skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Google Fiber teams up with Netflix in fight against Comcast's Internet tolls
Even let's just assume for the sake of argument everyone agrees on who's the good guys and who's the bad guys.

There's still no way for an algorithm to correctly exclude all bad guys and avoid excluding all good guys. And trying to improve in one area often decreases in the other. (Before even getting to the fact it's a dynamic system where the bad guys are constantly trying to adapt to avoid exclusion)

> Often, there is an inverse relationship between precision and recall, where it is possible to increase one at the cost of reducing the other. Brain surgery provides an obvious example of the tradeoff. Consider a brain surgeon tasked with removing a cancerous tumor from a patient’s brain. The surgeon needs to remove all of the tumor cells since any remaining cancer cells will regenerate the tumor. Conversely, the surgeon must not remove healthy brain cells since that would leave the patient with impaired brain function. The surgeon may be more liberal in the area of the brain she removes to ensure she has extracted all the cancer cells. This decision increases recall but reduces precision. On the other hand, the surgeon may be more conservative in the brain she removes to ensure she extracts only cancer cells. This decision increases precision but reduces recall. That is to say, greater recall increases the chances of removing healthy cells (negative outcome) and increases the chances of removing all cancer cells (positive outcome). Greater precision decreases the chances of removing healthy cells (positive outcome) but also decreases the chances of removing all cancer cells (negative outcome).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precision_and_recall
Exactly...

From the articles comments: "It's no more unreasonable than, say, storing solar power as a highly-linked hydrocarbon liquid and then burning it in a miniaturized power plant.﻿"

Putting it in a flywheel is cool but you can't practically transport that. I think the point is... there is a lot of sand. So if you only use it once maybe that's ok.
>For the same reason, I don’t see Python or Julia building up a huge code repository comparable to CRAN.

CRAN has 5,566 packages. PyPI has 44,024.

I recognize that the author is trying to make a point about statistics packages specifically, but the R community is simply dwarfed by Python, so I don't think it's so farfetched that Python could overtake R even in its own little niche. It's also much easier to add your package to PyPI than CRAN, which is curated by a small and sometimes opinionated team.
You can get your frontend rendered statically before serving if the case is rendering HTML on the front-end. It doesn't have such a disadvantage for multiple page apps.
Based on the heatmaps, it looks like the customer base is highly concentrated amongst apartment dwellers and students.

Having said that, we live in a house in Palo Alto and my wife is a big fan, to avoid cooking or eating out with small children :-)
Sorry, I should have been more clear. Their slogan is "payments for marketplaces." That's a very specific type of business.
High hopes for new malaria vaccine based on blood protein
How do you wash your hair? Do you wash your hair? Do you scrub with a non-soapy cloth on your body? Sorry for the intrusion, just very curious.
Meh, there are hedge funds powered by Excel.
Infectious disease was a huge killer of children.
How is it not CO2 neutral? It isn't using carbon as an energy carrier like fossil fuels so no CO2 should be released unless I'm missing something.

It is renewable to some extent although it sound like on subsequent uses the media would become less effective.

I agree with you on the title. Not accurate.
The no obfuscation paper requires plaintext input, FHE requires encrypted input. What's unclear here?

There's no contradiction: If you have the plaintext input, you are required to have at least a (non garbled) function describing your operation, so it doesn't imply obfuscation.

Anything that can be written as a function can exploit FHE, as long as the output doesn't grow (i.e. you have to account for growth before)
Your question is a bit confusing...

If a baby/child doesn't die, then the only logical conclusion is that it is (and by extension "us" are) living longer...which validates his statement.
It sets a poor foundation upon bad faith to equate Judy Miller and Glenn Greenwald.
Imagine if political disputes were settled this way instead of real war
Did you understand that sand is the waste product? Not the fuel? It's much harder to burn silicon than you seem to be expecting. A miniature plant has no hope of doing it.
Was there anything beyond that which would enable reconstruction of the data? Just curious. I was only trying to share, and on a level which would enable the audience to know it was real. Thanks.
There's a lot of discussion about that on #docker-dev. I think we (Docker maintainers) might pick a default format + plugin system to swap in your own. Of course the plugin would itself be a container :)
This article nails several realities dead on. The premise of a pervasive electronic panopticon is a modern fatal charade, that we've unwittingly cast ourselves in. There's an enourmous power differential at play now, in everything we do. Even buying a pack of gum at the gas station with pocket change can be readily transformed into permanent public record.

On the other hand, it's important to bear in mind that the problems highlighted here are social. Between human beings. The manner in which we share the world we live on, and whether we reduce it to ashes by fighting with each other.

