skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Funny, because from a European perspective I get the sense that SV libertarianism (accompanied by a complete lack of ethics) is leading to a backlash where people are demanding stronger consumer-, labor- and privacy- protection.

I would say the reaction in the real world tends to be "Oh, fuck, those regulations are good for something after all."
Cash Drawers for sale
It would not surprise me that "$1 million run rate" means "$1 million worth of products sold through our service," or some other actuarial abuse.
There are also mechanical solutions to this, old Saab cars for example required the gear to be in reverse before you can remove the key.
The pardon in 2013 was granted by the Queen, who was already queen and capable of granting him pardon when he was convicted. Her apology in that context could well be meaningful (I don't know whether she gave one alongside the pardon - the pardon could possibly be interpreted as one, but it's a slightly different thing as well).

The 2009 apology by Gordon Brown made somewhat less sense. I don't have any strong opposition to well-intentioned nonsensical theatrics, but I think that it can lead to confusion and that keeping in mind that an organization is a different kind of thing than an individual is important.
At the bottom, the site says "SmileBASIC will be available in Japan and other countries in respective languages.", which suggests to me that this will be available in both the US and Europe. At the very least, its predecessor, Petit Computer, is currently available on the US eShop.
You are right in a sense. I think people are demanding more flexible, realistic and more consumer favourable laws. Rather than the rigid structures that are in currently in place.
> Lets consider the rather remarkable backflips Standard ML and OCaml had to perform in order to make FP work with strictness and impurity.

What backflips are these?

Apart from the value restriction (which is a real albeit minor inconvenience; I find it about as annoying in practice as Haskell's monomorphism restriction, and each can be removed in principle, at the cost of making it harder to reason about the semantics/cost of using a variable), I'm honestly not sure what you have in mind.

On a tangent, I'm not sure when statically-enforced purity (as opposed to purity-by-default) and pervasive laziness (as opposed to laziness-as-a-tool) became culturally defining features of FP. The original FP language, Lisp (and even its "this FP stuff is great, let's have some more" cousin Scheme) is impure and strict. I'm grateful to Haskell for trying to answer the question "just how far can we push these purity and laziness ideas", but I don't think that complete purity or laziness are necessary features for FP. They're just tools in its toolbox. But then, I have always been inclined to pluralism.
Ebola: Liberia's President writes moving letter to the world
Usually Andreas Rossberger has written a good rebuttal in the comments.
Yes, and I have, but most companies don’t give enough importance to such projects.
Happy 10th Birthday Ubuntu (Scott James Remnant)
I think GP meant off the top of your head knowing the current-day conversion rate, which would be impressive; not simply doing the calculation which is certainly trivial, by what grade level, 3rd?
You don't need a sky full of drones to attack another country that has an army of drones. You need only a nuclear warhead delivered via cargo container to a strategic port by cargo ship.
I have seen this pattern on European flight, and I am starting to think this is a very dodgy, although completely legal, practice.
The author is the creator of clojure-py [1]. Pixie looks like a follow-up effort with strong influence from PyPy. The following post of his from over 2 years ago might provide some insight: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/clojure-py-dev/Lmhd0...

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3649883
It's not even news
Microsoft Touch Cover Mini Teardown
Piccolo, a tiny CNC bot
Yes. That does.
Show HN: Jumble solver [weekend fun project]
I would say that they're just asking for new laws to meet the need of the moment, and I'm not even very libertarian. I mean, I'm sure they'd describe them the way you have but it's not clear to me that there's substance to the characterization.
As someone who relocated from DC to SV two years ago, DC has always had a healthy startup scene that is, as you suspect, hampered severely by money flow. That's not to say it's not possible to fundraise where you are, it's just amazingly much harder to do so.
There's also the risk that aggregators will screw up something. On two separate occasions I saw someone arguing with hotel reception about a booking they made with an aggregator that the hotel never received. Customer says, "But I have the printout right here that says I paid in full!" Hotel says, "Sorry sir, you'll have to take that up with the company you paid. You didn't pay us."
Please don't put words in my mouth. All I said is that recent events make no change in how much you can (or cannot) trust your friends, despite your original apocalyptic comment about all trust now being subverted.

