skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Tl;dr - three trends look like they will form a perfect storm - mesh networks, bitcoin/blockchain and Autonomous agents.

It's true - they do look like they will usher in a new world. It's pretty damn hard to justify the architecture of sending my wife's photos to SF just so they can appear on our neighbours Facebook feed.

But the technology feels too immature. I just wish I could tell if I would have felt the same way about perl cgi scripts in 94 - but I was too young then to know the difference.
There is a fully fledged implementation for Node.js https://passwordless.net (Disclaimer: I'm leading the development)
What do you mean? AirBnB is for renting out stuff that is actually yours, Uber is for getting something to you with the press of a button.
Is Microsoft Corporation About to Pull the Plug on Surface?
> email, which is decentralized

Even email is centralised these days. Look how many providers host over 90% of people's primary email address.
Also worth of note: the Cox-Zucker machine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cox–Zucker_machine
I've also seen this behavior pattern a lot. I think there is a subtle line between disassociating yourself from evangelical Bitcoin fanatics and pushing a technology without really understanding it.

Also, isn't blockchain style computing obscenely inefficient? It would be great if someone well versed in these matters could weigh in.
I would argue that the gap between a centralized authority and a blockchain is a lot less that the gulf between a blockchain and a mesh network.

Mesh networks are awesome, they have a life of their own and an be split apart and stitched back together endlessly.

Blockchains, on the other-hand, are big and bulky, require an extraordinary amount of co-ordination between the maintainers and the miners and the clients to ensure everyone is running the right software. Many are so big that more people simply defer to a company to a handle their interactions with the chain - and as these companies grow they simple forgo the blockchain altogether in many instances and simply move bits about in their own database.

Also, can anyone offer an insight into the benefits of decentralized voting and storage? I can already decentralize who I rely on for storage by trusting different parties different amounts. There seems to be no benefit for everyone to trust the same blockchain for storage - and plenty of issues (hard forks etc.)

As for voting, the existence of a vote requires the existence of a group that wishes to vote (and a co-ordinated campaign.). Many countries have decentralized counts (e.g. each region votes separately) - and may separate organizations and individuals can become monitors to ensure the integrity of the ballot box and count. What then is the advantage of moving the actual vote to the blockchain?
So not only was it morally ambiguous, you didn't even benefit financially?

All in good fun I suppose...
> Yeah, those assembly-writing badasses making $500k at HFT funds are really hurting.

Yeah, all ~100 of them.

Better normal Java than it's scripting counterpart though (the assembly of the web).
Why do you wish to sell the app?

Why don't you link to the apps on google play or the app store?
I don't think that's the promise of mesh - it's more the local networks will share very small amounts of data relative to say a current peer1 but large compared to the usual daily browsing habits.

I guess it would be useful to gauge the size of local vs international traffic - Facebook does not need to send my data to SF unless I am in contact with someone in SF. Video uploads and downloads are similar. Most of my daily traffic almost certainly has a strong correlation to my physical location.
Personally, if we can find ways to create reliable, low latency mesh networks capable of transferring decent amounts of data, I would find that exciting.

With unreasonably recurring failures, there is little incentive for mainstream usage, as current networks are extremely reliable.

With excessive latency, there is little usability, as data may become outdated before being consumed, thus prohibiting real time applications (ie: one of the big reasons that we use computers).

With little bandwidth, little data can be sent, thus limiting the overall usefulness, especially in a day and age where data just keeps getting bigger.

But if you have all three, you can effectively have an internet that is extremely difficult to censor or alter, that is capable of connecting multitudes of users, that can handle most uses. And that, my friends, that will be the day.
This is still nothing more than a password...it's essentially just a password that is emailed to you. I've never understood why we can't instead authenticate ourselves to our browser or device, and get people out of the habit of authenticating to individual websites. This would eliminate phishing and greatly enhance security. Touch ID is a big step in this direction, but still can't be used for websites.

When authenticating, the browser could just send the user's public key, and if a user with that key is in the system, it replies with a session key encrypted with the user's public key. If browser companies would get their act together, we wouldn't have as many authentication issues as we do today.
Thanks for pointing me to that book - it sounds like something I'd read.

Yeah phased arrays have probably been the rule for decades at that price-no-object level.

