatriate its cash tax-free. Except that these companies have actually paid 0% tax, so this wouldn't work.
I see you did not follow the link I posted, which give the exact answer:

> a Big Mac extra value meal costs 58 kroner, or $10.25, while the Dollar Menu is the 10 kroner menu, which means it’s the dollar-seventy-seven menu here. In Denmark, taxes are included in list prices, unlike in the US, so backing out the 25 percent VAT gives us $8.20 for a Big Mac meal and $1.41 for the “dollar” menu. That compares to $6 and $1 in Seattle.

(It's not quite right to compare VAT and sales tax, but so be it.)
"I'm sorry you've chosen to stop being civil. It doesn't support your argument."

No, it doesn't support my argument. It also doesn't undermine it, and it served as a certain amount of stress relief in the face of an unconstructive and (in my view) absurd response, but it was nonetheless inappropriate and I apologize.

"Bespoke development clearly is out of reach of most end users. There are billions of end users of computers now. You may exist in a rarefied stratum of the economy that gives you this freedom, but to claim that this is the case for most users is bizarre."

Is your argument "it could not be sustainable, because there are not enough developers compared to users"? I don't see any other argument there, but as that one seems easily (if somewhat verbosely) addressed I want to be sure I'm speaking to your actual argument.

"I am astonished that you think that choosing a good developer is the biggest challenge for end users who want custom software."

Not just choosing a good developer, but collectively choosing a good developer, sufficiently defining the task, and communicating with the developer. I do think that is the biggest challenge for users who wish to customize an existing piece of software under a free license. It is not the biggest challenge for users who want to modify or reimplement a large piece of proprietary (or non-existent) software, but that is comparatively rare and it matters less the licenses of existing code. If you disagree, please be explicit about what challenges you think would dominate.

"Your comment about proprietary software is invalidated by the examples of the web, Google Play, and the iOS app stores, which are brimming with highly specialized solutions which are developed because there is a business model to support the developers."

That certainly invalidates any claim there can be no specialization in proprietary software, but I never made that claim. Freedom 1 is a right to modify the software I am running. That presumes there is an existing solution that's not quite what I want. If the license on that solution preserves my "freedom 1", paying someone to modify it is competitive, and therefore probably cheaper and probably better.
In principle this could be true but I don't think it will be. A simply example: right now speech recognition happens in the cloud. Could be that a future device has a dedicated chip for speech recognition (or some kind of preprocessing). Then future versions of the OS will require this. Hence you have to upgrade.

This is how it has gone with things like graphics, animation, even sound. In principle the core elements of the Mac OS don't require extremely fast chips/hardware ... but once you get into the fancy desktop animations, the sound processing, face recognition (e.g. iPhoto), etc etc, you require fancier hardware.

There are still lots of directions for Apple to push their software, directions that will be aided by better and/or more specialized hardware.

If all you need is a text editor, an email client and some CPU power for crunching spreadsheets then for sure, all you "need" is a desktop circa 2000 (or even earlier ...) ... but if you want to run the latest OS, even if you don't need/want all the features of that latest OS, you need to keep up with the hardware.

Never mind games.
Not if the cost of paying attention to the new rules has opportunity cost in excess of the value of the improvement. We have to pick our battles.
Of course it is, as it allows us to at least determine if "mass" surveillance is going on, as opposed to the "good old-fashioned police work" that everyone here claims to want.
That's certainly a possibility. The contrary may prove to be true as well. For example, if I was a terrorist and I knew that the NSA was spying on all my phone communications, I may elect to not use a phone. This means that I'm not as effective at communicating with other terrorists which may reduce the effect I have. You may very well be right though. It's unclear to me.
I live right in the center of europe and drugs are not treated like a health problem.
Actually, my response to your first point gives you a very clear and useful test for deciding whether "criminals can use $FOO, therefore $FOO must be tightly controlled" actually applies to $FOO.

That test is: Is owning/dealing in large amounts of $FOO specifically relevant for having power?

Three examples that lie on different points of the spectrum:

Criminals can eat hamburgers. Should hamburgers be tightly controlled? Ask yourself: Is owning/dealing in large amounts of hamburgers specifically relevant for having power?

Criminals drive cars. Should cars be tightly controlled? Ask yourself: Do large amounts of cars lead to power?

Criminals use guns. Should guns be tightly controlled? Ask yourself: Do large amounts of guns lead to power?

And so on...
Yes, there is a point at which tolerance becomes harder to find, such as when children or rape is involved. However, to me, a wasted life is a waste. Imagine an individual serving a life sentence for a horrible crime that they were definitely guilty of. They may never get out of prison, fine, but putting aside their predicament, why wouldn't you hope for them to make the best of what life they have? There is no benefit or pleasure in holding grudges, there is plenty of benefit in helping others find a more fulfilling life. Some people like to demonise others in order to separate themselves from 'evil' people, but the truth is everyone of us is capable of 'good' and 'evil', all capable of making a positive or negative impact on the world around them, and I refuse to see someone as sub-human just because they've made some really poor choices up until now.
Money laundering is illegal, not necessarily selling BTC on the silk road.
Houston to Dallas via Amtrak is possible. It's also about 20 hours and $70. And leaves once a day.