Governments and corporations have always engaged in social engineering. Facebook has been extremely successful at getting everyone to spy on themselves and their friends since 2004. MySpace and Friendster were less successful and earlier. The only thing that is new is the rate and scale of success.
Not so amazing. We have dozens of creeps sign up with us at Perfect Audience every day. It's a constant battle to block them out.
Smart meters in Spain can be hacked to hit the National power network
Why are salespeople fascinated with the Wolf of Wall Street?
Precisely. It is kind of amusing to see people write something like

> The Fed would create a new blockchain called Fedcoin. Or it might create a Ripple style ledger by the same name.

Do they not realize that if a central bank or any other entity wanted to create a convenient electronic currency system that is publicly accessible, it would be much simpler for them to just set up a boring old webservice with a REST API?

With an efficient implementation, the amount of hardware required to replicate a Bitcoin level of transactions is miniscule.
A 1975 switch probably doesn't have the same crash characteristics as a modern one, it's quite common that keys in older cars will penetrate your knee during a crash.
I want to question the importance of soundness in type systems. Suppose you could catch 99% of type-based errors instead of 100%, and in addition, use a compiler switch to see all the case statements where a class of a type is missing. The intended benefit of this system is that it accepts all correct programs. Correct meaning, the program runs and returns the correct answer.

Would such a language be viable? Or is it absolutely necessary to catch all possible type errors. In the past, tools like lint have been considered useful, although lint is not at all the kind of type system that I envision, namely a system that is in practice catching all the errors that ML catches -- it just doesn't (and cannot) guarantee it catches them.

The restrictive nature of static type systems today is legendary, but I wonder sometimes whether people realize how restrictive they are. If you can't make your idea work with functors or typeclasses, chances are good there's no way to get it to compile and you have to write functions in longhand.
Kippo Honeypot Video Gallery: Screencaps of Intruders at the Terminal
Marissa Mayer to outline the new new new turnaround plan for Yahoo
>The presidency itself is not a top-down institution, as many people in the public believe, headed by a president who gives orders and causes the bureaucracy to click its heels and salute.

What a bizarre world when an academic will say such a thing, almost comical really.
>"you can with some effort devise a scenario in which it would have been possible for NSA to influence the curve selection"

Let's try to be clear: The NSA (naming names, among them Jerry Solinas) worked directly with the Certicom engineers to choose the properties of the SECG curves (some of which became the NIST/X9.82/Suite B curves, there's a lot of parallel working/overlap). They helped to perform the computational search to find the seeds, which were manipulated so that the results had certain properties (some of which were concealed and then were misrepresented as "provably random"). That is not a scenario: that is actually what happened.

Given that, and how incredibly opaque the process was, why am I not screaming in horror running away from secp256r1 et al? Because the information I've found (except for the SIGINT Enabling Project's budget) all points to that manipulation and deception taking place to obscure properties of the curves which allowed patents for efficient implementation of the curves - patents the NSA had in return agreed to licence.

Also, they use it themselves, in their most critical systems (they are particularly careful about randomness and side-channels). Is that just a cover? (Are they really willing to sacrifice the IA mission for the SIGINT?) I have no evidence that it is. It probably isn't. It could be. (They also use Dual-EC_DRBG themselves, likely on the basis that since only they have the private key, "nobody but us" can break it - shame it's got a bias anyway!)

On balance, I think the NIST curves are probably OK to use for now. If secp256r1 was somehow "backdoored", I have absolutely no idea how, and on balance, I do not think that it is. I think it's more likely any negative manipulation was to deliberately standardise something that's fragile not because it's weak but because it's easy and naïve to make it weak: hard to do in constant-time, convince some people to use insecure blinding techniques, etc. (And yes, I agree RSA w/PKCSv1.5 is definitely not better - one may wonder if it's another example.)

