skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You can walk around downtown/Uptown at dark. The crime, especially murder, is not spread evenly around the city. There are neighborhoods that experience flash points quite often -- as is the case in most cities.

Oakland, for reasons unique to Oakland, did not benefit from the move-back-to-downtown movement of the 90s-on that turned around city cores like Chicago. Still, Oakland's downtown is so small and geographically special that another strong wave of residential building will turn it around quicker than other cities. I'd argue we are already witnessing the run...
> Being offended shouldn't offer anyone any special rights.

Its a good think you said "shouldn't" rather than "can't", because any number of laws forbid various kinds of offensive behavior.

> If something "offends" you, ignore it and move on.

Not everyone can "move on", which is why we have the laws we do. This is only peripherally associated with the present topic, but no one should imagine that offensive behavior is absolutely tolerated, or that people can only relocate themselves to solve the problem.
I've lived in Oakland for ~8 months and I'm yet to be in a situation where I felt at risk (disclaimer: I'm a reasonably tall man and rarely feel at risk in cities). I live north of Lake Merrit, work in Jack London Square, and deliver bagels up and down Broadway and Telegraph on my bike. Primarily traversing that terrain, I feel very safe.

That said, there are other parts of the city that are much more dangerous. I generally put these in two categories: (1) neighborhoods with a high concentration of crimes like robberies and (2) neighborhoods where gang-related violence occurs. (2) is very often a subset of (1).

I'm not an expert, but from my understanding, (2) areas are heavily concentrated in East Oakland (east of Park Blvd), so if you generally don't traverse that part of the city, you avoid much of that danger.
Not strictly true that data is transferred a bit at a time! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadrature_amplitude_modulation for example transmits multiple bits on the same wire at the same time.
Maybe I'm being daft here, but why don't would-be file-sharers just encrypt files and send their friends passwords along with the links? Neither the provider nor the copyright holders would be able to tell who was sharing what, unless they monitored IM, email etc..

Of course it does seem that anyone can abuse the DMCA with impunity, so strictly speaking this wouldn't stop the "notice and takedown" actions. It would however prevent the automated detection and might increase cost and difficulty for copyright complainers.
Building Interfaces with Backbone and jQuery UI
Wouldn't the signal sent by abolishing all future software patents likely bias courts in the direction of not upholding current software patents even if we didn't explicitly invalidate all current patents? It seems that it would be a lot harder to get a judgement against an "infringer" of a bogus software patent if all software patents were considered invalid. So even if we didn't get all past software patent awards retroactively invalidated it seems plausible that it would significantly declaw them.

It seems like the holder of a software patent would really have to have something to get it to stick in such an environment. Because of that potentiality it doesn't seem like an all or nothing proposition to me.
This is a huge issue that doesn't get a lot of airtime. Many urban city dwellers rely on street parking. What solution is around for them to charge their vehicles? I love the concept Tesla is pushing, but this problem has me vexed.
Original Reddit comment: http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/17x0sh/john_carmack_a...
Twitter has enabled photo tagging by default. You might want to turn it off.
Source, please. I have something more recent from him:
Worked late last night, got insufficient sleep. Probably a net loss due to reduced efficiency today.
https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/436349946732621825
i found this via https://lobste.rs/s/e7rezf/twitter_has_enabled_photo_tagging... by https://lobste.rs/u/eik3
I love your description of the opportunity you are looking for :)
I agree, "blatant absurdity" is quite a strong wording. I should've wrote "quite dubious" or the like.

In my defense, I didn't even think of having a language with type coercion and 0 operator overloading (even on builtin types). I never saw such a language, and I'm skeptical that it could work. But it's an interesting take on the problem.

I cannot say why I think that the no-coercion+overloading is the better solution... maybe that's because operators are dyadic, and thus type coercion can be executed on both sides of the operator, and multiple times.
While function application is (can be?) sort of monadic (in the APL sense) since coercion/overloading for an argument doesn't depend on the type of the other arguments supplied to the function

(But while writing this, I'm not so sure anymore... at the very least, it could depend on the order in which arguments are evaluated...)
I was just going to mention Seedrs: http://www.seedrs.com/invest

(among many others but they seem to be the most popular choice in the UK)
I live and work in Oakland. My office is 3 blocks from 19th street BART in the heart of uptown. There is so much incredible development happening in this part of the city. The Hive project launches later this year (The Hub is already open in the space) with awesome new apartments, and amazing new food options. From Lake Merritt to Jack London Sq. to Rockridge to Montclair there are a wide range of options to consider for office / living space. Its also typically ~10 degrees warmer then SF. If you have any questions feel free to ask and I'll answer when I get back this afternoon.
Also look, the linked post is 1 year-old... Long before Carmack left id and switched to Oculus (and now Facebook).
Yes to a data analyst that is big data. If you are doing some MCMC and that is really what it takes on that size of data then you have a big data problem.

