skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Congratulations, you figured it out.

You don't know anything.

Come on man—you're 23! how many real problems have you even encountered in your life? Let me rephrase that in a way that sounds less dismissive of any personal problems you may have in your life (which are important but not the basis of a startup)—how many problems have you encountered in your life that could be solved by technology or automation that are also shared by people with money who are willing to pay for them?

Get a job that pays well. If you can get a job that pays you well enough to save a little something AND lets you work part-time, that's even better. Take the extra time to work on your ideas, work on learning a new language, read up on things you know nothing about. Because THAT'S where successful startups play. Until you get out and see the world around you, you're not going to see problems you can solve. Its the biggest mistake I made in my 20's, and the biggest mistake I see most people your age making. Work at a crappy job for awhile, learn an industry that has a lot of sucky parts to it, and figure out how to make them better.

Also, FWIW (and something I wish I'd figured out a lot sooner)—most of your friends probably don't share your values, so find some that do, and things like paying your rent and going on vacation to Germany with your girlfriend is as much her responsibility as it is yours. Don't be that guy.

Email's in my profile, feel free to contact me for lots of cranky-old-guy advice.
I have a little skype group where we discuss AI. If you are interested you can add me on skype: Switch336

As for learning AI it is best to learn it in the language that you are strongest in or a language that is easy to understand the semantics from it. For that matter Lua, Ruby, and Python are fairly commonplace for people trying to learn how to use AI. But AI algorithms can be written in any language really.

I'd suggest books with common examples of AI; like https://github.com/jbrownlee/CleverAlgorithms. He uses ruby for most of their examples but they are fairly understandable.

If you cannot get the books you want. You may be better off checking out the source codes at least. There are tons of free online books if you do some more searching. And you can even read some online ipython notebooks or blog posts about AI that may be more helpful.

Anyways, the more the merrier for discussions. So feel free to join our group. Just give me a message and I'll add you :D.
I only know a few. There's the civil rights attorney who was on Quan's staff. That's two negatives for me; trying to be nice to everybody at once is how Quan got into a quagmire with Occupy Oakland. Seigel refers to the space in front of city hall as "Oscar Grant Plaza" which puts him firmly in the moron column on my ticket.

I know Schaaf, who represents my district. I don't really like her policies because they represent the clueless barely-affluent people up in the hills. Anti-tax and tough-on-crime on the same ticket? Schaaf has that ticket. It doesn't make sense. She's also been active in trying to rollback pedestrian improvements and bike lanes in favor of a handful of parking spaces which reinforces my image of her as a bit clueless.

I guess technically Quan is also running again. Heh.

Your thoughts?
In some areas, the R&D required to come out with a prototype is substantial -- in medicine you have costly clinical trials for instance. Free riders would benefit a lot more from that than software innovations.
Static type checking, regardless of language, requires thinking about programs in a particular way because one possible mode of failure is prioritized over all other modes. It does so regardless of whether absolute type safety deserves to be prioritized given the purpose of a particular program and it does so regardless of whether absolute type safety is an appropriate concern at a particular stage of the program's development.

Static typing can make "how do I get this to compile?" a design criterion Consider year 2038 problem. In MySQL, various date types are coerced to the timestamp type by design. Otherwise the program would not compile. Compilation takes precedence over problem solving.

http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/datetime.html
Yeah, the terrible cost is that you end up believing them.
839 Traits of Successful People
Could that be sold as an upgrade, something akin to the international outlet kits that apple sells for it's laptop chargers?
Sweet Jesus the HN comments here are scary. I'd have hoped for some sort of sense here.

I really should get over my idea that comments here are any better than any other internet cesspool....
Out of curiosity, as I'm not aware of any patents that oculus actually owns on VR, do you happen to have any information on that?
I don't think its in Google's strategic view to release any official WP apps. Doing that would mean they would have to accept WP as competition. Windows 8 (Desktop) store on the other hand has a handful of official Google apps.
I think this might be overstated. It is certainly an opinion with some mindshare; I would hesitate to guess whether it's in the majority or minority, and it's definitely not universal.
True, but any gradient in real estate prices will tend to induce a flow of people.
Ooh, pretty fun! I played with it for a little while for ya and signed up! Best wishes from a fellow founder! :)
I have used other statically typed languages (I used to do C# .NET for a living), but Haskell was the first time I felt like I was getting my money's worth so to speak.
The term is derived from German. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geistiges_Eigentum

It dates back at least 150 years.
Pops head down in to a rabbit hole ...

I find your code reads naturally enough forward. Your abstract brief example makes it no big deal to me which way round it goes.