Even at the consumer level, there have been phased-array marine -sonars- (e.g. Interphase brand product line) for at least ten years for "only" 4-digit prices. Spatial resolution is of course tied to the number of elements but they do present more information that your typical 1-d "fish finder."
Here's a good discussion of static typing in Common Lisp:

http://www.lispforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=191

TL;DR is that many CL implementations will check types at compile time, but for appropriate speed and safety settings, they will also generate code that checks types at runtime, too.
I think youre talking about timewait states et al. On linux thats dominated by the MSL, which is a compile time constant of 60 seconds. You mentioned sysctls, those are primarily tcp_tw_reuse and tcp_tw_recycle (which is the worlds worst sysctl). Regardless, its a couple KB per connection. How many hundred thousand do you want to support?
Model for Massively Parallel Computation, or Theory of MapReduce
Can pCells be used as a mesh?
Whether you can upgrade and how much you can put in varies by machine, but Apple publishes instructions for upgrading your own RAM: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1651, http://support.apple.com/kb/ht1270
> And governments can’t shut them down.

This is not true. Mesh networks are vulnerable to electronic warfare. Governments can use measures usually reserved for electronic warfare[1] to disrupt all signals except the ones the government needs. This is a standard capability of most modern militaries. Even the United States Marines, probably the least sophisticated among American branches of the military when it comes to intelligence and technology, have radio battalions that can do this.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_warfare
I have no notable background in physics and cannot identify whether this experiment is a valid analog of Hawking radiation, but it's amazing to me that one could substitute that many conceptual components and still have a strong result.

Then again, the whole process of a billionth-of-a-degree condensate flowing at high velocities to create multiple distinct internal sound barriers that could even approach an effective model of an event horizon is a testament to the patience and creativity of the physicists involved. And when you study something so difficult to observe, you definitely need creativity and patience, right?
So the first answer is that you are designing for larger scale (# of photos and # contributors). Cool.

2. I think needs to be better. Is there a place people are trying to do this already but they aren't being served well by the product?
Whether we like it or not email or its successor is bound to be the natural authentication platform. Something is happening here, I'd pay attention.
Ask HN: Early Stage Startup Product Advice
We are trying to figure out how to increase engagement on our website. In talking to our users that have created accounts, they always say that they are very interested in using our product and they are planning to use it but they have not yet because they are busy and don't have the time. Does that mean our product doesn't solve a strong enough problem? Is this a UI/UX issue? Product is similar to HackerRank. Help plz!
As I pointed out above, if you actually look at the study itself (not the NY Times article), the participants didn't "kick an antibiotic resistant infection" as you put it. All they did was have reduced bowel movements and better self-rated health.

Interestingly the study did a stool test for C dificile before the study (to see if the participants actually had the infection) but they didn't do any stool analysis after the study.

All in all, there are a lot of deficiencies with this study and it doesn't really tell us much.

And yes, the placebo effect has been shown to reduce diarrhea (as I pointed out above). This is expected, as the HPA axis (the body's stress system) is one of the systems that controls bowel movement.
VB.NET is no more dynamic than either Java or C#. (Less so than C#, if anything: it doesn't support dynamic variables.)
Interesting, how does this relate to FRP? The examples at http://simplectic.com/projects/underscore-transducer/ are similar to hello-world examples in Bacon.js or RxJS.
The first place I'd look would be the UX around your onboarding process and if it encourages immediate use of the product. Without further details it is tough to say.
Karl Marx has a memo for you, prices are arbitrary and RAM is cheap.

http://www.mouser.com/Semiconductors/Integrated-Circuits-ICs...

$2.50 for a 128 MB, single chip, qty 2500.
The email, as a method of exchanging digital messages is not centralized. Now, it's true that a few providers host most people's email addresses, but there is not a single authority controlling the flow of the email messages.

If the case of a social network, you can't just switch and still remain connected with everyone else, because the provider controls the flow of your interactions. However, you can very easily switch your email provider, or even host your own, and as long as your friends still have the same emails, you're still "connected". I wouldn't call email centralized, but I agree is not decentralized 100 percent.
Reverse Engineering the We Heart It API
I'll stick to my Casio's trusty numpad.
I still thought it was fun, but it does do pretty well at deliberately choosing "bad" pieces. With enough strategy and playing through just a couple times you can exploit weaknesses against it, however. While being very good, I was still able to score 5 lines even though it was trying to to force me out of it. As to the proof, I do believe your guess that a player can always score a line given sufficient depth. My initial thought at approaching it is to consider that the pieces must all have only 4 blocks in their structure. This is a tight limiting factor which basically gives you that you need half the width in number of pieces to get across for the most part. What makes it tricky is the shortcoming* of the algorithm you used to define the worst piece available at each turn. It, with reasonable consistency, gives you a great number of the same piece until you cross a certain boundary, so with the Z shaped pieces, for example, you can construct a row, then when you get to the last one to finish a line, it switches to straight pieces, which you can similarly line up all the way across. Repeating this process leaves you with a "hole" that is two block-widths across from very nearly top to bottom, essentially guaranteeing that you can score at least one line in the process. I'm not sure how I would formalize it exactly, but that was the strategy I employed to get 4-5 lines per game.

