skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
For what it's worth, the nightly builds seem freely available still (http://synergy-project.org/nightly/)
I think that's why he mentioned using random amounts of time for disconnect and reconnect. If your malicious device guesses correctly for the simulation of "fake breaking" (let's say it only has 10% chance of doing that) and similarly for reconnecting (another 10% chance), then the malicious device only has a 1% chance of fooling the PC.

Not great, but certainly a lot better than a 100% certainty of fooling the PC.
This is the link to the site:
http://www.InterviewHound.com/
DigitalOcean and Sendgrid (both techstars companies) probably have valuations exceeding 100m at this point.
Sure. I hope you don't hear me suggesting that anyone who works out of 1871 must be playing house.
Trivially easy. If you want to believe it, it's true. If you don't want to believe it, it's false.
OK, but nothing in your comment implied that you were talking about the "Shellshock" vulnerability. I believe that a very recent OSX update patched this vulnerability, anyhow.
> Is there a similar "exercise" for programming?

Project Euler?
Lyft - https://www.lyft.com/jobs - San Francisco, CA
With the tap of a button, passengers in need of a ride are instantly connected to nearby drivers. We currently operate in cities all across the country, and with your help, we’ll take Lyft worldwide! If growth excites you, this is the place to be! We're looking for:

- Software Engineers
- Android Engineers
- iOS Engineers
- DevOps Engineers
- Data Architects
- UX Researchers
- Data Analysts
- Data Engineers
- Web Developers

Stack: AWS, MongoDB, PHP, Python, Go, AngularJS Interested? kiana a/t lyft d/o/t com. Open to coffee/tea or whatever to discuss. Incredible team, top medical & dental, open vacation policy, catered lunches, snacks, dogs, equipment, Lyft credits, support Visas, etc. -----
After hearing this story, I would be more likely to invest in this startup. The LOI pressure over the weekend was unacceptable. The fact that the founders held firm and did not fall for it is an indicator of future success for them. This was responsible, wise, business behavior. If the startup continues to operate like this, their chances for success are high, market allowing.
Isn't it well known that natural selection operates on communities? Doesn't seem very controversial to me.

Douglas Adams described it years ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCsHuoVABgI
Were either of those companies part of Techstars Chicago?
> As for the goto being essential: first, FSMs. They cannot be implemented more naturally and efficiently with anything else.

Lua has proper tail calls, which are the natural way to express FSMs there. Programming in Lua actually uses an FSM as an example when explaining the motivation behind tail calls:

http://www.lua.org/pil/6.3.html
> Memorization helps, but MAKING CONNECTIONS between concepts is _HOW YOU MEMORIZE EFFECTIVELY_.

This is the essence of the article. It is chunking.
It is actually worse than that, isn't it? By law, only individuals are protected against fraud. If any small business account is compromised, they don't have that protection.

Or am I just off in my understanding of fraud protection?
Typically the perpetrators in these cases will trickle the data out over a very long period of time, thus evading many alarm triggers.
This only works when feeding the data forward. When SAT-solving (i.e. working backwards), each clause has multiple possible inputs, meaning there is nothing to resolve away.
If you've got 2 people in your team, I don't think the math on spaces like 1871 works out; it's cheaper just to get an office. If you're just one person, you probably don't need any space at all.

We're shopping for offices right now for the new company, and Chicago offices are cheap.
It's probably less needed here since Lua's standard library is already pretty lean.
nsa works with contractors who have deep pockets because of their nsa contracts
I feel there's two levels of the constant fiddler, one where their fiddling is fruitful, one where the fiddling is not. The difference, I feel, basically comes down to how much you document, test, and automate what you do.

If treated like science instead of voodoo, messing with your computer becomes one of those "interesting things to be learning."
The Codebreakers: The Comprehensive History of Secret Communication[0] by David Kahn is probably the best book in this area. Be warned it sits on many bookshelves but due to its length few are the number that have finished it, none the less it is an extremely rewarding read. It has oddles and oddles of stories about cryptographers you have never heard of doing awesome things, including the history and personalities behind many of the Black Chambers of Europe.

