skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Way to only see everything with rose-colored glasses.

Has it even occurred to you there might be any possible cons to your scenario?

First of all, the lot the cars come from is going to require real estate, so subtract that from your windfall. Where will they be at night or other low-use times?

Second, subtract the additional resources in gas/electricity it takes to get to my house from god-knows-where it came from.

Third, subtract the time I'm waiting in my driveway with the kids screaming and my wife in labor for a car to show up from god-knows-where. Or else the premium I'm paying to get ahead of the other guys in the queue. And while we're at it, all of those times that I wanted something from the store 5 minutes before it closes? Guess what, if I can't get a car in time, that's lost productivity. Have to buy lunch from the cafeteria b/c I couldn't get to the supermarket. Unless you're telling me that in order to accept this vision of the future, I have to be perfect and plan everything. Telling me in the future no one will be able to get to the store 5 minutes before it closes is just unrealistic, undesirable and unacceptable.

Fourth, subtract again, the additional energy needed to take the car to its next destination.

Fifth, consider all of the extra cost of adding, servicing, verifying, maintaining LIDAR and servoes to all of these millions of cars. With thousands of dollars of extra parts, they're going to require thousands in extra maintenance, inspection, training and insurance. Yeah, I know that's boring. It's not an interesting technical problem, but that's the reality of motor vehicles. If anyone thinks this won't make the price of vehicles go up significantly, they've never been in charge of anything critical.

I'm not "against the future," it's just that all of these digit-heads are seeing a grandiose signal-processing problem and doing multiplicative math like yours to make it look attractive and not even operating at a practical level whatsoever.
I think this will eventually be resolved the way vaccines were with liability shifted to government. There's just too much societal good to come out of self driving cars for liability to be the deal breaker.
Wow, five. Yeah it's a strain juggling client work and a startup, I decided a few months ago to die of kwashiorkor if that was what it would take for my startup to show me some (revenue) respect - because juggling that with client work was going to kill me anyway
"It's those little tweaks that bridge the gap between a jerky robotic ride and an amazingly smooth one."

Properly taught robots know about jerk, snap, crackle and pop (the third, fourth, fifth and sixth derivatives of the position vector with respect to time, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jounce ). "Amazingly smooth" is probably the minimum jerk trajectory.
This isn't "American Schools" these are the ultra-competitive "good schools". Put your kid in a normal school that has experienced teachers and is closer to the average for output and you'll probably find all these problems go away.
Focus is key definitely, but isn't there elbow room a bit if you build (usually) SaaS products where it addresses some nichey problem so much there isn't much to be done feature-wise save for a few ad campaigns?

Great job you're doing with PostJobFree. From my experience you're right, one startup is more than handful if you need more features to stay competitive. Two? They've been breaking me to little pieces although one is about to reach feature-completeness.
This author rails about how scientific progress isn't exponential; but that's not even relevant. The idea of accelerating returns was only ever meant to apply to information technologies. Though they are related on various levels, fundamentally, science != technology. Only when scientific processes are converted into information technologies do they start becoming exponential (as was the case with genome sequencing).
All videos from Stock Footage (anistock) on Dailymotion
We use Skype chat as a daily tool to keep the team (a few remote) up-to-date. We have daily standup using a proper mic so the remotes can hear properly.

I find the screen sharing feature in Skype to be poor quality. We tend to use Skype for calls, and then join.me for screen sharing.

We sometimes have call quality problems on Skype too. We also switch to hangouts for this reason, and we are often surprised how good the call quality, video quality and screen share quality is on hangouts.

Only problem is that nobody can figure out how to login or start a hangout. The interface is damn awful. They need a simple app like Skype's that installs like Chrome does, and give me history for gods sake. How hard is that to deliver?

One of the reasons I shy away from hangouts, is that I use Skype to backfill my timesheet. I can see exactly what calls, video calls, chats I made going back to 2006 on Skype's history. Admittedly so can the NSA, but still, the feature is awesome from a work perspective.
Certainly. LIDAR resolution is related to a few things:

- How many beams you're putting out and at what angles

- How fast you're spinning and how fast you can get the data back.

- How many points of data you can get through your bus

If the Google Car is using the big Velodyne (http://velodynelidar.com/lidar/hdlproducts/hdl64e.aspx), it puts out 1.3 Mpt/second over a 26.8 degree vertical field of view. That makes it put out ~135 pts per vertical and horizontal degree. At a range of 50 meters, with angular resolution of 0.09 degrees and 0.4 degrees vertical resolution, you're looking at vertical spacing of 34.9 cm/pt and a horizontal spacing of 7.8 cm/pt. You'll need multiple "hits" to make an obstacle, and they have to reflect well enough to be counted. A common thing to do is reject any obstacle below a certain height - since it could just be noise.