*shortcoming may not be the best description of the algorithm, but a better choice escapes me at the moment.
I KNEW my 1990s muscle memory for Graffiti for Newton OS would come in handy again someday!
Boy, it was dumb of them to put stream in the name (Stream Control Transmission Protocol) if it wasn't capable of acting in a streaming manner.

Oh wait, SCTP can act in an ordered-with-congestion-control mode (aka stream-oriented), and the userland interface to it (the most basic form of which is just plain old Berkeley sockets) does in fact implement packet assembly (of course, no matter what, if you want packets bigger than the MTU something's gonna have to disassemble and reassemble them on some level of the stack anyways).

Not to say that SCTP is a practical solution given the glacial pace of acceptance of any new network protocol at its level, but let's not start spreading FUD about its capabilities.
Do you still work for NASA, and did your paper succeed?
Looks like the old Palm input, back in the 90s.
So KeePass?
Google acquired the domain when they bought On2, a video code company which was originally called the Duck Corporation. @yegg (founder of DDG) tried to buy it from Google in 2010. He gave his take on it the last time this was posted to HN:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4817812
You should put an option when people ask a question to allow you to post it on your public website. It would be interesting and might attract more traffic to your site.
microwaves are at the wavelength that 'excites' / 'wobbles' / 'resonates' (pick your analogy of ball and spring physics) the O-H bond. H2O is entirely O-H bonds (give or take) and hence microwaves heat food vicariously via the water in it (heating up day old rice from the fridge is easier/better if you put a few mL of water in it). Peroxide peroxide is H-O-O-H so plenty of O-H bonds to excite and hence decompose...
I'd say Go is becoming mainstream pretty quickly. I think Clojure isn't far away and Rust is showing big promise. I doubt based on probably under-informed personal observation that Haskell, Scheme or Julia will ever become widely adopted.
I learned how to sail without a rudder. The trick is to use the force differentials between the fore sail (jib) and main sail to steer. I did this on a 20 foot boat with a crew of 4 people, and could tack, jibe, and safely pick up a man overboard.
I'm curious as to what anyone is speculating regarding the mission durations. It seems that a small reusable craft shouldn't necessarily have a requirement that it stay in orbit for one or two years.

Since the three tests that were done all had long durations, I really wonder what the mission profile for this thing is.

Some sort of readiness is needed, that is, it needs to wait in orbit, rather than relying on a launch schedule.

Launch -> deploy a payload -> wait -> capture a payload (either the one already deployed or some other one) -> return to Earth

The longest shuttle mission was 17 days, and they deployed and recaptured two satellites in that time.

It's possible these are used as a platform for servicing existing Air Force/government assets in space.

If you look at Hubble as an example, it required servicing every 2-4 years. Space instruments suffer pretty steady degradation, and various transient events can cause that to degradation to accelerate.

If you spend a few billion to launch an instrument, and you need to replace it entirely every few years, you're spending a lot of money on replacements, but it may only be small parts that need to be replaced or repaired. Having a "pick up truck" of modular, drop-in components waiting in orbit could greatly extend the life of surveillance equipment and reduce the amount of downtime (either out of commission, or operating with reduced coverage).
You must listen to this before your pitch, if you haven't all ready :)

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/533/i...

Longtime This American Life producer Alex Blumberg decided, a while back, to try and start his own business. He also decided to record the whole process, including investor meetings that go off the rails, and other tense and awkward moments that business reporters usually don’t get access to.
The first thing to strike me is the double-edged sword which is the current massively profitable status of the business. Any sane executive will be very careful about doing anything to harm a massively profitable business. If they are not careful that would mean that they were not fulfilling their fiduciary responsibilities to the owners.

Having said that the current leaders are trying to be very forward thinking and say we have to get deeply competent in technology because the world is changing under our feet. And for that I commend them. And, the current profitability certainly gives them the firepower to get ready for the next stage of their business.

If I were the owners I would do a multi-pronged approach. I would create a venture fund to do seed and series A venture investments and I would find the 10 most promising ideas and teams that could disrupt or replace my current business and invest from $250K to $2M in each of them, depending on the stage. I now have a chance of participating in a future big winner. And, for those ideas that don't work out I create another fund to do acquisitions of those start-ups that have forged really competent teams. It becomes a means of identifying really competent technical people and knowing that they have experience in the challenges of my media space.

In parallel to that I would go ahead and build out an internal technical organization like you have described but take it kind of slow, especially with the lines that generate the current massive profits.

Your position internally will, as you have already discerned, require the utmost of tact and team building even while you seek to make the decisive moves that the new technologically driven business requires.

