skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Link to the paper: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~tygar/papers/Keyboard_Acoustic_E...

It's pretty interesting. It's an algorithm which, given a recording of you typing out several HN comments, can generate an acoustic profile of how you type on your particular keyboard. By assuming that you're typing English, it can infer what words you're typing based on its rough guess, and then it can train itself to recognize keystroke sounds that it previously got wrong. After a few times of doing this, it claims to be accurate enough to recover your passwords from a recording of you typing them in.
Watches have ceased to have real use in modern society? For most people (or rather me and my immediate society at least), a watch is now a piece of jewelry.

A pebble is thus more of a want than a need.
Buy Digital Ocean Servers with Bitcoin
Some of the best hackers I know are in India, and they use Microsoft products... I'm talking truly gifted people.
To give fair warning, it seems Safari on iOS 7 will randomly refresh text boxes on pages when you jump to other tabs to cut and paste information. It has bit me a few times and I now wait until I'm at my PC to write any reference laden post or form where information comes from multiple tabs.
Doubt they will make it very far with me since I do most of my keystrokes in vim. I'll stick to being paranoid about van eck phreaking.
"You can cancel your subscription at any time and keep using the engine, though without monthly updates."

from: https://www.unrealengine.com/register
Why Most People Fail To Cash In On Their Dream Idea
They should have put more emphasis on the top 20 non-perfects winning 100k. That's still pretty good! But I suppose the goal was harvesting information for quicken loans so mission accomplished.
How do you know your coin isn't a duplicate of another? You'd need some sort of distributed consensus to allow you to independently verify its authenticity.
Most people's opinions on this stuff is somewhere in the middle

In the US. I don't think I have ever met someone in Europe who was against gun control.
It sounds like you're describing a modern Smalltalk. I would love something like that, especially if it was cross-platform and perhaps syntax like Nu.
I'm not too surprised that alpha-beta does well, because when you are in a "good" state, playing so as to ensure that even in the worst case, you will still remain in as good a state as possible is very similar to playing to minimize the probability of ending up in a bad state in the next few moves. Obviously, the latter is your actual goal rather than the former. But the former is often a decent approximation and has the benefit that if most of the time there actually does exist a way you can maintain a "good" state even under perfectly adversarial play, then alpha-beta pruning will let you search much deeper and faster to find that way.

However, I would not dismiss MC-search or expectimax. Whereas alpha-beta should perform well when the current position is in a "good" state, when the current position is in a "bad" or "tricky" state, it almost certainly will perform way worse than search methods that actually take into account the opponent being random.

To consider the extreme example, imagine the position is extremely tenuous and that alpha-beta has proven that if the tiles are placed in the worst possible way in the next several turns, it is guaranteed the position is a loss and a 2048 is impossible. Obviously, it would be better that point to switch to something like expectimax and play so as to minimize the probability of a loss and maximize the probability of recovering, which could still be quite large. Whereas with alpha-beta the only thing you can do is maximize the number of moves until the forced loss, which will often not be the same thing as maximizing the probability of recovery, particularly if most reasonable branches of play lead to a forced loss in the same number of moves.

Similar arguments apply when the position is not a forced loss yet but is still "bad". For example, if the "bad" position is such that your long-term win probability is only 30%, I would expect alpha-beta to pass-up opportunities to fix the position if those opportunities carried any risk of making the position worse, whereas taking those risks is clearly correct if they could fix the position into a probable win and the probability of making things worse was only 1/2 or 1/3.

On the relevant stackoverflow thread, there is another answer much further down that has received far less attention, which is a shame:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22342854/what-is-the-opti...

I've downloaded and compiled the solver, which uses expectimax rather than alpha-beta, and uses heuristics that are arguably even simpler and dumber, and yet it seems to outperform the OP's solver. It gets 4096 with good consistency and even often gets an 8192, whereas the OP's solver (after a tweak to make it not stop at 2048) can sometimes require a few tries to get a 4096 and only rarely gets an 8192. Granted, there's a large computing power difference, since one runs as native compiled code and one runs as javascript in the browser, but it shows that expectimax, which one would expect to be the most theoretically-sound approach, is indeed at least a comparably good approach, and possibly a superior one.
Actually, even in coins fast hashes have their place (specifically, in Merkle trees; we're using SHA3 in Ethereum precisely because computers will have hardware modules for it), and for mining you don't want to be using anything that's classified as a hash function anyway.
See also:

"Heather talks about how a fixation with a single hair led to a controversial art project, the study of genetics, and the bones of an unidentified woman"

https://vimeo.com/71657839
http://deweyhagborg.com/strangervisions/portraits.html
Well, I'll explain why I'm a naysayer on NoSQL.