So I'm not running away from P256. But I'd like to walk away from it and switch to something more rigid, safer and a bit faster soon - and hopefully we get that out of the CFRG process (to the grandparent comment: Curve25519 is one of the top contenders).

The slides are a bit of out context without the talk, by the way!
“1984” by George Orwell (Audiobook) Part 1 [video]
Its actually very easy to upgrade OpenBSD. There is lots of information on that page and you should read it all, but the actual process of the upgrade is quick.
I don't think it is legal.

"Firstly, you may not be charged a higher price for a ticket because of your nationality or where you are buying the ticket from."

http://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/travel/passenger-rights...
I wrote it in my guide: http://tuhdo.github.io/helm-intro.html#sec-2
The Fastest BigInt in the West
And they just watched that? It's sad. Should have prevented it. Make Kasakela understand they can't do that kind of things there.
That's just a scaremongering clishé, in reality you don't need anything other than good old TNT or a lot of magnesium to cut the ship in half.

Blow the port. You have just wrecked at least a digit percent of that nation's GDP, the cargo ship (net present value of its production capacity loss), especially if you can manage to get your container at the bottom of the stack, you disabled the port (if you blow it in a narrow place you cut off the port until they remove the wreck and/or dredge a new deep enough way).

And even if you don't achieve any of this, do it a few times and insurance premiums will rise considerably, people will be demanding "ACTION", and so on.

Of course, in a war, effective home propaganda can stifle these sentiments and you might be shooting yourself in the foot indirectly if you turn the civilian population against yourself.
I'm only 19, and even I remember a time when Netscape was still pretty popular, or at least a lot of people had Navigator installed. It was even mentioned or displayed in a lot of programming books, articles, and presentations. I wonder how he managed to avoid knowledge of it for so long.
I'd be curious to poll people's experiences, but, I can say that I had never heard the term until today and I've known this stuff for a number of years.

And it sounds silly and adds nothing. That too.

(edit: my education on this stuff was in the 00's. Sounds like it was more common in the 80s. I'd definitely support obsoleting the term entirely now, though! It adds unnecessary complexity.)
Yeah, many bootcamps have become like those "get rich late night informercials".
Couldn't Khan Academy be that WB equivalent of education? Are they not doing the same thing, just with a much much smaller production budget?
The big difference here is the principle of least privilege[1].

We could have built Boxifier so that it requires you to login into Dropbox and get back an access token to be used by Boxifier with the Dropbox API.

If someone wanted to get access to the data in your Dropbox account, they could do that with an access token (that they received when you authorized their app to access your Dropbox). Then they could use that token from any computer to download data from your Dropbox, without you ever finding out about it.

Boxifier works completely offline so it doesn't need any network access (which could be misused). If you want to be 101% sure you can setup a firewall rule and block all network access for Boxifier. This way you can make sure it cannot get data from your Dropbox folder and upload it to a remote location.

On the other hand, with an access token you have no control on how it is used outside of your computer. You may argue that you can always revoke it, but the reality of today's attacks is that they go stealth for a long time before you find out about them.

We used to work in the antivirus industry so that's why we care so much about security and privacy. Boxifier has been designed with security in mind from its early days.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_least_privilege
If you are really interested, http://nsl.com/ is a treasure trove - quite a few of the examples are extremely well documented, some or not, but there's a wealth of information there.

Specifically about graphs, you can look at:

http://nsl.com/papers/order.htm - topological sorting

http://nsl.com/k/tarjan.q - strongly connected components

http://nsl.com/k/loop.q - find loops in graphs

I think in all of these the graph is represented either as a list of edges or a dictionary of node->(list of nodes that it has edges to)
The U.S. President appoints about 3,000 high-level people in the U.S. Government. This includes all the cabinet members, the entire National Security Staff, the directors of the CIA, NSA, DIA, etc. He can fire most of them at will. The Buck Stops Here, as Harry Truman's desk sign used to say.

