skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Step 1. 'Delete' Facebook account

Step 2. Wonder whether or not your data is really deleted or not

Step 3. Realise all of your family, friends, acquaintances, ex-friends and 'random people who gave you their email address at some point and they accepted your friend request but god knows why', are on Facebook.

Step 4. Sign up for Facebook again

Step 5. Wallow in your own shame and self-hatred for doing so.
You're not missing anything. Two posts were merged. This is the Privacy policy blog post by Slack. There was another blog post (third-party) that talked about changes in their TOS to include arbitration.

https://konklone.com/post/slack-is-now-forcing-users-into-ar...
> Qt started long before C++11, as I'm sure you know, and lambdas weren't available for the 10 years prior.

Of course. That's also the reason we have UTF-16 and a Qt reimplementation of the standard library: the project's age and need for backward compatibility.

moc for C++98 didn't offer closures, so you still had to write a separate function and then call connect() to link the signal with the new slot function. Even in C++98, moc could have instead just allowed you to use a version of std::function, written for C++98 (I wrote such a container, as did boost.) So instead you'd have: button.onClick(&MyClass::clickEvent, &myClassObject); which for at least 98% of GUI programming, would cover the same use case as connect(button, SIGNAL(pressed()), &myClassObject, SLOT(clickEvent())); but without the need for preprocessing; and without the downside of run-time type checking of the signal and slot names.

...

I definitely don't doubt you that you have use cases that moc makes significantly easier. But in my case, I really don't. And I've written a dozen simple to moderately complex UI applications. So, I would be appreciative if in my simple case, I didn't have to use moc at all.

One thing I do like, that is possible with a fancier std::function class, but is still kind of clunky with pure C++, is the way you can bind a slot that has less parameters than a function ordinarily takes. It's a nice way to offer additional information, but not require you to have an exactly matching callback signature. Great for binding multiple signals to the same generic slot that handles all cases at once (eg "synchronize()" called whenever you change a setting.)

> You only need to run headers of QObjects through MOC, although that is most of them if you are using Qt, obviously.

Yeah, I wrote a recursive wildcard search function in GNU make to find all files that matched "%.moc.hpp", and then ran moc against all of the results. It's not a huge burden, but it's still kind of annoying. It interferes when you just want to write a small utility class and have your interface and implementation in the same file. You have to deal with knowing what moc is called (moc on most platforms, moc-qt4 on Debian). You can't distribute pre-parsed moc files because they are extremely version-dependent.

> I tend to prefer qmake over make

I prefer GNU make over qmake, bsdmake et al. qmake is great if you like it, but not if you're already happy with your build environment, use lots of specific features from your build tool, and don't want to change it just to make using Qt easier.
Ruby Cloud Function - Get an Endpoint, UI, and Docs in Seconds
IO devices were also mounted/manipulable within this filesystem. So you could mount your home keyboard/mouse/monitor to your remote workstation (maybe an HPC box in some datacenter) and continue working where you left off. Java tried something similar with Jini but without the powerful abstract of everything being a file descriptor in some hierarchical mapping.
Digging into .NET Loop Performance, Bounds-checking, Iteration, and Unrolling
Yeah, but an assumed 10% rate of return with no risk is still ridiculous.

How come the government can sell t-bills at sub 1% interest? They wouldn't be able to sell a dime of debt if those numbers were anywhere near reasonable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmosphere_of_Earth

That makes it 95.6% oxygen. Probably good enough for most purposes. And the bulk (96%) of the non-oxygen is argon, which is inert.
The threat isn't that robots will kill you, but that they will take your livilihood. If you are a worker in a capitalist society, you should be worried. The analogy is the internal combustion engine vs the horse. What happens when AI advances to the point of matching your general intelligence and learning capacity? If you work in IT, poof, firm management outsources your job to a computer. If the AI is attached to a robot that further matches your dexterity, poof there go most other jobs as well.
I agree, but the appropriate route is to email hn@ycombinator.com with this sort of feedback.
There is a slight irony in "the evergreen state" using red, white, and blue for its numberplates, without so much as a hint of green to be seen...
You are assuming that discrimination in favor of males and discrimination in favor of females are like vectors that are parallel and opposite in direction. Under that assumption, overall equality could be achieved by selecting and titrating an appropriate magnitude for your own bias, based on the observed bias in the system.

I believe the assumption is flawed. There is a perpendicular component to those vectors, such that any decision to discriminate, at any magnitude, can result in a decrease in fairness for everyone. Thus, the only way to ensure that you are not actually making things worse is to not discriminate based on irrelevant factors like founder gender at all.

If you want to show off the experiences of women founders in YC, make your random sample size large enough that several of them will be represented. Narrowing the pool by eliminating one gender or the other is cheating. So adding "here's 40 male founders" would actually just be making it worse.