One issue is "end weight". Let me slightly doctor the examples in http://perl.find-info.ru/perl/028/perlbp-chp-2-sect-16.html and ask you to compare:

When, after long nights of hacking, in horrible dreams there come to me damnèd souls responsible for ANSI C++, I run screaming.

with:

I run screaming when damnèd souls responsible for ANSI C++ come to me in horrible dreams, after long nights of hacking.

If I were writing one of the above two sentences, "end weight" consideration might lead me to write the latter.

If one applies these principles (left-to-right sweep and "end weight") to writing and reading of programming language statements one arrives at features such as the 'unless' keyword and the benefits they supposedly confer on writers (expressivity) and readers (ease-of-reading).
tl;dr If you are buying stocks as an individual for less than 10 years, don't: you are going to get killed.

see also: buy index funds
This is a very interesting project and it has actually set me on an interesting path.

In scientific computation one blends mathematics and computation. The math is highly advanced, and it will tell you important things about your resulting code such as what kind of stability properties you should expect, and how "robust" the code is (deliberately ambiguous term, but in most cases it means: does your code work equally well no matter what parameters you throw at it?).

In the realm of physics simulations, these math questions turn out to be amazingly delicate and failing to answer them before running your code on a very large problem very often leads to unexpected (and wrong) results, if the code actually ever successfully finishes executing.

There is therefore a tremendous amount of literature where these questions are answered, all containing a meticulous amount of careful detail as well as deep insights coming from all the relevant branches: linear algebra, physics, functional analysis.

The problem however is that as we gain more understanding and knowledge the math hasn't gotten any easier. Sometimes the arguments are so sophisticated that it really leads me to doubt whether the result can be trusted at all.

This leads into something which I know very little:

A better understanding of foundations really is called for here, and a foundation which lends itself better to computation than what is currently available. Computers need to start being able to verify proofs better. Proof assistants exist today, but their use is currently limited to computer scientists because they rely on deep results in that field relating type theory to mathematics - it represents a tremendous barrier to practicing mathematicians.

I hope in the future that "reproducibility" in my field means not only submitting your code so that other people can reproduce your performance claims, but submitting proof documents to be independently verified on someone else's computer. Whenever I read the small bits about univalent foundations it sounds like they are adding magic sauce to make this possible, and so I follow it closely (but don't understand it all yet).

The interesting path I spoke of earlier: I'm now learning type theory and functional programming just so that I can make sense of this branch of computer science that I originally didn't know existed.
Below are some stats regarding starting your own business in perspective. [1]

Starting a business is hard and takes a long time. It also takes a fair amount of luck.

May I suggest, next time you have a business idea, you pitch it to as many successful business people you can find. They don't have to be VC's or Angel investors. Pick any successful business owner in your community.

Ask them for their honest opinion. If they say they like it, see if they would "put their money with their mouth is" and would invest in your idea.

In the mean time, do as others have suggested: get a good paying job and start saving as much as you can. You are going to need much more than $5,000 to pay for living and business expenses when you go all in on your next venture.

[1] http://www.statisticbrain.com/startup-failure-by-industry/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/elainepofeldt/2013/06/29/the-ris...
<sarcasm>That seems to be the principle use case for Javascript, and that is (arguably) the lingua franca of our generation. </sarcasm>
I think it's been raised here before, but why can't all trades be submitted, kept secret then only executed simultaneously at some discrete interval - say every 5 minutes?
Does anyone believe, but doesn't want to believe?

I'm edging atheist intellectually, but can't shake a gut emotion that there is something bigger.
Yep, it's all about drawing lines around things. Piedmont has little crime, but it's encircled by Oakland. Should it just be lumped in with Oakland statistically?

Speaking of which, when I get around to running for mayor of Oakland, I'm going to have only 2 planks:

1) Charging the people of Piedmont $50 to drive out of Piedmont.

2) Divesting "Oakland" of almost all of its real estate, while retaining all of its civic debts, then letting the remnant entity of "Oakland" just go bankrupt.

I think this is going to be a very popular platform!
Well, my memory isn't perfect, but didn't Musk try to let some other guy run Tesla, only to see it nearly driven into bankruptcy? It wasn't until Musk came back as CEO that it turned around, and is now worth over $20 billion. Of course there are countless talented people behind the product, but like great athletes, if they don't have a great coach, they won't win a lot of games. Musk just happens to be the greatest coach we've seen in generations.
This is a great and insightful comment. May I just clarify, you say you are a "PL theorist"—is that programming language theorist? What kind of work does that entail?
Settled for relevance would indicate they are currently not relevant which is a mindset only accepted in a few square miles on the planet. How different would the valley view Microsoft today had they been headquartered in SV instead of Redmond?
That is so on the money!

