skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
iPhone 6 uses H.265 codec for FaceTime over cellular
Peering into the secret, spooky world of the Stasi
You will not find them in Project Gutenberg for sure. María Kodama, Borges widow and heir tirelessly defends the rights. She prosecuted some visible sites that published the books.
Nerd sniping: how many books are in the library of babel?

Here's a PDF:

http://www.cultureofdoubt.net/download/docs_cod/library%20of...

Wikipedia has calculations, if you want to cheat:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Library_of_Babel
I'm not so sure the future is as bright as you make it out for all those groups. At the very least this change is going to bring with it a mountain of uncertainty.

As a driver, you probably lose your job. Not with the 3-5 year out model, but the one that comes 10 years after that. Even with the 3-5 year model, suddenly the competition for your job becomes extremely tight and starts to focus on things like people skills and entertaining, since the automated car will be doing most of the "heavy lifting" most of the time in a way that is automated into a commodity.

As Uber, you save a lot of money but you also lose a lot of moat, it becomes much easier/cheaper for other companies to suddenly field a fleet of cars.

As a car insurance company things look really iffy for you, again not so much in the 3-5 year timeframe but a bit further out when the human is completely unnecessary since at that point the insurance will be more about insuring the companies making the cars and car software and less about personal insurance, which means there is still significant money to be made, but probably far less than now (if the safety of automated cars turns out to be as great as it should) and by far fewer players.

As a car manufacturer, you'll do well at the beginning but the eventual model of a networked driverless transportation system should require far fewer people to own fewer cars and still live as if they do own cars, which is a long term problem for you when you've built a business optimized to sell cars to broad market consumers on a 5-ish year cycle.

As a government you should, in an ideal world, be in pretty good shape for the reasons you outlined, but good luck dealing with the lobbyists from industries this may "disrupt".

I do think driverless cars are quite a bit closer than most people think, for a lot of reasons, I just think they are going to upset a lot of applecarts on the way in, which isn't necessarily a bad thing unless you're an applecart vendor.
What Happens When You Break Up with Facebook: Nothing
The amount of business and industry logic tied up with ERPs is what makes it so expensive.
New Bootstrap Icon set
Service discovery in Docker using haproxy/consul in every container
Simulation on Disruptive Battery Technologies
Thanks.
I tried and its what I need. Good work.
Here's a better link (more detail and playable demo):
http://forio.com/store/harvard-christensen-innovation-techno...
Looks like they're now also selling UniFi through their online store, when they previously only sold airFiber through it.

https://store.ubnt.com/
That really illustrates the scale of the operation.
The fact that a modern language encourages developers to do something like

```
func (self Gok) SetCookie_4(name string, value string, duration int64,
urlPath string){ ... }
func (self Gok) SetCookie_5(name string, value string, duration int64,
urlPath string, domain string) { ... }
func (self *Gok) SetCookie_7(name string, value string, duration int64,
urlPath string, domain string, secure bool,
httpOnly bool) { ... }
```

is simply baffling to me.
Show HN: The Wisdom of Success
Facebook Billionaire Peter Thiel: It sucks that women have the vote
Many problems in AI, such as NLP, are AI-complete. While it's possible to solve subsets of the problem without creating a human level intelligence (and many companies have done so), these solutions do not "seem" very intelligent. Based on Sam's blog post it sounds like he does mean human-level intelligence. Which unfortunately does seem out of reach within our lifetimes though I hope to be proven wrong.
> we have things like displaying a linked list, which is trivial, being awarded patents by appending "on a mobile device" or "on a web page" or "On a payment system."

Citation needed.
Probably the largest application written in Rust is the Rust compiler itself.
Our company acquired the rights from the Napoleon Hill Foundation to distribute the original interview between Andrew Carnegie and Napoleon Hill.

Napoleon Hill used this interview to write the best selling book "Think & Grow Rich".

