skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Just some clarification. Firefox OS doesn't use just mobile websites. It uses web technologies to build apps. You can have mobile websites as apps but you can also have plain packaged apps that live in your phone. Mobile websites that use appcache will work offline and be indistinguishable from a normal app after they cache the content. Packaged apps are just apps that are stored on the phone just like on other platforms.

People need to be aware that Firefox OS is targeted at emerging markets where most people are still using feature phones. In these scenarios, the cheapest Android phones are still expensive to a large chunk of the population. Our Firefox OS phones are built to be a first smartphone for people that are migrating from feature phones. Democratization of internet access is one of our main objectives with Firefox OS. Bringing the next billion people online.

The idea is not to poach users from iOS and high end Android devices but to offer an affordable entry level smartphone that the common people can buy which has a good quality and performance.

And yes, there are a lot of features that still need to be implemented but then again we're building it all in the open and all the source code is on github http://github.com/mozilla-b2g/

If you count the smartphone platforms with devices available to purchase right now, we're the only one that is developed in the open where anyone can contribute and see everything.

There are still many steps to go but think for a bit in what type of world you want five years from now.

A place where walled gardens are king, where platforms are all proprietary or with closed development and where you need to ask permission before publishing an app.

Or a place where we still have the freedom of the web where anyone can publish anything. Where web based apps work with different vendors platforms (as in Hacker News will open in Firefox, Chrome, Safari all the same. The WebAPIs are being standarized and are open for all vendors to implement).

So, as I said, I agree with you that we still need to implement a lot of features but with the points made above you may be able to agree that we have a place and time now to offering a great product to our markets.
> We choose to go to the moon in this decade and
> do the other things, not because they are easy,
> but because they are hard, ...

This won't happen in one step anyway, just as going to the Moon used many missions, each learning the next thing(s) necessary.
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but Google cars still can't drive in the rain or in the snow. Not even on a wet street. They have driven all those thousand miles in Mountain View, Calif. in good weather.

Generally lidar's don't work well with rain or reflective surfaces.
Given that the NSA will likely have a backdoor into any automated driving system, is this really a technology you'd like to see become all pervasive? "We don't like this guy's ideology - ok, let's arrange for him to have an 'accident'".
Yes the maths are likely right, but that does mean Taleb is being fair to Piketty.

Economics is not just about the maths, it's about whether the maths being proposed (i.e. the model) are the right tool to understand and explain the observed data (and do predictions / counterfactuals). So the question of interest (is Piketty right or wrong) is not a question of someone's "maths" (either Piketty's or Taleb) being "right" or "wrong". Sorry if you find this obvious -- perhaps I missed the point of your question?
There are 25W CPUs, some are passively cooled. It's still more than ARM though. Here's the deal: ARM is very good at doing nothing, but x86 is better at doing something. If your project is doing nothing (not intensive), RPi is good for you; if it's intensive, x86 may be better.

These ARM boards certainly have their place. We use one to drive a TV with build/bug/CI status. RPi is too slow, and x86 is too big to fit, but a beefier board (Odroid-u3) is just fine, and still hangs behind the TV running on its USB port. But for most of the other projects, either a RPi is good, or you'd be better off with x86.
Humans have very poor peripheral vision, while the self-driving car can see perfectly in all directions. I think it also has a faster reaction time. (Though either way, a car may not always be able to break in time.)
This is assuming that someone is specifically targeting your machine. In which case yes, changing the port number probably won't do much. But if someone is just hammering random servers on port 22, changing the port number is much more likely to be effective.
Just because Go doesn't fit your use case doesn't mean it should be something else. In most cases Go IS a better choice than C/C++ in a server side case. For instance let's say you are writing a server for a multiplayer game. Most of the server's activity is spent on waiting for IO and managing concurrent socket based connections. There are drawbacks and risks to managing memory in this type of system and Go's concurrency makes writing this code much easier. Another great go use case is a rest based web service, a lot of these are typically written in Java, Ruby, or Python. I love python but go has serious advantages over all three of those languages in this use case. This is where go was designed to be used and it's best spot. The glue servers that are most commonly used for web applications. Go is designed to be simpler, safer, and easier to write than C/C++, Java, or C# but faster, more modern, and more fault tolerant than python or ruby. It's not a perfect language by any means but it does fill a nice sweet spot.
Harder yet, Southeast Asia. Hundreds of pedestrians, tons of vehicle variety (some entirely makeshift), uncontrolled intersections, very little regard to any regulations.
I don't think you should be testing for truth implicitly like that, try

