skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
It's not stupid at all. By giving into the racket, Netflix demonstrated that it's not a technical issue at all, so that argument no longer flies. It's clear that the ISPs are capable of supporting the service, they just don't want to.
I agree that the whole process is flawed. In addition to the resume problem, job listings are ridiculous. They use inflated information about experience needed etc. and scare off people that might be a good fit.
I'm not sure why Level3 has to pay anything. Let's imagine there's only 4 entities in the world - User, Verizon, Level3 and Netflix. User buys internet access from Verizon and pays. Netflix hosts servers at Level 3. Level 3 has connection to Verizon. User pays Verizon to be able to access Netflix servers. Netflix pays Level 3 to deliver content up to Verizon. Why when the data crosses between Level3 and Verizon Level3 should pay anything? Verizon has been already paid by the user to deliver the data. That's like a taxi driver demanding payment from the restaurant since he brings them clients. Clients already paid for being brought to the restaurant, that's the whole reason they hired taxi in the first place, and demanding payment from the restaurant sounds like a racket to me. And a fraud towards the users which expect the provider to perform their obligations, not to use them as bargaining chip to extort other businesses.
Get Your Startup in a Holiday Gift Guide
What a pleasant surprise :) PH is a great community.
I was in Hamburg earlier this year, visiting among other things: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miniatur_Wunderland and I thought to myself, wouldn't it fun to play with those train routes again? I bought the "Railroads!" again on Steam, and had a lot of fun for 20-30 hours. Then I read the Railroads! wiki page and found out Sid Meier wrote it exactly because he visited the same Wunderland 7 years before.

Like me, he just wanted a fun train game, not a ruthless economic simulation and i think Railroads! has filled that niche well.

(It's not quite trains, but if you want a resource management game where you have to be careful, try the city builder Banished, built by a single developer)
CTIA Wireless Repair Expo 2014
It is entirely about the relationship between Verizon and their customers. Verizon's customers want these interlinks, they just don't know it. This whole thing started when Netflix posted a message to their customers explaining it. Verizon is trying to defend themselves against the complaints of their customers.
DevOps is Not a Synonym for Application Development
It's trivially impossible with unrestricted aliasing. No compiler can statically predict the properties of an unrestricted arbitrary graph about which, in the limit, absolutely nothing is known until runtime.
lol, in 100 years, it'll look like us saying penicillin should be illegal because if you fired a bucket of it through an uber powerful potato cannon, it can act as a buckshot
PUSH and PULL don't really describe how it works.

Its the senders responsibility to deliver data to the local ISP of the recipient. It doesn't matter if the person asked for the data, you still have to pay to get it there.

The issue is that Verizon is both a national transit provider and a local ISP. If you just dump your data on the nearest Verizon peering port, you aren't fulfilling your end of the bargain. You are asking Verizon to do it for you, as a transit provider.

However, if you are delivering it to the last mile, you have "paid for it" it already.

The issue is where are these congestion issues occurring. At the last mile or at the edges of Verizon's transit network.

Verizon absolutely has the right to bill for providing transit.
What about a driverless car filled up with murderous clowns?

That's something we should all be afraid of and why we should stop progress immediately.
While I'm not sure, I assume the author is referring to "error reduction". Error reduction is defined as

def ER(accuracy_before, accuracy_after):
delta = accuracy_after - accuracy_before
return delta / (1. - accuracy_before)

(It is often written as a percentage.) Note that ER(.5, .75) = ER(.98, .99) = .5. It is for this reason I dislike it. Without knowing what performance before and after was like, it's hard to tell whether this was an incremental improvement to an already impressive system or the innovation that made a system useable.

(It strikes me as unlikely that the author means to say that Google reduced the Android recognizer's word error rate [WER] by 25%, since WERs on many publicly available databases used for evaluation purposes were already well below 25% before the deep learning revolution. But, it is not impossible that Google's test set was particularly hard and the pre-deep-learning Android recognizer was unimpressive. Caveat: I know, I know, WER isn't really "accuracy".)
Sure it could be a cron job, but using Jenkins adds some conveniences: a nice UI to browse projects, plus it archives the output of every historical build, locally-archived build artifacts, lots of extensibility with plugins, and so on.
Malaysia Airlines passenger jet crashed in eastern Ukraine
I don't really have a problem with this. Kickstarter projects shouldn't lead to backer entitlement. Campaigns are a risk that everyone can pitch in a little for in the hopes of success. Pledge at an amount appropriate to risk and you'll lose the bet here and there, but it's part of the game.
But C's ecosystem is so extensive that everybody can piggyback on it (with varying levels of ceremony).
I just bought it and tried it out. It works great in good lighting. Awesome job.
Is cafeïnevrije koffie ongezond en kankerverwekkend? | Leef Nu Gezonder
> That's not how the internet works. Nobody PUSHES data. People PULL data.