It puts the Code Book to shame.

[0]: http://www.amazon.com/The-Codebreakers-Comprehensive-Communi...
My organization has mostly been seeing more reconnaissance than actual code execution as well. I suspect, or perhaps just hope, that this is because most of the current scanning is being done by white hats/gray hats. I suspect the people who actually want to infect machines aren't bothering with reconnaissance.
> The agency’s metadata collection program now targets everyone in the country old enough to hold a phone. The gargantuan data storage facility it has built in Utah may eventually hold zettabytes (1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 bytes) of information. And the massive supercomputer that the NSA is secretly building in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, will search through it all at exaflop (1,000,000,000,000,000,000 operations per second) speeds.

What? These numbers are clearly wrong.
Do see the "limitations" section:

github-backup is repository-focused. It does not try to back up other information from GitHub. In particular, social network stuff, like users who are following you, is not backed up.

github-backup does not log into GitHub, so it cannot backup private repositories.

Notes added to commits and lines of code don't get backed up yet. There is only recently API support for this.

The labels that can be added to issues and milestones are not backed up. Neither are the hooks. They could be, but don't seem important enough for the extra work involved. Yell if you need them.
I wrote about this here, see the section on CryptoAG. I provide quotes and direct sources in the footnotes.

A Brief History of NSA Backdoors. http://ethanheilman.tumblr.com/post/70646748808/a-brief-hist...
You made the right decision based on incorrect thinking.

Your math about dilution is completely wrong. That's a major issue right there. Then your math about expected success rate (claiming that TechStars has a negative impact on startups) is also completely off.

You did come to the right conclusion because you do not want to raise VC funding. That's it. That program is not for you, since your goals differ. From the tone of your post, you have your own way of thinking, fairly black and white. You naturally detected that there was a disconnect between your way of operating and TechStars'. So you didn't take the offer and my guess is TechStars is happy you didn't join either.

Good luck to your startup though. You are free to run your company whichever way you want (that's one of the beauties of startups).
In defense of the "cheaters", they are providing a benefit to consumers: produce at wholesale price.

I have no problem with this form of cheating, as long as it's clearly marked as non-local. The only downside is increased competition for local farmers, who have it hard enough as it is.
As for the 8 years and no exits, it should be noted that the average time to a successful acquisition is 7 years, 8.25 for IPO. Reference: http://techcrunch.com/2013/12/14/crunchbase-reveals-the-aver.... There are a few TechStars companies that are doing really well and should exit for >100M. SendGrid comes to mind.

Also, I think the section regarding TechStars success makes an assumption mistake:

"The national rate of failure for startups is 75-90%. So lets say it was a good year and Techstars Chicago received a 1000 applicants/startups to choose from. You know based on national averages that 750-900 of these companies will fail. That leaves 100-250 that will succeed. Techstars is only taking 1% of applicants, which is 10 startups. Unless Techstars is picking poorly, they are selecting companies that are positioned for success from day one. These startups would most likely succeed with or without Techstars."

The common assumption that 75%-90% of startups fail is usually regarding venture backed startups, not people who fill out the TechStars applications. I would wager that the if you looked at the failure rate of anyone who had an idea they wanted run through an accelerator, the failure rate would be much, much higher. What you should benchmark TechStars against VC performance.

(Disclaimer: I went through TechStars.)
From what I've read, there is no evidence of the hackers doing anything with the data they found yet. So your wife was probably the victim of some other hack (Home Depot?) or method (atm skimmer, etc.).
How does that eliminate the need for AI? Having a "standardized" format doesn't fix much of anything, except a bit of search engine display logic. It does nothing of the sort of eliminating the need for render code per app/site. Maybe some actual, solid, examples of exactly what a "standard API" would accomplish would help explain.
> ... Facebook iOS apps make liberal use of web views (and code push)

The Facebook apps absolutely do not use web code anymore. Their native code is conditionally enabled remotely.
HN Please Add Target Property to Links
Majority of sites that have links open them up in a new tab upon clicking. This behaviour would be great on HN (at least the main page) so that way I can click on a link, read it, and close it. This way I don't navigate away from HN, and don't have to worry about opening a link in a new tab myself.

