skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I dream of one day becoming a test pilot. Especially in ships during their developmental stages, unaccounted for situations will come up, and a human capable of assessing and managing these situations are necessary.

For each of the technologies involved with the X-37, et al., that technology required testing with a human-in-the-loop to act as the judge for if the control output made sense. It simply isn't feasible to begin testing your robot pilot without first testing it with a pilot there in the first place.
Wow. This comment is a neat microcosm of what's wrong with modern "progressive" discourse. Let's take a look:

• it starts with a personal attack—apparently giving any credence to conservatives is embarrassing?

• it completley ignores the underlying principles of individually liberty

• in fact, it completely steamrolls individual concerns in favor of abstract social groups

• it's unabashedly populist: instead of making a real argument, it's about "not embarrassing ourselves"

• it implicitly inserts the speaker as a defender for some nebulous "marginalized" groups, with no real basis

Of course, in this case, the marginalized groups are using social and legal pressure to suppress any dissent. Which isn't a product of being marginalized—and can't be justified by it either.

But I guess your views are so obviously correct that we shouldn't countenance any disagreement at all.

Long on pathos, long on populism and short on substance. And yet it's all too indicative of much of the discussion I hear in Berkeley, at the very least. (Fancy that.)

It's also disturbingly unwilling to consider any contrary opinions. Apparently that would be letting someone (other than you, of course!) "set the narrative".

The scariest thing is that this is exactly the sort of reasoning used to justify taking away people's rights. And, at least for now, it seems to be working.

I can't even tell if you're being entirely serious, or I'm just missing the parody and tearing down a straw man.
"Inevitable" does not mean "must prevent no matter what cost to prevent is".
It's probably not hard to fix; the codebase is tiny. I've been looking for an excuse to use it, but none has surfaced, since the only compiled language I use at work is Go.
I'm not against conservative opinions! I am saying that it's embarrassing that we are letting the narrative be set by an oppressor (oppressor through zealous journalism) rather than the groups he discuses.
For what its worth - and not necessarily to draw parallels with the Cygnus CRS Orb-3 mishap - Russia successfully launched an unmanned Soyuz rocket and Progress 57 cargo ship with supplies for the International Space Station from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan on Wednesday, hours after the catastrophic explosion destroyed a similar mission in the United States.[1]

The cargo ship was expected to and successfully docked with the ISS later in the day.[2]

[1]
Russia Launches ISS Cargo After US Craft Explodes

http://www.voanews.com/content/russia-launches-iss-cargo-mis...

Russian supply ship poised for launch Wednesday

http://spaceflightnow.com/2014/10/28/russian-supply-ship-poi...

[2]
Russian Progress M-25M docks with the ISS

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2014/10/russian-progress-iss-...
Let me try to rephrase what I was trying to put across.

Solar power output is a function of the total incident power (~ 1KW/sq meter on a clear day), reflection losses, heat losses, conversion losses and resistive losses. In the case of a concentrator you will also have losses due to imperfect optics (square lenses with a small area collector behind them in this case) and alignment.

As you correctly observe, you can compare tracking conventional to non-tracking conventional.

But in this case you can also compare tracking conventional with tracking non-conventional. The only variable is how you gather the light on the cell in that case, we already know how to track conventional cells.

So if the concentration step makes up for the losses in the optics and the reduced lifespan of the cell (more suns / area -> shorter lifespan!) then they may be in the money.

But with a lens system alignment has to be just about perfect (most tracking systems have a few degrees of error, no problem but for a concentrator with such a high degree of concentration a degree or more might put the spot next to the collector), which means they're going to have to have a very precise drive system on that huge leaf, and it will have to be extremely rigidly constructed so wind pressure on the leaf does not push it off from the ideal angle.

All these are engineering issues that they may have solved but the article does not mention any of that.

If their concentrating trick beats that 44% at 90 degrees to the sun they have a record on their hands, but that does not yet make it a feasible tech, for that it has to be cost effective too.

The collector has to be mass produced cheaply enough and the tracker system can't add too much overhead in cost, disadvantages in shading will have to be overcome by corresponding increases in efficiency.

If all those conditions are met then they're possibly going to end up producing power cheaper than conventional, rigidly mounted cells at ~24% efficiency.

Solar is rapidly headed for a 'piston engine' situation, where conventional cells can be produced so cheaply that better technology will have to overcome a huge advantage in invested $ and economies of scale before it will be considered.

From that point of view I don't think this tech stands much of a chance, it will have to be built to very exact degrees of tolerance, it causes losses because of the tracking (less usable area with a tracked system), it is more expensive to mount and maintain than an untracked system and it still needs to recoup the start-up losses.

