skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
You need to build in some hyperbole. Python is a scripting language, and even amongst scripting languages, not a particularly fast one. So ...

Python, as a weapon, is like a government grant on which you have written "shoot a gun". You just tell it what to do and it somehow happens ...

using 500x the resources any sane human being would have used. If you examine what it did to launch a bullet found it built and operated an international airport including 5 passenger terminals and then used a very elaborate looking runway to fire the bullet. The amount of empty space between the buildings looks very impressive and significant.
A lot of places in Sweden don't take Amex, but do Visa/Mastercard
You'd think the world of "change jobs every 9 months" would understand that :)
This I can well believe, but I'm interested in this bit:

> you fire a new event type from model A, say "model-a-changed-because-of-user-clicked-x" or a more generic event, say "model-a-changed".

These two seem to be on opposite ends of a spectrum where I'd try to pick a middle point. I wouldn't want the semantics of "this is a reaction to a UI event" anywhere past the first event, it's way too detailed. I'd try to pick something like "model A's date field changed ", or ideally something more meaningful like "The User updated their address".
Having built large Ember and Flux apps, Ember seems a big opaque mess.

Computed properties which depend upon other computed properties never seem to update quite right. The object system is tightly coupled to the template system. It's a monolithic framework that depends upon hidden magic to bind the pieces together.
> For example, amazingly short-sighted insistence on paying for a "generic" medication $3/mo cheaper than the drug already working is an every day challenge.

Pardon my ignorance, but aren't generics chemically-identical compounds that simply don't carry the brand name? My "generic replacement for Norco" is still acetaminophen and hydrocodone. Indeed, the Wikipedia article on generics notes that "A generic drug must contain the same active ingredients as the original formulation", and that it must be "comparable in dosage form, strength, quality and performance characteristics, and intended use".

What am I missing that makes generics a problem?
This makes sense. I've thought for a while that separating commands and events was the right thing to do, even if they use the same distribution mechanism.
Who is your target audience for this presentation? It doesn't do enough to say 'why' someone should adopt Swift (and use your services), be them a developer or business owner.

Also, be careful - the first two slides might give the impression that in order to use the new features in iOS 8.0, one must adopt Swift (which isn't true). "Mapping Obj-C to Swift" contains some inaccuracies that may be clear when you give the presentation but written down don't make sense (e.g. "-" becoming "func").
They just installed NFC-ready consoles at my local Whole Foods. It could easily be coincidence, of course.
Chicken or the Egg... which comes first? That's one problem. Must support it in the phone (or wearable) before you can use it at the store... must support it at the store before it's worth supporting on the phone...

The second issue is fragmentation. Look at wireless charging. Two separate solutions. What works at McDonald's won't work at Starbucks (and vice versa). Although both support wireless charging, they support different models.
http://www.androidauthority.com/qi-a4wp-wireless-charging-st...

What use is a wireless payment service going to be if 90% of phones can't use it? When there is a competing standard?
Oh boy, jQuery soup. Sounds fun to unit test.
In your JavaScript console, run:

var s = document.createElement('script');
s.src = 'https://cdn.mathjax.org/mathjax/latest/MathJax.js?config=TeX-AMS_HTML';
document.body.appendChild(s);

The page is pointing to the old MathJax CDN, which was decommissioned on July 31: http://www.mathjax.org/changes-to-the-mathjax-cdn/
Wow. He deserves a really good vacation, and I'm really curious to see what he does next.

AnandTech has been an amazing resource, and fostered a lifelong fascination that turned into a career. Sure, there were other sites, but Anand himself showed me that a true deep understanding of the hardware made it even more interesting. And he explained in such a great way as to open up the wonder and beauty within everything he wrote about.

That was the other key teaching from Anand: that good writing and good communication make everything better. He showed us that in earnest through his great work.

Three cheers!
American Express is not commonly supported outside the USA.
Very true. Corners would require some very careful orchestration.
When one tells the truth in a manner that's full of integrity, it's rarely bad.
Indeed. You don't break them at MOD, you break them at IF.
So you've not had to do a big code pull from source control or something like Maven or the "Go-lang" builder?

Being done in a few seconds is much more fun (and productive) than being done in a few minutes.
You're right about my background. Still, I know many experimental PhD students who enjoyed great freedom in deciding what to work on. It's not always possible in the most expensive experiments -- a student probably can't easily repurpose the LHC for their own ends. But outside those huge experiments there's often a lot of flexibility, provided (a big caveat!) the PI is on board, and the student has ideas of their own.
Most important takeaway (other than a series of anecdotes, a general history lesson, and a few random undefended policy suggestions):

"In 1940, in inflation-adjusted 2010 dollars, the mean income for U.S. physicians was about $50,000. By 1970, it was close to $250,000—nearly six times the median household income."
lt that too. The proportions were all wrong, wrong for what it was trying to be. It reminded me of some chintz pots you get from garden centres, in the gnomes section. Yes it is easy to criticise, however I feel that is 'fair' to do if one's dream of a 3D printed house turns out, well, ugly.