The quality of a president's cabinet appointments determines how well the government functions during their presidency. The problem is, where do you get 3,000 people able to perform at that level? They're usually drawn from the usual suspects. When that's not the case, the result looks like amateur hour. How many people are qualified to be Secretary of State? The pool of people who have been around enough countries and political leaders to operate at that level is small.

The role of the White House staff varies from administration to administration. Eisenhower probably had the most effective staff in many decades. He knew how to make a military staff work together, and modeled the White House on that basis. Eisenhower was very good at putting the right person in the right job. (How Eisenhower deployed Montgomery and Patton is a famous example.)

None of the recent presidents have had that kind of experience.
Hacked account => billing alarms get turned off. So you won't find out.
For anyone feeling nostalgic, I ported the open-source version of the original game to the web: http://micropolisjs.graememcc.co.uk
It compiles to bytecode but it doesn't compile to python bytecode. The bytecode used by pixie is custom and also interpreted by pixie itself[1].

[1]: https://github.com/pixie-lang/pixie/blob/master/pixie/vm/int...
There are two basic causes of this, and they apply to a lot more than just airfare:

1. Price discrimination based on market segmentation. As others have described, the consumer behavior of an international traveler is that they are willing to pay more, so why not charge them?

2. Badly set foreign exchange rates. Companies that sell internationally will use an exchange rate internally when setting prices in a foreign currency that are typically very beneficial to themselves. Sometimes this represents the inherent risk in doing business in a foreign currency. Other times, it is used as a dumping tactic so they can claim they set their prices by simple conversion (Strauss Israel, for example, uses an internal rate of 4.8, which the shekel has never reached in all of history).

The former is the reason why flights in Brazil, Thailand are expensive when purchasing abroad. The latter is the reason why Malaysian or Colombian flights are expensive. Better advice is to simply know that most credit cards (both US and european) automatically convert charges, and you'll get a much better rate (typically 1-2% commission on the forex rate of the bill date) by finding a way to make the purchase in the foreign currency, rather than USD or EUR.

EDIT: because I can't spell properly.
> If you have any loose ends to tie up, pending sales, or earnings left in FOBO, be sure to do so in the app, so we don’t have to have the FOBOTs track you down to get you paid.

I'd like to check on that, since I sold some stuff on FOBI a while ago. Unfortunately the app doesn't seem to exist in the App Store. It shows up in my iPhone's spotlight results, but the App Store page never loads.
It's the kind of unhelpful, overly simplified dismissal that HN is known for.

You should recognize that your opinions about how people should use your favorite programming language are not "more or less objectively true".

Context: the post I'm replying to used to end with a complaint that people would downvote something that's "more or less objectively true", and a request that people should explain why. I can't downvote, but I can explain.
No, this doesn't change much. Before MOOCs we still had all the textbooks authored by same professors which anyone can buy for less than $100 and learn the subject on their own. MOOCs are very much a video version of those textbooks.

The major missing component of MOOCs is intensive homework problems that often requires you to consult professors in their office hours. And the time professors/TA spend in checking your homework.

The core thing to understand is that real learning doesn't happen when you are listening to lectures but it happens when you are working on homework and doing exercises where you struggle through and occasionally have to go back to professor's offices to get insight.

But the truth is that the price of education is mostly justified as "certification service". When you have degree from Stanford it means someone very reputable is backing up your claim that you have learned thing or two about something. That's mainly what you are paying as "tuition fees". MOOCs are relatively much weaker as certification services and hence chances of them getting trusted is same as chances of trusting degrees from many other "online universities".
It's interesting how many parallels the US government shares with other governments around the world, like Turkey. There is an existence of a "deep state", or "state within a state". I often wonder if a sufficiently sophisticated AI would do a better job of running our government than the system that we have in place.

