skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Also the father of the A-10, which the air force hates but is so useful. He arrived at the design after studying how air power was used in WWII. We still get a lot of utility out of the A-10. The air force is of course trying to kill it still.

Source: Boyd - http://www.amazon.com/Boyd-Fighter-Pilot-Who-Changed-ebook/d...
Drones don't go on bombing runs during an invasion or as a precursor to large troop movements. Drones can't really support ground troops well due to limited ammo (although they can provide eyes in the sky support for long periods of time).

Also, the air superiority that these aircraft enable, allows the use of drones, and other ground advantages.

So yes, while air-to-air dog fighting is rare (although posturing certainly isn't), it's only one use for these planes.
He mentions dogfights, do those even happen anymore?

High G maneuvering to defeat missiles certainly still happens. There is a YouTube F-16 cockpit video of one flight's encounter with a SAM missile trap in the balkans. The F-16 is supremely maneuverable. Sounds like they were desperate and barely made it out. (One plane was hit, IIRC.)

EDIT: I remembered wrong. This was the video about an incident over Iraq. Also, it was due to a mistake in mission planning.

Drones would be even better at this in many ways. Possibly worse in terms of situational awareness, however, depending on how well integrated the pilot's information is.
Hi, speaker here. Let me know if you have any questions.

The video starts off with the basics but gets into some pretty obscure, and interesting, internals on how things work.
Oh yes definitely. Don't worry, I'm not interested in jumping the gun.
ClojureScript already runs on node: https://github.com/clojure/clojurescript/wiki/Quick-Start#ru...

I think what GP is complaining about is the compilation step, which requires a JVM and isn't exactly the fastest.

Touche - You don't need project.clj and leiningen and can run a command basically like you're asking for. I'm not sure how much faster it is than using leiningen and cljsbuild, as I haven't tried it: https://github.com/clojure/clojurescript/wiki/Quick-Start#cl...
Hmm, that font seems to be copying Android and iOS icons nearly 1:1. How does that hold up from a copyright perspective?
EBay Valet – An iPhone App That Does The Selling For You
That's the "essentially" part. The key bit here is "cheap counter to the F-35 you can mass-produce in the hundreds or thousands for every F-35 you'll face".

Nothing says you can't have a few dozen/hundred drones with SAMs, either.
Manned aircraft don't become lawn darts when you start jamming radio comms.
RIP Google Reader Shirt
Amiga. Respect! There was a time when it was clear that Amiga was going to win. And then it didn't.

I hung out on #phreak as pHaze.
Wasn't there a shoot-down of an F-117 over the Balkans enabled by long wave radar?
Encrypt-Then-MAC for TLS
Think of how terrible that sounds from an investor's perspective. "I don't know how to employ capital profitably because my best course of action is to return my funds to you because my startup is a virtually assured failure." Would you invest in a startup that just told you that?

If you're going to bother founding a startup, you should have some reason to believe that you are in the 1% that is going to be a success. You might be wrong in that belief, and that's why startup success continues to be fairly rare, but if you don't even have a reason to believe that much you might as well pack up the startup, get a good-paying job, and invest the money you earn.
If read it four times, but the logic in this statement is bizarre.

Your first sentence clearly states "Youtube blocks all videos they don't have the rights to". That's YouTube doing the blocking. Period. Of course they can play those videos, copyright hasn't gotten that far out of hand yet.
having a vested interest in their hires staying at a job for as long as possible

Exactly what I was thinking, but of course as I'm not experienced with this I thought there could be some glaring issues with it.

I would love to see some data (even if anecdotal) from someone that tried something similar. Imagine that you can even treat some of your older, most successful employees as "passive income"; as a recruiter you made a really really good effort locating, training and making the best fit for someone, and then that someone is netting you, say, 1% of their salary every 6 months or something, for the next 5 years (haven't worked through the numbers so that might not even make sense), but replace 1% and 5 years with X and Y.

In general terms, I would like to have a recruiter in more "closer" terms. So maybe this recruiter got me a job at company A, then 3 or 4 years from now, since they really did their job and know me well, they can put me in a much better job, for say the next 3 or 4 years again, and so forth. That would mean both he and I could have continued income due to the effort we both made. He made his effort picking a really good candidate and so did I, doing my job.

