skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I think a more subtle solution (a thus politically viable) would be to attach a filter to the front of the current political system. Right now, we get sports stadium style debates filled with sounds bites, pretense, and timely rhetoric, which encourage showmanship over substance. A cooler, internet based debate system could crowd source better policies and politicians. An interactive system for judging the debates and commenting could increase exposure and decrease apathy for the "voters".

It could be a platform where people "run" and "vote" on candidates. Debates could be structured in some sort of tournament system, where winners are determined by voters who are directed to them evenly. The debate topics could be decided on before hand by the voters, once again by voting their interests. At the end of it, there would be a few filtered candidates, who would have a series of well formed and observable views on each of the topics defined by the voters. The whole system would have no legitimate political tie in, but the win there could be used to prefilter their conventional run, and provide a history to go on.

There are some substantial details I overlooked there, a big one being how to make sure the votes are legitimate. But if enacted, I think it would take our political system a long way towards a true democracy.
> You won't be left holding the bag

Yeah, unless it's 51% attacked in which case you would lose everything.
απο ποιο μερος εισαι greekdev? αθήνα?
Need a music player for the office?
Why? If it's so cut and dry, it should not be a problem to explain this.

I would of course assume that less people downvoting + more specific complaints would lead to more moderator action on the more obnoxious/distracting posters, if that wasn't the case I wouldn't recommend the change either.
You have to rethrow exceptions in other languages too. What's wrong with this?
do we have to redefine intelligence and technology :) or should we stick to the definition we all know :)

All I could make of your comment, other animals are like us, but they are not nerds. :)
"It should be easier for a late-arriver on a post to add a useful comment, and have it be promoted"

That'd be nice, but not important enough to the discussion for me to recommend a feature. It'd just encourage threads to last even longer and with even more bickering.
There's this project by Stanford to simulate Mycoplasma genitalium: http://wholecellviz.stanford.edu

There's also this, which is part of the project above: http://www.cell.com/abstract/S0092-8674(12)00776-3

The problem is you need to know about tons of stuff before doing anything useful with it. For example, you need to know the biology of M. genitalium (or even what the hell it is) and you need to know at least a little bit about how the biology works (i.e. what is the metabolome? etc.). Then you need to know enough about software to be able to install and get everything running (often with poor documentation). Sometimes you need access to expensive software like Matlab.

So I guess that means it's coming, but very slowly and only for people who are in the field, not DIY biologists.

This is actually something I'm interested in working in (once I get to grad school).
Just offering unpaid time off would mean people who are tight on money would take exactly 0 days off. Because at the end of the month your paycheck is going to be that many days smaller.
> Routines should have only one purpose, If a routine does more than one thing then it is better split it into individual routines.

Yes, unless the routines's purpose is to decide which action should be taken, and unless each action is so small that branching to other routines is inefficient. I can't count the number of times I've seen someone pontificate about a rule that isn't a rule.

If the OP's views had merit, there would be no switch statements or function hashtables.
Tell me "unlimited vacation" and I will run as fast as I can and never look back.
Design a creative and inspiring logo for a web automation startup
Something went terribly, consistently wrong in his job search for a Stanford CS PhD in that economy to fail to land. I've always found his article to be an odd piece of self-antipromotion. He's publicly admitting he landed a ton of interviews and couldn't find common ground with a single company, which means he either doesn't know how to choose companies or can't carry a conversation for the duration of his interviews.
Hmm, so nobody has brought up the possibility of some sort of Apple + Nike collusion (for lack of a better word) here?

Cook sits on the Nike board. Who's to say he didn't let the folks at Nike in on what Apple were working on and the two companies decided to make some sort of deal seeing as the two products would have areas of overlap.

I can see a scenario where Nike features prominently as a partner for Apple's wearable products.
"Troll: Disagrees with individual or community."

It's not that they disagree or "hold an unpopular opinion", it's how they express said opinion.

Some people can champion unpopular opinions in insightful and interesting manners. Others are kneejerk contrarians and collect opinions that are likely to get themselves the negative attention they seek.
Watch two chatbots talking to each other
> The code quality issues in the patches are fixable. The biggest problem with this is the fact that right now, the wifi chip (from Marvell) needs a proprietary driver to run. The submitted patches only include a prebuilt .ko for this driver. The response I got from Belkin indicates that they didn't realize that this was going to be a problem and they are now trying to fix it.

More at: https://lists.openwrt.org/pipermail/openwrt-devel/2014-April...

[That said, I find this to be typical of Belkin overall and would not, at the moment, recommend any of their Belkin/Linksys products if you expect to interface with them using software.]
Thanks!