I will grant that "don't use NoSQL" isn't the correct advice in absolutely all cases. Once in a blue moon there is a case where it's the best solution, and if you say you have one of those cases, fair enough, I'll take your word for it.

But the vast majority of people who use NoSQL should be using a relational database instead. And the consequences of using NoSQL where you shouldn't, can be very bad indeed. (If your data gets messed up, it's not like a bug that can be put right just by fixing your code.)

So I will stand by "don't use NoSQL" as general advice. If you're really sure you know what you're doing, if you have sufficient expertise on databases and understanding of the present and future characteristics of your workload to be certain you're an exception, fine; but then you don't need general advice in the first place.
Mobile Network Performance and Content Delivery – Part 2
Aphyr has thoroughly explained what is wrong with MongoDB[1]. I'm quite sure that things aren't probably as swell with your tech stack you might imagine. A commenter here has in the past demonstrated how to cause someone using MongoDB data problems by sending too much information too quickly for MongoDB to handle in a targeted way although I can't find the link to it now. I have been wanting to try it myself to see if I could do it too. Firebase uses MongoDB[2]:

"Firebase stores all its data in MongoDB which offers the built-in capability for apps to scale automatically and gives each piece of data its own unique URL stored in JSON documents."

I was going to see if I can get achieve data consistency problems there for my own firebase app.

Also posts that malign MongoDB frequently make it to the home page [3][4].

[1] http://aphyr.com/posts/284-call-me-maybe-mongodb

[2] http://www.mongodb.org/about/production-deployments/

[3] http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/2013/11/11/why-you-should-never...

[4] http://www.aaronstannard.com/post/2013/12/19/The-Taxonomy-of...
Designing Medium: Crafting Link Underlines on Medium
> A copy of you isn't you

Actually, it is.

The current laws of physics don't have the notion of identity. So swapping two identical particles not only doesn't have any effect, it doesn't even make physical sense. Like the rest of physics, this principle stays valid at the macroscopic scale.

Teletransportation is a genuine form of transportation. It doesn't kill you, and the result is not a mere copy. It was traditionally a philosophical question, but thankfully, physics has the answer.

http://lesswrong.com/lw/r5/the_quantum_physics_sequence/

http://lesswrong.com/lw/pl/no_individual_particles/
Talking coins here. They never go out of circulation. Can last decades, a century even. And a 'grace period' for coins is what I was getting at - they get stuck places, left for years. Billions will become worthless if there's a cutoff.

And further, coins are exactly that currency that's supposed to be intrinsically valuable! The founding myth was, they're precious metal and that's why they're tradable. A cut-off defies that myth. Unsettling.
Startups should use a relational database unless their requirements (current and future) exactly fit a nosql model - which is difficult to predict. You can migrate later if scalability becomes an issue. Going nosql first (considering that most startups lack enough design experience) will make things messy and would make it difficult to scale when needed.
Yeah, take the average American meat eater and drop them into the woods to what... Starve to death shortly. They couldn't even farm or forage for edible plants.

Your post is ridiculous, and I say that as an American hunter with some knowledge of foraging and farming.
How to know what you can openly discuss in China
When I read the title, I dreaded opening the link, half expecting it to be another 2048 clone with a ridiculous target! And boy was I right! :(
As mkohlmyr mentions, it is unfortunate that MongoDB is offhandedly dismissed, however by the second paragraph of the linked article you have to appreciate how such hostility comes about.

But what is it that SQL databases could not solve which lead to the evolution of NoSql databases...{some "big data" changes to the world}...Which means processing huge amount of data. Which SQL databases were never designed for.

Firstly, specialized data storage and retrieval, including unstructured or document oriented, existed long before SQL did. Your filesystem is just such a system. Everything old is new again.

And secondly, a citation is required for the SQL databases "were never designed for" huge amounts of data claim. To start with, a definition of huge is necessary to make such a claim. 1GB? 1TB? 100TB? There are SQL solutions that work with all of those with ease. Many of the largest databases on the planet are humming away on SQL systems right now. SQL is abstract from the underlying platform, so if you have a cluster of 100 machines each in front of 1000 storage arrays each in front of 100 SSDs, it doesn't suddenly become "NoSQL".

SQL databases are generalized solutions. They generally do not solve specific, individual problems as well as precisely engineered solutions, which is why giant companies like Google, with extremely precise needs (e.g. index the web) have solutions that do a much better job for their purposes. Does that apply to your needs at all, though? Are you looking at your specific requirements, engineering precise storage and retrieval that is optimal? Probably not. Saying "MongoDB is under the umbrella of NoSQL, and NoSQL also kind of encompasses highly specialized solutions from industry leaders, so it will work for my startups contacts databases" is very, very poor, misleading reasoning. But we see it all of the time on HN in regards to solutions like mongodb. Which again is how you get responses that might seem hostile.
Popular versions of 2048 with previews
The same amount of money would exist, it would just be distributed differently. Poor people would be able to buy more things, so the things that are disproportionately bought by poor people would go up slightly. Conversely rich people might buy fewer yachts, lowering the price.

