skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
The Facebook acquisition really seems to have broken some people's brains.

Either you think it works or doesn't, whether or not Facebook bought a company doesn't speak to the technology or possible market.
Musk bought himself into the game. There is actually some more dirty little secrets to the whole story. It looks like Musk bought himself in and then overtook the whole company. In 2009 after Eberhard (real founder and CEO) was kicked out, he filed a lawsuite against Musk - it got settled for god knows how many dollars.

Here is the full complaint: http://evworld.com/pdf/eberhardvmusk.pdf
I get where you are coming from, but you want to associate bike riding = helmet wearing.

From training wheels to full-speed downhill riding should only take 6 months. You want to encourage helmet wearing as a habit before that progression occurs.

My child had a very large crash that occured because he went down a hill and got confused as to which side of the bike the brake was on, because he was riding an unfamiliar bike. He had ridden down that hill many times. He crashed heavily at a high speed, enough to knock a tooth out and lost a lot of skin on his face, elbows, hands and knees. The helmet had serious damage and had to be thrown away. I don't want to think what would have happened had there been no helmet. He was 4 at the time.

I let them ride down hills to get used to the speed as part of learning, so that when they do get older they don't make bad mistakes. I also ride on the road with them to develop their traffic awareness. But helmets are a vital part of that.

I had several high speed crashes on my bike during school years. It was only luck that meant I didn't hit my head hard.

Please start making them wear helmets.
Which one ? Seriously tho', I imagine the results would be a bit skewed because most agnostic people are really just atheists who'd rather not be bothered with asserting their atheist belief simply because they haven't thought long and hard enough to cross over the line with conviction.

I used to be like that. I had my 'personal understanding of god' and so would call myself agnostic. However, a while back it really bothered me that I couldn't explain my beliefs to anyone who asked. It was always so imprecise and incomplete. Always on the fence, in a manner of speaking. On further reflection, I realized that my belief system was basically this:

* A moral compass. The fact that there is a very real right and wrong. These
are not relative. Shades of grey don't really exist for morality if you do
away with the notion that humans are in any way more 'deserving' of lesss
suffering (IOW: there is *always* a right and a wrong. Any 'in-betweens' is
solely due to the expectation that humans are in some way special)

* A recognition that the universe/nature/existence is immense, beautiful and
awe inspiring

* Everything in this universe/nature/existence is connected and as such there
is a network of influence (ie: every action will have long ranging effects)

* I am part of this universe/nature/existence, so my actions have long
ranging effects.

* Death is the end of life. There's no after-life. No re-incarnation,
ressurection, heaven or hell. This life is all that one has and ever will
have.

None of these things required God. A lot of these things were the teachings of my previous religion (and also a part of the teachings of almost all religions). I was holding on to the notion of God simply as a convenience to think about all of these things in a collective manner. To give it a name as the 'source' of all this 'knowledge'. Pretty much like the Hindu idea of 'Brahman' (not to be confused with the god Brahma).

Since then, I let go of my 'personal god' and have been calling myself atheist. I still meditate, reflect, marvel at the beauty of life and am in awe of nature. I just don't call it one name so as to confuse people into thinking that I believe in a larger-than-life-miracle-working-life-creating-morality-judging-God.
Draw a diagram of how you think it will work.
I completely disagree. First as a caveat, I've never traded US equities. That said, the idea that all participants in the markets have the exact same access to information that every other participant has is ludicrous. That has never been the case, and can never be the case.

Trading costs as a whole are lower now than they have ever been. Is that entirely due to HFT? No, of course not, but any "fix" you could put in place would most likely have huge negative unintended consequences. Let's all take our cheap investments to the bank and be happy that we don't have to pay 6'8" gorilla's to make our trades.
Ask YC: Should I start a company with a good friend?
I'm very good friends with a guy (10+ years) who also happens to be a good developer (as am I).

He's starting to work on something that meets many of the criteria I have in a good business, and I happen to be looking for the next thing to work on.

I'd love to build this business. I'm just not sure about doing it with him; I don't want to jeopardize the friendship. Some of his personality quirks are fine / funny in a social context, but I think would drive me crazy if we were co-founders. I wouldn't feel good about working on this without him, either.

Anybody face a similar situation? Thoughts on good ways to handle this?
Something doesn't add up. The user who wrote the report did not request that the destroyed droplet be recovered. The existence of lingering data was disclosed by traces which appeared in a brand new droplet. The only reason I can come up with for why that would ever happen is that you are re-using droplets, perhaps because erasing and resetting a few files is cheaper and faster than provisioning a brand new instance. If this is indeed the case, then what you are suggesting -- namely, that what looks like sloppiness is in fact conscious, customer-driven product design -- is completely false, because it means that the droplet recovery feature is available only in those cases where the customer did not create a new droplet after destroying the droplet she would now like to recover. I guess that this is why you were "able to recover almost everyone's droplets" after an attack, but not everyone's. The "temporary snapshot" feature is not actually a feature, or even a "mechanism" -- it's a bug, just one with a side-effect is occasionally positive.
Using PayPal WPS with Cartridge (Mezzanine / Django)
> other systems that skirt with getting banned.

