skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
A unit's movement options are vectors. As it's designed, you've got vectors in the due directions and the medians between those, each scaled to be the size necessary to make the grid work as mapped from a sphere for the particular location. So the east vector at 45 N is root(2)/2 the size it is at the equator.

So if you've got an east vector for every square that is a function of the location, that means there's an east vector field. Same goes for the other seven options. Might as well make a zero at the poles, since one zero is weird, zeroes that don't line up are weird, and no one wants to settle at the poles anyway.
Virool Is Hiring #2 Front End Engineer in SF (YC S12)
wet blanket alert: a modal form with credit card inputs has been done many times before. What is instant or new about this? Kudos for yet another checkout, payment button code snippet?
Isnt mongodb using "hashes" for ids by the way? I wonder how efficient it is and why they chose to do that.
From the Google C++ Style Guide:

"You should not use the unsigned integer types such as uint32_t, unless there is a valid reason such as representing a bit pattern rather than a number, or you need defined overflow modulo 2^N. In particular, do not use unsigned types to say a number will never be negative. Instead, use assertions for this." [0]

[0]: http://google-styleguide.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/cppguide.h...
Flightzapp.com , airline and flight ticket website reviews
Agreed. They discuss this in the chubby paper as well.

There is a grace period where the master is in jeopardy of failing over vs failing over straight away. I left this out for simplicity of the state machine but I pointed to the chubby paper as a true reference.

They also mention the fact that client and master clocks must advance no faster than a known constant factor.
If anything, the cyclical hype/backlash Docker is getting proves that it is popular and that it works for some people. Consequently, the exposure it gets displeases the people for whom it doesn't work or whose philosophies differ. This feels like Politics 101 if you ask me (I know you didn't :) ), and I'm still surprised by how vehement some people get about this, and about software philosophies in general (particularly considering the average shelf-life of most software).

All of that aside, I really like Docker, for the API but also partly because of what the CoreOS people complain about, i.e. a relatively monolithic system.

I'm a big fan of modular systems myself and I completely get where CoreOS are coming from with Rocket. But sometimes, I just want to be able to use the tool. I don't want to screw around for hours/days/... to put all the pieces together.

The network overlay situation is a perfect example. I know there are different solutions out there, in fact I've been trying some of them out at home. But the truth is, I don't want to have/have time to deal with that stuff and I'd much rather get on with my original ideas.

Unfortunately in some situations, as beautiful as the theory and principles are, people justifiably simply want things to work out of the box. I find the criticisms on String Theory are a good example of that, whereby the theory is gorgeous, but in practice does not necessarily have the value it intends to. I digress.

I love the idea of a super-modular car I can put together myself, change pieces as and when I wish and so on, but most of the time, I just need to get to my destination.
Well, first of all there is no problem with encoding low frequencies here (we do all the time! like the fact that the notes are not all played at the same time...).

What you feel is parts of your body resonating (because the low frequency sound is exciting modes of your body). This is unlikely to happen at high frequencies, partially because it would necessarily be much smaller parts of your body (see [0] for a diagram of typical body resonance frequencies) which we probably don't feel and because attenuation of sound greatly increases at higher frequencies (for example, see [0] for air), making it likely impractical to excite any such modes. My guess is that you might cause some tissue damage if you had significant ultrasonic excitation in your body (see [2] for something that may or may not be true...).

[0] http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/37543/does-the-hu...
[1] http://www.kayelaby.npl.co.uk/general_physics/2_4/2_4_1.html
[2] http://www.tovatech.com/blog/4376/ultrasonic-cleaner/ultraso...
Because it's only ok when white people do it.
> Yes, way too imperative. "map" and "reduce" are imperative; they order something done.

Well how would you write these snippets the right way then?with the language of your choice, so it fits the declaritive way a 100% ?
Interesting, until very recently I was writing a whole bunch of C++ at Google but I can't recall any such restriction. Most internal data structures at Google are expressed as protocol buffers and surely these support unsigned integers. In fact if someone suggested that a view counter should be signed that would invite a snark (kind of Google's specialty) like 'can it ever be negative'?

[One problem with unsigned integers in protocol buffers is that some supported languages like Python have no concept of signed/unsigned integers. Which is why for example Thrift does not support that distinction. This has nothing to do with C++ though.]
You need to setup a read-only API key in your Braintree account which you then paste into your ChartMogul account. You also need to setup a webhook. Once that's setup we take care of everything else via the Braintree API.