if ((bool(b->d != NULL) == true) {
}

much better to be explicit, don't you think?
That's funny, but probably a very real challenge. As a (human) driver, it happens that we come across ambiguous, contradictory or just plain impossible constraints and we overcome them by deliberately breaking the rules. I wonder how they would cope with that?
Even before we get self-driving cars, autonomous braking should be mandated so that cars and trucks are literally incapable of coming too close to a cyclist.
If I remember correctly, they already have one.
As far as I know, they already have a pretty good handle on limited access roads.

People use 'highway' to describe all manner of roads, I wonder if the gp is thinking about major 2 lane roads that have higher speeds but still lots of intersections to deal with.
Really interesting feedback. Thank you.
-Cards sent from Vermont. The postmark is small and bland.
-Stamps are USA stamps. Very plain, but elegant.
-With regards to your feature, I'd be happy to create that for you. If you send an email to note@scendr.com with a document containing: the letters, the addresses and the dates you want them sent - I could take care of that for you. Let me know.
Ah! I should have known better. ROT-13 for the win!
What are your thoughts on the evolution of evolution itself?

(the DNA/RNA/Ribosome complex has too many parts to have sprung into being just like that).
I have a solidoodle 3 at home and a makerbot replicator 2x at work. I used the SD daily for a couple of months, but then ran out of ideas. Just like every other tool, without a problem to solve, its not very useful. Ive done a few upgrades, like a glass bed, a new hotend, carriage bearings. Its a fun hobby, but thats it.

I don't see fdm printers ever becoming ubiqutous. Too much maintainance, too many moving parts. This will always be the domain of tinkerers.
You misunderstand.

Changing the port does nothing against targeted attacks and it's not about 'hiding' anything. The purpose is to take your host out of the scope of automatic scans which almost exclusively focus on the most common ports (22, 2222, 22222 ...).
> The sad truth of this is that whilst it's an interesting technical challenge, I really can't forsee a situation where a computer could react to all the different things that could happen when driving a car as well as a human.

I agree, at least for some time. But it's not about a computer reacting to as much as a human. The question is, can a computer can do a better job overall (e.g. drnk driving or texting while driving accidents are eliminated)? So dont look for a perfect driving record, as humans have loads of accidents today. As long as the computer has less frequent or severe accidents it is a welcome improvement to our roads even if it does have infrequent limitations.
Sources say Toyota fleeing CA, taking 5,000 jobs to more business-friendly Texas
As a cyclist, I was shocked to see the cyclist change his mind like that —unless he was a tester too, that’s how you get bumped– but I really hope Google Cars learn that most cyclists actually don’t signal their turn that well.

Cars don’t bother either, and the last frame show how most non-car drivers get killed: don’t notice what passing just being, shift in gear, swerve and… bang. Seeing how Google taught its car to behave literally had me shout in joy an dance at my desk.
Looking forward to see how self-driving cars can handle traffic in a city like Mumbai or Cairo.
Getting to that point is the challenge. I'm just throwing out questions and raising the point that there are some very very hard challenges to solve, where humans are probably much better.
This would also be better for optimal traffic routing. I remember reading about it previously somewhere, but it gets bad PR for privacy reasons so I think it's brought up less often.
My understanding is that it uses vision processing algorithms on a camera nowadays, and works just fine in rain. Snow is an issue because the car can't see the lane markings through the snow -- a human drives through snow by remembering where they were or making a guess.
http://www.innGrid.net - hotel management software. Minimal maintenance. (few hours a week)
started 5 months ago. 100 signups, 9 active users. Generating about $2k/month. I'm currently working as hotel owner/manager
It’s Crazy What Can Be Hacked Thanks to Heartbleed
The "Taliban" were never armed by the US. There were some members who were US allies during the Soviet-Afghan war. Just like they are some members of the Northern Alliance, US ally during the Afghan campaign, that were allies of the Soviet Union.