You will need vocal support from the very top of the organization, expressed through your title, your budget, your reporting line, and inclusion in strategic planning sessions at the highest level in the organization. Otherwise it won't work. Those executives leading really profitable business lines will resist your "crazy" efforts to remake their golden-egg laying division, and they may be right! And, those who are already becoming obsolete and seeing their business model undercut by technologically sophisticated competitors will be fighting you out of fear.

If you can forge a vision that uses the units hard-won domain expertise and super-charge it with technology you will be the hero, otherwise you face opposition at every turn and you need authority from the very top to succeed.
Don't Fire Your “Worst” Customers.  Hire Them a Psychiatrist Instead
Oculus have been doing something similar with their order tracking for quite a while now.
I have a lot of fondness for Yii as it introduced me to MVC and moved me from a designer into a developer. When I went on to learn Ruby and Rails everything seemed to click together and I recognised quite a lot of what Yii had taken from Rails.

That said, I get the sweats when I have to wade into an old Yii-powered app that I wrote. Entirely faults of PHP (lack of symbols, array(...) declarations, semicolon-itis) and my lack of experience back then (no testing, fat controllers). I do miss the simplicity of deploying a Yii app, and its speed compared to Rails. The creator, Qiang, is a PHP whizz.
> The next race will be a street circuit in Austin TX

Huh? I'm pretty sure it's going to be at the Circuit of the Americas.
It's only seemingly inefficient. It's basically the price you have to pay for maintaining a trustless distributed ledger.

If you were to run an organization/bank/Paypal clone that maintains a centralized ledger, it would be just as expensive (if not more), because you'd have to hire thousands of employees, compliance officers, lawyers etc. You probably see what I'm getting at.

There's always going to be a price for maintaining accurate accounting ledgers. The only questions is where those expenses are going to be pushed and whether it's going to be your payroll or your power bill.
> I would like to know the reasoning behind this. It sure seems clever but what is the advantage that this provides?

Since C provides very little metaprogramming capabilities, this was the only way to obtain what I wanted: Most (if not all) other testing libraries/frameworks require some boilerplate to start testing (namely: defining your `main` function, which calls all of your tests). Additionally, every time you write a new test, you must remember to add it to your `main` function.

I decided that those two things were bothersome enough, so I wrote a proof of concept that evolved into a large project with tons of useful features beyond that.
http://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA407255

This report explains the background, scope and goals of the X-37 project.

The title of the second part of the report sounds interesting: "Is Space the next Pearl Harbor?"
There are two ways to secure the blockchain with a guaranteed level of security. Proof-of-work, and proof-of-stake. I use the second term very broadly, and I'm not referring to the consensus schemes that NXT or BitShares use. Anybody who says otherwise today regardless of the "marketcap" of their coin doesn't know what they're talking about from a CS/game-theory point of view, or they're ignoring the costs of proof-of-work schemes.

Proof-of-work is expensive and will ultimately be replaced with better consensus schemes that require no mining, namely those that only rely on cryptographic signatures, a good balance of incentives and penalties, and an underlying byzantine consensus algorithm.

Disclaimer: I'm one of a handful of people working on new consensus algorithms.
my sincere advice (as an ex-chemist) is - don't. i suspect you'll want to do something 'fun' and 'fun chemistry' can go very bad, very quick. go fast and break things has never, never been a motto in a chemistry lab (even the dragon tail stories in the manhattan project were despite advice to the contrary).

most of a senior/PG chemistry degree is about learning how to work with this stuff and it's not book learnin' so much as translating what should happen, into what could happen and then what shouldn't ever ever ever happen. this is best done in a practical mentor-tutor fashion. even saying that, most uni's are really crap at protecting their chemistry students. I damn near killed myself _after_ getting my PhD and didn't really learn how to analyse the risks until i worked in industry (which leveraged 8+ years of theory)...
It gives you the best of both worlds: Non-JavaScript user agents, like search bots and scrapers, can still understand your page (as if it's rendered on the server), but you don't need to send redundant markup on each page view (because the client can render the new page with just a diff).
Keystroke dynamics
The thing with niche languages such as Haskell is that not everybody has to use them, but we ideally would get to enough critical mass that the ecosystem is sustainable, new and better tools are continuously being developed, and it's pretty beginner friendly. Clojure is probably at that stage right about now, Haskell doesn't quite feel that way, but it's getting better (more docs, guides, books, services like Stackage etc)

Basically it's very nice when a language gets enough traction that the lack of users is no longer a concern for its long term prospects.
yup. wonder who has those patents now?
What proof-of-stake blockchain is presently working and stable without checkpoints?

Are there any (serious question)?
1Password doesn't do that.