skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>It is in fact a political blog with it's own agenda to push.

It is describing a commonly used HFT trading strategy in objective terms. Your ad hominem attack on their credentials and agenda does not change this.

>After reading this article your assertion is that it is unethical and/or illegal for market makers to use standard market orders that are filled in legal and standard ways as price information signals, but it is not illegal and/or unethical for large market participants to hide their order flow with specialized orders and/or venues?

What was just described is detecting a large institutional order through the use of 'pinging' trades and then effectively taking advantage of that knowledge by trading ahead of it. That is NOT market making.

It is not strictly speaking insider trading or front running either, but it combines features of both practices.
So the biggest argument against random matching (whether in batch auction or open market book orders) is that the easiest way to game it is to figure out your expected fill rate. Then you just raise your order volume such that your expected fill rate matches your risk profile.

For the advantage of removing the speed advantage, you get the downside of providing advantage to people that have the loosest risk profiles and you further complicate the audit burden such that it is impossible to follow.

Think of it from the perspective of a value investor that set a market order 6 months ago. Under the current system once their price becomes top of the book they have a virtual certainty of getting filled. Under a (fair) random match they have the exact same chance of getting filled as someone who literaly just put in their order.
The Doom 3 engine was impressive at the time for its dynamic lighting and shadows.

He also developed megatextures for Rage.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MegaTexture
Very helpful and something we have worried about as well.
Not entirely true.

Tesla gets $195 million in tax credits that they can sell to other companies. Note that it's a credit and not simply a tax break or deduction.

Furthermore, the state and local county will have to pay large amounts of money to support the explosive growth of the community. If they expect 6,500 new workers and 22,000 new residents overall, that means huge upgrade to infrastructure, police, education, etc. That is potentially hundreds of millions that the will not be offset by property or sales taxes from Tesla. That money will be coming from Nevada tax payers.
Not as sad as you think. Americans, for all their bleating about liberty and personal freedom, absolutely adore power. They are infatuated with it. And they infer heroic qualities in people who wield it, regardless of merit. If you only pay attention to the right media, you might get the impression that police are suffering some popularity problem in the US. Even after Ferguson, I assure you this is not the case. Darren Wilson has a great many supporters, not just people who think the shooting was tragic but the officer is not at fault, but believe he was right to shoot the guy. They had a fucking rally, even, in St. Louis! Naturally, the crowd was lily-white.

On a personal level, and especially for people who aren't closet statists, sure it's tragic. But, on a national level, there are few places on Earth that deserve it more.
>simply that it is not a loss for our country if fewer taxes are paid

I consider citizens bearing more of the tax burden to be a loss for our country, along with less taxes being paid when we have debt.

>If you are worried non shareholders pay more and gain less, they are free to invest

You can't be serious.

>but shareholders inevitably pay capital gains tax

At a capital gains tax rate, which greatly contributes to wealth inequality: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2207372
This has been throughly debunked. Those cancellations were apparently by Lyft drivers who also drove for Uber, and they were trying to recruit more people to drive for Uber. But the 5k cancellations end up being less than one cancellation for every 5 days per Lyft city (in other words a non-factor). Lyft asked Uber to acquire them (presumably because Lyft is burning cash and is on the way out), Uber balked so Lyft started slinging mud. What's more, Lyft has apparently been engagaged in the exact same tactics. http://www.vox.com/2014/8/27/6074919/the-uber-recruitment-sc...
If every "bad" thing should be illegal, then tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, prostitution, lobbying, protectionism, should be banned. Then again, we have to argue what is "good" or "bad".
Rendering my art takes noticeable amounts of time whether it's a PDF renderer, an SVG renderer, or Illustrator's internal renderers. Even after a recent Illustrator update's main bullet point was "we rebuilt a significant chunk of AI's internals to make it tons faster". It may be theoretically possible to render vector images much faster than this, but ain't nobody stepping up to do this.

Moreover: a lot of the images people would like to serve in multiple sizes are presumably photos. Photos and vectors don't go together well; vectors are a lot better at simple images.

And finally. [Here](http://egypt.urnash.com/rita/chapter/01/) is the graphic novel I'm drawing entirely in Illustrator. The 72dpi bitmaps range from 15 to 212 kb. Printable 300dpi bitmaps range from 1.75 to 2.3 mb. They're CMYK rather than RGB, let's guesstimate they'd be 3/4 of the size -- 1.3 to 1.7 mb. Illustrator files? 948-34 MB. And that's with 'create PDF compatible file' turned off, which generally halves the size of an .AI file.

I'm going to pause here to let that sink in. Even distributing a CD full of 300DPI images of a nearly 200 page graphic novel is less data than the source Illustrator files. And converting them to SVG/SVGZ/PDF makes little in the way of size gain, either. A modest list of high-DPI images sounds like a hell of a lot less stuff to upload to your server, never mind that you'd only be sending the single bitmap that best fits the display at hand.