Kind of like an investor. Successful traders are usually the ones that make their due diligence and thus are rewarded with the most handsome payouts. Isn't that what a recruiter should do? invest in a particular candidate and find the best place where his "investment" can payback handsomely?
I do, actually; he says it himself in the video. And the F15 didn't start as a multi-purpose fighter; it started as a single-purpose fighter. It was when the bureaucratic process started that the design of the plane changed and arguably ruined the design.
ALL water has been recycled pee at some time or other over the last four and a half billion years. And a lot of tap water already has some pee in it from birds and animals (as well as the occasional human).
mthreat verified.
Drones are nice when you have a permissive environment where the locals don't have a decent air defense system. But otherwise, the current models we have are relatively easy to shoot down. They lack speed, maneuverability, and their operators lack the situational awareness that a pilot would bring to the table.

There are better drones being developed, but they will be expensive and will depend extensively on sat links for communicating between the drone and base station. This will be problematic against a peer foe who can jam radio transmissions.
Does anyone have a link to a reliable reference on what does and does not constitute insider trading in the eyes of the SEC?

Is there a clear definition for what constitutes actionable information?
I can't imagine somebody would trust me with their root-domain, basically.

The “root-domain” is the domain name with a single zero-length label at the top of the hierarchy. What you're referring to is a zone.
> Therapy is a medical science,

Therapy is a practice, not a science.

> but every layperson seems to think they have enough knowledge to comment on what it is or whether it's needed.

Ah, the "leave it to the experts" trope.

Giving that responsibility to someone else is the same as relying on a guru or a religious personality to tell you what to believe & do.

If you look into psychology & related fields, there are different traditions & approaches. A practitioner will go to school for a few years learning a particular curriculum. What is to say that that curriculum & approach is correct for you? That takes a leap of faith.

The workings of the human brain & the dynamics of personality is actually not fully known. There is a lot of progress being made and that knowledge is something that you have access to. Hopefully you can have an independent & thoughtful mind to make your own decision.

There's also issues with the Pharmaceutical industry. Pharmaceutical companies want to make money and making money means selling drugs. Hence it is in their best interest to have people regularly take their drugs.

Also notice that natural remedies, used for most of the history of life, are discredited. Why? The Pharmaceutical industry has an interest in controlling the channel of your medicine. They cannot profit from natural remedies that are commodities.

A side effect of many anti-depressants is suicide, yet these drugs are heavily advertised and prescribed. Billions of dollars are being made every year. Notice that there are ulterior motives that do not relate to your health.

Btw, Pharmaceutical companies also visit doctor offices and have a symbiotic relationship with the doctors. Some doctors are ethical & some doctors are not...
I don't, and it would be too expensive even at $15 imo. But even if something like this had a market there's the problem of the editor, as it uses contenteditable which is at best inconsistent across browser and at worst completely broken. That's also the reason Google Docs dropped it and started doing editing the hard way. As long as you know who uses your software and you can enforce the use of a given browser (as is the case with the writers for the NYT) there's no problem with contenteditable, but for a general solution you need to drop it.
I pretty much guarantee that if you ran the numbers with intent to profit off this phenomenon, you'd find that its predictive value is null. A commenter down below speculated that it sounds a lot like simple regression to the mean.
If there's one thing radiation types like, its multiple measurement standards and massive unit conversions.

First of all as typical the physicists use a SI unit that joe average USA doesn't use. The physicists like Bq which is basically odds of decay of a single particle. So 1 Bq/liter/second is one decay per second in a one liter jar. Not much. A legacy curie Ci still used by the EPA is something like about how many decays a chunk of radium gives off in a second or the length of the kings foot or some ridiculous. Anyway 1 Bq = 27 pico curies or pCi. So the EPA standard of 4 pCi/L translated into modern terms is 0.148 Bq/L

The dude provides his survey meter in Bq/cubic meter and we're talking Bq/liter so div 1000 because 1000 liters in a cubic meter. So the survey meter is reading 0.159 Bq/L.

I am a bit confused why the dudes test area is reading about 10% over the EPA standard for radon contamination. I guess he needs a source that should just barely be positive. In that way, it makes sense to run the tests in that location.

As a side note I'm guessing his homemade gadget has a volume of a tenth liter. That would imply about 0.0148 Bq/sec activity in his homemade gadget. He claims a detection level of 5.2 Bq/hour (edit: 5.2 hits/hour) so 0.0148 * 60 * 60 = thirty something actual Bq activity (edit: hits) happened in his detector of which he captured 5.2 on average. That means his homemade gadget is about 13% likely to detect any individual decay that happened inside of it. That's actually pretty good!

I can't be bothered to continue with a statistical analysis but the 10% claim sounds about reasonable because of what boils down to quantization noise. So your threshold is about 5 pings per hour. He gathers 20 hours of data thats about 100 pings total. The longer you gather and average data the more sig figs you get to accumulate with a sqrt of the number of samples (way too long story). So he's saying with 100 pings his data reduction indicates with X% certainty the actual number is within 10% of the legacy 4 pCi/L

Someone else can pick up the statistics torch and run with it from here.