Here's the quick obvious template with addition of the target property:
<a href="http://www.link.com" target="_blank">
My amazing link title here
</a>
But why are the problems systemic? Because some highly-placed people changed policy. Jail them. Don't jail every peon for following the rules as given to them (though they should not have done so). Jail every high-level person who didn't follow the rules as given to them, i.e., the Constitution.
EMVCo tokenization generates a token that can only be used with one-time cryptograms generated with a secret key that never leaves the device

You mean exactly like the EMV that is on every Canadian credit card since about 2007? NFC / Chip hold unique tokens that have on device cryptography, exactly as you've described. You can't "steal" anything of consequence via NFC or the chip, and that's why it was designed. Further while you say that it's for the vendor, the liable party for fraud is actually the credit card companies, which is exactly why they made EMV.

You seem to think this is all new because of EMVCo, however it is a standardization for the last mile: Google Wallet originally was doing what the credit cards themselves do, holding the secret key and identifiers on an NXP secure element. There are issues with that (largely carrier related) which is why the industry started moving to software-held tokens, as in the Apple solution. Presenting an iPhone token offers zero additional security over presenting a Canadian chip or NFC credit card, and that notion is rather ridiculous.
What are some break-out companies that have gone through Techstars Chicago? It doesn't take 7 years to see who's doing well, right?
I can't say why anyone downvoted you, but reading your comment I noticed a few things:

1. Your use of the term running. You make sweeping generalizations about 'running' and the people who run but you don't even define what 'running' is. Is it long, low intensity work like running more than 10 miles? Is it short, high intensity work like sprints? Is it a simple jog a couple times a week? Is it a hard run? Running is a blanket term for many different exercises and exercise styles.

2. You seem to conflate exercise with 'running.' I hate running, but I really enjoy exercise. I love lifting weights, playing sports, and climbing. I don't ever feel pain when I do any of those unless something is very wrong. Discomfort maybe, but discomfort is not pain.

3. Your whole point is hinged upon a logical fallacy. You say that nobody enjoys exercise because nobody really exercises. If they were really exercising, they'd be in pain constantly, and therefore, since nobody enjoys being in pain (an assumption you made in your post) nobody enjoys exercising. I don't hang with a lot of long distance people, but all the weightlifters I exercise with will tell you if you're in pain, something is seriously seriously wrong.

4. Your presumption throughout the post. Take the last sentence. You say that anyone who enjoys exercise has to learn to enjoy it. What is the point of that sentence? Are you speaking from experience? Are you telling people they're not really exercising? Later in this thread, you say you can't relate to the responses. So why are you making sweeping assumptions about people if you can't relate to things they say?

5. You're empirically wrong. There are a handful of responses already with anecdotal evidence to the contrary of everything you say. Millions of people exercise every day and love it, and nobody disputes that exercise is beneficial. It's really hard to understand where you're coming from.

The post was odd and confusing. It came off as very presumptuous and arrogant - like you know something about exercise no one here could possibly understand. A good number of people who come here exercise regularly and have learned all about it themselves, and know from their own experiences that what you're saying doesn't make much sense.
Specifically on the exit stats GrabCAD (Boston TS company from 2012) was acquired for 100 million -

http://betaboston.com/news/2014/09/16/product-design-startup...

And the real answer to this is that getting large exits takes a long time. Unless I'm mistaken YC, which is older than Techstars and has 50% more portfolio companies, has 3 exits over 100 million, OMGPOP, Heroku and Twitch. Granted the last one was a big one.
Spoken like someone from China or Russia.
> Troy sent over a Letter of Intent and explained that it needed to be signed and returned by Monday. I was very frustrated by this. You don’t send a legal document to someone over the weekend when their is no time for a lawyer to review it and demand it back by that same Monday. Whether it was the intention or not, this was a high pressure sales technique and just one more red flag.