It's not a problem that can't be solved. It's a problem that can only be sabotaged.
Well, you definitely can route IPv6 over the public backbone. If you get an IPv6 address in SF and I get one in NYC, we can already talk to each other. That is how we got past step -1. Dual stack is now a pretty standard setup on a non-trivial, though still small number of networks. For example, Linode, Comcast, T-Mobile all support dual stack on at least some of their networks.

What we have not quite reached yet is the point where IPv4 addresses are really expensive. You still get one with every VPS you sign up for and with every home connection. Once that can no longer be done, IPv6 will become standard pretty much across the board, starting in Step 3 and 4.
Blizzard still twisting and distorting copyright to go after cheaters
> There are no laws of nature that prohibit redundant replication of data

There most certainly are, at the information density of DNA. DNA is about a thousand times more information dense than our best hard drives. At that level, a passing photon can change or break enough chemical bonds to alter the bits. A nearby high-energy molecule can do the same. This actually happens gazillions of times per day in our body and we have a few hundred enzymes to automatically correct errors and a few hundred more to detect when those can't fix the problem and shut down the cell. The fact that it works at all is jaw-droppingly amazing. We take copying bits on and off hard drives for granted, and they only work for a few years max--cells operate on an entirely different scale of information transfer and yet some multicellular organisms live for centuries.

Unfortunately, I don't think you could improve the error checking mechanisms in our cells without fundamentally redesigning a lot of how we work. It would be interesting to try to add more "parity" mechanisms besides the complementary base pairing, which is used by most of the repair enzymes. From an evolutionary standpoint, no species would ever naturally develop perfect DNA replication because it would halt diversification, which is needed to survive continually changing environmental threats.

I should also add that it's a misconception that every cell in our body has the exact same DNA. That's only a half-decent approximation. In reality, a lot of our cells accumulate trivial mutations and it's OK. Some cells even rely on editing their own DNA to perform their primary function: that includes the B and T cells [1] which the cancer in the OP arise from.

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VDJ_recombination
Hengjie explains here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7783622
The Best Self-Hosted Alternatives to Popular Services
> How is it not CO2 neutral?

It's not CO2 neutral, positive or negative. It has nothing whatsoever to do with CO2. It's an energy carrier not a source.

The amount of CO2 released depends on the energy source.

Hydrocarbon fuels can also be CO2 irrelevant if you make the hydrocarbon from some other energy source (you can make gasoline from air + energy). But usually you get the hydrocarbon from the ground and then it's not just a carrier, it's also a source.

> It is renewable to some extent although it sound like on subsequent uses the media would become less effective.

"Renewable" is not a concept that applies here because it's not an energy source. The media can be used as much as you like, it doesn't get used up, it just changes and changes back. Rechargeable is probably the better word here, but it starts as already full discharged (sand) so you have to charge it with something.
This is a pretty cool idea but I didn't see anywhere that it would be open-source. On the contrary I expect this to be super expensive, at least in the beginning. As a side note, open sourcing all of the software would be useful but not enough to get your own satellites up.
I guess none. The information redacted was not really critical, I tried to remove personally identifying information while making the point... but I understand your point and appreciate the feedback. Thank you.
A nice piece of lateral thinking: use the desert sun to turn desert sand into silicon, take the silicon to where power is needed, and burn it.

Are there any chemical engineers who can comment on this? Is it an old idea that's been kicking around for years? Is it feasible?
Unfortunately I'm in the U.S. and if I had to pay $3,000 per box of that medicine (at 2 boxes a month) I would have to die because I simply do not make that much money. It's literally more than 100% of my entire income. I'm jealous, lol.
I wrote a Git extension about a year ago that transparently stores data in S3 / Cloudfiles / etc. and doesn't store any of the actual data in your Git repo. I've used it with a few projects but I think it could be battle tested a bit more. It integrates perfectly with GitHub / Bitbucket. Pull requests welcome!

https://github.com/lionheart/git-bigstore
It probably wasn't legal in the US either. The remedy, however, is threatening legal action and withholding rent.
There are other companies that have done well online in ecommerce. Niche focused companies like Newegg come to mind as a great example of how to compete and succeed. Monoprice is another.

Also, companies like Hayneedle have grown large on the model o focused niche e-commerce stores in lots of different verticals.

I don't think any store is going to come along and "destroy" amazon anytime soon. However, one area where other e-commerce retailers will exist is as sellers on the Amazon Marketplace. In some ways, Amazon becomes a large sales channel for online retailers in the same way that Facebook and AdWords are.

Fundamentally, I don't think Amazon cares who is selling what as long as they are making money and their customers are happy. Amazon, like eBay really gets that they are a platform that other sellers add a lot of value to.
The comment I mention was by the AUTHOR of the article.

Why do you have to run the process in reverse? This apparently can be done to some extent by why not discard it instead? There is plenty more where it came from. Maybe build an island or something ... IDK.