3D games have a lot of tooling to make things Render Fast. There are a ton of ways people have figured out to fake more complex images - LOD, bump maps, baked luminosity, lots more stuff I don't know offhand because I'm not a 3D person. Nobody has put anywhere near the same kind of effort into getting 2D vector images to render fast.

I would love to see someone build tools for doing the 2D equivalent of things like "turning a super hi res mesh into a simpler one plus bump maps" and rendering them quickly. Maybe I could finally stop rendering my stuff into bitmaps for the web. But I don't see anyone doing that any time soon.

anyway.

TL;DR: 2D vector rendering is sluggish and I don't see that changing any time soon, and the file sizes for interestingly complex images is a couple orders of magnitude larger than a 300dpi bitmap. Only the most trivial images are more efficiently served as vector files than as multiple bitmaps.
In flight school one of the very first things they teach you in flight is what to do when the stall warning goes off. You always nose down.

This story sounds like if I were driving a car and gradually started to drift into an oncoming lane, and upon the car's warning system alerting me to this, I jerked the steering wheel into the oncoming lane instead of out of it. At some point the pilot is just incompetent, you can't just blame the automation.
I don't know if you could the Doom 3 tech impressive - I always found that at the time, it looked like a dirty hack rather than being genuinely impressive. Later games with soft shadows looked much better. And for Rage I'm aware of the megatextures, but that looked horrible for anything that was close to you - again a failed tech.

EDIT: interesting, getting downvoted because I wasn't impressed by Carmack's later productions?
Whether or not they originally had a goal of making Gruber unhappy, the tussle has increased the visibility of their project. Going from "Standard" to "Common" is not likely to end the fight, and so won't end the free extra publicity.

As semisight says[1], "Atwood's reaction complies with the word of the request, but not the spirit of it." Atwood's a smart guy. Someone who lives and breathes (and writes about) this business. It's hard for me not to think this is intentional.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8271596
Puff your chest out all you want, call me back when you've made a bigger contribution and no longer have to hide behind 'froaway001'.
Very nice article! The only question I'd raise is whether the "aha! moment" is really the job of user onboarding to begin with. Why are people signing up for something if they don't know why they'd want to use it? How much of that can be front-loaded to the marketing touchpoints, so that your primary onboarding audience isn't people with a passing curiosity in what the value you provide is?
Except you're using it Clojure, which makes it easier to avoid that kind of stuff and easier to spot when you count on Java APIs directly.
I wonder how many people who decry Walmart's receiving "corporate welfare" have no problem with this.
Though he did manage to find the time to berate and poke fun at the project on twitter all day.
Dyson Releases the Eye, a Robot Vacuum with a 360-Degree Camera
Most devs fail to understand how important user-centricity in softwares are. Look at PHP, Windows, WordPress, or even Photoshop. They don't have the most beautiful code bases, yet look how successful they are. Clearly there is something to it.

Laravel is beautiful but its new and it still needs to prove itself. I've yet to see a project written in laravel (or any of those "modern" frameworks) that would stand the test of time. WordPress code base is a result of its long history (11 years). Backwards compat is no easy task. For that alone I applaud the WordPress team and congrats on the 4 point oh!
Apple Says It Will Add New Security Measures After Celebrity Hack
Sidaction: écoutez le nouveau single Kiss and Love
The suggestion that complacency due to automated aircraft systems is somehow not acknowledged or well-known is simply false. It is a well documented occurence that we train for, both in terms of recognizing it in ourselves and others, and in combating it. Most of the "we didn't get to fly with all of this new fangled autopilot" is as misguided as the "we should add another computer to solve this complacency problem too."
"Gruber was apparently unresponsive to them when they asked about it"

They didn't mention that they'd be calling it Standard Markdown when they emailed him about it - and he was on vacation when it happened...

I think it's great if they want to move the idea forward, but if he wants them to come up with their own name (which he very publicly said before this all happened) then that would have been the right thing to do...
After years of being a paying Evernote customer, I stopped using it several months ago. I am actively looking for alternatives. I found that I was spending too much time curating information in Evernote for the value I got from looking up material for reference.

One thing that I have been experimenting with is keeping a few top level subject directories in Dropbox and making notes in plain text markdown files. If I use a .txt file extension, then available iOS and Android editors that work with Dropbox give me coverage across tablet, phone, and laptop. Spotlight search on my laptop helps me find notes but finding the right information on mobile devices is a problem.

I also write notes in Google Drive and store potentially useful PDFs and purchased books in GD, and rely on GD search to find things.