The TLDR is given infrequent discrete events you need a lot of them to have a statistically relevant discovery if you rely on averaging them together to gain a sig fig in your results.
I bet we could get a cruise missile to "land" on a runway. The only catch is that it usually does this concurrently with a planned rapid disassembly.
They've got the timing wrong - look at the times of the tweets. They're not every 60 seconds.
Yeah it actually makes sense from a physics point of view. All the fancy reflective angles on the stealth plane won't do anything if the wave is longer than they are. "Small" things all look the same in terms of wave reflections.

The radar-absorbing paint may do something (or at least it could in theory). And long-wave radars are naturally going to bigger and more inconvenient than short-wave.

I've never really thought about it, but I think he might be right!
> The U.S. military is always fighting the last war. In this case, they aren't even fighting the last several wars, but are still locked into Cold War, pre-drone thinking.

I think there's an argument to be made that investment in new fighter jets is potentially an effort to avoid fighting the last (aerial) war.

That is, no one expects that the USA will actually get into a war with Russia, China, or one of the other "usual suspects" which has significant air-warfare capability. The existence of sufficiently advanced weaponry (on both sides) helps ensure that such a war won't happen.

It's certainly not the biggest motivator avoiding war (who needs motivation to not fight war, anyway?), but enough of these deterrents added up helps keep negotiations civil.

All that said, it's probably just the military-industrial complex at work -- why give up multi-billion dollar fighter jet contracts for much more reasonable multi-(tens? hundreds?)-million dollar drone contracts?
Its also noted in the changelog:

- Range based accuracy removed - UFO Extender accuracy added.

or in the ingame settings.
My agent's number is 1800...

I was going to say the market's too small, but based on defcon 2013's turnout it may actually not be that small.
Should replace the image with an actual demo. I couldn't find one.
This is an interesting point. I created an issue on the github repository concerning this matter. Maybe you'd like to comment on it about your use case so we can improve the tool?
Maybe this is all just an elaborate false-flag-y thing? The Chinese were allowed to "acquire" plans to a shitty plane, and in a few years the US Govt will be all "whoops that plane sucked, we've been working on a different plane, here it is"
Done

https://github.com/idibidiart/AllSeeingEye

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/all-seeing-eye/kio...
Could you post a link to that YouTube video? sounds awesome.
The reports I've read seem to indicate that the F-117 used the same ingress and egress routes, it was flying in daylight, and that it was shot down by an SA6 operating in electro-optical mode. Not very good mission planning.
Many countries have secret laws unfortunately. The US is especially bad because they hide their secret laws behind a veil of "nation security" when they clearly have no requirement to do so. They legalise these secret laws through a secret court.. once again justified with "nation security".
Mind you, a secret court whose judges are appointed by the executive.

How are we meant to hold our elected representatives accountable when the goings on of these secret courts are not even open to them? How can this possibly be a democracy if we don't have the slightest say in what our executive does in our name?

So no, we don't live in a democracy anymore. Long live congress and God bless America.
Remote controlled drones have limitations due to electronic warfare/jamming (not to mention security, see the one the US lost in Iran). There's also an issue with lag.

Actually autonomous ones are as far as I know only good for static targets (effectively they are reusable cruise missiles).Close air support or deciding whether to engage an enemy airplane or not gets tricky.
I think this is basically what scott adams pivot article said.
What's wrong with meatheads? As if getting in Bodybuilding-shape didnt require the same dedication as programming. I'd even say true bodybuilding is far more demanding than being a programmer. Not necessarily requiring as much math, but nobody in his right mind would compare against that.

Also, this program will not help you get in shape.
> read up on the South Korean procurement vs the F-18

Do you mean the F-15? If not, do you have any sources for this? Sounds interesting.
Predator drones have enough payload to carry several AIM-120s (where to mount more than one is an open question), which is a ~40mi range fire-and-forget air-to-air missile. Whether the F-35's stealth/avoidance is good enough, I don't know. But if you had say a dozen drones patroling an area, I don't know if I'd want to take an F-35 nearby.

So no, I don't think drone tech is good enough to down F-35s, but I think with sufficient zerg tactics, it could deny airspace.
Saudi Arabia rejects Maliki's charges on funding Iraqi militants – WorldNews
https://github.com/NYTimes/ice/
Similar relationship to famous architects (like Frank Lloyd Wright) and all the people working under them. You have engineers leading the design work (primarily responsible for something like the high level design documents and requirement documents) who oversee others (specialists, often) working on the low level designs.
General consumers often care more about physical size than actual resolution. Why else would 1920x1080 pixel computer monitors be sold in sizes up to 27 inches? What explains the proliferation of 15 inch, 1366x768 laptops, or even 17 inch 'laptops' of any resolution?
A quick searched turned up a popular mechanics[1] article about Russian radar and US stealth aircraft, that reinforces what Sprey said.