That's a large amount of disadvantage to overcome. I've sunk a good bit of money into a tracking system that had some fairly unique properties (the tracking system was relatively rigidly mounted and the collector was stationary, still converted solar to electricity directly) and I think I have a basic grasp of the economies of solar installations. I wish this company the very best and I hope they will make it but I fear that the degree of complexity, the increase in cost per area covered and the reliability of tracked systems in general and this one in particular will not make it competitive.
With Paper, Inbox and Sway, tech giants are suddenly reinventing their core apps
Trent Reznor on his new role at Apple
Perhaps you would be better off no longer showing up at my house, which is in Berkeley, where I (personally) do not welcome you any longer. You have expressed questionable, unchecked views previously, besides this, e.g. your worrisome views on Julie Ann Horvath's treatment.

Sorry I'm ruining your HN by challenging that many of the articles posted here are about marginalized groups, rather than by marginalized groups.

Edit: I reread this and note that this is NOT a threat. You would face no aggression coming to my house, I meant that if Berkeley's discussions are too progressive for you, perhaps my house where I live is not your kinda thing.
“We dressed up for Halloween”
NSA Phone Surveillance Faces Fresh Court Test
Pangu8 1.1 English jailbreak for iOS 8 to 8.1 Jailbreak
Probably they were just searching for things that don't have some extra tax (above the already existing %27 VAT), and they found this weird Internet thing on that list.

Also today the PM said:

"We need to find an answer to the question where the giant extra profit made on the Internet goes and if we could keep some of it in Hungary."
I find this dogma of "Eventually we will conquer space and make it accessible to all mankind" dangerous in the extreme to the actual, all-too-present predicaments we have here on real Earth such as climate change, environment devastation, fossil fuels/minerals/water depletion and the accelerating destruction of the web of life that makes possible your even being able to breathe.

You are all prey to the "religion of progress".

Your dogma is that space travel is not only possible, but a given, something the universe has put somewhere for us to find and make ours.

Except that, basic hard laws such as the speed of light, the laws of thermodynamics, etc. say NO. And it's only your religious thinking that allows you to handwave all that with a "we always find a way".

For all we know, in this universe it may be impossible to bypass or even bend those laws. Yet, you're betting the future of the species on old Star Trek fantasies.

As you said, the conditions and difficulty for modern space travel are in the extreme and pushing all of our sciences to their limits. And for what? just to get to... the moon. I don't want to scare you, but if that seems far to you, see how much bigger the distance to anything else in the solar system is, nevermind anything outside it.
I don't think that there's anything magical about C4. All the basics are discernible from this presentation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uljtqyBLxI

Azul originally started out as a hardware company. A pauseless collector is easy as long as you have transactional memory (at a minimum hardware which supports strong LL/SC, allowing you to build the rest in software). No commodity CPUs support this, then or now, so Azul's first product was a specialized CPU and memory architecture with real transactional memory semantics.

But nobody wants to buy specialized hardware these days. So they ended up having to emulate transactional memory on x86. That means _emulating_ the memory architecture of their original CPU. Again, there's no secret sauce to do doing this. Things like QEMU are free--which is to say, many people know how to do it. It just takes a lot of programmer hours to build it, and many, many more to optimize it.

Long story short, Azul's collector is truly pauseless, but its transactional throughput in the vast majority of workloads sucks because it's an emulator (for the JVM) built atop another emulator (for their original memory architecture). And while you can speed up emulating the JVM using JIT techniques, that doesn't work for emulating a transactional memory architecture. There are endless tweaks you can make, including playing around with memory page tables, etc, but at the end up the day you're still stuck emulating the semantics you need, causing huge latencies relative to your clock speed, which already suck on Ghz scale systems.

This won't change anytime time soon. Even Intel's new TSX features are not strong enough to be able to implement true transactional memory. Real transactional memory requires a way to atomically signal contention for every word of memory, or at least lines of words. It requires not only a specialized CPU, but specialized memory controllers, and specialized memory. Something like TSX would only provide a marginal performance improvement for C4, if anything at all, because almost all their effort goes into arranging to avoid locking, not making locking faster.
Automate the job search – tryhunted.com
We've built Hunted to make the job search 10x easier. It works by trawling the web for jobs you'll love, automatically putting you forward for them, and only interrupting you when there's interest for interview.
Many programming languages have some sort of file-to-hash function built in. PHP has md5_file(), python has hashlib.md5(), etc.

I believe the easiest way to accomplish your goal is to get the md5 hash of the file before and after and compare the two results.
Well I heard from a friend of mine that in Argentina the cellphone provider can access to your info.

The case was this one. He was cheating her girlfriend, a friend of her accessed to my friend's text messages log, saw the evidence, and told to the gf about it. Apparently, but I never confirmed this, the friend (the one who read the messages) worked in the cellphone provider of my friend.

Since then I know I can't trust in my cellphone ever again, but I always was suspicious about this could be possible.
> Taxing capital gains reduces the amount that can be allocated into generating new wealth, which may mean lower overall tax income in the long term.