The more sophisticated a statistic, the more high dimensional the data, the more sampling required, or the more of the dataset it requires to memorise at once - then the smaller your big data threshold will be.

It depends a lot on your point of view too. If I google something now it may bounce across lots of crazy server farms but to me I don't feel like I'm doing big data.. the person who built it all probably feels differently.
Here's my rebuttal: http://turtlapp.tumblr.com/post/81222024691/how-turtl-has-no...
You clearly didn't read the article. It only applies to sharing files, not storing them. All of your arguments do not apply to shared files.
Coincidentally, I just saw a reddit comment where someone showed a way to statically add a debug statement to every function definition. The trick is to use a "pattern guard" to evaluate the trace, and then compare the result to "undefined" (never matches), so that the program continues on to look for a pattern that matches.
Mm, most of the issues the article discusses are part of the learning curve of Coffeescript IMO. The real problem I've had (and I still love it for some reason) is dealing w/ JS frameworks. Like, try using Coffeescript w/ Angular or something. It's quite difficult.
My high-school physics teacher always said, "be lazily efficient" and it's been a pretty sound guiding principle for me. That means I find shortcuts, optimize menial tasks, and most importantly, look out for early signs of burn-out so I can back off, thus keeping more efficient in the long run, all while those "time wasting" tasks become automated (thus letting me work "harder" on the important things).
I don't think what you're arguing would be a problem. From the article:

"Only when a file is shared from user-to-user (or with the Internet at large) does the DMCA check system come into play"

"Some thought the original file was deleted from the user’s Dropbox — that’s not the case, either. Dropbox just blocks the file from being shared."

Personally I think cloud services are super convenient and the downside for most people is really small.
Sum types only cover this trivially when the type is closed or when those adding new subtypes can be expected to modify all uses of the type. It's still not the same thing.
You could also just encrypt before uploading.
The book mentioned seems to be "Parallel And Concurrent Programming In Haskell", available online here: http://chimera.labs.oreilly.com/books/1230000000929
AirBnB and Oculus create value one by disruption and the other by innovation ... They are better left off from King lane which is more ephemeral ..

'99 was more of a tide where everything rose - look @ how King got punished in the market, would that have happened in '99?
You used the keyword here of a bubble. Potential versus realized revenues and profits ;)
If someone needs a screenshot howto to turn this feature off: http://pic.twitter.com/V02HdSlriS
boredbanker.com/news was mentioned here a few days ago, but seems down to me.
I was under the impression they knew, but didn't care. In the past I had uploaded GB-sized HDTV stuff and had it instantly uploaded and available to a friend. I figured they just hashed it, realized someone else already put it up, and added that file to my account or otherwise linked it into my account.
Are "acquired for $X" statements related to reality?
We're hearing about a lot of big acquisitions these days. For instance, Lithium and Klout put out a press release that one acquired the other for $200M. But since it's some mix of cash and stock, presumably this is based on Lithium's pre-IPO valuation of itself.

These valuations could be based on reality (outside investors) or maybe they are simply pulled out of thin air, like 2-3x the last time someone invested?

Even if there is some kind of standard formula for figuring this out, is anybody checking these numbers? Given the way the tech press works, I doubt it.
I've seen a lot of outrage about this on Twitter, what annoys me most is that these people who are outraged for the most part consider piracy to be acceptable. Then when a company tries to enforce copyright law and protect the rights of the content owners they go on a tirade that their personal privacy is being breached.

I know that the rights holders haven't been blameless in their history but piracy is still wrong and getting upset about people trying to stop it is wrong.

EDIT: I also think that Dropbox's method of detecting copyrighted files is a perfectly reasonable way of doing it. By now we all (should) know the rights we give up for the convenience we get when using consumer cloud services. I think Dropbox are well within their legal and moral rights to do this.
This if done right could really be a game changer - think getting an API where I could send a word and get back what it meant ...
It's not quite that simple, something can be a derivative work even if none of the original content remains and it's purpose changes dramatically. Generally speaking fan-fiction infringes copy-write when someone trys to make money off of it. However, the same work may be free and clear if you don't try and make money from it.

Teachers can generally copy something to use in class as an example. However, they may not copy the same content every year after that. Same action, but slightly different context.
I do not know if it is possible but you should tell people a bit more about your service on your webpage. I could find no details about how any of your claims are implemented.
China seizes $14.5 billion assets from family, associates of ex-security chief
All these things could have been said for Android when iOS and Blackberry's OS were kings.