Despite the slight price increase, it would still be a net benefit for poor people.
Just curious: of the data that Zuckerberg could collect, what does he not collect?

It should be pretty clear that this is not an endorsement of NSA's broad data collection activities. But credible leadership in this area requires that Zuckerberg willfully constrain and limit the activities of his own company first.
I don't know if I would call it essential, but it is very nice. When I was debating to purchase one, the main argument was I don't wear a watch, and I generally don't like anything on my wrist or hands. The only time I'd wear a watch is camping, since I generally don't have a phone that is powered on on camping trips. This particular watch also has a barometer to help with rapidly changing weather.

I bought a Pebble, and wear it everyday. I don't miss much of anything anymore from my phone. Sometimes I'd put my phone down somewhere and forget it for a couple of hours, or not feel it when I'd vibrate in my pocket. One of the other reasons I didn't really wear a watch is I'd get bored of the watch face and want to purchase another watch. I can change watch faces easily now.
I totally agree here. The replies are the real issue.

Just from personal experience, if I have something to share on the topic, but the discussion already has a couple hundred comments, I look to contribute as a reply to an already highly rated comment. I'm much more likely to get actually engagement that way.

The issue isn't comment quality. It's UI. New comments, even on busy articles, should be discoverable. It should be possible to have discussions past the front-page-life of an article. It should be easy for the reader to decide whether to explore a given thread of conversation in depth or skip it altogether.
It is unclear to me what the intended mechanism of services helping different teams work together is that is not also provided by just writing libraries. Could you elaborate?
This is simply completely untrue. Newton synthesized a lot of earlier results in physics and mathematics into a unified framework, and he deserves a lot of credit for that obviously, but nevertheless it was a synthesis and not something done "single-handedly and all by himself", in fact you are contradicting Newtons famous own words that he was "standing at the shoulders of giants".

Isaac Barrow, Newtons teacher, had already discovered the rudiments of calculus:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Barrow

Hooke played a significant role in establishing the law of universal gravitation:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_law_of_universal_gra...

Newtons first law comes from Galileo's principle of inertia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_laws_of_motion#Newto...

And so on and so forth, lookup Kepler, Galileo, Huygens, Hooke, Barrow, Descartes, Fermat and so on in the Wikipedia, or better read any serious scholarly history of physics about this period, this is only scratching the surface of people whose work Newton very directly built upon. There is no synthesis to be done without a period of establishing a great many of particular results.
This would need an extremely robust real world identity system. If this was left to governments somehow, then the identity system itself would become the single point of failure and the main way to game the system through corruption. This is already the case in developing countries where deaths are purposely not recorded in order for the relatives to collect pensions and other contributions.

Building such an identity system algorithmically on top of a social network also doesn't seem to make sense because this can be cheated too.

One solution that might work would be to prove that you are a conscious person to a system like ethereum through a "Ghost Key" like in Ghost in the Shell. Assuming that there is a way to "fingerprint" each person's ghost, such as creating a hash of something that doesn't change, that could be like e key to such funds. I highly doubt that there is something constant in the human connectome though.
False.

BI would not provide increases to science nor art. It would dilute them. I get enough emails as it is from whacko's who think they've upturned Quantum Mechanics, Relativity, or created some perpetual motion machine. If society valued these people's output they would be financially rewarded already. There's already incentives in present society, called capitalism and competition! There's a reason why only a tiny fraction of actors, musicians, and artists earn a living. That living is what society thinks of their art.

Further, plenty of people on social programs are quite content with sitting on their ass. And some deservedly so, due to true disabilities. An able-bodied adult has no moral right to income which they did not earn. That is theft from the truly deserving individuals who either were born with extreme hardships, or became disabled.

Note: A few years ago I was a graduate student (24k/yr living) in Boston who made time to play drums. You can express your art (or science) without a handout.
Do you know what was different about them?
In my experience, the number of admins that say they can just stay on top of the vulnerabilities is greater than the number who actually can or do.

> Everything you said is very general.

Ok, here's specifically how this approach fails in the real world:

A guy is ignoring vulnerabilities that don't seem to apply to his configuration. So there's a kernel flaw that allows privilege escalation. He thought it was no big deal because he doesn't allow a guest login. Then there's a flaw that allows remote users to trigger memory corruption, allowing remote guest access. No risk there, he thought, because guests have no privileges on the box.

You see how the attacker got in?