There's more to "the Internet" than just "the WWW". While HTTP could be considered a "pull data" protocol, there's plenty of application protocols which involve "pushing" data over TCP/IP transport.
Talk about closing the attribution gap present in almost all paid advertising.
Ask HN: Are Branches (SVN/Git) Evil?
Recently, I had a discussion with two colleagues (who are far more experienced than I am and whom I respect a great deal). The topic of the discussion was Branching Strategies and when to use them. They made the argument that good developers do not need branches, if I recall correctly the statement they made was "If you need branches, your development process is broken."

Their reasoning for this statement is that all code changes can be made in small increments and be done in such a way to preserve existing behaviour while allowing new development to occur. This can be achieved in a number of ways, for example if/else statements where the else branch contains the new feature but is not executed (except when the dev changes the expression to return false). By this line of reasoning, it follows that any new or dev commits which lower the quality or reliability of the code will be in some code-path which is deactivated and so they won't actually lower the quality.

In summary, my argument for branching was you can use branches to help to ensure release quality (ie: have branches for master, release and development) by segregating changes in SCM according to whether they are under active development, ready for release or currently in production. Their counter argument was that ALL changes in SCM should be production-quality and be ready to release at any second (and if not, you should change your dev process).

What do you think HN, are branches indicative of a "broken development process"?
>'That's not really true.'

Sure it is, there just happen to be exceptions.

Of the 21 years and 136 Cisco acquisitions with prices on Wikipedia, 14 come in over $1B. The average price overall is $530M, and the average price excluding >$1B deals with $178M.
I think they upped the free builds/mo from 50 to 100
Apparently a rebel leader was bragging about having captured a Buk, but the post has now been deleted:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8048729https://news.yco...
Seems like that functionality would better be included as separate madvise() advice than a new syscall, but probably a good addition either way.
If we're being bitchy over definitions, then do you even know what the definition of "industrial action" is? Because it's orthogonal to whether or not the firings were legal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_action
ISPs charge me primarily to download. Literally I can't upload as much as I download. My uploads are contractually limited to 20% of my downloads.

So does that mean there's a downloader-pays rule?

If so that means that Verizon should be paying Level3 because it consumes 3x the bandwidth that it provides.

Verizon's needs Level3 3x as badly as Level3 needs Verizon on a bit-by-bit basis. So why isn't Verizon paying Level3 for the imbalance?

There are actually two sides to the ISP game. There's the consumer ISP side and there's the commercial ISP side.

Consumer ISPs are in business to get their customers hooked up to as much of the internet as possible to enable them to consume things. And they charge their customers (normal folk like us) for this service.

Commercial ISPs are in business to get their customers hooked up to as much of the internet as possible to provide services. And they charge their customers (big companies) for it.

When commerial ISPs meet consumer ISPs typically they say "let's trade traffic for free so that way we can both keep our money and not worry about accounting"

What's happened is that a consumer ISP is trying to charge more than just it's last-mile normal customers for data that they use and which it is ostensibly contractually obliged to provide to them without further fees.

What Verizon is saying is "look they need to pay us to upgrade this link" which on the surface doesn't sound too bad. It kinda makes sense. If I used more bandwidth they would charge me more. But the thing is that I am already paying them to make sure that the connection to the internet is uncongested. They are deliberately allowing it to get congested to try and bill both sides of the transit.
Balance-flow contracts are only used when each network is acting as a gateway where the end-point of the traffic is NOT IN either of the parties involved in the contract.

For example, suppose there are 5 separate networks, run by different groups: A, B, C, D, and E. C connects to A,B and D, and D connects to C and E. In this case, the only way networks A and B can connect to D or E is through the connection between C and D.

Now, if in this arrangement, the D or E networks are sending/requesting a lot of traffic to/from networks A and B, while C is rarely requesting data from D or E, then network C might have a fair argument to make that D is abusing their balanced-flow peering agreement. Basically, they are being asked to be a middle-man for all the traffic going between networks that are NOT theirs. They might ask for compensation for doing this job (carrying traffic between two other networks).