After reading the book, we decided to contact the Napoleon Hill Foundation to see if we can form a company to create an audio book and distribute the information online.

1) There's tons of free content on our Youtube channel if you want a sneak peak into the full 9 HOUR audio book:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC13De-V1r_zjANgzAIsGZbA/vid...

Thanks for your support! The principles of success are important to any startup.. including ours :) This is just a fun side-project.
hoping our working prototype will get us in
Try and find the capabilities of the firewall or VPN though, nothing even in the datasheet.
Warren Buffett wrote a letter to potential sellers of business that he (meaning Berkshire Hathaway) was interested in buying. It should be easy to find as I think it is reprinted in one of Berkshire's annual reports.

The basic idea is this: it's easy to make mistakes in business. As a startup or business in general you made many mistakes over the years that you've had to learn from and bounce back from in order to build you business into the success it currently is. You've earned this competence through your mistakes, and these mistakes cost you at the time you made them. Most businesses only get sold once (acquisition or IPO), so you want to go to the people who know what they're doing when you go to sell your business. For all the shit investment bankers get, they are very good at their jobs.
I flew in to NYC for the startup school in June, and I have one minor gripe- none of the other attendees I talked to had started a business. They were all students, bankers or people considering taking the plunge. Granted, I only talked to perhaps 8 people. It would be interesting to know how the demographics differ between the NYC and CA events.
Just what California needs: more cars on the road.

Idiocy. Plain and simple.
I would argue that it has been a long time in the USA since a taxi driver could earn a middle class income driving. Medallion fees basically make them indentured servants.
Show HN: Kata – A Template Engine for Javascript
Am I missing something or is the author of this pdf's proof equally flawed. They assume each function is idempotent and injective ... meaning that it is the identity function. And the proof doesn't follow. A much more natural way to have "fixed" the original proof would be to require that V: X -> R be injective.
Kata has the normal Interpolate, Iterate, and Conditional blocks. It also has mixins, extensions, imports, and plugins.

And jsperf says it is blazing fast (http://jsperf.com/hogan-vs-dot-js-vs-trimpath-zepto-js/24).
My answer to the main question in the faq, "Why do I need Paket instead of nuget?" (my paraphrase) is this: meh. NuGet's behavior simply doesn't cause me that many problems, and when it's a superbigdeal I can just get a git submodule and be on my merry way. The one killer feature I want is an easy way to convert a downloaded NuGet package into a folder of the latest sources.

And hey: NuGet is open-source.
On Modeling the Costs of Censorship [pdf]
Ask HN: Where to go to discuss GitHub?
StackOverflow is not the place - they close any question that does not have a concrete black and white answer.

Where else to go on the Internet to ask how to properly do something on GitHub?

thanks
Unless that process disrupts your brain's cleanup process, which might just kill you faster.

There is no free lunch in biology.
Yeah, but having some random noise still often helps.
- Lots of ideas how and what an OS should be

- Lots of systems programming languages to choose from

- Tight integration of OS and hardware experience

Most of the time we were writing in Assembly anyway and we would specialize on a given system. So of course it was pleasant to develop for our platform of choice.

Porting to other platforms was done via out-sourcing to companies that specialized in the desired systems. A model that still persists in the gaming industry.
Does your hand fit your phone screen?
Because no one else had set up an as well-known and well-regarded service before they did it. It takes someone to offer deals and build the app and train drivers to get things rolling.
U.S. scientists: Ebola epidemic to last 12 to 18 months
Assuming by function you refer to the "agents'" \Phi, where do they make the assumption that it is injective? I see nothing to the effect in the text, and the functions in the counterexample on page 6 are not injective.
Specially the inside windows kernel books.
Cooking too? Food safety has bigger risks if you're making 10000 donuts than 1. Restricting everyone equally would put an unreasonable burden on everyday life. Scale is a big reason why there's a difference. Unrestricted commercial drone flights would be much more common than hobby, and would therefore cause much more accidents.
From what I understand, speech restrictions are upheld in very narrow ways:

- "time, place, and manner" restrictions such as not yelling at 4 AM in a residential area (these must withstand what's called "immediate scrutiny", which basically says that the restrictions must be content neutral, narrowly tailored to serve a specific government interest, and leave ample opportunity to share outside of the specific circumstances)

- "content" restrictions, such as restrictions on direct threats or child porn. These must pass strict scrutiny (narrowly tailored, serve a specific government interest, and be the least restrictive means to serve that interest.)

