skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
This is amazing! I'd read Lagrange's eq in classical mechanics texts many times but my brain is just so tuned in thinking in terms of computations and programming that this approach in this PDF just feels natural. If lot of other things (how about General Relativity?) were written like this in terms of code, I would eat it up like buttered bread.
This reminds me of a concept I have been toying with for a while now that I would love to see implemented.

What I would absolutely adore is a wiki styled over the idea of covering mathematical topics in the style of a programming API, and teach it in the same manner. Meaning that someone could use the math as a concept to kludge some code together, or teach it to themselves in this style using the material.

I've been too lazy to start the wiki myself, and not nearly knowledgeable enough to throw together to a few topics to get the ball rolling.

If anyone likes this idea, please steal it, it's something I would love to see.
Bob Evans: Happy Hour for Seniors
nice thats a huge security hole
Why Apple did this in Swift language?
It will be interesting when they get down the to-do list to fmt, which contains the Knuth-Plass paragraph reflow algorithm -- the only C-language version I've been able to find, and about the only readable one, after Knuth's "literate" one.

[1] http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/spe.4380111102/ab...
I've always thought that Apple is driven by wanting to control its own destiny and not have the short term interests of the market dictate its decisions. That's why it is stockpiling cash and hesitating to pay it out to its shareholders.

Apple and Tesla just want to make great stuff. Not just great, esoteric stuff, but products that are also accessible to the mainstream. The profits are just a way of keeping score and giving them options for the future.

They're kind of like the Beatles, who as an organization always knew how to do things big commercially. But commerce is never what drove The Beatles. They understood that winning in the marketplace gave them more leeway to dream bigger and bigger.

It's easy to say, "why would a company want to exist besides to make profit?" But I think a company can be a creative outlet for its employees and shareholders, just like any other medium. The profits just ensure they have more creative control in the future.
Rapportive Raplets, Notes, and Contextual Gadget to be discontinued
Flying into the Air Force One temporary flight restriction area
How much time did you spend with Haskell? I've spent a year or so with it and I feel like my productivity will catch up with Python (8~ years with it) eventually, though I could be wrong.
they can optimise at compiler level. why user has to always pass the boolean inside if statement.
Great stuff. Ended up reading through a few of them. Wish the site was mobile friendly.
Likewise. That was my primary reason for buying the FitBit originally; I was disappointed at how inaccurate it was, even with the tempered expectation of knowing it was just a 3-axis accelerometer. That being said, FitBit et al. do seem to be making headway on getting people to buy into a device that is always on you, touching your skin. That is a prerequisite for any sleep tracker that didn't seem palatable only a few years ago (e.g. Zeo).
I think a more realistic solution is to educate developers to prioritize making open shiny.

After all, Gmail may have its problems, especially recently with Google+, but it interoperates with every other email service (and until recently, Jabber client) and is relatively easy to move off of; for most of its 10 years of existence, I'd say it had a positive role in keeping people using email. It's far, far better than something like Twitter where the platform owner has absolute control and can censor tweets or arbitrarily crack down on third party clients.

Similarly, while App.net didn't exactly replace Twitter, I think I think its emphasis on encouraging people to write independent clients for it was very healthy for it (and while some of those clients were proprietary, proprietary native clients for open platforms are far less bad than proprietary platforms). Why didn't tent.io try to launch with spiffy clients?

To be honest, I don't think it's as much that open can't be shiny as that creating a social platform without an existing userbase to leverage is nearly impossible - most closed platforms fail too. And I think most developers know that shiny is necessary - it's just that there isn't enough motivation and enthusiasm. But it's unreasonable to expect anyone to use your platform if you're not going to spend enough engineering effort on it...
One approach is to start documenting how much of your time is spent either a) manually testing changes because you have no automated tests b) debugging, fixing bugs, and patching messed up data due to bugs that easily could have been caught by tests. I find that investing in basic acceptance tests pays itself off very quickly. Good tests allow you to iterate on your early product much faster, because you can actually make changes without breaking things for your early users. If you can document the wasted time, maybe you can convince him of the benefit.
Yes, I'd like to see the evidence that someone like Musk, Wozniak, and maybe arguably Jobs, are not just outliers.

As for his mention of the WWW, I don't credit the valley for all that and wonder if Vint Cerf has emoted about his mentality when coding TCP/IP.

> cultural norms

Not sure about that, unless you consider it a very recent 'value.' There was quite a bit of flaunting during the dot-com era.
>The Mirabox comes with the Marvell fork of uBoot which is unfortunately quite old. It doesn't have support for device-tree, for example. I'm not aware of a newer working version from either Marvell or Globalscale. There was some initial work to get Barebox working on the Mirabox, but it is very feature limited.