I have tried org-mode but I no longer "live" in Emacs so org-mode is not ready at hand as it would have been ten or twenty years ago when I used Emacs for everything.
Jaguars football team fined $75k for live jaguars escaping during demo
which I thought was odd when I read the arstechnica article and saw the chart which showed the beast at ~59,000kg, or 59 tons, but then I remembered that our tons (tonnes) are 1000kg and the US ones are about 907kg
It may or may not have. These holes have been present presumably since the launch of these APIs. However, the author has now made public specific vectors of attack. You may be right that hackers have already been aware of them. In either case, does making these publicly known benefit Coursera, or its users in any way? I can't think of how it could possibly help, but I can certainly see how it might hurt -- anyone who comes across that page now might feel the urge to further 'explore' these findings.
Telsa gets $1.25B in Nevada tax breaks to build “Camry killer” battery factory
UnrealEngine 4 is free for academic use
A Case in Cognitive Science to Quit Twitter
The main problem (quote from the article):

"What we’re doing is using human beings as safety nets or backups to computers, and that’s completely backward"

Made me stop and think a bit when I read this, very true.
Post your question on the mailing list for redecentralize.org, https://github.com/redecentralize/swarm/wiki/Email-list
> invented JSON

Now consider what Doug Crockford labels himself as: discoverer of JSON.

DC is self-aware, humble, and thoughtful.

Contrast that with today's displayed behaviour: name-calling, puffery, 3 demands (apology, cease and no-redirect, new name).
I doubt it. Look at pearls or diamonds.

The sort of people who will pay extra for brand new ivory aren't going to bought off with fake ivory.
"No shit" is literally the greatest danger that your startup will ever face :p
They've done body-worn cameras in Sydney, Australia for a while now. It seems to have helped curb corruption and unnecessary brute force - most of the time. Where there's a will, there's a way.
Yes, people in the past (and even some currently) thought that marijuana and prostitution were "bad" so they made them illegal.

We are not living in a libertarian society, though I guess you can believe we should if you want.
I've just been digging through the C99 standard (official) and the N1570 (final C11 draft) and have come to the conclusion that these optimizations break the language. This is probably not something you should be compiling your OpenSSL shared library or SSH with.

A C program consists of translation units which may be preserved in translation form. That happens in translation phases 1 through 7. Multiple translation units may be linked, which is translation phase 8. Phase 8 only consists of resolving references; the last semantic analysis takes place in phase 7.

An example under 5.1.2.3 gives the range of adherence between actual semantics and abstract semantics. Though it is just an example, and not normative, it is very clear from the wording that the locus of valid optimizations is the translation unit.

Selected citations:

5.1.1.1 Program Structure

A C program need not all be translated at the same time. [...] After preprocessing, a
preprocessing translation unit is called a translation unit. Previously translated translation
units may be preserved individually or in libraries. [...] Translation units may be separately translated and then later linked to
produce an executable program.

5.1.1.2 Translation Phases

[...]

7. White-space characters separating tokens are no longer significant. Each preprocessing token is converted into a token. The resulting tokens are syntactically and semantically analyzed and translated as a translation unit.

8. All external object and function references are resolved. Library components are linked to satisfy external references to functions and objects not defined in the current translation. All such translator output is collected into a program image which contains information needed for execution in its execution environment.

5.1.2.3 Program Execution

8. EXAMPLE 1 An implementation might define a one-to-one correspondence between abstract and actual semantics: at every sequence point, the values of the actual objects would agree with those specified by the abstract semantics. The keyword volatile would then be redundant.

9. Alternatively, an implementation might perform various optimizations within each translation unit, such that the actual semantics would agree with the abstract semantics only when making function calls across translation unit boundaries. In such an implementation, at the time of each function entry and function return where the calling function and the called function are in different translation units, the values of all externally linked objects and of all objects accessible via pointers therein would agree with the abstract semantics. Furthermore, at the time of each such function entry the values of the parameters of the called function and of all objects accessible via pointers therein would agree with the abstract semantics. In this type of implementation, objects referred to by interrupt service routines activated by the signal function would require explicit specification of volatile storage, as well as other implementation-defined
restrictions.
Megatexture was simply a technology before it's time.

The problem is that there just isn't a way to ship the data set right now that you need to support it properly. The hardware is there, the infrastructure is not.

They really needed to ship several hundred gigs of textures to do it justice. Right now you can't realistically deliver that to players.

Now certainly basing a game off a technology that isn't ready for prime time is a mistake, but the technology itself is very impressive and the underlying concept will come back when the internet is fast enough that you can realistically expect someone to download a half terabyte game.
Teespring (YC W13) Seeks Engineering Thought Leaders – Sr. Ruby/Front-end/DevOps
1 in 100 people in the USA now own one of our products. Join our team and help us reach double digits.

