skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Nice! Screen looks a bit off, but the hardware design is streets ahead of the main competitor: Apple Watch. These round devices look way better. A bit big, so maybe it'll only work on men, but round is a significant advantage.
The accompanying photo on the website is of a dude on a motorcycle.

http://www.lg.com/global/gwatch/index.html#urbanstyle5

Hopefully he's wearing a single-ear bluetooth or something in the ear you can't see and getting his turn by turn that way, but the inset of a screenshot and the highly visible watch on his wrist to match certainly give an implied bit of poor usage advice.

In any case, more of a failure of the website marketing team than the watch or Android Wear designers, but it is a valid point.
So much anti-Russian sentiment - why is Hacker News so full of politics!? Are NSA or GCHQ any better? The thing is that other countries don't trust stuff built in the US anymore and you will see more and more of these.
somewhat related: ignition! http://library.sciencemadness.org/library/books/ignition.pdf - everything you wanted to know about liquid rocket fuels. foreword by asimov.
Wonder if they will get a nastygram from Casio. "G-Watch" / "G-Shock".
Almost. It almost got me.
Apparently it was too long; you didn't read the most interesting bits: sage and electric shock have a measurable impact on improved brain functioning.
I had thought I remembered reading somewhere that C++11 had made C++ a superset of C (I haven't used C++ in anger in quite a long time), but from further reading while it has closer aligned with C it hasn't actually subsumed it.
T-Pain Live in the NPR Studio – Without Auto-Tune
On the 4th or 5th tab, the note ...

"Idea for an all new park that delivers fun, friendship and safety for children of all ages."

... made me wonder, what have I done today to change the world in a good way? [Spoiler alert: sarcasm]
Oh, just 250+ citations on nicotine here: http://examine.com/supplements/Nicotine/
Not quite on topic but my favourite is the watch face image for 10 Greek St (a great restaurant in London's Soho)[0]

It's reminding of a supper reservation but as many (I'm sure including the designers!) know, 10 Greek St doesn't take reservations for supper[1]

Tiny thing but suggests that whoever did the creative here had a sense of humour.

[0]: http://www.lg.com/global/gwatch/index.html#outdoorstyle6
[1]: http://www.10greekstreet.com/about.php
That's the magic I'm talking about because it's not true; memory is memory and stack memory isn't treated specially by the processor. What it does have is a store buffer, which applies to all memory accesses and is what store forwarding uses to bypass L1.
support press freedom in the most suppressed countries
Sincere question -- is your concern looking away from the road, or looking down at your wrist? I take glances out of the direct line of my travel all the time, to check lanes around me, look at the speedometer, tachometer, fuel level, etc.

I do find it surprising that the pictured model would wear it on the right arm, though, since it's much easier to take your left hand off of the handlebar -- you don't tend to need to use the clutch when cruising on a highway, whereas (unless you have a throttle lock) your right hand will typically stay on the bar.

I do think motorcycle safety is important, but your reaction seems a little overboard to me. Having navigation on a small screen on my wrist seems like a relatively nice perk.
Wouldn't be the worst thing, but you definitely wouldn't wear it on your right wrist (throttle). 99% of the time if you ride one-handed, it's the left hand (clutch) you lift up.
I made the mistake of heavily using this after delicious went away (and is now back :S). I'm at a loss at what I should do now.
The Microsoft Band is for you.
Start a hacker bootcamp in a low-cost country, e.g. India, Philippines.

Hackers pay a reasonable fee ($10k I imagine, or less) for a year of accommodation, cooked meals and other basic luxuries. And fast internet access. They being their own computer,

And then work on whatever they like, for how many hours a week they like, with whoever they like.

The idea is programmers could use this a 'working sebatical' with no pressure to make money, or the usual living cost pressure in western countries.

They could get a start up going, or contribute to open source, or just learn lots of cool technologies, or whatever. They can escape Enterprise development, WTFs and tight deadlines and fall in love with programming again. And maybe make a bit of money or start a business in the process.

The $5m is to set up the building with accommodation, office space, place to eat etc.
But its Javascript Object Notation - Notation in this case implies text - if your storing it in something other than text it's not JSON.

From Wikipedia: JavaScript Object Notation, is an open standard format that uses human-readable text to transmit data objects consisting of attribute–value pairs.
Aren't you a mod here? You should ban me, or whatever the proper punishment is.
A common libertarian view is that marriage (gay and heterosexual) should not be the domain of government. http://reason.com/archives/2014/08/19/libertarians-gay-marri...
This would slow down the general case where the size is variable, but you could combine it with __builtin_constant_p in GCC.
I'd buy a bunch of land in Africa, setup a wildlife preserve, solar farm, and small community.
Awesome! Please don't be afraid to ask questions. That's what we made CodeHive for. For everyone to level up in their journey as a developer. Cheers :)
"They did improve after they got a caffeine drink, but only up to the level the non-users had achieved without caffeine.