This was the situation with the Dreamplug before it got mainline uBoot support. Is there any hope for the Mirabox?
Sites that do that have always annoyed me. I'm pleasantly surprised that mozilla actually agreed to fix this. Interestingly, just last week someone here posted a plugin fore chrome that also does this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7856152
It's a false choice. There are ways of handling errors without so much verbosity, and without teaching coworkers a bunch of combinators either.
> It doesn't do anything about non-practicing entities because it can't. There's no formulation of words that could cause a license to have any bearing on NPEs.

That isn't true at all. You can do something about NPEs by changing the behavior of their targets. You take away the ability to license a patent without securing a license for everyone and now the troll can no longer rely on extracting nuisance value settlements from large numbers of targets, because for the target the cost of losing the reciprocal license (and having to fight all of those patent holders) now exceeds the cost of invalidating the troll's patent. And if everyone sees the same calculus and everyone fights, trolling as a business model could become unprofitable.

> Your potential wording would make the patent license completely unusable.

Why is that? The ideal endgame would be to bring about a de facto nullification of software patents. The more patents that become licensed under the defensive license, the more incentive there is to put all of your own patents under it, which creates all the more incentive for others to do the same. Obviously you wouldn't have e.g. IBM signing on the first day, but as it snowballs the incentive to do so increases over time. At the end of the chain you would have a situation where there would be ten times as many patents that IBM is infringing than they own and the only way they could get a license to those patents is to join the agreement with everyone else.

I would think another interesting feature would be to allow anyone who has signed on to the agreement to use any of the signatories' patents offensively against anyone who hasn't, in exchange for a large chunk of the proceeds, essentially on a contingent fee basis. I believe a third of the amount recovered is typical? That would allow patent trolling to eat itself, because patents lawyers could sign on to the agreement at no cost (since they don't characteristically own patents) and then have instant access to a huge corpus of patents to go sue everyone else with, until such time as everyone relevant has signed on. And it would also create an incentive to sign on in the early days, because if you sign on and have any good patents there is a reasonable chance that some lawyers will go out and sue Microsoft et al at their own expense and then give you half the money. Until there are a lot of signatories that should be about as profitable for existing patent holders as hiring a lawyer to go sue people on your behalf without the defensive conditions, unless everybody starts signing on right away, which would be even better.
We are brainstorming some solutions for this as I type. Understood.
If you're working with a 3rd party api and want to store their response, it's waaay simpler to just stuff their response into a json blob, add a couple indexes if needed, and go on with life. (as opposed to making 30 tables to store all the data in a normalized format and writing the sql or configuring the orm to deal with that data)
The general literature on deflation is that deflation is much much worse in the long run. In particular, borrowing becomes significantly more difficult and those who have loans are trapped with them, as their wages are pushed downwards by deflationary forces but the nominal loan remains the same.

While run-away inflation and run-away deflation are both awful, an economy which slowly inflates is better than one that slowly deflates.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/17/world/asia/17japan.html?pa...

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_06/b42140145...

http://www.bis.org/publ/bppdf/bispap70c.pdf

http://www.kyotobank.co.jp/houjin/report/pdf/201305_02_e.pdf

http://www.nber.org/digest/jun05/w10938.html
An Analysis of Search Engine Crowdfunding Campaigns on IndieGoGo
I wrote something similar to this a while back for Plan 9. Having channels over the network is really awesome, and it's the only thing I think that Go is badly missing. It would be cool if the author could have this make use of the normal Go syntax for message passing.
Reminds me a lot about 'optional chaining' in Swift (among other languages I'm sure), at least on a superficial level. What I'm not sure about at the moment is where best practices suggest you should use them–it seems like some functions are written to accept optionals, while others are not, and it's not clear why to me.
You have to be crazy to think people will jump on this even after you ask this level of permissions. Landing page doesn't even really make clear what the use case is here. The feedback links pops up email client. Seriously?
Microsoft's MSN messenger also filtered links. One example I remember was that it would replace any link on mediafire.com with empty space (causing confusion in the conversation).
Having a spam filter for talking to someone you explicitly allowed to talk to you would be nonsensical. But hey, it's Microsoft.
Also, the swift slides (at wwdc) show something similar
The real issue is that most of the time is spent marshalling all the data into YAML

Using MessagePack would speed that up significantly, too. I've done a comparison of MessagePack vs. JSON vs. YAML vs. Ruby .marshal in the past[0], and I'm currently building a system using AMQP+MessagePack (as of now the only part that's public is [1]).

Basically, YAML is great for configuration files because of its flexible syntax, but terrible for communication because of its flexible syntax.