We are a small (-10 strong) engineering team that is changing the way people bring ideas to the market. In our first 2.5 years, we’ve shipped millions of products, provided a living for hundreds of our amazing users, and even had the privilege of watching a few of those users become millionaires through our platform.
Who we are: We’re an ecommerce platform that’s growing like crazy, and we’re just getting started. We obsess over our customers, and dream of a world where everyone can unleash their inner entrepreneur.

Things we care about: - Average product feedback score 9/10, - 9/10 customers say they would recommend our products
Who we are looking for: We’re hiring incredibly talented, passionate people. Our biggest need (in a senior capacity) is full-stack, front-end, and dev ops engineers (we’re a Ruby shop), but we’re hiring across the board for the right people.
Even if you’re not sure you’re ready for the next opportunity, get in touch and let’s have a conversation!

Email ashley.hearn@teespring.com w/ resume to learn more
In GRASP this is called "Pure Fabrication" - a thing that is not directly modeled in the problem domain. Initially, adding a search method to Product seemed sensible by using "Information Expert" (another GRASP term), but when proceeding on to adding suggestions and requiring the User object, it begins to violate "Low Coupling". You have to "fabricate" another object to avoid the God object.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRASP_(object-oriented_design)
John Gruber on Markdown and "standardization": https://overcast.fm/podcasts/episode/344902019595#t=4527
Yes. But dead store elimination combined with being allowed to dereference arbitrary pointers and leaving newly allocated blocks of memory uninitialized is problematic. Contrary to what the C standard would like us to believe, those other features do mean that dead store elimination alters the semantics of a program. It doesn't impact the semantics of the procedure whose dead stores are being eliminated, but it alters the semantics of arbitrary operations elsewhere in the program because it could influence the result I get when I dereference a pointer dereference or examine the contents of a newly-allocated block of memory.

In most cases that distinction is nit-picky. It can be perfectly reasonable for the language to throw up its hands, shout "undefined behavior", and just assume that whatever random uncontrolled thing happens won't be too terrible, assuming whatever your program does isn't too important. But for security-critical applications it's a really stinking important distinction, because the range of possible behaviors found in the "undefined" category includes things like Heartbleed.
Lev Vaidman – Can Future Measurements Affect the Present
Everyone knows that's the idea. But $1.2 billion is a lot of money. how long will it take to make this foregone revenue back in taxes? If there are 6000 employees, they're going to have generate $200,00 each plus interest in tax revenue before the state of Nevada breaks even. Nevada doesn't have a state income tax so it's going to have to get that money back through sales taxes, which means (assuming the top rate of 8.1% in the state) after each of the 6000 employees households has spent about $2.5 million within the state.

Don't hold your breath, in other words. Even with the most optimistic economic multipliers I don't see the state breaking even on this for about 25 years. I think they're gambling on the 'gigafactory' being the center of a manufacturing hub that attracts other businesses to the region, sorta like HP in Silicon Valley back in the day. Perhaps they'll call it 'Lithium Oasis' or something if it works out.

I'm neutral on this, and I hope it works out for them, but it's not the sure thing you suggest. Companies that get huge tax breaks sometimes crowd out other employers that were willing to do a better deal, only to up sticks and leave as soon as the tax break expires. I'm not saying Tesla will do this or that they shouldn't seek the best deal, just that it's not guaranteed to be a long-term benefit.
People do stupid things sometimes. Yes, I agree you shouldn't apply optimizations to security critical code without fully understanding the ramifications. It is also the case that you shouldn't write security critical code that might break under optimizations, where you can avoid it.
for those without tccutil :

https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/Darwin...
It's telling that your first concern is for Coursera (which deserves no concern at all) and only then its users.

There are definite benefits for Coursera's existing users -- at the very least, they now know it is vulnerable to cross-site attack and can be sure to log out before visiting other sites.

Another set of people clearly benefiting are those I've already alluded to, who now know not to sign up for Coursera.
There are norms for this type of thing. Normally a few weeks is the minimum that people are expected to give.

At worst they don't fix it in a timely manner. And at that point giving them a heads up that you're about to publish. Then you can publish the bug, the timeline and communications, which should serve as a ref flag to their users, government regulators and the community.

However, you need to bear in mind publishing before they fix the issue puts existing users at risk by publicizing a flaw that can be leveraged by bad guys. You need to weigh this against any slowness to fix the issue (99.99% of companies will fix the issue). Protecting users can be a tricky line to walk in this scenario.

Also, Security fixes might seem simple from the outside, but there might be hidden complexity or dependancies that you don't see. Or worse your report is only the tip of the ice berg and there is a much larger issue that they will have to tackle all at once (and the company won't share these related issues in order to protect their users and reputation).

Giving them the extra time will achieve the goal of getting the bug fixed and protecting users. If you suspect the bug is actively being exploited you can always email them and share your concern/frustration with the timeline.

My core advice is try your best to communicate with the company and inform them of your thoughts and concerns.
In-house Mobile Test Labs – How-To-Build