There are getting started instructions when you signup to ChartMogul, it's fairly simple to setup.
I hate that "money" is nearly taboo to talk about. When considering a job, compensation is very important to me. Honestly, it is probably the #1 factor. Other factors matter a lot as well but they are usually only guesswork when at the interview/offer stage. Things like "office environment", "mission", how I get a long with my co-workers, etc all are important but what they tell me up front and what I imagine in my mind's eye might not turn out to be reality. But the money part, that is set. When they say $100,000/year, they pay it. Now we are talking start ups, so obviously equity is a different story. But you can still run the numbers and calculate what you will make depending on the size of the exit. I am not opposed to some risk for the reward (equity vs. salary) but if the reward is 10% of one year's salary if we sell for $100 million dollars, then why should that interest me? Sometimes they make those offers where you can choose more equity or more salary. Maybe I'm just insecure but it's as if taking the salary option says something about you and your commitment to the "mission" negatively. In the scenario I laid out above, I'd say it just meant you can perform simple arithmetic.
Does the same also go for high end audio equipment that a typical audiophile might have?
I've done a bit of (very marginal) work for NASA, and the problem they have is that it takes 2 weeks and 5 signatures to get $200 worth of parts approved... while everyone is always in a hurry regardless. Just give your engineers $300 a month for miscellanea, it'll be faster and cheaper. I can see why being a federal agency they have to be spotlessly above-board when it comes to who does what with money, but there's a limit to that.

What ended up happening with my projects (PhoneSat and a couple other things) is that I was there part time, and just bought parts on my own dime, then I sent a global itemized bill for everything. It took six months but they did pay me back.
You're right, I was overly rude, and I regret the wording of what I wrote. I feel the above commenter was misguided in the subject his advice but it was probably well-intended.
I was just playing devil's advocate to explore a different point of view. But if you're talking about enlightened ideas, then welfare states are also an enlightened idea predated by centuries of feudalism (which a private-property-based society with little or no government looks like).

And the tribe didn't appropriate the individual's labor. It was naturally assumed that if you're a member of a tribe (that you rely on for survival) then your work should benefit the tribe -- not you specifically. Doesn't that make sense?
192kHz may not be as silly as you think: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10848570
Letting people take the jobs that best fit them, the world over, means more jobs are better done sooner, which means more resources available to do things like retrain.

None of this has much to do, anymore, with the question of whether there is "demand for average human brains", incidentally.
A no-bullshit workaround for captive portals
Yes, any launch from Mars is very likely to be methane.

I was just trying to figure out how SpaceX could fund its development of methane rockets before that, through domestic use of methane rockets.
There's something weird about the structure of your comment. How much traction do you assume a startup has when they hire #1?

Personally I think startups are too stingy with equity, 2% is considered generous, but this is not enough to compensate for the risk for employees 1-10, which is part of the reason the savvy ones want to be a founder rather than employee. I think the stinginess persists partly because of ignorance of the average prospective employee on stock option plans, so they're not getting the level of pushback they will about salaries. But more importantly from the granting side, it's very hard for founders to tell if a prospective employee has the all-out intelligence, hustle and tenacity to be a part of the critical core group that literally builds a money-making machine from scratch. It's true that hiring is a huge risk, but this is what the vesting schedule is for. Companies need to bet bigger on individuals, because the risk profile does not decline as precipitously as the equity grants, there's a discontinuity there that is keeping savvy employees out. If you are selecting only for people who can afford to work for free then you're leaving talent on the table.
You're being downvoted because that's not how cryptanalytic research works.
The problem is that object oriented programming is a premature optimization that has outlived it's usefulness.

Object oriented programming enshrines mutation.

Mutation is a good optimization when memory is expensive and fast relative to computation. Memory is now cheap and slow relative to computation. You can execute 100's to 1000's of operations in the time it takes to chase a pointer that is not cached.
That's a great quote, thanks for sharing
The interesting part of BFGS is that it directly approximates H^{-1} rather than H.
On the other hand, with perceptual audio coding (e.g. mp3, m4a, ogg) you do.
Ah, of course, understood.
It's just that previously neural networks with more than 3 layers have been prohibitively expensive to train. Now that we've discovered some shortcut tricks and got the training on to GPUs we can finally have those neural networks with lots of layers. Only the implementation details have changed.
hahahaha, very good. It's amazing that this article doesn't mention money at all. As if people who want to make startups are so idealistic that money isn't a factor in choosing employment paths.
Indeed. The only UK rail franchise still in public hands is also the only one that makes money for the state rather than requiring a public subsidy.

So, with impeccable logic, the government has privatised it.
Again: I'm assuming you're this invested in the thread because you really like the idea of working for an appsec firm. I don't blame you! Appsec is an awesome field to work in. I think you'd be much happier talking to Accuvant, which runs an all-remote team, than in trying to talk Matasano out of a carefully-made decision that is a core part of its culture.
Law school applications collapse: Get ready for schools to start closing
Ah. Sorry. I didn't do the math.
The Downside of Eating Too Locally
I never frown upon being thanked ;) pleased to know my two cents were useful
I saw the same thing. I've looked at the "earth lights" pictures for years, and you can pick out cities and the basic highway grid ... so those cloudy patches in North Dakota and southwestern Texas stand out.