We also just got rid of "Clowncopterize":

https://secure.phabricator.com/D8812
Email is fundamentally flawed, or better put it is not up to challenges of time. While I am reading this ars articles with great interest and was toying with the idea of rolling my own email server, series size and complexity serve as a best argument of email flawed state.
We are fixing and patching and protecting something that fundamentally can't be that well fixed, patched and protected. We need to reinvent everything.
What if instead of a Google API, this used a Duckduckgo API? What if DDG forked this to their own use?
SQL is pretty good
The only comment of yours I've ever seen gray, but there's certainly truth here. I haven't seen this EXACTLY, but close to it...
Your link isn't even an account of the trial or the details of the charges, it's just one guy disputing one version of the Nacchio story.

The "fraud" involved an overly optimistic assessment of Qwest's future. That might indeed legally be fraud but it's hardly blatant in the sense one might argue it's a fairly common occurrence and most instances of such behavior go to civil, not criminal court.

"In its case, the government stated that Nacchio continued to tell Wall Street that Qwest would be able to achieve aggressive revenue targets long after he knew that they could not be achieved. This helped it buy up regional phone rival US West, the government alleges."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio#Insider_trading....
No, the trivial-patent holders already have that incentive. In any case, in a direct lobbying/political conflict between IBM, GSK, Dow Chemical and whoever versus pure-play trolls, even big ones like IV, my money is on the former. The way in which a fixed levy would or could facilitate trivial-patent holders is by putting in place a revenue-collecting process (making claims on the 5% pool) which might (or might not) be smoother and more reliable than the process by which these gentlemen make their money nowadays.
I bought that once on a whim, when I worked a few blocks away from Powell's Technical Books, back when that was its own entity. Never really had the chance to do anything with it though.

What are MIPS processors used for these days?
You're really playing into the echo chamber of "celebrities" by giving such a damn.

The solution is to stop caring about upvotes and karma. They are internet friendship points, not validations of personality.
I would like to point out that you are assuming the person using these photos is able to post-process in such a way as to make them more presentable for their purpose. For many people this is not the case - they don't actually know how to make the images better. I would argue that for them, these kinds of sites are a great benefit and make their lives much easier (and cheaper).

Secondly, using one photo from each is hardly representative of the whole. Many of the simple stock photos that are found can be rather cheesy.
TL;DR: blurby article from last year that confuses the academic job market in general, the private job market for an average PhD, and one person's bizarre experience looking for a private job despite graduating from an elite CS PhD program in a very good economy.
As a pure user (someone who isn't going to modify and redistribute the software), I see no difference in freedom between BSD and GPL licensed software—I am just as able to download, install and run FreeBSD as Ubuntu. I can even burn a stack of DVDs of either to hand out to my friends.

The fact someone else can fork FreeBSD and start selling OppressionCorpBSD doesn't change this at all. Sure, I can't hand out free copies of OppressionCorpBSD, but that doesn't hinder my use of FreeBSD any more than the existence of Windows does. (And I do love my freedom to not use Windows!)

Neither license prevents the existence of proprietary software, but the existence of proprietary software doesn't force me to use it.

It's the modify-and-redistribute case that's interesting, which is why I focus on that. (Why would you care about having the source code at all if you don't plan to change it?) The nice thing about open source is it lets you blur the lines between user and developer—it lets you change existing software, then give that new version to anyone who wants it.

Even as a mostly user sharing minor tweaks, the GPL limits my options—I can only incorporate code I can legally distribute under the GPL. That doesn't hurt me when my patch is entirely my own original code, but it does hurt me if I want to re-use code from a (4-clause) BSD-licensed project, or from any other GPL-incompatible license.

The GPL envisions a world where all software is GPL'd. Simpler licenses co-exist in a world where a lot of software isn't GPL'd.
Consider making prints on archival paper. Although this seems "lo-tech" making 20 prints a year for 40 years would give you 8 volumes of 100 images. That would be a nice archive, not so unweildy as to be a problem, yet also readily shared and visually inventoried.

The issue of even file-formats is problematic when it comes to digital images. One has to ask are NEF and CR2 files going to be infinitely readable? Are canon and nikon themselves going to last 40 years? And if so, provide backward compatibility? and if Not, when and where and to what quality should we trandfer the information to something more archival?