When the non-users were given caffeine to drink their reaction times increased but they also became more jittery and anxious."

Seems like an important part of the quote.
>Kasparov had the benefit of playing all those games as well. ;)

You missed his point, its not about practice. The top chess players often study their opponents to understand what types of moves they make and in what situations they make those moves. If Kasparov were to play any other player in highly ranked matched both players would go and study their opponents move to get an insight in the way they think.

The "unfairness" in the Deep Blue match (or what made the Deep Blue match unlike other top-level play Chess), is that Deep Blue had a deep understanding of Kasparov's moves, but Kasparov had no information about Deep Blue's moves. And to make matters worse, any information he had built up in the previous games were erased once they tweaked the code.
Well the point is I am much more comfortable with the idea of them infiltrating something than with the idea of them being total impostors.

Not entirely comfortable, though.
This clearly isn't an especially rigorous analysis

Not especially, no.

Data samples consisting of two or five articles per keyword??

And 2 out of all 5 penalized "female" entries have nothing to do with social issues etc. (one is about female mice, another about mixed-sex animals).

Comparing stories on social justice against ARM and Intel is also cherrypicking, because we don't know whether this is supposed to be a bias against social issues, or just non-tech stories in general, or something else.

And what's your methodology of choosing keywords?

"Female" - which made it onto your list - gets penalized 5 to 1, all right.

But then in case of "girls" (omitted from your list) it's actually 0 - 3, telling us a different story.

And unlike with the "female" bunch, none of these articles is about mice. They're about how girls get better grades, how to get them into engineering and why it's easy to teach them code.

"Women" (plural) lose 13 - 4 and so the keyword is featured on your list, but "woman" (singular) wins 7 - 2, and surprise surprise, it's absent.

"equal", as a word stem (counting "inequality", "unequal" etc.) - penalized 2 times, not penalized 3 times. Holy smokes Batman, it rates better than "x86"!

Statistics, huh ;)

If this submission gets penalized, do we count it as bias against social justice, or junk science
Can somebody give arguments for using Racket or CL for web dev? Whenever I evaluate Lisps I end up choosing Clojure because to me it seems to be the most practical to develop web apps in.
The Linux kernel doesn't allocate memory until first access. Most other Unixes actually allocate when you ask them to allocate. So on BSDs, etc, malloc can and will fail when you ask the computer to allocate more memory than it can actually access. Overcommitting RAM is a rather silly "optimization" and tends to cause more trouble than it actually solves.
I don't think it's a mystery to any regulator what's going on. I think it's hard to argue against the notion that this is good for the economy. If the Monopolistic ISPs can extract more wealth out of the content-to-consumer pipeline, doesn't the GDP go up? Everybody wins?
Still compressed its going to be bigger. The other thing is its going to be more efficient for the processor if we define where in the object we are going to be working rather than navigating through the object for every single change even if they are adjacent to each other.
Pinboard. It is great.
We should replace asm.js with Rust
It has no syntax (of its own) in that it hijacks s-expression syntax instead. When you want to write Lisp code, you actually write some data structures in the s-expression data format, like when writing some data in JSON or XML. Then a Lisp interpreter or compiler uses an s-expression parser to read that data structure into memory, and operates on that.

Then again, not just every Lisp dialect but even pretty much every implementation has its own s-expression parser with its own extensions to s-expression syntax to make it most convenient to write code in, so there's not a very good decoupling after all. :-P Nevertheless it provides some benefits. Like being able to use something like "paredit" to edit code structurally, and making macro systems somewhat simpler (though hygienic macro systems cannot work with pure s-expression data; it must be annotated with lexical context).

You might find it hard to believe but I love Lisp syntax with all of its parentheses, and am explicitly against, for example, Sweet Expressions (SRFI-110). (Though SRFI-105 is fine.)

By the way another meaning of the word "syntax" actually refers to something within the data structures after the actual concrete syntax has been parsed away. For example when you have a list and its first element is the symbol "if", then that list is a usage of the if syntax. This syntax takes three arguments (further elements of the list): a test, consequent, and alternative. So "syntax" is something like a function here, except it operates during compilation and its arguments are unevaluated sub-structures (roughly, code snippets, though the syntax could interpret them however it wants, like for example how the "lambda" syntax's first argument is a parameter list). That's why we can say "in other languages you can only implement new functions; in Lisp you can also implement new syntax." (In the form of macros.)
Perhaps a very naive question - how hackable is this?