"Sand is a stupid energy storage medium" Ok.. probably so.
IIRC, lots of Google products (like Google Docs) don't support those browsers entirely.
Yes, I understand sand is the waste product. So, it can be recycled through the same process but less efficiently (according to TFA).

I'm not expecting it is hard nor easy. Nor practical either.
You could never recover 10/8. Simply impossible. Due to the fact that IP address space is running out, 10/8 what everyone uses for NAT; how are you going to solve the address exhaustion problem by removing the main tool people are using to fight it?

Well before that, you could recover 18/8, MIT's prefix; how many addresses does a single university actually need, even MIT? Stanford already returned their /8 prefix. Or you could potentially recover a variety of DoD /8s, or start assigning some of the ones that are "reserved for future use" like 240/4.

Of course, an even better use of 240/4 would have been to use it as a backwards-compatible way to move to a larger address space. IPv6 should have been specified with IPv4 compatibility via NAT from the beginning, so that it could be a gradual migration. I mean, we're moving that way anyhow, but with a much more painful period in the middle in which NAT is necessary but IPv6 isn't ready yet for people who want to end the pain of NAT.
They're expensive because the eastern Texas courts are so favorable to patent plaintiffs that in order to have a meaningful chance for a win you have to either get the USPTO to throw out the patent or get the case moved to a different court (as Newegg did here). The former is extremely time-consuming and expensive, and the latter is difficult and rarely successful. A direct fight against the subject and claims is all but doomed to lose in those eastern district Texas courts regardless of the content of the patent. And if you do find a way to win, you have nothing to retaliate against or recover fees from.
I just pointed out that the commenter probably got downvotes as much for the post further up as for the one in with the complaint about them. How is that ad hominiem? I didn't attack the poster, I just made an observation the likely reasons for the reception of the other post. Seriously, is there even one word that I wrote that attacks the poster rather than what he or she wrote?

Moxie Marlinspike is well-liked around here, at least as far as I can see. That's enough reason for people to downvote someone who says, "Or because they willingly comply with every government request, unbeknownst to their users, which is not really news-worthy (unlike Levison standing his ground for principles in which he believes)." with nothing to back it up. Perhaps the poster just wanted to mention it as a theoretical possibility, but it comes across as an allegation, at least to me.

As for your question about trusting Marlinspike more than Lamo, I'm assuming that you mean Lamo before it was revealed that he had informed on Manning. I.e., Lamo seemed like a good guy and look what he did. I'm not sure how to respond as I don't know any of them personally. Others here could do better. I never said you should trust Marlinspike, I said people here don't like to see him attacked out of the blue, or that is what I meant, anyway.
From your own link:

> "It was purely a symbolic act," Johnson said. "We knew that. GCHQ knew that. And the government knew that," He added: "It was the most surreal event I have witnessed in British journalism."

"Symbolic act" means "PR move".
Interesting approach. I'm very much looking forward to hashing out the details.
Yeah, but decreasing only this infant mortality does not make the individuals live longer. It's just that we have been efficient at removing one cause of death at one end of the spectrum, but not at the other end so much. So as long as you are born and alive, your life expectancy is not really increasing versus people who were alive 50 years ago, after the discovery of penicillin let's say.
My layman's guess is that the discovery and documentation processes would be very invasive and time consuming. Plus the risk of a loss is severe.
isn't (3.) 'knowingly' buying stolen property that is illegal? but 'unknowingly' buying stolen property would at worst mean you will have to surrender the property to the original owner?
"but less efficiently"

This is the second time you said that. Where are you getting that idea?
Are you serious? From a link that you yourself provided in another comment (http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/31/footage-relea...):

> Days later Oliver Robbins, the prime minister's deputy national security adviser, renewed the threat of legal action. "If you won't return it [the Snowden material] we will have to talk to 'other people' this evening." Asked if Downing Street really intended to close down the Guardian if it did not comply, Robbins confirmed: "I'm saying this."

In what universe does "we will shut down your company if you don't obey" not qualify as intimidation?
"It's not CO2 neutral, positive or negative. It has nothing whatsoever to do with CO2."

If it doesn't involve CO2, it is, by definition, CO2 neutral. As in, it doesn't produce CO2 (unlike fossil fuels). Yes, I realize it is an energy carrier (in concept). The media is less useful on subsequent uses. The sun is the source of the energy. Which I suppose makes you technically correct. As far as I know, the sun isn't "renewable".
It's a real shame that TL;DR has now become the norm.

I can't find the link right now but there was an article somewhere stating that the TL;DR is a redundant construct because if you want to summarize your article you should do it at the top, in the first paragraph.

That first paragraph is called an "Introduction".