The nature of gaming is changing. Listen to Gabe talk about player generated content being the way of the future. Core gamers are a niche bunch, and will spend thousands of dollars for custom hardware. Why would they settle for locked down, legacy software like Windows, when Linux can be made to work just as well if not better, for free, while allowing full customization?

Linux gaming is not going to be backwards compatible. It's not about now. It's about the future. An open source platform makes sense for the gaming industry, because it allows rapid experimentation and low barriers to entry.

Core gamers who support indie games have already moved to Linux. The AAA studios will follow once they see sufficient adoption.
The E60 M5 has an NA v10 ;-)
I think it's a brilliant idea, but I don't think people will be motivated to move forward with it without a clearer picture of what they would be creating in the real world.

We are strongly conditioned to try to "capture" value. You are attempting to redefine value in such a way that it is no longer advantageous to "capture" it at the expense of the overall system. But what would it look like in the real world?

It is a genuine challenge to envision real world transactions and a society based on Strangecoin, and even more difficult to come up with a profit motive to create it in the first place. Does a barista "couple" herself to a cafe when she gets a job that pays in Strangecoin? What are the effects of this vs employment as we know it? How does she fare as a result when compared to someone working for dollars with an employment contract?

Money serves many purposes, and one is to create incentives. Often these incentives are coercive. They don't have to be, but there are philosophical as well as technical challenges to overcome. When everyone is acting according to one set of rules, it is difficult to create a competing set of rules without some clearly defined advantage for doing so.
I think this article is pointing to Survival Mode as a state of mind more so than just an accounting reality. Some companies exist in Survival Mode far longer than their accounting might indicate.
Wonder if this implies you know what you are going to be doing in the future. As said by Sandi Metz, the true value good design is to reduce the risks of future change. I think it is a valid endeavor to study what reduces risk and what increases risk. This doesn't have to be about "design patterns".
I am really amazed at the amount of things that make it to the front of Hacker News with such little substance. I mean, that was a gif and a rather short few paragraphs of obvious advice.
"Object Oriented design is the Roman Numerals of Computing" - Rob Pike

For more quotes see :

http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/OO_programming/

Another, seeing as it's PG :

"The phrase 'object-oriented' means a lot of things. Half are obvious, and the other half are mistakes." — Paul Graham
Software patents tend to be the most superficial of them all when it comes to the litmus test of "Could I reproduce this patented system without ever reading the patent just by looking at the results of it". (Or, even worse, in many cases it boils down to "could I reproduce this patented system totally by accident without ever even knowing someone else patented this simple system").

A good canonical example of this is Apple's much maligned "bounce scroll" or slide-to-unlock patents (though Apple is hardly alone when it comes to this nonsense).

Any decent software developer could see either of those in action, having never read Apple's patent and never seen Apple's source code and whip up his or her own implementation in less than an hour. That alone should invalidate these patents.

Some will argue that Apple's original idea was unique at the time, so they should have a patent on those grounds, but that's not what patents are supposed to protect (though massive amounts of money being funneled into lobbying and the legal system have served to obscure this in the past couple of decades).

Patents don't exist to protect ideas, they are supposed to protect unique and novel implementations of inventions, not ideas. There's really not a true legal IP mechanism for the protection of ideas (even copyright is protection of expression, which is closer to ideas, but not quite the same).
His "D3D interop" layer (I'm not sure why he called it emulation) is almost exactly what Valve just open-sourced.

https://github.com/ValveSoftware/ToGL
Free VPN for Turkey
Ah, it's this "why not wine" article.

> I truly do feel that emulation of some sort is a proper technical direction for gaming on Linux. It is obviously pragmatic in the range of possible support, but it shouldn’t have the technical stigma that it does.

That might be a valid point if wine's windows support was like FreeBSD's linux compatibility layer. But it isn't... It is a massive pile of API translation layers and libraries reverse engineered from a huge closed source proprietary moving target. It's a hacky workaround and I couldn't believe he is actually saying reverse engineering windows is a "proper direction" that "shouldn't have a technical stigma".
I had a teacher like this too... helped me learn and then forget, and then re-learn that getting more done with less effort is working smart.

Trying to double that up leads to problems because working smart takes foresight and planning.

I know in my earlier 20's I didn't have much more to my life than coding. I wasn't as well rounded and did not know that my time away from the keyboard made my work at the keyboard twice as fast.

Maintaining that fine line of efficiency is key -- I've found being married to the right partner who gets the crazy runs, but ensuring it comes back to a norm is in place.