I mean how hard is it to strip Android off all its phone-home Google goodness and have just the kernel, basic OS services with complete root access? I used to do a lot of embedded work, but I have to plead almost complete ignorance of Android. This watch though ... damn ... so many possibilities for making such a nice toy out of it.
I just looked at some of my recent code where I'm using realloc. It's obvious that this approach is insufficient, because it assumes there is only one multiplication. I have situations where an array is being resized. The size is expressed in terms of elements, rather than bytes. So two multiplications are going on: the size is increased first, and then in the realloc call, the argument expression has a multiplication by the element size also.

An overflow checking realloc won't help if the first multiplication oveflows.

If I make this version instead:

void *realloc_array(void *old,
size_t existing_size,
size_t resize_factor,
size_t elsize);

that's no good either because I want the new size also if everything went well. I need something like:

void *realloc_array(void *old,
size_t existing_size,
size_t resize_factor,
size_t elsize,
size_t *p_newsize_out);

Okay, now we're talking. Resize my vector old, which contains existing_size elements, by a factor of resize_factor. The individual elements have size elsize. If all goes well (non-NULL is returned), give me the new size (in elements, not bytes) in the location *p_newsize_out.
> Yes, you should certainly suppose it's good, because it means the difference between an early out-of-memory error and a serious security vulnerability that can result in arbitrary code execution, like a buffer overflow.

my point is that this scenario is so improbable that it's not worth worrying about.

> You are in trouble, but the trouble will be considerably less severe if the untrusted input hits this function instead of hitting malloc or realloc

heartbleed, SQL injection, and hundreds of other vulnerabilities are more likely to occur from untrusted user input. if you overflow a realloc, you don't know where the destination address is. you're far away from the stack, too. there is very little (if any) risk. i have never come across a realloc based exploit.
The invisible global army hot on the trail of trolls
Apps Everywhere: The Chipotlification of American Fast Food
There are a couple ways to do this. The easiest is to work with a good recruiting company. Lots of them suck but if you can find a good one it's worth it. Ask people you know for recommendations. If you find a good recruiter they will be familiar with how long each company takes so they can do things like have you start interviewing at places that take longer first. Essentially, they'll handle most of the timing issues for you. Having multiple offers puts you in a stronger negotiating position and they usually get paid a percentage of your starting salary so they want you to do well.

If you're doing it on your own the key is to apply to several places and communicate a lot with each company's internal recruiters. When you start interviewing ask what the whole process is and what the usual timeline is for each step. After each step send a brief thank you message. If they are slower getting back to you on the next step than you expected send a quick message to check on when you can expect to hear from them. As you're going through the process at various companies some will progress faster than others. Make sure that the slower ones are aware you're further along in interviews at other companies so they can catch up. When faster companies propose dates for the next step choose something in the longer end of the range to slow things down. Once you have your first offer inform the other companies you're interested in that you have an offer and they need to start wrapping things up one way or the other.

Most companies can be flexible about their timelines. Even places that are known for long application processes can be significantly sped up if they know you're on a deadline.
I think some of the trouble with a rotating bezel is accidental input. I have a diver with a sturdy, mono-directional bezel, and it gets bumped around to odd positions from time to time -- maybe once every couple weeks. And that is with a bezel not designed to be used often.

A UI-driving bezel would have to be bi-directional, for starters. Then, it would have to be looser AND more resilient than normal bezels, since they will be used more often. And even once those items are fine-tuned, we only have navigation without confirmation. Do we press the bezel to confirm? Can the bezel be mounted as a rocker, for multiple inputs, like a volume key? Maybe. A glass or ceramic capacitive bezel, though, would really "wow" me!

I concede that I'd rather have a bezel input than Apple Watch's crown input, which to me looked inconvenient, but seeing as the jury is still out on round vs. square design for these "smartwatch" UIs (a rotating bezel only works on round watches) it would be quite risky from a usability perspective.
It became a common right-libertarian view about the same time as the heterosexual-only marriage policy throughout the US came under serious threat.

Its also kind of interesting as a libertarian view, since marriage is essentially just a convenient prepackaged contractual relationship regarding property rights in the broad sense, and recognizing and enforcing contracts and their impact on property rights is one of the few things that libertarians generally agree is a proper role of government.
darwin, NT, and linux all do this. that is the majority of systems. it's not a silly optimisation at all. at worst, it performs exactly as well as malloc. at best, it saves allocating memory. which in the mobile platform (again, most of computing), is a big deal.
how did they do this!?!
> If the Monopolistic ISPs can extract more wealth out of the content-to-consumer pipeline, doesn't the GDP go up?

Perhaps you are being sarcasic, but I cannot tell. This is a version of the broken window fallacy[0]. The money spent on the ISPs is now unavailable for netflix (as an example) to spend hiring new people, buying rights to new movies, etc. So it is not a given that this increases the GDP, or that it would do so in a healthy or beneficial way.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window
Numenta NuPIC 2014 Fall Hackathon Outcome
> It's wrong regardless of when it occurred.

But it can be more or less wrong in specific circumstances.