The only way to make it better would be to include a representative sampling of founders, chosen without using gender as a consideration.

But the article was motivated by the same premise--that opposing biases can cancel, so that is why it was created with an obvious gender bias. I doubt the intent was malicious, but the results may not be as expected.
I'd like to have CMD+Backspace do that.
Thanks for linking to this, Aaronson brings some good critiques (as did others on this thread). I do however think it is a bit disrespectful to the authors to use the word debunk,. Debunk implies a myth or a belief, or a completely unsupported theory, such as creationism. In contradistinction, this is peer reviewed science, and while there are undoubtedly probably faulty assumptions behind their work (or merely overstated significance), there may be some underlying validity and modest importance within the field of unconventional computing as well, so let us not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Also, just curious as a parallel example, Tononi and co had their day in the sun on Aaronson's blog a few months back, and there was a vigorous back and forth including a great response from Tononi ; would you say that now IIT has been 'debunked'? If so, how do you justify that? If not, why not wait for the authors of UMM theory and its hardware extension to have a chance to reply? This is how progress is made in science, deliberation & iteration, not instant victories.
Interesting concept, but I can already use the Google Play store to install stuff on an Android device from my desktop, so I'm not sure what problem you're solving here - how is this approach more efficient than a clear link to eh apps store, or conversely, if people ignore an app store link why do you think they'll ignore a text? For stuff I may just 'want to try out' then I very much prefer to go through the app store for the extra bit of security, as opposed to a download link from who-knows-where.

Obviously you've already got a bunch of subscribers - well done! - so it has some value, but talking about monthly income after 6 weeks seems a little premature - my initial instinct was to flag it for spam. Might be better to phrase it as '$1100 subscriber income in 6 weeks.'

Edit: 'Concept' refers to the underlying idea rather than the current state of the product. If you don't like pedantry then you should probably eschew it in your own responses.
It doesn't even make sense for an investor to provide office space, or even payroll services. How could it possibly make sense for them to provide child care?

This is a red herring.

In fact, it comes across a little like "well, thing will be better for women once society fixes their expectations about child care".

No. Women are perfectly capable of balancing their child care needs inside their families using their own support networks. Child care is a private issue. Founders are adults. Don't infantilize them. Don't try to run their families for them.

What needs to stop happening is people bringing up child care as an impediment to entrepreneurship. That's the child care problem we have in startupland.
> There is no reason to believe that an NP-complete problem solver can factorize integers in polynomial time.

You're misunderstanding the relationship between NP and NP-complete.

Integer factorization is in NP, which by definition means that anything that can solve NP-complete problems efficiently can also solve factorization. The question that's currently unresolved is whether factorization is easier than NP-complete, not harder.
How can someone monetize on a finding like this? This vulnerability easily had a value of millions to Google, Amazon, Yahoo etc, but how could Zachary Harris have made money of his discovery?
In a changing security landscape, cloud storage puts customers at ease
Same here. Shout out to the ##psp-programming crew from Freenode. So many memories!
The idea to create male only conferences, universities or network groups for psychologists and veterinaries is seen as a bad joke that no one would ever take seriously,

That is absolutely false. Yes, there are a number of professions dominated by females (the ones you mention as well as school teachers and nursing) and there are numerous examples of support groups, outreach groups, and scholarship programs that are trying to attract males students and applicants. You are looking for a double standard where none exist.
"I gave her a VAX" made me smile. You are awesome.
Yep, it works pretty well where I work
I've been a network administrator and had control of everything.

That did NOT mean that I was actively viewing everything and sitting in a tower somewhere cackling at all of the deep dirty news I had. I had to pull data a handful of times during lawsuits or sexual harassment complaints.

You should not be delving into deep personal/sexual conversations on any work tool without having in the back of your mind that it may come up at some point, whether you're at a startup or not. I'm on my 3rd startup and while I know nobody has been monitoring (because I pay for the tools) I still keep the tools somewhat professional. To the point that I couldn't care less if someone looked into my conversations. If we're going to bitch about that, then the fact that my data is on some unknown server at Hipchat is FAR more worrisome to me than my COO looking at my conversations.

You SHOULD trust your employees and if you don't trust one replace them. You should also TRUST your management to not spy on you. But you should also assume that they have the ability, if not, you're daft.
Hey! I've sent you an email with all the specifics that I could think off.
F# more or less started with OCaml, took some features away, added some others. If you're familiar with F# then OCaml will look natural.

Though, that said, if you're familiar with OCaml then Haskell should be rather easy to pick up syntactically.
Hi leeoniya,

Actually, I think the scanning approach actually simplifies things quite a bit. Let's see if I can explain this properly:

You can think of SnapJet as performing the same operation as holding a phone about 10 inches away from an old film camera, and opening and closing the shutter. Light comes out of the phone, and hits the film after being focused by a lense. The picture then develops from a chemical reaction based on the incident wavelengths of light. The novelty in SnapJet is simply that we reduce that 10 inches to 1mm - i.e. we focus the light using optical fibers rather than a traditional lense.

