skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
My prices can be whatever I want, I can price them under or over the market as I wish. I might not stay in business, but there are valid reasons for doing either.

For example, I want to beat my competitor. So why I don't I dump diamonds on the market at some ridiculous price and eliminate De Beers virtually overnight? Once I've cornered the market and have a monopoly, I can start to jack up the price again saying whatever I feel like (there's a new diamond shortage) and charge whatever people are willing to pay, which would hopefully be eventually close to what the market was paying before or even higher.

Or I might sell my diamonds at a price higher than De Beers and make some marketing claim that my Diamonds are only of the highest and rarest quality for <insert reason> and if I do a good job and am lucky get people to move up to my price. Or I might certify my Diamonds with a 100% money back guarantee within 1 year of purchase or some nonsense (betting that most people won't sell back their Diamonds that soon after purchase, but using that guarantee to justify the higher price) or whatever.

I can keep my prices at De Beers' high price or do whatever I want. The Market merely informs me of what will sell, defining the envelope of how I can manage my business to stay in business.
It was actually your library that inspired me :).

My reason for making this was a mix of "hey let's try making this", let me make something even shorter and (hopefully) sweeter, and "no jQuery".
A lot of things make people "feel more comfortable". Yet, you probably don't think all these things should be encouraged or become rights.

You also have to consider all the negative sides of privacy. All the lost potential. I'm actually convinced that privacy cause much more harm than good.

How do you feel about the fact that your privacy cause me discomfort?
Bitcoin Poker
I definitely think that GAs can uncover a variety of bugs ranging from simple NPEs and more nuanced bugs like memory leaks (which would then required human dev intervention to investigate for a post-mortem) by dynamically generating the test-inputs.

In addition to simply generating the input data, do you feel like GAs could broaden their span to essentially "mock" the states of other components in the system? I'm thinking of a case where you have some set of services deployed on different machines that communicate with each other. In theory, could we have the GA "mock/simulate" a network jitter sporadically (thus intercepting a request from ServiceA to ServiceB and deliberately dropping it)? This extends beyond the input data for some entry point at ServiceA, and instead encapsulates some sort of an "ether" surrounding all the components. Every permutation and combination of the subsytem state could in theory be controlled by the governing GA.

If someone actually built a DSL/library that handled these things I'm sure it would benefit everybody in a remarkable way.
I like the implied statistical wisdom, i.e. If you fail often, then help us find where we are failing. Rather than, if your passing solutions are brilliant then help us find passing solutions.

An aside, for things like unit tests where in most cases the result of the test is binary i.e fail/pass. How do you think about and ultimately represent the fitness criteria.
Gambling is not a societal ill.
Are there any laws against people playing this? I thought the anti gambling laws targeted casinos only. Any lawyers here?
Could you outline your rationale there - are you suggesting that cc numbers have leaked along with other details?
It generates passwords by repeatedly picking a random 3-letter prefix from a pool of 1024 ("tol dul bal"), then generating a phrase that would abbreviate to that password ("tolerably dull ball"). This makes analyzing the effective entropy easy.

1024 possibilities for each group of 3 characters is approximately equal to 1000 possibilities for each group of 3 numbers.
It's an exciting technology but isn't a silver bullet for all connected objects either:

from Sigfox website > On SIGFOX you can send between 0 and 140 messages per day and each message can be up to 12 bytes of actual payload data. The protocol already transmits the device ID, so the 12 bytes represent the actual payload and there is no limits on how you can structure the 12 bytes.

So if I'm correct you can only transmit 1.64 KB per device per day.
Even though ebay said it hasn't been compromised how can I trust that if it took them 2 weeks to notice this one
What’s a mid-career software engineer actually worth? Try $779,000 per year
Interesting that the screenshots mainly show KDE apps. I wonder how running through AndLinux compares with the KDE MS Windows installation, http://windows.kde.org/.
More glyphs: http://mozilla.github.io/Fira/
The Giles quote provided by Krugman is illustrative of his agenda -- or his delusion:

>>The exact level of European inequality in the last fifty years is impossible to determine, as it depends on the sources one uses. However, whichever level one picks, the lines in red in the graph show that – unlike what Prof. Piketty claims – wealth concentration among the richest people has been pretty stable for 50 years in both Europe and the US.

>>There is no obvious upward trend. The conclusions of Capital in the 21st century do not appear to be backed by the book’s own sources.

Of course the upper class wants you to believe that wealth inequality has not been increasing. Of course they want you to believe that things are fine and dandy. They want you to believe these things because they don't want their wealth taken away, either via taxes or via revolutions. And Giles is simply their mouthpiece.