The government's interest has never been in "remedying" the problem of people speaking about politics, regardless of money (it does have an interest in stopping bribery, but that's a different issue.) Indeed, Kennedy's majority opinion in Citizens United is quite direct about wanting to allow more people to speak about politics -- specifically, allowing associations of people (ie, corporations, unions, etc.) the same ability to speak that single wealthy individuals have. The alternative to CU is frightening -- the only people whose political messages could be heard would be the few with the money to own media companies, or the few with the social networking apparatus to create faux-viral content.

This parallels older supreme court decisions such as:

Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 17 U.S. 518 (1819)

Providence Bank v. Billings, 29 U.S. 514 (1830)

Santa Clara County v Southern Pacific Railroad Company, 118 U.S. 394 (1886)

United States v. United Auto Workers, 352 U.S. 567 (1957)
The promise of ERP that drove people from best-of-breed application portfolios to monolithic systems was primarily the efficiency of integration. That is, your payables, treasury, etc. would automatically post to the general ledger and utilize unified master data (customers, products, vendors).

Ironically, in large scale (SAP-class) enterprises today, the integration problems are often relate to the fact that they are running multiple ERPs they picked up through acquisition and run customized business rules that cannot be cost effectively moved. Look at large scale master data management tools to get a sense of this type of problem.

Much of my work involves mid-market ERP from Microsoft, Sage, Infor, etc. These vendors can give a smaller company an entire integrated suite of tools, with great support, an ecosystem of ISVs fully implemented for $200-300k, including consulting. That remains a compelling value proposition and less risky than hiring programmers, who these companies have no idea how to manage.

One company to watch is Infor. Their strategy involves traditional ERP (usually products tailored for a vertical) at the core, with ancillary products integrated through standard middleware or APIs and delivered through Amazon cloud services.
I'm super excited for self-driving cars - they're literally going to change the world in dramatic ways. It's sort of mind boggling once you start really thinking about the implications of it.

You may as well pose it as "what if we invented teleportation?" Many of the end results are going to be similar.
> Randomization improves algorithms.

The better intuition is "randomisation fixes algorithms that get stuck for superficial reasons" - if you wrote that instead of the diversity thing as the intuitive conclusion of the Hong and Page theorem, you could get away with it in a theoretical CS survey paper or introductory textbook. The set of assumptions they make about the different \Phi would be fairly reasonable, for instance, if we were talking about a number of different flawed heuristics for a search problem.
Are you being intentionally facetious? How could science defy "reasoning"? Is science some mystery cult that is shrouded in obscurantism and lack of intelligibility? Or poor choice of word perhaps? Science is most definitely about reasoning and reasoning properly.

You must realize that proof and empirical result are never a replacement for common or good sense. The very attitude that proof is self-sustaining is as silly as the idea of being able to pull yourself up by your own bootstraps. I encourage you to read Duhem's "German Science" in which he describes exactly the silliness of "science" when it is divorced from common sense. It's not magic, my friend. A man of little good sense will lack a sound place to begin reasoning from. Indeed, a man completely devoid of common sense can only begin by reasoning from arbitrary postulates. However, no amount of rigor can ever make up for the initially poorly chosen postulates. Theorems are only as true as their axioms. As Pascal once said, principles are intuited, propositions inferred.