This says it all to me.
How to figure out if you've built something people want.

1) Get someone to give you money. Hearing, "oh, I'd buy that!" is not the same as, "here's my credit card number."

2) Get them to give you money even though your product is not totally ready for prime time. Basically, even though your product is not done, not refined, difficult to use, etc., having your product is still so much better than not having it that someone is still willing to pay.

3) Short of getting someone to pay you, get them to get past some level of friction. If someone will invest their time to cross the chasm of not-user to user, it means they really want what is on the other side.

4) Get someone to use your product again. There's a reason online apps look at Active Daily/Monthly Users. If someone uses it, then uses it again... it must be something they want.

5) Don't have a product yet, just an idea... pre-orders (see point 1).

6) Can't even take pre-orders... You're just guessing. Build an MVP (or minimum sellable product if you're in enterprise). Don't try to take on the world. Find the minimum that can offer. Then go back to point 1.
Insofar as pushing new Meteor code up to the server will trigger an update to connected clients, it's hot code push. That's _not_ the same, technically, as a web view displaying a webpage that will update on the next page refresh.

Link bait? Maybe, maybe not. There are more interesting discussions to have. :-)
I agree that interval training is the way to go here, but it's definitely more nuanced than only targeting VO2max in zone 4. I'm going to talk from the perspective of cycling. This image is a reproduction of a chart from "Training and Racing with a Power Meter": http://lh4.ggpht.com/-bEo_kR-QvlM/UtSoVtZ1PlI/AAAAAAAAC2s/Q9...

You'll get some benefit across almost the entire spectrum almost no matter where you are focusing your efforts. You only see this diverge at the extremes: too easy, and you're just recovering; too hard, and you're only optimizing the systems that allow you to go really hard.

For some reason when I think of HIIT I picture people as trying to do Tabata intervals and you can see from that chart that you sort of run into a problem: you get the same level of benefit as if you just went slowly for a long time (this part is key -- the chart doesn't highlight how long you should expect to spend in the zone to get the benefit, whereas the training plans in the book make it clear that they expect you to sit in zone 2 for 2-4 hours at a stretch. Compare that to the 3-8 minute VO2max intervals for 3-6 repetitions.), while only really optimizing your ability to endure future Tabata intervals.

The real reason to be concerned with any of this at all is to focus your training and build up the appropriate ability without injuring yourself and without hampering your training down the road. Based on the previous chart, it seems like Z4 and Z5 have the most number of pluses, but they also build up the most damage as they are physically and mentally taxing -- you'll build training plans around 3-20 minute intervals in those zones instead, and fill in the gaps with Z2 work or rest.

If you're time-crunched, you may do abbreviated intervals at Z5, decrease the time you spend at Z2, and shift some of your training effort into Z3 instead. But Z3 starts to get hard enough where it impacts your recovery without giving you the most desirable adaptations. The ideal thing to do here is to increase your training time so you can spend more time in Z2, but we don't all have that luxury, unfortunately.
Home Depot is terrible at actually tracking their inventory. There app is useless when it tells you where the item is, only to find out that they actually don't have any in stock despite what their tracking system says.

I order easily 20x as many items from Amazon, and never had an email saying "oops, we actually don't have any in stock".
One of the most valuable skills someone can have, in my opinion, is not getting attached to really specific workflows or settings or tools. Instead I value being flexible and being able to adapt to whatever system I'm using.

In practice, this means that whenever I think about making some change to my software environment, my first impulse is to ask myself, "do I really have to change this?" This is a 180 from my old, college-age attitude, in which I not only wouldn't question the impulse, I would look for ways to automate making as many little changes and tweaks as possible. At the time I thought I was doing it because I was really increasing my productivity, when in fact I was just doing it because it was fun and fed into my self-image as a super l33t hacker guy. If anything, it was a distraction from whatever I was actually supposed to be working on.
Ok I respond to all comments as fairly and as honestly as I can. This one is just bs. I never framed anything as a fact. If I did I would explicitly say it's a fact and at least reference something legitimate to back it up.