It should be possible to work with the stripes and other materials to create wonderful shapes, as if e.g. a small, habitable part of Bryce/Zion/Arches National Park landed at your door.
As expensive as it is, I've found a Kinesis to be ideal ergonomically, but also to be by no means the end of the story. The design reminds me of a flatter Kinesis keyboard with an angle, due to the split in the middle.

The other part of the story was getting rid of qwerty, and using colemak instead (not Dvorak, which I'm still modestly confused about.) I found that qwerty was modestly uncomfortable to type with due to the dated understanding of how often keys are actually used while typing, which wasn't fixed by the keyboard alone.
" Bottles are still filled by hand (one employee is able to get through about 400 per day); as a result, Mathmos lamps start at $80 while cheaper, mass-produced lamps sell for as little as $15. "

Let's do a little math. Assuming the person doing that makes $20/h, so $160/day. That makes the cost of the employee per lamp $0.4.

I dont think the $65 price difference to China can be explained this way.
I think you don't understand either equities or probability. Here's an example:

> If the poster outperforms, his accuracy goes up.

No, it's not about accuracy, it's about chance. His position on a normal distribution changes, but the mean of the distribution is equal to the market long-term growth pattern, not any exploitable "secrets of the winners" advantage. The WSJ dartboard contest proved this once and for all -- professional stock pickers can't pick stocks, but they can charge brokerage fees.

Anyone can throw eight sequential heads with a fair coin, but only a fool thinks this makes him psychic. (If you throw a fair coin 256 times, according to the Binomial Theorem the probability is 63% that, somewhere in the series, eight sequential heads will appear.)

I can mail my customers six months of reliable, accurate and exploitable market forecasts and then try to get them to sign their portfolios over to me, but I don't actually have to know anything to do this, or have an inside track on the workings of the market. Do you doubt this? Here's how it's done:

http://arachnoid.com/equities_myths/index.html#Miracle_Man

The bottom line is that there are no secrets of the winners, and the only people who actually beat the market (in a reliable statistical sense) are those willing to deal in illegal insider information.

Guess what Warren Buffet chose as the financial instrument for his relatives, during his estate planning? Index funds. Buffet knows better than to trust market forecasters.

EDIT: In a long and reliable tradition, the above perfectly accurate post, replete with technical detail and references, is downvoted for the simple and sole reason that it's right. The downvoting is performed by people who can't articulate their grievances, but who can click a mouse.
The other problem with the "Bayes with flat prior = frequentist maximum likelihood" idea is that, even if you ignore the issues with improper priors, the concept of a "flat prior" is inherently dependent on arbitrary choices in the way a model is parameterised.

It's not possible for a prior to be "flat" with respect to all re-parameterisations of a continuous parameter in a model. E.g. a flat prior for the variance isn't flat for its inverse (precision) or its square root (the std. dev.), and the choice of which of these alternative parameterisations you use to express the unknown quantity in the model is arbitrary. In the frequentist case it doesn't affect the result of the inference; in the Bayesian case it matters which of the parameterisations you choose your prior to be flat with respect to.
Why don't they lawyer up, and sue them for defmation/libel?
This is the best explanation of the healthcare problems the US has that I've seen in a while. It's not a "public vs. private" thing in the US that is the problem. It's a byzantine system of patchwork laws that have tried to make the system better, but only made it worse. It's so complicated now that it'll take a hell of a lot of work to fix it.
Could you tell me what browser/system you are using? Thanks!
It's not a once size fits all. You would of course look at the size of the area and the amount of traffic. So areas with higher traffic would get more resources allocated.

The real problem with healthcare is that you can never have enough. Even if everyone paid 100% in taxes it wouldn't be enough.
I've had interviews where the guy will ask me a technical question, and I won't answer it to his liking. Then, he'll proceed to answer the question himself at nauseating length to the point where I can see his original intention was to show me his 'brilliance'.

It's shitty and lacks courtesy in standard conversation to do stuff like that, so it's even worse during an interview when the candidate took the time to prepare, dress up in nice clothes, and show up on site for the interview.

What bothers me about a lot of technical interviewers is they don't set out to measure a candidate's qualifications so much as to reinforce their own feelings of self-importance. It's because they have little incentive to surrender their own statuses within the organization because then they won't be the ones giving interviews and deciding who they get to work with.
I'm a PhD student in the US, and the author's view of PhD students, at least among R1 institutions, is not accurate for most disciplines. In most of these programs, a student is guaranteed a salary for 5 years, given health insurance, tuition benefits, and in many cases quite a lot of freedom.