Debris with cameras is tough because you can't differentiate between "dry spot on pavement" and "someone's dropped a sheet of drywall".
care to explain? I'm curious what you mean by that google search
Is this actually a real problem? There is a robust insurance environment around cars, with a huge amount of both pricing experience, case law, and experience with payouts for people injured in accidents. There is also plenty of experience with recalls and fatal manufacturing flaws.

Is there any reason to believe that insurance companies won't just happily write policies priced for automated cars, and everything will proceed pretty much like it does now? You drive around, accidents happen, insurance companies pay out to the injured parties, and adjust the rates on automatic cars to match the real cost to operate?
Innovator's dilemma matters if you're actually making money from your current product. Skype isn't in any way material to Microsoft's revenues, but is an important mindshare property (and could tie in to other Microsoft tools; integration on WP and Windows desktops, etc.)
There are app compat VM's with XP and IE6 for a variety of VM platforms here: http://modern.ie/en-us/virtualization-tools#downloads

There's also XP Mode for Windows 7, although I don't know how secure or supported that is: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows7/install-and-use-...

There's also Enterprise Mode in the IE11 (Windows 7 and 8) that makes it easier to get legacy web apps working in IE11: http://technet.microsoft.com/library/dn640687.aspx
It's not clear if a corollary of this is that good people who do nothing cease to be good people.
In Virginia, there is no longer a gas tax. Roads are funded by an extra half percentage added to the sales tax. This means non-drivers now subsidize the roadways with each purchase, while people buying gas/diesel for their mowers and generators no longer do.

That said, how much toward road maintenance would you say the average commuter pays? You're looking at $214/car/year, according to the FHA and Census Bureau (see, for example, http://www.artba.org/about/transportation-faqs/faqs/#4).

How much more roadway is used by a car than a bicycle? How much less maintenance is caused by a bicycle than a car? (N.B. cars are more than an order of magnitude heavier than bicyclists; trucks are two orders more per axle.) How much do you think a bicyclist's fair share should be? How should it be measured, applied, and taxed?

As for registration, I was under the impression that was more akin to registering a firearm; it's chief purpose is enforcement of laws and property taxes, rather than offsetting the costs of highway maintenance. Is there a state where vehicle registrations are a major source of highway maintenance monies?
URX: On linking content across varying media
It's only been 4 years, give them time.
> consider employing an alternative web browser

Where's all the big corporate sysadmins here today, saying we should all be running the same OS, same browser? Herd immunity is no immunity if everyone's vulnerable.
Exposure to male researchers causes stress response in lab mice
I really don't know why you are being down voted for this comment, which seems like a reasonable interpretation of the data...can someone provide some explanation for their disagreement?
Part of the storage space requirements for cars in normal use is access space for human drivers and to allow random access entrance and exits. Cars as a service can eliminate much of the storage space requirement.
If you're seriously asking, I'm happy to answer my two cents, but i'm very concerned that you don't have a sense for the reasons people would want to use G+ gated products without being part of G+.

As someone who has a personal G+ account and doesn't mind, and who runs a company that pays Google for apps for my domain on which we manage our email, I still had to register for G+ to be able to use the hangouts product in invitations and threads I'm having with my work email. Now that I've done so (without adding a profile photo or anything else), i'm getting tons of people adding me to circles, etc., which I don't want. It's essentially forcing a social-connection construct on a relationship with an empty profile that I don't want to create or have to maintain.
I'm a professional programmer that went to engineering school and I can't be fussed to start up hangouts with anyone. It seems like it takes a full 30 minutes to get everyone in the same hangout and I always feel like a buffoon for suggesting.
sure, but i do it once and then i have peace of mind. i have a car at my disposal, 24/7/365.

should i book a car for the weekend? a last minute shopping tour? etc. etc. etc.
> He's obviously illiterate

No, his first language was clearly not English.
New Relic raised $100M
Becoming an Engineer
Getting humans to participate only in emergencies is almost the worst of all approaches. With reduced practice the human is deskilled and they are less likely to be alert and aware of the situation if they have to take over suddenly.

Signing an agreement will not make people alert and ready.
and requires you have a google plus account, even if you are invited directly to a hangout.

I was trying to integrate hangouts into an app this weekend, it sucks because of the G+ requirement.

Switching to tokbox
Here's the crux of my argument, quality code is not a function of the number of tests. I tried real TDD 5 years ago and I can assure you code I write today (with less tests) is better than the more tested code I wrote 5 years ago.

This means that there is not a clear correlation between number of tests and clean code, yet that is the central premise of the testing religion.
Maybe, but is the charger as durable? The construction as good? The colors on the screen as vivid?

I am not trying to say apple is perfect, I am just trying to say that they show that bigger numbers do not correspond to a better product. And some of the things that DO make a better product are sometimes harder to quantify (will the laptop hinges squeak after a month of use?)