Like Krugman, I'm looking forward to Piketty's defense. But I doubt the errors are anywhere enough to overturn his conclusions.
Such gamble. Wow.
Diamonds are hard in that they resist scratches very well, but can shatter rather easily from impact (not very tough).
>Also, this is a device that absolutely does not need to be running Linux; its functionality would probably be achievable with an 8-bit microcontroller and WiFi module, running none or maybe a minimal realtime OS.

This would make it much mode expensive. They just took a router that they already had and added a relay to a gpio pin. The actual cost of the hardware is probably the same. Re-engineering from the ground up? It should be done but the likes of D-Link aren't going to do it.
Don't eat alone
"Then the world will realize how valuable what the US stood for despite its shortcomings."

The West, maybe.

Not if you're living in a Middle Eastern country, with oppressive rulers kept in power by US funds, forcing the country to sell its oil resources cheaply.

Not if you're living in Eastern Ukraine, where the US toppled an elected government to install a government that is hostile to your people.
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2014/03/25/355978/nuke-8-milli... You could pretty much tell her attitude to them by the way she suggested the 8 million ethnic Russians living in Eastern Ukraine should be nuked.

Not if you're living in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Iran.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw#t=79 All countries where the U.S. has sought to destroy domestic, independent, public institutions if and when they arise.

If you're living in an African country where the U.S. has previously tried to destabilize your government, and where China instead have offered to build infrastructure for your country, you might not be so sad that the US has lost a drone, which it was probably using for spying purposes.

If the world was Panem, then U.S. is the Capitol, and its closest allies are the Capitol's adjacent districts.

Of course, you're probably from the U.S., if not, then probably, U.K or Australia, or N.Z. Of course you'd have something to lose if the US will some day not be able to police the world.

EDIT: What's the downvote for? A lack of citations?
Iran is roughly four times the population and GDP of Iraq. Beyond the sanctions already in place, what are we going to do to Iran? Invade?
US may block visas for Chinese hackers attending DefCon, Black Hat
The nice thing about Piketty is all his data is right out in the open, on the web, and not behind some kind of crazy academic journal paywall type of thing. You don't have to take him or his detractors at face value for anything.
New Vulnerability on Yahoo, allow Hackers to delete comments on Yahoo sites
Consider this hypothetical situation:

A game in which for evenly matched players, in a match of 1000 games, 9 are wins for white, 1 is a win for black, and 990 are draws. Would it really be reasonable there to say that W has a massive 90% advantage? I don't think so - in that situation white only has a tiny average advantage per game, so that winning such a match would mostly depend on real skill differences.
I've seen "no chat interface" come up in multiple gmail/fastmail comparisons, and I'm genuinely confused as to why. Do people expect email to come with a chat client? It seems weird to me to have email + xmpp/hangouts merged together and not separated (I use Adium, for instance). Email contacts are rarely people I chat with, with the exception of my innermost circle who I contact with pretty much everything, whichever fits best at the moment.
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=wireless+technology+that+THRIVES+on....

Artemis, eg https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2817730
A great example of how people think they can do better than Apple's Human Interface Guidelines only to backtrack later. Stop trying to reinvent the wheel!
Don’t Believe Anyone Who Tells You Learning To Code Is Easy
I'm not sure that the phenomenon you've encountered is unique to the evolutionary computation community: If you go to an academic conference dedicated to specific methodology, because the attendees have a vested interest in that methodology (they may have built their career on it), that hammer will certainly end up finding many questionable 'nails'.

In my opinion, EAs are most useful when you don't have a more specific human-fit algorithm to solve a problem, and particularly when a gradient to your objective function cannot be calculated. For example, when you are trying to create a controller for a many-jointed robot in a complex simulation with a high-level objective function.
If the OP is correct some Africans used the Egyptian system, tautologicly.
I wouldn't necessarily assume that games would be shorter because of better efficiency, but that the central optimization has been piece preservation and high level players have become very good at it. This creates the defensive play style that seen in the modern game.
I suppose I don't really care. I consider but it's unlikely that a universal denial of privacy would be necessary to find the balance to be the core of what I was thinking. I'm sure there are some situations where privacy does harm, but I'm at least as equally sure that there are some situations where it doesn't matter (in those situations the preferences of the individual should take precedence). There's probably even situations where everybody is better off with privacy being maintained.
Piketty's response:
http://blogs.ft.com/money-supply/2014/05/23/piketty-response...

Note that, as mentioned in the comments there, it's not clear whether FT gave Piketty Giles's specific points to respond to. The response was written before the column was published.

Previous discussion on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7793609
> One reason is that exposing some forms of personal information can lead to discrimination

Prejudice, which is central to discrimination, is usually a consequence of limited information. The less you know, the easier it is to generalize. When you know everything, "discrimination" becomes facts.

> For instance, access to private medical records or to genetic information may allow insurance companies to discriminate against people they believe might be predisposed to certain health risks.