He he, those cloudy patches are what keeps OPEC up at night.
> being open to accepting a mistaken belief.

This is odd. Do you think "mistaken beliefs" are clearly labeled so you can reject them without examination or experimentation?
>> Nothing about having one makes you any better at technology work, it's function is purely signaling.

Better than someone with more experience, possibly no.
Better than someone with similar experience but without the degree - hell yes.

I'm still happy I did mine because it gave me a grounding in all sorts of concepts and it keeps on giving, even though I graduated 14 years ago now.

A comp Sci degree is way more than signalling.

--edit-- or perhaps I should say that a degree is no more signalling than experience is. I've worked with terrible, awful engineers who appeared to have both.
> I think that may be conflating cause and effect. I'd argue a manned trip to Mars is a focus of pop culture because it resonates strongly with so many.

Game of Thrones, Star Wars, etc, also resonate with society. Things in those movies aren't necessarily worthy of exploring. Conversely, cancer research isn't represented well in pop culture... but that doesn't mean it doesn't warrant pursuit.
Where are these rankings kept? I honestly never had a clue that there were rankings for developers. I've never once seen that or heard it talked about.
Convolutional networks were also developed in the 80s as well as backpropagating algorithms (autoencoders). The way i see it used, "deep" usually means many layers, indicating a difference in quantity, not in quality.

Point is, the science was there since the 80s, and not much has changed.
I think Joyent's right here. Docker's open and progressively enhanced API is a godsend. Somewhere around 0.7x they basically enabled the entire existence of my business, just by virtue of having a good API.

I frankly don't even care about the rest of the orchestration vs bloat stuff - I want a good API and good performance. The rest is secondary.
Great news, hopefully it will be better than twitch!
Speaking from personal experience - the white-trash/tweaker culture, and the intergenerational Section 8 culture.
LATERAL allows a subquery or function to refer to the records that it's being joined to when computing results.

WITH RECURSIVE allows a query to refer its own results when computing its results. That may sound mind-bending, but it's really just poorly named way to do a "while" loop in SQL.

A WITH RECURSIVE has the form (base-case-query UNION ALL iterative-step-query). The query for the iterative step can refer to itself via the WITH alias. When it does so, it's actually operating on only those records produced by the previous step of the iteration. The iterative-step-query will execute possibly multiple times, stopping only when it doesn't produce any more records.

Here's the WITH RECURSIVE example from the Postgres docs, translated into Python:

all_records = []
previous_step = [1] # base case, i.e. "VALUES (1)."
while previous_step:
all_records.extend(previous_step)
# iterative step, i.e. "SELECT n+1 FROM t WHERE n < 100"
current_step = [n+1 for n in previous_step if n < 100]
previous_step = current_step

The confusing part is that the alias "t" in the SQL example means different things in different places. Outside the WITH RECURSIVE, "t" is equivalent to "all_records" in the example. Within the WITH RECURSIVE definition, "t" is the same as "previous_step".
>You can proof almost anything in agda. Even the most complicated mathematical theorems.

And I think that's the thing that makes Agda interesting. If you limit Agda to proving things about computer programs, it doesn't sound that special. People are using Agda to prove things about, for example, topology.
Came here to say this. If that's deemed too heavyweight, you can just add "delay" as a random amount of computation overhead (say a loop that does nothing but does not get optimized away). The trick is to make the delay large enough that if you run X times a password with wrong first characters and a password with wrong last character, you aren't able to tell the difference (or you need like a zillion tries -- at which point you may as well do bruteforce).

If you did not have the requirement that password could be arbitrarily long (which seems like a bad idea anyway), you could just pad the password, then compare char by char, never stopping until the end, updating a boolean variable that says if the string is different at each step (character).

Also, this might not be a concern on the web where there's already quite a bit of variability in the response time.
The everyone in the title is clear hyperbole, but obviously one meant to convey most or maybe even very nearly all. That's probably a belief held by TechCrunch writers and Startup School attendees but most likely far from realistic.

My previous job was at a small nonprofit and we worked in a large co-working space that had hundreds of startups[1]. Many of the people I had conversations with (or overheard) in the kitchen/common-areas were heavy into the startup-scene (serial-founders or engineers who would only work at startups). I'm now at a large tech company and not one of my co-workers has ever expressed interest in founding a startup (or even working for one). This is probably because startups tend to attract people who want to work for a startup and larger companies tend to attract those that would rather not.

