skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Concept Search: Enter a concept and find similar startups
> This is assuming compilers implement the standard quickly, which is worse on some platforms than others (cough Visual Studio cough).

If your compiler isn't tracking the standard well, don't use it. The truth is that C++14 is just got ratified now and already open source compilers have implemented most of its capabilities. Concepts are a bigger kettle of fish, but compiler makers have also had much more time to work on them, so I wouldn't assume we have the huge lag problems we used to have with standards adoption.
I have seen grugq write that russia/china both have underground culture that are free from prosecution and free to do their own work, and US arrests their own and then has the other two assault it.

probably a misquote but still something akin to that
I don't have a driver license so for me that would be perfect. I don't care about driving, I don't want to drive, but I want my (or a) car to come for me to the bar / after work. If the weather is not good then I will use public transport.

I think people overestimate their abilities. Sure, this is a new technology but in X years these cars will be better drivers than 99% of the people.
In the air you have an entire 3rd dimension to play with. You can get far more density of vehicles per route. You can fly in a band lower then commercial air vehicles 300-1000 ft has hardly any vehicles flying. The self driving car always strikes me as a faster horse solution.
And if there isn't a good pension scheme in place, public or private, it gets interesting. Palm Springs was an interesting place. The only place I have been where the dinners seemed all full of grannies working the tables.
Oh really? A futuristic mind blowing developing technology which hasn't been released to the public (and has no plans to) isn't ready to be released to the public? What's the point of an article like this, especially being posted here? We're all technical people who understand the complexities (or understand it's so complex that we can't understand them.) If the effort is to inform the ignorant public of their misconceptions, post it on fox news or yahoo answers.

/rant
What I should have said was provide high level abstractions while still allowing low level operations. There is an impedance mismatch that the language needs to address. Languages like Rust can get away with this by not allowing the most low level operations that are deemed unsafe and so have a more user friendly api. C on the other hand, makes no attempts at make the abstraction so the syntax is just small by definition.
I figure anyone who is reading right now is in Asia (too early for Europe, too late for USA).
Starr's quote isn't what you'd said. The precolumbian population of California was less than one tenth the present total, and equivalent to a large town, not even a city. Say, Stockton.
The True Reality of War
They don't have an online store in most countries though, do they?

Usually you just order and then you have to go pick up everything you ordered.
Negative obstacles (e.g. potholes) in particular are trouble for line-of-sight flight time sensing modalities like laser & radar. The lower the sensor is mounted on the vehicle, the longer (in direction of travel) the hole has to be before you get a sufficiently large difference to notice between returns from the same beam in subsequent time-steps. This is of course worsened further by increasing vehicle speed. It is somewhat mitigated by having multiple beams, i.e. the Velodyne laser scanner has 64, but even still only a few are hitting the obstacle and surrounds at any one time.

Some of the more interesting research in this area uses infrared to detect the change in heat of a shadowed hole versus flat ground. Of course, that only works when there's sunshine to provide the heat source.

P.S. Google people reading this (Urmson, Ferguson, etc), please consider this my annual reminder of the awesomeness of your Google Sydney office and the large quantities of autonomous field robotics engineers training and working within walking distance of it, for wages that could be doubled without your budgets even noticing...
I would love to get on board the 3d printing revolution, but I can't think of a single thing I need or want that I could make.
I would really like to see any pictures of Symbolics hardware or screenshots of Genera. I used to work with a guy who wrote CAD software on these in the 80s and he made it sound really cool.
>"Some experts are bothered by Google’s refusal to provide that sort of safety-related information... the public 'has a right to be concerned' about Google’s reticence: 'This is a very early-stage technology, which makes asking these kinds of questions all the more justified.'"

This seems to be a pretty common opinion, but I fail to see why anyone feels they have a "right" to be told Google's plans, strategies and ideas, much less their development mistakes and failures for a thing that is not a product currently available (or even close to it).

I realize there is a very real fear many people have about autonomous vehicles because it's something they don't/can't understand. And while that's something Google's marketing/PR department may want to deal with, this fearmongering attitude of "Google won't tell me exactly how it's going to work... it must not be safe... oh no we're all going to die!!! " is just getting ridiculous.
Representative democracy isn't just about the difficulty of arranging a plebiscite for every single decision the legislature would make. At some point, the electorate of a democratic society has to delegate decision-making. Legislatures name committees to originate, review and flesh out bills, and even those bills tend to consist of authorization and funding to hire people to coordinate particular tasks ("bureaucracy").