The guarantee of funding doesn't mean that you won't have to work for your income. In my field, it is common for theorists to teach for much of their graduate career in order to support themselves.
My whole foods has had that for at least a few years.
You missed the second part: "However ...". :)

My point was that it is the planning step that is extremely difficult, not the estimating one. With most real-world projects the project plan must follow changing requirements (based on external input or on things you have learned during development). It is extremely unlikely that the original plan will (or should) be followed to the end.
Problem with estimates is that once there is an estimate the team can really stick to this estimate. Regardless of quality.

It is feasible for the team to claim that it met the estimate, and it is feasible to have all indicators green on the day the deadline is met. Simply do less design, less refactoring, less thinking, less tests, less collarborative work, less engineering...
> Well, we need an independence assumption. And then we have some rock solid theorems and not just something "naive".

We have rock solid theorems that the average converges under some conditions. (As an aside, do you rule out the Cauchy distribution in your axiomatic approach?). We don't have rock solid theorems that the average is of any interest. If we're interested in knowing whether a dam is likely to overflow based on historical water levels, the average is of limited use -- for heights well below the highest historical depth, an average will be something that we can at least calculate, but not precisely. If we want to leave room for error (build a dam above the highest historical waterlevel, and do it conservatively so that we'll be above future maixima for the next x years w/ some probability), we can't even calculate an average.

Now what? That's what I mean by "naive." If we're going to try to attack problems that aren't transparently easy (something like stationary weakly-dependent data with finite moments, enough observations that not only the CLT is a good approximation, but that we don't even need to worry about efficiency, loosely defined) then we need to start thinking about the properties we want our estimation procedure to have.

One set of properties leads to something like frequentist statistics, another set of properties leads to Bayesian statistics. Other sets of properties lead to some of the more idiosyncratic branches of statistics that I don't know much about.

> since the frequentist approach does not have enough to let us be clear on the properties of an average, we need more

This makes no sense. Every branch of statistics puts the estimator on top of a probability space, just usually not explicitly. (Because it would be boring.) The t-test has certain properties if the probability space is in a class with....

> The axioms and independence make a nice package to give us a rock solid version of what we want. So, that's why I go for it.

I want to get decent answers for hard problems and have a measure of their reliability. Both frequentist and Bayesian stats are often good for this, and certainly better than "no stats."
IMHO it looks more like a concept than an actual product at the moment. A lot of the technologies they demo are impractical, or otherwise not as convenient as they would like (i.e. how could the robot know about the stories the children are reading?)
Crap thought I did.
The implication is that the municipals are not just "non profit", but operating at a (significant) loss. Is this "funded by taxes" aspect usually true?

At least for the case of the Sacramento area electrical company, no. PG&E is substantially more expensive, although I don't know how far-flung rural distribution is funded - by all rate payers, or if there is some kind of govt subsidy to encourage rural distribution. (by rural, I don't mean the parts of Yolo and El Dorado counties that are 10 to 15 miles outside of Sacramento county, I mean areas like the Sierra and Siskiyou mountains)
Most PoS systems in the U.S. are being updated to read chipped cards for the big EMV-related liability shift[1], anyway, so it makes sense to add NFC while they're at it.

[1] http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/BL-234B-3681
> You prove your understanding by the type of questions you ask.

I can't find where I paraphrased this from. Maybe it was Better Explained [0] while explaining the intuition behind complex numbers? As I remember, the context was "Now you understand that complex numbers are rotations through 2 dimensions, I bet a lot of you are asking 'can we extend math to rotations through 3 dimensions?'" (aka quaternions)

The vibe I get from this article is "the meaning isn't important, so plug and chug away". No no no no no! Grokking the meaning is important because it allows us to extend our understanding from a strong foundation. E.g. HN a few days ago submitted a paper on "Half Coins"[1] which extends our conventional notion of probability to negative numbers. And after I read the paper, I realized it's not as weird as it sounds.

[0] http://betterexplained.com/cheatsheet/

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8187457

disclaimer: I don't know anything about statistics.
True, although in the Netherlands this seems to be changing in the last few years. A lot of restaurants and stores for clothes/shoes etc are now accepting them. Grocery stores over here almost never accept credit cards.

If Apple sings some kind of exclusive deal for iPhone payments with the credit card companies I expect that half of Europe will start accepting credit cards because people willing to pay for a 600 euro phone are an interesting market segment.
Unit testing has been done with jQuery since it came out in 2006. Rather than one giant monolithic app, jQuery promotes putting things into plugins or separate libraries.

What stops you from unit testing function calls? Nothing.
There is a major use case for std::vector having contiguous memory, which is passing a reference to the first element of a vector into a function expecting a pointer. This is fine assuming the vector is not empty.
His calculations are simply wrong. In his examples, the cost of annual car ownership remains $12,744 despite the different mileage estimates.