If startups feel they are having a harder problem filling vacancies than large companies maybe that's a sign that talent pool is larger and they should ask what they can do to appeal more to that crowd, instead of what they could do to get potential founders to work for them instead of founding their own.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Innovation_Center
Java is mostly confined to Android and the frontend (think GWT) which do not constitute a large proportion of the Google internal code as far as I can recall.
One problem with this is that the sizes of STL containers are returned unsigned, and with high warning levels, compilers will warn about comparing a signed int with one of these sizes.
Everything You Need to Know About ‘App Links': Mobile App Equivalent of Web URLs
Snapchat Murders Facebook
Such anger.

I don't recall claiming to make the world a better place. We've changed our focus since I joined and to be honest I was more excited about the original vision but I'll take corporate file sharing over online advertising any day.

Then again, I'd take life as an itinerant purveyor of french toast and fine liquors over online advertising so I'm hardly representative of the average person in this "industry".
FAA and SUAS (Drone) Prerecorded Broadcast
Companies are supposed to pay an H1-B workers the prevailing wage. But the fact is that real wages are a very wide range that would depend on your exact skills and competence. So companies can get away with paying an H1-B worker less than his real market value and the worker cannot easily switch jobs. If the worker could easily switch jobs, then there is no real incentive for the company to hire a worker and pay him lower wages (). Because, very soon he will switch to another company that pays him his real wage. The problem with the H1-B system is that the law is based on the assumption that fare wages can be enforced by statute as opposed to by ensuring competition.

() One can argue that large companies might have incentives to bring in more H1-Bs to increase the overall labor pool, which in turn will reduce wages for everyone. This can partially be offset by having high fees for H1-B workers.
Here's the link to the memorial fund:

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ezra-zygmuntowicz-memoria...
Firefox 33.1.1 on Mac OS 10.10.1. Initially it would get stuck looking like: http://imgur.com/DhXAmI7

After refreshing the page a few times, all the formulae rendered correctly. In Safari things rendered correctly immediately.
It's also a lot smaller than the 4.5 trillion sunk in quantitative easing.
The GP posits interactions between the several possible universes, in the sense that I am from universe A and am litterally talking to someone from universe B. While it is conceivable that this type of cross universe interaction is possible, it is not at all possible in our current understanding of physics, and if it where possible, it would have to be possible in a very subtle way or else we would have already noticed it (in the same sense that relativity breaks Newtons laws in a very subtle way).

Assuming that such interactions our possible, we have no reason to believe that the macroscopic effects would be to transfer intact memories between universes, or for the universes to be similar enough for us not to notice this effect explicitly, but different enough for events to occur differently for different people.
However, the issue is, is that if this did occur, we could assume the same effect would be observable in recordings.

If you can find video recordings of the same event happening differently, then this would be interesting.
Is there any reason to use Agda over Coq or vice versa?
Er, yes, I believe that's the point the grandparent was making (and the parent was disagreeing with)
I'm one of those non-connected people working non-stop nights and weekends on "startups". Switching to an industry that actually pays out according to the amount of work I would put in is interesting. I either haven't considered it or never really thought that type of industry existed (outside of something like sales).

Also, I 100% agree. Employee equity is so small it's kind of insulting. The only time I took equity was b/c I was able to work with some semi-"famous" founders and hoped to at least to grow my network. I did grow it a little, and I might be able to tap into it at some point but the equity returned me exactly zilch.
Lecture 19: Sales and Marketing – How to Talk to Investors
Maybe it's more hopefully instructive than naive? I imagine informed by both his YC groups and raising young children?
What is the point of this thought experiment? If I know I am looking for a certain thing in a thought experiment, than I might be able to suspend disbelief on the other parts, but without knowing what I am looking for, all I see are the inherit inconsistencies in the universe you posit.
There is another reason 24-bit music is desirable: it's good for remix culture (silly IP laws notwithstanding).

If I pay for music, I want to truly own it, including the possibility of someday making a mashup, a music video, a hip-hop beat, et cetera. A 24-bit source gives casual creatives the same quality material as the original masters, for a relatively paltry 1.5x increase in file size.
I probably should have written 16/44.1 vs 24/192, since I was thinking mostly of the waveform 'beat' interactions as shown in the linked video. Do you feel those are also indistinguishable? I can't afford an actual bet on it, but I'm interested enough to explore a bit and see what I can find.
I just think of a certain audio player...
Say you're comparing the number of views between two different videos as (video_A.views - video_B.views). How do you represent that the second video has more views than the first?
From the coolgeek style guide:

"Never use a signed type for a number that can never be negative"

One of my pet peeves is developers using int (instead of unsigned ints) for primary keys in database tables.
The Benefits of Having an App for Your Business