Like everything in life - just because it appears simple, doesn't mean it is easy...

...and then go bang your partner again. They're either missing you or about to break up with you.
You sir, deserve my upvote for making me laugh on HN.
"UDP hole punching does not work with all types of NAT..."

I think what you mean to say is the STUN and TURN solutions do not work.

What else have you tried?

I personally do not use those solutions.

The last resort is for a peer outside the problem NAT to forward traffic.
This is not true peer-to-peer (IMO) but it does work.

If what you suggest were true, that reliable peer-to-peer is "impossible" because of some types of NAT, then how do you explain the success of Skype?

If you give specifics about what exactly you were trying to do, and what exactly you did to try to accomplish this, maybe someone could offer suggestions.

I already knew that STUN and TURN have problems. That's why I do not even bother with those "solutions".
* I've lost pretty much all my friends because of the time I've spent trying to make my ideas work.

I suspect that work has nothing to do with this, more likely the negativity and the real reason why you're so obsessed with work. I think work is your crutch, not your problem.

* And now it's 2:31am on a Sunday evening and my girlfriend is in bed wondering why I won't come give her a cuddle, but I can't.

Most people are asleep then, that, by no stretch of the imagination is "evening".

You need to stop whining and get a job. Learn how to be a person, relate to your girlfriend, balance your interests, sort your shit out. Whining to the hn crowd is not the way to sort your life out, you need to stop looking to others to sort things out for you.

No business person with any chops is going to read this and want to go into business with you. You can't sleep, you can't keep your end up in a relationship with your girlfriend, you've been working five years and have only $5k to show for it, you've admitted to failing at everything!
I just read through it all and realized you're just 23! I don't think you should be so hard on yourself. I thought you were like 40 and lost with no hope. But at 23? Come on.... Just get yourself a simple job for a bit. Take a break. What do you have to lose? Once you sound a little less burned out, you can give startups a shot again. Have some patience, and please enjoy your journey; you only get to do it once.
It seems there are other solutions that are superior to the patent system and that some of my assumptions were flawed. I no longer think that "patents are the best system we have, given the alternatives."

Elaborated in full here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7499328
CHICKEN, not to be confused with the CHICKEN CHICKEN CHICKEN programming language defined here: http://torso.me/chicken
No, it's not. Releasing their ideas using a patent involves a lot less risk for a company who relies on an invention of theirs than keeping it secret and just waiting for someone else to have the same idea. It provides stability that they otherwise cannot rely on without some kind of protection. The know they can keep their intellectual advantage for the whole term of the patent, where without it they are just waiting an indefinite time until someone reverse engineers their technological advantage. Stabaility leads to more investment, and patents lead to society gaining access to ideas much sooner than they would have otherwise.

Most people forget the patent system is based on one simple idea: you can exclude others using an idea you have a patent for, but society must have that idea shared in return for the protection, and after a limited period of time anyone may be allowed to use the idea. 20 years is a bit long for software when things are moving at such an accelerated pace, but coming up with an appropriate period of time is also difficult.
Musk is thinking 8 steps ahead of almost everyone.

I think he's just thinking from first principles and it's the rest of us that have convoluted reality with a panoply of suppositions and just-so stories. People like Musk only seem like they have a "reality distortion field because we're seeing his simple conclusions through the lens of our own distortions. (It's us that have the 8-steps, in a tortured circle.)
Who knew that HN was a hotbed of climate denialism?
Their solution at IEX was to coil a bunch of fiber so that high speed traders' orders get slowed down...I'd have to know more about why they thought that was necessary, but on its face this seems like complete overkill. Obviously there are probably reasons that I don't understand but it seems like this problem would be really easy to solve in software. For instance, I don't see why they don't just trade on a step interval. Basically everyone who arrives within 1 second of each other should have their trades executed simultaneously. Thus you have step of 1 second - nobody can get ahead of you because the travelling time between any two exchanges for even the slowest person is much, much less than 1 second. Does this make the market too slow? Just make the step interval whatever the slowest latency is for any given round trip at any given moment. That would still be on the order of milliseconds but nobody would be able to front-run you because any trade you make will be ahead of theirs or at the very worst at the same time as theirs.
If you have 3 people buying at price x and 2 people selling at price x, which 2 of the 3 buyers get their purchase?