[0] http://blog.mikebourgeous.com/2012/10/12/optimizing-message-... (missing numbers for MessagePack, but mentions 2x speed up beyond best other option)

[1] https://github.com/deseretbook/classy_hash (includes a benchmark script that shows how ridiculously fast MessagePack is compared to YAML)
People have been signing up for a while, but we understand the point about the permissions, and are going to work on it.

The landing page description is also something we are talking about right now.
It is a startup, with only 5 developers. In my honest opinion, it should feel dysfunctional at this point and you should be stressed out. I don't know what you expect but don't expect it to be easy breezy and lots of learning. There is a point for that but it sounds like they are just trying to crank things out. This is your first job and you should treat it like boot camp and get as much as done as you can. Do your job and think about criticizing later once you have gained some experience and have something to compare against. So write this post again on your next startup.
How to swim with the sharks when you land your first job.
Creating a Multiplayer Game with TogetherJS and CreateJS
If I had said that, then yes, it would have been quite foolish. But I did not say that all corporations are striving with equal fervor, nor that they focus solely on profit.
The official Docker Hub supports private repositories. https://hub.docker.com
Does anyone know of an open source web RSS reader you can self host?
Firefox OS ecosystem redefines the entry-level smartphone
These 'ghost towns' will still be there in 10 years and the buildings will still be valuable. Eventually they'll get used. The 'ghost town' problem is overstated.

“No question, there are towns (some city-like) with empty buildings for the world to see. And, there certainly have been cases of poor planning and overbuilding. But as my team and I travelled around China, it was clear to us that those represent a small sample of projects and not the country as a whole.”

-- Mark Mobius
I hate to register on sites but I often do. This is because if I expect the trade off between the pain of registration against the value I expect to get from continuing to use the full functionality to be positive then I sign up.

My pain from registration is largely due to the friction from having to think up a unique username (I hate when my favorite username is already taken) and making up a password.

I am really not bothered by receiving email from services as most respectable sites will unsubscribe you with one click and if they don't I simply mark their email as spam.

I never sign up with social services (GooFaceTwit) due to my irrational fear that at some point my activity on the site will be made public without my consent.

Your takeaway as a product owner I think is that if you are building a service for technical folks (would your typical user hang out on HN? If so, read on. If not, ymmv), you should really think about if your service truly needs user registration (I have seen some creative workarounds that don't impose a burden on the customer and still allow the product to achieve business objectives). If you do need registration, you should remove as many impediments as you can (meaningful engagement prior to registration, email as username, only ask for information you absolutely need to have, stagger your profile updates within the user lifecycle, etc).

Personally, I would like to see a structural solution to the registration problem. This is such a common issue for a significant portion of the web that it should be solved at the browser level. Why is there not a "Register for this site" button on the browser chrome? The user signs into their browser and from then on can simply create an account on any site by clicking the button. A little drop down or tooltip can show what information they need to share to successfully register so the user is making an informed choice.

I shouldn't need to enter a user name password combo on any website ever again and the entire process should be as easy as hitting the back button.
I've always thought that Apple is driven by wanting to control its own destiny and not have the short term interests of the market dictate its decisions. That's why it is stockpiling cash and hesitating to pay it out to its shareholders.

There are a million reasons why I really want to like Apple. But I can't, because they use mostly trivial patents offensively against their competitors. That's not controlling one's own destiny, that's forcibly imposing one's will on others.
Sorry for the flippancy, what I meant was it's just 1 application layer protocol (HTTP) amongst the multitude you could potentially be serving. Trying to fix for that one service means nothing, big picture, to people who know how to suppress a network, broad spectrum. Think ICMP, UDP, TCP, routing protocols (BGP if they're feeling sassy), everything that happens on the wire and in the kernel and through upstream ISP's before it even reaches your web server - HTTP protocol handling is literally the last bastion of hope in a DDOS scenario.
TFRs are just another security theater from post 9/11 era: a typical VIP movement TFR radius is 3-4NM and a big enough plane to carry a real weapon or to be a weapon by itself (e.g. business jet with speeds above 400 knots) will penetrate through TFR in less than a minute which is obviously not enough time to intercept such a plane.

In the same time, TFRs are hurting aviation business. Quite a few Bay Area flight instructors recently joked that they will vote for Republicans next time since Obama is visiting Bay Area too often and there are too many TFRs.
Not really, but throwing in for something that already exists is slightly different than creating it in the first place.
1) Porosity is the ratio of the volume of openings (voids) to the total volume of material. Porosity represents the storage capacity of the geologic material. On the other hand, permeability is a measure of the ease with which fluids will flow though a porous rock. Although a rock may be highly porous, if the voids are not interconnected, then fluids within the closed, isolated pores cannot move. This situation is commonly found in nature and represents a challenge for the extraction or the injection in reservoirs.