If you drive only 5,000 miles per year, your ownership costs are going to be much less than if you drive 13,000 miles. Why did he not adjust the cost of ownership?
Google removes piracy app, 'Disconnect Mobile,' from Store
Wouldn't one rather use Traceur over JSTransform? It's ES6 coverage seems rather more extensive.
Those experiments always use variations on the word "stop". The speed of light does not vary.

In those experiments, "stop" usually means absorbed and later re-emitted.
I agree with @blutoot they need to focus on Visa and Mastercard. Then again maybe they're going for a higher HHI bracket?
Ok, something is happening now. But as you can see from the graph[1], nothing was really happening for a long time.

I was following several issues that the author wasn't even responding to, even though many people were asking after it. Around 25% of the issues are a year old, and many more are 8+ months old.

Finally, someone made a fork of the project with a lot of the requests that people were making. A "people's fork" wouldn't have been created if it were sufficiently active.

[1] https://github.com/nnnick/Chart.js/graphs/contributors
I imagine he meant "arguable, potentially false or misleading", and is commenting on the consistent clarity and reliability of AT journalism.
New Temporal Cloaking Method Hides Communication Signals
If you use it for new stuff with up to date frameworks (e.g. symfony) it's not that bad, really. Since 5.4 it's getting a lot better.
If you're stuck with some old version and legacy codebase it's a problem unrelated to the language itself.
>> "An Amex card is no harder to get than a MC/Visa."

Do Amex do a debit card? In Europe (certainly in the UK) debit cards are in much wider use than credit cards and Visa and Mastercard debit cards are given with almost every bank account.
Kickass stuff! Although if by chance you documented your way through out the app and could share it, it would make a pretty decent guide for people looking to go MEAN. And that would also add a lot of substance to the Technical Details section of the post.
Everything that you've written is technically correct. But it seems like in the large majority of situations where people are using/publishing statistics, the expected value is what we care about but we are using frequentist methods. So if we are going to correct the "norm we use to choose our optimal procedure," it should imply a many-fold increase in uses of Bayesian methods. A huge amount of published papers that include any statistics are reporting means and p-values in very simple statistical analyses (essentially all papers published in the social sciences, health sciences, etc.). In many of these situations researchers could provide subjective priors based on the state of the research and knowledge beforehand and it would be philosophically valid and beneficial.

Because of this mismatch, people who support Bayesian methods perhaps overstate their case. Maybe this is for the same reason that partisan political actors argue fervently for a single side of an issue, ignoring nuance. Nuance historically has not led to social change, and fixing statistics in science requires changing people's minds and "raising awareness."
The article mentioned rebar, but I didn't see any rebar in the photos or video. A significant concrete structure is going to need rebar.
This is great and I've been wanting to try out Docker for a while. Here's some feedback:

1) I had to delete my existing host-only networks

2) Images could be pre-populated with popular images so you're only a click away from getting started with an app. As a first-time docker user I don't have any of that stuff lying around.

Edited to add:

3) A progress indicator would be great creating/starting apps and images

4) am I supposed to install docker separately to access the command line tools?
The estimote stickers are pretty cool. However, I notice they have a battery life of one year, at $12.50 a sticker ($99 for a pack of 10 + $25 in shipping) it is starting to get close to where I can imagine buying a set. If only they had some sort of solar recharging, or ability to pop in a new battery for a few bucks.
It's only when you see a side-by-side comparison daily does it resonate how slow our interwebs are.

Example, every time I log into VPN I barf a little knowing that for various reason I need to use US servers, but that practically every random smaller nation is blowing us away...
Offline attack shows Wi-Fi routers still vulnerable
I live in Los Angeles, I have sold my car and now take UberX everywhere. I have a number of reasons for this:

1) I am not a great driver. I learned to drive in a rural area where the dynamics of sharing the road were simply different. It's not fun for me to drive in LA.

2) Parking in this town is a challenge.

3) I telecommute.

4) When I go on a long-drive vacation, I simply rent a car.

For me and my family, in our calculations, for a family with a telecommuter in Los Angeles, UberX is well worth it. We don't have to worry about parking when we get somewhere, we don't have to worry about maintenance, and when we do want to go on a long road trip, we simply rent a nice big car that makes sense for that particular trip.
It also promotes procedural code for modifying DOM, not declarative. This makes unit testing much harder imo, since you're into the realm of either working against a real DOM, or mocking everything.
short and sweet! building 2 apps that will be made available in the App store in a few months. This was helpful! Thanks!
He makes average assumptions about car ownership but then makes optimistic assumptions about UberX. Like no surge pricing, productivity and wait times.

The biggest thing is of course Uber is available in a few cities. Places like SF and Manhattan it might be convenient since everything is nearby but in LA and Silicon Valley everything is spread out.
QUANT E-Sportlimousine by NanoFLOWCELL (Saltwater Powered)