Common sense is not infallible, of course, and certainly science can help us refine it. But common sense is the necessary starting point of all science (the ancient Greeks talk about doxa and endoxa). Without it, there would be no starting material for your empirical science or your proofs. There would be no interpreting of the results of your experiment or any understanding of what the experiment should consist of in the first place.

Of course, you must also be careful to understand that not everyone possesses a good deal of common sense even though they may appeal to it. Common sense is not the same as popular opinion.

Science isn't a magical thing that is somehow divorced from "everyday reality" or some gnostic religion that tells you how it really is without being somehow derived from experience.
What he actually said: "Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of 'capitalist democracy' into an oxymoron."
Learning How to Exert Self-Control
What do you do for software / firmware? I've been dabbling in meshbox / CJDNS lately.
Moneyball shows us that all that knowledge and experience used to pick a baseball team was wrong and that people should ignore their "common sense" (which is usually just another word for "cognitive bias") and should use hard data.

In the absence of hard data just picking a team randomly froma pool of qualifying players seems to me like it would be as good as pickping players based on the team-picker's experience of the game and "cultural fit" and other bullshit.
...any vector format needs to be read from disk, decoded and "rendered" (bezier, gradients, transparency, etc calculated), too.
Pragmatism? If you want your web site to be viewable in China you can

a) change a URL

b) campaign for open internet access in China

which one is likely to be more effective?
Analysis of Blood and Glory Economics
Oh, oops. I was reading their statement:
This interpretation is incorrect
without the additional hypothesis that V (x) is
a one-to-one function.
as - all of the phi functions must be one-to-one. Looks like they made the same assumption that I would have.

This was bothering me though so thanks for your response.
Were you just using HDMI capture cards on each receiver and tuning each to the channel you wanted to capture?
> I bet they won't be allowed to directly bill based on time or distance driven

Before jitneys were generally outlawed in the US a popular billing method was based on zones. You take a map of the city, chop it into regions and there's a flat charge for travel anywhere within one zone, a different charge to travel between two or more zones. The zone map and payment schedule can then be printed on a business card the driver hands passengers or painted on the side of the vehicle. This is a LOT cheaper and simpler and more predictable than a taxi meter and removes any incentive to take a longer or slower route, but regulators tend to hate it because without metering it's too easy for the cab driver to take payment in cash and avoid paying any taxes on the income.
Docker injects environment variables with ip addresses, as well as setting the host name.
Hence it's very easy to use the environment variables and not worry about hostnames :-)

Eg

backend beChalet
option httpchk GET /
server chalet ${CHALET_PORT_80_TCP_ADDR}:${CHALET_PORT_80_TCP_PORT} maxconn 200 check

https://docs.docker.com/userguide/dockerlinks/#container-lin... has more details
The response paper seems to harp a lot on how the circumstance that typically, N_1 and N >> k, precludes any realistic applicability of the original theorem -- but it admits a fairly self-consistent and altogether much more sinister interpretation if you call the different \Phi "groups" (or "races" for maximum creepiness). The assumptions then say something to the effect of "every group's approach to problem solving produces fundamentally predictable results, and no group can be the best at solving each type of problem", which is a meme that in some form has been floating around in diversity activism circles for a long time.

The "mathematical theorem" then simply captures the triviality that under this sort of worldview, you want your team to contain Zorblaxians (sorry, SMBC) because there are some Zorblaxian problems that Zorblaxians have a natural affinity towards, and nobody without such an affinity could possibly make progress on. Since this is not stated explicitly, the statement becomes invokable even in settings in which otherwise a large number of people would raise eyebrows at the smell of exoticist quackery that the idea of "different ways of knowing" exudes.
Yes! Throwing out the baby with the bathwater is always the sane and rational thing to do. Always.
Water quality voicemails: Vojo and Coqui
We just use Ubiquiti's software/firmware now. It does what we need, and zero hand-off is nice.