I find I'm able to get done in hours by preparing and thinking a little what can take days of trying haphazardly and burning the candle at both ends, but everyone's mileage may vary.
How is this supposed to work? Unless you want to route all non-native-IPv6 traffic (i.e. almost all traffic) through the gateway, which would defeat the goal of peer-to-peer, you need a way to do NAT traversal over UDP, and at that point assigning IPv6 addresses would be somewhat redundant.
Average revenue per customer is meaningless
http://data.heapanalytics.com/your-average-revenue-per-customer-is-meaningless/ Your average revenue per customer is meaningless
There's wefunder too (https://wefunder.com/) who are getting set up to allow unaccredited (lower net worth) investors once the JOBS act goes through.
I agree that shadowing is bad.

Implicitly scoping variables to their lexically-outermost point of use is a terrible solution, though: changing anything in any outer scope can completely change the meaning of code in all nested scopes. That's really really bad.

A much better syntax would is to require the 'var' keyword to denote the scope of every variable, but reject shadowed symbols at compile time.
OK, since I didn't give a very good example, let me try to show a better one. Let's imagine you're writing a testing library. You have a series of tests; each one of them takes in an input, a function to run on the input, and an expected output.

data Test i o = Test String i (i -> o) o

and then say your testing function is something like

runTest :: Eq o => Test i o -> IO ()
runTest (Test name input f output) = case f input of
o | o == output -> putStrLn $ name ++ " passed"
| otherwise -> putStrLn $ name ++ " failed"

Then let's say you had a bunch of tests. For example, you want to test that addition works:

test1 = Test "addition" (1, 2) (\a b -> a + b) 3

And you want to test string concatenation:

test2 = Test "concat" ("hello", "world") (\a b -> a ++ b) "helloworld"

Then you could write your tests as

doTests = runTest test1 >> runTest test2

Now if you have a lot of tests, it would be nice to put them in a list:

doTests tests = forM_ tests runTest

However, this would require that every test have the same inputs and outputs. You couldn't do

doTests [test1, test2]

Even though the resulting type is known (it will be an IO () regardless), and even though runTest will operate on each one, because test1 and test2 have different types, you can't put them all in a list.

I think that `forall` and similar allow you to get around this restriction somehow, but I don't really know how that works.
So if you don't control, say, your family they are not your family?
It does apply, there is no evidence that receiver does not have a valid license. It could be even the same person using two accounts.

By this logic we should shutdown Github and SourceForge, until we "clear up some legal stuff".
You're confusing NAT with the firewall. Without a firewall, a pure-NAT will often let you route to the internal network addresses from the outside. There isn't really much "obfuscation" of the LAN addresses either, as they are almost certainly a 1/256-guess away on the 192.168.1.x network.

This confusion is very common, probably because it's incredibly rare to find NAT by itself. Every home router is basically guaranteed to have a basic stateful firewall in addition to providing NAT.
It delights in the techno-utopia envisaged by Nicholas Negroponte, personally I just can't be doing with it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Negroponte
Also, it's a weird comparison because Haskell is one, crisply-defined thing -- but what does he mean by "Lisp"? Common Lisp? Scheme? Racket? Clojure? Does Dylan count? The only Lisp he mentions specifically is Emacs' Elisp -- which would be a straw man to pick for a comparison.

Things like Typed Racket (and its port to Clojure.Typed) show that you can have a lisp with static typing, as well as the traditional strengths of a lisp.

You can also have a lisp like Dylan or Pyret that doesn't even use s-expressions, but is most definitely a lisp.
Yes, the former is much worse - you're immediately don't get a useful product, instead of not getting a paper which may or may not bring you some money somewhere in the future if 1000 things align right. Note that most sales of product actually end up in product being sold, while most startups end up failing and wiping their investors clean. That is without any fraud - just plain statistics.
Just curious, are you storing the keys? Or at the very least the login info from which you could regenerate the keys? If so, there's no reason a government couldn't ask for you to hand the info over, so even though this is a step more complex that Dropbox, it doesn't add too much security.

Now, if users provide their own key and it's never transmitted, that would be secure, but obviously the data would be un-decryptable if the key is lost.
> The idiomatic approach here was already mentioned by dllthomas: this is a functional programming language, so use functions! Specifically, use a record of functions, with each function in the record serving the same role as a method in OO. The functions can have private data by closing over it.

This is also how one does OO programming in C: just roll your own v-table using a struct of function pointers. You don't get to close over an environment in that case, so you have to be careful to pass everything in.
Enter service to add random metadata to your files to trivially thwart protection scheme.
My answer is in other thread, but in short my comment does apply even to sharing.
Is it just me, or has John Carmack become a collective programming idol around here to the point of absurdity (absurd for any one person)? Or maybe it's just because of all of the VR controversy as of late. ´John Carmack does/did it´, well... I guess that settles it, then.