You seem pretty sure that your opinions and actions will stand the test of time, just like countless people were in the past. So sure that now we are right, and amazed how they could be so wrong.

Well, I don't know the future, but see you in 30 years. Let's see what moral fashion will rule those times. Be prepared to be judged.
"Please rotate your screen for the optimal service."

How about I immediately close the browser tab instead, and never give another thought to the LG G Whatever?

(iPhone 6 Small, if anyone cares.)
Excluding GPS doesn't just help battery life. GPS is a power monster.
This article is humorous considering that it was submitted on the same day as Tim Cook's op-ed which has been #1 on HN all day and now has over 2000 upvotes.
Had he come out earlier, would he still have become CEO?
well the solution is to validate user input. user input should certainly be limited to 4gb, at least. a wrapper around an allocator is definitely not the solution.
Past performance is not a guarantee of future results, but when a company has such a long history of dependable hardware, they have earned my trust.

Of course trust is easily lost, but they haven't disappointed me yet.
Also worth noting that IBM stock price increased by $2Billion after defeating Kasparov. So they have had everything to gain by beating him at whatever cost.
I've taken a look at the evidence, but the primary sources are in a foreign language so there's certainly a possibility I've missed something major.

There are kinds of evidence that I would find convincing. Testimony from police that he had certain things open on the screen at the moment of arrest (as in the Silk Road case). Or hidden-camera video of him at a terminal, doing something bad. Or an audio recording of a voice call in which he tries to do social engineering.

I haven't found anything like that. If someone posts a link, I'll certainly change my mind. But for know, all the evidence I know of is of a sort that one person could've forged.
(I'm the author/founder.)

Old one did distributed breadth-first graph exploration: https://github.com/zerotier/ZeroTierOne/wiki/OLD-Multicast-A...

It was nifty and cool and worked pretty well for small to mid tier stuff, but biggest disadvantages in practice were:

(1) Peers seem to drop the potato more often than I predicted when I simulated it, leading to a lot of truncated propagations. It also has no geo-awareness, so if your propagation graph goes through sub-Saharan Africa you're likely to see a lot of packet loss. I think my simulations implicitly assumed all high-end first-world broadband links, when reality includes the whole world and a lot of slow/crummy cellular.

(2) High latency, which caused problems for people who wanted low-latency multicast for SDN-type applications (enterprise stuff). In the beginning I never considered those applications, but they're emerging as a major user base.

(3) Imposed a high CPU cost, since to prevent flooding every packet had to be cryptographically signed by its originating node. That's a lot of ECC256 signatures and verifications.

(4) Mobile-unfriendly, since mobile devices really want to be able to enter long-term hibernation and not have to wake to help others propagate their multicasts. Mobile might even want to turn off most multicast, only allowing ARP and NDP or even emulating these for no multicast at all. (Currently working on iOS and Android ZT1 ports.) This also applies to tiny low power embedded devices, and I've had some interest from Internet-of-things experimenters.

There's no write-up on the new algorithm yet, but it's basically sender-side replication with lazy but deterministic gathering. It gathers recipients up to the limit from supernodes and from peers. (In reality supernodes are peers-- they're merely peers designated as such.)

I remember initially passing on that idea since I was afraid it would be too heavy on the sender, but observing real traffic flows shows that in aggregate the multicast traffic load ends up close to the same. Sender-side replication is also inherently fair -- sender pays the price -- so you don't need such heavy signature/verification checks to ensure that somebody can't flood the network. This way it's no easier to flood with multicast than with unicast. (Obviously anyone can DDOS but that's another matter.)

In the longer term I plan to add some support for merging of multicasts going to the same local network or site, but I'm not sure how yet... it's probably going to intersect with R&D work I'm doing right now on enterprise supernode federation for SDN applications and similar stuff.
From the poll I cited:

The maximum sampling error estimates for results
based on the overall sample of 834 registered
voters have a sampling error of +/- 3.5
percentage points, while findings from the
random subsample of 415 voters have a sampling
error of +/- 5.0 percentage points at the 95%
confidence level.

http://field.com/fieldpollonline/subscribers/Rls2443.pdf

FiveThirtyEight rates Field Poll (at least for political races) as being "A+": http://fivethirtyeight.com/interactives/pollster-ratings/

Your references to incidence of HIV and syphilis among gay and bisexual men are something of a non sequitur, and—I think—underscore the value of extending the institution of marriage given that one might reasonably expect that enabling an at-risk population to engage in a social institution commonly associated with monogamy should only serve to decrease rates of transmission.

My friends (who are gay)

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Friend_argument

Also, why would you want your friends to be deprived of a right you enjoy?

I regularly see billboards in my neighborhood targeting young gay men to be tested for HIV. I bet that risk of transmission would be further lowered if the stigma associated with being gay was further reduced or entirely eliminated.