As someone in this thread mentioned, getting a laptop with comparable build quality and specs as a mac will not be especially cheaper, even though everyone seems to think so.
Seriously? I live abroad and skyped with my family weekly until we switched to G+ to never go back, the quality of the calls and or video difference is not even funny.
Legal liability seems to be a red herring IMHO. At the end of the day, it's an insurance company that pays for it all anyway, regardless of whose fault it is. And car insurance companies already have the capability to adjudicate and litigate a large number of crash-related legal challenges. If anything, Google could use the data collected by its autonomous vehicles to streamline that process.

If I were Google, I would just make some kind of deal with an insurance company to handle all scenarios where a crash occurs when a vehicle is in autonomous mode and bundle said insurance in with the cost of the vehicle.
Maybe it already is. That doesn't mean it would happen. People do not genuinely optimize for what they want, they tend to optimize for what they want given what they know today and their internal biases.

I'm not willing to claim that Haskell is perfect, but I am willing to claim it is better. I'm also willing to claim that if it had anything resembling the community, say, C# has (to pick a random example) then it'd solve most of the problems you're highlighting here.

And it's getting that way. The number of programmers proficient in it and projects succeeding using it grow year over year.

But if you want to argue from a perfect world then you need to note reality will look different and search for trajectories that aim to approach your perfect world... not just current states which are far from it.
I agree strongly with this message. There is a lot more to web design than making a page "pretty".

Wikipedias design is good; and certainly too good to justify a complete design overhaul.

The biggest problem I have with it is the unclear visual hierarchy: there are links which are context dependent (changes depending on which article you're viewing) next to links which always link to the same page.

And the list of languages the article is available in would benefit from listing the most viewed (or last used) versions before the full alphabetical listing.
Unless you're also frustrated by not being able to write `int int = 3` in C/C++/C#/Java/most other languages, I don't see the point of your concern.

f = file.open("a.txt")
out_file = file.open("b.txt", file.WRITE)
I'm not sure how important of a mindshare property it is. I would guess most users don't even realize that Microsoft owns Skype.
excellent. i'll give it a go.
It means signals can only propagate about 6 centimeters during a single CPU clock cycle. That makes accessing information off-chip difficult in a single cycle, since 6 centimeters is on the same order as the linear scale of most motherboards.

This limit doesn't immediately impact computations that are carried out entirely on-chip. I expect that's the great majority of computations on today's CPUs, which typically have large caches. So I'm not sure the GP's explanation is correct, although it's certainly interesting.
There are plenty of people ignoring this law, in Italy and in the world. But I'd say that a trip in the space is something a bit too big for just ignoring laws :)
KDE Ships Applications and Platform 4.13
Right after he invents the quantum computer.
They are indeed, Julia has replaced the combination of Python (prototyping) and C++ (implementation) for me for scientific work - would be painful to go back.
Crumple zones and needing a 'big car' is old fashioned safety.

Probably the best cars to study are the big brothers of the Smart Car - the Mercedes A and B series. The original A series had a problem with the elk test, that was fixed and is a side issue to the main safety advances.

The passenger cell is the key part, ideally you want the engine to go under it rather than land in the passengers laps. That is a key innovation for whether you can walk out afterwards.

Next is the steel the passenger cell is made of. It doesn't crumple, things bounce off it.

Then the real big innovations for survival are inside the passenger cell. Those airbags, the way the seat belt tensions, the way the steering column collapses. These are big things.

There is a 'Fifth Gear' episode on Youtube that you can watch to see how all of this works. They crash a big Volvo that happens to be a decade old and built when the crumple one was king into a modern Renault hatchback. In the hatchback the passenger compartment stays as is, all of the airbags go off, the crash test dummies walk off with not so much as a scratch. Even the doors open. Meanwhile, the Volvo is a scene of carnage. The firemen have to cut the crash test dummies out, leaving their amputated legs behind.

Personally I would want a full rally-car style roll cage inside whatever car I had if I had to have one, however, I gave up driving after crashing into an on-coming car :-) That was a turning point for me, I no longer derived pleasure from speed or sitting in traffic. I cycle now, or get the train. The accidents I am particularly keen to avoid are the rapid decelerations where, regardless of airbaggage, the brain crashes into the inside of one's skull to result in the same sort of complications Shumaker is having now (wish him well). His incident was skiing, not driving, but the same principle applies.

Speaking of F1, I would like to see a Google car do the new Electric Formula E series, lapping every driver on the grid like some mad Scalextric car, taking the most optimal lines through the bends and learning the track to go quicker and quicker... In F1 would be cool too, like an automotive version of IBM's chess playing adventures, taking on World Champions and just beating them hands down. That would be cool.
Microsoft must release email data held on Dublin server to US court
Hindsight. Nobody had the technology for the allocation diagrams then, they were encouraged to implement them only once people presented them the fetched keys.