In the end one war ended and groups broke up. Then the next war came and alliances had changed.
Well, the subtle point is that the Stanford parser really _is_ a fine choice for a lot of experiments...Even while it's far from state-of-the-art!

For researchers outside of NLP, it's often actually worse to have your parser be 2% better than the previous work, for reasons your readers don't care about and you can't easily explain. If your readers have heard of the Stanford parser, and previous work has used it, it's likely a good choice for your experiment.

Basically, if people are always using the new hotness outside of NLP, then those non-NLP researchers have to keep learning the new hotness! Ain't nobody got time for that.

I do think we're at a good "save point", though, where we should get people updated to the new technologies. Hence the blog post :)

As for use-cases, mostly people will use labelled dependency parses, because why not? And they're mostly used inside other NLP research, for instance I've been working on detecting disfluencies in conversational speech, there's increasing work on using this stuff in translation, information extraction, etc.
> Roughly 1 in 4 drivers have a statistically significant amount of alcohol in their blood system.

1 in 4 seems high, especially if you mean to the level of impairment. I'd be interested to see the source of that statistic.
I personally think society is going to have a much harder time accepting death by software bug, than human error.
I absolutely agree, and I now feel like offering to cyclists a t-shirt that reads in bold “We WANT Google self-driving cars.” and maybe, in tiny ‘Because, if you can read this, your driving sucks and you don’t respect security distance.’
How about a boring theory, Internets.

It's just a subculture that couldn't gain critical mass without the internet. Like furries it has a wide but sparse appeal.

It is a subculture that's not simple though, it takes a while to get into, unlike being a furry you really need to do it in your job to be good at it hence it's only starting to hit it's peak.
Apparently, 0.5% is slightly less than orange juice. I'd confirm it with a link, but I am on the work machine.
I want to see the self-driving car on place de l'étoile on a busy day. Or in more or less any south-east asian metropolis.
Even New York City seems to only have tens of thousands of cab drivers ('seems' because I just looked at wikipedia for a minute), I don't think they are that big a percentage of the population.
And here is the discussion mentioned https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3367865
So DHH is in favour of integration tests and distrusts mocking.

Google is in favour of integration tests and distrusts mocking. http://googletesting.blogspot.se/2013/05/testing-on-toilet-d...

What's to be said for TDD and mocking?
NSA: Note to self
I know it's probabbly old news by now, but I was just going over the NSA redhat guide, when this line made me laugh:

Data transmitted over a network, whether wired or wireless, is susceptible to passive monitoring

Hey, if they have to even tell themselves this, then maybe there is hope for us yet LOL!
>What if the cyclist swung from the pavement on to the road

My Volvo already has a system that is better at that than me:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nfT9dfPi7g
Nissan's ‘Self-Cleaning’ Car Prototype [video]
I don't really understand why people would use Uber in London when services like Hailo exist. A black cab is going to get you around London much faster than a car that can't use bus lanes, there are many more cabs available than Uber cars, and I would guess (without knowing) that a cab is going to be cheaper.

So, apart from Uber maybe having some nicer cars available, what's the deal?
Static compiler checks are free, while unit-tests cost initial effort and later maintenance.
There is too much conflict of interest here. TDD is a software trainers' bread. It doesn't age and it is better to learn with someone experienced.

I would be more interested to hear what is his opinion about design-by-contract and strict functional languages such as Haskell and OCAML.