In the fantasy version of direct democracy, every decision there is to be made is a clear yes or no on an easily defined question ("Do we invade Iraq?"). In such a system, the power would end up belonging to the people who write and pose the questions. Look at the history of the initiative system in the US for an idea of what that looks like even on a limited scale -- the potential for graft, corruption, incompetence, and capture by special interests makes the current system look like rule by benevolent genius saints.
People have trouble with snow as well. If there are no tracks in front of you, you just guess where you're supposed to go and go for it. It's pretty fun on roads you know well, rather miserable on roads you don't.

Also, most 3-lane roads magically turn into 2-lane roads, and many 2-lane roads turn into 3-lane roads etc.
>So avoiding any unexpected item in the road when safe to do so is probably always the right solution anyway.

Exactly. These are edge cases that will undoubtedly be better handled as the technology matures in the near future. There no reason that these (still very speculative) issues should slow down adoption.
As a researcher, I have freedom to constantly reinvent things. Complexity melts away the better you understand your problem: ya, it was there, it was needed, but now I know more and I can get rid of this. People in production don't usually have these benefits.

I have only made this letter longer because I have not had the time to make it shorter. - Blaise Pascal.
Les Sims 4: le jeu de simulation séduit lors de la Gamescom
Also Not storing multiple copies of each file is really bad product-wise as there were some incidents where users lost their data stored on Dropbox with no other backups (relying heavily on cloud storage).

Read here: https://medium.com/@jan.curn/how-bug-in-dropbox-permanently-...
It depends on how "reasonably close" they end up coming. If it ends up being a xeno's paradox of issues where it can handle 90% of situations, then 99%, then 99.9%, then 99.99%, etc, but each of those incremental improvements prove harder and harder to achieve, how many lawmakers are going to say "Sure, only .001% of robot cars on the road get into catastrophic accidents in unhandled situations, that's fine, let's make these things legal"?

The problem with emergent technology is that it's what people tend to be most afraid of, and if there ends up being situations a robotic car absolutely cannot handle that's known about, how long will it take for people to start abusing it?

And for unhandled exceptions...awhile back I was driving up 280 and a police officer pulled out in front of traffic, flipped his lights on, and started weaving back and forth across all lanes of traffic. All the drivers slowed down and kept behind the officer, obviously not sure what was going on. The officer stopped weaving at a couple points along about a one-mile stretch to get out of his car and pick up an item off the freeway, then got back in and resumed weaving, until he got up to a previously-pulled-over car and parked behind another officer.

That's definitely not something they covered in driver's ed, apart from "if something unusual is happening, slow down". But how long would it take for it to make the news if a smart car in that situation passed the car on a weave and struck a drunk guy that was stumbling along the freeway at 85mph, do you think? And do you really think every possible situation that occurs during driving will eventually be able to be handled by a smart car?

Another example, any point you run into a car or random other vehicle that's double-parked in the city. If the car can only figure out that pedestrians are blobs of pixels, does it have sufficient resolution to figure out how far away that oncoming car is, or will it just patiently sit behind that moving truck until they're done and start moving again?

There's a lot of edge cases for this tech, and most if not all of them have potentially fatal exception cases if you fail to handle them correctly.
ZT PR is in overdrive! Woooooooo. The ham-handed way they've done it has endeared me to them.

And maybe I thought the State of NAT posting was pretty good.
No, unemployed people count as participating. Non participating people don't count towards the official unemployment rate. For participation to drop as unemployment grows is the worst possible combination of trends.
I like the pictures. These are 1990s web pages: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/6125914/How-20-popular...
The public has the right because Google is testing its cars on public streets.
I demand giving be analyzed in an open data sort of sense empirically over the long term for viable effectiveness. I question all methods that seemingly signal 'good person' and fail to produce long term results.

For everything else, there's Watsi.
> we (humans) have notion of time "entirely" due to the certain properties of our environment

That sounds very philosophical and all, but it seems to me that we have an internal perception of time based on the rate that electrical impulses propagate throughout our brains. Perhaps it would be distorted based on the lack of external stimulus, but I believe we would feel the passage of time all the same.
Ahh, the downvotes, as expected.

> 95% of people don't know what Javascript is

Indeed. So you take every opportunity to exploit that ignorance, instead of educating them that there might be risks associated with running unknown code?

This is a perfect example of one of the larger problems in the tech industry. Your product could be something that helps them, despite their ignorance of the alphabet soup of technologies. Instead, you choose to make something that requires the client to take risks. Was there some technical reason this was necessary? No. Was here some huge benefit to speed or availability that wasn't available with other technologies? No. The benefit was personal convenience ("development time").

The next time you see someone annoyed at technology they don't understand, remember that YOU (and people like you) were the source of that frustration.