This is really true of all taxes. The tax money comes out of someone's pocket and that person may have otherwise invested the money or done some other economically productive thing with it.
Oh yes, heaven forfend that you ever have to interact with people that you disagree with. Then again, I suppose it is consistent, at the very least.
>Seeing only the first paragraph, I already know that some rubber in the hybrid engine detached blocking the nozzle and causing the whole engine to explode.

Can I ask how? What is in there that tells you that?
Oh, I understand that the ability to draw that line himself is part of what he is seeking. I meant to say that the idea of 'safe spaces' can be used to conflate 'preventing harm' with 'indulging arbitrary wants' and even 'pandering to narcissists'. Unlike with physical safety, I don't see a line we can use to semi-objectively declare that one has left one domain of 'emotionally safe' and entered another domain.

Notice that I'm not arguing against the establishment of circumstances in which a person can feel safe! Only that we should pay attention to the language and how it is used, lest we become manipulated into an unhealthy dynamic, all in the name of pursuing a healthy dynamic.
Thinking about it, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition would probably be better than democracy in this case, though even that is not free of problems.
I think they're a little newer than that, but that's a good point. Still, I'm not sure either engine was inadequately qualified.

I'm not sure what constitutes adequate qualification, though. Both engines were ground tested at least some. And in Virgin's case, this flight was one of tests.
Earth doesn't need saving, it's perfectly fine. Regardless, in a world with practical interstellar travel local damage is irrelevant - the universe is infinite. Milky Way alone contains at least 100 billion planets.
Not sure, but SpaceX has performed plenty of them.
Rebalancing  Socioeconomic Asymmetry  in a Data-Driven Economy [pdf]
Not sure what you mean by "we", but that comment was deleted by the commenter.
"I first explored mescaline in the late '50s, three-hundred-fifty to 400 milligrams. I learned there was a great deal inside me" -- Alexander Shulgin

I happen to believe that they connect you to much more than just your mind, however.
Not quite the same, but one of the math professors from my alma mater could write faster on a blackboard than most people could write with pencil and paper and was not shy about erasing when he filled up the board. It was always crazy trying to keep up with him.
That's a fair point, but on the other hand, how would you know that it's an accurate representation of what a colorblind person sees /except/ if this were the case? Perhaps people who had their colorblind status change, but I'm not sure if that's possible.
Since people are forking Truecrypt now. Has anyone made it possible to use plausible deniability on a Linux OS?

I've never understood the point of using plausible deniability with Windows when Windows has the ability to force update your computer even when you disable it.
"But providing fingerprints and other biometric information is considered outside the protection of the Fifth Amendment, the judge said."

Which is why 2 factor authentication is so important.
It is a nice sounding quote, though it may have factual problems until you get to programs with large numbers of iterations.

Speaking of which, your username was coined by a traditional drummer/singer friend of mine. Do you know her?
That's one of the main shortfalls I find in IRC as well. If it weren't for that (and basically requiring a bouncer/remote tmux session), I'd probably stick to IRC for quite a bit longer.
As I understand the history, a couple of things happened. First, HC got kicked around from one business entity to another, and was never wholeheartedly supported by Apple. It was kind of an orphan. There are legends that Bill Atkinson had to go ballistic in order to get it included with the Mac at all.

Second, HC reached its zenith (the final version was a real improvement over its predecessors) just as Apple went into somewhat of a dark age in between System 7 and OS X.

I loved my Mac but never felt that Apple was interested in encouraging indie or small-scale software development. I can't say that Windows was any better, but Windows had a built in lightweight API called MS-DOS.

Continuing my revisionist history, I think what happened next is simply that desirable computer system features proliferated more rapidly than any development tool could keep up with. And the diversity of interests in programming is what would stymie such a revival today.
I interact with a lot of people I disagree with! But there is a certain level I expect. Either way you turned me into a straw man - claiming that I'm making this about personal liberty, rather than steering the narrative away from hearing only from the loudest voices (like op).
I'm sorry, but even the thought of a more secure Facebook site won't get me to post on there.
Shouldn't they be able to do something better with popular content that is beneficial to the community and appropriate to the forum than "lock" it on a technicality?

Like this one I found useful the other day - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/81584/what-ide-to-use-for..., favorited by 1600 people, 1000 points, 5 answers with over 100 points ... locked because it's a bad question that doesn't suit the site. Just that it suits a lot of people using the site. Its score puts it at about 180 in their rank of 8.2 million questions and makes it the 8th most popular python question out of 350k.
Just tried it out on our LAN. Had to modify options to ping to '-bc 4' (I'm on desktop Linux), still didn't work. The only host that responded was the gateway. We have Windows, Debian, Ubuntu and Arch Linux hosts on our network.