This actually makes the device super-low-tech. The optical fibers are just plastic, and so the device technically doesn't need any electronics whatsoever. The current printer we're kickstarting has batteries and a PCB in order to support Fuji's film cartridges (and make the user experience a little smoother). But we're imagining future versions that work entirely without batteries or motors and are ultra-slim, like 5-7mm.

Hope that makes more sense!
It does but GitLabs ticket capabilities are very, very basic.
Old Blood and Guts and Litigation
The problem is that they have suspended their service until we agree to their terms. Their service enables much of our company communication, so basically they've maimed our internal communication until our lawyer has had a chance to review these new terms, which could take any amount of time.

You as a jurist might look at this and go "meh, it's fine", but if you're the CEO of a small company this sort of thing really fucks with you.

their CEO gave his ideas on this situation:

https://twitter.com/stewart/status/537007282811195392?t=1&cn...
These centers are developed by capital willing to invest in risky technology start ups. That is the first-step oxygen that is required to have a SV-style tech hub. You can import the talent in afterwards.

I left Canada because it's mostly resource wealth that makes the money there. There isn't nearly as much capital available for software in Canada as SF. SF has more $30mm+ net worth families/individuals than all of Canada combined. And a 1/3rd of those Canadian families made money from resources.
That's a bit inaccurate. Prosecutors have legal discretion on a case-by-case basis, but a President not enforcing large sections of the law has never been tested. This is going to be complicated and messy. If your belief is the truth, what happens when the next President decides not to enforce the laws they don't like?
Ah, my apologies. It's been some time since my courses on this.
Jobs going 'poof' thru automation used to be a GOAL of modernization. Is the race going to work hard forever? Will we ever be free from the need to provide food and shelter? Wouldn't that be a good thing?

The real issue is, WHEN we no longer need to work to all have a great standard of living, HOW will we work it out.
Care to elaborate on what you like about its syntax? I can imagine preferring it to Haskell or Lisp, but not thinking it's beautiful.
I feel somewhat conflicted about this blog post. I can agree with what others are saying in the comments that all frameworks have there pitfalls. A lot of development is dealing with trade offs and your teams varying experience.

On the other hand, I agree with the author that there is a tipping point where a framework/tool becomes too much of a burden. Sure, we can all do it the "right way" but teams don't always have people with the experience to even know what the right way is.

We should think about the frameworks we use as tools. Make sure the tool is right for the problem and the team. Also, don't try to apply all your older experience to the new tool. Take time to learn about the thing you use.
How does Ocaml do on having predictable memory usage? This is still a weak spot in Haskell, though I absolutely love the language and it hasn't mattered yet for my use cases.

Doesn't it hurt having a GIL?

How awesome is having the ML module system?
Palo Alto Council Reviews Bus Rapid Transit
"Debunk" was my word, not Scott's, and you're right, it's overly harsh. I've edited my post.

But Scott did convince me, at least, that this paper is nowhere near as relevant or important as the authors make it out to me.
OriginPC has a limited sale on their case
Going against established theory has nothing to do with "pseudoscience". Pseudoscience is how you treat it. If you say, this is the next best thing, all my doubters are idiots, and invest now! Then that is pseudoscience. But if you just go, "hmm, that's funny" and keep investigating what's going on, that's just plain science.

The article is very much written in the second form, at least as far as I can tell.
Thanks! Title changed from "Strange thrust: the unproven science that could propel our children into space".
I'm currently working on an 11/23 here: http://bensinclair.com/category/pdp-11

It's not quite as involved as this 11/04, but still a lot of fun. I'm not having much like right now though!
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." -- I don't hear anyone claiming otherwise. Woodward publishes all his work an has invited others to attempt to replicate it or tell him where he's wrong.

"such as the fact that their paper is published in a philosophy journal, and the guy having a history degree instead of a physics degree." -- argument from authority, very unscientific. If an unemployed poodle shaver publishes a replicable experiment, it is science.

"naive rebellious spirit of HN that dictates that anybody can overthrow fundamental physics with an experimental setup in his basement" -- if the experiment works and can be replicated, they certainly can.

There's also a misunderstanding of scientific epistemology in your last statement. Theories are seldom overthrown, but they are often extended. Einstein didn't overthrow Newton -- he provided an extension. Newton's equations still work, but with a very tiny error that only becomes visible at high velocities or with unbelievably precise measurements unavailable in Newton's day. A theory is not an absolute dogma, but a model that is deemed correct within its context -- namely all data and experiments available at a given time. New data or new experiments can extend the context, requiring an extension of theory. If this effect is real, it would not "demolish" or "overthrow" relativity, but would likely require some sort of extension to the theoretical framework. Who knows? Perhaps such a thing could point in the direction of the elusive quantum / relativity synthesis?