//i'm sure this will be downvoted as well, given how selfishly narrow-minded this crowd can be at times
I think they already had one, in the N800 line that was to become Maemo/Meego/Tizen/Sailfish. They just didn't want to put all wood behind that arrow. I never understood why, exactly, and I still don't.
Chef engineer resigns following death threats
Computer Scientists Suggest New Spin on Origins of Evolvability
Apache Kafka 0.8 basic training
I'm placing my bet that there will always be people who are interested in systems programming. They're the Night Watch (http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/people/mickens/thenightw...)

There will always be people who after years of doing high level stuff, get curious about the low level implementations, start asking questions about how data is represented in the machines, and then get sucked in and they stay there.

I'm personally not too worried about the fact that there are fewer systems programmers, because those who do it in the future, are those who are interested in it. That will ensure higher quality software in general.
Of course they did. 1TB costs the same in Glacier and Google Drive. Now it costs even less on Dropbox.
Yeah, based on just the data in this article, I would see A9 as preferable to A15 for using as the CPU of a mobile device.
Thank you - I will have to give the project another look once that feature is implemented in its final form.
Is there any real advantage to having such a complex system rather than (some level of) a phonetic one like most other languages? Obviously there are cultural reasons we would still like to be able to read old text and not lose that, but in general the Chinese system just seems like pain for very little gain...
That, and you have to consider that one of the chief issues this article brings up - that the self driving cars are relying on unreliable maps - is that once a self driving car traverses a road, it could propagate a much more detailed, or at least much more auto-appropriate map to the swarm of other cars.

The maps would get magnitudes better the year the cars were unleashed.
Mysterious Phony Cell Towers Could Be Intercepting Your Calls
It was actually a wife of an executive on a cruise, not a yacht. It looks like you can get cell connections on a cruise now, but I think it took quite a while. Remember, this "idea" was born around 1990.

If you haven't looked, it's actually quite reasonable now to rent an Iridium phone for a backcountry trip these days. If I was taking some boy scouts into the wild for long weekend, I'd definitely consider it in case of emergency.

The system was really a great piece of technology; MOT really let the engineers go at it. If it wasn't for the billing and provisioning, you could actually make an Iridium-to-Iridium call anywhere on the face of the earth in some sort of doomsday scenario, since all of the call routing goes between satellites—you don't need a ground station.

When I started at MOT, we were working on the broadband followup, Celestri, which turned into Teledesic. Same deal, anywhere on the globe, but around a 1-2Mbps connection, rather than Iridium's 0.002Mb data rate. It was a magnificent piece of engineering with hundreds of engineers working in a fancy new building with plans in place to double the building in a couple years as hundreds more engineers were coming on for the detailed design phases.

We were about 9 years from operation and had thousands of pages of architecture and design documents. I think the highest-level system design document was around 500 pages when it was shelved, but there were already some architecture documents running into the thousands of pages.

The projected launch costs alone were around $15B; that's not including actually building anything. It was the most expensive commercial project ever undertaken, though after Iridium's disappointing launch, even the most short-sighted executive could see that it was too big of a risk for any company to take.

Looking back, it was an amazing experience to be a part of a project that huge.
They are still designed fundamentally to avoid obstacles. And they have 360 degree vision, meaning they will avoid other vehicles when they do not follow expected traffic behavior.

I imagine some kind of "paranoia" setting where the car just assumes that anything it sees moving can and will accelerate towards it or its immediate path.
It's election time in Brazil right now, and everyone is trying to look good. This might just be our current president and candidate to reelection Dilma Rousseff trying to win over the evironmental cause votes, which is a huge electorate and a huge chunk of Marina Silva's electorate, who holds second place in the current vote intention polls.
Because I'm almost certain that it will cause some kind of inconvenience down the road. It's unlikely to be "free" -- no OS-level security feature I've seen has been "free" in terms of convenience.
Your best bet are probably very small companies that do not have very many engineers on staff. There are many businesses desperately looking for the value that engineers bring, that don't have the people on hand to grill you for 6 hours in a conference room.

Looking for remote gigs can also help you avoid whiteboards, but that might be harder to do as a jr. engineer (but certainly not impossible).