However, this is NOT what Verizon does. All of the traffic between level 3 and the Verizon network is bound FOR A VERIZON CUSTOMER. They are not a middle-man, they are the end destination. Now, if Level-3 is sending data over those congested level-3/verizon gateways that is bound for, say, AT&T's customers, then they would have an issue and could fairly demand payment.

That is not the case, however.
The really important thing here is that these libraries have no dependencies, so, unlike npm libraries, you can plug them in a no-CommonJS environment, like a browser, and them will do their work, you won't need any browserify or other stuff.
Using Docker Containers to Achieve Continuous Delivery for Large, Ugly
Kickstarter is an interest free business loan with absolutely no obligation to deliver or recourse if they do not. You'd have to be a damned fool to Kickstart anything for-profit, and people Kickstarting things think you're an idiot ripe for exploitation. If you want money to start a project take out a loan or sell equity.
> maybe they just hoped no one would notice, or didn't anticipate the impact of Netflix on already-existing contracts?

It's not just Netflix - the entire Internet works this way. End-users send a request, and servers send a response. There are very few cases in which the response is not larger than the request. It doesn't matter what content you're serving - the raw traffic delivered to consumers is going to be greater than the raw traffic from them[0].

Saying that they didn't know that the traffic would be shaped this way is saying that Level 3 doesn't understand the way the Internet functions on a technical level, which I would say is impossible.

[0] This is (sort of) why residential Internet speeds are usually quoted asymmetrically (e.g. 20 down/5 up). Consumers - well - consume more traffic than they produce, so networks are already optimized for delivering more traffic to consumers than they themselves generate. That said, all of the traffic is initiated by consumers; the traffic Netflix sense is only in response to the explicit request by a paying Verizon customer.
It ... depends?

If your rake|make tests last few minutes, you probably can do without CI just fine. I am working Q/A, and each night we run install tests on latest repo, i.e. provision a clean machine, run the install script, check all the daemons are running, run sanity check. This can take ~hour. No dev will take an hour to check if he didn't mess up instalability of the system :) For CI server it is not a problem.
I recall some treaties in the early 90s guaranteeing Ukraine’s territorial integrity in return for it returning Soviet nuclear weapons to Russia.

Maybe the French still want to share theirs with us, now that these treaties are obviously no longer relevant :)
It's easy to ridicule the FBI for statements like this, but I'm glad they're considering the downside to some of these technologies. The pie-in-the-sky version of a driverless car society is tremendous, and I hope we get as close as possible to that, but it does open up some other problems.

1. How would you go about stopping an autonomous semi truck that was programmed to drive through crowds?

2. Will terrorists use autonomous cars as delivery mechanisms for what were formerly suicide bombs?

3. If locations with pedestrians are sandboxed in some way, could a sufficiently skilled 'hacker' intentionally break that sandbox without a trace only to blame it on bad technology?

4. How much privacy / 'liberty' would we be willing to give up to enable such a society?

Someone should be considering the worst-case scenarios..
Then you're doomed to frustration, because it is rational to alter your risk calculus to minimize stress. The cost to most people of altering their plans (eg choosing a different carrier when they fly) is less than the cost of anxiety or stress alleviation.
As logical as that sounds it's not the way it works for the "Buy Now" buttons they've been testing on Virtual Goods ads for a while now: https://developers.facebook.com/docs/payments/ads_virtual_go...

You pay to get distribution for your ad and if it converts you pay 30% of the total purchase price on top of that.
Wow, the comments here are of an unusually low quality. Let's step it up.

I've personally been thinking of the negative implications of driverless cars as well. I also thought that a car with a driver could take advantage of a highway full of conservative automated cars by driving like a maniac to get to his or her destination faster while all the autonomous cars moved out of the way.

Of course, I still strongly support moving to driverless cars, but I can acknowledge that there are some unanswered questions.
> The report noted criminals using automated cars would have both hands free and be able to take their eyes off the road during a car chase.

... and guns aren't the problem?
When To Use An MPP Database, SQL on Hadoop or Map Reduce
Would a driverless car really be ideal to use as a get away vehicle? You would be stuck in a car that obey's the speed limits and rules of the road. Hardly useful to dodge the cops.
> The getrandom(2) system call was requested by the LibreSSL Portable
> developers. It is analoguous to the getentropy(2) system call in
> OpenBSD.