The results of the challenge were a good learning possibility for a lot of people and we, the observers, have now also something we can point to as an example.
Well he said if you kept giving the AI exponentially more computing resources it would get linear growth.

I think it's fairly obvious that providing 1 computer exponentially more resources isn't much different from creating exponentially more brain simulations...
Honestly if we can get multi-core programming working we can probably keep it going.

Although that is an enormous if.
I used this one a few months ago: https://github.com/Smile-SA/node-pushserver

Works for android as well, and has a nice web interface too.
Non-cyclists don't typically understand the very real cost of losing momentum at a stop sign/light. Cyclists don't tend to understand that unfairness aspect many drivers seem to feel when cyclists cheat.

That said, some states are starting to address the stop sign/stop-light problem for bicyclists (well, sort of). Virginia, for example, lets cyclists (including motorcycles) treat stop lights as stop signs after a certain amount of time/cycles. I'm sure most cyclists would prefer they be treated like flashing yellow or flashing red lights (yield sign and stop sign equivalent, respectively), but we've got a ways to go before that can happen.

I think we'll need to start licensing street riding and overhaul traffic law to include bicycles on the road before things get much better.
With the ruling in and MS being forced to release data from a server on foreign soil, what does this mean for other providers? Anybody offer up a good replacement for AWS/S3 or Google Cloud that isn't run by a US company?
The women! They go crazy over programmers...
> as well as other pure marketing tricks such as calling what used to be "Turbo Boost speed", the "normal speed"

I always found calling it turbo boost speed odd. During the majority of applications that exist today that is the speed you will get.
Go's native synonyms of lists, vectors and maps are already "generic", so I'm not sure what your point is.
There are very, very few people who are capable of arguing against an idea on its merit if that idea clashes strongly with their worldview. Usually the cognitive dissonance of a differing worldview eclipses understanding to the point that anything with a wildly different context is just "insane."
Tolkien was a professor and student of linguistics, so I think he's allowed a little fluffing of his tails feathers here :)
I'm a 30+ year Systems C programmer who is really enjoying Go.

Why do people make generalizations like this, Language wars are so much fun but we really do waste a lot of time on them.
Hacker broke into baby monitor and watch 10-month old daughter sleep
LESS/JS/TPL in one module — YES.
"Intelligence" as we have come to understand it is not some magical thing, not some exotic element that's impossible to fabricate. In fact, it's probably something mundane and insultingly simple when we get to the core of it.

Reproducing intelligence is mostly a matter of finding the correct formula, the right structures, the right technology. After that it will be boring, ordinary, even disposable. This doesn't sit well with some people who reject that on an emotional level even if they can't figure out any concrete reason why. It just can't be.

We already have enough hardware to fake intelligence, to make a believable Turing Test candidate that could win, but we've yet to figure out how. That much will become clear in the coming decades, guaranteed.

If you look at the progression in computer chess programs, where they were pathetic for the longest time until things came together and the performance of them rose exponentially, matching and then eclipsing grandmasters, it's inevitable that the same pattern will play out in the artificial intelligence space.
IMO CPUs aren't getting any faster because we don't really need them to be much faster.

Now before the flames begin, let me caveat that as "We don't really need them to be much faster at single-threaded workloads." The article round-aboutly mentions this in the context of specialized CPUs, specifically GPUs: GPUs are basically hyper-concentrated thread runners. They're not very fast at running any single thread, but they have efficient shared memory and can run thousands of individual threads at once.

For larger workloads, we've gotten a lot more efficient through cloud computing. An individual CPU in the cloud is really not any faster than it was 5 years ago; but the advances made in energy efficiency (aka heat) and miniaturization mean you can fit a lot more of them in a smaller space.

While the technical hurdles to going faster are very real, I think we've built a technical infrastructure that's just not as reliant on the performance of any single piece of the system as it used to be. Therefore there is less demand for faster CPUs, when for many of the traditional "hard" computational workloads, more CPUs works almost as well and is a lot easier to scale than faster CPUs.
So, how do you enumerate every type that exists or will exist in the future?
The average emacs user I know doesn't actually know or write Elisp, they just grab preconfigured .el files off the Internet or corporate intranet and add the appropriate snippets to their .emacs.

Elisp gurus, in my experience, don't get all that much work done, other than writing lots of editor extensions. This is great if their job is writing editor extensions, less great if their job is something else. It's the same as with compiler writers: they're great at making other people more productive, but when it comes to writing end-user software, not so much. In general, of course - there are exceptions.
Interview with Rob Rhinehart of Soylent
Apples to oranges.

No car passengers have ever died because a cyclist hit them.
This is exactly how it works - testing reveals corner cases and you address them.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who uses the two-notebook method. My latest venture into the digital to-do list world is wunderlist.