That sounds a lot like the "price discovery" flavor of securities fraud.
> I do everything I can to make sure she's happy.

What do you do to make sure you're happy? No one wants to hang around with, invest in or buy something from someone who isn't happy.

Find yourself first. Everything else will fall into place. I'm not saying you need to break it off, but put yourself on equal ground and see what happens. You'll learn a lot about yourself and her.

Personal stuff aside, heed the advice of so many others: Get a job, be great at it. Take every opportunity to learn and think of new ideas, new ways to create value and grow.
I'm in Hong Kong, I know there are a few HNers out here, but not that many.
The notion of having having 'secure' data on someone else's hardware is just a bit silly.

I think the OP here definitely points at something, but primarily that the `scrubbing` checkbox is essentially a placebo button.

Getting a little meta: a 'no matter what delete this in a fully 100% absolutely totally unrecoverable forever fashion' checkbox is just begging for a generic law enforcement ping which DO would be forced to provide covertly.

I appreciate OPs side, I definitely see DO's viewpoint of customer happiness >> accurate UI.. but the lesson here is definitely to own your own necessarily-secure data.
Why is it that the intermediate exchange in NJ is able to see the desired trade? Shouldn't that information be encrypted?
High frequency trading does lots of things and only a few of them are being highlighted as bad. There are a specific set of legal advantages which can be had by being physically close to an exchange which give unfair advantage.

If the speed of light was infinite, these advantages would be clearly and unbeatably illegal: in essence the high frequency traders are paying huge sums of money to impose a delay on every other trader resulting in foreknowledge of events.

As a hypothetical high frequency trader, I could see that you have placed an order for a million shares of Apple, because of my positioning I can execute my own order _before_ yours goes through raising the price a tick and then selling those stocks to you. If exchanges allowed this and profited by it by erecting artificial delays it would be extraordinarily immoral, but because it's a natural delay it is still illegal.

The problem is that laws didn't catch up with technology, and as stated before the whole thing is complicated and not so easily understood and there are a _lot_ of money in it.

This has nothing at all to do with the separate issue of high frequency traders providing liquidity... they can do that without a time delay advantage over everyone else.
One difficulty with not "lying" to yourself is complexity.
It's often quite demanding to articulate exactly what you know and what you don't. And in the process of trying, you'll often find that your model of the situation is subtly wrong... but it's hard to say exactly how. To really be in contact with reality, you're a scientist, trying to discern truth.

That is, sometimes we lie because it's simpler and less work to articulate. A little similar to advertising hyperbole, lacking nuance. Absolutes are simpler to say, to understand, to reason about.

But the article is just talking about active lying: asserting something that you know isn't true (or, that you know you're not sure of).
University of Michigan researchers proposed a "centralized call market" to mitigate fragmentation (inconsistent pricing and order handling across different exchanges) and latency disadvantages:

http://www.ns.umich.edu/new/releases/21535-high-frequency-tr...

Haim Bodek discusses how certain exchanges provide special order types that give traders priority over others:

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000087239639044398920...

Of course HFT is just a small part of the built-in asymmetries in the markets. Firms exploiting their own clients, conflicted investment advice, corrupt fund management, routinized insider trading, retail bucket shops, hidden fees, payment for order flow, specialist/MM privileges, etc. are all ways that investors and beneficiaries can be disadvantaged.
Thanks, kasey_junk for your detailed answers. Greatly appreciate it. Not trying to get any inside or competitive info as I do more options algorithmic trading on a time frame of weeks and months. But I'm always curious how the other half live.

Are you using Scala specifically as your JVM language, CUDA for your FPGA? Also, have you dealt with Complex Event Processing (CEP) as way to combat stale quotes and feeds that require long time to process? These are area's that I haven't explored, so curious about your $0.02 if you have any experience/opinions, thanks.
Plenty of action ongoing in the TV space in China,
* ZTE and The9 are producing a TV Game smart box,
* Baidu's Iqiyi has overtaken Youku (youtube of china) in active users
* Xunlei and BesTV creating a set top box to tap into the internet TV sector
* Alibaba also bought 60% of Chinavision for $805M
* Xioami (the smartphone maker) invested $200M into Xunlei and created Xiaomi TV focused on film and video content.

The space in China is really hotting up.
Earlier bids match, the other bids are force-frozen for reuse in the next trading step.
The setup for the article theorizes on the cost of lying on the person's stress levels. I'm sure that's a factor, but I think that pales in comparison to the empirical evidence the author has found in her own life -- the benefit of transparency.