Oh the joy of NIH.
You make a much better point than I've seen here. Verizon acting both as a backbone and as an ISP. This creates an internal conflict between those businesses.
Malaysian Boeing 777 shot down in Ukraine near Russian border
Never saw the RaR mod, thanks for the tip. I don't remember the mission/artillery thing from the game, either, but why wouldn't it make sense to take cover in a sturdy building when cannonballs are falling on your village?
Right. If they really cared about ratios they wouldn't offer unbalanced service such as 50/15. They have built their network around users predominately consuming content and then complain when there is too much consumption from specific providers that happen to compete with services they also offer.
1) Level3 has offered to split the cost with the Big5 ISP's of upgrading their infrastructure.[1]

* This would increase throughput and capacity for both Level3 and the consumer networks.

2) Netflix has offered free Open Connect Appliances to all major ISP's.[2]

* This would allow consumer networks to only download a video once, then serve it up locally within their network to all their customers. In-network traffic is almost free for the ISP's.

3) Netflix has offered to change their entire distribution model into a P2P model.[3]

* This would allow consumer networks to only download a video once, then serve it up locally within their network to all customers. In-network traffic is almost free for ISP's.

.

All of these options have been flat-out refused. The Big5 ISP's are purely after the money. There is no other compromise for them.

[1] http://blog.level3.com/global-connectivity/chicken-game-play...

[2] https://www.netflix.com/openconnect/hardware

[3] http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/04/netfli...
"On the one hand, the doctrine of at-will employment has been heavily criticized for its severe harshness upon employees.[39] It has also been criticized as predicated upon flawed assumptions about the inherent distribution of power and information in the employee-employer relationship.[40] On the other hand, conservative scholars in the field of law and economics such as Professors Richard A. Epstein[41] and Richard Posner[42] credit employment at will as a major factor underlying the strength of the U.S. economy.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment#Controversy

Well I'm certainly not a conservative.

I think the second point is true. An at-will contract (or lack thereof) is essentially skewed towards the free will of the employer in a way that is massively to the detriment, as these cuts prove, to that of the employee.

At will might be the employment norm in America, but assuming a sizeable number of Nokia's workers are actually Finnish where they have far stronger employment laws, I would wonder whether this is all even legal.
Radar Images Show Human Footprint Claims More of Earth
Very, very very unusual. I thought it was a relatively low energy crash before viewing amateur video that made it clear that near the end the nose was on the ground and the rest of the plane pivoted around it 270 degrees or more (!). The crash bled off energy in a slow, survivable way.
colbert cerf video torrent
Future Programming Language For Android Development
How did I not know about this? Autoexpect is one of the thousand ways of interacting with computers that we USED to do back in the 80s and 90s that have since fallen out of favor. Macros, modem dialers, folder watchers, etc.. Remember trying the record button in Applecript Editor, only to find that it didn't actually work like it did in Macro Maker? The fact that autoexpect isn't installed by default on Mac OS blows my mind.

Edit: still trying to install autoexpect on Mac OS 10.9.2 and having no luck. Tried ActiveTcl at http://www.activestate.com/activetcl/downloads but it doesn't seem to have autoexpect. Tried brew install autoexpect, tried port install autoexpect, nothing. Sometimes unix reminds me of looking up hints in video game magazines upon finding oneself stuck, so if someone knows how to get autoexpect on Mac, please let us know because I'm throwing in the towel.
One solution would be for Netflix to modify their clients to send useless and quickly discarded UDP packets back to balance out the traffic. Verizon then has tons of data to push back to Level3 and everyone's happy.
How about Perl, Ruby and C?

pg said that for a language to become popular, it has to be the scripting language of something popular. That's the category where the three languages I mentioned are falling.

So the answer is simple: one has to build something really nice in Nimrod and use Nimrod as the extension language of that thing. Maybe the embedded world would be a nice field from Nimrod due to having nice interop with C? (I haven't used Nimrod in my life yet, although I am tempted because it looks very easy).
One question: There aren't that many large edge providers around. What would Verizon do if Netflix signed a contract with a dozen of the larger ones and routed their streams through whichever had the best connectivity for a given endpoint? If Verizon throttle all of them, they are going to get a lot of collateral - essentially degrading the Internet at large for their customers. Or would they just do packet level filtering then?
You probably already know this, but if you think there might be wind generation potential I'd highly recommend throwing up an anemometer just for the heck of it. When I was mucking around that industry back in Oregon (helped a friend launch a business refurbishing turbines), the universities gave out loaners.

Also, you've probably already done this as well, but if the property has wetlands, those have HUGE ecological value particularly given the location. Lots of ways to monetize that ecological value these days via wetland banking, conservation easements, etc. You'd save some critters, reduce some local flooding, AND have some extra mad cash for crazy experiments. Triple win!