Sure, you say, that's because there's no direct route. True. San Antonio's better: 5 hours and $34. Still leaves once a day. At 7pm.
The trailing revenue number is one I've been watching as well. It shows solid execution but a not a lot of growth. This makes me more curious than ever to hear about this years products. They have had a solid year of flatness, so I don't doubt there is quite a bit of pressure on. Personally I'd like a 12" iPad with a retina screen and a Wacom class stylus with zero lag. Not holding my breath though.
When I say logistic regression is underused, I don't mean underused among data scientists. We have an incredible shortfall of "data scientists". What I mean is there is data sitting on computers somewhere, which is a logistic regression away from giving someone some information that they could use to make better decisions. But there's no one at Debbie's Diner who is capable of doing the regression, so it goes undone.

And the computer scientist who eats Debbie's waffles every Saturday spends his weekends reading about SpaceX instead of pulling her data into R and giving her some insights that would give her a much safer retirement.
While I find this humorous (which I assume was the goal), I think using common development terminology could be worse than complete jibberish since you start to apply irrelevant meaning when reading the beautified code.
I also like http://haskellnews.org/
China’s WeChat App Targets U.S. Users
Yes, but this also goes some way to explaining my assertion that such apps are disproportionately large and slow to start - Chrome exhibits exactly that behaviour.

When they get closer to having the OS WebView actually updated via Chrome channels then it's conceivable that the apparent startup time will come down, and it wouldn't surprise me if this is one of the main reasons for it.

If you see this recent thread:
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink...

They even say this:
"The web is quite far behind in mobile, which is why we're applying a greater amount of focus to solving the problems we have on mobile, even at the expense of nice-to-have features."

This is quite an admission, and at odds with a lot of their noise. It's also telling about their problems because Chrome suffers from a sort of death by a thousand cuts. On mobile to get the user experience people demand (they aren't wrong to be after 60fps performance as studies have shown mobile users are even pickier than desktop net users) you simply can't afford things like that anywhere, let alone right as the app starts up.
This was pretty cool

http://randomstreetview.com/#m19t2_-1xxgr6_-o_a_-7
It seems to me that short-term performance incentives are the problem here, not the idea that management should be maximizing shareholder value.

IMO, when they focus on the short term, Management will make decisions that may not be in the best interest of the firm/shareholders in the long term. It is in their individual best interest to prop up Quarterly numbers, etc. to help their stock options/bonus.
Disingenuous? Hey buddy, GFY.

Last year I drove from Florida to San Francisco. We did it over 5 days, my wife and I with our dog.

We stopped as-needed and always more than 10 minutes. Just filling the tank & handling payment takes that long. But in reality, you NEED to clean the windshield to clear off the bug splatter. And you NEED to use the facilities. Probably you and your passengers. And you really WANT a moment to stand up and stretch your legs anyway.

Does it always take 30 minutes? Certainly not. Twenty? Probably more like it.

"Just not accurate"? "enthusiasts need to pretend?" From where I'm sitting your comment here is a contender for A-hole of the Thread award. Congrats, you must be so proud.

I take issue with your accusations. I wrote what I wrote in good faith based on my somewhat recent experience with the cross-country road trip. I don't look politely on somebody like yourself suggesting otherwise.
I got the impression the requirement on new companies was to satisfy the Intelligence Community, not the existing tech companies.

The presumable idea being that if a new email/social provider pops up and has, say, a 2,000 subscribers after the end of the first year, saying that there have been <500 NSLs is more individually-specific than saying there were 500-1000 (or whatever) for a site like GMail or Facebook.
At the networking stack level, it depends on how one implements congestion control. AFAIR, in the case of Apple/MPTCP: they were sending the same packet on both the interfaces and hoping for the best delay (a really bad idea) unless you are in a managed network else you are just creating unnecessary congestion.

OTOH, if the last mile is oversubscribed, there is very little one can do.
Wow, it's surprising what you can do with it.
I think the poster's point was that he spends a lot of money on apple products, relative to his income. To understand apple's success, one should look at how much money ordinary people with ordinary jobs spend disproportionate money on products they wouldn't otherwise.

There's a graph somewhere of yearly sales figures of various cars vs the cost of those cars. There's a general exponential decline from say the toyota camry, which costs reasonably and sells a lot, to a Bentley, which is the opposite. But there's an irregular data point with the BMW 3-series, because many, many people stretch to afford it. It sells disproportionately well for that reason.

I'm not assigning judgment on how anyone spends their money, just pointing out that there are human reasons for business success and failure.
I guess my perspective is more from handling customers when they use our software development kits. We developed software devkits and our customers built embedded applications using silicon and software. In such a case, there is no way to get away from supporting customers because that's what we did.
I'm gonna be that guy...

... maybe being able to unlock a car remotely is a bad idea.
Not, actually it's a valid point: If you are a corrupted bank, you can get away with everything. If you are against the establishment you can't.
Hmm. Downvoted, but no one actually refuted my assertions. Nice.
Good times. I used to have emacs mode hooks that ensure that "$Id$" was written into files. I don't miss that.
It also implies illegal activity. I didn't mean to ask you to correct your usage, I just meant to point out a potential interpretation of it.
Sadly it still sounds unreasonable for the 196 mile (frequently business related) trip between Austin and Dallas. There will probably always be some commonly non-stop traveled distance just outside their range, but I presume it'll be marginal.
The tiny Ozobot line-following robot is high-tech creative fun