There's an episode of How I Met Your Mother where a character always asks "Where's the poop?"[1] when she can tell someone is lying. She had a dog that always made he same face when it was hiding that it had pooped in the house.

I think the truth is that we all know in business there is always some poop somewhere. Whenever we lie, we leave our audience with an uneasy feeling, wondering what the catch is.

When we come right out and tell them what the catch is, we get past that barrier, which builds a relationship of trust from the start and allows the audience to weigh the values of our proposal on its true merits. This is the real power of telling the truth.

[1]: http://how-i-met-your-mother.wikia.com/wiki/Where's_the_poop...
Sorry that's on me for not explaining better:

I created a droplet and then destroyed it with the 'Scrub Data' checkbox enabled, and was surprised when I noticed it had been turned into a "temporary snapshot" rather than eliminated entirely in a secure, irrecoverable manner as the text around that UI element would have suggested.

I then went ahead, to prove a point, in restoring said snapshot onto an instance called 'test' and what you are seeing in terms of lingering data is from 'test' as very primitive proof that the snapshot did indeed occur and 'Scrub Data' doesn't behave how I think it should.

tl;dr - raiyu is being perfectly forthcoming and DigitalOcean is not reusing droplets to avoid erase/reset, we're just quibbling over the semantics of whether the 'Scrub Data' box should have a safety net or not, and whether the presence of a safety net could be deemed a security issue.
Not all duplication is bad. If you live to be long enough, you'll typically spot a cycle of stories carried in the mainstream media: local media's recycling of "places to visit" and "quaint historical anecdotes" items (new to me in my youth, somewhat less so in my dotage), the very, very predictable seasonal trend, particularly in consumer business stories around holidays, election cycles, etc.

In the case of HN, there are submissions I've seen which have gone down with no appreciable comment which, one or two or four years later, may well deserve a re-hearing. At the same time, you'll get iterations on a specific theme (a recent instance being 2^11 stories) which, while different in source, are often largely similar in content and significance. HN penalizes the former while passing on the latter. I'd prefer that reversed.

I've grown increasingly impressed with reddit's "related" link giving access to other discussions on a particular URL or topic. Actually, I've been growing increasingly impressed with reddit in general.
His issue is with market fragmentation then, not HFT. If all the liquidity providers were at the same market, his large order would hit all of the liquidity at the same time. This is a valid complaint to me, but blaming the HFTs for "front-running" (if you could even call this that) is a bit like UPS complaining that FedEx is using airplanes to quickly move packages around. Keep up with the technology or stop competing.
Not to be flippant, but price discovery is not a fraudulent issue in the markets I trade. That said, the exchanges I trade on, are much, much, much more diligent than the relevant governmental agencies.

I won't pass a value judgement on that.
I often hear people say: Get a 9 to 5 job...
But a job probably will not teach you much about business.

I have a different advice that will give you two important lessons at the same time:

"Sell something, as soon as possible."

If you have a product that you can build quickly. Build it and sell it, ASAP.

If you don't have a product... Good. Use the money you have and buy some product that you can sell for more... Repeat it.

Sales is the quickest way to make money and consequently will teach you about business.

PS: At this point it is preferable to find cheap products, so you can buy <-> sell quickly, until you have a good sum of money... then, you'll be able to elaborate the perfect product/business you have in mind.
Not surprised. The accounting nightmare that results from this means I'm basically done with cryptocurrencies. As a user trying to buy stuff with it I have no interest in dealing with keeping track of every transaction for the purposes of tax reporting, and neither is anyone else except for hardcore supporters.
HFT pushes incremental buy orders, which your sell order accepts (price discovery) but are canceled before they are filled.

This is incorrect. If you place a BUY@$100 and someone has a SELL@$100, the exchange instantaneously matches the orders and a trade is issued. You can't cancel an order which was matched.

The "price discovery" happens before the trade is placed. The instant the exchange receives the BUY@$100 order it is published to the world via the exchange's multicast quote stream.

"Issue an order they don't intend to complete" is an anachronism related to pit trading - in the pit, it's possible to throw the "I accept" hand signal at the other guy and then change your mind after trading hours during reconciliation. The FIX and OUCH protocols do not have a similar "oops I changed my mind now I'll be a jerk after hours" message.
He seems to have a Reality Clarification Field to me.
Op-ed: The legality of virtual currency
yeah, it's totally overpowered. =)
One of the reasons for it is actually Marketing. If I were to provide an 8Mbps connection, an average person would not know the fact that 8b = 1B. From an ISP view, 8Mbps seems a better speed than 1MBps to an average non-tech customer.
"At an event hosted by the [Chicago Mercantile Exchange] in October, Leo Melamed, one of the pioneers of Chicago's financial futures markets, called Budish's proposal a "nonstarter." He said the markets are working pretty well and there's no need to fix something that isn't broken.