If you think about it, having AI run our government is the next logical step, and a natural evolution. All governmental systems are inhuman systems that self-correct.
Hi Folks..

Have been a dormant user of Ycombinator for some time. I have been researching on this topic for the last 4-5 years. To be really honest I think TripHobo.com does not fit SomeCallMeTim's use case. I think Roadtrippers.com may fit the bill. Having said that, I am a big fan of TripHobo.com. I have seen the portal evolve for sometime and I see it as the closest solution to fixing travel planning
I have my reasons here:
1) The only source which gives you draft itineraries created by other users. This is immensely useful as i can see what other are planning to my destination. I planned a trip to Rome using TripHobo.com and i find it immensely useful..
2) If you hit Plan my trip button, the TripPlanning functionality is awesome. You can add almost all attractions in a city to your trip plan and you can hit the optimize button, you get an automated route planned. What TripHobo claims is that the route plans generated are not only optimized for distance but also for opening and closing times of attractions. I think this is really cool.
No one does it so easily.. not even google!
3) The ease of usage: This is the most easy to use portal for trip planning.

Limitations:
I think there is only one limitation as SomeCallMeTim pointed out..
Limited number of cities .. I counted the number of cities manually in August last year, i could find 171 cities to which i could plan trips to. I counted again on 5th october 2014 and i found that there were 243 cities. Today i saw that they have changed their interface to a search bar and hence I am not able to determine how many cities are enabled on Triphobo.com.. If they go on increasing the number of cities to which one can plan his/her trip to say 3000-4000 cities around the world.. i think TripHobo.com will have fixed travel planning for sure. My 2 cents!

I am also tracking folks like roadtrippers, mygola and tripomatic. To me these (along with TripHobo) are the leading 4 travel planning players today. MyGola has been a disappointment..Tripomatic is difficult to use..Roadtrippers and TripHobo are i think getting some serious traction .. Roadtrippers has primary focus on roadtrips whereas TripHobo is a holistic leisure travel solution if they are able to scale their content..
CGPGrey did a video on this subject recently https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU.
But even this video isn't too optimistic about the number of jobs left to humans.
WTB tutorial :D
By this logic NSA also is responsable for all buffer overflow attacks as well.

At the end of the day, there are just things that are easy to get wrong, it's not all a big conspiracy.
Gutmann's cryptlib (if you stick to the high-level API, which is documented as such).

It's "anciently conservative" (not based on fancy new ciphers, you can like it or not), by a competent cryptographer, and battle-tested.
In addition to the Ergodox, Massdrop has another keyboard that requires soldering available right now, which resembles the shape of the HHKB.

https://www.massdrop.com/buy/infinity-keyboard-kit
Infinix Zero Review – Hospital Automation Made Easy by Panasonic
There is always idea of Gradual Typing [1] which has been implemented with varying degrees of success. There are also a large set of static analysis theories/tools which can help here.

It is also worth noting that if you dont want (global) type inference, you can get far in a language with permissive casting, type annotations and local inference. The results aren't a panacea though.

> Suppose you could catch 99% of type-based errors instead of 100%, and in addition, use a compiler switch to see all the case statements where a class of a type is missing.

I am not quite sure what you mean by this. Care to elaborate? (In general, with inference systems, missing type information is hard(ish) to localize. So pointing out where exactly a type error occurred is non-trivial)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gradual_typing
Well, much of this shadow government consists of the executive branch. Obama is still obviously wholly accountable, as he can likely issue executive orders unconditionally changing the policy and operation of agencies at will. Of course, he has to make good appointments and get reliable people to carry out any semblance of that, and most of his work has to be indirect. But, like the CEO of a large corporation, the job is whatever it takes to get it done, and is judged by the results without regard to the difficulties.