This is just my opinion, which I believe in very strongly. Can I not be voted down for a differing opinion? Psh. Much Thanks doing for that btw.

Additionally you should note that none of the replies, yours included is a fact either. It's just their opinions which I respect even though I don't believe it.
Unless "apt-get install" starts deducting BTC from your wallet.dat, charging money for open source software isn't worth it. The revenue collected is minuscule, yet it reduces adoption and fragments the community. People use free forks instead of the "official" version.

There are better ways to monetize open source software: Consulting/support contracts. Bounties for features. Paid SaaS features. "Enterprise" features, such as turning Synergy into a mass remote admin tool. (I bet this would be handy in schools.)

It took me 30 seconds to think of those monetization ideas. I'm sure Nick Bolton can come up with better ones.
TS 2013 Seattle.

Easily one of the best things I've ever done. I'm not sure how to compare it to other Cities, but it was certainly a benefit to our company.

Edit to add:

The 3 month program was broken up roughly into three chunks:

1. Achieving Product Market Fit
2. Product Development
3. Fund Raising

Depending on the stage of your company, you spent more or less time in each of these phases. We were relatively mature from a product market fit standpoint, so we focused our time between Product Development, Signing Customers, and Fund Raising.

Add the TechStars network, the "prestige" of being in TechStars, and what essentially amounts to a 3-month pass to ask for help from businesses, and it felt like it was a great experience.
Whats Wrong with Markdown
Is the point here that Techstars "7-11% equity" claim is accurate given the range of possible valuations for their convertible note? Or is it just that it's not as inaccurate as the post claims?
Don’t Judge the Economy by the Number of Startups
Hyperbolic? Well, it is right at the beginning of The Making of the Atomic Bomb, and it's Rhodes' hook used to introduce the bigger story.

But even so, he's not wrong. Szilard did have (or claimed to have) a sudden epiphay, which according to Rhodes was significantly informed by H. G. Wells' "The World Set Free", which does foretell nuclear war and "a way to the future, death into the world" etc.
Techstars in Chicago is actually less than 2 years old. Excelerate labs was 2 years old at the time it joined Techstars, so the oldest company connected to that city is less than 4.

Also important to control for cohort size. These are 10 company classes. A 100 million+ breakout seems to be somewhere between a 1 in 100 and a 1 in 50 occurrence.
How do you count this? What's the rationale for saying that Excellerate was the next-best incubator after YC and 500s?
OCLP – Manual of Disobedience [Used in Occupy Central in Hong Kong]
The quora post is correct (note is a 100k convertible 3 mil - 5 mil cap, 20% discount). It appears that the OP misunderstood the terms.
If you're making your numbers, people will invest. If you're not, it often doesn't matter if they invest or not.
In "The Selfish Gene" Dawkins makes the point that you do not need to have children to pass on your genes. You get 100% of your genes from your mother and father, and you full-brothers and full-sisters also get 100% of their genes from your mother and father. Therefore, from the point of view of your parents, there is absolutely no difference between you having a child yourself, or you bringing in enough extra food that your sister's child lives through the next famine (whereas they would have died without the food you brought in). In both cases, your parents end up with 1 extra grandchild, because of you. And this is a possible explanation for the fact that in humans the more sons a woman has, the more likely it is for the son to be homosexual.

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

Biologists do not normally regard it is "altruism" if you give resources to someone who shares at least "50%" of your genes. (The 50% is in quotes because any 2 creatures that belong to the same species will have well over 99% of the same genes, and often 99.9% of the same genes. The "50%" actually refers to only to those genes that vary in your species. Dawkin talks about this, too, in "The Selfish Gene".)
Telling other people what they find boring is not opinion, and rather insulting. That's why you got downvoted.
What patterns would show up?