His constant reiteration that TDD is the only way is a bit tiring now.
The grand experiment of bringing original shows to Xbox
There was a report some time ago about making the cars be somewhat aggressive. If I recall, they had a lot of trouble with left turns until they programmed in some lurching forward behavior.
> very little regard to any regulations.

That's an important point, I never expected lanes count and lane direction to be interpreted as suggestions until I saw people going through a roundabout on both sides at the same time.
According to Brad Feld's book "Startup Communities" you have to be committed to a place for 10 years to see any real change. He mentions politicians as being too short sighted for not being able to carry thru for that long. I'm not sure if it's been 10 years for the New York Startup scene, but maybe NY Times is being a little hasty. If the current political establishment keeps it's support up and so does the next batch, I think the NY has a very decent chance indeed.

However, it's the tough times that will tell whether NYC Startup Culture endures, especially when the hype has died down and the economy has had another mood swing. I remember after the 90's .com boom people in the city acted like tech was over (the boom and subsequent bust was surreal on the people's part too, I thought), but what it proved was when the party's over, all the riff raff falls away and only tech companies that were fairly strong not only made it thru, but thrived.

NYC, shouldn't be Silicon Valley, only Silicon Valley can be that! The city, despite it's many "issues" is one of the most amazing places on earth. I hope the tech that comes out of there is just as amazing and real. Cheers!
Assuming this is satire, LOL :)
They control killer robots in the sky with missiles... It doesn't really get worse than that...
Ray dolap
Mobilya tasarımında öncü firmalar arasında en çok ön planda bulunan artevetta, tasarım harikası üretimler gerçekleştirmektedir. Sektörde adı sıkça duyulan arte, kurulduğu günden bugüne yapmış olduğu çalışmalarla adını sıkça duyurmuştur.
But what about distance? Imagine a cyclist travelling down a hill at 50km/h and running straight over some crossroads in a residential neighbourhood. Assuming a line of sight to the hill, a human can probably recognise that that fast moving object (that may or may not run over the cross-roads) is a bicycle with a cyclist on it quicker than a computer can do the same.

This of course, assumes the driver has good vision or is wearing any prescription they might be required to do so by law.
when someone at MIT recollected the requirements that NASA kept hidden regarding the computer that MIT was to designe for the apollo program, they said that their team would have dismissed it as technologically impossible at the time (the early 60s), and that it was the contractual obligation that forced them to come up with the ideas and technologies which were required for the flight.[1]

I don't disagree with you entirely, it is simpler to emulate an environment.

[1] http://history.nasa.gov/computers/Ch2-2.html
Your integration test will be more realistic and simpler to write if you use a client.
I want to build this! Tried Mailbox, Postbox, MailPlane and all the others for so long. Also been a huge betali.st follower for a while now. Tweet me if you genuinely want someone to build this: @encima27
Creativity, Inc.
Very impressive, although I'd like to throw a few more edge cases at the system than the one shown in the demo video.
That's definitely not fair as, at a minimum, it is disparaging to the profession of teaching which is a skill and art unto itself.
If you take part of the URL of any nytimes article...pop it into google and then click on search result...it's free.
Quantified Toilets – Live feed from CHI2014 conference
That's a much more obvious way of doing away with someone though. Having a car experience a 'software failure' and driving you into a wall at 80MPH, is less so.
Simply saying "unintended consequences" means doing nothing, ever.

WHO says "severe dengue is a leading cause of serious illness and death among children in some Asian and Latin American countries." After we don't have so many dead kids, some of them can grow up, and you can ask them how they feel about whatever unintended consequences there are.
Indeed — I remember a projet in high-school, explaining how lidar were being used to measuring rain drops direction…