Cloudtrax was nice too, and we used robin/batman and open-mesh for a while before that. At the time, the most common recommended hardware for that stack was Engenius, and we had a terrible experience with their hardware. I don't think we still have a single functioning Engenius unit deployed anywhere.

Ubiquiti's older hardware could be custom-flashed for, I think, open-mesh, and we did that initially, but later on it became too much of a hassle. I don't know if that's still doable or not. IIRC, there was some kind of FCC dust-up with some of the wireless equipment manufacturers a couple of years back over support for custom firmware, since people were changing the country code in the firmware to violate US FCC regulations on broadcast power.

Regardless, once Ubiquiti announced the zero hand-off, that became a killer feature for us and we quit messing around with the open source options. I love open source and try to use it when possible, but unless you need a specific feature that's not otherwise available, you're better off just using the Ubiquiti stack.

There is one thing about Ubiquiti that irritates us at the moment: they use this really manky Java software for the initial AP setup, and it really sucks. Once you're up and running, everything's gravy, but that software really hates to run sometimes.
The index fund is the greatest investing technology ever invented. The under-adoption of this technology is a behavioral problem. The solution definitely isn't additional layers of asset allocators taking fees on top of this.

I'm kind of confused by what Sam is talking about in the RFS about enabling lower cost index fund investing. VFINX has a minimum initial investment of $3,000 and minimum additional investment of $100. At 17 bps that's literally $5/yr. on the Vanguard S&P 500 fund. You are basically talking about a nominal cost to service accounts (send statements, support, backoffice, etc). It would be interesting to think about how technology can lower these costs, but cost isn't preventing anyone from participating.
Ah click-bait titles, so glad we can officially declare the 2010s as this century's decade of yellow journalism (or at least, it's worse now than ever before).
> Not all "chemicals" are evil.

A while ago Monsanto ran a series of condescending ads whose tagline was "without chemicals life itself would be impossible"

http://peterfeld.tumblr.com/post/51503279414/monsanto-ad-197...
Hands-on big data – fire a spark cluster on Amazon AWS in 7 minutes – lesson 1
There are some interesting ideas that could help with reading and writing programs:

from Bret Victor:

http://worrydream.com/LearnableProgramming/

and intentional programming from Charles Simonyi:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intentional_programming

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSnnfUj1XCQ
Human-powered hydrofoil
GitHub Flow T-shirt
$\sqrt{3}$ * $\sqrt{2}$ = $\sqrt{6}$??
How to install multiple versions of Go
LOD terrain
Arizona Cardinals vs. New York Giants
In this particular example, they don't.
They encourage you to define a Cookie struct, construct it with all the fields you know, pass it to the method with
gok.SetCookie(Cookie{name: "blub", duration: 5000})
and the method should decide what to do based on the fields available
"assurances that the drivers of these services have commercial insurance."

I'm not sure about the situation in California but I looked into how taxis were insured in Maryland and it turns out they basically don't have insurance. They are only required to have a certain amount of cash in an account that acts like insurance if something happens. I believe the amount was around $30,000 which is very very little if something legitimately serious were to happen. Which is why I find it funny when people think taxis are some how better insured than ride share services.
This is an interesting subject and a clever way to approach it, but post-Snowden, I can't help wondering what will happen to all the biometric data harvested from the hand measurement section.

You could also check your personal compatibility with the latest mega-devices by folding a piece of paper or card to the dimensions of the phone you're interested in (or using a similar-sized object)

It looks obvious that evolution will eventually select for longer thumbs
This is what I think, as well.

Car pooling/sharing is supposed to be sharing, i.e. split the cost. If you charge every pessenger individually you're trying to make a profit, not sharing or pooling.

Since the government considers the existing public transport infrastructure worthwhile to keep (buses, taxis), it doesn't want non-dependable competition to undercut it. Non-dependable meaning that these services aren't guaranteed to have a schedule, or to even transport you, like a bus will.