It's not clear at all. So I think this is a great question to ask, consider, and ponder solutions for.
A Sarcastic Comment about Instant Message Virtual Keyboards
Many instant message virtual keyboards include comma and period but question mark requires an extra step or two to access

The reason for this is obvious commas and periods are absolutely essential to context and communication while question marks are rarely if ever needed

I mean lets just see what a happens when we try to communicate without commas or periods lets just try it and see the chaos that results

Imagine a shopping list without commas bread eggs milk potatoes utter complete confusion

The wise designer of todays instant message keyboards understands that people primarily communicate in assertions declaratives and imperatives while questions are exceedingly rare

And on those rare occasions when one needs to ask a question the sentence context always makes the question clear without need for a question mark

lets consider some simple examples

no

This sentence is clearly a question

yes

This sentence is clearly a statement

There you see our wise designers decision to slavishly follow traditional keyboard structure is more than jusified

well done wise designer
Introducing Bits To Change, a new Bitcoin charity hub
RFC439 by V. Cerf, for real?
>Can you explain to me how my computing freedom is enhanced by using a binary that's licensed under the Free BSD licence without the source being released?

That isn't a thing. I find it hard to believe you are genuinely as confused as you appear to be. I suspect the "silent downvotes" reflect the likelihood that you are being deliberately dishonest to spread FUD, as your particular example of FUD is older than a lot of the people posting here, so it is hard to believe anyone genuinely doesn't know better at this point.

A proprietary program that is a derivative of a BSD licensed program is not a BSD licensed program. It has literally nothing to do with what the BSD license offers you. The GPL is less free than the BSD license because it imposes more restrictions on you. This is incredibly simple and obvious. Many people believe those restrictions are important and good, and you may well believe that yourself. But that doesn't make those restrictions an increase in freedom. Just as some countries prohibit speech they deem objectionable, they may well believe that is better than free speech, but it doesn't make them freer than countries with free speech. Free speech includes the right to say things I don't like, just as free software includes the right to create software licensed under licenses I don't like.
New App Matches You With Others In Vicinity Who Wasted $2.99 On Same App
Disingenuously, from the point of view of an average user it's all the same, since the average person doesn't audit source code.

If you're in possession of some GPL-licensed source code, then it clearly restricts your freedom to do things with it, compared to BSD/MIT-licensed code.

If you're arguing otherwise, I think you're being purposefully obtuse.
assume you'll end up with nothing, because you probably will. Or maybe you'll be able to eat a few nice dinners if you are lucky. If you are being paid under-market, leave ASAP
Why do you discriminate against developers? Many of the GPLs' restrictions have everything to do with propagating freedoms that enable users to be developers. In fact for mere users who have no intention of developing or hiring someone to do it, many of the freedoms granted are just plain useless.

Coincidentally, many of the people who prefer permissive licenses are users and developers (and because they share their work, distributors!) at the same time. That is why they go with licenses that respect freedoms relevant to all these roles equally, without discriminating.

Even if you are not developing software, the GPL (v2 in particular) has a nice trap in it should you decide to use your, ehm... freedom to share the software with a friend who needs it. In case you forget to comply with all its petty obligations..

With no developers there are no users.
We learnt MIPS and we even implemented a simple MIPS processor with Verilog, it was simple, but fun. Recommended to any starter.
Interesting, but if Nacchio's so shady and unethical, I wonder why he didn't just do the easy, obvious thing, and play ball with the NSA?
If you can phrase them interestingly and insightfully, they're not going to be downvoted into oblivion. Perhaps you should put in the effort to explain them to the uninitiated and you might change the dominant opinion?

Otherwise it seems like a hit and run for many people, from the outside.
I also know of 0 PhD students who did this at all, and I am a former PhD student from a program of ~200.

Academia tends to do a poor job preparing graduate students for an actual career outside academia. I spent 2 1/2 years looking for work myself until I taught myself programming and quickly accelerated myself in a career of software engineering.

This is a poorly tapped talent pool - many of these people are some of the smartest people you will ever meet. Academia (usually) does no favors for them professionally in forming connections or informing graduate students, and industry doesn't want to hire them due to inexperience. The situation leaves them to snag whatever job they can, which is equal to a missed opportunity.
Top 3 Pranks of All Time
Wikimedia is seriously looking into replacing Bugzilla and Gerrit with this. http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Phabricator
Thanks for clearing that up!

I do believe that this is a permanent showstopper for modeling C. Elegans reproduction, correct?

I would be very curious to hear if there have been any plans to one day re-visit the model to allow reproduction, and if any thought has gone into how that process could be allowed!
Where is the output supposed to show up?
http://codex3.com.br/google-clone/
And if you prefer C++, there is Embarcadero C++ Builder. Interesting that it gets a somewhat less attention generally.
Maybe I'm mistaken about the code, but it doesn't look like HugeCollections is storing the key off heap?

Example: Looking at the containsKey method on line 420 here: https://github.com/OpenHFT/HugeCollections/blob/master/colle...

A return map.containsKey(key2) is used, with that map being declared as

final Map<K, DirectStore> map = new HashMap<K, DirectStore>();

on line 232. That makes me believe maybe only map values are kept off-heap?
Quick demo: http://codex3.com.br/google-clone/
Usually when you do a genetic experiment, you have a model of how things work in your head, then you do the experiment and test that model on living organisms.