The rules for this are the "matching algorithm". In most markets this is determined in a fifo fashion. Adding a discrete time delay wouldn't change this, there would still be a race to be first into the 5 minute period.
Instead of being angry about hyperbole and ignorance, my new policy for HN story's touching HFT is to just answer questions. I build HFT systems for a living. My experience is only in commodities futures but I can try to explain equities markets as well. Ask away instead of passing on bad info.
That's ok, there's a whole spectrum of boring/interesting, well-paid/not so well-paid jobs.

pyrrhotech's advice is exactly the one I was going to give.

Work on some side project at the same time.

And you know what? You might even like it, gain some skills and friends at work which will put in get stead for the rest of your life.

The genius artist in an attic is a seductive myth.
The world WAS BEGGING for a BuzzFeed Satire site.
An iPad is a paper replacement too.
I wish they'd depict the y-axis starting at 0 instead of 450, which makes the decline seem worst than it is.

Also -1 for disabling zoom on mobile devices.
Discrete time matching always forgets about the case when there are more buyers than sellers (or vice versa). If 2 people are buying at price X and 3 people are selling at price X, which 2 sellers get "filled"?

In most markets currently that is done in FIFO order. Discrete time values do not eliminate the race into/out of a level.
Then randomise rather than FIFO it.
Or pro-rata it -- (an option submitted with the offer)
As far as I know, IEX is of no use for the average joe investor. We aren't buying and selling in blocks of 1000 or 10,000.

Believe what you want, but there is a reason companies pay big money for super low latency.
I may be wrong but I don't think Skype works without at least a browser extension.
Debunking the "expensive procedure call" myth (1977) [pdf]
Judge tosses Samsung's objection to patent video
> He's established both things. First, that class hierarchies are bad when they break encapsulation (he calls this the engineering problem with them).

His exact quote was "Class hierarchies create brittle programs that are difficult to modify."

But he has not demonstrated the first part of that except in one specific case. That case may (?) be common, but it not inherent in the problem - class hierarchies do not require breaking encapsulation.

His conclusion is not supported by his argument because his argument applies only the the strawman he created, and not to the general case to which his conclusion refers.
That looks pretty cool, actually. It's a community event, and people are clearly having a good time doing something they love. What's not to like?
Find a Mormon friend and ask them. They have a different view.
China plans global network of surveillance satellites
I have a bunch of feedback to this.

1. You have to support yourself before you can do other things. If that means getting standard employment, that is what you have to do.

2. Being from a working class family is no obstacle. You can do some work on the side (make sure you check your employment contracts, make sure no conflict of interest, and if necessary discuss with your employer). But avoid living in the machine. Get out, spend time with friends. Maintain social relationships. Those are important, and nevermoreso when you are in business for yourself.

3. Go to garage sales. Pick up used accounting textbooks. Learn enough accounting that you can keep your own books. Accounting is the language of business, and it is one thing you have to have at least a basic grasp of if you are to get back into business for yourself.

4. If you still have time, get involved in Toastmasters, to develop public speaking ability.

5. Surround yourself with people who will support you when you start something but challenge you before you do. This is vitally important because you want a clear view of the problems before you begin but you also want people who will help you overcome problems rather than drag you down to them.

6. You don't have to know everything yourself. You need to know people who can help with things.
Then forget the FIFO convention. How about a hardware random number generator?

However, this doesn't fix the problem with placing and canceling lots of orders to sway the bucket toward the end of the 5-minute window. I suppose if some could do this faster at the end of the window then others, they would still retain an advantage.

(Imagine somebody placing many orders, monitoring how many are likely to be fulfilled advantageously, and then cancelling the disadvantageous ones as close to the end of the window as possible.)

That could perhaps be solved with fees for cancelling bids or asks.
You'd be somewhat surprised on that point. Especially if you just take it such that everything is just trying to build up an s-expression. While the homoiconicity of the language is incredibly cool for macros and whatnot, I don't think you strictly need it. Especially not at the top level. (That is, if you made a language that "compiled" down to s-expressions, what is missing?)

At the extreme end, take a look at Dylan.

Though, I was really referring to your other points. It seemed every one of your "questions" is directly addressed.
do you mind elaborating why you hoped for this tax ruling? currency seems like bitcoin's most powerful application, but this ruling cripples its currency applications -- not because of documentation purposes (since wallets can easily record tax data), but because now each transaction contains a potential bitcoin capital gains cost. in other words, buying a camera for $200 might cost more than $200 because of capital gains. unless the price of bitcoin completely stabilizes, doesn't this ruling hurt bitcoin as a currency?
Big Data is less about size and more of a characterization. Human generated data can never be big data - there's just not enough humans to make it all. Possibly with the exception of the biggest social networks.

Big Data is machine generated by systems. Typically its logs, IoT etc.