Rightly so. Likewise, healthy people could have better rates.

> Additionally, there is a reason why people don't like revealing things about themselves (like their salaries, for example): it opens them up to judgment and allows society to comment on how they rank hierarchically within a certain community.

Again, how is that a problem? Do you have a plan to help poor people afford nice clothes and nice cars so that they can look as rich as their boss?

> Privacy allows us to feel comfortable revealing only the information we think won't detriment us in the eyes of others, especially because this can have significant tangible effects on our lives.

I don't want my employers to know my GPA. I don't want banks to know my credit score. I don't want the government to know I went to jail. Yet, these are not things we can hide, even if they "have significant tangible effects on our lives".

If the objective is equality, hiding negative qualities won't cut it. You'll have to prevent people from showing their positive qualities too.
Didn't mean to annoy anyone, I'm nowhere near the office team. The downvotes speak for themselves though, so I guess apologies are in order.
I don't think that the hamburger button was ever meant to look like a button. It's supposed to be a place that you can drag and move like a grip. The interaction where you can tap it and a menu will appear is just their for user convenience.
The sigfox.com website is IPv4-only. Let's hope they show more foresight when it comes to the network design.
Instead of looking for the negative impact on society, have you tried looking for the possible positive impact _if_ everyone knew basic CS and programming? I see that those should logically be isomorphic, but I think the way you frame the question makes a big difference as to what you will discover.

I think literacy is a very good comparison. Society certainly did work without everyone being literate, with just a few specialists who knew how to read and write, and there was no obvious need for everyone to learn it, and it is a huge investment of time and effort for everyone who has to go through it, so it would seem like a natural candidate for specialization, wouldn't it? Yet, as you note, essentially universal literacy has transformed the way we live massively for the better, and few would argue that this massive investment of every single person is not worth it and we should return to specialists taking care of our reading and writing.

Now, the question is: What would a society with universal knowledge of CS and programming basics look like? What would future kimdouglasmasons say when they claim that some new skill is not worth teaching to everybody because there simply is no comparison to computationality? How were pre-computational societies fundamentally held back in their progress, what kind of fundamental transformations of society would never have been possible if people had stayed uncomputational?

Your example isn't particularly helpful. Anatomy is not a widely applicable set of skills. There never is any question of whether you could use the help of an anatomist to help you solve an anatomy problem with your new motor design or your new soup recipe. Automated computation, much like literacy, essentially can be applied everywhere. That's why you write "it's much more efficient for specialist developers to consult with domain experts". That sentence only makes sense for universally applicable skills - I doubt many anatomists often consult with domain experts because they need to apply their knowledge in a field they so far have no clue of.

Also, the grocery lists a literate society writes also aren't of particular literary value. That does not mean that society isn't better of for people being able to write them. And to appreciate more the works of those who still are "literacy professionals", who obviously still have their place in society.
I used to think this way, but I no longer do.

In the book 1984 -- which has far more similarities to today's reality than I am comfortable with -- the Oceanians are utterly and completely convinced that their side is the good side. Throughout the book there are various hints that this is in fact not the case. But the Oceanian government's control on information, combined with people's cognitive dissonance, prevents the truth from being realized. And the few who do realize it are imprisoned, tortured and converted (or killed).

What would today's world be like if China and/or Russia were the dominant power? The answer is that no one knows. No one can know. It's like asking, "what would the world be like if Hitler had won?" That alternate universe was created so long ago that it is simply not possible to conceive of.

It is silly to look at today's China and Russia and conclude that they would continue their current practices and ideologies after becoming dominant world-powers, since said practices and ideologies are very likely what is preventing that from happening. It is also possible that there will be a reversal of roles, with them becoming "good" and the USA becoming a tyrannical, fascist state. I'd say there is a scary amount of indication that the latter is very likely, actually.
Is it legal for US residents to play at sites like http://www.betcoinpoker.com ?

I think the laws that banned online poker were mainly against Casinos, and now that they can be funded in btcoin, what prevents US residents from playing?
Same thing with networking, queueing etc. It has existed since the dawn of desktop printers, but now that they add "3D" to the name, it's considered a novel invention? The patent system is flawed.
Half the oil that enters the sea comes form natural sources. It is consumed by organisms able to metabolize hydrocarbons.

Source: http://www.whoi.edu/oilinocean/page.do?pid=51880

Thus, I don't think anyone would expect the world to be covered in oil.
> write that software, and sell it into the industry

I hope by this you mean start a collective open standards FOSS project to fill the need, rather than write proprietary software that every single firm will redundantly reproduce because nobody wants to embrace the information age. That is the same kind of backwards redundancy that highlights why "everyone coding" is a bad idea.