Funny enough the author of the blog post wrote a good introduction to his article, but chose to tack a TL;DR to it.
Where in the no-obfuscation paper does it say it requires plaintext input? Searching for the word "plaintext" only reveals three results, and all of them are talking about a chosen plaintext attack. The paper doesn't seem to specify any requirements about the input.
In general, the model doesn't include risk.
This is great! I think quantum computers are inevitable at some point as soon as we figure out how to effectively isolate them from their environment (to prevent decoherence).

In this case, the theory is way ahead of the practice, and it would seem wise to go ahead and begin offering CS courses now in quantum programming and quantum algorithms so by the time these computers are built, we're all ready to hit the ground running. Websites like this one Google has made are a good start.

Quantum computing will revolution a lot of fields. In my field (molecular dynamics and quantum chemistry), there's an issue known as the fermion sign problem, which essentially puts a hard limit on what we can accomplish through classical simulation. It basically says that the most accurate methods of performing quantum simulation scale with 2^(3N) number of particles. There is no classical computer that can handle this for any molecular system of interest, and there will never be one either. However, a quantum computer can solve this problem in non-exponential time (can't remember the exact complexity off-hand). What does this mean? Quantum simulation will lead to huge advances in materials science. Maybe we could even find a room-temperature superconductor with this kind of approach.
I ride this 650 http://instagram.com/p/VtGOXeldRY/

I fill it once every 2 weeks and get about 200km for $20AUD. I could probably get more but i can't help but strap it everywhere. It also takes less than a minute to fill the tank, and about the same to pay the cashier.

I can kind of see where they were going with the design - its harping back to classic designs of the 1950's - but its no Morgan http://www.morgan3wheeler.co.uk/desktopindex.html
you think the male should put himself at risk of being fired because the female may get fired if she does it?

That's not equality, and I would defend anyone who stays quiet in such circumstances. Don't ask the random male to go to bat for you if you're not willing to do it yourself. Common sense.
This is a naive question, but how can we simulate a quantum computer on a classical computer? Isn't the whole point of developing quantum computers that they enable computations that are totally outside the capabilities of a classical computer? I'm sure I'm missing something simple here.
The food is terrible. ...and such small portions!
Anyone with any experience in the SEO world knows that dchuck doesn't have a fucking clue anymore. He's no different than a talking head reporting on the daily ups and downs of the stock market on your local news.

Ad hominem.
If instead of saying "X is an idiot, anyone can tell " you'd say what's wrong with his argument, you wouldn't look like a talking head.
>Assassinations and Kidnappings were an obvious part of military operations since even before Sun Tzu wrote about it in 500BC.

They still weren't considered heroes, and most peoples with actual histories and traditions of war and such don't consider such behavior heroic.

>It is only in recent times, when the majority of people in the western world can spend their entire lives musing about what's right and wrong while sitting on their couch, drinking beer and eating ice-cream, that suddenly it becomes debatable whether killing bad people is wrong or not.

A, the "you can't handle the truth" defense.

Unfortunately, I'm not from the little cushy "western world", in fact we have a huge death toll in various wars in the 20th century. So it's not just "couch potatoes musing about right and wrong" that consider killing bad people wrong.

Morals is not some kind of luxury. People have had them even in the worst combat situations. Even people in the frontlines can and do have ethics. If anything it's the couch potatoes and the heavily armed nations that don't sacrifice much and see war as fun and/or a videogame that put such moral issues aside.
"Also mentions first running ads that blended with the content to then running ads that stood out from the content."

I noticed this when I went to their site. Making ads look like content is bad.
Every computation that can be performed on a quantum computer can be performed on a classical computer, albeit sometimes with exponential slow-down.
Same with retirement calculators. Step 1, at what age do you plan to die?
Get a refund on apps in Google Play after 15 minutes
That "law" occurred to me too, but I kept an open mind until I reached the sentence:

"On paper Jimenez seems an unlikely backer for one of the most revolutionary medical breakthroughs any company has ever tried to develop. He’s a marketer by trade"

At that point I stopped reading. The answer is indeed "no."
> If it doesn't involve CO2, it is, by definition, CO2 neutral.

No, CO2 neutral is an energy source that does not release any extra CO2 into the air (like growing a plant and burning it). (CO2 negative removes CO2 from the air.)

This is not an energy source, the CO2 measure of this depends only on the source. The silicon is completely irrelevant to that.

> The media is less useful on subsequent uses.

And that's the 3rd time you've said that, and I still have no idea where you are getting this erroneous concept.

> The sun is the source of the energy. Which I suppose makes you technically correct. As far as I know, the sun isn't "renewable".

No, the sun is not the source of the energy. This proposal does not include an energy source. I keep telling you that, but you don't seem to get it. This is an energy carrier. There is no energy source involved here.

(And you can ignore the words "solar panel" in the article. You can use a solar panel for anything, it has absolutely nothing to do with this.)
Time Hacking