At the end of the day though, interviewing, including whiteboard coding, is all about "being judged". As someone mentioned, it's a skill worth practicing, either at home with the help of friends, or by applying to a ton of jobs just to practice the interview process. I still find it brings me anxiety after 10 years of working/interviewing, but so much less so than when I started in the industry. I dislike and am annoyed by interviews and whiteboard coding, but I don't fear them any longer.
We use both because both have reason to exist.
Since I started working in a multinational company spread across different sites (and continents) I have appreciated both approaches: sometimes the chat is a quick way to ask something, to verify that something is working etc.. compared to mail (that is not always seen "in time") or using the phone (as a bonus points, IMHO for non-english speakers it is easier to chat than to talk...)
LA Schools' $1B iPad Fiasco Ends After Corruption Revelations
I get the feeling the anguish arises from working with a large codebase with varying quality of developers. For me the main problem of C++ as a language is that it is marketed as a general purpose programming language while in reality only particular types of developers are capable of using it properly in an industrial context. You have to be an a) expert with b) a good taste or the whole codebase will in time become unmaintainable and/or unstable, or both. And even in the best case scenario there will be horrible bugs arising from some minutiae you forgot to take into account.

The expert part is required just to cope. The good taste part comes from the requirement that other people must comprehend your code. i.e. it needs to be simple, pithy and correct. Some languages make it more obvious how to reach this goal than others, while in C++ I see this being mostly the result of trial and error. You require taste, restraint and experience not to implement your production solution in some unmaintaineable template-class-Gang-of-four mishmash "just because you can" and because "it's the C++ way".

The main problem with all this, IMHO, is C++'s continuing popularity. There are some problem contraints where it still is the best tool for the job but those contraints should be well understood and realized when selecting it as the implementation language.

> C++ works great for millions of programmers who get it

I feel this is a huge productivity loss for the industry as a whole. C++ creates a huge bureaucratic burden on the developers where they must spend their efforts to trivial minutiae and not in value adding work. C++11 improves on this considerably, though. I do not presume to impose some other language on those developers - rather my point is that the issues the FAQ author raises are real and that since lots of people are using the language the severity of these issues is multiplied by the number of people using it.

Note: I'm a developer who mostly writes C++ in an industrial context :).
I really hope this article doesn't make anyone actually try to get rid of these arachnids although I'm sure "hygiene" companies will be all over this in a few years.

> Spiders are living on your FACE! Please buy our stuff.
i think we've had enough of this.
Language Log has many posts about what they call character amnesia, for example this one:

http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=5669
This is how you rick roll
"if the place is as corrupt as the article says"
It is.

And also even if they are convicted they probably will not stay in prison for long. Assuming the way those things happen now a days there.
Coffee Pocket – know when coffee is near by
Ditto, dead for me too
Maybe the systems programmers are on mailing lists instead of web forums?
I think Ampersand is the analogue for Backbone. It does the same stuff, but it fully embraces modules, npm, and browserify and it's got great computed properties. These days I work mostly with React, but if Ampersand had existed a year and a half ago I'd have been all over it.

http://ampersandjs.com/
You're wrong. I'm in the USA, and I just tried to read it.

(and the link doesn't work for me either)

There have to be so many "night owls" on this site, I can't imagine why you would think it would be too late in the US to try at this hour.
CrashPlan is great and encrypted at rest and transmission. But, I prefer services outside US
Russian hackers said to loot gigabytes of big bank data
This doc is great. Thanks for taking the time to write it out.
Are you sure?

I said:

It had about a third of the native population of what is now the USA.

Which to me means, take what is now the USA, find out what the native population was, and then find a third of that.

I wasn't saying that it was anything close to the population of modern California, just that California is not inhabited because of the irrigation, but that the irrigation is there because it is a place that people want to inhabit.

At the time Columbus landed London only had ~100,000 people. For the time, California was pretty busy and if Europeans had not taken over the western USA, I am pretty sure there would still be massive irrigation networks in California today.
I've been saying this for years, as I took Thrun's class when he was at Stanford. Google's dirty little secret is that self driving cars are still mostly smoke and mirrors. Given relatively controlled conditions and a trained driver who can play backup when needed, they work. But if you put them in complicated situations - snow, a busy city environment, abnormal signage - watch out.

The problem is that the driving model is probabilistic. When you solve a problem probabilistically, getting from 90% covered to 99% to 99.9% covered to 99.99% covered involves exponential leaps in difficulty. So even if the car covers 99.9% of driving conditions (and it currently doesn't), there's still a tremendous amount of work to be done to get it to 99.9999% correct, or whatever the threshold is for it to be deemed "safe" for fully autonomous use.

I personally am bearish on the technology, as getting the inconvenient final situational cases correct will be extremely challenging. I would love to be proven wrong, but at Stanford I came to the opinion that the probabilistic approach would get us to really cool demos, but never a fully autonomous vehicle. That being said, the people working on this are a whole lot smarter than I, and I would love to be proven wrong.
Insane Indian Michael Jackson Fusion Cover
Such crap. Cattle ranches are the leading cause of Amazon deforestation in Brazil. Logging (legal and illegal) is 2-3%.

Edit: Right, here's some numbers: http://www.mongabay.com/brazil.html