> I would hope they choose the later

Medicine is rapidly being transformed by AI, robotics, and automation. In decades we should see the complete replacement of human labor in many surgical procedures, since a programmed machine can be much more precise and interpret the bodies signals and vitals in much greater clarity. But do you want doctors, the experts on performing these procedures, writing the code, or do you you want programmers who know to ironlad it against unexpected behavior to write the code? (trick question, we want both, but the doctors need to be computer literate and the programmers medically literate, but usually the later is more true than the former).

I think there is a misnomer equating computer literacy with writing software. The latter can give the former, but it doesn't always happen - I know many SEs who can't point out a hard drive from RAM, and couldn't make heads or tails of problems out of their niche domain. That isn't really computer literacy either, even if they live in a deep crevase within it.

I think computer literacy, as others in this thread have pointed out, should be its own course - just like English literature. You want to convey the macroscopic concepts and motivations and overarching conventions, rather than the minute details. The analogy would be do you care about sentence structure, word density, and subliminal messaging in Lit 101 - well, no, you care about overarching plot and meaning.

Any computer literacy class should have a cirriculum teaching its students what code is, but that doesn't mean they need to know how to write it. They should just understand how the machines in their day to day lives work, and how to control them if they want to from there. Because so many people are misinformed or just ignorant about what these magical glowy screens of letters and pictures actually are to begin with. It is the difference between being able to appreciate literature and being able to write world class novels.
One cool thing about all of Meteor's magic is that it's quite understandable. Chris Mather's EventedMind and Arunoda's MeteorHacks are good resources for looking behind that curtain.

In my experience, once the magic becomes more of an understanding of the Meteor-y way of doing things, then debugging and maintaining isn't any harder than a more traditional architecture.

I wouldn't say that Meteor is a suitable framework for any type of app, but I would say its design is suitable for a lot more than just prototyping and games (with a pre-1.0 caveat).
There's merit in reminding people that a lot of development contains a decent amount of Googling, but I'm not sure that "knowing which code is best to copy-paste" is the main trait of coding.

What's certainly true is that learning how to code is dramatically easier than it ever has been; and is likely to get easier as time passes. Learning how to code is indeed pretty easy, knowing how to build a complex product goes beyond that, though.
Amen. I switched to FastMail from Gmail more than a year ago and also absolutely love it. I highly recommend it for anyone dissatisfied with Gmail.

A few things that may be helpful for people considering making the switch:

- If FastMail's IMAP import doesn't work for you, this might (it worked for me): http://protips.maxmasnick.com/export-gmail-to-fastmail-or-an...

- If you want to try FastMail "risk free" so you can switch back to Gmail if you don't like it: http://protips.maxmasnick.com/how-to-test-fastmail-risk-free...

- My own writeup about my experience switching to FastMail from Gmail: http://www.maxmasnick.com/2013/07/19/fastmail/ (discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6069944)
If you can't find anything would it be hard to ask ebay and amazon?

Or you probably already did that I am assuming
The Babylonians used a base 60 [sexagesimal] floating point system with the exponent implied by the context. Knuth discusses in in TAoCP volume 2, some of it referenced from The Exact Sciences in Antiquity.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylonian_numerals

http://store.doverpublications.com/0486223329.html
Well I visited them in incognito mode and it took it a day or 2 but someone from the company looked at my linkedin.

How is this even possible? wtf
It happens in EA because the researchers don't account for over fitting. The experimenters often do not validate so the population converges to the training set maxima too far. If you had 2 simulations of walking. You would select and mutate based on one sim and stop the evolution when performance degraded on the second sim. Not blindly maximize the one measure.

if validation were performed the population would not evolve into the cracks of unlikely physics loop holes.
After reading this I plan to switch to fastmail as well.

Thanks for sharing the good stuff!
This is a great read (handbook of neuroevolution through erlang):
http://www.cabafx.com/trading-ebooks-collection/newpdf/Handb...

I highly recommend the hard copy
You know those pictures are faked right? (Maybe it says that there, I didn't check.)

This microparticles would not have that affect anyway though.
Yeah, that's just a graph with no data behind it, and it comes from a biased source. Do you have anything actually usable?
The article doesn't deliver on the sensationalist title. Here is all the evidence that this "insider" provides us:

"TL: What triggered the decision to call the game off?

KG: I can only guess it was the trial lawyers. Why? Because they lost at every turn. If winning the debate wasn't an option, they were just going to call the game off. Which is apparently what they did."

Glueck may be right, but this is nothing but speculation. Moreover, it is speculation unaided by any more information than the general public has. We all know that trial lawyers would, logically, dislike patent reform, so of course they're a natural suspect when it gets scuttled.
It is not relevant to my point to just say that an invasion of Iran would be expensive. (But you know that, I think.)