[1] http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/planes-u...
I'd almost buy your conclusion if C to HDL/Verilog compilers didn't exist [1].

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_to_HDL
Why does the airforce hate the A-10? That thing is terrifying.
That's the game (original) I played for years in my childhood, and opening theme was my favorite music video :)
Thanks to the team behind OpenXcom.
> Lockheed’s F-117 stealth fighter was developed in a breakneck 30 months by a close-knit team of 50 engineers led by an experienced fighter designer named Alan Brown and overseen by seven government employees. Brown said he exercised strict control over the design effort, nixing any proposed feature of the plane that might add cost or delay or detract from its main mission.

> The F-35, by contrast, is being designed by some 6,000 engineers led by a rotating contingent of short-tenure managers, with no fewer than 2,000 government workers providing oversight. The sprawling JSF staff, partially a product of the design’s complexity, has also added to that complexity like a bureaucratic feedback loop, as every engineer or manager scrambles to add his or her specialty widget, subsystem or specification to the plane’s already complicated blueprints … and inexperienced leaders allow it.

For those interested in a deeper look at why the F-35 is so, well, F'd, this is a great read:

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/fd-how-the-u-s-and-its-alli...

It basically comes down to stupid design considerations forced upon the program by the various branches(mainly the Marine Corps) and how easily blinded Congress was by the notion of a (supposedly cheaper) one-size-fits-all solution.
So, the trick with the early game was to accept losses, right?

Once you realized "Hey, we're totally outgunned...we just need to flood the aliens until we get better gear", things changed. Missions became more about resource management: what is the bare minimum I can field to wipe these guys, what can I build and manufacture that has the highest profit margin, etc.?

Terror missions, for example, early on devolved into "Set fire to everything, because we need the light, and shoot the civilians, because they could be used to feed the Chrysalids and make more Chrysalids."

The enemies in the game stayed largely the same difficulty, but your equipment got better and better and tactics switched as you were able to field more expensive units--and unless you ran a really tight resource game, you treated those expensive units much differently.

The thing that made the game feel unique was exactly that: the reverse-difficulty. If you started kicking ass, and then things got harder, it'd be annoying--instead, you had some early success, discovered just how outclassed you were, and after a few restarts learned how to fight a technologically-superior enemy until you had achieved force parity.
Good question. According to webster, it has to be 'relatively small' to be a cult. From the article, it seems that the cults have a higher relative level of exploitation. My guess is that there is a continuum that runs between the two.

Edit: My guess substantiated by wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult
This article talks about it: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/04/28/new-u-s-ste...
Boyd's biography is one of the most rewarding biographies I've ever read.
One interesting thing is that this is a service that Google is letting you pay for instead of viewing ads. Have they done that before? I guess gmail/google apps, but that's a little different, as you have to get a new account, you can't add a subscription to your existing account. I wish they would do this for all of youtube, not just music.

The phrasing (and its effect on how people react to the story) is very interesting. If it had gone instead with "Google forcing labels to allow ad-free youtube subscription service" or something, you'd probably see far more positive reactions. I hate services like hulu plus (subscription and ads!) with a fiery passion, so it sounds good to me.

On the other hand, youtube is so ubiquitous, "block" might not be that poor of a choice of words, as not being able to monetize on youtube is surely a hit. Of course, if they're getting revenue from ads they already have some kind of deal, this is just a different one, and it wasn't so long ago that some labels were holding out ("blocking" youtube from playing their music) in a reverse of the situation.

Really, though, without knowing the details of how google is trying to strongarm them into this agreement (or even the terms of the agreement), it's hard to make much of a judgement here. Definitely played up in the news for drama, though.
No, I mean "can this iPhone be used to make a smoothie", not "can a blender turn this iPhone into an iPhone smoothie".

Take a blender, remove the blades, put iPhones on the spindle where the blades were. Now fire up the blender and throw in some fruits. Will iPhones spinning at $whatever RPMs be able to turn your fruits and wheat grass into a delicious smoothie?

The original is actually "Will It Be Blended [by this blender]". I want to know "Will It Make a Suitable Replacement for a Blender".
I was watching the "Dogfights of the Middle East." One of the aces interviewed was pretty jazzed about the F-15. He basically thought of it as "a flying SAM site!" Considering how dangerous SAMs got through the last half of the 20th century, it's perfectly understandable how a pilot would be jazzed about having that kind of firepower under his control!