It's entirely possible that your model is way off and you get results that don't mean anything. With computational models, we can test hypotheses (the models in our heads) much faster (don't have to wait for the worms to grow up) and much cheaper (we can do it on the computers all of us already own).
In the defense of the original poster, he does provide a reason to want the source code without changing it: "[I] can vet it to make sure the vendor has not put tracking software/other malicious code inside".

(Of course, if the vendor did that I'm sure they'd just hand me code that didn't match the malicious binary.)
Many classes of assets are inherently centralized.

IBM shares are essentially centrally controlled by IBM.

Gold (or other physical commodity) backed shares can be centrally issued by each holder of gold; essentially, each bar or vault would have its own issue. This is just negotiable warehouse receipts.

The only classes where decentralized issues make sense are "virtual" currencies like bitcoin, or equities/debts of virtual corporations. There probably isn't a market for more than one virtual currency in the long run, except maybe for sidechains (or exchangeable alternatives) due to purely technical things, or compliance, like zerocash vs. bitcoin.
"I reply to everyone I downvote"

I try to give constructive replies generally, but some people freak out over even positive advice so I just save the low-content back and forth "something is wrong on the internet I must comment on this!" that would make everyone else miserable and downvote them.

I try to avoid downvoting reasonable people.
Check out this book, I started my MIPS CPU reading it:

D. A. Patterson, Computer organization and design: the hardware/software interface, 4th ed. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 2009.
I love these sorts of articles. They criticize Milgram for a lack of scientific integrity, but nobody seems to point out that prisons aren't a bastion of scientific integrity, either. If anything, Milgram's sloppiness made his study a better model of the institutions in question. He allowed his human biases to overcome his duty -- which, as his own results show, is exactly how these things happen.
Care to elaborate? Assuming C++ and UI development of course.
Why HBO’s “Silicon Valley” Would Never Happen In The Real World
The icky factor is a little too high. Marketing wise they could have done much better.
I find it interesting that voice-reco is a primary input mechanism for both the Amazon Fire TV and Amazon's scanner gadget for their Fresh grocery delivery service. The Fire TV is not on battery power, so it's not surprising there. But the scanner wand gadget presumably doesn't have much of a CPU in it, nor does it rely on a nearby smartphone.
If politicians in DC can trade on inside information [1], I don't see what makes it such a crime. The amount of hypocrisy in this country is just mind boggling. It's teaching the public horrible lessons. It seems like anyone can break the law in very public fashion these days so long as they haven't angered the wrong people, nobody cares. It's selective enforcement of laws and often times the selective enforcement is unjustifiable.

1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3DZh1109W8
Major Jailbroken iOS Malware From China Discovered By Reddit
a routine that makes decisions on what action should be taken can still have a good name, like "routeOrder" or "dispatchWork".
In C, inlining works if you are really worried about fn call overhead.
No problem with the notion here, just... its 2014 not 1990.
It's possible that there won't be an Apple iWatch as such, but instead a platform like Google Wear for others to develop on. But such a thing is hard to keep secret once you've told a dozen partners about it.
National Geophracic diver indirectly kills a dozen penguins
>Which has nothing to do with what I asked about my freedoms as a user.

Yes it does. The hypocrisy inherent in this line of reasoning is that the GPL exists specifically because the distinction between "user" and "developer" is a false one. The GPL seeks to protect so called "developer freedoms" for all users. But then misguided GPL advocates turn around and present the false dichotomy of user vs developer in an effort to spread FUD about BSD/MIT/ISC/etc licenses.

>But for the majority of the people, who do not work in the one company releasing the binary, the GPL is infinitely freer

No it is not. Sqlite (public domain) is totally free. I can do literally anything with it. That is maximum freedom. Postgresql (BSD) is less free, I have to follow certain restrictions in order to do certain things with it. Mysql (GPL) is even less free. I have to follow more restrictions. This is trivially simple and obvious, which is why lying about it tends to earn downvotes.
For those who expect that Betteridge's law of headlines ("Any headline which ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no.") applies here, the article is actually quite positive about F# :-)

But even then, it is just worth pointing out that there is a massive list of testimonials from those who are already happily using F# in production in a wide range of areas, including finance, science, line-of-business, startups and many more: http://fsharp.org/testimonials/
Thanks for the feedback! I'm working on a site that should make everything a lot clearer.
True, but you can inspect BSD-licensed source just as freely as GPL'd code too.

Not that that's much use against a malicious distributor, who could disguise malicious code so that it passes inspection: http://underhanded.xcott.com.