You might counter that that admin was just too "lazy" to line up all the vulnerabilities and see how they interact. But there were almost 200 vulnerabilities last year just in the kernel. Are you going to conduct the 19,000 security audits required to see how they interact? What about groups of three? What about vulnerabilities in other packages? This workload doesn't just go up linearly.

Also, this approach is weaker against unpublished vulnerabilities. If you're strapping together older software, especially deprecated stuff no one else is using, you're losing one perk of open source software, the many eyes shallow bugs bit. People not using your configuration means no one is going to discover vulnerabilities on it except for attackers. You may think, "good, that makes it harder for attackers," but that's security by obscurity, it doesn't actually hurt attackers very much. Vulnerabilities patched in newer versions of software give insight into vulnerabilities lingering in older versions, so often exploits can be crafted for previous versions far more easily than for newer.

This is why security professionals recommend defense in depth. You don't know which part of your platform is going to break and allow attackers to exploit vulnerabilities that you didn't think were relevant.

Also, for a lot of systems, eventually the admin will change. The guy or gal that follows you will be dependent on the system you set up, and may be less experienced or less capable. If they inherit a patch management system that basically entails, "Become a security expert in addition to your other duties," they are not going to strictly adhere.

You know your system and your situation, so I don't want to sound like your approach can never ever work. But if we're giving advice to the unwashed masses, I think we need more advice tailored for the people you dismiss as "too lazy to pay attention to security," because that describes basically everyone.

PS - When you describe other people's opinions as "lazy cop outs," it can kill discussions. You might watch out for that. HN isn't Reddit, people sometimes bury stuff that has good substance but poor tone.
Worse, there used to be a concern that, given food and housing, people would stop trying. Once the comforts of life are a civil right, the great majority might stop making any effort at all.

Its bound to be a major disruption. McD's will have to automate; you'll need a Roomba for your lawn; everybody in the world will want to come here regardless of the job situation.

Maybe that's all right; maybe we can sustain it. But it will be a rough couple of years.
Thanks for the reply. Luckily I am not gonna start from scratch scratch since I have a little experience with front-end and I am "familiar" so to speak, with the programming "environment" but I never really dived into it (a very stupid decision).

So for:

1. Some people told me I should start with C and go on from there, while others told me to start with C# or Python. Am I wasting time with C? I've seen some articles here where some guys went straight RoR and managed to get an app running in months. I feel like I would skip important stuff if I do that. How important is the order in which you learn these? I think this is the hardest thing for me. To choose which one goes first on the backend side I mean.

2. So it shouldn't be a problem to go for an old mac right? I don't have 2K right now for a maxed MBP.

3. Well I figured I can do it on a 10-15h a day marathon for 4-6 months. So I can't do a YC demo for example?Something to show to investors or enough to express an idea?

4. I believe I got this covered although everyone is pretty busy these days:)
That's because it really is a terrible database. It does absolutely nothing better than other popular databases. It's slower, less durable and has less features than Postgres, but also slower, less reliable and worse at sharding than Cassandra.
How were those keyboards different? silent keys?
The bill itself is in violation of the First Amendment, as it makes a distinction between who is and who isn't a "journalist." The Supreme Court ruled on this a long time ago:

> The liberty of the press is not confined to newspapers and periodicals. It necessarily embraces pamphlets and leaflets. These indeed have been historic weapons in the defense of liberty, as the pamphlets of Thomas Paine and others in our own history abundantly attest. The press, in its historic connotation, comprehends every sort of publication which affords a vehicle of information and opinion.

[Lovell v. City of Griffin - 303 U.S. 444 (1938)](http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/303/444/case.html)

This bill clearly makes a law abridging the freedom of the press, since a portion of "the press"—namely, those receiving official sanction by government as being the real press—get special treatment.

This is dangerous law.
It's a demonstration of good health. (But not necessarily longevity.)
Surely if the human body were a simple machine, as some people argue, then you would be running at a deficit? Any excess energy would have to be stored. In reality, however, the body can adjust to a range of energy input and allow you to run at lower levels of input, albeit with a reduced metabolism.
Has it actually annoyed you or have you heard of someone being annoyed by it? Because I can't imagine it being annoying. Most of the time, saving form input is desired. The few times where it's not, it's easily solved by one of the many ways to remove all the text.
Meh. Site has up and down votes as well, along with flags. This is just another effort to keep the crap level down and quality up. If you've got something to say, you can say it in a way that isn't inflammatory or low value. This is a privately held gathering place, and if the price for absolute lack of censorship is comments and rhetoric that incite, inflame, go off topic, or otherwise just make this gathering place worse, then they can be shown the door. No virtue in that with respect to a private space with high value conversation as one of its premier objectives IMHO.
>All of politics should run 100% (including elections) on a public fund.

That's a horrible idea. The dominate parties would become even more dominate with the backing of the government. I do not approve of my tax money being spent on ridiculous political commercials either.