EDIT: Linux discards normal broadcast ICMP responses. Must switch off /proc/sys/net/ipv4/icmp_echo_ignore_broadcasts. Even after doing so, no responses. I guess broadcast ping flood is a serious DoS concern that it's almost universally disabled.
It was bound to happen. You can view the fingerprint reader on the iPhone and other phones like the Samsung Galaxy S5 which feature fingerprint readers as having made it easier for law enforcement to get into your phone.

I would not be surprised if the fingerprint scans the police take from you down at the station or the ones you give up when entering a US airport when travelling from another country could be used to open up a fingerprint protected phone in the near future.

No matter what anyone says, the fingerprint reader is convenience, not extra security.
Reminds me of "Self-Organizing Maps" [1]

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organizing_map
We must never forget that progress, social or technical, is built on people dedicating or sacrificing their lives.

Wikipedia lists:
19 Test Pilots
18 Astronauts in spaceflight
11 Astronauts in training

The death tolls for social progress are vastly greater.

These people choose to dedicate and risk their lives drive us forward.
How to Remember to Do What You Intended
I'm surprised it took this long to come to a legal decision.

A fingerprint is a means to identify someone, not a security mechanism (like a password).
It's the whole apple/android full encryption debacle that has been going on for what, two months now? Brute-forcing an iPhone with iOS 8 is extremely slow.
There's not a chance in hell that this is true. I'll be shocked if you can produce any evidence whatsoever that any version of this story happened.
> ""shouting down", misrepresenting foes, making threats, and poisoning discussion from the inside"

Making threats is a serious problem -- and is also not a form of protected speech. Intentionally misrepresenting foes in certain ways is considered defamation and is also not protected.

The others are lesser problems as long as there are strong legal protections in place. The problems of being shouted down or (non-maliciously) misrepresented are mitigated by having your own platform from which to speak. Discussion being poisoned from the inside is mitigated by people realizing someone is poisonous and treating them as an outsider in the future. These things are still obnoxious, but they don't tip the scales in favor of significant speech restrictions.
Lunchlady Land (Adam Sandler with Chris Farley) [Lyrics via Genius.com]
> A belief is by definition the opposite of evidence, certainty and rationality.

No, it is not. A belief may be unjustified, or it may be justified by evidence and/or reason, or, in certain schools of thought, it may be justified by other means, but, in any case, belief is not the opposite of evidence, certainty, or reason.
Wakie, Social Alarm Clock
I completely agree with you on the spamming point. But disagree on the intelligence side ...

Bacterial colonization is a useful argument for interrogating the "we must colonize spaaaace!" folks' intentions. I mean, why exactly must we colonize space?

"Before the sun leaves the main sequence of the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram/the Earth is hit by a comet or irradiated by a GRB" is a meaningless argument. These events happen on a time frame of hundreds to thousands of megayears; while the mean life expectancy of a mammalian species is on the order of one to ten MYa, and for a hominid species like us, it's well under one MYa. These arguments don't hold water. Furthermore, we coevolved with our biosphere and we're really badly adapted to existence without a large subset of it: calling for human space colonization is implicitly a call for terraforming/transporting a viable terrestrial biosphere to other worlds. Which brings us neatly back to bacterial colonization, because that's part of the package deal.

While I can't refute the quasi-religious imperative implicit behind the rhetoric for space colonization, I wish its proponents would recognize that it's essentially a faith-based ideology!
Scaling Yelp from 0 to 139M Unique Visitors
Dad Hurry There's a Norton Ghost in My Computer
This is what my 7 year old just said a few minutes ago. It was impossible not to laugh our lungs out.

And the timing! Halloween!
isn't the point to block OTR. a core concept of both of them is knowledge capture and searchability which can't be done properly if your only having part of the conversation.
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/iphone-fingerprint-scanner-test,...

"One of the contest's organizers, Washington D.C.-based security researcher Nick de Petrillo, scanned his penis with TouchID and then used it to unlock his phone. He announced his success on Twitter on Saturday (Sept. 21) and fellow security researcher Andrew Ruef replied "Now no one will ever, ever steal your phone. [Is this] the secret to the correct use of TouchID?" "

Future HN headline: "Judge Rules Suspect Can Be Required to Unlock Phone with Penis"
I didn't know this, which I assume is what you're referring to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Hq2VQ8P_9o
Barry Harris tells it like it is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjnX_PkDwWs#t=2992
Bootstrap 3.3.0 Released
It's Apache V2, which is a lot better than GPL for many of us.

https://github.com/citusdata/cstore_fdw/blob/master/LICENSE

They're really nice talented people, and a great example of a company giving back to the community.
Immutable.js – Immutable Data Collections
Just go to jail for contempt.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8540279

Currently #1 on the front page - lengthy discussion. In fact, if anyone wants to say something and have any chance it will get seen, you may as well comment here, not there, because that thread is long, rambling, and significantly off-topic.