Otherwise, Melamed said jokingly, "I'm going to consider going to North Korea and show them how they can become the center of finance in about three weeks."

So yeah this has been discussed and no, the powers that be like things the way they are. Go figure. This will need stronger powers to force the hand of the traders.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-high-speed-trading...
I prefer to work in Scala on the JVM if I can, but Java is still very prominent. CUDA is most common on FPGA though I haven't worked in it for awhile. Have not dealt with CPE in trading.
I think the fundamental problem though is that there are plenty of areas in biology where this breaks down on a practical level. The problem is actually a nomological problem, which deals with the limits of ontologies. Do "species" exist as such? Or are the limits which we place on them projected by us? Obviously a bat is not a dolphin, but where do you draw the line between species and subspecies, between one species and another closely related one, or between one genus and another closely related one?

These turn out to be remarkably tricky questions which is why Linnean classification is not as stable as we would like to believe..... It mostly works, but only to some extent, which is the problem.
Of course that's what I meant, not your entire tax return.
Wow, downvoted for simply posting a report on a dissenting opinion from a former IPCC review panel member. WTF?
Of course it's not going to help; but mostly because humans are driven by emotion.

Sharing copyrighted material is not a crime unless is an illicit sharing, that is, when you do not hold a license that allows you to do so. So there are many exceptions such as: when you download a song that explicitly allow copies for any of your own devices; the same applies when you are the copyright holder, or when the license does not cover the country where you live.
Anonymous takes on Albuquerque police
You might be interested in Edward Kmett's automatic differentiation[0] package, ad[1]. It is one of my favorite non-trivial blendings of computer science techniques and more traditional mathematics. In specific, it uses Haskell's type system to prevent subtle numerical errors which other automatic differentiation libraries require the user to prevent by being very careful. The resulting code is much more trustworthy.

[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_differentiation
[1] https://github.com/ekmett/ad/
From the article someone from bible studies said:

It’s amazing how water works. Ice freezes, then floats on water. It’s the only reason life works on earth and it’s a miracle! I can’t believe how cool it is, and the fact that modern science still can’t explain why ice floats is further proof of God and his miracles.

It’s quite amazing that someone thinks modern science does not have an answer for this.

I would have thought basic high school science has an answer for this.

From my high school days some 35 years ago, I remember being told this and if I remember correctly those same polar characteristics also help to explain why water has surface tension and why you can bend a stream of water using a charge stick.

I'm glad you put him right on that one.
So Skype has a 100% success rate piercing NATs and does not require any fallbacks?
Also you mentioned that you do not use STUN/TURN, what other solutions are there that allow for p2p data streams between browsers?
Escaping from the working class is a matter of luck, not hard work, and that's a brute fact of reality.

Bullshit.

It may be harder, but it's certainly not about luck. I went to a shitty state school (not even the flagship) in Arkansas. While I was a "frat boy" unless I'm interested in managing a cracker barrel they are of little help.

Instead I worked my ass off to develop meaningful skills. Then I intentionally found work with incredibly smart people who could help me. It may have taken me longer to reach my goals than someone with a Ivy League pedigree I was absolutely able to do it. No luck involved.

I absolutely believe that anyone else can do the same. I see it every single day.
This reminds me of the idea of Radical Honesty. Here's a good feature on it: http://www.esquire.com/features/honesty0707
>there is a very reasonable bias against non-repeatable matching algorithms in current markets.

What about psuedo-random that uses the trades themselves as a source of entropy?
Since the IRS has given a statement on BTC, people who had bought it last year and sold near the peak for USD or products/services have now realized that they owe a significant amount of taxes. So they now have to sell more BTC to get enough cash to write a check to the IRS. Thus the supply of BTC will increase and the price goes down.

The smarter thing would have been to sell the BTC and then put away X% in a savings account (or a stable investment) with a plan to pay that money to the IRS. Then the (100-X)% could be spent freely without issue.
Frad Google Apps Found on Windows Phone Store
Success in anything is rarely just about luck.
Downvotes seem to be as much emotionally driven as anything else. Also, there is the perpetual confusion between "I do not agree" and "This is not constructive"
Yep and I bet this guy was writing articles about the epic failure of tablet computing in the 2000's too...
Public money allowed his company to develop faster than it did, but even with only non-governmental commercial contracts SpaceX still would have developed along the same lines, just much slower for a while.
Matrix is Simulated Reality. Virtual Reality (imo) is just a component of it.

Believe it or not, but Simulated Reality is as close to us, as Proxima Centauri is close to the Sun. Its just about ~4.6 light years away!

We have MUCH research to commit to for us to get close to SR in an academic way, forget about commercial ways in even far away future....