The thing is: there apparently now is a technology (at Mercedes or BMW) that uses beamers instead of front lights; a secondary camera detects droplets’ movement, predicts their fall and the beamer doesn’t shine light precisely on them. It helps light in front of you at night without shining mainly the rain. I was stunned when I learned we are now that fast. Same thing with cooking mosquitoes with lasers. I’m assuming that with those tech handy, a lidar should work properly through the rain. It leaves braking as a problem, especially on black ice — and that one is tougher.
I don't agree that Taleb's math is any more careful than Piketty's. He has his own set of "fat tail" hobby horses to ride, and does a poor job showing how they apply here. The question should not be whether Taleb's math is right or wrong, since it could be right but irrelevant. The question is whether Piketty's math is right or wrong. Neither Taleb, nor Brooks, nor many here, seem to be addressing that.
i think a lot of people miss the joke about why piketty is so popular. it's not the theorizing about the cause of inequality, which seems fairly obvious if you read financial news and blogs. the "novel" piece - at least in polite conversation - is that his solution to the problem is a wealth tax, which goes after assets instead of income. (i say polite conversation, since wealth taxes normally apply in cases where there is a sovereign liquidity crisis, which is not a polite situation.)

so, we think the wealth tax this sounds like a great idea, let's go after the billions that accrued in offshore hedge funds for US citizens and take 30%, sounds fair since it avoided taxes in the first place.

of course, when it comes time to implement the tax, that money is gone, perhaps to some other jurisdiction, and they settle for enforcement by having the average joe write a check based on money in your bank or brokerage account, whatever meager amount over $100k you may have. and, probably convert 401ks into a myRA account, which gives the government a new forced buyer of treasury securities, while pretending it was for some other reason.
Theme, Pragmatics, and Purpose in Programming Language Implementation
The title is a bit link-baitey, but the article drives home the (very important) fact that an unsecured internet of things is a dangerous thing. It obviously is not the first article to do so, but it is good to see people continue to note this point and, in the case of this article, provide concrete examples.
The second argument does not hold: maryjane and mаryjаne are similar but are different sequences of bytes.

You're nit-picking with that attempt at an argument. If I'm a moderator of a large forum and my user name is "MaryJane", is the community made better when a "Mary Jane" joins? Obviously not - there would be confusion as to who the mod is (regardless of icons/colors/other text used to display the true mod). In marketing speak, "It dilutes the brand".
Yup, I'm aware - nice work on this so far!
Skype Makes Group Video Calling Free on Windows, Mac, Xbox One
Erm.... keep London moving by putting even more cars on the road?

Because that's the problem, not enough affordable cars. That'll definitely work.
Seth Roberts’ Final Column: Butter Makes Me Smarter
You should try to be more specific. What are the hard challenges that remain? Where are humans better? If it's bad weather driving, for example, perhaps humans would drive in those instances.
This is like asking if they are gay or lets say it's audio, asking if they are black. Saying OT doesn't really let you off for asking questions about peoples private lives.
don’t notice what passing just being, shift in gear, swerve and… bang

Can you rephrase this? I can't understand it.
Hey, there are LOTS of new features from 1.1 to 1.4. Heck there are new APIs available, advancements to all the rendering stuff...

I am a mobile app developer. I have all platforms in here and I use Firefox OS as my daily driver. I get angry sometimes and things do not work as expected or when I see a bug but dogfooding is a great way to recognize points where you need to improve and then work on it.

I haven't seen a FXOS phone crashing all the time. They can be perceived as slow if you're used to high end devices but their performance still great when compared to entry level device.

Also Movistar is not a shell company. Its present in many countries in South America. Telefonica owns many telcos such as Movistar and VIVO.

I have some Alcatel phones in here, most of them running 1.1 and one running a nightly build of 1.3. They are working as expected and they used to cost USD 75 here for a while at the same time the cheapest Android was USD 150.

But as I said above, there are still features needed and believe me 1.3 is much better than 1.1 regarding performance. I hope with the new devices and new OS we can make a better impression on you. As for 1.1 on that device, lots of people migrated from their feature phones and are pretty happy with the purchase.
This is Step A, where Step Z is one of "save the planet from a world-killing asteroid" or "everyone gets a solid gold toilet" (or "a few people get solid gold toilets larger than the existing moon")