I am skeptical (lower-case S) of this, in that I wouldn't really believe it unless the effect could be reliably amplified. So far that hasn't been the case. But I don't consider it at all psuedoscientific to try it out. Even if the effect is a result of something else, doing so will refine your skill at measuring tiny forces and possibly advance the field of experimental technique.

The character assassination and arguments from authority are completely unwarranted, and is a major reason I am not a Skeptic (upper-case S).

P.S. a tangent:

Part of why I think CS advances so fast is that the unambiguous nature of computer "experiments" leaves little room for arguments from authority or character either pro or con. Either something works or it does not. Politics -- that age-old enemy of truth -- are clearly irrelevant.
I nowadays resist the urge to make syntactically beautiful code if that means that it is a little bit brittle or vulnerable to mistakes.

Wrt. using { }, I omit them if I put the block to be executed on the same line, and usually I do that only with special cases, e.g.

if(expr1) continue;

if(expr2) throw new RuntimeException();
Probably because it's way over the top.

That comparison proposes that people who can't program have a huge mental deficit compared to those who can. There are plenty of programmers out there who are not particularly proficient at thinking, and plenty of extremely intelligent people who aren't programmers. It's a needlessly breathless and self-congratulatory comparison, with limited perspective on the outside world.
>Because it's of course adorable that you can write map and compose in JS (it's 2014, it can do it everywhere), but FP = many more serious things.

Or you know, stick to JS, because it's of course adorable that you can do functional programming in a functional language (we could do that since the 60s), but having access to the most prevalent language in the web and being employable is even better.
What are you defining as a website? A domain? If I have a:

* myname.com/about.html

* myname.com/projects.html

Would you want to jump out of myname.com entirely when you press back? If not, how do you differentiate that from slides with myname.com/slide1, myname.com/slide2?
A really amazing, honest, and straightforward account from the grad student in the lab.

http://www.otherhand.org/home-page/physics/graduate-studies-...
Their "memprocessor" is a set of standard analog computing elements - four analog multipliers, two op amps, and a "controlled inverting differentiator". General purpose analog computers are rare today, but you could set this up on the patchboard of an analog computer from the 1950s or 1960s.

The idea that analog computers are in some sense more powerful than Turing-complete digital computers comes back now and then. Here's a paper on that from 1998:

http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1138111

"The neural network that represents the analog computer proves to be inherently richer than the standard Turing model."

The idea that having variables which can take on an infinite range of real-valued values fascinates some people. But you can't, not really. Resolution is limited by noise. Noise is inescapable, since electrons are discrete. Infinite resolution is impossible in a granular universe. Real numbers are a convenient fiction which cannot be realized in hardware. ("God created the integers; all else is the work of man." - Kronecker)

The author of the paper almost gets this. They mention the Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem, so they know about Shannon. But they don't seem to be considering the problems of the noise floor. They also write "the multimeter of the hardware implementation analogically measures the integral over a continuous time interval, directly providing the result, thus avoiding the need of sampling the waveform and computing the integral". Amusingly, they're using a digital multimeter.
Actually, there is an implementation of Touch Events (the Microsoft one) that already supports all this...
Then agree under duress. You have 72 hours to modify any contract you enter (which becomes 10 days by snail mail), so agree quickly with your adversary, so as to get out of his way. Once you have access to your account, immediately begin arbitration whilst looking for another safe place.
The Art of Insight in Science and Engineering
Well, I am surely not social enough but my phone-to-paper picture usage involves mostly postcards and there are excellent apps for that already. It's so much easier to snap a picture on the phone click two buttons, a week later someone gets a postcard than printing and then sending it as a physical postcard.
>The issue is that if you're going to be doing FP, you'll want to use a language in which it's not just possible, but natural and happens without an uphill battle.

Most FP paradigms are natural and quite easy in JS.

And learning Haskell can also be described as an "uphill battle".
The-cli.info
Indeed, and some of the things in this article are blatantly wrong, such as using an "invalid instruction" to cause a signal we can catch.

Debuggers do NOT use invalid instructions, on x86 and AMD64 they use 0xCC (INT 0x03) on other platforms they use whatever dedicated trap-to-debugger instruction there may be, there's not usually a need to use an invalid instruction to do debugging.
> Lastly I see no mention of printing over BT/BLE which is the only reason I would buy it.

The Kickstarter page - https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/snapjet/snapjet-a-slim-... - has more details:

"We've also included an OLED display, USB, and BLE connectivity. So all the tinkerers and photographers out there can control exposures, hack, and reprogram the SnapJet."