Nevertheless, I have no idea of the porosity level that could exists at those depths.

2) At 700km depth pressures are of order 21 Giga Pascals (~207000 atmospheres) and temperatures about ~1900ºC. Water is not the water we know at these conditions, it is a supercritical fluid. The line separating liquid and gas phases ended at much lower temperatures.
I believe that the various employees at Apple and Tesla, like lots of employees at lots of companies, are there because they enjoy what they do and want to make and do great things. That includes technical and executive staff.

But the overall business goal is to make money, because unless they're making money they employees will not be able to continue making great things or doing great things.
https://github.com/socketubs/leselys
PyDEC: Software and Algorithms for Discretization of Exterior Calculus
FDA admits Psychiatry has no tests to prove the existence of brain disorders
From what is on the slide, I can compute (x', E_{k'}(x')) for x' and k' of my choosing by just running the encryption algorithm.

(I know that ideal ciphers are defined correctly elsewhere, and agree that their definition makes sense.)
>But you might want to look up why certain rights are generally considered or legislated to be non-waivable.

I'm intimately familiar with them! It's why I've come to my conclusion: all of the reasons are either confused, would invalidate the right to sell one's apples, or are an issue of informed consent that only justify greater scrutiny, waiting periods, etc rather than a blanket "lol you can't trade that right".

Had you read my responses, you could have articulated -- perhaps even substantiated -- those reasons in your own words the first (not fourth) time around, rather than dwell on the orthogonal issue of how many jurists agree with you. Then we could have had a productive discussion and probed each other regarding the basis for our beliefs, and perhaps learn something from each other.

But as it stands, you chose to condescendingly lecture me about issues that don't speak to those I raised, as per my previous reply.

Next time, would you mind focusing on the substance, rather than on citing Black's Law to refute that "a right ... is not a right" and such?

For example, you could have said something like, "well, inalienable rights can definitely feel like obligations, but capping what people can waive has the following benefit ..." And then gone on about the stuff you're only now saying. See how much more productive that is?
Water will never become a valuable commodity for the foreseeable future (on a global scale). Most of the Earth's surface is covered by water, and we do very little that actually destroys water. What may become valuable is drinkable water, which is easily obtainable from sea-water (for the right price), an local access to water.

The first of these problems has an easy free market solution, and sets a hard cap on the value of drinkable water (as de-salination plants can scale linearly to meet our needs). The second of these is more difficult, but still has a worst case scenerio of needing to move people to water rich areas, and re-build infastructure to support the new population distribution, as well as dealing with a decrease in the habitable land area.
In the past, Microsoft's business goals, and the needs and wants of their customers have aligned fairly well. This is no longer true. Microsoft's current business goals are to lock customers in to their app store environment and their cloud computing infrastructure.

The main goal of Windows Phone 7 and Windows 8 was nothing to do with improving the experience for customers, it was about establishing and locking in customers to the Windows app store.

Likewise, the main goal of Office 2013 was about migrating and locking in customers to Office 365.

Microsoft included all the features they needed to fulfill their business needs. Once these programs were released though, customers saw that they didn't meet their needs and wants. Microsoft was left with no choice but to respond by (slowly and halfheartedly) giving them what they wanted.

This stands in stark contrast to Apple (at least under Steve Jobs) not only putting the needs and wants of their customers first, but anticipating the needs and wants of their customers before they themselves even knew they had them.
Nice technical trick but doesn't this make Firefox OS even less necessary than it ever was?

I mean, if I were Mozilla, I'd work very hard to get Android apps to work on Firefox OS, not the other way around.
That's interesting. I thought thought radioactivity was harmful to all life forms, any source?
There's nothing wrong with publishing new theoretically plausible ideas. They just need to be properly qualified.
On the other hand, a minute may be enough to get the VIP out of the building or whatever place he's in, so that it's hard to know from the outside, where exactly to strike.

The TFR buys you that minute, because you know that something's wrong. If it wasn't there, your time window would be zero.

Of course, TFR violations seem to happen too often to really always evacuate the VIP whenever someone enters without authorization.
Twitter is struggling to grow because they failed at achieving the purpose they were created for.

WeChat, WhatsApp, Kik, FB Messenger, et al. have accomplished what Twitter was supposed to.

Now Twitter is just a mostly one-way broadcast for famous people. That's why such a small percentage of their user base actually shares anything, much less on a regular basis.

There is no reason for Twitter to exist. What they do is being better served by other platforms. This will become very painfully obvious in the next few years, their active user base will shrink.